Episode 141 - Making Successful Planning Applications

This week we will be talking about how to approach the Planning System and Applications. This episode content meets PC2 - Clients, Users & Delivery of Services & PC3 -  Legal Framework & Processes of the Part 3 Criteria.

Resources from today's episode:

Book:

• Good Practice Guide: Making Successful Planning Applications 
  
  

Thank you for listening! Please follow me on Instagram @part3withme for weekly content and updates or contact me via email me at part3withme@outlook.com or on LinkedIn. 

Join me next week for more Part3 With Me time.

If you liked this episode please give it a rating to help reach more fellow Part3er's!

Transcript

Episode 141:

Hello and Welcome to the Part3 with me podcast. 

The show that helps part 3 students jump-start into their careers as qualified architects and also provides refresher episodes for practising architects. I am your host Maria Skoutari and this week we will be talking about How to approach the Planning System and Applications. Todays episode meets PC2 & 3 of the Part 3 Criteria.

Make sure to stay until the end of todays scenario.

Firstly, you must assess and understand for yourself what the Planning System is looking for:

The planning system has a legal basis and operates in a quasi-judicial manner. Architects should develop a good working understanding of national planning policy and guidance, similar to their knowledge of Building Regulations and assessing what the planning system is looking for across the various stages of the design development process. 

This may involve informal conversations with planning officers or more formal discussions within the framework of the pre-application consultation process operated by many Local Planning Authorities. Pre-application consultation and planning performance agreements, should be progressed via a conversation with the local authority which achieves clarity, and hopefully agreement, on the strategic elements before time and energy is invested in the development of dependent detail. Pre-application consultation is encouraged by the Government in the NPPF as a basis for improving understanding of the planning dimensions of proposals and identifying, and potentially addressing, issues before applications are submitted. One area of major concern with pre-application responses from Local Planning Authorities is the frequent lack of critical focus. Many responses include an extensive listing of all the Local Planning Authorities planning policies which may have a bearing on the consideration of the application.

This understanding is crucial for navigating the complexities and perceived inconsistencies in planning requirements across different locations. Planning features in a number of places in the RIBA Plan of Work 2020. Under ‘Core Tasks’ it is recognised that there may be a need for a Project Strategy covering planning. Planning is specifically covered in the bar relating to ‘Core Statutory Processes’, with general observations about what actions in respect of planning are most likely to occur within specific Plan of Work stages. Assessing planning issues should not be left to later stages, as developing design solutions for proposals unlikely to gain consent is not valuable. Adequate resources must be allocated to manage planning issues throughout the project

As such, planning should be viewed as a process that extends through multiple stages of design development, rather than a single event. Early strategic thinking about potential projects is essential. This involves a three-part testing approach to answer the question "Will it fly?”, which includes:

• Clarity on the character and capacity of the site
• Clarity on key aspects of planning policy affecting its use and development
• Clarity on the requirements of the development

This would then be followed by a thorough understanding of the planning history of the site:

Examining the planning history of a site and of the area around it can be very helpful in considering the potential acceptability of proposals. It will also alert applicants to potential resistance, evidenced by past refusals, or encourage the applicant through evidence of approval of past proposals with similarities to their proposals.

This process will then assist to establish what the application will be evaluated against:

The first port of call for architects in developing proposals which need to go through the planning system should be a good working knowledge of these areas of the National Planning Policy Framework and the related National Planning Practice Guidance.

The other main bases of evaluation will be the local plan for the area in which applying in and any additional adopted local guidance. This additional material is generally in the form of supplementary planning documents (SPDs) or adopted guidelines (often covering particular development types, such as ‘extending your home’), masterplans or strategies. The local plan, supplementary planning documents and guidelines should be readily accessible on each Local Planning Authorities’s website, and can typically be accessed through the planning section of the council’s website.

When going through the lists of Local Planning Authority material, note the date that each document was published. The older the document, the less relevance it will have in relation to government policy and guidance in the event of any conflict.

This in turn will inform how the application is likely to be determined:

Decisions on the determination are formally delegated to planning officers.

If an applicant has been struggling with the designated officers views on a proposals, and the applicant feels they have a strong case for consent given your understanding of the policy framework which should be guiding the determination, you may want to try to ensure that the application referred to committee for decision.

Referral, first, opens the possibility that the committee, or individual members, might be more supportive than the officers. Second, it offers the possibility of putting your case in support of the proposals directly to the committee before they make their decision. Understanding the exemptions to delegation in the LPA’s scheme of delegation may help to secure the referral of an application to committee. 

