1 / 53

WELCOME

WELCOME. Policy Planning Awareness. November 2010. Preliminaries/Introductions Expectations The scope of today’s training: Development Management – Why and How Development Plans – the policy framework Infrastructure Delivery – securing outcomes Case studies

leigh
Download Presentation

WELCOME

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WELCOME

  2. Policy Planning Awareness November 2010

  3. Preliminaries/Introductions Expectations The scope of today’s training: Development Management – Why and How Development Plans – the policy framework Infrastructure Delivery – securing outcomes Case studies Planning under the Coalition Gov Preliminaries and Introductions

  4. Control the development and use of land in the public interest Creates a framework for consistent, robust and sustainable planning decisions Determines what is needed, where and when Helps facilitate and guide growth Helps LPA’s resist proposals that would give rise to harmful effects Encourages development in sustainable patterns Expresses political values Helps shape communities Creates framework for investment Helps protect historic and natural environment Helps implement LAA targets, priorities and actions (i.e. social, economic and environmental aims ) Provides transparency/certainty Why have Planning Policy? GROUP EXERCISE

  5. 1) Government Planning Policy (NP’s/PPS/RPS) Guidance and circulars Sustainable Community Strategy (long term vision + strategic priorities) Planning Regulations Ministerial statements 2) PPS’s Regional Spatial Strategy policies? Saved SP/LP policies LDF/DPD’s/SPD Previous appeal decisions? What tools help 1) shape LDF policy and 2) inform DM decisions? GROUP EXERCISE

  6. Spatial Planning/Development Management David Nock

  7. to shape the places where we live, work and play ensure that we get the right development at the right time in the right place helps deliver homes, jobs and opportunities in sustainable patterns helps protect the environment quality control – design / prudent use of natural resources tool for taking forward a local authority’s vision Spatial Planning – Why

  8. Development Management – What and How not just a name change no longer just about development control (applications / enforcement) a positive, proactive approach to shaping, considering, determining and delivering development proposals led by the LPA, working closely with promoters and stakeholders spirit of partnership / inclusiveness and supports deliveryu of key priorities and outcomes its about: facilitating development – spotting opportunities influencing proposals to achieve quality outcomes problem solving to deliver sustainable development

  9. Development Management – What and How changes for planners and stakeholders: more proactive more delivery focussed more creative / innovative better aligned with other local authority strategic functions – inc. plan makers better project management of the application process greater use of judgement rather than standards / criteria (as plans become more visionary / strategy focussed) whilst maintaining proper consideration / transparent determination (in accordance with the development plan unless….)

  10. Development Plans Craig Alsbury

  11. Town and Country Planning Act 1990 Planning and Compensation Act 1991 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 Statutory Instruments Planning Policy Statements (PPS11 dealt with RSS preparation and PPS12 deals with DPD preparation) Development Plans – Law and Policy

  12. In 2004 Regional Strategy saved elements of the Structure Plan and Local Plan, or UDP Later: Regional Strategy Development Plan Documents within the Local Development Framework Development Plans - Under the 2004 Act

  13. But Regional Strategies revoked July 2010 meaning the Development Plan nows comprises: saved elements of the Structure Plan and Local Plan, or UDP; and / or any adopted DPD (LPAs advised to press on with DPD preparation) Unless CALA challenge is successful and RSs ‘temporarily’ reinstated Development Plans - Under the 2004 Act

  14. Scope and Purpose: provide a broad development strategy for 15-20 year period provide clear framework for LDF and LTP preparation be confined to matters of Regional and Sub-Regional importance address inter-regional issues focus on delivery mechanisms – implementation Development Plans – Regional Strategies

  15. identify scale of housing and employment development to be delivered specify District-level development requirements – influencing patterns of growth promote economic development and regional competitiveness address environmental issues such as climate change and air quality provide a long-term framework for transport in the region (RTS) Development Plans – Regional Strategies

  16. RTS Scope and Purpose: identify regional objectives and priorities for transport investment and network management include all capacity enhancements entered into TPI (Improvement Programme) advice on the promotion of sustainable freight distribution strategic framework for public transport assist RDA in the development and implementation of RES based on robust assessment of future transport needs based on objectives-led approach (Government policy objectives, PSA targets etc) Development Plans – Regional Strategies

