Last month the Scottish government announced a number of proposed reforms aimed at making the country’s planning system more efficient and transparent. Among the potential changes are extending the lifespan of adopted local development plans (LPDs) from five to 10 years; the removal of city region-wide development plans (SDPs) and the National Planning Framework (NPF) to set out clear national and regional ‘aspirations’ for housing delivery; and the strengthening of the role of local communities in planning through a requirement for development plans to take account of new community planning partnerships.

Post-financial crisis, housebuilders still face infrastructure hurdles in delivering developments. The positive implication of these changes would be that by confirming housing targets, the NPF could remove the debate over numbers. On the other hand, setting out housing delivery aspirations could well lead to more uncertainty. Councils will be able to blame each other if aspirations are not met. Also positive is the proposed introduction of a new infrastructure levy to raise extra finance for necessary projects and to embed an ‘infrastructure-first approach’. However, recent attempts in the north of England, where viability is more challenging, have demonstrated how difficult it is to do this in practice.

As far as local councils are concerned, revising maximum application fees alongside proposed new charges, including for pre-application discussions and appeals, will provide much-needed additional resource for planning departments. Provided these extra funds are ring-fenced and care is also taken to ensure that applicants unable to pay the enhance fee are not left with a basic service, this additional resource is a real opportunity for councils to deliver improved performance.

However, extending the lifespan of LDPs from five to 10 years could mean that some authorities are unable to sustain permanent planning policy teams. Specialist resources may need to be pooled or outsourced to maintain quality in plan delivery. The extended plan period may also be overly inflexible and could limit the ability of authorities to respond to specific development needs across this longer timescale.

There are risks, too, for developers. A move to more appeal decisions being determined by local review bodies, involving local councillors, could result in developers of major sites being unable to appeal to Scottish ministers and decisions being determined by an independent reporter. This presents a clear risk for significant developments where the interaction between complex issues needs qualified assessment and examination to achieve a balanced and measured outcome.

The paper recognises that it is important to speed up the time it takes to conclude section 75 planning gain agreements. But it proposes restricting the ability to modify and discharge the terms of planning obligations. This could result in further time and delay to the conclusion of section 75 agreements and development delivery.

Further information

Read the Scottish Government's Response to the Review of Planning