Killian Pretty Review - Revision history

Designing Buildings at 07:08, 23 November 2020

2020-11-23T07:08:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:08, 23 November 2020
Line 57:		Line 57:
	This rapid rate of change in the planning system has raised a number of concerns, with campaigners describing the transformation as giving the go ahead for a bonfire of planning rules, creating a charter for development and putting the countryside at risk.		This rapid rate of change in the planning system has raised a number of concerns, with campaigners describing the transformation as giving the go ahead for a bonfire of planning rules, creating a charter for development and putting the countryside at risk.

−	~~= Find out more =~~	+	= Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki =
−		+
−	=== Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki ===	+

	* Alternative dispute resolution.		* Alternative dispute resolution.
Line 74:		Line 72:
	* Taylor Report.		* Taylor Report.

−	=== External references ===	+	= External references =

	* Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/developmentmanagementconsult Development Management: Proactive Planning from Pre-Application to Delivery - Consultation].		* Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/developmentmanagementconsult Development Management: Proactive Planning from Pre-Application to Delivery - Consultation].
Line 87:		Line 85:
	* National archive: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] 21 December 2009.		* National archive: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] 21 December 2009.

−	[[Category:~~Publications_/_reports~~]] [[Category:~~Other_legislation~~]] [[Category:DCN_Legislation]] [[Category:Planning_permission]] [[Category:Property_law]]	+	[[Category:DCN_Definition]] [[Category:DCN_Guidance]] [[Category:DCN_Legislation]] [[Category:DCN_Policy]] [[Category:DCN_Report]] [[Category:DCN_Research,_Development_and_Innovation]] [[Category:Publications_/_reports]] [[Category:Other_legislation]] [[Category:Planning_permission]] [[Category:Property_law]]

Designing Buildings at 16:01, 19 July 2016

2016-07-19T16:01:05Z

Designing Buildings at 15:59, 19 July 2016

2016-07-19T15:59:46Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:59, 19 July 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	= Introduction =		= Introduction =

−	The Killian Pretty Review, 'Planning applications: A faster and more responsive system' was published on 24 November 2008.	+	The Killian Pretty Review, '[http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyfinal Planning applications: A faster and more responsive system]' was published on 24 November 2008.

	The review was announced in March 2008 and was jointly commissioned by Hazel Blears MP, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and John Hutton MP, Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. It was undertaken by Joanna Killian, Chief Executive of Essex County Council and David Pretty, retired Group Chief Executive of Barratt Developments PLC.		The review was announced in March 2008 and was jointly commissioned by Hazel Blears MP, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and John Hutton MP, Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. It was undertaken by Joanna Killian, Chief Executive of Essex County Council and David Pretty, retired Group Chief Executive of Barratt Developments PLC.
Line 47:		Line 47:
	The Review was broadly welcomed (see [http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-RTPI-response-5-September-08.pdf RTPI response], [http://www.architecture.com/NewsAndPress/News/RIBANews/News/2009/RIBAResponseToKillianPretty.aspx RIBA response] and BPF response) and in March 2009 the Government published its [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report] suggesting that the need for action was urgent.		The Review was broadly welcomed (see [http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-RTPI-response-5-September-08.pdf RTPI response], [http://www.architecture.com/NewsAndPress/News/RIBANews/News/2009/RIBAResponseToKillianPretty.aspx RIBA response] and BPF response) and in March 2009 the Government published its [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report] suggesting that the need for action was urgent.

−	A ~~[http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyprogress~~ first progress report] was published on 30 July 2009 and a ~~[http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond~~ second progress report] was published on 21 December 2009.	+	A first progress report was published on 30 July 2009 and a second progress report was published on 21 December 2009.

