The Role of Local Development Frameworks in Influencing the Real Estate Development Process

Development of both rural and urban lands has been the centre of debate as far back as the history of United Kingdom. When the administration of Ramsey MacDonald ratified the Town and Country Planning Act, the debate had included the issue of betterment. However, what is interesting about it is its preamble which stated that the Town and Country Planning Act has the authority to design and promulgate schemes as regards to the development and planning of both rural and urban areas (Andrew, Pitt & Tucker 2007, p. 275). The Town and Country Planning Act of Scotland, on the other hand, explicitly granted landowners rights to rebuild, and create modest expansions on their agricultural and forestry areas (Andrew, Pitt & Tucker 2007, p. 275). Ratciffe, Stubbs and Shepherd (2004), on the other hand, argued that the Town and Country Planning Act of 1974 was the beginning of the modern-day planning we see evident in real estate development today. These Acts significantly changed the real estate development processes in the United Kingdom and Scotland. Henceforth, the government and its agencies have taken a more active role in local development.
This research is designed and undertaken to understand the role of local development frameworks in influencing the real estate development process. In this regard, new and old local development frameworks or LDFs are compared. Then, specific roles of the LDFs and their impacts on real estate development process are identified and analysed.
Adam and Watkins (2002) profoundly asked “Why do they need to build outwards on to those green fields when there is so much vacant land within the city?” (p. ix). This apt and thought provoking question can be directly answered by an in depth analysis of the local development frameworks. Real estate development in an area while there is none in a much more obvious choice rarely happens without reason. For example, Adams and Watkins (2002) observed that in the middle of the early 1990s, the new housing boom clearly presented a plethora of “potential social, economic and political effects” (p. 4).
The common assumption of the different arguments put forth by Adams & Watkins (2002) and Allmendinger, Prior and Raemaekers (2000) is that real estate development will have a difficult time taking off without the local development frameworks. The authors are correct, without a framework to guide real estate development, land use will most probably not maximised.
Basically, the local development frameworks comprised the system utilised by the government of UK to oversee how developments in towns and countryside in the United Kingdom ensure (www.planningportal.gov.uk). The Planning and Compulsory Act of 2004 introduced a structure in the local development frameworks. This structure is a two-tiered plan system made up of:
“Regional Spatial Strategies” (www.planningportal.gov.uk) which are prepared by different regional planning bodies such as the Mayor of London. Generally, the regional spatial strategies underline the general “spatial planning strategy for how a region should look in 15 to 20 years time and possibly longer” (www.planningportal.gov.uk).
“Local Development Frameworks” (www.planningportal.gov.uk) which include several documents from district councils and officials, unitary authorities or even national park authorities. These documents, as opposed to regional spatial strategies with their concentration on regional spatial planning, outline the spatial planning strategies for local areas (www.planningportal.gov.uk).
Hence, the two-tiered system above determines how a community or locality is developed.
From the two-tiered plan system outlined above, it is clear the any development in real estate is a direct consequence of the local development frameworks rather than in spite of it. This is so because any real estate development which is outside the spatial planning strategy of a locality is not allowed. Moreover, the inclusion of a regional development framework through the regional spatial strategies is a new role of Local Development Frameworks. This goes to show that the government of the United Kingdom realises the need for an effective national policy with regard to local development.
The figure on the next page shows the general flow of how local development frameworks are developed. LDFs generally consist of the statement of community involvement, annual monitoring report and the local development scheme as the three required documents, and supplementary planning documents, and LDOs and SPZs as the two optional documents.
The inclusion of the statement of community involvement in the modern versions of LDFs is a result of the criticisms made on the processes adopted by the government in formulating earlier versions of local development frameworks (Miller & de Roo 2005). This statement outlines how the local government plans to consult the community and other key stakeholders regarding the local development frameworks and its documents. According to the Planning Portal of the UK government, an expected and major outcome of the statement of community involvement or SCI is “to encourage front loading” (www.planningportal.gov.uk/). Front loading occurs when at the earliest stages of each documents, consultations with the community and stakeholders begin which gives the communities and stakeholders the chance to participate fully in the development of the documents, and consequently in the development and improvement of their local communities particularly in the communities’ real estate.
Hence, the Office of Communities and Local Government, in July 2008 in accordance with the statement of community involvement conducted a public consultation as regards its proposed changes to Planning Policy Statement number 6 which is the planning for town centres or PPS6. 6: Planning for Town Centres (PPS6). The proposed revision focuses on several methods to assess possible impacts of development proposals in out-of-centre locations, and replaces the ‘need test’ basis with an ‘impact test’ (Communities and Local Government).
The annual monitoring report, on the other hand, has been present in the earlier versions of local development frameworks albeit in a different form. This is hardly surprising – because of its nature, as a government initiative, local development frameworks, whether required or not, must provide for a way for taxpayers to be able to audit the jobs of their public servants. This is just but prudent. Specifically, the annual monitoring report is a document submitted by the local authority to the government. The report assesses the progress resulting from and the effectiveness and efficiency with which a Local Development Framework created and promoted such progress (www.planningportal.gov.uk), hence it also serves as a feedback and control mechanism for policy makers so that the LDF can be improved upon. As designed, the annual monitoring report assesses four points with regard to the LDF and these are:
Did policies achieved their objectives and was sustainable development delivered through these policies?
