To coincide with last week’s National Careers Week, a one-week celebration of careers guidance and free resources in education across the UK, Firstplan were pleased to welcome three apprentices for the day as part of the Build The Way traineeship scheme.

The scheme, which sees trainees join a group of SME architectural practices — HUT, GPAD, Morrow + Lorraine and Shedkm — is a 9-month entry-level architecture traineeship, providing an alternative and accessible route into a career designing and making buildings, spaces, cities and communities. It specifically seeks to overcome the historic lack of accessibility, support and diversity within architecture and the built environment discipline. Additional mentorship is also provided by industry professionals POoR Collective and trainees are also enrolled at the London School of Architecture’s Extended Programme Qualification.

As part of the scheme, Firstplan provided the three apprentices with ‘A Day in The Life Of’-style work experience to give them an opportunity to engage with other professionals within the industry. The trainees each spent the day with a Firstplan Director and their team, undertaking activities such as site visits, client and in-house meetings and an external CPD event. In addition, introductory workshops were held on topics including the Use Classes Order and the planning application process. The trainees were then invited to use their newly-acquired skills in a range of practical tasks. The placement has provided the trainees with invaluable experience and insight into the interconnection between planning and architecture.

The Build The Way scheme has already received a commendation at the ‘Inspire Future Generations’ Awards and it aims to be part of the movement and debate around architectural education and training, changing the future landscape. Firstplan welcomed the opportunity to take part, and we look forward to contributing to the Build The Way scheme again in future years.

Firstplan are pleased to have welcomed six new colleagues to our team in recent months, as we continue to expand to deliver the best possible service to our clients.

Raveen Bhamra has joined the team as an Associate and has over six years of experience in the private sector, having previously also worked in the public sector, whilst Orla Thompson has joined Firstplan as an Assistant Planner and has previous private sector experience across several development sectors. Orla is working towards completing her APC to achieve RTPI chartership.

Joining the team as Graduate Planners are Darcey Morse, Charlie Wan, Abid Mirza and Myranda Morrison, who have all recently graduated with their Masters and MPlan Degrees, and are beginning their careers in planning with Firstplan.

Our new Graduate Planners reflect Firstplan’s commitment to investing in new talent at the start of their careers to help them develop the necessary skills in the industry and work towards professional recognition as chartered town planners. We are also working with London South Bank University on a work experience programme and will be hosting two placement students over the coming months.

In addition, Firstplan will also be participating in the ‘Build The Way’ programme in March, which is an entry-level architecture traineeship providing an alternative and accessible route into a career in the development sector.

For full details on the Firstplan team, please visit the Team section of our webpage.

We are always on the lookout for new colleagues at all levels of career experience, and anyone interested in exploring a career with Firstplan should email a CV and introductory cover letter to info@firstplan.co.uk

As 2023 comes to a close, Firstplan team members are reflecting on another successful year, and we would like to thank all of our clients, old and new, for their instructions throughout the last 12 months. The projects that we work on remain as diverse as ever, across a broad range of sectors and covering all parts of the country.

One of the highlights of the year was achieving Carbon Neutral status in 2023, working with Carbon Neutral Britain. Our management team has worked hard to minimise our carbon footprint and ensure that our remaining emissions are offset. We have chosen to partner with the Woodland Fund to contribute to carbon-offsetting projects worldwide. Our Carbon Neutral status is an important first step in our efforts to move towards Net Zero, which we have set ourselves the ambitious target of achieving by 2025.

A full summary of our year is provided in our newsletter in the link below.

Firstplan 2023 Wrapped

As we await all that 2024 has to offer, we would once again like to thank our clients and the many consultants and architects that we work with for another rewarding year.

Merry Christmas from all of us at

The recent High Court ruling in the case of Armstrong v Secretary of State for Levelling-Up, Housing and Communities [2023] EWHC 176 reaffirms the principle of Section 73 (‘S73’) applications which can be used to amend conditions attached to an approved scheme, provided it would not conflict with the description of development permitted by the planning permission.

Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA 1990) allows applicants to apply to alter or remove a condition attached to a planning permission without incurring the expense and risk of submitting a new full application.

The issue surrounding the scope of S73 applications was identified over the course of the High Court proceedings which concerned a 2007 permission to build a Swiss chalet-style home on the Cornish coast. In 2021, the applicant applied to vary the building’s design under Section 73 of the TCPA 1990. This application was refused by Cornwall Council on the basis that: “the proposed revised design completely alters the nature of the development and would result in a development that would differ materially from the approved permission”, falling outside the scope of S73.

A subsequent appeal against the refusal was dismissed by a Planning Inspector, by reason of the proposal falling outside of what is considered a ‘Minor Material Amendment’ (‘MMA’). However, once the case was presented to the High Court, the presiding Deputy Judge quashed the appeal decision, having found that the Inspector misinterpreted the scope of S73.

