No 'clear direction of travel' from Scottish planning reform proposals, experts say

Planning law experts at Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind Out-Law.com, said that although there was "promise" in some of the proposals, the package as a whole lacked detail and did not yet provide a "fully clear and consistently positive direction of travel".

Gary McGovern of Pinsent Masons said he was concerned that "in trying to please the various demands and interests any gains or plusses on one side of the equation, such as measures to streamline and simplify, will be offset by the introduction of new and potentially even more complex layers such that we again end up with a different, but not necessarily an improved, system".

"For instance, while the paper recognises measures to improve and speed up the process for 'section 75' obligations are necessary, the only concrete proposal is to curtail the existing right to seek to modify or remove planning obligations," he said. "This seems more likely to add further delay to the conclusion of section 75 obligations."

"It is somewhat disappointing to see that many measures put forward in the name of 'strengthening the development plan' focus on making speculative planning applications even more challenging and expensive rather than giving a 'foot up' to allocated development by making subsequent applications easier and cheaper. In this context it is disappointing, although perhaps not surprising, to note that the notion of granting planning permission in principle to allocated sites is likely to be abandoned as too difficult," he said.

The consultation follows, and builds on, the recommendations of an independent review of Scotland's planning system, which concluded last year. That report recommended replacing the country's system of regional-level strategic development plans with a single, enhanced National Planning Framework; and allowing local communities to bring forward their own 'locality plans' as part of the local development plan, with statutory status.

The Scottish Government's proposed approach is to try to align community planning better with national spatial planning. It intends to do so by introducing a requirement for development plans to take account of wider community planning, and by developing the existing National Planning Framework so that it better reflects regional priorities.

Planning law expert Craig Connal QC said: "There are a number of areas where the proposals could work against housing delivery. For instance, while it is understandable that there is – and there is nothing new here – emphasis on the role of local people in plan-making, the elephant in the room is that few, if any, involved in the system have ever seen a strong local community movement demanding major housing development in their area."

McGovern said: "Experience with 'neighbourhood planning' in England and Wales suggests the proposal to empower communities to bring forward their own 'local plan plans' is a challenging concept and one which could as easily frustrate as enable housing delivery on any significant scale - those already living in a community are often ambivalent, if not hostile, to further housing proposals".

In addition, local development plans would be strengthened, with plan periods extended to 10 years, and more appeal decisions heard by local authorities rather than centrally. Plans would be required to take a more strategic and flexible approach to identifying land for housing, for example by using 'simplified planning zones' to put consents for zoned housing land in place; while planning authorities would be required to take more steps to "actively help deliver development".

The consultation calls for an 'infrastructure first' approach, with infrastructure planning better co-ordinated at the national and regional levels. Infrastructure planning should become more "innovative"; with a focus on low carbon and digital technologies. The Scottish Government is also keen to explore new options for funding infrastructure, including the potential introduction of a local 'infrastructure levy' to raise additional finance for necessary projects.

Connal said that although the infrastructure proposals sounded "positive", there was "little real commitment to ensure that where housing has to be provided in order to meet demand, infrastructure will be delivered by public bodies charged with delivering it".

"The proposal for an infrastructure levy is interesting; but seems unlikely to be delivered, if ever, in a timeframe designed to deal with the current issues facing the system".

"It is perhaps unfair to judge a paper of this kind, with a myriad of interlocking provisions, at the stage of relatively early scrutiny," he said. "However, many will feel that as a blueprint for delivering significantly increased numbers of houses, and delivering them now, the paper falls well short."

The consultation closes on 4 April.