  17. What are they? “The LDF should be set out in an LDS, comprising LDDs, some of which are DPDs, namely the CS and AAPs, and a Proposals Map. Other documents will be LDDs, but not DPDs, namely SPDs and the SCI, although the SCI will be treated as a DPD – sometimes. These documents will require SA and may need SEA. The DP will be the DPDs plus the RSS or SDS.” (Baroness Hanham, Hansard, 2004) …………… clear or what!! Development Plans - LDFs

  18. Development Plan Documents (DPDs): Core Strategy – spatial vision (10 years plus), delivery strategy, strategic allocations – infrastructure requirements are key Allocations – site specific (non-strategic) proposals and designations Area Action Plans – detailed strategy for areas expecting significant change Proposals Map – showing all proposals and key designations Development Plans - DPDs

  19. Infrastructure in Core Strategies: Underpinned by evidence of what physical, social, green infrastructure needed to enable development to be accommodated; taking account of development type / distribution evidence of who will provide, how and when This means costs, funding sources, timescales Development Plans - DPDs

  20. Development Plan Documents – Preparation: process de-regulated now no precise detail on how Council’s should prepare DPDs, but need to ensure community engagement (incl. consultees) need be underpinned by evidence (the evidence base) need to ensure SA is robust need to ensure DPD is sound (justified, effective, consistent with Government policy) Development Plans - DPDs

  21. DPDs – Highway Authority’s Role: engagement as early as possible – identification and testing of issues / options advice and technical support to guide the scale and location of development advice, for inclusion in the DPD, on demand management measures and scale and nature of infrastructure improvements needed to facilitate sustainable development testing soundness and contributing representations during consultation and examination stages Development Plans - DPDs

  22. Big Issues: a complex process one that demands early and then constant attention a process that pay dividends (particularly at application stage) LPAs hungry for information and guidance evidence base is key, and not easy to assemble Development Plans - DPDs

  23. GROUP EXERCISE: Consider the approach a highway authority might adopt in the consideration of a site for 1000 dwellings which might be the LPA’s preferred option in a DPD which has yet to be adopted. To complicate matters the 1000 dwellings would be reliant on a transport evidence base that has not yet been prepared. Encourage developer to go thro’ LDF process so that there is a policy basis for the Planning Application (PA) to be considered. HOWEVER, if developer intends to submit PA 2. Involve LPA at every stage in process 3. Remember that our role is to guide and advise developer and LPA 4. Agree development options to be tested with the LPA 5. Involve your Transport Policy/Strategy team 6. Keep an audit trail and record of what has been agreed 7. Undertake a comprehensive TA inc. sensitivity testing

  24. Infrastructure Delivery Steve Clarke

  25. Infrastructure Planning • Infrastructure Planning • CIL • Planning obligations • Planning conditions

  26. Infrastructure Planning – PPS 12 June 2008 Core Strategies require infrastructure evidence base Infrastructure Delivery Plan should identify as far as possible: • Include physical, green, social and community • Strategic and local • What is needed; • When and where its required • Who is responsible for delivering • How much it will cost; • Funding sources

  27. Infrastructure Planning (Cont’d…) LPA’s required to undertake timely, effective and conclusive discussion with infrastructure providers Key infrastructure providers are encouraged to engage in discussions; Policy basis for securing contributions shall be derived from: Core Strategy IDP; Planning obligation SPD CIL/Local Tariff?

  28. Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations in force April 2010 Mandatory not negotiable charge on development Breaks the direct contribution/infrastructure link Purpose is to: increase revenue towards all types of infrastructure - estimated increase of £700m by 2016 Broaden the amount of development that will be charged - Only 6% of PA’s currently make contribution Increase transparency and fairness Improve predictability and certainty CIL to work with other funding streams Put 3 tests in C05/2005 on statutory footing

  29. Community Infrastructure Levy (Cont’d) • Pooled contributions not allowed once charging schedule approved or by 06/04/2014 whichever is sooner • Pooled contributions only acceptable when less than 5 separate planning obligations are involved subjects to tests being met. • LPA’s are the charging authorities

  30. GROUP EXERCISE In respect of implementing CIL consider the: • Advantages; • Risks and • Difficulties of implementing CIL to the highway authority

  31. Securing Outcomes via Planning Obligations/Conditions – Why? To avoid consent being refused To improve quality of development To regulate development

