The proportion of major planning applications* decided on time by Middlesbrough Council has plummeted to little more than a half in three years compared with a median average of almost 90% for most authorities across England, according to official figures which are, however, disputed by the council.
It now faces the possibility of action by Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Secretary Michael Gove over its alleged under-performance.
And in a linked move, three Tyneside councils – South Tyneside, North Tyneside and Gateshead – are already subject to action because they are not meeting the targets in their local plans for delivering new homes.
Gove gets tough
Gove is getting tough on local authority planners, particularly over new homes, as the next general election approaches and at a time when the government is struggling to fulfil the promise in the Conservative Party manifesto 2019 to build 300,000 new homes a year by the mid-2020s. The figure in the past year was 230,000.
The issue is not just one for the North East – far from it. Seven councils already named by Gove for failing even to have a local plan in place are all in the south of England or midlands; two others told to produce an improvement plan and allow developers to apply directly to the Planning Inspectorate for a decision are in the south and Lancashire.
The threads of government policy on housing and planning were brought together by Gove in a major speech to the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) just before Christmas and the publication of a new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) the same day. While acknowledging some concerns are legitimate, Gove attacked NIMBY (not in my back yard) resistance to new development and pledged to root out delays, blockages and bad practice in the planning system.
Planning delays
Back in 2015-17 Middlesbrough’s record for determining major planning applications within the statutory 13 weeks was 85.7%, which was close to the median averages for both similar authorities (so-called “nearest neighbours*) and all authorities in England. The borough’s performance improved gradually, along with that of other councils, until 2019-21 when it reached 90.6%
Then it plunged. According to figures published by the Office for Local Government (Oflog), while the median averages for Middlesbrough’s near neighbours and for all planning authorities in England drifted down to 88.6% and 88.9% respectively by 2021-23, Middlesbrough’s performance fell to 73.9% in 2020-2022 and then again to 53.6% in 2021-23. By this time it was 35% behind its nearest neighbours and 35.3% behind the all-England median.
Middlesbrough suffered a similar decline, but not as steep, in deciding non-major applications, with a statutory time limit of eight weeks. The council improved gradually until 2019-2020, when it was actually slightly out-performing both its near neighbours and the national median.
But then, as with major applications, it fell back while other authorities held steady. It dropped successively from 94.8% in 2019-21 to 83.8% and then 72.7% in 2021-23. Middlesbrough was now 16.7% behind its near neighbours and 14.2% behind the all-England median.
Though some other North East councils are below the medians, none come close to Middlesbrough’s poor record for deciding major applications, according to Oflog. The second lowest proportion dealt with on time in 2021-23 was 79.4% in Northumberland and it was on a rising trend – up from 73.1% in 2020-22. For non-major applications Northumberland nudged Middlesbrough off the bottom with only 72.4% decided on time in 2021-23 compared with Middlesbrough’s 72.7%.
A spokesman for Middlesbrough Council said: “While it’s true that government figures show us below the minimum standard required of us, these have been incorrectly reported and our performance is actually above the minimum. However, we fully accept that improvement is required.
“It is worth noting that because we deal with so few major applications, one can have a significant impact on performance figures. For the monitoring period one application equates to nearly 5% of the overall figure.
“Performance in the first two quarters of 2021/22 was adversely affected by a number of issues including lack of resources, the impact of Covid-19, increased workloads, nutrient neutrality and other changes to the planning system. There was a significant improvement in performance in the second half of the recording period.
“Measures put in place to address performance include:
- Increasing staffing levels;
- Introducing new processes to deal with applications, particularly around the use of extensions of time;
- Successfully securing funding from the Government’s Planning Skills Delivery Fund to address resource issues;
- Service review by the Planning Advisory Service.”
*Major applications include development on a site having an area of one hectare and the provision of more than ten dwellings. Non-major developments include minor dwellings, minor retail and service, and householder developments.
**Nearest neighbours is not a geographical designation but groups councils which are similar according to a model devised by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (Cipfa).
Housing delivery
On the same day as his RIBA speech, Gove’s Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) published the results of its 2022 Housing Delivery Test (HDT), leaving three North East councils facing action for under-delivery on the housing targets included in their local plans.
Under the amended HDT, councils that fall below 95% will have to produce an action plan for improvement; below 85% they will have to add a 20% buffer to their housing land supply unless they have an up-to-date local plan; and below 75% they will be subject to a presumption in favour of sustainable development.
Gove told the RIBA conference: “This [Housing Delivery] Test acts as an assessment of an authority’s previous three years of housing delivery and where there has been under-delivery, consequences rightly follow.”
Once again, this is not primarily a North East problem; 60 councils in England are under a presumption of sustainable development, 11 are having to apply buffers (in the absence of an up-to-date local plan) and 20 are having to draw up action plans for improvement.
Gateshead, North Tyneside and South Tyneside councils are all having to draw up action plans under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) after missing their targets. Of the three, Gateshead was closest to its target, having delivered 1,065 homes or 93% of the requirement of 1,145 of the 2019-22 period. Gateshead Council has been approached for a response.
North Tyneside may have to add a buffer as well as preparing an action plan, depending on how up to date its local plan, first adopted in 2017, is. It delivered 1,589 homes, or 81% of its target of 1,969.
South Tyneside will be subject to a presumption in favour of sustainable development and may have to add a buffer as well. It delivered only 625 new homes over the years 2019-22, which was 72% of its target of 868.
