Joint Services

Powys seems to have done the right thing in looking to buy-in part of the planning service particularly those occasionally required services. This time it's minerals planning. It appears that the northern part of Powys will join forces with Flintshire, while the south part of the County will have its minerals planning work undertaken by Carmarthenshire. Makes a lot of sense given that minerals planning is a very specialised area of planning legislation, which is forever changing. The cost of employing a minerals planning specialist is costly. However, minerals operators may have a free reign to do very much what they want in Powys in the future given the distances that Flintshire or Carmarthenshire staff will have to travel to deal with an enforcement complaint. As for the communities living in close proximity to minerals sites, the local minerals authority will be in no position to safeguard their residential amenities.

Ceredigion Planning Enforcement Problems

It appears that Ceredigion Council plays lip-service to enforcement of planning controls. This was revealed in last week’s meeting of the Council’s Development Control Committee.

The meeting was told that the one enforcement officer working for the Council deals with some 400 cases a year. The Planning Department reported that following a survey of local authorities in Wales it was revealed that most councils employ at least two enforcement officers and have an annual average number of cases of no more than 200, often less. The result is that the service at Ceredigion is reactionary rather than adopting a pro-active approach i.e. there is only capacity to respond to complaints rather than to keep a watchful eye over developments within the County as they are being built. Does Ceredigion have statistics on the number of retrospective applications that it deals with? Surely another enforcement officer would be almost self-financing if such a post concentrates on getting planning applications for developments under-way without consent?

This is astonishing and a recipe for developers to do what they want.

But isn't planning enforcement a statutory function? Aren't councils now required to monitor developments as they proceed? The Government has introduced charges for conditions monitoring. But how many authorities I wonder have a proper and systematic process in place to ensure that each condition is effectively managed? Planners are notorious for issuing permissions with loads of conditions in a 'belt and braces' approach. But they rarely monitor conditions and chasing applicants for information to discharge conditions is rarely undertaken - but the fee for submission is also lost as a result!

But it seems that developers can make hay in Ceredigion - forget about the rules, just carry on as the likelihood of being caught out is slim.

Shropshire County Council Charges

Shropshire CC has introduced charges for their pre-application advice. These are as follows:
For each type of development a charge will apply for pre-application advice given by the authority. The charges that will apply are as follows (All charges are inclusive of VAT):
Category A - Largescale Major Proposals - £1,750
Category B - Smallscale Major Proposals - £1,000
Category C - Minor Proposals - £500 *
Category D - Other Proposals - £80 **
* A single dwelling will be charged at a flat rate of £200.
** Applications for Minerals & Waste Schemes will be subject to a separate charging regime in recognition of the complexity of such schemes.

Quite a good idea on their part is that they advise developers that pre-application discussions are not mandatory (of course) but to not engage in the process will mean that if the application is subsequently found to not come up to the mark, the Council will not engage further and a decision to refuse planning permission will be issued.

This certainly concentrates the mind and ensures that a good application is lodged first time.

The Council has a range of technical specialists who will be on call to provide advice on their individual specialisms in the following areas:
Highways and Access
Green Travel Plans
Cycling Provision
Ecology
Landscape
Rights of Way
Aboriculture
Conservation & Design
Public Protection
Drainage
Archaeology
A lead officer is appointed to co-ordinate the input of these specialisms, dependant on the scale and nature of the development proposed.

Although some may view this as a money making exercise, I think developers will be only too pleased to get a firm indication of the likelihood of their proposal's success, as well as providing certainty.

Powys Cabinet Funding of Planning Department

As an adjunct to the previous blog, attention has been drawn to the minutes of Powys CC's Cabinet on 4th October 2011 which agreed to vire up to £198,000 (two tranches of £100k and £98k) "to support the changes to the Development Management staffing structure". The only changes it seems is to pension off two officers based in the Welshpool office! This is a real waste of public money and the scant minute and confidential report is typical of such a secretive Council. Anybody willing to submit a Freedom of Information Request?

Powys Planning ....and it goes on

Changes are afoot in Powys Planning Services with a confidential report being considered at Powys CC Cabinet on 4th October. It seems that Cllr Wynne Jones Cabinet Portfolio Member for planning has found yet another scapegoat for the failure of the service. We hear that the planning manager for Montgomeryshire is now being pensioned off with the post filled by the manager responsible for the south (Brecknock and Radnorshire) assuming a County-wide role. But where is the senior manager in all this? A certain individual was taken on to fulfil the role of senior manager across the County with two team leaders managing the day-to-day business at Welshpool and Llandrindod. But we now hear that he is assuming a "strategic" role within the planning applications (Development Management) section. Isn't that the role of the Head of Development & Regeneration? Cllr Jones should look to ensure that these two very senior people also do their jobs. As the local MP said on his blog, Powys is too management top heavy with insufficient capacity on the ground to get on with the work in hand.

Ceredigion-Powys Planning Departments Collaboration

Both Powys and Ceredigion Councils have agreed to look at ways they can collaborate presumably to improve performance and customer service. Both Councils have occupied very lowly positions in the league tables of performing authorities in Wales and some would say two wrongs doesn't make a right and that two of the worst performing authorities are unlikely to improve overnight. What has happened to benchmarking where the worst authorities learn from the best performers? The Councils hope to achieve more responsive, efficient and effective services and point to the need to standardise the validation processes associated with planning applications, enhancing electronic planning services, provision of more resilient and expert team of officers, eradication of duplication e.g. delivering of training and developing new procedures and potentially merging of planning policy teams and developing joint development plan policies.

