Planning and Architecture

Championing proportionality of planning assessments

April 3, 2025 by planningarchitecture No Comments | Category Investing in Planning, Planning

Requiring or providing too much or too little information to accompany planning applications can add costs and delays to the determination process. That is why we convened the Proportionality of Assessment Short Life Working Group. This blog highlights key principles and best practice identified by the Group. It promotes a proportionate approach to planning applications which helps to maintain a robust but efficient planning system which supports significant investment in Scotland.

Good communication between planning authorities and applicants is of paramount importance.

Pre-application discussions can help to identify potential key planning issues and considerations at an early stage. Those discussions can help to clarify the information required to support a subsequent application and the potential scope of statutory consultation. In doing so, pre-application discussions can inform design development and improve the quality of planning applications and the efficiency of the determination process.

Once an application is valid, the clock starts on the time period for reaching a decision: two months for local developments and four months for applications for major or national developments. A valid planning application is one that contains the relevant information and details as specified in the Development Management Regulations.

The information required for an application to be legally valid (and ‘start the clock’) is actually quite limited. Beyond that minimum level, it is normal for additional information to be necessary so that the planning authority can understand the merits and impacts of a proposed development and reach a decision. The trick is not over-doing it. It is, therefore, important to try and pitch the information required at the proportionate level, e.g. a 50 page document should not be provided if the key information can be conveyed in 2 pages.

It is in both the applicant and planning authority’s interest to establish requirements pertaining to an application as early as possible to ensure the right level of quality information is sought and provided timeously. Applicants are encouraged to think beyond the statutory requirements and anticipate, ideally through constructive pre-application discussions with the planning authority, what additional information might be needed to support efficient decision making. The key is providing enough information to give professional planners the confidence to make or recommend a decision on the proposed development. Where additional information is required however, that should not delay the validation process.

Clearly, there is a cost associated with preparing supporting information and assessments, particularly where this involves appointing consultants. Furthermore, some developers may be unable to secure finance for a proposal until they have received planning permission. This can create cash flow challenges, particularly for SME developers. In such circumstances, it may be helpful for the planning authority and applicant to discuss the timing of certain information requirements, and whether in some cases these could be appropriately ‘backloaded’ through conditions, suspensive or otherwise, attached to the permission.

 It is important for all parties to consider, in each case, whether, why, what and when information should be required to inform the decision. These questions need to be considered as early as possible, ideally through pre-application discussions and the use of processing agreements.

Whether

Decisions on planning applications must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Planning can be complex and requires careful balancing of issues, therefore, conflicts between policies are to be expected. NPF4 policies should be read as a whole, and it is for the planning authority to consider whether certain information is imperative to determine a planning application.

Why

Planning authorities should think carefully about the reasons for potentially requiring certain information – is it to assess a proposal against a certain development plan policy, or to address a particular technical issue?  These reasons will inform decisions on whether, what and when information is required.

What

The nature and scope of the information requested should also be considered and defined, with input from relevant consultees, as necessary. It is important to avoid a tick-box exercise where assessments required are simply listed without any detail of the expected scope and content of those assessments. It is equally important for the applicant to focus submissions to planning authorities on pertinent issues.

Where further assessment is required, we would encourage the planning authority, applicant and relevant consultee to consider reaching agreement that there will be one assessment from an accredited source. This approach has significant potential to avoid duplication and to help to minimise cost, resources and time.

When

The planning permission in principle route minimises requirements and should not entail the level of technical detail that accompanies an application for detailed permission. However, whether the application seeks permission in principle or detailed permission, it may be appropriate to require certain information at a later stage through suspensive conditions. If information is to be required by condition, it is also important to consider the trigger points for requiring that information – e.g. is it necessary for the information to be submitted before any development can commence, or only before a certain component or phase of the development can begin?

In particular, requirements for schemes for compensatory or mitigatory works related to a development to be prepared and agreed could, in appropriate circumstances, run alongside the construction of a development. For example, conditions requiring schemes for the delivery of compensatory planting could require such schemes to be agreed prior to the development becoming operational. This may be more appropriate than prohibiting any development until such a scheme has been approved and reduce the risk of avoidable delays to delivery.

Checklists and guidance regarding information requirements can be useful and may help to provide certainty and clarity upfront to developers and tailored to suit good practice. However, these should not be used at the expense of providing clarity and support and using case-by-case discretion as to whether and why information is actually necessary and when it needs to be provided.

Thank you for taking the time to read this. We are keen to hear your views on this blog and your thoughts on what more practical assistance could help achieve proportionality. We would also welcome thoughts about how the national Planning Hub might be able to support practice in this area.

The content of this blog does not, of course, deviate from planning policy and should not be treated as a material consideration in the determination process.

Further reading:

Planning Circular 3: Development Management Procedures

National Planning Framework 4

Planning and architecture – gov.scot

Planning and Architecture blogs

National Planning Improvement Framework | Improvement Service

National Planning Improvement Hub | Improvement Service

Tags: assessments, planning

Comments