The Scottish Government

Listen

May 2005
Note - the following is a synopsis of comments made during the meeting. Comments recorded here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Scottish Executive.

ISBN 0 7559 2561 0 (Web only publication)

This document is also available in pdf format (280k)

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION
SUMMARY OF MEETING
WORKSHOP SESSIONS - POINTS ARISING
REPORTING BACK
MEDIATION AND PLANNING
LOCAL PLANS INCLUDING LOCAL PLANNING FORUMS
NEIGHBOUR NOTIFICATION
RURAL DIVERSIFICATION
E-PLANNING
PLENARY SESSION
OUTCOMES
ANNEX 1: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
ANNEX 2: AGENDA
ANNEX 3: WORKSHOP 1-PAGERS

National Consultative Group on Planning

1. The built environment is of interest to most people in Scotland. It is one of the things that impacts directly on where people live and work. However, the Scottish Executive's experience suggests that it has proved difficult to engage people in discussions about strategic issues related to planning. People's engagement in planning tends to be reactive (for example, when objections are being made to a specific planning application) rather than proactive, and at a point where it may be too late to influence the process. We are keen to find ways of giving people an earlier, more meaningful involvement in discussion of the more strategic planning issues. Our 2002 consultation paper Getting Involved in Planning contained proposals to enhance and strengthen public involvement in the planning system including seeking comments on a National Consultative Group.

2. Subsequently, Your Place, Your Plan, a White Paper on public involvement in planning, was published in March 2003. It contained a commitment to establish a National Consultative Group on Planning as a means for people from a wide range of interests to put forward and exchange their views on planning, to alert interested parties to current planning issues and to share examples of good practice. The first meeting of this group took place in Glasgow in February 2004. The intention is to hear views from across Scotland and this second meeting will be followed by another meeting this year in Inverness.

The Scottish Civic Forum

3. The Scottish Civic Forum is a network organisation which was set up to get people more involved in the decisions that affect them. This is done through a variety of means, including the preparation of monthly newsletters on participating in the work of the Scottish Executive and the Scottish Parliament. The Forum also regularly prepares briefing papers on Executive consultation exercises and hosts events across Scotland on topical issues. The role of the Forum in this event was to provide a neutral convenor and to encourage civic organisations to attend. It also provided trained facilitators for some of the workshops; the other facilitators were Max Cowan (an expert on mediation) and Karol Swanson, Planning Aid for Scotland.

4. In its independent role, invitations were issued by the Scottish Civic Forum. These were sent out widely to the Forum's contact list of roughly 2000 people and organisations as well as interested civic organisations and individuals suggested by Forum council members and local co-ordinators.

5. In addition, the Scottish Executive invited interested parties such as local authorities, community planning partnerships, local rural partnerships, representative business Interests and professional/amenity/environmental interests. The event was publicised further by an advertisement in the Perthshire Advertiser and posters were sent to the relevant Scottish Parliament Partner Libraries. An article was also published on the Rural Gateway website. A list of participants is at Annex 1.

SUMMARY OF MEETING

6. The meeting opened with a short introduction from Debbie Wilkie, Director of the Scottish Civic Forum and convenor of the meeting. She welcomed the group and explained the programme for the day (Annex 2). This was followed by a speech by Malcolm Chisholm MSP, Minister for Communities; and presentations by Tim Barraclough, Head of Planning Division 1 in the Scottish Executive, and Karol Swanson of Planning Aid for Scotland. A brief overview of these speeches follows.

Minister for Communities

7. Malcolm Chisholm MSP welcomed the group and began by reflecting on the purpose of the planning system and identifying what it is meant to achieve. He stated that our planning system is to guide development, redevelopment and regeneration to suitable locations and to offer safeguards against inappropriate development. It must also respect the rights of the individual while acting for the good of the wider and longer term interests of the community, which can be a difficult balance to achieve. For an effective system partnership working, genuine community involvement and good dialogue with developers are all needed.

