One in four of all planning applications is processed late

Nearly a quarter of a million applications have not been processed on time for six years, according to an investigation by The Times.

Freedom of Information requests sent to every council in Britain also revealed that many planning departments were reducing staff numbers.

This leaves the Government’s pledge to get Britain building “in tatters”, says the paper.

“Local authorities are so under-resourced that they simply can’t acknowledge and administer the number of applications they are receiving,” Gavin Sherman, from Linea Homes which specialises in regenerating derelict sites, told the paper.

“Some officers only work two days a week which makes it impossible for them to deal with the workload they are given. We are not the only developer experiencing severe delays.”

The investigation also found:

– Not a single council had processed every application on time and one in 16 was failing to process half on time;

– A third of major applications have suffered delays over the past five years, with some councils only managing to process one in three applications in the statutory three-month time limit;

– More than a quarter of minor applications, which include developments of fewer than ten homes, took over two months.

Rico Wojtulewicz, from the National Federation of Builders, said: “Councils overlook smaller builders. They don’t push through applications of less than ten houses even though these are the developments that can been done quickly to increase the number of homes. Larger projects can take years to deliver.”

Great variation between councils was found by the investigation with some councils twice as likely to approve an application as others in 2015.

Examples given include Waverley Borough Council in Surrey, which approved the lowest proportion of major applications last year at 41%, down from 80% in 2010. Carlisle Council approved every major application.

The Government has tried a raft of measures to speed up the planning process, such as proposing a ‘fast-track system’ announced in February, and barring councils from imposing pre-commencement planning conditions unless “absolutely necessary” through the Neighbourhood Planning and Infrastructure Bill announced in the Queen’s Speech in May.

Government figures show 140,180 homes were completed in England in the financial year 2015/16.

A Department for Communities and Local Government spokesman told The Times: “We are getting Britain building again, with almost 900,000 homes delivered since the end of 2009.

“Now our plans to allow councils to introduce competition into the planning system will help speed up the process and bring a renewed focus to our efforts to build more homes.

“But the new local government secretary accepts we need to do more. That is why housing will be a priority.”

x

Email the story to a friend



One Comment

  1. clarky46

    “But the new local government secretary accepts we need to do more. That is why housing will be a priority.”  Not much sign of prioritisation so far.

    On a personal note I bought a property in September 2015 and applied for planning for 2 detached houses. We achieved outline consent very quickly but have only just finished with the ‘Reserved Matters’ (August 12 2016) having had to get the application to Committee on June 8th. So we had permission on the 8th but it’s been bogged down with what I believe to be ‘irritated’ planning officers who claim the delay was because we failed to submit our application on the final reserved matters quickly enough. These are the same people who want you to negotiate rather than go head to head with them??

    The process needs simplification with less reliance on the personal feelings/opinion of individual planning officers. Hold ups down to buff bricks or red, black tiles or red are ridiculous.

    How does a local authority believe it is more financially efficient to employ someone 2 days a week when all that achieves is slower processing? Especially if they apply all the same processing criteria and examination of an application as if they worked 5 days or had more staff. That would probably be because the individual picking up the cost of delay is the applicant.

     

    Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

Comments are closed.

Thank you for signing up to our newsletter, we have sent you an email asking you to confirm your subscription. Additionally if you would like to create a free EYE account which allows you to comment on news stories and manage your email subscriptions please enter a password below.