« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Options For Change
11.0 SIMPLIFIED CONSENT PROCEDURES
Proposal: There is no current proposal; but from time to time there have been suggestions that certain categories of development might be subject to a simplified consent procedure thus relieving the burden on the planning authority and speeding up the decision-making process. The argument is that it should not be necessary for small, relatively simple proposals, unlikely to raise objection, to be put through the same stringent procedures as a major controversial proposal.
Source: G Dobry, Review of the Development Control System, HMSO, 1975, ch.7; SDD, Review of the Management of Planning, 1977; DoE Circular 22/80 "Development Control - Policy and Practice; SDD, "Efficient Planning", 1989; Land Use Planning under a Scottish Parliament: Overview of Responses to Consultation, SEDD, 1999, response noted at para.30.
Present position: The present position is that in general all planning applications, large and small, controversial and straightforward, are subject to the same procedure. There is a simpler documentation requirement for outline planning applications and for renewal applications than for full applications but the process is the same. Reserved matters applications can also benefit from a simpler documentation requirement. A more complex documentation requirement and more complex procedures apply to EIA applications; and certain developments such as 'bad neighbour' developments and departure applications are subject to additional publicity requirements.
The proposal in more detail: Proposals to simplify consent procedures have taken different forms. Dobry suggested that guidance should be issued to planning authorities on the streaming of applications and that authorities should have a discretion. By way of example, he suggested that developments qualifying for a simplified procedure might include all straightforward cases, applications conforming to an approved/ adopted development plan, developments which just exceed the Permitted Development Order thresholds and the approval of reserved matters.
Department of the Environment Circular 22/80 took a different line and urged local planning authorities to pick out for 'priority handling' (but not for a simplified procedure) those applications which in their judgement will contribute most to national and local economic activity (para.11).
The SDD paper Efficient Planning (1989) proposed an automatic grant of planning permission for householder applications after 8 weeks in default of a decision (para.2.2).
A response noted in Land Use Planning under a Scottish Parliament (1999) suggested that householder planning applications for development in 'back areas' not affecting the public interest might be reduced to the submission of a certificate to the planning authority that no notifiable neighbour had any objection to the proposal. The success of such an approach would depend on accurate neighbour notification.
Implementation: Implementation could be achieved through secondary legislation by way of amendment to the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Scotland) Order 1992 (SI 1992 No 224).
Discussion:
- while the proposal is in line with the objective of keeping regulation to the minimum required, there are existing mechanisms such as the Use Classes Order, the General Permitted Development Order that already offer scope for reducing regulation of straightforward activities. What is missing from these mechanisms is an element of local discretion to respond to local circumstances. That is already provided up to a point by delegation to officers (with some authorities applications do not go to committee if there are fewer than a prescribed number of objections) and could be enhanced by Local Development Orders (above).
- the introduction of different application procedures could be seen as confusing. The White Paper (para.47) notes that the Executive would need to be convinced that grading types of development would not make the system overly complex.
- however, if the new style 'development plan' is successful and is supported by non-statutory action plans, it might be possible to use these as a vehicle for identifying categories of applications to be fast-tracked.
- householder applications tend to be picked out as potential candidates for a simplified procedure. It needs to be borne in mind, however, that householder applications are often the subject of an objection from neighbours. They are not quite so free of controversy as may be thought; but this goes back to the earlier discussion (para.7.2 above) about whether development control should be a neighbourhood protection service.
- if such a proposal was felt to be worth exploring further, a possible candidate for a simplified consent procedure would be certain proposals that had been the subject of full pre-application discussions (see Section 9.0 above).
« Previous | Contents | Next »