130221410TCP1014 EssayWord Count: 1989

The English Planning System: the arena where National and Local Political interests meet

Our planning system is a reflection of both National Political decisions and Local Political Agendas; there is no doubt that Political Ideology constrains the final decisions made on planning applications through the use of policy and legislation. This essay will use a recently approved planning application for 8 dwellings in Skelton Green (near Redcar, East Cleveland) as an example to demonstrate how and why the planning system allows both National and Local interests to influence planning decisions, and will conclude by debating whether Local or National Politics acts as the main constraint on Local Authorities.

It could be argued that the planning system acts in the interests of the Coalition Government who use policy and legislative tools to influence development by reducing the weight which local policies hold in resisting it. Regarding the case of Skelton Green, the applicant proposed the building of 8 dwellings on agricultural land on the edge of the village (Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, 2013). One local concern was that that the proposal was located outside of the permitted development limits set out in Policy DP1 of the LDF (Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, 2013). Furthermore, the proposal is in conflict with Policy CS2 ‘Location of Development’ which sets out to limit development in the East Cleveland Villages (Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, 2007). So it is clear that this local concern was highly valued by the Local Policy. The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004) seemingly promotes the value of the Local Policies and the plan-led nature of the system;

“(6) If regard is to be had to the development plan for the purpose of any determination to be made under the planning Acts the determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise” (Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, 2004; 38(6))

However, “unless material considerations indicate otherwise” is key here. The NPPF is a material consideration and should be taken account when determining applications (DCLG, 2012). Paragraph 14 of the NPPF states that:

“At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking.” (DCLG, 2012: 4)

The Framework then further adds:

“For decision-taking this means:●where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting permission unless:

–– any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole” (Ibid)

The presumption in favour of sustainable development allows the by-passing of what it refers to as ‘out-of-date’ local policies in favour of development. In relation to the case study, Paragraph 49 of the NPPF states that:

“Housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites.” (DCLG, 2012: 13)

The Planning Officer’s report found that the Local Authority could not demonstrate a 5-year housing supply, meaning that subsequently, policies DP1 and CS2 could be considered out-of-date. (Redcar

130221410TCP1014 EssayWord Count: 1989

and Cleveland Borough Council, 2013). This shows how the local policies and the local concern raised were not allowed to be valued highly by the NPPF. As the NPPF is a product of the Coalition Government, National Politics has acted as a constraint to the Local Authority, forcing them to consider the NPPF -using legislation to do this - as a significant material consideration which encourages development.

It could also be argued that the system acts in the interests of Local Authorities who give weight to subjective national guidance, reducing the weight that their own local policies hold in order to alleviate their housing deficits. In this example, the applicant claimed the proposal site was not at risk of flooding and would not increase flood risk elsewhere; this is in direct conflict with a neighbour’s concern that the site, in its current form as agricultural land, is prone to flooding (Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, 2013). Local Policy CS1 was produced line with the local RSS which discussed “controlling development in areas at risk of flooding” (Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, 2007: 20). The adoption of this policy seemingly supports the concern of flooding and aims to protect communities from its dangers. As mentioned earlier, section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004) stresses how the decision-making process should be plan-led unless there are any material considerations holding considerable weight against it (Planning Portal, 2014). In addition, the NPPF states that; “Inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding should be avoided by directing development away from areas at highest risk, but where development is necessary, making it safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere” (DCLG, 2012: 23). The words ‘necessary’ and ‘inappropriate’ are open to interpretation and as a result it could be argued that the word ‘necessary’ was given significant weight by the Local Authority as it was seen as ‘necessary’ development to alleviate housing pressures on themselves; necessary enough to warrant a departure from Local Policy.

Further local concerns raised consisted of access to the site and danger to children using the nearby play area (Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, 2013). The local planning Policy DP3 highly regards these concerns; proposals must “Include a layout and design that takes into account the potential users of the site and does not cause a significant adverse impact on residential amenity” and “create a safe and secure environment” (Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, 2007: 14). The NPPF, however, considers that conditions could be applied to the developer if the application was to be approved, which would be at the cost of the developer and would allow development to go ahead when without such conditions, the development would be deemed unacceptable (DCLG, 2012). Again, the word ‘consider’ hints a degree of choice for the local planning authority, suggesting that they had the choice whether or not to give the NPPF weight in this case. As discussed earlier, the Local Authority is under-achieving in its delivery of a 5-year housing supply. The planning agent - in their role to ‘sell’ the development to the Committee - made the points that the site’s size made it easily deliverable and that “it would help in the delivery of the Authority’s 5 year housing supply” (Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, 2014: 31). Therefore, subjective national guidance has been considered by the Local Authority as a material consideration in order to give weight against local policies which would otherwise be detrimental to allowing this development to go ahead; after all, “whether or not…material considerations outweigh the development plan is a matter of judgement for the decision makers” (Cullingworth & Nadin, 2006: 161).The subjectivity of national guidance shows the flexibility of the system; it allows Local Authorities to easily divert from depart from Local Policy.

