Agenda item

(Director of Planning and Economic Development) To consider the attached report.

The Panel received a report from Mr N Richardson, Assistant Director of Planning and Economic Development, regarding Proposals for Changes to Planning Application Fees in England Consultation.

On 15 November 2010, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (CLG) issued a consultation paper seeking views on proposed changes to the planning application fees regime, which would decentralise responsibility for setting fees to local planning authorities. It also proposed widening the scope of planning application fees allowing authorities to change for applications which were currently free and to set higher fees for retrospective applications.

The handling, checking, administering, assessing, deciding and publicising of planning applications required each one to have appropriate and careful consideration. The Government introduced fee charging over 20 years ago to recover costs of processing most types of planning applications. Subsequently the fees have been increased, the most recent of which was a 23% increase in 2008. So far, setting fees had been restricted so that they were done only nationally. It was advised that the fees were not taking account of differing local circumstances, it had been found that some authorities, including the District Council, were not recouping their costs. The consultation paper assumed that most local planning authorities would increase fees on average by 10-15%. However, the District Council shortfall was greater and required a much greater fee increase to achieve full cost recovery.

Options

There were three options outlined in the Consultation Paper.

Option 1 – Decentralise the responsibility for setting fees for planning applications to local planning authorities, who would establish a changing scheme which reflected full cost recovery and the principle that the user should pay for the service received.

Option 2 – This was similar to Option 1, but with a cap of 25% on maximum fee levels.

Option 3 – Maintain the current centrally set planning fee system, subject to a 10% to 15% increase in fee levels.

Eight questions were posed in the consultation response.

1.         Do you agree that each local planning authority should be able to set its own (non-profit making) planning application fee charges?

Response      Strongly agree

Epping Forest District Council costs and fees were higher than the average 10% shortfall being quoted. Based on the budget for 2011/12, our current fee income would cover 49% of costs and the average fee was £708. By using an initial maximum 25% annual increase based on the budget set for 2011/12 of £481,000, the Council expect to raise a further £120,000, plus a further £80,000 from areas not currently subject to charges. Current fee income would then cover 69% of costs, so the likelihood would be that a further fee increase would be required for 2012/13 and beyond, until full cost recovery was achieved.

2.         Do you agree that local planning authorities should be allowed to decide whether to charge for applications that were re-submitted following withdrawal or refusal?

Response      Strongly agree

There were a number of costs still included in handling, administering and assessing these applications. In particular, the checking for completeness of the submission, further consultations, report writing etc. In effect, this resulted in re-assessment of the planning issues and used officer time as with any other type of planning application.

3.         Do you agree that local planning authorities should be able to set higher fees for retrospective planning applications?

Response      Strongly agree

4.         Are there any development management services which are not currently charged for but should require a fee?

Response      Yes

Whilst not part of the CLG preferred consultation recommendation, fees should be chargeable for listed building applications and conservation area consents, particularly where these were not accompanied by a fee paying planning applications, because the District Council had a large number of listed buildings and required specialist advice in assessing them. At Epping Forest, between 1 April and 1 December 2010, no fee application accounted for 30% of all type of submitted applications.

Apart from claiming for costs, there was no income return on planning application related appeals. A fee payable to the Council covering administration costs should be introduced and be variable depending on which procedure was chosen.

5.         Are there any development management services which currently require a fee but should be exempt from charging?

Response      No

Officers were in favour of not charging for applications relating to disabled access. comfort issues. Works to trees in conservation areas and those that were protected appeared a little unreasonable given the Council protects these in the first place, and there was the fear that a fee may encourage works to take place without an application.

6.         What are the likely effects of any of the changes on you, or the group or business or local authority you represent?

It would allow for a move closer towards full cost recovery, reduce overall cost of the service by re-looking at our overheads and re-charges, staff retention and greater emphasis on pre-application advice and collaboration with various parties. Setting fees locally allowed authorities to run a more efficient service since it would be a more transparent system, directly accountable to local residents.

7.         Do you think there will be unintended consequences to these proposals?

Response      Yes

Difficulty in accountability of cost recovery as a comparison across local authorities, depending on what was included in the budget make-up of Development Control/Management sections.

Potential disagreement and fluctuations of fees comparable to neighbouring authority, resulting in increased challenges of fees set.

Threat to general positive customer feedback as agents became disillusioned and confused by varying fees between authorities, particularly if the fees were substantially increased.

8.         Do you have any comment on the outcomes predicted in the Impact Assessment, in particular the costs and benefits?

Response      Yes

Option 1         This would be the preferred option. The benefits for local planning authorities would result from being able to locally set fees and allow them to increase to a level where costs were fully recouped. The benefits for the District Council would be full cost recovery, based on local conditions and on current estimates, this would mean a further income in a full year of approximately £500,000.

The costs would be the additional cost burden imposed on applicants with an average estimate of 13% on fees paid by individuals and 87% on fees paid by business. Full cost recovery would in the case of the District Council possibly double the fees currently being charged.

The consultation responses would be forwarded directly to the Department of Communities and Local Government.

RECOMMENDED:

(1)        That the Proposals for Changes to Planning Application Fees in England Consultation be noted; and

(2)        That the consultation responses be forwarded to the Department of Communities and Local Government.