	A further review, the Penfold Review, 'Review of non-planning consents' was published on July 18th 2010. Commissioned by the Department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS), Penfold's remit was '…to identify opportunities to deregulate (planning), as a means of supporting business investment in development…'. The review made a great number of recommendations, intended to '…increase certainty, speed up processes, reduce duplication and minimise costs', although it stopped short of recommending a unified consent.		A further review, the Penfold Review, 'Review of non-planning consents' was published on July 18th 2010. Commissioned by the Department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS), Penfold's remit was '…to identify opportunities to deregulate (planning), as a means of supporting business investment in development…'. The review made a great number of recommendations, intended to '…increase certainty, speed up processes, reduce duplication and minimise costs', although it stopped short of recommending a unified consent.
Line 76:		Line 76:
	=== External references ===		=== External references ===

−	* Planning Portal: [http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/planning/planningpolicyandlegislation/reform/killianpretty/finalreport Killian Pretty Review, The final report].
−	* Planning Portal: [http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/PpWeb/jsp/redirect.jsp?url=http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/kpr/kpr_exec-summary.pdf The Killian Pretty Review Summary and Recommendations].
	* Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/developmentmanagementconsult Development Management: Proactive Planning from Pre-Application to Delivery - Consultation].		* Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/developmentmanagementconsult Development Management: Proactive Planning from Pre-Application to Delivery - Consultation].
	* Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingplanningconditions Improving the use and discharge of planning conditions: Consultation].		* Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingplanningconditions Improving the use and discharge of planning conditions: Consultation].

Designing Buildings at 11:03, 5 July 2016

2016-07-05T11:03:59Z

Institute of Historic Building Conservation at 08:52, 11 June 2016

2016-06-11T08:52:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:52, 11 June 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
−
	= Introduction =		= Introduction =

Line 13:		Line 12:

	Five key areas of concern were identified:		Five key areas of concern were identified:
−	*The proportionality of the system, in particular relating to the requirements for smaller-scale developments.	+
−	*Problems with the pre-application process and with discharging conditions.	+	* The proportionality of the system, in particular relating to the requirements for smaller-scale developments.
−	*Some key parties, such as elected members and some statutory and non-statutory consultees, were not being involved effectively.	+	* Problems with the pre-application process and with discharging conditions.
−	*The target culture was not effective.	+	* Some key parties, such as elected members and some statutory and non-statutory consultees, were not being involved effectively.
−	*Legislation was too complex.	+	* The target culture was not effective.
		+	* Legislation was too complex.

	= Recommendations =		= Recommendations =

	The review set out 17 recommendations:		The review set out 17 recommendations:
−	#Measures for expanding the scope of permitted development for non-householder developments.	+
−	#Measures to reduce information and validation requirements (in particular for householders and minor developments).	+	# Measures for expanding the scope of permitted development for non-householder developments.
−	#Measures to improve the advice available to users of the planning system.	+	# Measures to reduce information and validation requirements (in particular for householders and minor developments).
−	#A range of improvements to pre-application discussions.	+	# Measures to improve the advice available to users of the planning system.
−	#Improvements to the processing of applications, including dissemination of the findings of the National Process Improvement Project.	+	# A range of improvements to pre-application discussions.
−	#Measures to improve the way planning conditions are dealt with.	+	# Improvements to the processing of applications, including dissemination of the findings of the National Process Improvement Project.
−	#Measures to improve the agreement of planning obligations.	+	# Measures to improve the way planning conditions are dealt with.
−	#Proposals to find a simpler way of varying existing permissions.	+	# Measures to improve the agreement of planning obligations.
−	#Measures to improve the involvement of statutory and non-statutory consultees.	+	# Proposals to find a simpler way of varying existing permissions.
−	#Measures to improve the engagement of elected members.	+	# Measures to improve the involvement of statutory and non-statutory consultees.
−	#Measures to improve the engagement of the local community.	+	# Measures to improve the engagement of elected members.
−	#Measures to encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution.	+	# Measures to improve the engagement of the local community.
−	#Measures to improve the standard of applications, including an accredited agents scheme for householders and minor developments.	+	# Measures to encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution.
−	#Addressing the shortage of resources and skills in local authority planning departments.	+	# Measures to improve the standard of applications, including an accredited agents scheme for householders and minor developments.
−	#Revisions to performance targets to include quality as well as time.	+	# Addressing the shortage of resources and skills in local authority planning departments.
−	#Measures to avoid expansion of national policy objectives delivered through the planning system and duplication with other regimes.	+	# Revisions to performance targets to include quality as well as time.
−	#Measures to simplify the national planning policy framework and secondary planning legislation.	+	# Measures to avoid expansion of national policy objectives delivered through the planning system and duplication with other regimes.
		+	# Measures to simplify the national planning policy framework and secondary planning legislation.