It is true that both authorities have been criticised by agents and by applicants alike. Powys in particular is not a responsive authority - it is impossible to access advice or speak to an individual planner; they do not respond to messages left at the offices; they do not provide reliable advice. The web site and online public access over the internet is extremely poor. While plans are uploaded on the system and can be viewed online, the system is not user-friendly and is certainly not interactive - none of the consultation responses from statutory consultees are made public. Revised plans aren't placed on the web site and there is no sense of instant interaction - the information is that received at the time of registration.

We wait to see the report from the consultants but it is clear to agents working in the area that both Councils have fallen behind the time and act very much as backwater authorities who have failed to embrace modernisation.

Carwyn Jones Statement on Renewable Energy

Carwyn jones issued the following statement on 17th June 2011 - it's worth copying in full:
"The Welsh Government takes its responsibilities to deliver sustainable development, tackle climate change and deliver energy security very seriously. Our energy needs in a modern society will remain considerable and must be met securely from low carbon sources.

We have a number of obligations we must fulfil, both in terms of our sustainable development duty, and in playing our part in helping to meet the UK Government’s targets for carbon reduction set out in European and UK law.

The Welsh Government’s Energy Policy Statement published in March 2010 sets out the actions that will be taken to promote a diverse mix of renewable energy technologies, including onshore and offshore wind, biomass and marine, and we remain committed to promoting the widest range of renewable energy technologies we possibly can.

In addition, the Welsh Government has made significant progress to promote micro-generation of renewable energy, for example by removing planning restrictions for most forms of domestic micro-generation equipment, as well as supporting community based renewable energy projects.

However, while we continue to promote all forms of renewable energy, onshore wind is currently the most commercially mature form of renewable energy. The Welsh Government remains committed to the principles of planning for onshore wind in a strategic way, which seeks to optimise the production of renewable energy whilst protecting Wales’ environment.

Our policy in TAN 8 seeks to restrict the proliferation of large scale wind farms across the whole of Wales and focuses on the Strategic Search Areas which were derived following an independent assessment.

The indicative capacities set out in TAN8 in 2005 reflected a considered view of the potential impact of grid and transport connections. However, in a number of the SSAs, developer interest has now greatly exceeded those indicative figures. The Welsh Government believes this level of development is unacceptable in view of its wider impacts on the local area.

In our view the TAN 8 capacities should be regarded as upper limits and we call upon UK Government to respect this position when they finalise the Renewable Energy National Policy Statement and to not allow proliferation when they take decisions on individual projects in Wales.

It is this overcapacity which has led to proposals for major new overhead grid infrastructure. We contend that the level of capacity within the Strategic Search Areas which we set in 2005 would negate the need for the large obtrusive pylons which are causing such concern. My Government would not support the construction of large pylons in Mid Wales and my Ministers are pressing this case with National Grid Transmission and with Ofgem.

It has always been our position, as set out in our Energy Policy Statement that such connections should be delivered by less intrusive techniques, and as sensitively as possible, including the use of undergrounding. In cases where communities get the disbenefits of major infrastructure without the economic advantages high voltage power brings to city areas, we believe a new approach must be taken to the undergrounding of high voltage power lines.

In addition, I will be meeting with the British Irish Council on Monday where I intend to raise the impact of the UK Government energy policy on Wales and Montgomeryshire in particular. This situation amply illustrates why consents for major energy infrastructure projects must be devolved to Wales. We cannot accept a position where decisions made outside Wales will lead to inappropriate development for the people of Wales."

This is good news on paper at least but suggests that having identified Strategic Search Areas in TAN 8, which has generated the enormous developer interest, Carwyn knows full well that the ultimate power to grant consents lie with Westminster. I do not believe that the Welsh Assembly Government really believed that the electricity could be delivered by way of 33Kv lines when it published TAN 8. It is indeed ridiculous to have pylons traversing the Severn and Meifod Valleys and Carwyn like so many politicians has beck-pedelled on the issue...for the timebeing....or will end up blaming Westminster!

Wind Farm Special Meeting

An interesting alert from Glyn Davies today about a special motion from Powys Council Councillors David Jones and Graham Brown for a debate by Powys County Council on 29th June to demand that the Welsh Assembly Government conducts a full review of its renewable energy policy guidance to planning authorities before any new planning permissions for wind farms are granted.

Glyn explains that the meeting was to have been held in the Council Chamber at Llandrindod Wells, but it seems that the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall will be at Llandrindod that day. The meeting has been moved to Welshpool Livestock Market, where a building is being converted into a makeshift debating chamber. An audio system is also being installed so that any people attending will be able to hear what is going on.

This all good stuff but a little late in the day. Both Councillors were key members of the Council's Board and were party to positively responding to the the consultation on the Draft TAN 8 when it was published and subsequently agreed the Council's planning policy on wind farms. Maybe the details were too complicated for them at the time.

Let as many people attend as possible to "hear" the debate - we'll sure be treated to some high brow intellectual debate.... oh well, we can only dream! But will it change WAG's thinking? One thing's for sure - our politicians are now clambering on the bandwagon as they see votes being pinned to those rotating blades.

Wind Turbines and Minimum Distances from Residential Properties

A Bill is currently before the House of Lords, which is intended will establish minimum distances between wind turbines and residential properties, depending on the size of the turbines. If enacted, local planning authorities will be prohibited to construct wind turbines unless it meets the minimum distance requirements set out. These will be:
If the height of the turbine is greater than 25 metres but less than 50 m there will be a minimum distance requirement of 1000 metres; if greater than 50 m but less than 100 m the minimum distance requirement is 1500 m; if greater than 100 m but does not exceed 150 m there will be a minimum distance of 2000 m; if greater than 150 m the minimum distance will be 2000 metres.

