Brownfield Redevelopment – Midlands & North Presented by Ian Mercer, Bruton Knowles Development Partner

Question

“ Examining to what extent Brownfield Registers and ‘Permission in Principle’ (PiP) can effectively identify

potential land and facilitate its development”

Contents • Brownfield Land Register - Background information • Permission in Principle: Consent Route • Brownfield Register and its effectiveness • Preparation of the Register – Bruton Knowles Case Study • Permission in Principle and its effectiveness • Q & A’s

Background Information • Brownfield Land Register and Concept of Permission in Principle

introduced Housing and Planning Act 2016

• Further details followed in: – Town and County Planning (Brownfield Land Register) Regulations

2017 – Town and County Planning (Permission in Principle) Order 2017 – New section planning practice guidance published 28th July 2017

Brownfield Land Register - Background Information Each LPA must prepare and maintain a register of previously developed land: • Within their area • Meets criteria – regulation 4 – “suitable”, “available”, “achievable” “Available” • Owner has expressed intention to sell or develop • Developer has expressed intention to sell or develop • In LPA’s view no issues relating to ownership or legal impediments “Achievable” • In the opinion of LPA development is likely to take place within 15 years

of entry date, having regard to information publicly available and relevant representations received

“Suitable ” • Free from constraints and policy compliant

Brownfield Land Register - Background Information

• Has an area of at least 0.25 Ha or supporting at least 5 dwellings

• Publish Register by 31st December 2017

• Reviewed each year

• Brownfield Land Register kept in 2 parts:

Brownfield Land Register -Background Information Part 1 – Register • Sites categorised as ‘previously developed land’ that also satisfy criteria

relating to ‘suitability’ and ‘availability’ for new homes and the ‘achievability’ of housing development

• Before part 1 is published LPAs are likely to carry out procedures including consultation, taking into account representations

Brownfield Land Register - Background Information Part 2 – Register Before entering land into Part 2, the LPA must:- • Display a site notice for at least 21 days • Follow a series of prescribed procedures on publicity and notification • Take into account representations • Sites moved into Part 2 of the Register, will be granted Permission in

Principle, for housing led development described in the individual entry, with the LPA having had regard to:- − The development plan − NPPF − Material considerations − Contain statement “allocated for residential development for the

purposes of Section 59A of the T&CPA 1990 (Permission in Principle)”

Brownfield Land Register – Background Information • Schedule 2 of the Brownfield Land Register sets out details of what must

be included in parts 1 and 2 including:- - Name and address of land - Plan identifying land - Location co-ordinates - Area in hectares - Planning status - Description of proposed development - Min/max number net dwellings

Brownfield Land Register - Background Information

• Exemptions that cannot be granted Permission in Principle consist of : - working and winning minerals - Falls within Schedule 1 of the Town and Country and Planning

(Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017 - Falls within Schedule 2 of the EIA Regulations and has been screened

as EIA Development - Prohibited under Habitats protection

Permission in Principle (PiP): Consent Route PiP is alternative way of obtaining planning permission – 2 stages: • Stage 1 Permission in Principle

Entry of land into Part 2 of the register, establishes the principle of development including use, location, and amount of development or min / max number of dwellings per Ha. However work can not commence until technical details consent granted

• Stage 2 Technical Details Consent Requirements for a valid application same as a full planning permission including:-

– Provision of infrastructure, details open space, affordable housing, design, access, layout and landscaping.

– Design statement and an impact assessment – strategies for contamination, remediation and drainage.

– Work cannot commence until details are acceptable and LPA can refuse for “justifiable reasons”

Stage 1 - Permission in

Principal (PiP) Stage 2 - Technical

Details Consent Permission to Start + =

Permission in Principle – Other Key Points • CIL may be payable • Following Permission in Principle, default duration of 5 years for Part 2 • If LPA determines at technical stage that proposal should be subject to

EIA regulations, Permission in Principle remains valid, with regulations dealt with during technical stage

• A fee is payable • Time limits for determining technical detail consent apply unless agreed

otherwise: – 10 weeks for major development – 5 weeks for minor development – 16 weeks for EIA

Brownfield Land Register and Its Effectiveness Key question - does it identify and facilitate development? Consider following key points: • An accurately identified and deliverable land supply is essential for LPA’s to:

– plan future housing need – 5 year land supply – identify housing supply issues – district and HMA – justify/defend reviews of green belt – help to mitigate/avoid “aggressive” applications given the need to

identify a 5 year land supply - particularly significant for LPAs without green belt

– interactive tool for developer - identify land and speed up house building process

– How much value does the process add if an LPA has an up-to-date development plan?