The judgement confirms that: “there is nothing in section 73, or in the TCPA 1990, that limits its application to “minor material amendments”, or to amendments which do not involve a “substantial” or “fundamental” variation”. It goes on to state that: “if Parliament had intended the power to restrict its application further (for example to limit it to “minor material” amendments to a condition, or non-fundamental variations to a condition) one would have expected that to be expressed in the language used and it could readily have done so”.

Instead, it clarifies that S73 applies to any application for planning permission for development of land: “without complying with conditions subject to which a previous planning permission was granted”.

The judgement also acknowledges the relationship between the decision in Finney which confirmed that a S73 cannot be used to vary the operative part of a planning permission. This established that one cannot use S73 to vary or impose a condition where the resulting condition would be inherently inconsistent with the operative part of the planning permission; that would also involve effective variation of the operative part of the planning permission as well.

The judgement focusses on the: “plain and ordinary meaning” of S73. Taking the principles laid out in this judgement and Finney, it states that: “section 73 is clearly intended to be a provision which enables a developer to make a section 73 application to remove or vary a condition, provided of course that the application does not conflict with the operative part of the planning permission”.

The judgement goes on: “The operative part of the planning permission is for the construction of a single dwelling on the Site. The proposed revision to the architectural style of the dwelling (however different in nature) does not conflict with that. It will remain a permission for the construction of a single dwelling on the Site”.

It was deemed that the redesign of the approved dwelling would not cause a: “change in the basic principle of what was being permitted on the Site, namely the construction of a single dwelling”. Accordingly, it was considered that this change could fall within the scope of S73.

Notwithstanding this, the judgement notes that: “the effect of giving the words used in S73 their plain and ordinary meaning so as to allow an application to be made for non-compliance with any planning condition which is not in conflict with the operative part of the permission does not, of course, dictate the outcome of that application. It simply means that the application can be entertained. Any such application would then fall to be determined on its planning merits”.

As a result, this judgement helps to clarify the principles surrounding the scope of the S73 process in allowing changes that do not conflict with the operative part of the planning permission and that the acceptability of any such changes will remain a judgement call for the decision maker.

Firstplan continues to monitor any changes in planning guidance and legislation. For advice regarding the S73 process, please contact Chris Jones who will be happy to advise on any related matters.

Article by Joshua Hindle

The Government has published a technical consultation on the proposed Infrastructure Levy (‘the Levy’), another significant reform set out within the emerging Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill (‘the Bill’). The Levy is intended to replace developer contributions currently encompassed by Section 106 (S106) agreements and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).

The current consultation is intended to influence the preparation and content of the regulations, which, once drafted, will be subject to further consultation. The proposals apply to England only, with the current consultation running for 3 months, concluding on 9^th June 2023.

We have summarised the key headlines of this consultation below.

Current system

Developer contributions are utilised to mitigate the impacts of new development through the provision of essential infrastructure such as affordable housing, schools, GP surgeries, green spaces and transport infrastructure.

There are currently two routes which are front-loaded within the planning process:

–    Planning Obligations: S106 agreements, negotiated with developers under S106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

–    CIL: a fixed charge levied on the floorspace of a new development.

Planning obligations are, nevertheless, criticised as ‘uncertain and opaque’, often resulting in significant delays to the final granting of planning permission. CIL is discretionary in principle and still only around half of all Local Planning Authorities (LPA) charge CIL. The Government has thus taken the opportunity to devise a new system to “reconsider how value is captured from new development and to create a simpler, non-negotiable, and streamlined system that can capture more value and provide better outcomes for communities”.

The new system

Crucially, the new system will become a mandatory charge in England, meaning more development overall will be captured into the regime of developer contributions. The new Levy is presented as a more efficient and transparent system, intended to ensure developers pay a “fair share” for affordable housing and local infrastructure.

Another key difference is that the Levy will be charged at the end of the planning stage. This would involve the total fee being calculated once a project has been completed, as opposed to the current arrangement, whereby the amount is negotiated during the final determination of proposals. This amendment is designed to allow Councils to benefit from increases in land value. The consultation sets out that the Levy will be charged on the value of the property at completion per square metre and will be applied above a minimum threshold.

The Levy rates and minimum thresholds will also be locally determined by the charging authority, with Councils also able to set varying rates within their authoritative area; when setting their rate consideration must be given to factors including the viability of development within the area and the desirability that rates can deliver affordable housing at a level equalling or exceeding the current rate in that area.

Developers would therefore be able to price the value of contributions into the value of the land, while also enabling Levy liabilities to reflect market conditions, thereby removing the need for planning obligations to be renegotiated if the gross development value is lower than originally expected. On the other hand, this system would allow local authorities to benefit from the uplift if this value is higher than anticipated.

The current consultation makes it clear that Levy charging schedules will be subject to a process of examination in public prior to adoption. It is also noted that the Secretary of State for DLUHC can intervene in the preparation of charging schedules in certain circumstances.