LPAs generally include their particular scheme of delegation on their website, outlining the circumstances in which applications must be determined by committee rather than by officers, and also the circumstances in which officers should not use their delegated powers, but instead refer the application to committee.

The exemptions will vary depending on the LPA, so the applicant would need to check with the specific authority concerned. If the application receives a high level of objections and are reflected in a recommendation to refuse, the application will normally not be referred to committee because the report and recommendation are responding to expressed concern. On the other hand, in finely balanced applications, local council member support can be invaluable – both in getting the application referred to committee and in how discussion proceeds in committee.

Council websites provide details which will help applicants to identify councillors. A ward boundaries map shows which ward the proposal is located within and the applicant can access a list of councillors and their contact details by ward. Will also be able to access lists of the LPA’s committee and its membership, past and future committee meeting dates and the papers from past meetings of the committees.

One important factor to remember is that ward councillors who are also members of the planning or development management committees involved in the determination of planning applications will be wary concerning their involvement with applications and applicants or their agents in advance of determination. They have a legal requirement not to enter the decision-making process with any predetermined views. In this context, while it is useful to familiarise them with the application and its merits, a ward councillor who is not on the decision-making committee may be a more effective ally.

So, if the application is selected to go to committee, this is the architect or clients chance to present their case for the proposal:

If the application has been referred to committee for decision, therefore, there is the possibility that  clients or their architect can make the case in support of the application at a hearing. This is often the best means of securing a reasonable discussion of the merits of the proposal with the decision-makers in public before a decision is made. Such a discussion may result in a recommendation to refuse being overturned, or the application being deferred to allow a site visit to take place, during which committee members can gain a better understanding of the proposals in context, or a suggestion that the application be deferred to allow specific issues to be addressed.

Most hearings will only allow applicants to speak in support of the application if a hearing on the application has been requested by consultees. Consultees tend to request a hearing only if there is strong objection to a proposal and a fear that the LPA might grant consent. They rarely request a hearing to support an application. The LPA’s protocols for hearings, in addition to the circumstances in which hearings will be allowed, will determine the timetable for requests and the rules by which the hearing, if granted, will be conducted. An important element in the conduct of hearings is likely to be a rigidly enforced and generally brief speaking period.

Applicants should ensure that they are clear on the main points that the report is making and the biggest areas of concern and be prepared to strongly rebut them. To help boost the case, applicants should draw on anything they can find from the committee’s or the LPA’s delegated handling of any recent applications with similarities to the proposals. Local press is particularly helpful as a means of gauging committee and member concerns.

Now, apart from the consent required from the Local Planning Authority and committee, applicants are also required to understand other parties that could be involved whether in support or opposition:

Regulations require LPAs to consult all immediate neighbours. Coverage of discussions with them, any modifications made in response to these and any expressions of support secured should be included in the material submitted with the application to help applicants build a successful application. Most LPA websites allow applicants to track consultation responses as these come into the local authority and are posted as documents under the application number. Viewing consultation responses allows applicants to get a feel for the location and the nature of the reaction to the application. It may help consider changes to the proposals which would remove or reduce objections. 

Another party to consider are active organisations in the application area, such as a parish council or residents association. Applicants should consider approaching them in advance of submitting the application and, if appropriate, presenting the proposals to them in draft form. The process should be recorded alongside the applicants response to local reactions as this information can form a valuable part of any statement that is submitted in support of the application – and the material that is included in the presentation in any hearing.

Local press is also another party to consider which can give applicants a picture of community interests and concerns to help applicants identify potential supporters and likely opponents. The local press can be a helpful supporter if applicants find they are running campaigns, columns or article series in relation to the proposal, or proposal like it in the area in which they are working in. 

To further support the process in making successful planning applications, there are a few tools which clients and their architects can use to assist with the process: 

The first key one being, and mentioned at the beginning of the episode, is utilising Pre-application Consultation. Applicants should familiarise themselves with the individual Local Planning Authority’s requirements to assist them in assessing the point at which they are best prepared to enter the process and checking the likely timescales and scope of response. Some LPAs have extended response periods, others may not be able to guarantee to include observations from consultees whose input may be of vital importance to the performance of the project. Therefore, awareness of these factors involving delay or uncertainty, despite engaging in the pre-application process, may prompt some clients to bypass pre-application and simply progress straight to submission of an application with a willingness to amend it to address issues as they emerge during the processing of the application. One area of major concern with pre-application responses from LPAs is the frequent lack of critical focus. Many responses include an extensive listing of all the LPA’s planning policies which may have a bearing on the consideration of the application. While all of these may indeed have some bearing, there will almost inevitably be a small number of policies which are of fundamental importance to the particular application on the particular site. Being able to identify and reflect on the implications of these is central to the further development and progression of the application.

