The Government is being warned that ‘it remains to be seen’ if scaling back the scope of planning obligations and introducing a new charge development will speed up the process.
The latest consultation on the planning gain supplement (PGS) proposed removing facilities such as schools and leisure facilities from the remit of Section 106 agreements. But this takes out items which are simply dealt with, often by formula-based cash contributions, the South East Regional Assembly is expected to tell the Government.
In contrast, Section 106 agreements will still cover off-site issues, such as transport and affordable housing, ‘and may still involve complex contractual drafting and negotiations,’ according to SEERA’s draft response. SEERA is to welcome, however, the acknowledgement of ‘the difficulty of applying the development site-related approach to managing the transport impacts of development’. But it will warn against extending the geographical scope of Section 106 agreements too wide, as ‘this will place an inherent bias in favour of easier-to-identify road-based solutions’. Restricting planning obligations to site access-related transport links would better support the promotion of measures to reduce car travel – as long as this was co-ordinated rather than actioned on an ad-hoc, site-by-site basis, perhaps through ‘local infrastructure plan’ policies.
But Alison Quant, of the County Surveyors’ Society strategic planning committee, said it was ‘difficult to see how having the PGS and scaled-back planning obligations could be a simpler system than just having planning obligations’. While the CSS supported the principle of the PGS, insufficient information had been provided to give confidence on how it would work . Local councils needed to retain the right to negotiate based on site-specific matters, and to consider the needs of the transport system beyond the immediate area of a development site, she added.