  32. Planning Obligations - What are they used for? • Restrict development or use of land • Phasing of development/infrastructure • Control use and magnitude • Require operations/activities to be carried out • Works • Travel Plan monitoring and implementation of remedies • Require land to be used in a specific way • Land use mix • Affordable housing • Can require payments to be made to the local authority • Bus subsidy • Travel plan monitoring

  33. Planning Obligation Tests - Circular 05/2005 • Necessary • to put right a problem caused by development • Directly related to the development • required because of development • Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the proposed development • capital sums to be fair • Relevant to planning • consistent with planning policy • Reasonable in all other respects • should not be used to put right exg. deficiencies • payments can be timed to help developers

  34. Condition Tests C11/95 • Necessary • otherwise consent would be refused • If not complied with would LPA bother enforcing? • Is condition essential or desirable? • Relevant to planning • otherwise ultra vires (Eg TRO’s) • Relevant to the development to be permitted • otherwise ultra vires • Enforceable • impracticable if difficult to detect contravention (Eg routeing condition) • Precise • conditions need to be complete, concise and clear • Grampian conditions requiring junction improvements should relate a 2-dimensional plan • Reasonable in all other respects • Prospect of being delivered - see J Stambollouian letter 25/11/02 to CPO’s

  35. Proposed Changes in Consultation on Planning Conditions Dec 09 C11/95 to be replaced Clarification on conditions requiring S106’s Reduce number of conditions More site specific when CIL charge introduced Six test to be retained necessary; relevant to planning; relevant to the development to be permitted; enforceable; precise; and reasonable in all other respects.

  36. Question - Obligations or Conditions? • S106 can slow down DC process - use conditions where possible • Only obligations can be used to secure capital contributions • Travel Plans with targets that need to be achieved need to be secured by obligation • Conditions enable developers to lodge Planning Appeal. • Conditions are easier to enforce by LPA

  37. QUESTION – Apart from satisfying the tests what are the essential components of a Grampian condition? • When? Requires action before development commences or is brought into use for e.g. • Submission of further details for written approval by the LPA; • Completion of works to LPA satisfaction. • What? - Should relate to a layout plan already agreed and subject to Stage1/2 RSA or QA • Who? – Should specify the LPA where further approvals are necessary • Why? A reason for the condition should be provided i.e. Based on reasoning and policy

  38. Question/Discussion Session - All

  39. Case Studies David Nock

  40. Case Studies 1 – Drakelow Park

  41. Case Studies 1 – Drakelow Park – The Question • First of “Burton” SUEs • Located in S Derbyshire! • 2000 + houses, 50,000 sq m business • Part of 13,000 home growth for town? • Core strategies started and stopped • Staffs developed SATURN model – but no firm information on development size/ location • Transport consultant focussed on the myopic! • Congested road system – trunk and local • Little progress in 18 + months • Political pressure • IS THERE A TRANSPORT SOLUTION OR NOT!

  42. Case Studies 1 – Drakelow Park – The Resolution • Big Picture – 2026 – with full LDF • PS use traffic model – realistic developments • Trip making (basis) agreed by 4 parties • HA take view on A38 • SCC and DCC for local roads • Short / medium / long • Short = easy, long = needs approvals • Public transport factored in as “extra” - targets • Package of “acceptable” measures given to developer – DaSTS compliant • Proofed for further development

  43. Case Studies 2 – Kettering

  44. Case Studies 2 – A14 Kettering – The Question • First of Kettering SUEs - 5000 homes • Part of 60,000 homes in North Northants • Part of ¼ million MKSM homes • N Northants JCS • LDF strategies complex – W’borough/ Corby • A14 route to Felixstowe – heavily congested • Local movements using A14 • HA investigating relief scheme (2 years) • Cost • Economics • Environment • Short Medium Long (again)

  45. Case Studies 2 – A14 Kettering – The Resolution • Decide what is deliverable – what is not • Liaise – DfT / GO-EM - NCC • Build from basic blocks: • Short / medium / long (again) • Ramp metering – CIF fund - 2012 • Local widening – DfT funding – 2015+ • Programme entry! • Junction 10A – S278 – 2015+ • Extend further (along A14!) – to 4 / 10A – 2020+ • Deliverable – which suited some, didn’t suit others!

  46. Question/Discussion Session

More Related