8. Mr Chisholm continued by highlighting the modernising agenda set out by the Executive. The Partnership Agreement contains a commitment by the Executive to improve the planning system, "to strengthen the involvement of local communities, speed up decisions, reflect local views better and allow quicker investment decisions". It was stressed that it is possible to have a system that is both efficient and inclusive. However, it was acknowledged that with some planning policies and decisions these priorities can and do come into conflict.

9. The commitment made by the Scottish Executive in Your Place, Your Plan to engage individuals and communities more thoroughly in the planning process was discussed, with the explanation that, as well as holding the National Consultative Group, other initiatives are being taken forward. These include building up existing mechanisms for public involvement; requiring planning authorities to give reasons for all planning decisions and make these widely available; and giving Councils the responsibility for carrying out neighbour notification (a workshop topic for the day). The importance of public involvement at an early stage in the planning process is considered crucial, as many people get involved in reaction to a specific project, often when it is too late to really influence the decision. This can create frustration and enduring cynicism towards planning. Ensuring planning engages earlier and with a wider section of the community is a key challenge for the reformed planning system.

10. In addition, Mr Chisholm highlighted the funding of £115,000 over the last two years allocated to Planning Aid for Scotland which has helped with the recruitment of extra staff, training of additional volunteers and production of high quality promotional material. It was recognised that people and community groups across Scotland have benefited from the free, impartial, expert advice that Planning Aid offers. Another mechanism for public involvement, e-planning, was outlined. The role of e-planning, at both a local and national level, was stressed as new technology offers opportunities for people to get involved in planning in a way and at a time that suits them. There is the possibility to access development plans and electronic submissions, process and track planning applications, and on the Inquiry Reporters Unit website, view the progress of planning appeals.

11. Mr Chisholm concluded by stating "I believe that individuals and communities want and deserve a planning system which is more inclusive, straightforward and responsive to their needs. I hope that events such as today's help to make planning a little clearer and more accessible to the wider community".

Tim Barraclough

12. Tim Barraclough followed with a presentation on the planning system. This included an overview of the system in general, describing the different roles of local and structure plans and explaining the roles of the Scottish Executive and the local authorities. He particularly drew attention to the Executive's role in giving advice, making planning policy, monitoring the operation of the planning system, and dealing with the casework of major or controversial planning applications and appeals.

13. The commitment in the Partnership Agreement was again highlighted, showing the need to balance the potentially conflicting ideals of more participation and speedier decision-making. This theme was to be explored further by the mediation workshop, with the discussion on the extent to which mediation can help reduce conflict and tension in planning.

14. The main criticisms of the planning system were outlined. These included: the out-of-date plans of many local authorities, the length of time to make a decision, and the way in which the community often feels a plan does not accurately reflect their views. These issues would be less significant if the system were consistently to produce quality developments, but the reality often falls short of this ideal.

15. The three strands to the modernising agenda were outlined - the Review of Strategic Planning, Design, and Public Involvement. Some of the main conclusions from the Review of Strategic Planning are the publication of the National Planning Framework; the proposed removal of the two tiers of plans for the majority of Scotland and replacement with City Regions plans for the four major cities (ie Edinburgh, Dundee, Glasgow and Aberdeen) and Local Development Plans taking the place of local plans; and the change from National Planning Policy Guidelines to Scottish Planning Policies. It was also emphasised that modernisation to development plans requires more than procedural change so that consultation, management, content and delivery are all reassessed.

16. Following on from Mr Chisholm's speech, Mr Barraclough picked up on the conclusions of Your Place, Your Plan. He stated that in addition to the National Consultative Group, that it was important to stress local forums, as planning is mainly carried out at a local level. One of the workshop topics included reference to Local Planning Forums and was to discuss in part what these forums should do, who would be involved and what status they would have. Mr Barraclough also spoke on the consultation on widening the rights of appeal, and the importance of e-planning in providing a modern accessible system. In particular it was noted that many planning authorities have made great progress with their websites and that there would be an opportunity throughout the day and in the e-planning workshop and demonstration to see and discuss this.