All height measurements are to end of the blade tip at its highest point.

Not too sure what evidence has been placed before the House of Lords - there doesn't appear to be any scientific studies that would help justify the distances and I wonder whether as technology improves, will the quieter turbines result in changes to legislation?

Pylons in Mid Wales

Have to congratulate Glyn Davies who really has taken up the fight against the proposed pylons which will be necessary to serve future windfarms and who has linked the whole issue back to the Welsh Assembly Government's misguided TAN 8. TAN 8 was hastily prepared based largely on the capacity of the Welsh landscape to accommodate wind turbines. Effectively what the WAG planners did (with the support incidentally of a Powys planning officer seconded to the WAG to help prepare the document!)was to undertake a sieve mapping exercise. Land within our National Parks and AONBs were omitted completely leaving the windy Mid Wales landscapes as the main development opportunity. I understand that the energy people at WAG did not participate in the exercise and neither was the Highway Agency involved. The MOD was uninterested. The result was an over-simplistic, essentially desk-top exercise but the resulting planning policy has taken on far greater importance than it was ever envisaged. At the time WAG was keen to explain that it was a guide for individual local authorities to develop and detail up as a proper planning tool. Instead however, authorities such as Powys and Ceredigion neither had the in-house expertise or the finacial resources to buy-in consultants to develop an effective landscape assessment model. We are left with developers ruling the roost, commissioning the very best national landscape consultants that money can buy and who have run rings around our local authorities. Where applications have been refused, Inspectors at appeal have had to pay regard to TAN 8 as the only adopted planning policy approach. It is only now that people have woken up to the realities and by not consulting properly with the Electricity Companies and the Assembly highway agency at the time, we are left with the ridiculous situation where pylons are necessary to carry the energy into the national grid and our towns and villages are going to snarled up with traffic for years to come. TAN 8 should be reviewed and abandoned as a hastily prepared, uninformed simplistic planning policy tool.

Good on the Montgomeryshire public who are now prepared to take action and to Iolo Williams for his commitment. What a good site the campaign has:
http://www.peopleagainstpylons.co.uk/latest-news

Criticisms of Powys Planning Services

Once again Powys Council's Planning Services have come in for criticism, this time from its own councillors who undertook an internal review. The Scritny Review Panel's report can be found at http://www.powys.gov.uk/rep_2011-03-21repsc1_13.2a_en.pdf?id=47&L=0
The Conservative Group of the Council has taken little time at all in wading in with additional criticism including from Cllr Aled Davies who said at a meeting of the County Council: “I am constantly getting complaints from my constituents about the negative attitude of officials towards development proposals – just when Powys most needs to be encouraging economic regeneration. Powys Planning Services needs a completely different attitude towards the private sector. That’s where the work and the jobs are being created.”

Cllr Russell George also told the meeting that: “One of the major problems in Planning Services is the underperformance of some officials. That puts an extra burden on those who are working properly and so often is at the root of the poor service which the Scrutiny Committee has highlighted. We have known about these problems for a very long time. The time for action is now.”

The councillors' own report found that there was a difference in the quality of services between the two teams operating from Llandrindod and Welshpool, particularly in terms of customer service, individual officer performance and attitudes towards economic development, despite the Council's previous recognition that planning is an important and vital mechanism for delivering regeneration. The councillors' report recommended that
1. Given the differences in service between the two teams, and proposed WAG
changes to the planning system, that consideration be given to reviewing delivery of the service to ensure that an efficient, equitable and customer friendly service is provided across the whole county.
2. Applications submitted which are about to run out of time should be considered by the Senior Manager to ensure that there are no unnecessary delays.
3. Monitoring of applications delayed in the system for whatever reason should be undertaken on a regular basis, to examine the reason for the delay and to assess how much regeneration is being lost or delayed.
4. Planning Officers should be encouraged to challenge statutory consultee objections and to seek advice on a way forward, where the application is likely otherwise to result in a refusal.
5. Planning Officers should be encouraged to use their discretion more, and be given the confidence to use this discretion. Managers must instil into officers that regeneration is one of the main priorities of the Authority. In the current economic climate, private sector initiative should be given all the help it can, as the local economy may benefit from it.
6. Major IT changes should be managed by a dedicated officer from the relevant support service, who is given the time and support to manage the change effectively through to implementation.
7. A robust customer grievance procedure needs to be put in place, whereby all parties have the opportunity to meet early and discuss issues in respect of applications and at an operational level.
8. Where an officer is not performing to required professional standards, performance capability procedures should be instigated at an early stage, and pursued vigorously.
9. Planning Officers should attend Agents' Forums as well as Managers, so that all officers have a clear understanding of issues and concerns from the customer’s perspective.
10 Additional workshops/training sessions should be held cross-county to ensure exchange of good practice and consistency of approach as well as foster closer integration of the North and South teams. There should be consistency in the application of policies across the County to ensure that all clients have equality of service.
11. A more pragmatic approach to overcoming technical problems/planning issues needs to be adopted in some areas.
12. Members should have up to five weeks to call in an application. The current system is too restrictive, and can lead to unnecessary administration being placed on the service by blanket call-ins.
13. In view of recent WAG development control legislation there is a requirement to review the relevance of outline and full planning applications and to discuss the matter directly with WAG.
14. During 2009 Corporate Governance Committee investigated the length of time it took for S106s to be implemented. It is now appropriate to revisit this issue with other departments to ascertain whether the situation has been addressed.