	Killian and Pretty considered that their recommendations could remove 15,000 applications from the planning system altogether and simplify or speed up a further 16,500, resulting in savings or £300 million per year (ref DWF: [http://www.dwf.co.uk/insight/legal-updates/the-killian-pretty-review The Killian Pretty Review]).		Killian and Pretty considered that their recommendations could remove 15,000 applications from the planning system altogether and simplify or speed up a further 16,500, resulting in savings or £300 million per year (ref DWF: [http://www.dwf.co.uk/insight/legal-updates/the-killian-pretty-review The Killian Pretty Review]).
Line 44:		Line 45:
	= After the Review =		= After the Review =

−	The Review was broadly welcomed (see [http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-RTPI-response-5-September-08.pdf RTPI response], [http://www.architecture.com/NewsAndPress/News/RIBANews/News/2009/RIBAResponseToKillianPretty.aspx RIBA response] and BPF response) and in March 2009 the Government published its [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report] suggesting that the need for action was urgent.~~<br/>~~	+	The Review was broadly welcomed (see [http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-RTPI-response-5-September-08.pdf RTPI response], [http://www.architecture.com/NewsAndPress/News/RIBANews/News/2009/RIBAResponseToKillianPretty.aspx RIBA response] and BPF response) and in March 2009 the Government published its [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report] suggesting that the need for action was urgent.

	A [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyprogress first progress report] was published on 30 July 2009 and a [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] was published on 21 December 2009.		A [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyprogress first progress report] was published on 30 July 2009 and a [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] was published on 21 December 2009.
Line 59:		Line 60:

	=== Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki ===		=== Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki ===
−	*Alternative dispute resolution.	+
−	*National Planning Policy Framework.	+	* Alternative dispute resolution.
−	*Neighbourhood planning.	+	* Charging for Listed Building Consent pre-application advice.
−	*Planning conditions.	+	* National Planning Policy Framework.
−	*Planning obligations.	+	* Neighbourhood planning.
−	*Planning permission.	+	* Planning conditions.
−	*Penfold review.	+	* Planning obligations.
−	*Permitted development.	+	* Planning permission.
−	*Planning policy replaced by the NPPF.	+	* Penfold review.
−	*Statutory authorities.	+	* Permitted development.
−	*Taylor Report.	+	* Planning policy replaced by the NPPF.
		+	* Statutory authorities.
		+	* Taylor Report.

	=== External references ===		=== External references ===
−	*Planning Portal: [http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/planning/planningpolicyandlegislation/reform/killianpretty/finalreport Killian Pretty Review, The final report].
−	*Planning Portal: [http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/PpWeb/jsp/redirect.jsp?url=http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/kpr/kpr_exec-summary.pdf The Killian Pretty Review Summary and Recommendations].
−	*Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/developmentmanagementconsult Development Management: Proactive Planning from Pre-Application to Delivery - Consultation].
−	*Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingplanningconditions Improving the use and discharge of planning conditions: Consultation].
−	*Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingengagementconsult Improving engagement by statutory and non-statutory consultees: Consultation].
−	*Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/publicityplanningapplications Publicity for planning applications: Summary of responses to consultation].
−	*[http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAHoldings/PolicyAndInternationalRelations/Policy/PublicAffairs/2012/RIBAResponsetotheTaylorreviewofPlanningguidance.pdf RIBA Response to the Taylor review of Planning guidance].
−	*[http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-RTPI-response-5-September-08.pdf RTPI response].
−	*Government [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report]
−	*DWF: [http://www.dwf.co.uk/insight/legal-updates/the-killian-pretty-review The Killian Pretty Review].
−	*2007 Planning White Paper: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/planningsustainablefuture Planning for a Sustainable Future].
−	*National archive: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyprogress first progress report] 30 July 2009.
−	*National archive: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] 21 December 2009.