17. He concluded by summarising the National Consultative Group's role as an element of wider engagement with communities and emphasised that the Scottish Executive want to use the group to hear the views on its current programme of reform and beyond.

Karol Swanson

18. Karol Swanson began her presentation with an overview of Planning Aid for Scotland's role as an impartial charity formed in 1993 that provides free advice, information and training on planning matters. She outlined the public conception of the planning system as inaccessible and bureaucratic; a process that "happens to them'. She explained that the barriers to involvement are many, including a lack of resources to assist participants, mistrust of local authorities' attempts at involvement and ' NIMBYism', but there are several ways to overcome them. These include learning the planning language, opening up local debates to include others and cascading the information learned at events through the community. Local people have valuable knowledge to give to planners about their area and the needs of their community. If they have a say in how they want their communities to develop then the Scottish Executive vision of "strong, vibrant and healthy communities" may become reality.

Workshops and Plenary

19. The meeting then broke into two rounds of workshops, with a total of five workshops being held in each session. These involved a presentation and discussion on e-planning, as well as workshops on Mediation, Local Plans (including Local Planning Forums), Neighbour Notification and Rural Diversity. The facilitators were asked to seek a Reporter who would summarise the discussions into five key points. Roger Kelly of the Scottish Executive co-ordinated the output from these discussions and reported them back to the whole group in the plenary session. This was followed by an open discussion. Details of this are set out in the following pages of this report.

WORKSHOP SESSIONS - POINTS ARISING

INTRODUCTION

Attendees were asked in advance to consider which of the five workshops were of particular interest to them and were allocated their preferences where possible. The structure of the day allowed each attendee to contribute to two workshops. They were also provided in advance with copies of 1-page handouts for each of the workshops as a way of facilitating discussion and debate. These can be found in Annex 3.

Each workshop was led by an independent facilitator. Members of the workshop were asked to appoint a Reporter who was then asked to provide at least five key points for the Reporting Back session.

Following discussion with the Reporters, Roger Kelly of the Scottish Executive collated the comments from each workshop for the Reporting Back session thus allowing all attendees a flavour of the discussions.

REPORTING BACK

The following is an overview of the comments made at each of the individual workshops.

Mediation in Planning

The Mediation workshops defined their topic as "dispute resolution in planning through the intervention of an independent third party". True mediation is not a negotiation of the kind that might be carried on before a planning application is submitted or before a local plan inquiry is heard into objections. It is not a substitute for community involvement either. But it can help to build understanding and it can go on to help resolve conflict. Mediation must be undertaken as early as possible to help build understanding and head off conflict. But it has a part to play in different stages in the process. Its powerful role in brokering understanding of the details of development should not be underestimated. Used effectively, and at the right stage, mediation has the potential to save time and vast amounts of money. It can also reduce stress through better understanding. All in all, the groups heard a vast range of opinion, positive and negative, on what mediation can achieve.

Local Planning

The workshops on Local Planning Forums explored an idea floated previously by the Executive to build up opportunities for effective public involvement in planning in the longer term and to provide effective channels for feedback. In touch with local issues and expertise, the forums would deal with all aspects of the planning service in an area. There was a strong workshop view that the community's input to planning should be a priority and given proper weight and resources. "Above all, the need is for constant engagement, not consultation, and we should learn from past experience." Some were cynical about the value of a constant arrangement, because it might just involve the usual suspects. It is important to engage people with the issues rather than just responding to proposals. But old habits die hard and the "Scottish Executive is misguided if it thinks attitudes are going to change in the short term." Apathy is the main problem, this comes from a feeling of powerlessness: "People want a system they can influence". If there is no chance to influence the council's planning policy, implementation and service, the Forum would have no purpose. A good example of work with service users in Aberdeen was mentioned.

