Changes in the planning regime
In the 1980s the planning regime was relatively relaxed to encourage retail development and stimulate economic growth.
The early 1990s saw the start of a change in the planning regime which would lead to a stricter, more regulated system. Previously local planning authorities (LPAs) had only to bear in mind the development plan. However, 1991 saw the beginning of the plan-led system that requires planning applications to be determined in accordance with a statutory development plan.
Another significant change in the planning regime came about in 1996. The Government introduced Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) 6, to direct investment back into town centres, which introduced the idea of sequential tests. In other words, town centre sites should be exhausted for retailing prior to edge of town and out of town developments. This has been accompanied by a shift towards sustainable development which has also brought in the presumption that 'brownfield' sites should be developed in preference to undeveloped land ('greenfield') sites.
In addition, in 1999, a Ministerial Statement introduced the requirement to show 'need' for more grocery retailing space.
Another significant change in the regime was brought about by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which requires all LPAs to bring forward new-style local development frameworks and development plan documents. This process places greater pressure on under-resourced councils.
LPAs are struggling to deal with their workloads. This delays the planning process further and can reduce the quantity of sites progressing through the system.
The appeal system has also become slower in recent years, in part due to rising case loads: according to the Government’s Barker Review , “six per cent of planning inquiries took over a year to determine in 2001-02; by 2005-06 this had risen to 34 per cent, with increases in processing time for other types of appeal”.
In summary, the regime has become increasingly complicated and working one’s way through the regime takes skill, forward planning, persistence and patience. As recognised by the Barker Report there is undue delay in the process. It is precisely this delay that explains why we find it necessary to have a pipeline of land.
*The Barker Review Interim Report was published in July 2006. The report’s focus is on evaluating the outcomes of the planning system with regard to economic growth and productivity, in the context of increasing pressures from globalisation.
Key facts at a glance
Job creation
Our Regeneration Partnerships have created almost 4,000 jobs, including 2,200 among the long-term unemployed and disabled.
New stores
The process of acquiring land, getting planning permission and building the store has become much more complex, risky and time consuming.