−	[[Category:Publications_/_reports]]	+	* Planning Portal: [http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/planning/planningpolicyandlegislation/reform/killianpretty/finalreport Killian Pretty Review, The final report].
−	[[Category:Other_legislation]]	+	* Planning Portal: [http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/PpWeb/jsp/redirect.jsp?url=http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/kpr/kpr_exec-summary.pdf The Killian Pretty Review Summary and Recommendations].
−	[[Category:Planning_permission]]	+	* Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/developmentmanagementconsult Development Management: Proactive Planning from Pre-Application to Delivery - Consultation].
−	[[Category:Property_law]]	+	* Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingplanningconditions Improving the use and discharge of planning conditions: Consultation].
		+	* Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingengagementconsult Improving engagement by statutory and non-statutory consultees: Consultation].
		+	* Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/publicityplanningapplications Publicity for planning applications: Summary of responses to consultation].
		+	* [http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAHoldings/PolicyAndInternationalRelations/Policy/PublicAffairs/2012/RIBAResponsetotheTaylorreviewofPlanningguidance.pdf RIBA Response to the Taylor review of Planning guidance].
		+	* [http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-RTPI-response-5-September-08.pdf RTPI response].
		+	* Government [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report]
		+	* DWF: [http://www.dwf.co.uk/insight/legal-updates/the-killian-pretty-review The Killian Pretty Review].
		+	* 2007 Planning White Paper: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/planningsustainablefuture Planning for a Sustainable Future].
		+	* National archive: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyprogress first progress report] 30 July 2009.
		+	* National archive: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] 21 December 2009.
		+
		+	[[Category:Publications_/_reports]] [[Category:Other_legislation]] [[Category:Planning_permission]] [[Category:Property_law]]

Designing Buildings at 13:27, 28 September 2015

2015-09-28T13:27:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:27, 28 September 2015
Line 44:		Line 44:
	= After the Review =		= After the Review =

−	The Review was broadly welcomed (see [http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-RTPI-response-5-September-08.pdf RTPI response], [http://www.architecture.com/NewsAndPress/News/RIBANews/News/2009/RIBAResponseToKillianPretty.aspx RIBA response] and ~~[http://www.bpf.org.uk/en/what_we_do/planning/overview.php~~ BPF response]) and in March 2009 the Government published its [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report] suggesting that the need for action was urgent.	+	The Review was broadly welcomed (see [http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-RTPI-response-5-September-08.pdf RTPI response], [http://www.architecture.com/NewsAndPress/News/RIBANews/News/2009/RIBAResponseToKillianPretty.aspx RIBA response] and BPF response) and in March 2009 the Government published its [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report] suggesting that the need for action was urgent.<br/>

	A [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyprogress first progress report] was published on 30 July 2009 and a [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] was published on 21 December 2009.		A [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyprogress first progress report] was published on 30 July 2009 and a [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] was published on 21 December 2009.
Line 79:		Line 79:
	*Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/publicityplanningapplications Publicity for planning applications: Summary of responses to consultation].		*Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/publicityplanningapplications Publicity for planning applications: Summary of responses to consultation].
	*[http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAHoldings/PolicyAndInternationalRelations/Policy/PublicAffairs/2012/RIBAResponsetotheTaylorreviewofPlanningguidance.pdf RIBA Response to the Taylor review of Planning guidance].		*[http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAHoldings/PolicyAndInternationalRelations/Policy/PublicAffairs/2012/RIBAResponsetotheTaylorreviewofPlanningguidance.pdf RIBA Response to the Taylor review of Planning guidance].
−	*[http://www.bpf.org.uk/en/what_we_do/planning/overview.php BPF response].
	*[http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-RTPI-response-5-September-08.pdf RTPI response].		*[http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-RTPI-response-5-September-08.pdf RTPI response].
	*Government [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report]		*Government [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report]

Designing Buildings at 11:29, 30 June 2015

2015-06-30T11:29:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:29, 30 June 2015
Line 48:		Line 48:
	A [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyprogress first progress report] was published on 30 July 2009 and a [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] was published on 21 December 2009.		A [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyprogress first progress report] was published on 30 July 2009 and a [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] was published on 21 December 2009.

