The approach in the paper is necessarily selective and will deal with the following matters: development plans; development control; planning obligations, with particular reference to affordable housing; and use classes and temporary uses. Most of the text provided is set out in note form and is intended to provide a concise summary of the issues covered and, where appropriate, details of the proposals. Comments on the proposals and on reactions to them will be provided orally.

• to simplify the hierarchy of plans, reducing the number of tiers and clarifying the interrelationship
• to provide more concise plans that can be adopted and revised more quickly
• to engage the community more closely in the preparation process
• to improve integration with other local strategies and plans

• complex system of inter-related local and structure plans in most areas and of unitary development plans in major urban areas
• inconsistencies between policies at various levels, particularly between plans made by local planning authorities and policies made at regional and national levels
• local plans are too long and detailed attempting to provide too close guidance for the exercise of development control
• preparation is slow and expensive with burdensome procedures to consider representations as a result of which 362 plans still remain to be approved and adopted and 214 have expired and not been replaced
• local plans are too prescriptive and inflexible with too many detailed policies which are difficult to update as circumstances and/or government policies change

• plans are failing their users
• plans are poorly related to other local authority policies and programmes, particularly those set out in Community Strategies
• plans need to be integrated at local, regional and national levels
• reginal planning guidance should be replaced by Regional Spatial Strategies with statutory status
• the Structure Plan should be abolished
• structure/local plans and unitary development plans should be replaced by Local Development Frameworks.

• to consist of:
1. in Greater London, the spatial development strategy and, elsewhere, the regional spatial strategy for the region in which the area is situated; and
2. the development plan documents (taken as a whole) which have been adopted or approved in relation to that area.
• Determinations to be made in accordance with the development plan and, in the case of inconsistencies, with the most recently approved document.

• Regional Spatial Strategy to be established for each region setting out the Secretary of State’s policies in relation to the development and use of land within the region.

• To be made by Regional Planning Bodies (RPBs) as recognised by the Secretary of State.

• RPBs may seek assistance from the higher tier local authorities i.e. county councils, metropolitan district councils, unitary authorities and National Park authorities.

• RPB must keep the Regional Spatial Strategy under review, monitor its implementation and submit an annual report to the Secretary of State.

• RPB must revise the RSS, when appropriate, when required or when directed to do so.

• RPB must have regard to national policies and advice,, RSSs or equivalent of adjoining regions, resources available for implementation and other matters as prescribed.

• RPB must appraise the sustainability of the proposals and report on its findings.

• Secretary of State may make regulations prescribing the content and format of the RSS.

• RSS must be submitted to the Secretary of Sate for approval.

• Opportunities to be given for representations and these to be considered by the Secretary of State.

• Examination in Public may be held to consider representations if the Secretary of State so decides.

• Secretary of State may then approve the RSS incorporating such changes as he thinks fit.

• Secretary of Sate empowered to issue regulations prescribing details of the procedure to be followed in the revision and approval of the RSS.

• A Local Development Scheme to be prepared by each local planning authority.

• The Scheme must specify the documents which are the local development documents, the subject matter and area to which each document relates and which documents are development plan documents which if any documents are to be prepared jointly, the timetable for preparation and revsion and such other matters as are prescribed.

• The Scheme must be submitted to the Secretary of State.

• Secretary of State may require such amendments as he thinks appropriate.

• The Local Planning Authority must prepare a Statement of Community Involvement.

• Local development documents must be prepared in accordance with the Local development scheme.

• Local development documents must have regard to:
• national policies and advice
• the RSS
• the RSS of any adjoining region
• the community strategy
• any other development document
• resources
• other matters prescribed

• An appraisal of sustainability must be carried out and a report of findings issued.

• Documents must be submitted to the Secretary of Sate for independent examination.

• The purpose of the independent examination is to establish whether it:
• meets the requirements of the Act
• is sound

• Person carrying out the examination must make recommendations and give reasons.

• The authority must publish the recommendations.

• Secretary of State may intervene to prevent adoption of an unsatisfactory document and to direct that it be modified.

• Documents are adopted by resolution of the authority.

• Documents must generally conform to the RSS.

• Documents may be revised when appropriate, when required or when directed to do so.

• Local Development Framework to consist of 3 elements:
• a core strategy setting out the local authority=s vision and strategy to be applied in promoting and controlling development throughout its area – location specific rather than site specific and may be illustrated by a key diagram
• a proposals section with a proposals map which is site specific more detailed action plans for smaller local areas of change, such as urban extensions, town centres and neighbourhoods undergoing renewal
• area action plans for key areas of change and conservation with detailed site specific policies/proposals and guidance.

• Must also contain a Statement of Community Involvement.

• The Framework may contain a mix of statutory and non-statutory policies.

• Local Development Frameworks to include:

• the long-term vision for the area
• clear objectives and a proposed timetable
• a strategy fro delivering the objectives
• a Statement of Community Involvement
• criteria based policies as a basis for development control

• Action Plans would include:
• area master plans for a major area of renewal or development
• neighbourhood and village plans
• design statements for an area or type of development
• site development briefs

• Area plans might also relate to topics over wider areas such as:

• Green Belts
• housing allocations with particular reference to timing of land release
• major developments with authority-wide implications
• safeguarding of land for transport and other purposes

• Local Development Frameworks to be continuously updated in line with national and regional policies and an annual monitoring report submitted.

• National policies to be set out so as to be clear which are mandatory and require revisions to the Local Development Framework and which are guidance.

• National planning policies as set out in the 25 Planning Policy Guidance notes judged to be successful and necessary but too extensive

• All existing PPGs and MPGs to be reviewed starting with PPG1, PPG4, PPG6, PPG7, PPG15 and MPG1.

