RICS Supports Planning Reform

RICS submitted its response to the government white paper ‘Planning for the future’ at the end of October 2020, based on the views of members and others we consulted in our sector. We will also give evidence to the House of Commons Committee on Communities and Local Government on the subject at the end of November and continue our ongoing engagement with government on how the planning system can be made to work better for everyone.

What follows is a summary of our more general positions on planning reform. Our detailed response to the consultation is available here.

1. Support in principle

In principle RICS supports a number of the proposed changes to the planning system.

Over the years public, professional and political frustration with the planning system has built up, some of it understandable, other elements misplaced.

The frustration is characterised in the following ways for some of the key stakeholders in the process:

• After spending years participating in the plan making process the local community still has little or no idea about what is going to be built in their area.
• After spending a lot of time and money developers are often still very unsure about what the outcome of a planning application will be.

In summary there is a general desire to see more certainty in the planning system at a number of levels: plan making, development management, infrastructure funding. More importantly the community wants to know what the proposed development outcome is intended to be and will look like.

Position 1: RICS supports the move to a more certain planning system in the interest of restoring community confidence in the planning process and in the interest of reducing ‘planning risk’ for those expected to carry out development.

2. Planning reform not enough on its own

RICS does not envisage the private sector being capable of responding to the shortfall in the delivery particularly of affordable housing and therefore advocates a programme of publicly funded housing for those who cannot afford to house themselves.  

Position 2: RICS has consistently advocated a programme of publicly funded housing. The governments new proposals or indeed a continuation of current policies would not seem to be capable of addressing the shortage of affordable housing.  RICS thus continues to advocate a programme of publicly funded housing for rent.

3. Stakeholder legitimacy

The diverse stakeholders engaging with planning will have particular requirements and expectations about how a successful planning system works for them. Some will be irreconcilable, and the system will need to be able to legitimately determine these competing interests in a decisive but equitable way having regard to the fundamental rights of the individual.

Position 3:  RICS supports devising a system which responds constructively and legitimately to these different, sometimes conflicting interests. The system should allow for sufficient time to deliberate the issues at the appropriate point in the process of policy formulation. Once the policy is decided through the local community and its elected representatives, delivery of the policy objectives should primarily be an executive function, accompanied by appropriate democratic safeguards. Such a system would also provide a dynamic planning system, enabled by digital technologies to quickly respond to evolving circumstances requiring revised policy responses. Achievement of certainty in this context should not be about rigidity.

4. Funding Infrastructure

Funding and delivering infrastructure are significant challenges in development worldwide. How infrastructure is funded and who pays for it is frequently tied up with debate about land ownership and betterment. The need for infrastructure is fundamentally based on population growth and increasing standards. In the first instance it is necessary to distinguish between infrastructure need and infrastructure funding. Where mandatory national standards are to be met the funding obligation should be clear, though the source of funds will be less so.

Position 4: RICS advocates that in delivering and funding infrastructure a clear distinction be drawn between infrastructure need and infrastructure funding. We also advocate a clear distinction between infrastructure funding measures in total and ‘land value capture’ measures as a component part of the funding mix. Finally, we advocate clarity in relation to ‘land value capture’ measures and other land/property/construction taxation measures in development projects. This clarity is essential to achieve the certainty sought from the reforms to reduce risk for both the local authority and the developer ensuring development is brought forward in a timely manner and to a nationally agreed standard.

5. Transition periods

In response to such far reaching proposals as contained in the white paper there will need to be a number of transition periods for both the planning reforms and the digital transformation. These periods will need to operate smoothly to ensure delivery is not impeded during the period when the legacy system overlaps with the new one.  

Position 5: As soon as officials have completed a preliminary assessment of the consultation responses, the likely time frame for passing legislation should be indicated and any transition periods envisaged for the preparation of new plans communicated so that various stakeholders can consider how best to maintain delivery of development.

6. Monitoring progress and professional planning resources

Goals and objectives set for delivery through the new planning system and local plans should be fully aligned with international obligations for sustainable development and carbon reduction. A system to ensure these are regularly monitored and verified should be integral to any new planning system. The new system will need to be resourced with skilled professionals as well as digital technologies.

Position 6: In devising a new planning system government should ensure that the system and its outcomes are capable of being constantly monitored to assess compliance with international obligations for carbon reduction and achieving the UN SDGs. The successful operation of any new planning system will require full resourcing with skilled professionals to implement complex and competing objectives.