Did the policies result to externalities?
With regard its assumptions and objectives, are the existing policies still relevant?
Are the identified targets in the Local Development Frameworks being and can still be achieved? (www.planningportal.gov.uk).
An assessment of old LDFs shows that their own annual monitoring reports are not as comprehensive and as detailed as that of The Planning and Compulsory Act of 2004
The local development scheme, the last of the three required documents, on the other hand, is the starting point for both the community and key stakeholders to identify about the district councils, unitary authorities or national park authorities’ planning policies with regard a specific place or issue (www.planningportal.gov.uk). Moreover, the status of these policies is also disclosed in the local development scheme document. Most importantly, the local development scheme presents the specific timetables and details of all documents that will eventually comprise the locality’s Local Development Framework (www.planningportal.gov.uk). This LDF is usually for over a three-year period.
Supplementary Planning Documents, on the other hand, is one of the two optional requirements. Their function is to present additional explanation of the different policies contained in the Local Development Framework. SPDs make design guides, area development briefs, a master plan or issue-based document (www.planningportal.gov.uk). These supplemental documents have a significant and perhaps, even restricting impact on a locality’s real estate development process because of the restrictions these documents poses. For example, the design guide can put a restriction on what can be done in a particular place or issue. Although supplementary planning documents are optional, local authorities are still required to involve the community and key stakeholders in developing these documents.
LDOs or Local Development Orders and SPZs or Simplified Planning Zones are the last of the two optional documents of a Local Government Framework. A Local Development Order is made in which a planning authority extends permissible rights for specific development with respect to an existing “relevant local development document” (www.planningportal.gov.uk). A simplified planning zone documents outline and identify specific locations where the local planning authority wanted development stimulated.
One of the roles of LDFs is to protect land from misuse – that is preserve land which needed preserving which include parks and forests. This role, over the development of local development frameworks, did not change. This role is still central to the newest LDFs. As a matter of fact this role is embodied in the World’s Commission on Environment and Development in 1987, which was penned by The Brundtland Commission. More specifically the Commission stated that development means meeting “the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Ratcliffe, Stubbs & Shepherd 2004, p. 4). An analysis of the historical development of local development frameworks and accompanying documents shows that they have taken into account the potential impact of the frameworks into the foreseeable future.
Another role, although only evident in the newer LDFs, is sustainability. As Ratcliffe, Stubbs and Shepherd (2004) said “[t]he wider issue is whether planning can make any real impact on such issues as global warming and vehicular emissions” (p. 230). Hence, local authorities have incorporated sustainable policies into their own local development frameworks (Rydin 2003).
However, Pacione (2007) asked whether sustainable urban development in the United Kingdom is a mere rhetoric or a reality. The concept of sustainable development in the cities or urban areas is now a major challenge faced by the government, but in the United Kingdom this major challenge is also face by the two-tiered system mainly the regional and spatial strategies and the local development framework. Pacione (2007) concluded that in the beginning, in the emergence of the concept of sustainable urban development, it was more a rhetoric than a reality. Now, however, Pacione (2007) said the “gap between public declarations of principle and implementation of concrete measures remains significant in most cities” (p. 248).
This gap, as Pacione (2007) described it, might be contested back to the term sustainable development. Sustainable development, although widely accepted as a guiding principle when formulating plans, projects, programmes and policies (Unsworth 2007, p. 725), is still a much contested concept. Hence, defining what sustainable development means is a key success factor in order for such plans, projects, programmes and policies to be successful. For the government of the United Kingdom, the guiding principles for sustainable development are social progress with which the needs of everyone are taken into account, effective and efficient environmental protection, the prudent use of natural and scarce resources, and the maintenance of a stable, but high, economic growth and employment (Office of the Deputy Prime Minister 2005).
The conscious inclusion of sustainable development in the design of regional spatial strategies and local development frameworks is one of the major differences of modern day LDFs from their earlier counterparts. The researcher concludes that the differences of LDFs would depend largely on how different the environment these LDFs were created in. as society becomes more concerned with sustainable development, then society would demand that its public servant be as concerned.
The government and authorities involved in the two-tiered system, whether regional or local, had acknowledge the gap between what is declared and done. Hence, the Local Development Frameworks, specifically its Supplementary Planning Documents, undergo a Sustainability Appraisal process. This appraisal ensures that economic, environmental and social effects of LDFs are in lined with the identified sustainable development targets of the local community (www.planningportal.gov.uk/).
Given that local government’s role in local development is now more important than ever as a result of the new LDFs, Cullingworth and Nadin (2006) argued that the local government and authorities need to respond immediately, but effectively and efficiently, to the different challenges of local and sustainable development (p. 62). Take for example the Stirling Council’s reaction to these challenges. The Council implemented an entirely different committee structure in order for the council to shift its attention toward identifying and responding to local people’s need (Scottish Office 1999).