Neighbour Notification

The Neighbour Notification workshops heard reports of bad experiences: people being given wrong or misleading information by applicants and sometimes not being notified at all: "Councils surely must be better at doing things right". "We need to get information out to key folk quickly". This means clearly defining neighbours and ensuring they are notified, but also reaching out more widely to community groups. There are problems for areas that don't have active community councils or groups. There are problems for neighbours who may be disabled, elderly or speak another language, who may find it difficult to follow up the notification. At least the council can make sure that the form of notification clearly describes the proposals without misleading or frightening people, and can show people where to get more help and information. The workshops looked beyond neighbour notification to websites and billboards as possible channels of information about planning proposals and intentions. Websites should be easily accessible, no-one should feel excluded, and "community involvement needs to be properly resourced".

Rural Diversification

In the Rural Diversification workshops, flexibility was a key theme; flexibility to respond to local needs and flexibility in the definition of rural and urban. Both workshops thought more planning should be devolved to communities: there should be local community participation in identifying needs and appropriate development. The planning powers-that-be should show a lot more sensitivity to rural types of development, to particular localities, and to the needs of the farming community as custodians of the land. Rural areas seem to suffer a jumble of conflicting actions and policies. We need long term vision and joined-up action. "Wealthy visitors pushing out the locals" and "closing the post office and closing the schools while we seek more land for housing" need sensible, practical responses, yet decisions are not being joined up because there is no proper vision in the first place.

The lack of joined up thinking extends to the way grants and regulations are applied, often with locally-adverse consequences: "lots of money is being spent: we should be spending it better to get the results we want in each area". We need joined-up policies between agencies. Empowering communities could play a part in doing things right in each area, looking at support for local facilities and opportunities for new development, remembering that local knowledge is vital and rural land tends to be held in very few hands. The point was made that for all the rhetoric about small is beautiful, local needs for development are often rejected and it seems easier to get away with the really big things in the countryside. We need to think about scale: Scottish, regional and local. And about sustainability: economic, social and environmental. "Let's be opportunistic, not mechanistic", and avoid following set formulas blindly. "Let's be optimistic, too", there are plenty of good examples of planning on the ground ("creating tourist attractions on the back of aggregates working for example") we can learn from and be inspired by.

e-planning

The e-planning workshops explored the new online planning information and service options becoming available from planning authorities. The opportunities were there for businesses, community groups and the public to get what they needed to know twenty four hours a day. Some saw a danger that e-consultation might grow at the expense of face-to-face contact. We should think of it as an enhancement of existing services, not a replacement. As a priority, awareness of e-planning and its potential needs to be raised with the general public. Second, there should be proper attention to staffing, training and realistic expectations of resources to implement the new services. Some administrative savings could be made.

Thirdly, effort should be put into getting consistent e-planning services across every part of Scotland. This should not be by holding back the pioneer authorities, but in setting standards and securing resources for the others to follow. We need to ensure we have the capacity for future use. A fourth point raised in the workshops was about the benefits of visualisation. Maps, images, air photographs, 3-D models and fly-throughs could all help to give a better idea of the impact of new development and the interaction of geographic factors: these are already used for computer games, we should explore their uses for consultation and decision-making. Finally ("to avoid e-estrangement") we should remember the diversity of service users and aim to help them to meet their own needs, augmenting the 24/7 access with easy searchability and the necessary range and depth of topic information and planning history, so that their decisions, comments and judgements on land use and property matters can be better informed.

The message of several workshops was that there are many legitimate voices. People don't want to be excluded just because "you're not from round here", "you're not a neighbour", "you're just a NIMBY", "You don't know what you are talking about", "You're not in the majority", "No-one else says that". They want to be able to understand what is happening. To have their voices heard, their viewpoints valued, and clear explanations when decisions are made.

