AGENTS’ FORUM 28 November 2012

Proposed pre-app enquiry fees What’s New article posted 19 November at What's New web linkWhat's New web link Consultation period ends 31 December 2012 Implementation from 7 January 2013 Analysed time recorded costs for 47 cases completed April to October 2012

Findings from first 47 cases 267 hours of service At a cost of £13,327 (at £50 an hour) Recovered £8,847 (a 34% shortfall) Why fees have to go up Applicants being subsidised by Council Tax payers Need income to retain the staff necessary to provide the service

Main changes proposed Householder, Advert and Change of Use – fee to be increased from £50 to £75 Minor development simplified into two categories with fees of £200 or £300 (Existing fees go up in £50 stages from £150 to £300)

Small-scale Major developments: –Stage I ‘in principle’ enquiry from £350 to £400 –Stage 2 detailed enquiry from £850 to £1,000 Large-scale Major developments –Stage I ‘in principle’ enquiry from £450 to £600 –Stage 2 detailed enquiry from £1,350 to £1,500.

Proposed changes to validation requirements (LPAR) What’s New article posted 19 November at What's New web pageWhat's New web page Consultation ends 31 December 2012 Implementation from 7 January 2013 Changes: Local validation checklists Coal Mining Risk Assessments C-Plan option for Sustainability Statements

Local validation checklists Addresses common problems that can delay applications, 28% invalidity (Householder, Full, Outline and Listed Building) Explains Sheffield requirements and National. Based on CLG 2010 guidance. The Forum discussed the information required to demonstrate proposed ground and floor levels in 2009.

Coal Mining Risk Assessments

Main risks in Sheffield Mine entries Shallow workings Former surface mining sites where restoration methods may not have been to modern standards or is not fully known Coal Authority has mapped higher risk areas Link to Coal Authority guidance and map of 'Coal Mining Development Referral Areas'

When is a CMRA required? In areas of higher risk (Coal Mining Development Referral Areas) - where the proposed  ground works,  excavations, and/or  design and layout - may need to be amended prior to the application being determined

A CMRA is not required for: Householder planning applications Other minor development where: –design or layout are unlikely to be affected –the applicant may want to defer any consideration to a later stage On the former site of Tinsley Park opencast, where coal mining risks were removed as part of the operations.

C-Plan option for Sustainability Statements An online tool all Yorkshire and Humber LPAs are considering Helps applicants submit energy and sustainability statements Traffic light system makes it easy for applicants and officers see if a development is complying with policy requirements Could help some applicants, minimising the need for expert advice and long written statements Possible alternative or supplement to Sustainability Statement (not a validation requirement)

I need to know if an application complies with our policy I need to submit an energy statement for my development 1. Developer I need to know the local policies and targets 2. Architect/Engineer 3. Case Officer 4. Sustainability Advisor I need to manage receipt of supporting information 3. Admin manager 5. Policy planner I need to report on the overall effectiveness of our policies I need to know the details of the energy statement C-Plan option for Sustainability Statements

The C-Plan Process Reports and archives Capture data in consistent format Cost £ submissions Check for feasibility and policy compliance Provides accurate basis for negotiations Report on overall impacts of policies in annual monitoring reports Stage1. Applicant Stage 3. Development Management Stage 4. Monitoring by Policy Team Stage 2. C-Plan Online form completed by developer Database benchmarks calculations engine Dashboard and decision screens

Traffic light overview of compliance with policy

Edit inputs until secure compliance with policy requirements

C-Plan – initial findings Can demonstrate compliance with 10% renewables Perhaps develop a sustainability check list as well Need to avoid duplication of BREEAM, Code for Sustainable Homes and SAP energy calculations Applicants want flexibility (LF and others) Stage 1: –give details or commitments –explain where can’t comply Stage 2: –provide missing details in response to condition(s)

C-Plan – agents’ views Ted Tunnicliffe (Tatlow Stancer) & Laura Fitzgerald (DLP) attended a presentation with officers - Ted can give his comments shortly Still developing with C-Plan Possible April full implementation Aim to pilot with a couple of schemes Laura Fitzgerald (DLP): “Overall I think it is a useful tool. Whether it is simple enough to use in practice and avoids the need to instruct an energy consultant will be the test as to its success.”

Follow us on

Planning and Building Control In a sample of 100 planning applications, 50% of those applications would follow on to need Building Regulation consent We can be there if you need us We want to be involved We can add value

Planning and Building Control - An example Development Team Approach Extension for a New Heavy Forge Early engagement with all parties Visit to site Preliminary comments and problems resolved Client sees benefits and is leading on management of project LABC engaged

Any questions? Are we delivering? Contact: Andrew Taylor Building Control Manager Sheffield City Council

Enhanced application service

Registration and alerts

Follow us on