Planners have welcomed new guidance that could put economic growth at the heart of the planning process.
The new draft PPS4, which replaces four existing policies, removes the so-called “needs test”, which requires developers to show there is unmet need for new out-of-town retail schemes.
It will also allow more larger-format stores to be built in edge-of-town-centre locations as it encourages councils to consider commercial applications favourably unless they can show the potential costs of a scheme outweigh its benefits.
However, the consultation document retains the “sequential test”, which requires developers to seek the most central sites first, and introduces a tougher “impact test”, which assesses proposals against economic, social and environmental criteria.
Bruce Hartley Raven, planning & sustainability partner in Cushman & Wakefield’s consulting group, said: “There is more emphasis on economic sustainability and economic growth and development, as opposed to planning for town centres.
“One key issue will be what sort of weight is going to be attached by decision-takers to issues like job creation, because at the moment that is not clear.
“It could potentially result in more proposals getting planning permission, particularly those that come along with quite a few jobs attached to them.”
Hugh Bullock, senior partner and head of planning of Gerald Eve, said: “This paper highlights the need for the planning system to be flexible and responsive and adopt a positive and constructive approach towards planning applications for economic development.
“This will send a message of encouragement to the development world as it reassesses property strategies going forward.”
Roger Hepher, head of planning and regeneration at Savills, said: ‘It is good that the draft says applications for economic development should be given the benefit of the doubt, and approved unless there are good reasons for not approving them.
“This is moving towards a return to the presumption in favour of development that underpinned much economically beneficial development in the 1980s and 1990s.
“The abandonment of the needs test is going to make it easier to make the case for out of centre development. On the other hand, the enhanced impact test is going to be more challenging.
“On balance it will be marginally less difficult to make the case for out of town centre retail and leisure.”
Ian Anderson, planning director at CBRE, said: “The strong support for economic development in the previous draft PPS4 has been retained with an expectation that authorities support applications where they accord with the development plan or there is a strong evidence base.
“Authorities are also encouraged to drop historic employment land designations and support changes of use.”