PLENARY SESSION

In the plenary session, Debbie Wilkie (Scottish Civic Forum) invited comments on the theme of the planning system. The following substantive points were made:

• There is a delicate balance between making the planning system faster yet more inclusive. The planning system is seen to be failing if it is too slow, but if the results are unacceptable to the general public it is also failing.
• It is problematic to get individuals to consider strategic planning. Most individuals react to proposals. Possible that change could come about through different dealing with the media and education.
• Planning needs to interface more with other departments within local authorities to be truly effective. (It was pointed out that effective planning departments should already be doing this.)
• Community councils could be used more effectively. They could help with Plain English for the different planning documents (for example a glossary at the back could be helpful) and disperse the information effectively. They should also be reformed so that they are a true reflection of the community they represent.
• It is important that the public have realistic expectations. Participating does not mean that you get what you want all the time.

Debbie said that these were all useful points and would be reflected upon.

The meeting closed at 15.00, with the Group being thanked for their participation and contributions.

OUTCOMES

The Executive agreed to provide an update to attendees on how their input to the NCG impacted on Executive thinking. The outcomes for individual topic areas are highlighted below. Where it has been indicated below that no further progress has been made on a particular issue since the meeting, this does not include the further meeting of 30 November in Inverness. This meeting has provided additional views for consideration.

Mediation and Planning

There has been no further progress on work towards the consideration of mediation in planning since the meeting. However, the workshop contributions will form a valuable part of the Executive's consideration of this matter when time and resources permit further work to be taken forward.

Local Plans (including Local Planning Forums)

The workshop discussing local plans raised many useful views and interesting experiences on the important issue of how neighbours are most effectively notified of planning issues when they arise.

It was helpful to hear the views on the proposal to directly notify neighbours of site specific polices and proposals being put forward in the local plan. There was support for this initiative provided it is practical and not overly burdensome.

There has been no further progress on work towards the consideration of the broader aspects of local planning forums since the meeting. However, the workshop contributions will form a valuable part of the Executive's consideration of this matter when time and resources permit further work to be taken forward.

Neighbour Notification

The workshop discussing neighbour notification raised many useful views and interesting experiences on the important issue of how neighbours are most effectively notified of planning issues when they arise. All the points expressed are being considered by a Scottish Executive working group set up to look at the current practice of neighbour notification and recommend how it should operate under the new system.

It was encouraging to hear support for the Executive's proposal to transfer the responsibility for carrying out neighbour notification from applicants to local authorities. It was felt this would give communities greater confidence in the system. The suggestion from some in the workshops for direct notification to be extended to a much wider area is being considered against the concerns raised that additional burdens and costs would be placed on local authorities.

The Neighbour Notification working group is currently addressing all the views made as it draws up detailed proposals for legislative change.

Rural Diversification

The comments by the groups were very helpful in assisting the Executive to finalise its package of planning measures for rural Scotland, which was published on 7 February. A number of points either helped to confirm some of the Executive's initial thinking or prompted some further thinking. The vision set out in Scottish Planning Policy 15 Planning for Rural Development http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/planning/spp15-00.asp will be important to delivering prosperous and sustainable communities, with community involvement key to helping to deliver these objectives. The general thrust of PAN 73 ( http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/planning/pan73-00.asp) was welcomed and a number of important points were raised and considered in the conclusion on what the PAN should address. The PAN has sections that deal with: recognising individual circumstances, defining what rural is, community involvement, business location, the importance of liaison with other agencies, issues of scale, and deals with issues surrounding the sustainability triangle of environmental, economic and social factors.

E-Planning

In November 2004, the Executive published Planning Advice Note 70: Electronic Planning Service Delivery ( http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/planning/epan70-01.asp). The purpose of this PAN is to identify how new technology can improve the delivery of the planning service. It sets out the online information and services that need to be provided by the Scottish Executive, planning authorities and other organisations responsible for the efficient operation of the planning system.

It also highlights the e-Planning Compact which sets out the Scottish Executive's and planning authorities' agreed aspirations for an effective e-planning service and details the objectives for delivering planning information and services in the short, medium and long term.

Since the National Consultative Group meeting the Executive, in partnership with the e-Planning Group, has continued to promote the use of e-planning to improve service delivery. Planning authorities are continuing to enhance their internet sites to provide access to planning information and services. Additionally, a joint bid by the Executive, planning authorities and other governmental organisations has been submitted to the Efficient Government Fund. If this bid is successful it will enable rapid advancement of e-planning services across Scotland.

