Final changes to Localism Act alters little for developers

28th November

After a marathon set of revisions and amendments, the Localism Act 2011 finally entered into law on 15 November 2011 replacing the Localism Bill that preceded it.

Over 600 amendments were made to the Bill as it passed through Parliament, but comparatively few affected infrastructure planning provisions. In fact, all the proposed changes to the planning regime that the Localism Bill originally contained remained in place and will come into force next year. The most significant to infrastructure developers can be summarised as follows:

• the application-examining role of the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) is to be taken over by the Planning Inspectorate;
• the decision-making role of the IPC is to be taken over by the Secretary of State, with a consequential extension to the timetable for applications of three months;
• the Planning Act regime is to be able to have further consents added to it;
• the ability is introduced to 'upgrade' a below-threshold project into the regime at an earlier stage;
• there is a reduction in the number of local authority consultees; and
• only summary statements of community consultation need be published in newspapers.

Wider aspects of the Bill were amended in many key areas before the Act was finalised but the following changes are considered to be the most significant alterations:

• an ability for councils or other organisations and even individuals to apply to take over other public service functions was introduced;
• the general requirement to hold a local referendum if 5% of the electorate called for one was dropped;
• the local authority duty to co-operate on planning policies is strengthened.

Although the National Planning Policy Framework was consulted upon during the passage of the Bill, it is not referred to in the Bill directly, it still being guidance rather than legislation currently.

Commenting on the Act, Pendragon’s Alex Doyle said: “There are less substantial changes to the planning regime and less subsequent impact on developers than it had been thought might occur at one point. What is important is that developers stay aware of the most significant aspects and ensure they consult closely with local stakeholders as planning proposals are put forward.”