Moving onto the second key tool to assist with developing planning applications, which I again mentioned at the start if the episode is the ‘will it fly test’ which looks at three key elements, site evaluation, key policy requirements and key development requirements. As mentioned, many pre-application consultation responses produce long lists of policies which will be relevant to the consideration of the eventual application but fail to highlight the limited number of policies that will make a critical difference to the acceptability or otherwise of the proposals. Similarly, many plan policies refer to ‘responding to/in sympathy with/in keeping with the character of the area’ without actually defining this ‘character’ anywhere. The ‘Will it fly?’ tool seeks to pool efforts to provide a more narrowly focused understanding of these two areas as a base for considering whether the core requirements of the development brief for the project can reasonably be satisfied on the chosen site. The suggestion is that applicants should try to reach an agreement with the LPA in preparation for a pre-application consultation on sharing the preparation of various elements. In return, the LPA responds with an endorsement or refinement of the character assessment, highlighting the key policies which would shape their response to the core development requirements on the proposed site. If this trade-off can be achieved it will allow the pre-application discussion, and the advice derived from it, to be much more clearly focused on key issues and much more helpful in progressing the project.

The third tool that can be used to assist with the development a successful planning application is planning performance agreements. These are arrangements that are voluntarily entered into between applicants and Local Planning Authorities as a management tool for progressing applications. They encourage joint working between the applicant and local planning authority, and can also help to bring together other parties such as statutory consultees. The principle is that, in return for the payment and the applicant’s agreement to provide specified information by specified programme dates, the LPA commits to responses and actions on agreed specified dates.

Next, the fourth tool that can be used to assist with development a successful planning application is the use of supporting statements, such as Planning statements, Heritage Statements, and so on. LPAs typically require a Planning Statement as part of their validation requirements. If the application relates to a ‘heritage asset’, they are likely also to require a Heritage Statement. The specific circumstances may dictate that a Design and Access Statement is also a formal requirement. It is important to underline the value of making the case to the LPA about the virtues of integrating these statements. All of these aspects impact upon and interrelate with each other. Heritage considerations influence design, and both will have a critical relationship with wider planning issues. In shaping the statement, applicants can choose to establish clear sections which focus on material that is particularly relevant to design or to heritage. This will enable individual consultees to readily identify the material that relates to their core area of concern – but, crucially, embedding the material into the wide  statement should enable them to see their area of concern in the wider context of the remainder of the issues that shape and justify the application.

And lastly, the fifth and final tool recommended to assist with developing successful planning applications are the utilisation of Design Reviews. If dealing with a proposal that seems to be challenging to the LPA in the area of design, applicants should consider referring the proposal to a local, regional or national design review panel. The Design Council (a partial successor to CABE) offers design review through panels drawn from a wide range of national expertise. At the level of the former Government Regions, there are organisations that run design review panels which are interconnected through the Design Network. Many towns, cities and London boroughs have their own panels. With the loss of publicly funded design review services, virtually all panels now charge for their services and will operate a scale of fees for a varying range of services, even if they are run on a not-for-profit basis. Schemes which have been through design review are likely to have relatively extensive related material on the planning application part of the website, including the officer report on the final application, which should feature the record of observations from design review. It may include coverage of how this supports the officer recommendations or how the design has been amended in light of the review. One further factor in considering referral to a design review panel is the breadth of expertise available to it through its panel membership. Most organisations have access to a very wide range of experts from a variety of disciplines. From their pool of panelists, they tend to select a panel that is specifically shaped to the nature of the proposal they will be reviewing, making the most of the process for the proposal. 

To sum up what I discussed today:

• Early Planning and Strategy: Start addressing planning issues early in the design process by understanding site character, relevant policies, and development requirements to avoid costly redesigns.
• Pre-Application Consultations: Engage with Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) early through pre-application consultations to gain clarity on critical policies and strategic elements, ensuring alignment with planning requirements.
• Stakeholder Engagement: Build community support by engaging neighbours, local organisations, and ward councillors while addressing objections proactively.
• Planning Evaluation Tools: Use tools like the ‘Will It Fly?’ test, Planning Performance Agreements, and supporting statements to align proposals with LPA expectations and manage timelines effectively.
• Design Review Panels: Refer challenging proposals to design review panels for expert guidance and validation, strengthening the application’s credibility.
• Committee Involvement: When necessary, advocate for referral to planning committees to present proposals, rebut objections, and leverage opportunities for public discussion and site visits.