ANNEX 1: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

ANNEX 2: NATIONAL CONSULTATIVE GROUP MEETING, 15 NOVEMBER, SENSATION, DUNDEE

Programme

E-Planning demonstration will also take place over the coffee and lunch breaks

ANNEX 3: WORKSHOP 1 - PAGERS

Mediation in Planning workshop - Background Note

1. Getting Involved in Planning ( http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library3/planning/fipc-00.asp), published by the Executive in November 2001) sought views on the use of mediation in planning: whether and when it could be recommended, how it could be funded and arranged. The paper said that mediation, commonly used in business, family and neighbour disputes, might have a useful role to play in planning. For example it might help to resolve disputes between potential developers and objectors at pre-application stage or after a planning application refusal. It may also have a role in resolving objections when a local plan is finalised, before a public local inquiry is held. Successful mediation depends on both promoters and objectors of development being willing to meet and consider compromise. Research in England showed that the main benefits of mediation might be in householder cases. We could see there could be difficulties when one party is a public body with statutory duties. While we thought it was too early to suggest any formal role for mediation in planning, we welcomed views.

2. Your Place, Your Plan ( http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/planning/ypyp-00.asp), published in March 2003, noted that mediation was held to be useful as an additional option in dispute resolution, but in relatively limited circumstances. Respondents suggested that mediation had the potential to save time and expense, and to help all parties better understand the issues where there were disputes. It was likely to be helpful in relation to householder or other small scale applications, applications contrary to planning policy or where there was significant community interest or opposition. Some respondents queried the value of mediation, commenting that the approaches involved were already a part of current planning practice.

3. Regarding the organisation and funding of mediation, the most prevalent view was that it needed to be an independent service to gain credibility and trust. There was no consensus as to how it should be funded. We noted that there may be merit in mediation in planning in the right circumstances. Our view was also that there is scope for planning authorities to use mediation to reduce the range and number of objections in local plan inquiries.

4. In addition, the Partnership Agreement says that the Executive will examine the mechanisms required for pre-application consultation and mediation in the planning process, including, where appropriate, involvement by local councillors, revising the councillor's code of conduct to assist this, so communities can engage with developers over controversial applications.

5. Attendees at the first NCG meeting reflected similar concerns about mediation with the early involvement of communities, including at the local plan stage, being suggested by a number of people. In addition, the distinction was made between mediation, which would take place once a firm proposal was in the public domain, and early interaction with affected parties or communities before firm proposals were submitted to the local authority.

Issues you may wish to consider for the workshop:

• Have you used mediation in the context of planning? If so, how did it work? What were the circumstances that led you to do this? Was it a positive experience?
• How could mediation in planning attain the "independent" status that consultation respondees said was important? How should such a service be funded?
• To what extent should the Executive become involved? Should it be left to councils to progress this, using professional mediators and others as appropriate?

Local Plans including Local Planning Forums - Background Note

1. It is very important that the views of individuals and the local community are fully considered when decisions are made on planning matters. In order for people to be able to comment they first need to be aware when a proposal is being put forward, right from the preparation of a local plan through to the consideration of a planning application.

2. Publicising the preparation of a local plan, and the proposals contained in it, has traditionally centred around mail drops, press adverts, public meetings and general media coverage. Many people still complain of a lack of awareness of the proposal being put forward in the local plan. Often when an application is put forward they feel frustrated that the principle for that development has already been agreed in the local plan, the existence of which they were not aware.

3. The suggestion that Councils directly notify people who may be affected by proposed policy changes in the development plan was supported by the majority of respondents to the White Paper Your Place, Your Plan (published by the Executive in March 2003) . But while individuals and community groups were strongly in favour of the idea, seeing it as a means of encouraging much better, continuous communication on development plans, local authorities were opposed. Councils suggested that the proposal would have significant resource implications and was likely to lengthen the timescale for local plan production. To improve participation in the preparation of local plans, the Your Place, Your Plan confirmed the Executive's decision to pursue a proposal to supplement traditional forms of publicity with direct notification to neighbours of key proposals in a development plan. As this is an entirely new aspect of the planning system, it is important we design it so that it useful, practical and not overly burdensome, perhaps by focusing on certain types or sizes of proposals.