• greater distinction to be made between policy and advice

• national statements to be issued about major infrastructure needs, such as airport capacity

• Government=s objective is to create a system that:
• is responsive to the needs of all its customers and offer a culture of customer service
• delivers decisions quickly in a predictable and transparent way
• produces quality development
• genuinely involves the community

• introduce a statement of development principles

• reduce the standard period of validity of a planning permission to 3 years

• to update the General Permitted Development order

• to introduce local development orders to implement policies within development paln documents

• to enable repeat planning applications to be refused

• to enable subttantially similar application to not be accepted whilst another one is under consideration

• planning checklist so that people know how to submit a good quality application

• tighten targets for determining planning applications and deal with delays caused by statutory consultees

• to increase the extent of delegated powers

• promote better community involvement by offering community groups advice on planning

• introduce delivery contracts for planning for major developments

• introduce new business zones where no planning permission is required for certain forms of development

• seek better and tougher enforcement against those who evade planning requirements

• require reasons to be given for the approval of planning applications

• ensure that stakeholders may address planning committees

• improve access to documents and limit charges for providing copies

• reduce the time limit for appeals from 6 to 3 months

• Local development orders may be issued to implement polcies in development paln documents.

• Order may grant planning permission for development specified or class of development specified.

• May relate to the area, part of the area or a specific site.

• Secretary of State may restrict the area or type of development to which an order applies.

• Secretary of State may direct that the order be called for approval.

• Secretary of State may approve or reject an order in whole or in part and may direct that it be modified.

• "or local development order" inserted in the Act after references to "development order".

• Local planning authority must issue as Statement of Development Principles when requested to do so by any person.

• Authority must have regard to the development plan as far as material to the request and any other material considerations.

• Statement must indicate whether the authority agrees or disagrees with the principles of the development proposed in whole or in part.

• The statement is a material consideration in the determination of a subsequent application for planning permission.

• Authority may refuse to issue a further Statement for similar development within two years.

• If a Statement is issued outline planning permission may not be granted for a similar development within 2 years.

• Statement expires after 3 years.

• Local planning authority may decline to determine applications submitted within 2 years when a similar application has been refused and there has been no appeal or where it has been refused on appeal.

• Local planning authority may decline to determine overlapping applications before the first application has been determined.

• Planning permission and listed building consent valid to be valid three years.

• Consultees must respond within a prescribed period.

• Intended to ensure that applications submitted are properly prepared and complete

• Pre-application discussions are to be encouraged but local planning authorities will be allowed to charge for the advice given to recover the costs.

• Applicants should be able to track progress with their applications through a nominated officer.

• Better integration of separate planning controls is proposed and the case for integration of all controls by local authorities will be reviewed.

• Arrangements are already in progress to ensure that pollution control and planning permission can be synchronised involving the Environment Agency, the Local Government Association and the Confederation of British Industry.

• New targets are to be set for the determination of planning applications. Currently the target is for 80% of all applications to be determined within eight weeks but only 30 authorities met that, the average is 65% and 45 authorities decide less than 50% in eight weeks.

• Major development proposals are to be subject to >delivery contracts=, an agreed timetable for determination. Sanction for failing to meet the agreed date would be a fast-track route through the appeal system.

• The consultation process is to be speeded up allowing developers to approach statutory consultees before submitting an application.

• Further proposals re consultees:
• the number of statutory consultees to be reduced to those whose advice has health and safety implications and those which operate parallel consent regimes
• statutory consultees to be required to respond within 21 days
• response within the timescale to be a statutory responsibility
• link funding of statutory and non-statutory consultees dependent on government funding to performance

• Regional Development Agencies to be added to the list of statutory consultees where major investment proposals likely to have regional or sub-regional impact

• Changes top enforcement deferred pending separate consultation exercise.

• Review of the Planning Enforcement System in England proposed little substantial change.

• Issues raised:

• Is enforcement working?
• Can the process be simplified?
• How can authorities be encouraged to make greater use of the powers?
• Can the system be speeded up?
• Is there a need for more consistency between authorities?
• Should fines be increased?

• Are resources inadequate to guarantee effective enforcement?
• Would it be inappropriate to criminalise offences?
• Are retrospective applications an appropriate means for rectification of breaches?
• Are higher fees for retrospective applications inappropriate?
• Are existing powers adequacy and sufficient of existing powers?
• Is there a reluctance to take enforcement action?
• What are the reasons for the downward trend in enforcement action?
• How useful is the existing Good Practice Guide?
• Is compensation liability a deterrent to use of stop notices?
• Could stop notices be used before an enforcement notice?
• Should there be a right of appeal against a breach of condition notice?
• Could there be a requirement to post a site notice when works commence?
• Should there be a requirement to self-certify that development accords with planning permission?
• Could planning contravention notice powers be extended to require submission of a planning application?
• Should the 10 year limit be abolished and there be no time limit where 10 year limit currently applies?
• Should an enforcement notice be issued immediately following refusal of retrospective planning application?
• Should authorities be able to refuse an application for planning permission and/or an application for a lawful development certificate once an enforcement notice has been issued?
• Should the right to appeal continue in its current form?
• Should the grounds of appeal remain unchanged?
• Should the double deemed fee be administered by and go to the local planning authority?
• Could enforcement cases be brought in batches to magistrates courts/
• Is there scope for skill sharing and joint working between authorities?
• Do magistrates need more or better guidance?
• Is the level of fines adequate and should authorities as k that cases be heard in the Crown Court to allow the imposition of higher fines?
• Is deferment a real problem and could cases be bundled to reduce the scope for deferment?
• Should judges be invited to visit appeal sites where injunctions are sought to establish harm?
• Would a formal mediation process result in quicker and more effective resolution of breaches?