Development, for the purposes of the Levy, is defined at Section 204E(1) in Schedule 11 of the Bill. This definition is noted within the current consultation as broad and covering the creation of new buildings and changes of use in existing buildings. Forthcoming regulations will further clarify what is and is not to be treated as ‘development’ for the purposes of the Levy. Nevertheless, it is anticipated that most development types will be subject to the Levy, including residential, commercial and industrial development. LPAs will still be able to set different rates for different types of development, as per CIL arrangements. It is assumed that the current CIL definition of what constitutes ‘development’ will be maintained.

‘Integral’ infrastructure and ‘Levy-funded infrastructure’

To streamline the delivery of supporting infrastructure, two categories are proposed which are subject to the current consultation:

1) ‘Integral’ infrastructure needed for the functioning of a scheme, integral to how the site is designed and how it operates. This infrastructure is to be integrated into the build cost and will be delivered alongside the development. It is envisaged that planning conditions will be the main way of securing this category, with a ‘retained and narrowly’ targeted use of S106 agreements known as ‘Delivery agreements’, used to fill the gaps from planning conditions.

2) ‘Levy-funded’ infrastructure delivered by the LPA using cash receipts from the Levy. This category covers infrastructure not needed for a particular site but needed to address the cumulative impact of development. Examples include, inter alia, expansion or improvements to: healthcare infrastructure, schools and road/highway infrastructure. It is understood Levy receipts may be passed to third parties such as County Councils, highways authorities, and water and sewerage undertakers, if they are best placed to deliver the infrastructure.

Proposed Levy routeways

To provide flexibility for sites with complex infrastructure needs, three distinct routeways for securing developer contributions are proposed:

1. The core Levy routeway

This is proposed for the majority of developments, with the Levy to be paid in cash by the developer. Liabilities will be based on final Gross Development Value (GDV) above a minimum threshold. ‘Delivery agreements’ are presented as the new form of S106 agreements, used to secure ‘integral’ infrastructure in circumstances where conditions cannot be used. The current consultation further outlines that under this routeway, affordable housing can be secured as an in-kind contribution of Levy liabilities; this means that the value of affordable housing secured can be offset against the total amount of Levy owed.

2. Infrastructure in-kind routeway

This second option retains existing S106 obligations for large and complex sites, which often require bespoke and specialised infrastructure. For qualifying schemes, S106 obligations will be used as a tool to secure infrastructure and affordable housing as an in-kind contribution of the Levy. This routeway is regarded as a more flexible approach to accommodate the transformative impact that development has on a particular area. A key difference from the current S106 framework is the introduction of a ‘Levy backstop amount’: the value of the agreement cannot go below a certain monetary value. This routeway will only apply to qualifying sites that fall over a certain threshold based on site size; it is acknowledged that where the threshold for this routeway is set will have significant implications for the final design of the Levy, with differing threshold options proposed in the current consultation.

3. S106-only routeway

It is proposed that a minority of developments, such as mineral and waste sites, will not be charged the Levy and will therefore remain subject to current S106 obligations.

The consultation states that an overarching framework for these three routeways will be outlined in regulations, following further consultation. Based on this framework, the routeways which will apply to a particular kind of site will be set out in the Local Plan.

Levy rates and minimal thresholds

The Bill will allow provision to be made in the regulations for Levy charging authorities to set ‘stepped’ rates which increase at specified future points. The consultation notes that this mechanism will “serve as a useful tool when implementing the Levy, reducing the risks of both overly ambitious rate setting (which may lead to landowners withholding land) and overly cautious rate setting (which could see a reduction in value captured)”.

The consultation goes on to state that “Levy rates and minimum thresholds should be set at levels appropriate to be charged to sites that are typical of a typology of development which is in a local authority’s area. In doing so, they will balance the need to capture land value uplift with the need to ensure that development remains viable”.

Permitted Development Rights

Currently, permitted development rights (PDR) which create additional floorspace can be subject to developer contributions. Nevertheless, most PDR relate to small householder development or do not create additional floorspace, meaning many such permissions do not fall within the scope of developer contributions. The Bill has been designed to accommodate capturing PDR subject to a provision that is made in regulations.

It is proposed that the Levy will only be charged for PDR applications when the value of the measured extent of the scheme is over a certain threshold, resulting in PDR schemes more likely to have a transformative effect on the surrounding area being captured within the Levy. The minimum threshold could be set through regulations at £x per m2 of development, with the LPA able to set higher thresholds where appropriate. To ensure that this approach is standardised, this ‘value threshold’ would be set nationally in Levy regulations.

The Government also proposes that a maximum Levy charge would be set for permitted development schemes to protect viability. A suitable value threshold for qualifying permitted development is sought during this consultation.