However, it could be argued that the Local Authority can be indirectly forced to allow development to proceed by Central Government. By allowing this development to go ahead, the Local Authority

130221410TCP1014 EssayWord Count: 1989

took a step towards demonstrating that they had a 5-year supply of deliverable housing, which ensures that the local housing policies will hold significant weight against the NPPF’s paragraphs 14 and 49 when considering future planning applications, giving them more control over development in the region. The Local Authority have been embroiled in a “catch 22” situation, whereby they are indirectly forced to allow development to go ahead - the NPPF’s paragraph 14 and 49 take control away from the Local Authority by claiming policies are out of date (DCLG, 2012), while the only opportunity to remove the label of ‘out of date’ and restore control is to adhere to guidance such as Paragraph 100 which gives encouragement for further development to take place. The Coalition Government can therefore be seen to be influencing this development; encouraging development by indirectly constricting the Local Authority.

There is a pattern emerging in this essay: National Politics seems to be directly and indirectly influencing this planning decision by reducing the power Local Politics has in the planning process. I shall now include some reflections on the aims of this, which underpins the planning system. One ideological argument relates to the Coalition Government’s policy of Localism – a neoliberal argument for less state intervention (Featherstone et al, 2011). The Conservative Party has a “vision of a more decentralised economy” (Conservative Party, 2010: 1); in terms of planning, they want to remove bureaucratic barriers which they claim the previous government erected (Ibid) so that more development can occur. Through this decentralisation, they are transferring power to private hands; in this case, developers. This is demonstrated in the NPPF’s presumption in favour of sustainable development, which has used legislation to over-run the LDF’s housing policies and in turn, local concerns. This shows the transfer of power from local hands (The Local Authority and local people) to developers by increasing the weight given to policies which approve of their application; clearly demonstrated here is how neoliberal ideology has used policy and legislative tools to transfer power to developers in order to increase the rate of development, which subsequently constrains the decision the Local Authority can make. Furthermore, Danny Dorling discusses another Coalition aim: building more houses. He argues that since 1978, the inequality of income and wealth has risen and along with this, the ratio of rooms the country’s richest have in comparison to the country’s poorest is now 5:1, and that we do not need any more homes as there are enough bedrooms and houses for every family in this country; contrasting with the government’s claim that we need one million new homes (Dorling, 2013). This suggests that the Coalition Government are acting in the interests of the rich by preserving their disproportionate number of bedrooms and houses. Introducing policies which are more inviting for developers (such as the already discussed presumption in favour of sustainable development) allows for an increase in development rates, particularly for housing as has been demonstrated in the case of Skelton Green. This means that the extra bedrooms and homes that the affluent own do not have to be shared out to comfortably house everyone in this country. Instead, new homes are encouraged through a loosening of the planning system; relating to the idea of roll-back neoliberalism discussed earlier.

Throughout this essay, a clear Local Political agenda has been outlined: to increase the 5 year deliverable housing supply which will regain control of future development in the area from developers and Central Government. But this agenda is only in place because National Politics has encouraged it. Tools such as the NPPF were used by the Coalition Government to increase the rate of development; for reasons which cater for the roll-back neoliberal ideology and the rapid increase of housing they wish for. The presumption in favour of sustainable development was given weight by legislation which instructed Local Authorities to consider material considerations that may have held more weight than Local Policies; this ultimately made the LDF’s housing policy redundant, giving more weight to the developer’s application. Avoiding this situation in the future called for a 5-year

130221410TCP1014 EssayWord Count: 1989

deliverable housing supply to be present when considering future developments – this pressured the Local Authority to give subjective NPPF policies more weight to further increase the likelihood of the application’s approval. Yes, the Local Authority clearly has an agenda which at first glance has given weight to policies which cater for an increase in housing, which compromises their own Local Policy (which seemingly regards local concerns highly). However, a closer examination tells a different story: National Political ideology, which seeks to increase development, has been the key driver in directly and indirectly constraining the decision-makers using policy and legislative tools - shifting the power from a local level to developers who will create the development the Government wish for.

130221410TCP1014 EssayWord Count: 1989

Bibliography

Conservatives (2010) Open source planning green paper. London, The Conservatives. Available From:

http://www.conservatives.com/~/media/Files/Green%20Papers/planning-green-paper.ashx (accessed 16/4/2014)

Cullingworth, J. B. and Nadin V. (ed.) (2006), Town and Country Planning in the UK 14th edition. London, Routledge.

DCLG (2012), National Planning Policy Framework, London, DCLG

Featherstone, D., Ince, A., Mackinnon, D., Strauss, K., Cumbers, A. (2011). Progressive Localism and the Construction of Political Alternatives, The Institute of British Geographers, 37(2), 177-182

Dorling, D. (2013) Too many people too few houses? APL Public Lecture, 10th October 2013

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwSeabrXDZ8&noredirect=1

(Accessed 16/4/2014)

Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. (c.5). London, The Stationary Office

Planning Portal (2014), Planning Practice Guidance, Available From:http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/policy/introduction/(Accessed 16/4/2014)

Redcar and East Cleveland Borough Council (2013), Officer Report for R/2013/0738/OO Proposed Erection of 8 Detached Dwellings on Cleveland View, Skelton Green, Redcar, Redcar and East Cleveland Borough Council

130221410TCP1014 EssayWord Count: 1989

Redcar and East Cleveland Borough Council (2013), Redcar and Cleveland Local Development Framework, Redcar, Redcar and East Cleveland Borough Council

Redcar and East Cleveland Borough Council (2014), Planning Committee Minutes 9 January 2014, Redcar, Redcar and East Cleveland Borough Council