−	A further review, the Penfold Review, '~~[http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/better-regulation/docs/10-757-penfold-review-interim-report.pdf~~ Review of non-planning consents]' was published on July 18th 2010. Commissioned by the Department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS), Penfold's remit was ‘…to identify opportunities to deregulate (planning), as a means of supporting business investment in development…’. The review made a great number of recommendations, intended to ‘…increase certainty, speed up processes, reduce duplication and minimise costs’, although it stopped short of recommending a unified consent.	+	A further review, the Penfold Review, 'Review of non-planning consents' was published on July 18th 2010. Commissioned by the Department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS), Penfold's remit was ‘…to identify opportunities to deregulate (planning), as a means of supporting business investment in development…’. The review made a great number of recommendations, intended to ‘…increase certainty, speed up processes, reduce duplication and minimise costs’, although it stopped short of recommending a unified consent.

	In March 2012 the Department for Communities and Local Government published the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The NPPF is commonly cited as having reduced planning policy from over 1000 pages to around 50 (although in fact, unless specifically revoked by the framework, existing policies remain effective). The NPPF dismantled the regional planning apparatus and introduced neighbourhood planning in order to create ‘ …. a framework within which local people and their accountable councils can produce their own distinctive local and neighbourhood plans....’		In March 2012 the Department for Communities and Local Government published the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The NPPF is commonly cited as having reduced planning policy from over 1000 pages to around 50 (although in fact, unless specifically revoked by the framework, existing policies remain effective). The NPPF dismantled the regional planning apparatus and introduced neighbourhood planning in order to create ‘ …. a framework within which local people and their accountable councils can produce their own distinctive local and neighbourhood plans....’

Mustafa Pasha at 14:19, 28 January 2015

2015-01-28T14:19:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:19, 28 January 2015
Line 77:		Line 77:
	*Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingplanningconditions Improving the use and discharge of planning conditions: Consultation].		*Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingplanningconditions Improving the use and discharge of planning conditions: Consultation].
	*Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingengagementconsult Improving engagement by statutory and non-statutory consultees: Consultation].		*Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingengagementconsult Improving engagement by statutory and non-statutory consultees: Consultation].
−	*Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/publicityplanningapplications Publicity for planning applications: Summary of responses to consultation].	+	*Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/publicityplanningapplications Publicity for planning applications: Summary of responses to consultation].
	*[http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAHoldings/PolicyAndInternationalRelations/Policy/PublicAffairs/2012/RIBAResponsetotheTaylorreviewofPlanningguidance.pdf RIBA Response to the Taylor review of Planning guidance].		*[http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAHoldings/PolicyAndInternationalRelations/Policy/PublicAffairs/2012/RIBAResponsetotheTaylorreviewofPlanningguidance.pdf RIBA Response to the Taylor review of Planning guidance].
	*[http://www.bpf.org.uk/en/what_we_do/planning/overview.php BPF response].		*[http://www.bpf.org.uk/en/what_we_do/planning/overview.php BPF response].

Mustafa Pasha at 14:17, 28 January 2015

2015-01-28T14:17:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:17, 28 January 2015
Line 76:		Line 76:
	*Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/developmentmanagementconsult Development Management: Proactive Planning from Pre-Application to Delivery - Consultation].		*Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/developmentmanagementconsult Development Management: Proactive Planning from Pre-Application to Delivery - Consultation].
	*Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingplanningconditions Improving the use and discharge of planning conditions: Consultation].		*Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingplanningconditions Improving the use and discharge of planning conditions: Consultation].
−	*Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingengagementconsult Improving engagement by statutory and non-statutory consultees: Consultation].	+	*Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingengagementconsult Improving engagement by statutory and non-statutory consultees: Consultation].
	*Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/publicityplanningapplications Publicity for planning applications: Summary of responses to consultation].		*Gov.uk: [http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/publicityplanningapplications Publicity for planning applications: Summary of responses to consultation].
	*[http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAHoldings/PolicyAndInternationalRelations/Policy/PublicAffairs/2012/RIBAResponsetotheTaylorreviewofPlanningguidance.pdf RIBA Response to the Taylor review of Planning guidance].		*[http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAHoldings/PolicyAndInternationalRelations/Policy/PublicAffairs/2012/RIBAResponsetotheTaylorreviewofPlanningguidance.pdf RIBA Response to the Taylor review of Planning guidance].