It is a little disingenuous to be too critical of officers in the north and I suspect that the main charge in this criticism was led by Montgomeryshire's Conservative MP's Agent ( a former Chief Executive himself who dabbles periodically in planning matters without any planning qualifications and whose previous experience was back in 1996). Of course and as Cllr Wynne Jones Cabinet Member for Planning at Powys acknowledges, planning has become increasingly complex with planners having to balance a myriad of planning considerations as well as expectations from an increasingly articulate and knowledgeable public. The north of the County is the area of Powys under greatest pressure with far more complex applications being submitted. Agents often comment that the officers in the south of the County are far more approachable and communicate better. But is this something to do with workload pressures I wonder?

Having observed planners working locally (as well as talking to planning officers in both areas), I think there are a number of issues that need to be addressed, including:
a) Planners must make themselves available - in the Welshpool office it is almost impossible to get past the administrative officers who while hardworking and extremely pleasant, are no substitute for speaking directly to officers. Planning officers in Welshpool rarely take phone calls so that dialogue can occur and appear "frightened" of expressing a view - this is directly opposite to the officers in the south of Powys.
b) Planners in the north say that their senior planner responsible for the service has been up to Welshpool no more than a handful of times during his three year term of office. He should be made to spend 3 days a week in Welshpool and not hide away in Llandrindod and Brecon (where he lives).
c) All planning officers should adopt a "positive" attitude towards development, recognizing the importance of investment - at what ever level - to the economic health of Powys. There is a tendency to view applications negatively - starting from a position not "how can we approve" this application but rather "lets see what's wrong with it"!
d) Councillors should not listen to the handful of agents that have criticised the service - planning is a very complex activity (as Cllr Wynne Jones at least understands) and some agents are just not up to the job. Their clients should be demanding better from them having often paid silly fees. It seems to me that agents haven't kept up with this increased complexity and moan when they are expected to provide quality information. As a resident of Powys I am glad that Powys planners are demanding detailed planning applications - it is a pity that we have not got the quality of agents locally - one wonders whether they should demonstrate professional competence. One agent I know is now 70 and has never qualified in architecture, planning or any professional discipline!
e) I'm not sure whether the system whereby Councillors "call-in" applications for determination by Planning Committee is a really useful procedure. They should instead review the scheme of delegation so that major and contentious applications only are referred automatically to Committee rather than being left to officers to decide. Powys councillors have the habit on concentrating on minutea rather than what matters to the wellbeing of Powys. They should not get involved at all in the bulk of straightforward applications but only on really major decisions.

I do think the criticism that the performance of individual planners is poor is a myth. Surely there are internal management systems in place to monitor performance and effectiveness? But speed of determination is not really a very good indicator and Powys should look at quality issues and how these can be monitored. But the senior planner responsible for the service should be seen more often. He seems to be a little puppet for Cllr Wynne Jones who appears to dominate headlines when it comes to planning.

Lingard and Styles landscaping of Offa's Dyke Business Park, Buttington, Welshpool

Hats off to the Assembly Government whose Offa's Dyke Business Park may well be a 'white elephant' but thankfully will be landscaped to a high standard - unlike that awful utilitarian Welshpool Livestock Market down the road where the local hedgerows have been ruined, not a tree planted and the car (lorry) park and roadway reduces any chance of meaningful landscaping. By comparison at Offas Dyke Business Park, proper landscape architects have been employed and a respect to the local landscape achieved. Well done WAG and well done Peter Styles.

Chancellor announces that Government will implement a presumption in favour of sustainable development

The Chancellor has announced the Government will implement a presumption in favour of sustainable development, as recommended by the environmental audit committee. There was concern the current Localism Bill did not have such a presumption, and several Whitehall committees and reports have recommended its inclusion.

Osborne also said the Government will retain existing control on greenbelt land, but remove the current restrictions on other land. What does that mean for AONBs, National Parks, Conservation Areas?

Land auctions of planning permission on public land are also due to be implemented too.

Plans for a new version of the homebuy scheme were also outlined. The Government has made a £250m commitment to the new ‘firstbuy’ scheme for first-time buyers, which Osborne hopes will mean 10,000 families will be able to get onto the housing ladder for the first time.

The plans also include:
 reforming the planning regime, including establishing a powerful new presumption in favour of sustainable development so that the default answer to development is 'yes'
 opening up more land for development by removing nationally imposed targets, while maintaining the greenbelt
 piloting new land auctions, starting with public sector land
 streamlining planning applications, including a 12 month guarantee for processing all applications and appeals and a fast track for major infrastructure projects
 a consultation on proposals to make it easier to convert commercial premises to residential

Great changes lie ahead in planning. Trouble is all this negativity could undermine confidence in the planning system.

Planners - "Living in an ivory tower!"

Shadow planning minister Bob Neill has launched a bizarre attack on the planning system following the results of a Planning survey undertaken in the wake of the recently published green paper.

Responding to the survey result that 80% of planning consultants felt housing completions would fall if Tory proposals are introduced, Neill said:

“Under Labour’s regime of regional planning, house building has fallen to its lowest peacetime rate since 1924. Labour’s Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and Planning Act 2008 have broken the planning system.

This is why we need dramatic change and a new approach that rewards development. This will take away a comfort blanket from full-time planners, but they are living in an ivory tower if they think the current system of fantasy targets works.”

Neill ignores the fact that the survey sought opinions on the Conservatives’ recent green paper, not the current planning system.
Only two weeks ago Neill described the green paper as the start of a conversation. Now, in the face of a tide of criticism, the message seems to have changed to “we know better”.