Your Place, Your Plan paper: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/planning/ypyp-00.asp

Getting involved in Planning consultation paper: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library3/planning/fipc-00.asp

4. Getting Involved in Planning (published in November 2001) suggested that councils should consider setting up more active consultation arrangements through local planning forums. The Executive noted that these forums could be used to encourage discussion and build up local interest and expertise in the full range of planning issues in an area. Your Place, Your Plan recognised that the consultation responses showed strong support for this idea, although this was qualified by requests for more detailed information on issues such as the remit, status and composition of forums, and how they would fit with existing and developing mechanisms for community involvement.

• In the past how have you learnt about the preparation of your local plan?
• What types of development proposals would you like to be notified about?
• How would you expect to be informed?
• How best can the community be informed to ensure a representative view, rather than only those individuals neighbouring the proposal site?

• If you have experience of local planning forums, what scope do you think they could play in local plan preparation? Who would be involved in these forums? What status would they have?

Neighbour Notification Workshop - Background Note

1. It is very important that the views of individuals and the local community are fully considered when decisions are made on planning matters. In order for people to be able to comment they first need to be aware when a proposal is being put forward, right from the preparation of a local plan through to the consideration of a planning application.

Planning Applications

2. There are a number of existing methods used to publicise planning applications. These include letters, site notices, weekly lists, websites and local press adverts. The present neighbour notification system is based upon self-certification by the applicant. It differs from England and Wales where planning authorities have the duty to make sure notification takes place. Getting Involved in Planning (a consultation paper published by the Executive in November 2001) suggested that If authorities carried out neighbour notification, it should be more consistent, the notice should be more accurate, plans and documents would be available for inspection and the period for making representations should correspond to the period when the authority cannot determine the application. This should raise public confidence in the system.

Getting Involved in Planning consultation paper:

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library3/planning/fipc-00.asp

3. The White Paper Your Place, Your Plan (published in March 2003) noted that this proposal was broadly supported by most groups, albeit largely qualified by comments that significant extra resources would be required by councils as a result. Indeed local authorities were mainly opposed to the idea on the grounds that there would be a significantly increased administrative burden, a strain on resources, and potential delays in the processing of planning applications. The Executive's intention is to transfer the responsibility for notifying neighbours by letter from applicants to local authorities.

Your Place, Your Plan paper: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/planning/ypyp-00.asp

4. The Executive considered that there are significant benefits in passing neighbour notification responsibility to local authorities and would therefore be implementing this proposal. It accepted in principle the need for increased fees as a result, and is to examine the appropriate level of any increase building on the existing evidence base. As the Executive moves to this new system there is an opportunity to adjust the existing notification arrangements; for example, only those neighbouring the development site or within 4 metres will receive a notification letter.

• If the site adjacent to you was being considered for development how would you expect to hear about it?
• Should anyone other than the immediate neighbours be directly notified?
• What is your opinion of the usefulness of these methods of notification?
• A local newspaper advert - do you read these? are they easy to understand?
• A site notice - do you stop to look at these?
• A large billboard placed on the site or side of the building - would this be effective?
• A letter through your door - would you respond to this?
• The Council's website. - do you have access? Would you check for new development proposals?
• What other methods could be introduced to notify people of development proposals that may affect them?

Rural Diversification - Background Note

1. In 2002, The Scottish Executive commissioned research to evaluate the effectiveness of National Planning Policy Guideline 15: Rural Development. The findings of the research have informed a new Scottish Planning Policy 15: Planning for Rural Development ( SPP) 15, a consultative draft of which was published in January 2004. The final version of SPP 15 will be published before the end of the year along with two Planning Advice Notes ( PANs) providing examples of good practice in rural development; one on 'Housing in the Countryside' (Revised PAN 36) and one on 'Rural Diversification'. Your views will be helpful in assisting us to finalise these publications.

