Unpickling costly planning obligations
Steeles Law Head of Planning & Environment David Merson looks at the Coalition’s proposals to revise the planning obligations regime to try and help kick-start stalled development proposals.
It is suggested that some two thirds of approved building projects in the last five years have either been dumped or stalled as a result of planning obligation costs making development proposals uneconomic in the wake of the credit crunch and subsequent recession.
The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Eric Pickles, is therefore sending ‘troubleshooters’ into 13 local planning authorities to see if re-opening and re-negotiating section 106 planning obligation deals could provide a means of getting some projects back on track.
Coupled with this, the Coalition has announced a consultation exercise involving amendments to the Town and Country Planning (Modification and Discharge of Planning Obligations) Regulations 1992 SI 1992/2832.
The proposal will allow planning obligations entered into prior to 6th April 2010 to be re-negotiated in order to unlock development projects which were negotiated in more buoyant economic conditions but which are currently not economically viable.
Section 106 of the Town Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) allows local planning authorities, usually before granting planning permission, to enter into planning obligations with developers. Those obligations can be voluntarily renegotiated at any time but, under the terms of the Regulations and absent any agreement, can be subject to a formal application process to reconsider the terms when it is five years old. Appeal provisions apply where such an application has been refused.
It is anticipated that the new regime will operate to allow planning obligations entered into on or before the relevant date to be re-negotiated. This provision removes the five-year restriction in the current Regulations from those planning obligations but those more recent planning obligations entered into after that date will not be able to benefit from this change. They must either be re-negotiated by agreement or wait until the expiration of the five-year period and then go through the existing formal modification and discharge procedure.
Developers looking to rely on the revised provisions, if and when enacted, will still need to ensure that the substantive legal test is met and there will, according to the consultation document, need to be strong justification for any change(s) sought. The modified obligation must still be acceptable in that it must still be necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms.
Note however that local planning authorities cannot be forced to re-negotiate planning obligations. They would be expected to act reasonably and to consider and determine such an application applying proper planning considerations. But they might refuse to do so or they might conclude that there was still clear justification for the obligation to remain unmodified. This would engage the appeal provisions and could also, where the relevant grounds arose, permit an application for judicial review.
Details of the consultation exercise can be found here. The consultation period runs until 8th October 2012.
If you require further information or advice on any issues raised in this article or any other planning & environmental matter please contact David Merson on 020 7421 1720 or [email protected]