National housebuilding figures show a decline, but this is hardly unexpected given the current economic downturn. The coalition believe that planning should allow local opinion rather than properly thought through decisions to dictate whether development proposals get the green light - heaven help housebuilding figures when the NIMBYs get their way.

As one planner pointed out, 'What goes around comes around – anyone remember Heseltine and his “planners locking up jobs in filing cabinets” ? What is it with the Tories and planning – are they ideologically opposed to the idea or just with the outcomes – it is hard to tell. Everyone in the profession should read their Green Paper and prepare to be afraid, very afraid – then again remember Nicholas Ridley – he didn’t like planning very much, did a lot to undermine it until someone wanted to build houses opposite his mansion in Gloucestershire – then he found that perhaps it wasn’t such a bad idea after all.' !

Another planner remembers that the current housing crisis started in 1980 when the then Conservative Government cancelled the council house building programme that had continued successfully since 1890. At that time they believed that local decisions and the market would provide the homes we needed for our children and theirs to come. The result of this decision is 4.5 million on the housing waiting list, increasing homelessness, repeated booms and busts created by the undersupply of homes and a whole generation unable to secure a home for their future, that are therefore disconneted from society as they have nothing to look forward to.

The last government attempted to address the massive shortfall in homes, which is our nation's biggest social problem, but alas introduced a development plan system that hasn't really worked, leading to an ever falling supply of homes.

But the system, with amendments, has started to work. It still needs some change, but it had the basis to work. Now is not the time to introduce ill conceived political gesture planning that panders to the middle classes with their large homes thereby forgetting those on the council house waiting list, our homeless and our disconnected youth with no future of a home. We need the regional housing targets and we need council house building to deliver the social homes our children need. The planning commentator ended saying "I am ashamed as a town planner to be living in a society where we can not house our children and I can certainly not suppport a green paper that illustratesd so little knowledge of the planning and development systems".

The green paper is seeking to incentivise local authorities to take housing growth but this may further entrench the NIMBYs and undermine the impartiality of planning decisions.

It is a widely held opinion that the green paper is full of lofty ambitions with little understanding about how planning works in practice. Ivory tower indeed.

One way system around Welshpool

Lots of views being expressed about Welshpool's one-way system not least from certain town centre shopkeepers who fear their businesses will be affected. One noticeable feature of the works is the poor quality materials being used to create the pedestrian refuges and other minor highway works. The use of tarmacadam and concrete kerbs looks stark. After all, Welshpool is an attractive historic town with a fine conservation area. I've commented previously on this subject but now that the works are nearing completion, the highway works are totally insensitive. This would just not happen in Brecon where we find natural stone, conservation kerbs and stone/brick setts being used in the one way system. Seems to me that the highway works were rushed through with no conservation officer input from the Planning Department.

Permitted development rights - changes to planning regulations

WAG is currently consulting on changes to permitted development rights - these rights afford automatic planning permission for small scale development projects. For instance householders will be able to do a lot more to their properties without the need for planning permission. This is sensible as a a lot of the work of a Planning Department is taken up dealing with small scale often domestic extensions and alterations. Powys Council in a report to a recent Board appears to welcome these changes, which is fair enough. The report suggests that the workload of a typical Planning Department will reduce by 25% as a result. But nowhere in the report is any mention as to whether the reduced workload will result in either staff savings or redeploying of staff to undertake more meaningful work. It is clear that planning authorities have wasted much time and effort in dealing with minutiae at the expense of taking care to ensure that major developments of real interest and value to the wider public are considered properly. What will the 25% extra capacity within the Planning Department at Powys be now doing? Hopefully delivering a better service to Powys. But isn't it time that Powys councillors look to saving money too?

Welshpool developments

As the new Tesco development is nearing completion, we hear rumours of the likes of Halfords, Next, Argos, Marstons and even a Travelodge clambering to get into the town. Welshpool Town Clerk Robert Robinson appears to be getting the credit for "saving" Welshpool but probably at the expense of traditional retailers who may find it difficult to compete against the Tescoville that will certainly change the axis of shopping away from Broad Street. Time will tell of course and maybe Mr Robinson will leave a legacy that he at least can be proud of.

We also see that the one way traffic system is being implemented in time for the opening of Tesco. Some have noticed the lack of attention given to the various traffic calming devices that are being installed as part of the new system. The re-paving of Broad Street some years ago resulted in real visual improvements to the townscape of Welshpool. The use of natural York paving and granite kerbs was most welcome and has done much to help preserve the historic character of our conservation area. But the works that are being put in have not incorportaed these sensitive materials. Concrete kerbs and standard bollards (not the Welshpool bollard used at Morrisons) abound. Shame really - clearly the Highway Authority has failed to consult with the Council's Conservation Officer who surely would have insisted on greater care in the use of traditional materials. Unlike most towns across the country, Welshpool does not have a Civic Society who could help keep a watchful eye over our heritage. The lone voice of a single Conservation Officer is not sufficient it seems.

Royal Town Planning Institute Cymru Manifesto

As changes begin to bite into planning in England, Anna Prescott, Chair of RTPI Cymru, said:
“RTPI Cymru does not believe that there is any need for significant change in the planning system in Wales, but we do believe that there are a number of areas that can be improved. In particular, we believe that the Wales Spatial Plan can be improved to ensure that the right infrastructure is in place for development; that all decisions on renewable energy projects should be devolved to Wales; and, that there should be sufficient resources for planning to perform effectively for the long term.”