Designing Buildings at 13:43, 8 July 2014

2014-07-08T13:43:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:43, 8 July 2014
Line 87:		Line 87:
	*National archive: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] 21 December 2009.		*National archive: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] 21 December 2009.

−	[[Category:~~History~~]]	+	[[Category:Publications_/_reports]]
	[[Category:Other_legislation]]		[[Category:Other_legislation]]
	[[Category:Planning_permission]]		[[Category:Planning_permission]]
	[[Category:Property_law]]		[[Category:Property_law]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:01, 19 July 2016
Line 41:		Line 41:
	# Measures to simplify the national planning policy framework and secondary planning legislation.		# Measures to simplify the national planning policy framework and secondary planning legislation.

−	Killian and Pretty considered that their recommendations could remove 15,000 applications from the planning system altogether and simplify or speed up a further 16,500, resulting in savings or £300 million per year (ref DWF: ~~[http://www.dwf.co.uk/insight/legal-updates/the-killian-pretty-review~~ The Killian Pretty Review]).	+	Killian and Pretty considered that their recommendations could remove 15,000 applications from the planning system altogether and simplify or speed up a further 16,500, resulting in savings or £300 million per year (ref DWF: The Killian Pretty Review).

	= After the Review =		= After the Review =

−	The Review was broadly welcomed (see ~~[http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-~~RTPI-response~~-5-September-08.pdf RTPI response]~~, ~~[http://www.architecture.com/NewsAndPress/News/RIBANews/News/2009/RIBAResponseToKillianPretty.aspx~~ RIBA response] and BPF response) and in March 2009 the Government published its [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report] suggesting that the need for action was urgent.	+	The Review was broadly welcomed (see RTPI response, RIBA response and BPF response) and in March 2009 the Government published its [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report] suggesting that the need for action was urgent.

	A first progress report was published on 30 July 2009 and a second progress report was published on 21 December 2009.		A first progress report was published on 30 July 2009 and a second progress report was published on 21 December 2009.
Line 80:		Line 80:
	* Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingengagementconsult Improving engagement by statutory and non-statutory consultees: Consultation].		* Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/improvingengagementconsult Improving engagement by statutory and non-statutory consultees: Consultation].
	* Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/publicityplanningapplications Publicity for planning applications: Summary of responses to consultation].		* Gov.uk: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/publicityplanningapplications Publicity for planning applications: Summary of responses to consultation].
−	* ~~[http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAHoldings/PolicyAndInternationalRelations/Policy/PublicAffairs/2012/RIBAResponsetotheTaylorreviewofPlanningguidance.pdf~~ RIBA Response to the Taylor review of Planning guidance].	+	* RIBA Response to the Taylor review of Planning guidance.
−	* ~~[http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-RTPI-response-5-September-08.pdf~~ RTPI response].	+	* RTPI response.
	* Government [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report]		* Government [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report]
	* 2007 Planning White Paper: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/planningsustainablefuture Planning for a Sustainable Future].		* 2007 Planning White Paper: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/planningsustainablefuture Planning for a Sustainable Future].
Line 87:		Line 87:
	* National archive: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] 21 December 2009.		* National archive: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] 21 December 2009.

−	[[Category:Publications_/_reports]] [[Category:Other_legislation]] [[Category:Planning_permission]] [[Category:Property_law]]	+	[[Category:Publications_/_reports]] [[Category:Other_legislation]] [[Category:DCN_Legislation]] [[Category:Planning_permission]] [[Category:Property_law]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:03, 5 July 2016
Line 9:		Line 9:
	= Findings =		= Findings =

−	Killian and Pretty found that people felt planning ~~‘…should~~ be customer-focused, fair, proportionate and transparent. It should allow for local people to have a meaningful say. It should deliver the right decisions with appropriate speed.’ suggesting that 10% of major developments were delayed by a year or more, and that permissions for small changes to property were a barrier to growth.	+	Killian and Pretty found that people felt planning '…should be customer-focused, fair, proportionate and transparent. It should allow for local people to have a meaningful say. It should deliver the right decisions with appropriate speed.' suggesting that 10% of major developments were delayed by a year or more, and that permissions for small changes to property were a barrier to growth.

