A report said that as many as 40 per cent of routine household planning applications in Scotland could be taken out of the system. 97 per cent of householder developments were approved, and most did not raise issues significant enough to warrant restrictive conditions.
Source: Alan Prior et al., Review of the General Permitted Development Order 1992: Householder Development, Scottish Executive, available from Blackwell's Bookshop (0131 622 8283)
Links: Report | SE press release | BBC report
Date: 2006-Dec
The government set out (following consultation) reforms to the planning system designed to help local authorities deliver more and better homes - including more affordable and family homes.
Source: Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3): Housing, Department for Communities and Local Government (0870 1226 236) | Delivering Affordable Housing, Department for Communities and Local Government
Links: Statement | Guidance | DCLG press release | Consultation responses | LGA press release | CABE press release | CPRE press release | NHF press release | TCPA press release | BBC report
Date: 2006-Nov
The High Court upheld a challenge to a compulsory purchase order sanctioning the acquisition and demolition of 500 homes to make way for a road scheme and new housing under the 'Pathfinder' initiative. It said that there had been an impermissible 'watering down' of the statutory requirement that a CPO could be made only if the land affected was 'under-used or ineffectively used'. The CPO also breached the claimant's human rights because the state had tried to take her home by a process which was not 'according to law'.
Source: Pascoe v Secretary Of State for Communities and Local Government, Urban Regeneration Agency, and Liverpool City Council, High Court 27 September 2006
Links: Text of judgement | Guardian report | Times report
Date: 2006-Sep
The government began consultation on proposals for a new housing delivery grant, and reforms to the existing planning delivery grant, designed to benefit local councils which responded to local housing demand and the need to plan for additional houses. It said that under the existing financial framework local authorities had only limited short-term incentives to respond to housing needs.
Source: Planning Delivery Grant 2007/08: Proposed Allocations Criteria, Department for Communities and Local Government (0870 1226 236) | Housing and Planning Delivery Grant, Department for Communities and Local Government
Links: Consultation document 1 | Consultation document 2 | DCLG press release
Date: 2006-Jul
A report said that the use of planning obligations had increased, and was funding more affordable housing and infrastructure than ever before. But there were wide variations in the amount of contributions, even for comparable sites and between similar local authorities. Around two-thirds of new homes were built without any contributions towards affordable housing and infrastructure.
Source: Tony Crook, John Henneberry, Steven Rowley, Craig Watkins and James Wells, Valuing Planning Obligations in England: Final report, Department for Communities and Local Government (0870 1226 236)
Links: Report | DCLG press release
Date: 2006-May
A report examined whether the affordable housing element in 'Section 106' planning agreements was being delivered. Once development had started, the agreements delivered what was originally agreed in the majority of cases. The most important explanation for the disparity between planning permissions and completions was that either schemes were not developed or there were very long delays between permission and completion.
Source: Sarah Monk et al., Delivering Affordable Housing through Section 106: Outputs and outcomes, York Publishing Services for Joseph Rowntree Foundation, available from York Publishing Services Ltd (01904 430033)
Date: 2006-May
An article examined the proposal for a new tax on the windfall gains arising from the granting of planning permission for residential development. It said that a detailed taxation proposal would need to include clear relationships between other demands on the development process, especially the provision of affordable housing through planning.
Source: Michael Oxley, 'The gain from the planning gain supplement: a consideration of the proposal for a new tax to boost housing supply in the United Kingdom', European Journal of Housing Policy, Volume 6 Number 1
Links: Abstract
Date: 2006-Apr
A think-tank report said that the planning system should be abolished in favour of a market-led approach. Much agricultural land, including land labelled as green belt, was not especially green, and should be reforested and/or used for housing.
Source: Mischa Balen, Land Economy: How a rethink of our planning policy will benefit Britain, Adam Smith Institute (020 7222 4995)
Links: Report | Summary | BBC report
Date: 2006-Apr
A report examined the relationship between development control and property development, including housebuilding, and suggested possible alternatives to the existing system of development control. Three alternatives were discussed: co-regulation, whereby developers and planners agreed an over-riding code of practice in a designated locality; a 'positive planning' approach of combined planning and permission; and a greater use of restrictive covenants in property titles, either for designated land or built structures, limiting in perpetuity what could be built or redeveloped.
Source: Phil Allmendinger and Michael Ball, Rethinking the Planning Regulation of Land and Property Markets, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (0870 1226 236)
Date: 2006-Apr
Two reports raised concerns about the quality of some of the housing being produced under 'section 106' planning agreements (designed to provide affordable homes through exploiting planning gain). But they said that in quantitative terms most of the affordable housing numbers specified in planning agreements was being being delivered.
Source: Sarah Monk et al., Delivering Affordable Housing through Section 106: Outputs and outcomes, York Publishing Services for Joseph Rowntree Foundation, available from York Publishing Services Ltd (01904 430033) | Jon Watson, Understanding Planning Gain: What works?, Joseph Rowntree Foundation (01904 629241)
Links: Watson report | JRF Findings | JRF press release
Date: 2006-Apr
A think-tank report said that too few houses were built because local communities had no incentives to support new development. It made a number of proposals, including allowing local authorities to retain more tax receipts arising from new developments to encourage them to attract new inhabitants to their areas; introducing a 'social cost tariff' worth 500,000 per hectare to compensate communities for the costs of development; and devolving all aspects of the planning system apart from minimum building targets to local authorities.
Source: Alan Evans and Oliver Marc Hartwich, Better Homes, Greener Cities, Policy Exchange (020 7340 2650)
Links: Report | LGA press release
Date: 2006-Feb
A report examined existing and emerging regional spatial strategies, including levels of housing development. Proposals made by regional planners to reduce the environmental impact and respond to public concerns were routinely overridden by central government. Regional housing targets had been increased, and policies to secure less damaging development had been seriously diluted, often in the final stages of the planning process.
Source: Regional Planning: Delivering a Sustainable Future?, Campaign to Protect Rural England (020 7981 2800)
Links: Report | CPRE press release | BBC report | Telegraph report
Date: 2006-Jan