The ten recommendations are:
1. Promote appreciation of the planning system as an essential tool for society
2. Retain Climate change as a key priority
3. Retain the Local Development Plan System
4. Promote the culture of pro-active planning to enable community wellbeing and sustainable economic growth
5. Ensure planning supports sustainable economic growth, for long term benefits
6. Review and improve the Wales Spatial Plan to ensure the right infrastructure is in place for development
7. Ensure all decisions on renewable energy projects are devolved to Wales
8. Improve the health and use of the Welsh language
9. Provide resources for planning to perform effectively for the long term
10. Retain independent examination of planning decisions and plans

So not a lot to suggest from RTPI Cymru then - a little more of the same! There is a suggestion that Welsh planners are a little behind the time as evidenced when you hear of the annual dinner in Cardiff, the speakers, the same old participants wearing their black ties! It's in their own interest to peddle the same old storyline of "no need for changes to planning in Wales!" But up and down the Principality, we hear communities bemoan their local planners. Welsh Assembly - look over the border. Yes Pickles is a blast-from-the-past Tory but he is listening to communities and is about to radically change planning in England.

Localism Bill - again an English phenomenon

The much awaited Localism Bill has been published...in England (doesn't apply to Wales) and observers herald this as a new dawn for the planning system. Here in Powys, planning remains under siege from our Tory MP, agents and disenfranchised communities and individuals.

Not much different to my previous blog on the topic but with some omissions, notably the removal of third party rights of appeal, the deferrment of matters relating to CIL (Community Infrastructure Levy that will replace elements presently covered in section 106 Obligations) and the anticipated unequivocal presumption in favour of sustainable development.

But on the latter issue, Greg Clark announced later that the Localism Bill will "establish a presumption in favour of sustainable development". So there you have it. But that is not all there is to the announcement - what is planned does sound as if the word "overhaul" might even be an understatement. Planning is to be very much a local issue with the Government setting national priorities in a single policy document. All national policies currently in PPS/PPG/MPS/MPG (to the extent they survive in the new world) will be merged into a single document, much as it has been done in Wales. Guidance beyond the national policy framework will also be radically slimmed down. The new framework will:
- hand power to local communities to decide what is right for them - instead of imposing excessive rigid rules from the centre
- be more user-friendly and accessible, so that planning will be made easier for the public to have a meaningful say in planning decisions
- make sure that planning is used as a mechanism for delivering Government objectives only where it is relevant, proportionate and effective to do so
- introduce a presumption in favour of sustainable development.

The Government has invited views on priorities before the Bill becomes an Act of Parliament - in 2012.

The death of Section 106 Local Needs Agreements in Powys?

Hidden in the agenda papers of Powys County Council's 14 December 2010 Planning Committee was an appeal decision issued by the Planning Inspectorate discharging a section 106 Agreement on a property at Abermule, Montgomeryshire i.e. allowing the particular property to be sold to anyone on the open market. We know that Powys County Council has been prepared to allow local people to build homes on sites which would otherwise have been refused provided that they have a local housing need. Many have applauded this Council for so doing and helping first time buyers in particular to build a house of their own. Housing need is defined in the Council's Unitary Development Plan and Affordable Housing Guidance and includes first time buyers either from the local community or coming in to work within the community and ensuring that the property is sold at a price that reflects the purpose as a dwelling serving genuine housing need. In this particular case, the Agreement merely stated that future occupiers should have been living in the community for a period of 3 years.

Accepting that the Legal Agreement dates back to 1995 and may not have been carefully prepared with reference to affordable housing need (it merely requiring the occupier to have local connections), the decision is highly critical of the original decision to grant planning permission for a large dwelling outside the settlement limits which was now valued in excess of £390,000 - well outside the reach of any person with a genuine housing need. The appeal inspector appointed by the Welsh Assembly Government removed the section 106 Obligation on the basis that it no longer served a useful planning purpose i.e. irrespective of the Council's planning policies on affordable housing, this property would never be affordable to those people with a genuine housing need.

In fairness to Powys, I believe the policy has tightened up since 1995 and the section 106 Agreements now require houses designed to cater for people with a housing need to be of a certain size and be limited to first time buyers. Such Agreements also try to limit the price at which such houses can be sold at, thus preventing the type of abuse of the planning system that this particular Abermule gentleman got away with back in 1995. Not many authorities have gone down the Powys route of permitting affordable houses for sale and have preferred instead to encourage Housing Associations to build houses on "exception" sites and offer these up to local people on various tenure arrangements. This tends to remove opportunities for abuse where often outrageous claims of hardship and local connections can be made in the quest to build a property on a site outside the settlement limits! But at least Powys has been brave enough to stick its head above the parapet and make the case that Powys has different housing problems to other more urban areas of Wales and that its affordable housing policies meet the needs of its population.

However, can I now retrain as an estate agent and make a killing in the sale of all those houses built under section 106 since the 90's? With this appeal decision, quite clearly there is little appetite on the part of the Planning Inspectorate to uphold Powys Council's affordable housing policies. But I also believe that the adopted Unitary Development Plan has primacy in law when it comes to planning decisions - presumably the decision of Powys to refuse to discharge the section 106 Obligation was made in accordance with the UDP. Why didn't Powys then challenge this decision in the High Court?

Powys Planning Department's answer to critical Agents

I have heard that Powys Council is at last responding to ongoing complaints from planning agents who according to Glyn Davies MP's blog are thoroughly "p....d off" with the Council's Planning Department for the treatment they receive from Powys. What this means is that Powys planners require that Agents submit a copious amount of technical information with planning applications. Glyn states that "developers remain incandescent with anger, fuelled they tell me by delay and unreasonableness." He also suggests that things will blow up between agents and planners next year - a revolution perhaps?!