2. The revised SPP 15 recognises that the planning system has an important role in supporting rural life, rural communities and the rural economy, and sets out a vision for a more confident, forward looking and diverse rural Scotland (Rural Scotland is defined as the countryside, and settlements of 3000 people or less). It recognises that many landowners, including farmers, have diversified away from traditional farming and forestry, and that many other rural businesses are also expanding into new areas. The SPP encourages further diversification of the rural economy. It encourages planning authorities to liaise closely with organisations, such as Scottish Enterprise, to help promote and support business opportunities in development plans. It also states that diversification is likely to be most appropriate in locations where access, particularly by public transport, drainage capacity and IT infrastructure exist or can be provided at reasonable cost. Developments with the added value of employment generation or community benefits are encouraged, especially where they involve the imaginative and sensitive re-use of land and buildings.

3. The review of NPPG15 found that there are many different interpretations of rural diversification and of planning authorities' roles in supporting it. The new PAN on Rural Diversification will define rural diversification as being, in its simplest terms, the establishment of new enterprises in rural locations (from heavy industrial activities through to shops and services). The PAN will highlight how the planning system can support rural diversification through development plans that reflect the aspirations of communities, contain positive policies and identify sustainable sites that reflect the many different demands of businesses. It recognises that sustainable rural diversification can attract new people to declining areas, reduce commuting, help to protect the environment and bring brownfield sites back into use, but that issues of accessibility, infrastructure, scale and design sometimes need to be overcome. It also stresses that sound and helpful advice from Planners can help to identify issues early and reduce delays for businesses, and that a flexible approach is sometimes required if businesses are to realise their opportunities.

Issues you may wish to consider for the workshop:

• What does the term 'rural diversification' mean to you? What is the difference between farm diversification and rural diversification? What sorts of businesses are most beneficial to rural areas? Are rural areas suitable for all types of business?
• What is the planning system's role in supporting rural businesses? What sort of obstacles do businesses in rural areas face? How can the planning system help them overcome these obstacles? What are the most important planning considerations for rural areas?
• How do you ensure that new development associated with rural businesses is both sustainable and sensitive to its surroundings? How can rural businesses help to improve the environment? What do you think are the main social and economic benefits associated with rural businesses?

"E-Planning" workshop - Background Note

1. The Scottish Executive is committed to getting more people involved in planning the future development of their area. Getting involved has traditionally been through paper correspondence, telephone calls or face-to-face contact with planning officials. However, for many people and businesses an increasingly convenient way to get involved is via the internet.

2. Many planning authorities have developed their websites to allow access to planning information and services online. Indeed, planning already notches up more internet hits than almost any other local or central government topic, and use of the internet is increasing. However, the level of online planning information and services is uneven across Scotland.

3. The Executive has been working with Planning Authorities since 2001 through the E-Planning Group to drive up standards and help to co-ordinate new forms of service delivery. An E-Planning Compact has been drawn up jointly and sets out how each element of planning service and information can be delivered electronically. It encourages putting more planning information on the internet about policies and planning applications. It promotes the creation of online systems that allow people to submit or comment on planning applications and pay planning fees. This is not the stuff of dreams! Some planning authorities already have the computer systems in place that make all this possible.

4. The Executive has removed legal barriers to electronic service delivery and its planning homepage ( www.scotland.gov.uk/planning) is being developed as the main point of access to planning information on the web. Links have been created between this and Planning Authority websites, so that users of the planning system can easily find the information or service they need. The Executive is also investigating the feasibility of creating a standard planning application form and making it available online.

Issues you may wish to consider for the workshop:

• Do you ever use planning authority websites or the SE planning homepage?
• If not, why not? What is preventing you?
• If yes, which features of these sites are most helpful or unhelpful?
• How would you like to see planning websites develop in the future?