Charging and paying the Levy

In a departure from current CIL arrangements, final Levy liabilities will be based on the GDV at completion, which will be responsive to market conditions. As the final GDV will be reflected in the sales price of the development, or a valuation of the market price if the development is not sold, the need for obligations to be renegotiated if GDV is lower than expected is removed. Further, an LPA will be able to share in the uplift if GDVs are higher than anticipated.

Infrastructure Delivery Strategies

The Bill requires local authorities to draft Infrastructure Delivery Strategies: a strategy for delivering local infrastructure and spending levy proceeds. These strategies are designed to provide an opportunity for an LPA to take a more strategic approach to the way in which infrastructure is planned and funded.

‘Right to require’

The consultation sets out that, for most schemes, payment of the Levy will require a certain percentage of the liability to be delivered in-kind as affordable housing, which thereby removes the need for negotiations on this type of infrastructure to be negotiated on a site-by-site basis.

A new ‘right to require’ will enable LPAs to outline the proportion of the Levy they want delivered as affordable homes and what proportion they want delivered as cash. This is designed to ‘strip negotiation’, as, within the current developer contributions arrangement, developers often negotiate down affordable housing levels owing to viability. This mechanism is thus designed to strengthen the ability of local authorities to secure affordable housing, with limited scope or incentive for developers to provide less on viability grounds.

The consultation clarifies that on mixed-use development, where a portion is used for commercial purposes and another for residential, the ‘right to require’ will only apply to the residential portion of the site.

Neighbourhood share

The consultation also introduces the concept of ‘neighbourhood share’, intended to enable communities to profit from a portion of the amount generated directly, to fund their specific infrastructure needs. This will build on the approach taken in CIL, in which a proportion of funds are passed on to a parish or town council.

Exemptions

The consultation suggests that the Levy will replicate the existing CIL charitable relief exemption, with further exemptions or reduced rates to be set out in regulations. The Government could therefore, via regulations, set out other national exemptions or reduced rates for the Levy. In addition, exemptions for residential annexes and extensions and self-build housing will continue to apply under this new system.

Small sites

Reduced Levy rates may be charged on small sites. In practice this will mean that where a scheme meets this threshold, usually set at fewer than ten units, a reduced Levy rate will be set, and a local authority will not be able to require that a proportion of receipts are paid in the value of affordable homes.

Phased ‘test and learn’ rollout

Cognisant of the extent of significant change proposed, the Government has confirmed it intends to introduce the Levy over a gradual 10 year period through a ‘test and learn’ approach. The Levy will firstly be introduced in a representative minority of LPAs, prior to a nationwide rollout to all English authorities.

The consultation confirms that where sites have been permitted before the introduction of the new Levy, they will continue to be subject to their CIL and s106 requirements.

Summary

This particular facet of the emerging Bill has the potential to substantially streamline the system of developer contributions with a more consistent approach that removes unnecessary delays and provides additional funds to local communities. Crucially, the Levy is to be non-negotiable, meaning in principle, the amount of affordable housing set by the LPAs will be delivered. Pertinently, the Levy will be calculated from the GDV, and thus tied to development value, rather than calculated from the floorspace of a development.

Industry representatives have however questioned whether this new system will in fact ever be fully introduced, noting the prolonged roll out. Given the gradual transition, concerns have also been raised that it will slow the system down in the short term.

As ever, further key detail is outstanding with additional consultations planned over the next year. Firstplan continues to monitor the progress of the Bill through Parliament and will produce additional summaries in due course.

–     The Government’s Consultation is available here: Technical consultation on the Infrastructure Levy – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

–     Accompanying research by the University of Liverpool modelling the Levy is available here: Exploring the potential effects of the proposed Infrastructure Levy (publishing.service.gov.uk)

 

Article by Claire Stafford

On the 17^th March 2023, the Government launched its consultation on a new procedure which will supersede the current EU-derived Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) processes. It is proposed as part of the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill (LURB) to secure powers to introduce new ‘Environmental Outcome Reports’ (EORs) for development projects in England. This new system was first announced in Spring/Summer 2022 when the Bill was initially published, as summarised in Firstplan’s earlier update here: Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill: Environmental Outcomes Reports – Firstplan .

In the recent Government press release, it was noted that:

“Our vision is for an assessment to be more effective as a tool for managing the effects of development on the natural environment, supporting better, faster, and greener delivery of the infrastructure and development we need.”

The Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill is currently before Parliament, and should it receive Royal Assent, it will provide the Government with the power to draft new EOR regulations in order to introduce an ‘outcomes-based approach’, which builds upon the provisions of the Environment Act 2021. It is the Government’s intention for this to “simplify and streamline the assessment process” in order to make it more effective in helping to achieve and deliver the UK’s environmental commitments.

There are a number of key points that can be taken away from the latest consultation, as summarised below:

 

–    Building upon the provisions of the Environment Act 2021, the new regime intends to provide an ‘outcomes-based approach’. Outcomes would be set by the Secretary of State and are understood to be subject to further consultation in the future. Notwithstanding this, the consultation outlines that the Government is proposing various guiding principles to ensure consistency of approach across environmental issues.

