In this explainer, we look at how planning happens at different levels of government and how changes like ‘devolution’ could impact the way we plan for new homes, transport, nature, and many other things that shape the quality of people’s lives.
Why does planning happen at different levels of government?
Some areas have only two levels of government, national and local, but others can have up to four.
Over the years some ‘higher’ levels of government have been encouraged to plan across larger areas where this can be done most effectively, and some local bodies have been empowered to make plans closer to the people affected by planning decisions. These arrangements have helped to make sure that planning policies and political decisions about them reflect the needs of the community, are made with their best interests in mind, and will be accepted by them.
For example, planning for public services like transport networks that connect many communities, protections for nature across council boundaries, and action to tackle challenges like pollution or flooding can require ‘larger than local’ collaboration across regions. However, neighbourhood issues like the design of streets and homes can be hyper-local or have a big impact on small groups of local residents and require a detailed knowledge of the place being planned.
This patchwork of different planning responsibilities has spread across different levels of government and in different ways over the years to try and secure better outcomes for communities and give more control to local leaders in ways that will be meaningful to the people who elect them.
Who does planning currently?
In England, ‘district’ or ‘unitary’ councils are typically responsible for making planning decisions and for developing policy to explain how proposals will be considered. Where they exist, smaller parish and town councils can make neighbourhood-level plans and comment on applications that affect their area. ‘County’ councils across larger areas are also consulted and can develop their own plans for some types of infrastructure like transport, waste, etc… which they provide. At all levels, decisions are taken by elected councillors or are delegated by councillors to their planning officers.
Central government in Westminster also has a role to introduce new planning laws, to issue policy and guidance that councils are expected to follow, to examine each council’s planning documents and to ‘call-in’ and review planning decisions they make. Ministers are ultimately responsible for funding council’s planning services and monitor their performance to ensure the public are receiving a good quality of service and good value for money. They can also create unique models for planning like Development Corporations and administer a separate planning process for major ‘nationally significant infrastructure’ projects.
However, Government Ministers have transferred some of their responsibilities to the mayors in city-regions in recent decades through a process known as ‘devolution’. The London Mayor for example can also ‘call-in’ applications decided by the city’s councils and Liverpool’s Mayor is in the process of developing a strategic plan across the city-region to set regional planning priorities that set a direction for councils in the area.
Why would devolution impact planning and in what ways?
Recent changes to local government have introduced new ‘Metro Mayors’ in some areas and allowed some councils to pool their resources and make decisions together.
As a result, places and communities can be much more ambitious about their built and natural environment. This is especially the case when strategic planning powers are included for a number of reasons: larger areas have more options of where to build new homes, parks, shops and employment centres and can make better ‘strategic’ choices about where to locate them; plans about the future development of areas can be more closely aligned with investment decisions about infrastructure, community facilities and nature so that residents can benefit more from these resources and access them easily; councils can more easily share resources and staff to run their planning services more efficiently and effectively, delivering a higher quality service at a lower cost.
Where Mayors have been able to take and use strategic planning powers, residents have enjoyed a stronger democratic voice over planning policy and decisions and their councils have been better able to co-ordinate with neighbouring areas benefitting whole communities.
Strategic planning has been devolved in London longest. As a result, Mayors have found it easier to transform parts of the city by planning for new housing and urban regeneration in combination with transport improvements including London’s Jubilee line extension and Elizabeth Line, identified ‘Opportunity Areas’ that can encourage investment and produce homes, jobs and infrastructure and created innovative ‘Mini Holland’ schemes to generate best practice and encourage more cycling and walking access to high streets.
However, places have had mixed experiences of strategic planning in recent years. This is because some area’s devolution agreements have not included planning powers. Of those areas that did include strategic planning powers, only one – Liverpool City Region – has so far produced a strategic plan.
This means that local leaders in many parts of the country have had the power to invest in regeneration, public health, transport and housing projects but lacked the authority in our planning system to get the most from them.
What needs to change?
Mayors have been given the choice about whether to take responsibility for strategic planning and once they do, how and when to use these powers. In practice this has left many areas without the benefits of strategic planning because the process has not yet been started. The RTPI believes that strategic planning should be required of all Mayors and newly Combined Authorities and they should be expected to use these powers.
We have also called for changes that would make it easier for those areas with strategic planning powers to deliver new strategic plans. Some strategic planning processes have failed because individual councils have been able to veto plans or to drop out of them at the expense of the wider area. We would argue that the next Government should allow strategic plans to be agreed by a majority vote of participating councils, rather than a unanimous vote, to overcome these important obstacles to better outcomes.
Further reading
You may also be interested to read:
- RTPI’s Strategic Planning hub
- Making Better Decisions for Places (2014)
- Strategic Planning (2015) https://www.rtpi.org.uk/policy/2015/february/strategic-planning-effective-co-operation-for-planning-across-boundaries/
- Smart City Regions (2017)
- Green Growth Boards (2021)
- Local Government Association’s Devolution explained