Brownfield Land Register and Its Effectiveness Why facilitate housing development? • economic benefits, through growth and investment • jobs • housing for all parts of community • achieve good long term sustainable development - not short term

opportunistic schemes

A well prepared Part 1 Brownfield Register is an effective tool in identifying and facilitating development – but only as good as the process used to prepare the Register

Preparation of the Register – Case Study Most LPAs have SHLAAs which can be updated/renamed as the Brownfield Land Register The City of Wolverhampton Council example: • Bruton Knowles assisted Wolverhampton with the preparation of its

– SHLAA – AAP Work

• Undertook preparatory and investigative work now included within

Brownfield Register http://wolverhampton.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=2e36e2eff14e40c480194b42b33a0abc

Preparation of the Register Staged work for Wolverhampton undertaken as follows: Stage A – Identification/compilation of sites • Reviewed existing planning permissions • Undertook desk top work/aerial imagery to identify land • Completed drive-by work to review opportunities, recording data such as

owner/occupier, existing use, access and suitability for housing • Record using site assessment pro forma – award site prefix

Stage B - Record and analyse key site information • Contact identified owner and occupiers - bespoke questionnaire • Undertake consultation inviting submission of sites • Review availability and identify issues - legal, easements, access

restrictions, neighbouring land etc • Complete an initial schedule of sites with “Traffic Light” tool defining

achievability in years

Preparation of the Register

Stage C • Review information and results of consultation, assess deliverability of

sites and assess quantum of development • Undertake additional work as necessary to determine deliverability

including viability work • Complete Register

In summary a schedule completed accurately and in detail will: • Provide an excellent record of potential housing land supply which helps

prioritise investment for future sites (eg HCA or public/private sector) • Be easy to review annually

Preparation of the Register

Permission in Principle and its Effectiveness Is it effective? Too early to tell how many sites will be included with PiP in part 2s, however: Positives • Prevent arguments about the principle of development – speed up process • More certainty in planning process • Helpful for SME’s • Useful for LPA to request further resources • Speed up delivery of housing where out of date local plan. Is it an alternative route to

deliver housing in advance of Local Plan review? Negatives • Lack of resource within LPA’s • Is Permission in Principle just an outline permission, and yet another process creating

additional work? • No statutory requirement to move sites to Part 2 and in the absence of any application fee,

suggest LPAs are unlikely to want to/ be able to resource such decisions unless: – Council owned land – Site benefits from external funding

Q & A’s Q. How effective is the Register in minimising the risk associated with developing brownfield or contaminated sites? A. Preparation of Register is likely to highlight the possibility of risk, but will not minimise it. The site will either be remediated during the process of preparing it for redevelopment, with confirmation and proof provided as part of the technical application, or a condition to be discharged

Q. What safeguards will be put in place for ensuring contamination is adequately and correctly risk assessed? A. Proof of the removal of contaminates and treatment of the site should be provided as part of the technical details consent or be a condition of the same

Q.Will the register provide developers with the information they really need? A. Up to a point, but in reality will developers really buy land off a register on an unconditional basis – may do with permission to build, with issues resolved and site de-risked

Q & A’s Q. Where do responsibilities lie with regards to listing and assessing sites on the Register: who is responsible for Phase 1 risk assessments given PiP? A. The LPA on the first point, it would seem. On the second, a LPA may undertake a level of Phase 1 work as a general indication of the deliverability of a number of sites to determine relative risk. Equally the site owner may undertake this work as well Q. Who decides if a site is viable for development? A. Ultimately the interest providing the risk capital, notwithstanding the various matters to be agreed, such as s106 obligations

Q. How will sites identified on Brownfield Registers, but classed to be of high environmental value, be dealt with? A. Such sites are exempt from Permission in Principle, thus if “screening” determines the need for EIA, have to follow regulations and traditional route to secure a full planning permission