–    The consultation highlights that EORs will succinctly summarise and signpost underlying technical work carried out for development proposals. An EOR should contain:

1.  A short introduction (which references the project details in the accompanying Planning Statement);

2. A short, high level, summary of how reasonable alternatives and the mitigation hierarchy were considered early in the development of the project;

3.  An assessment of contribution towards achieving an outcome supported by the indicators set out in guidance, including:

> The residual effects of the environment identified through the underlying technical work, with relevant conclusions in the technical work clearly pinpointed;

> The current baseline and relevant trend data, similar identified;

> Commentary on levels of uncertainty for that data or indicator set;

> Proposed mitigation, and

>  Monitoring proposals.

4.  A summary of the contribution of the cumulative effects of the project as a whole on outcomes and how this relates to the conclusions of any strategic or plan level assessment.

–    Currently, there is a requirement for the consideration of reasonable alternatives to certain development proposals. The consultation highlights that there is confusion about the range and scale of reasonable alternatives that are required to be considered as part of the existing process. As part of the new consultation, it is explained that the new process will aim to ensure that the consideration of options with less consequential effects on the environment is carried out within the early stages. It is the intention that this will be more effective in delivering the greatest environmental gains.

–    The LURB outlines that development proposals will be categorised into one of two categories requiring EOR assessment. The first of these would require an assessment in all circumstances, with the second category requiring an assessment if certain criteria detailed within the relevant regulations are met. It is noted as part of the consultation that the details of which plans and projects require assessment will be consulted on as part of developing regulations.

–    It is suggested as part of the new regime that the Government wants to maximise the value of assessment through effective monitoring and mitigation, which is to be supported by powers to address issues, should they arise. A ‘new adaptive mitigation’ approach is proposed which would allow mitigation to be fine-tuned in response to greater certainty on effects following implementation.

–     It is noted that measures within the LURB would provide the government with the authority to require public authorities to report on the performance against specific environmental outcomes, which in turn, would assist the Government in generating a picture of whether and how environmental outcomes are being achieved across England.

–     It is set out within the new consultation that making sure that relevant authorities have the capacity and capability to successfully implement the changes proposed within the LURB is critical. It also notes that the Government will look to support and work alongside local authorities to ensure that they possess the capability and skills to deliver an efficient service and feel assured that they can protect our environment and deliver levelling up.

–    The consultation has provided respondents with the opportunity to give feedback on the length of the transition period that would be suitable between the new and current procedures, which includes the choice of six months, one year or two years.

 

The consultation is currently underway and will run until the 9^th June 2023. It is understood that detailed provisions are to be set out in secondary legislation, which the Government will also allow further consultation on in due course. Full details of the consultation can be found here: Environmental Outcomes Reports: a new approach to environmental assessment – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).

Firstplan will continue to monitor for any future consultations relating to EORs and will publish further updates in due course.

 

Article by James Emblin

The Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, Michael Gove has recently confirmed in Parliament that the Government will bring forward new planning reform to manage the way in which residential dwellings can be used for Airbnb’s and other associated short-term holiday rentals.

The response came in light of concerns raised by Liberal Democrat MP Tim Farron who stated in the House of Commons earlier this week that it was creating “a big problem” in his Cumbrian constituency, further citing “the collapse of the long-term private rented sector into Airbnb” and the associated issues this is bringing to the local economy and the wider community. Other parts of the country, particularly those associated with seasonal tourism, are also known to be subject to similar issues to those identified in Cumbria.

Tim Farron asked Housing Secretary Michael Gove “Could he give me some assurance of when this government will change planning law to allow communities such as mine to control our housing stock, so that there are enough homes affordable and available for local families and local workers?”

“Of course, we want to have a labour market that works, and of course we want to have a tourism sector that works,” Mr Gove replied.

“But there is a problem in the private rented sector, particularly in beautiful parts of our country like those which he represents, where we do have homes which are turned into Airbnb’s and into holiday lets in a way that actually impedes the capacity of young workers to find a place where they can stay in the locale that they love and contribute to the economy of which they wish to be part.”

“We will be bringing forward some planning changes to the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill which are intended to ensure that we have restrictions over the way that homes can be turned into Airbnb’s,” he added.

It is typically accepted that an individual can let out a property for short periods of time on platforms such as Airbnb, however Firstplan has seen inconsistent interpretations across the UK with regard to properties used as short term lettings, holiday rentals or party homes. This pattern of use can fall outside of the traditional Class C3 use, and may require planning permission.

It will be interesting to see if the Government seeks to adopt a clear classification for permanent Airbnb and holiday rental properties, to provide property owners with more certainty.