	Five key areas of concern were identified:		Five key areas of concern were identified:
Line 49:		Line 49:
	A [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyprogress first progress report] was published on 30 July 2009 and a [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] was published on 21 December 2009.		A [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyprogress first progress report] was published on 30 July 2009 and a [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100402101411/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettysecond second progress report] was published on 21 December 2009.

−	A further review, the Penfold Review, 'Review of non-planning consents' was published on July 18th 2010. Commissioned by the Department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS), Penfold's remit was ~~‘…to~~ identify opportunities to deregulate (planning), as a means of supporting business investment in ~~development…’~~. The review made a great number of recommendations, intended to ~~‘…increase~~ certainty, speed up processes, reduce duplication and minimise ~~costs’~~, although it stopped short of recommending a unified consent.	+	A further review, the Penfold Review, 'Review of non-planning consents' was published on July 18th 2010. Commissioned by the Department of Business Innovation and Skills (BIS), Penfold's remit was '…to identify opportunities to deregulate (planning), as a means of supporting business investment in development…'. The review made a great number of recommendations, intended to '…increase certainty, speed up processes, reduce duplication and minimise costs', although it stopped short of recommending a unified consent.

−	In March 2012 the Department for Communities and Local Government published the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The NPPF is commonly cited as having reduced planning policy from over 1000 pages to around 50 (although in fact, unless specifically revoked by the framework, existing policies remain effective). The NPPF dismantled the regional planning apparatus and introduced neighbourhood planning in order to create ‘ …. a framework within which local people and their accountable councils can produce their own distinctive local and neighbourhood plans....’	+	In March 2012 the Department for Communities and Local Government published the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The NPPF is commonly cited as having reduced planning policy from over 1000 pages to around 50 (although in fact, unless specifically revoked by the framework, existing policies remain effective). The NPPF dismantled the regional planning apparatus and introduced neighbourhood planning in order to create ' …. a framework within which local people and their accountable councils can produce their own distinctive local and neighbourhood plans....'

	In 2012, the coalition government commissioned the Taylor Report, a further review of the remaining planning policy guidance. Amongst other things, Lord Taylor said '...it is very clear that the old way of doing things is no longer fit for purpose. We have made recommendations for a modern web-based resource that is clear, up-to-date, coherent and easily usable, not just by planners and developers, but the public too.' A detailed review of individual pieces of planning guidance was also presented in the report along with proposals for changing or cancelling that guidance. Taylor suggested that the great majority of this work should be completed by July 2013		In 2012, the coalition government commissioned the Taylor Report, a further review of the remaining planning policy guidance. Amongst other things, Lord Taylor said '...it is very clear that the old way of doing things is no longer fit for purpose. We have made recommendations for a modern web-based resource that is clear, up-to-date, coherent and easily usable, not just by planners and developers, but the public too.' A detailed review of individual pieces of planning guidance was also presented in the report along with proposals for changing or cancelling that guidance. Taylor suggested that the great majority of this work should be completed by July 2013
Line 85:		Line 85:
	* [http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-RTPI-response-5-September-08.pdf RTPI response].		* [http://www.rtpi.org.uk/media/5630/KP-RTPI-response-5-September-08.pdf RTPI response].
	* Government [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report]		* Government [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http:/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyresponse response to the Killian Pretty Report]
−	* DWF: [http://www.dwf.co.uk/insight/legal-updates/the-killian-pretty-review The Killian Pretty Review].
	* 2007 Planning White Paper: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/planningsustainablefuture Planning for a Sustainable Future].		* 2007 Planning White Paper: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/planningsustainablefuture Planning for a Sustainable Future].
	* National archive: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyprogress first progress report] 30 July 2009.		* National archive: [http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/killianprettyprogress first progress report] 30 July 2009.