Recent manifestos, government announcements, and policy consultations on proposed planning reform have almost exclusively focused on housebuilding, seemingly at the expense of any reform of policies for town centres and town centre uses, as
we have referenced in this blog.
Those of us interested in this area were thrown a lifeline earlier this month when the Built Environment committee questioned Baroness Taylor (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, MHCLG) and Alex Norris MP (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Democracy and Local Growth, MHCLG) about
the Government’s plans for high streets in towns and small cities.
The Government’s responses did not rule out changes in policy related to high streets through the NPPF consultation, acknowledging that changes in consumer patterns mean that the role of traditional high street retail is changing. Healthcare, public services and leisure facilities were seen as having a key role in attracting people and businesses to town centres, while there was a welcome acknowledgment of the potential complementary role of out-of-town retail locations. The Government were also non-committal on the continued role of the Towns Tsar or acting on the findings of the High Streets Task Force.
Other insights about the Government’s direction of travel included:
-
Permitted Development Rights: The discussion predominantly focused on Class MA (commercial to residential) Permitted Development rights, highlighting poor quality examples and suggesting that such Permitted Development rights would be kept under review.
-
Use Class Order (Class E): Whilst it was acknowledged that Class E covered a very wide range of uses, the ability to quickly provide health facilities on high streets was noted as a particular benefit and there was no suggestion that the Government would revisit the Use Class Order.
-
Vacant Buildings: There was
another confirmation that the Government intends to bring forward
High Street Rental Auctions through the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act (LURA), alongside the Community Right to Buy, the Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) reforms in the LURA, and the long awaited
CPO consolidation exercise recommended by the Law Commission.
-
Historic Buildings: The responses highlighted that the Government was keen to draw on the successes of
High Street Heritage Action Zones, recognizing the importance of repurposing of historic buildings and their role in the regeneration of town centres.
-
Funding: The fragmentation of funding allocations and the complexity, risk and time spent by Local Authorities bidding for funding was highlighted as a concern, with an ambition to bring funds together into a single pot with a simplified bidding process along the lines of the UK Shared Prosperity Fund. However, the most recently announced (and unspent) funds including Levelling-Up Fund (round 3), Community Ownership Fund (round 4), and Long-Term Plan for Towns Fund are to be reviewed, along with any potential Business Rates reform, as part of the upcoming budget.
Importantly, the
“Mission-led approach to Government” was cited as a means to leverage the cross-departmental collaboration needed for widespread investment and to support regeneration across town centres, with planning reform falling squarely under Mission 1) Kickstart economic growth. Whether this will deliver the results required to revitalise town centres, cut-through planning and governmental bureaucracy, and incentivise economic development is another matter.
Prior to and during the consultation period for the draft NPPF 2024, colleagues across Lichfields spoke with local authorities and landowners, consultants and developers, community groups and professional organisations. We have identified a number of key priorities for delivering on the Government's growth mission specifically relating to town centres and main town centre uses:
Collaboration (strategic planning)
Town centre shoppers, workers and residents do not limit themselves to a single authority area and may well not realise that they are crossing administrative boundaries. Town centres and high streets can complement each on a regional basis, which is often presented as the ‘hub and spoke model’ whereby local high streets provide a more limited range of day-to-day essentials, supporting higher-order centres that feature a wider variety of commercial, retail, leisure, residential, health and administrative uses (amongst others).
We would encourage a collaborative approach to managing allocations of main town centre uses and new local/district/town centres between authorities, prior to the draft publication of Local Plans. Changes to boundaries including extensions and the contraction of Town Centre and High Street boundaries should be undertaken in a coordinated manner, building on the duty to cooperate.
Clarity (early engagement)
The complex nature of town centre developments often includes intricate financial arrangements across multiple landowners and stakeholders that necessitate viability testing, which can result in delays during the planning process. Equally, the technical nature of retail planning applications can require support from independent consultants.
This can frustrate applicants, increasing costs and reducing the appetite for investment. Whilst Planning Performance Agreements make sense for larger schemes, we would encourage early engagement with independent consultants to support Local Authorities at pre-application stage. This can assist in agreeing the scope for the determination of the application including the retail impact assessment methodology, relevant assumptions and data sources.
Consistency (guidance)
Given the technical nature of determining applications for main town centre uses, particularly retail impact assessments, it is fundamental that policy is interpreted and applied consistently. A body of case law has developed over the years, providing details on a number of niche areas of town centre policy including the requirements for cumulative impact assessments, the scope of ‘proportionate’ assessments for smaller scale developments, the requirement for disaggregation (in terms of the sequential test), and the implications of alternative Class E uses as a fallback.
Unless you are entrenched in such work, this case law is not widely accessible or understood and is constantly evolving. In the absence of detailed policy guidance, this current approach can lead to inconsistent and poor quality decision making, further delaying and frustrating development and investment in town centre uses.
Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) should also provide a clear steer on the appropriateness of topics such as meanwhile uses, to avoid unnecessary delays for the testing of new and innovative formats. Equally, the current PPG provides guidance on Town Centre Strategies, but this has not been updated for five years and does not reflect the latest thinking and technologies, including the wealth of information gathered during the five years of the Government’s own High Streets Task Force.
Commerciality (reflect the market)
Town centre policies (notably ‘impact’ and ‘sequential’ tests) have remained largely static since the NPPF was first introduced in 2012. However, the wider ‘Town Centre First’ policy approach
[1] has been in place for almost 30 years, restricting new retail and other main town centre uses to town centre locations.
In reality, there are going to be nuances around ‘town centre first’ for some traditionally main town centre uses that can only be accommodated in specific locations, a point that is already recognised in the PPG in relation to the sequential test. The likes of health clubs that provide indoor and outdoor facilities and require large plots of land in close proximity to an urban population, or Electric Vehicle (EV) charging hubs that require heavily trafficked roadside locations but often include complementary food, drink and retail uses can often get ‘caught’ by the town centre first approach.
As retail floorspace continues to plateau and even decline in some locations, town centres are increasingly anchored by their social, leisure, community and civic facilities. Even offices are declining as a major driver of traffic to mid-sized town centres, given the prevalence of flexible working arrangements following the Covid-19 pandemic. Comparison retailers and department stores in particular are down-sizing, while major convenience retailer business models prioritise sites with characteristics that are unlikely to be found in town centres (such as ground level parking and servicing, visible frontages along main roads, and relatively uniform shape plots).
We would suggest that Local Authorities are given the flexibility to balance policies for new floorspace to meet an emerging population’s need against the commercial occupier market in order to actively manage the decline of retail floorspace in centres. This may, where appropriate and carefully controlled, include the acceptance of out-of-centre allocations and developments in conjunction with the
repurposing of vacant shopping centres, department stores and other empty units that are no longer suitable for modern retailers.
However, without the policy freedom to accept and tackle the reality of the commercial occupier market, we are left in the worst of all worlds where town centres sites that are no longer suitable for retailing are left vacant, but retailers and other ‘main town centre uses’ are unable to progress with investment on sites that do reflect their particular market and locational requirements.
[1] PPG 6: Town Centres and Retail Development (June 1996)