Under current regulations, Airbnb are required to occupy a 90-Day Rule whereby in Greater London, with The Greater London Council (General Powers) Act 1973 implementing a London-specific rule which restricts short-term renting of residential properties for more than 90 days in a calendar year. In accordance with the Deregulation Act 2015, homeowners can now rent out their properties (in London) on a short-term basis for up to 90 nights annually without requiring planning consent from the local authority. In the rest of England the 90-day threshold has not been applied which therefore gives home owners greater scope to rent out their property on a short term basis.

An amendment to the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill has been tabled by Lord Foster which would enable neighbourhood plans to include policies relating to the proportion of dwellings that may be second homes and short-term holiday lets under new use classes. Another, tabled by Labour peer Baroness Hayman, allows for “regulations to be introduced to licence short-term rental properties”.

Irrespective of cross-party politics, there is a clear ambition to tighten planning regulations to protect local housing stock, and to preserve the vitality and prosperity of local communities. Allowing local planning authorities and community forums the powers to mitigate the unwanted effects of Airbnb’s over-expansion could certainly prove beneficial in managing housing stock in local areas as could the creation of a new use class for dwellinghouses. It will certainly be interesting to see what final form the amendments to the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill take, and what potential impacts this will have on the wider planning system and the housing and visitor economies in the area where the issue is at its most pressing.

 

Article by Will Hayes

 

Introduction

As part of their continued ‘levelling up’ agenda, the Government has launched a consultation on new plans to annually adjust planning application fees in line with inflation, with an initial increase of between 25% and 35% being earmarked as early as this Summer in England. Extra funds raised by the fee hikes are to be ring-fenced for local planning authorities to provide a more effective service through additional financing and resources.

The Government says the proposed changes have come as a result of consistent feedback among many businesses and individuals involved in the planning process that the core planning application service is not consistently performing at the level it should be.

Planning Application Fees

The following amendments to planning fees are proposed by the consultation:

-An increase in planning fees for major applications by 35%

-An increase in planning fees for all other applications including prior approvals by 25%

-Double fees for retrospective applications (except for householders)

-Removal of the ‘free-go’ for repeat applications

Therefore, with the proposed 25% increase, householder planning application fees would rise by £52, from £206 to £258 while, prior approval applications would rise from £96 to £120.

Non-major applications, which are charged per dwelling or per 75 square metres of non-residential floorspace, would rise from £462 to £578.

As a result of the 35% increase in major planning application fees, major applications for between ten and 50 dwellings or between 1,000 and 3,750 square metres of commercial non-residential floorspace will rise from £462 to £624 per dwelling or per 75 square metres.

Major applications for over 50 dwellings or more than 3,750 square metres of floorspace would be charged at a rate of £30,860 plus £186 for each additional dwelling in excess of 50 dwellings or additional 75 square metres in excess of 3,750 square metres up to a maximum of £405,000. Applicants are currently charged £22,859 plus £138 for each additional dwelling in excess of 50 dwellings or additional 75 square metres in excess of 3,750 square metres up to a maximum of £300,000. The current proposals offer a considerable uplift in the maximum fees for major applications.

Having not increased since January 2018, the Government has announced that to keep up with inflation, it is proposed that planning application fees will be adjusted annually. The proposed changes would apply to all applicants, notwithstanding those able to claim fee exemptions. The Government estimate that the proposed increase will represent on average, less than 1% of overall development costs incurred by applicants.

Local Planning Authority Capacity and Capability

The Government has estimated a funding shortfall for the planning application service, which is currently estimated to be in the region of £225 million annually (approximately 33%). They emphasise a desire to reduce the funding shortfall and create greater financial sustainability for all local planning authorities, whilst also wanting local planning authorities to be more efficient, to lower the costs of delivering the planning application service.

In relation to the performance of the planning applications service, the Government state that they want to ensure all applicants experience a high-quality and timely service. The consultation therefore proposes a new approach to how the performance of local planning authorities is measured across a broader set of quantitative and qualitative measures.

The Government highlights that whilst extension of time agreements are useful, they should be used in exceptional circumstances to allow additional time for unforeseen issues to be resolved to the benefit of all parties. Currently, extension of time agreements do not count against a local planning authority’s performance figures for speed of decision-making and therefore can mask instances where local planning authorities are not determining applications within the required statutory periods. Although not specifically mentioned in relation to extension of time agreements, the Government propose the introduction of a wider range of metrics to encourage improvements in service quality, which in doing so, will allow the Government to identify authorities that are most in need of additional targeted support.

Specific metrics have not yet been outlined within the consultation, however It is proposed that a broadened planning performance framework would continue to focus on development management activity only and would exist alongside other performance monitoring regimes, for example in relation to local plan progress.

Potential Introduction of ‘Fast Track’ Applications

In addition to statutory planning application fees, local planning authorities have the ability to charge for bespoke or additional services above the level or standard that the local planning authority has a duty to provide, provided that these charges do not exceed the cost of providing the service. These services can include pre-application advice, Planning Performance Agreements (as currently exist), and the consultation identifies the prospect of premium or ‘fast track’ planning application services. More broadly, the consultation identifies that the Government has shown interest in expanding the options available to local planning authorities including allowing extra flexibility to bespoke services where these services would provide a more expedited service.