South Tyneside
South Tyneside is in the process of consulting on an updated version of its local plan, first adopted in 2007. Following changes by the government to the standard method of calculating local housing need, South Tyneside’s new plan proposes the provision of 3,443 new homes by 2040 instead of the previous target of 4,471. A number of sites in both the urban area and the green belt previously allocated for housing will be removed.
This may make it easier for South Tyneside to meet its HDT by reducing the target, but whether this will help the government meet its 300,000 new homes target is another matter. There will eventually be a public examination of the new plan before an independent planning inspector, where this issue may well be discussed.
Meanwhile, according to a House of Commons Library briefing: “While the change in the standard method has been welcomed by some organisations, such as the Royal Town Planning Institute, there has also been a degree of scepticism about whether it will lead to the delivery of 300,000 new homes per year.”
Local plans deal with much more than housing. Councillor Margaret Meling, South Tyneside’s lead member for economic growth and transport, said: “[I]t’s about making the borough a thriving and prosperous place. It gives us the opportunity to enhance and protect our natural and historic environment and embed policies that mitigate the effects of climate change.
“We want people who grow up in South Tyneside to be able to stay here, with access to affordable housing and skilled jobs. We want to create well designed, sustainable neighbourhoods that last a lifetime.”
A spokesperson for South Tyneside Council told North East Bylines: “The borough had a strong record of housing delivery until 2018; however, delivery has dropped considerably since then and we failed the HDT in 2021 and 2023. The presumption in favour of sustainable development has applied since 2021.
“The current development plan, the local development framework, is out of date and as consequence the council is unable to demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing land which has contributed to the council failing the HDT.
“The council is producing a new local plan, with consultation on the draft local plan commencing on 15 January for six weeks. The local plan will allocate sites for housing delivery over the next 17 years and, as such, the council does not consider it necessary to produce an action place as the adoption of a new local plan provides the means for improving housing delivery in South Tyneside.”
North Tyneside
A spokesperson for North Tyneside Council told North East Bylines that housing delivery of 81% in 2022 followed strong performance in 2020 and 2021 when delivery exceeded 100% of requirements.
“Work is already underway to support appropriate housing development in North Tyneside. This includes the council working closely with the housing industry and its partners at Homes England and North of Tyne Combined Authority to address some of the challenges to housing delivery in North Tyneside, including bringing forward brownfield housing land, as well as delivery of strategic housing allocations and bringing forward suitable council-owned land for development.
“A core component of the borough’s housing delivery strategy is two strategic allocations at Murton Gap and Killingworth Moor that are expected to provide 5,000 homes in total. Following their allocation in the North Tyneside local plan 2017, housing delivery for some 300 homes is underway at Murton Gap. Planning applications for nearly 4,000 additional homes (alongside major infrastructure and new open space provision) are currently being considered by the council.
“As a result of the latest HDT, 2024 will be the first year where North Tyneside is required to publish a housing action plan. This is required within six months of publication of the HDT and will be published later this year. As the current local plan was adopted in 2017, North Tyneside is still required to publish a five-year housing land supply and the next publication will be based on the increase from a 5% to a 20% buffer on housing requirements.
“The borough’s HDT performance is expected to recover in the near future as development progresses on key sites.”
Accountability
Gove told the RIBA conference: “I will make sure that every local authority is held to account for delivery against its plan, for the speed with which planning applications are processed and also the rationality of their decision-making.
“At the Department for Education I saw that nothing so concentrated the mind of system-leaders as sharper accountability. Rigorous inspection. Robust league tables. I will apply the same principles and approach to the performance of local planning authorities.
“We will publish league tables revealing the real performance of local planning authorities. The speed with which they respond, the level of approvals, their delivery against targets. We will ensure that these league tables reflect how the system is gamed at the moment by some.
“Strip [extension of time] agreements (ETAs) out of the system, and in the two years to September, only 9% of local authorities determined 70% or more of non-major applications within the statutory…period. On major applications it is even worse: strip out the ETAs and only 1% of local authorities managed to get through at least 60% of planning applications within the statutory. period…
“I intend to constrain their [ETAs’] use, including banning them for householder applications, limiting when in the process they can apply, and prohibiting repeat ETAs…
“There are too many instances where planning committees overturn their planners’ recommendation for approval of new development even when the proposal is entirely in line with the local plan and its policies. When that happens the developer, understandably, appeals the judgement and almost invariably wins. The local authority will end up paying costs…
“So we will lay out the details of which local authorities are most promiscuously rejecting planning applications against officers’ advice. And we will make transparent the amount that it is costing the local council taxpayer.”
Reaction
Clive Betts MP, Labour chair of the levelling up, housing and communities select committee, said: ““We have a national shortage of housing in England but the secretary of state’s speech…didn’t provide clarity on how we are to achieve the national housing target of building 300,000 net new homes per year by the mid-2020s.
“For all the talk of getting tough with local authorities, without mandatory local housing targets it’s not clear how many houses will need to be built in local areas to deliver the national target.
“Often objections to developments are about concerns of a lack of infrastructure – are there enough schools, GPs, parks, and recreation spaces to help support the residents of new homes? The secretary of state didn’t spell out any plans to bring forward this investment in local services and amenities or how it would be paid for…
“Councils are hit by a range of financial pressures and there is a pressing need for additional resources for local planning authorities to ensure the planning system works efficiently. The government must ensure local planning authorities have the investment and specialist skills to help speed up the planning process.”
,