But Agents operating over in Shropshire, I am told, also have a difficult time. Planning has become increasingly complex over the last few years - unfortunately, small time agents (or architects pretending they know planning)have been unable to raise their game. I see that Powys has introduced a Local Requirements List - explaining the standard it requires in terms of documents that must accompany planning applications. It is really up to agents - who charge clients excessive fees anyway - to ensure that applications are of an acceptable standard.

Powys is now about to introduce an Agents Accreditation Scheme whereby agents who prove that they can submit decent applications on at least three successive occasions will thenceforth be given a "light touch" from the planners. I wonder whether the introduction of the scheme at this point (given the threats of revolution) isn't a little bit insensitive. Mind you Cllr Wynne Jones Portfolio Cabinet Member for Planning was never one for currying favour! Shame he hasn't investigated agents' concerns in a structured way and insisted changes at least in attitude.

Speaking to an experienced Council planner operating in the south of the County, he acknowledges that there has been a breakdown in relationships between agents and planners but that this "bad feeling" is largely confined to that part of the planning department operating out of the Welshpool offices where there is a culture of speed of decision-making rather than a culture where quality of decisions is paramount (which helps substantiate concerns expressed by agents active in Glyn Davies' Montgomery constituency). I can see the merit in ensuring that planning applications contain all the information that is necessary to ensure that a quality decision can be made and for this to be presented upfront rather than during the application process when local residents begin challenging the quality of information submitted. What is difficult to understand is why the apparent differences in approach between the various planning authorities - both sides of the border. Has Glyn Davies checked with other authorities - but more to the point, has Cllr Wynne Jones?

It will be interesting to see how many Agents obtain Accreditation. Will Powys be offering medals to those successful agents - they can even be called "The Wynne Jones Excellence Star"! Agents can then meet up with their prospective clients wearing that coveted medal - oh yes, and add a further 10% to their fees! Powys County Council might be missing a trick here - they could charge agents for being Accredited!

New Policy Direction in England

Ministers over the border have revealed details of planning reforms, ahead of Thursday’s publication of the Localism Bill, which will see councils required to adopt neighbourhood plans supported by residents.

Communities secretary Eric Pickles and planning minister Greg Clark have outlined plans to decentralise and streamline the planning system, which they claim will hand powers down from Whitehall to neighbourhoods.
The ministers called for communities to get involved and have paved for the way for neighbourhood groups to shape where they live.

Residents will be able to decide what their local area should look like, where new shops, offices and homes are built and what green spaces should be protected. Communities will be given the power to draw up neighbourhood plans, which if backed in local referendums, councils would be forced to adopt.

The new powers will also give residents the power to grant planning permission for chosen sites on local lands to enable urgent development can go ahead quickly once a neighbourhood plan has been adopted.

The Department for Communities and Local Government said it wanted a dozen localities to come forward to act as ‘vanguards’ to trial neighbourhood plans in their area.

Mr Pickles said: ‘For far too long local people have had too little say over a planning system that has imposed bureaucratic decisions by distant officials in Whitehall and the town hall. We need to change things so there is more people planning and less politician planning, so there is more direct democracy and less bureaucracy in the system. These reforms will become the building blocks of the Big Society.’

Mr Clark added: ‘Most people love where they live, yet the planning system has given them almost no say on how their neighbourhood develops. The coalition Government will revolutionise the planning process by taking power away from officials and putting it into the hands of those who know most about their neighbourhood – local people themselves.

‘This will be a huge opportunity for communities to exercise genuine influence over what their home town should look like in the future. It will create the freedom and the incentives for those places that want to grow, to do so, and to reap the benefits. It’s a reason to say yes.’

No sign yet of what's to come in Wales, but one thing's for sure, changes over the border will have an impact in Wales too as localism picks up and communities wanting a certain planning direction having their own way. The growth of nimby's is obviously a threat to good planning and this paves the way for opportunism and potentially corruption. Here in Powys and Ceredigion, the planning system has occasionally been abused by a few prominent local people who have driven unwanted development in their communities. Others have lobbied to prevent good development from occurring also. The rise in prominence of the Parish councillor will occur over the border - but hasn't this always been the case in areas such as Montgomeryshire and Radnorshire where individual Community councillors have managed to get the odd bungalow in the countryside for their friends?

Agricultural Occupancy Conditions in Mid Wales

As we travel the length and breadth of Mid Wales from the Shropshire border to the Ceredigion coast, we cannot fail to note the large number of houses in the countryside. These are almost always bungalows and are almost always isolated from other buildings or settlements. What they are of course are so-called farm dwellings. But are they? Most probably not. They are the result of applicants pulling the wool over planning officers' eyes - those planning officers are invariably people from towns and cities who haven't a clue about farming and are not well placed to scrutinise planning applications for so called agricultural dwellings.

There are so many houses built in Ceredigion and Powys under the heading of farm workers dwellings. They are almost always a ruse to build in the open countryside. Planners are always quick to attach a planning condition to the planning permission restricting occupancy to a farm worker working in agriculture in the locality, believing that this will make it all ok. Agricultural occupancy conditions can reduce the value of these houses by between a third and a half thus helping to meet the needs of low paid agricultural workers needing a house close to the farming operation.