No specific changes are proposed within the consultation however the Government are seeking to understand what experiences stakeholders have had regarding bespoke or ‘fast track’ services for which an additional fee is or could be charged and how this has assisted in supporting faster decision-making. They also welcome any other suggestions on how local planning authorities could deliver a more efficient planning application service for an additional fee.

Tightening the Planning Guarantee

The Planning Guarantee allows for an applicant to secure a refund of the planning fee where a planning decision has not been made within 26 weeks of submitting a valid application if an extension of time has not been agreed with an applicant.

The consultation proposes that where the statutory determination period is 8 weeks the Planning Guarantee should be set at 16 weeks and where the statutory determination period is 13 weeks (or 16 weeks for Environmental Impact Assessment developments) the Planning Guarantee should be retained at 26 weeks.

Introduction of a Prior Approval Fee for Permitted Development Rights Afforded to the Crown by a Closed Defence Site

A further proposal seeks to introduce a prior approval fee for the permitted development right allowing development by the Crown on a closed defence site. For context, in December 2021 the Government introduced a new permitted development right allowing development by the Crown on a closed defence site under Class TA of Part 19 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, as amended. The right allows the Ministry of Defence to both extend and alter existing buildings and erect new buildings within the perimeter of a site, subject to certain limitations and conditions.

Conclusion

The proposals seek to ringfence planning fee income for the running of planning departments however this only relates to the uplifted portion of the fees with the original portion of the fee remaining available for use across any local authority function. If the Government really wanted to invest in the planning application service, all fees received from planning applications should be used to cover the costs of the service, with any additional profit being released for wider use by local authorities.

The removal of the ‘free go’ for non-householder applications is likely to provide particular concern for some small and medium enterprises who would be required to completely restart the planning process should an application be refused or withdrawn. The Government has consistently stated that they wish to support the growth of smaller businesses, however the initial costs incurred through planning could be a cause for concern. It would be more appropriate for the Government to implement a reduced planning fee in these instances to ensure consistency in their aims to support new and existing small and medium enterprises.

The proposals are undoubtedly welcomed on the whole provided that the uplift in fees will result in a tangible improvement to the planning application experience and the overall efficiency of the services provided by local planning authorities through the recruitment and training of staff.

Whilst the proposals have been earmarked for introduction this summer, they remain at consultation stage, and are likely to be subject to change as a result of the outcome of this process.

The consultation will last for 8 weeks from 28 February 2023 to 25 April 2023 and is accessible online via this link

 

Article by Will Hayes

Introducing Ashkan Liaghat as the latest addition to the Firstplan team. Ash joins us as an Associate, bringing with him experience from both the public and private sectors. Ash has extensive experience across industrial, commercial, residential, mixed-use, life-science and educational development projects.

Firstplan also celebrates the well-deserved promotions of Amy Murray to Planner, and Rory Coles and Joshua Hindle to Assistant Planner.

It’s fantastic to see the continued growth of the team as Firstplan expands its client base and instructions, whilst also recognising the value of current team members to the company’s longstanding success.

Head over to our Team webpage to meet the Firstplan team in full.

 

As the year draws to a close, Firstplan would like to thank all our clients for a great 12 months of instructions. Working up and down the country across a broad range of sectors, our Directors and team continue to provide strategic advice and support to key names in property and industry, whilst also forging successful connections with new clients.

In 2022, Firstplanners gave back to the local community by volunteering at the Age UK Yalding Day Centre in south-east London, a local charity that both empowers and supports elderly residents in and around Bermondsey. The company also enjoyed taking part in the Great British Beach Clean 2022 on the Isle of Sheppey in Kent.

Whilst the past year has seen much political turmoil, including three Prime Ministers, and three Secretaries of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, culminating in the return of Michael Gove, we still await the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill, with a shake-up expected in housing targets, and the introduction of a new Infrastructure Levy. The Growth Plan 2022 from the previous Chancellor, Kwasi Kwarteng, signalled intentions to speed up decision taking, and final secondary legislation is still outstanding for Biodiversity Net Gain, which is expected to become mandatory from November 2023. Positive planning legislation updates include the extension of Temporary Pavement Licences provisions up to September 2023, with the provisions expected to be made permanent in Spring 2023. Firstplan will continue to monitor these developments closely in the New Year and will keep our clients informed via our website and social media channels.

The Firstplan family welcomed new members to our team and we continued to increase our year-on-year number of instructions, with particular achievements this year including:

–

Retail and Town Centres

Firstplan were pleased to secure permission for a new commercial district centre in Derriford, Plymouth earlier in the year. The mixed-use, foodstore-led scheme will act as a catalyst for significant investment and regeneration into this area, supporting the sustainable growth and development of northern Plymouth as sought by the Council’s Local Plan.

