Planning Overhaul
We’ve heard it before. And we are now hearing it all over again – the Government wants to slash red tape and speed up the planning application process in respect of both commercial and residential property. So what’s different this time around?
Critics of the UK planning system have been demanding change for some time. “Now following a just-published White Paper, an overdue shake-up is on the way,” said Matthew Smith, who heads up the commercial agency operation in the Nottingham office of King Sturge.
He added: “Government ministers have admitted that new proposals will replace an existing system which is both costly and confusing. But climate change is really at the heart of the reforms.”
Communities secretary Ruth Kelly told parliament that changes were needed to the country’s cumbersome planning system in order to fight global warming and secure future energy supplies that did not release harmful fossil fuels into the environment. And by scrapping the need to secure planning permission for minor home improvement projects, property owners will now be able to do their bit for the environment by making more use of rooftop wind turbines and solar panels.
Significantly, however, the consolidation of eight separate planning application mechanisms into one all-encompassing commission will save £1bn over the next decade,” said Mr Smith, who added that the overhaul also called for the establishment of an independent planning commission to take responsibility for approving major infrastructure projects.
For a long time we have needed a planning system that is good for the consumer, good for businesses and good for the environment. Hopefully, that is now on the way,” said Mr Smith. He added: “At the moment, the current system of lengthy public inquiries to deal with major infrastructure projects if far from satisfactory. And apart from the delays, uncertainties and costs involved, it is questionable what weight is placed on the views of major objectors.”
Mr Smith said that the new proposal for an independent planning commission was worthy of consideration but great care needed to be taken to ensure public accountability. “National policy statements will assist, but the Government will have to be very careful to ensure that local people’s views are fully taken into account – otherwise there is a danger of civil disobedience.”
With regard to out-of-town retail developments, Mr Smith said that the RICS had called upon the government to retail a “needs” test for supermarkets on the grounds that it would prevent supermarkets unnecessarily creating large out-of-town superstores that could have a detrimental affect on the sustainability of town centres and the future of the high street. However, he commented: “Fears that the revision to retail planning policy later this year, with the removal of the “needs” test, will open the floodgates to out-of-town development are unfounded. And the recent success of the “Town Centre First” policy gives me confidence that when a new test is to be introduced it will continue to ensure that priority is given to the town centre.”
He said: “The reliability of needs assessments that have been undertaken in recent years are open to challenge – most analysis is based on limited real world data and many of the assumptions adopted in such instances are open to challenge. However, detailed information on the turnover of shops throughout the UK is available and it would be helpful if date protection issues could be addressed to allow this information to be used to assist in retail planning.”
Commenting on local development frameworks, Mr Smith said: “Planning authorities and the property industry have been struggling

to get to grips with the system, and I am pleased to see that the Government has recognised that it has certain shortcomings and that there is need to simplify procedures. Action needs to be taken as a matter of urgency as in many parts of the country the delays in bringing forward LDF Core Strategies are delaying the preparation of more detailed planning policy guidance for areas in need of regeneration.”
Referring to planning application fees, Mr Smith added: “The Treasury influence in the White Paper can readily be seen. There are proposals to increase planning application fees, and to introduce new fees to help Councils recoup the cost of dealing with planning conditions, and potentially the introduction of new fees for planning appeals.”
He went on: “The Government needs to remember that the planning system exists not only for the benefit of individual applicants but for society as a whole. Whilst securing planning permission may give rise to significant enhanced land value, that is something which the Government’s proposed Planning Gain Supplement (PGS) seeks to address. It is of note that the White Paper, which introduces a wide range of reforms, does not include any further indications of the Government’s attitude towards the proposed PGS – may be a reflection that this measure may be diluted or even dropped altogether.”
Business Rates
As businesses across the county start to receive their dreaded annual rates bill Underwoods is warning that the amounts may come as a shock as transitional relief diminishes and rates increase in an every upward spiral.
Andrew Boulter of Underwoods, says: “Now is the time for businesses to consider challenging their rating bill – as a successful appeal can save thousands of pounds.”
“Most ratepayers assume that as the bill is sent by the local authority it is accurate and must be paid, however a demand often includes a complex set of calculations with little or no explanation. This could mean businesses end up paying excessive amounts.”
Local authorities calculate a property’s rate bill by multiplying the Rateable Value by a factor known as the Union Business Rate (UBR). For the year commencing 01 April 2007, the UBR is set at 44.4 pence in the pound and at 44.1p in the pound for small businesses (one where the rateable value is under £15,000 or £21,500 in Greater London). Transitional relief eases the burden of an increased rateable value from one five year period to another and limits the amount by which a rates bill can raise – or fall – each year following a revaluation.
The legislation, under which the demands are calculated is extremely complex especially when a property has been altered, is subject to the transitional regulations or where the liability is subject to any number of supplementary charges. The problem is compounded by local authorities who often interpret rating legislation differently giving rise to legal and technical inaccuracies. Therefore, businesses which are keen to ensure that their rates bill is correct should turn to a professional advisor with expertise in rate liability.
The National Rating Forum, which interfaces with local authorities and government agencies in this area of taxation, recently investigated demands from 441 UK authorities and discovered the 60% had potential billing errors.
Andrew Boulter concludes: “A well advised business operator should employ a specialist consultant to check, not only the accuracy of the assessment placed on their property by the Valuation Office, but also the demands they receive from the local authority.”