Homeowners looking to extend, convert or renovate their home could soon find themselves receiving planning permission approval faster than they had hoped.
The new Government National Scheme of Delegation will see straightforward projects, such as some extensions and loft conversions handed direct to expert planning officers rather than Planning Committees.
It is hoped that removing these type of applications from the traditional route will have a positive impact on the speed at which both small and larger schemes are approved, but are the moves without risk?
New officers recruited to help manage applications
Although eight weeks is the usual time cited for the length of time it takes to get planning approval, anyone who has applied knows that it can often take double that time, or longer.
Housing Secretary Angela Rayner said of the new scheme: “Families wanting more space and businesses looking to grow shouldn’t be left waiting unnecessarily for straightforward planning decisions.
“We’re giving councils the people, tools and reforms they need to get applications moving faster, while freeing up planners and councillors to focus on the developments that will deliver the homes and infrastructure communities need."
Along with the change in approvals process, the Government has also appointed 420 new planning officers to ensure applications move more quickly through the process, with plans to add a further 1,400 new recruits by the end of this Parliament.
Scheme will sit alongside planning AI tools designed to increase speed
The new National Scheme of Delegation will further be supported by the continued roll out of PlanAssist, the Government AI planning tool developed with Google DeepMind, Google Cloud, Faculty and local authorities.
PlanAssist works by compiling essential details such as applications, policies and site constraints into one place. It then gives planning officers an evidence-backed initial assessment to consider, helping to speed up routine householder applications such as extensions and loft conversions, which make up 70% of planning officers’ workload.
The tool has so far been tested in Camden, Barnet and Dorset councils, where results showed a decrease of 58% in the time spent on key planning tasks. Government information states this helped, "halve processing times for routine householder applications from eight weeks to four."
The tool will now be expanded to an additional 15 councils for 12 months, with the aim of every council in England having access to it by the end of 2027.
But are the new planning changes without risk?
While frustrated homeowners waiting for approvals may see the changes as positive, planning experts warn that they may not be as clear cut as it seems.
"I am concerned that the National Scheme of Delegation is a solution to one problem which risks creating another," Simon Rix, planning consultant and founder of Planix.uk told Homebuilding & Renovating.
"I understand the desire to reduce the number of applications going to planning committee, but the Government has effectively removed an important safety valve for smaller applicants. There are occasions when a planning officer is unreasonably moving towards refusal, despite there being a perfectly credible planning case for approval.
"Previously, there were mechanisms through which a councillor could seek to have such an application considered by committee. That opportunity has now effectively been removed for householders and small developers. The result will be that applicants are left with little option other than to accept an unreasonable refusal or incur the considerable additional cost and delay of an appeal," Simon explained.
"Ironically, I suspect this will increase the burden on the Planning Inspectorate, because more applicants will feel compelled to appeal decisions which might otherwise have been resolved through democratic consideration at committee."
On the topic of AI, Simon was more positive, confirming that he felt it had the potential to be a useful development. "Anything that reduces the administrative burden on planning officers and allows them to spend more time on the actual planning merits of applications has to be welcomed.
"However, planning is not an exercise in simply matching proposals against policies," he warned. "It requires interpretation, professional judgement and an understanding of the particular circumstances of each site. AI can help identify relevant information and highlight potential issues, but it cannot replace the experience and judgement of a good planning officer.
"My concern would be that, in an increasingly target-driven system, there could be a temptation to treat AI-generated assessments as authoritative, rather than as a starting point for professional consideration."
In conclusion, while improving the planning process is important, Simon points out that in his opinion, there is a danger that the Government is concentrating too heavily on the speed at which planning applications are processed, rather than the quality and fairness of the decisions being made. A fast refusal is not necessarily a good planning decision, and it certainly isn't a successful outcome for an applicant who has a perfectly reasonable proposal.