Working with Bracknell Forest Council, Firstplan provided a retail planning support to the Council at the examination the Council’s new Local Plan. Our strategic advice and support also included commenting on current vacancy levels and undertaking a ‘critical friend’ review of the submission Local Plan retail and town centre policies.

–

Employment and Logistics

Firstplan played a crucial role in the refurbishment and rebranding of a 1980’s office building into a high quality, flexible 21st Century office campus in Southwark.

Working closely with the Port of London Authority, Environment Agency and Gravesham Borough Council, Firstplan secured planning permission for a comprehensive scheme of works to upgrade and secure the long term continued operation of an important transhipment facility in the Thames Estuary, Tower Wharf.

Our team is also proud to have secured permission for the redevelopment of former industrial buildings into a high-quality office development providing 2,600 sq m office floorspace in Camden.

Firstplan secured planning permission for the expansion of the existing StantonPrecast Ltd site in Ilkeston, Derbyshire to provide a new 9,000 sqm precast concrete segment production facility, along with around 10ha of open storage, a concrete batching plant and ancillary offices and HGV parking.

Firstplan has supported a range of clients in bringing forward rail and wharf based development including a new international car-carrying service at Toton Sidings, Nottinghamshire running between the UK and France and a substantial cement distribution facility at the Port of Sheerness.

–

Restaurant and Food Delivery

Firstplan continue to assist some of the restaurant sector’s leading names, including Five Guys, Nando’s, Burger King, Popeyes and Deliveroo. 2022 has seen a significant increase in the demand for drive-thru restaurants. Working with several of our clients, Firstplan has secured permission for various new-build drive-thru restaurants and the adaption of existing restaurants to provide a drive-thru lane across the country.

We have also seen an increase in the opening of high street sites with many restaurateurs making use of the benefits of Class E and the flexibility for buildings to change uses without the need for planning permission.

Earlier in the year, Firstplan assisted in winning an appeal of behalf of Deliveroo, to allow for the continued operation of Deliveroo Editions commercial kitchens in Islington. Following a public inquiry, the inspector concluded that the change of use was acceptable in planning policy terms, as well as having significant economic benefits.

Firstplan were also involved in securing various planning permissions and listed building consents for the amalgamation and change of use of two ground floor units and associated works to a vaulted basement at the Grade I Listed The Royal Exchange in the City of London, to create a vibrant new restaurant and bar: The Libertine.

–

Hotel and Leisure

Working for Ziser London, Firstplan obtained planning and listed building consent for the redevelopment of the former Steels Lane Health Centre, parts of which are Grade II Listed, to deliver a 101-bed boutique hotel. The previous NHS Health Centre in Tower Hamlets subsequently became surplus to NHS requirements, rendering it available for redevelopment. Firstplan successfully secured the change of use, extension and internal alterations to the existing building to revitalise the vacant site.

Firstplan are also involved in the redevelopment of the former Hammersmith Magistrates Court to provide a part ten, part five storey building offering 400 hotel rooms.

In Westminster, Firstplan are instructed by Cheyne Capital to provide planning advice for the redevelopment of the Taxi House site along the Grand Union Canal. This project will deliver 332 hotel rooms across 12 storeys along with flexible working spaces, retail, leisure facilities and replacement Westminster City Council cleaning facilities.

Firstplan has also taken a central role in securing planning and lawful development certificates for largescale music festivals and family events at Crystal Palace Park and Gunnersbury Park in London. These temporary events will help secure the long-term upkeep of these listed parks and are an important social lifeline following the Covid pandemic.

–

Residential

Highlights within the residential sector include our involvement in the redevelopment of The Mall in Walthamstow town centre, east London, comprising two buildings ranging from 24 and 36 storeys to provide over 500 residential units along with retail and community uses. Firstplan’s ongoing involvement includes coordinating a consultant team in preparing technical documentation and leading negotiations with the Council Officers in the planning, economic development and S106 teams to secure permissions.

As part of our continued support to Dominvs Group, Firstplan are involved in delivering a 17-storey building with 713 student accommodation units along with public realm areas and ancillary development associated with the Former Hammersmith Court redevelopment in Hammersmith, west London.

We continued to work with London Borough of Newham, securing consent for 81 affordable homes and a replacement gym in Manor Park and 32 affordable homes in Plaistow.  We have also appraised a further 11 sites for them as they look to bring forward new affordable homes throughout the Borough.

–

Community

Firstplan are proud to have played a crucial role in securing planning permission for one of Veronica Ryan MBE’s Turner Prize-winning works, a monument to the Windrush Generation in Hackney town centre, east London.

Firstplan has also continued to work on many new children’s nurseries across London and the Southeast.

–

Whilst we look ahead to 2023 and celebrating Firstplan’s 20^th birthday, we would once again like to thank our clients for another successful year.–

Merry Christmas from all of us at

 

 

Article by Claire Stafford