How many agricultural dwellings have been approved and built is not known. But are they truly being lived in by bone fide farm workers? Not if my estate agent acquaintance is to be believed. He says that 75% of agricultural dwellings approved for farmers are not being occupied by people working in agriculture as the planning permission requires. He also says that he has numerous cases waiting to be submitted to Powys and Ceredigion Councils who would inevitably have to remove the agricultural occupancy condition on any dwelling coming forward for consideration. The only proof required is for evidence to be submitted that the particular property hasn't been occupied by a farmworker for four years.

I fear the floodgates have opened after a successful appeal case in Kerry, Powys recently. The appeal following refusal of a Lawful Development Certificate was allowed when it was revealed that the so called farmworkers dwelling had not served the original purpose and that at least four families had lived in the property since it was built who were unconnected with agriculture. Powys Council was unable to defend the appeal and offered no contradictory evidence.

I think I should re-train as a planning consultant and advertise to assist in the removal of these agricultural ties as there is little doubt that any farmer who can prove that his tied house has been occupied by people unconnected with agriculture for a period in excess of four years can immediately increase the value of these rural properies four-fold.

As for the local planning authorities - shame on you for allowing abuses of the planning system in the first place and then for not checking ongoing compliance with the agricultural tie.

Powys Planning response to WAG changes to Validation of planning applications

The Welsh Assembly Government has consulted over changes to what is required in order for local planning authorities to accept planning applications. Fine you may say and Powys County Council alongside other authorities in Wales have already adopted validation protocols that require applicants to submit often very technical information for the very minor of planning applications. But Powys councillors responding to this Government consultation have suggested that flood risk assessments be submitted every time householders want to build even an extension to their property! The way that WAG now consults on new planning initiatives gives every opportunity for local authorities to secretly respond with quite bizarre comments and requests.

I have it from many agents working in Powys that it is almost impossible to submit planning applications and for those to be validated and taken forward for consideration first time. They require the most ridiculous of supporting information under the banner of their published list of validation requirements. This list is self imposed - it doesn't have to meet any national requirement or adoption by WAG. Powys has quite forgotten that it is a rural area with very few technical constraints to development. It is not Cardiff or Swansea or the Valleys where technical constraints to development require very technical submissions.

No, Powys planning department insist on a whole host of technical documents before it accepts a planning application and is now suggesting that a detailed Flood Risk Assessment be submitted for householder applications. This is madness at best! what is Councillor Wynne Jones Board member for Planning doing supporting such a response to this consultation?

What is happening to Planning nationally?

Planners and communities alike must be asking the same question - what is happening to our planning system. I've been alerted to what is going on over the border and it is quite frightening. A radical shake-up of planning was promised by the Conservatives while they were in opposition. It's a pledge they are determined to fulfil now they are in power.

In England, the Government Communities secretary Eric Pickles has already abolished regional spatial strategies, which set the framework for planning under the previous administration. Regional plans have now gone with the promise that planning responsibilities should fall on local authorities to make planning decisions for themselves. But around three-quarters of English authorities have no Core Strategies in place and certainly no Local Development Frameworks (LDF)in place to guide planning decisions, despite their introduction by the government six years ago. The development industry was already complaining that planning policy was too slow in its making but had begun to work alongside regional development targets.

Many authorities in England were working on their Plans but this work is likely to be aborted fairly quickly. Regional targets for housing growth have been abandoned and Local authorities will be asked to provide their own development targets and local plans are expected to be based on those created by residents for their own neighbourhoods.

This is scary as many Conservative controlled authorities have already pledged to abandon planning approaches in Core Strategies and LDF's, claiming that the new Coalition Government has or is about to completely dismantle the planning system leaving a huge planning policy vacuum. A free for all is on its way in terms of planning decision-making leaving the planning system at the mercy of nimbyism.

So in England we will see replacement of LDF's by Neighbourhood Plans - but what are these? Already over-stretched planning departments will be completely unable to support communities wishing to progress such local plans. But we're also told that Councils which do not adopt a local plan within a given timeframe will be forced to accept development – whether they like it or not. The policy has been framed as a "presumption in favour of sustainable development."

Royal Town Planning Institute public affairs officer James Butler says: "In the absence of a local plan it has been suggested that all development which fulfils national minimum standards will be permitted.

"Local authorities must have the capacity and resources necessary to draw up a local plan if the new planning regime is to genuinely empower communities and reflect their views."

A lack of resources is not the only source of concern. Questions have been asked about what exactly sustainable development might mean. Indications from the government suggest it will require judging applications against the need for new development, as well as schemes' environmental credentials. But how it would operate in practice is far from clear.

Simon Ricketts, head of planning at commercial law firm SJ Berwin, said "It's open to the obvious criticism that sustainable development means all things to all people. It's very difficult to apply a test like that to individual situations. We need details as to what is meant by this term. Sustainable development sounds reassuring but as a lawyer I want to see how it is defined."

Details surrounding the new planning process, including national planning guidelines, the presumption in favour of sustainable development and a timetable for implementation are due to emerge in a localism and decentralisation bill to be published next week.

Over the last few years planners over the border have complained about the amount of evidence and documentation required to justify the Local Plan - this has slowed down the system. But while brevity will be welcomed, the proposed system has been accompanied by the complete removal of regional planning and abandonment of guiding principles. Even the Planning Inspectorate is now at risk of dismantling as Localism dictates that local decisions are sacrosanct.

Here in Wales, we are of course years behind England. But the Local Development Plan system that Wales opted for may well see us maintaining planning values - what is required here though is a quickening of LDP production. Snappy planning policy documents that are able to change with changing circumstances are the order of the day. But are planning authorities up to it?