IT is quicker and easier to get planning permission for major property developments in Glasgow, rather than Edinburgh, according to a new study, though both lag the rest of the UK, writes Bob Serafini.
Research by specialist property firm G L Hearn, supported by industry body The Scottish Property Federation (SPF), shows major applications take an average of 47 weeks in Edinburgh and 39 weeks in Glasgow – more than twice the national target of four months.
Eight out of ten who applied are dissatisfied with the length of time it takes to get a decision, exacerbated in the capital by a success rate of only 72 per cent for its 18 large scale projects determined in the last financial year.
Glasgow, which has a reputation for pragmatism and working with developers from a very early stage, approved all the 31 large applications in this UK-wide study, extended north of the border for the first time.
The sample was limited, and the councils’ own figures are slightly different, but developers attending the publication of the results wasted no time in highlighting how important the smooth operation of the planning system can be for our economy.
Chris Stewart, chair of the SPF and CEO of the successful Chris Stewart Group, said: "I nearly fell off my chair when I found that Northumberland processed more major applications than Edinburgh and Glasgow combined. That was quite a shock."
Stewart, who has plans for a £70m regeneration scheme cornering George Square, was part of a Glasgow delegation at 10 Downing Street last month, presenting to more than 100 international investors, and emphasised high level commitment to speed of planning was vital in attracting this source of financial capital.
"One good thing about this report is understanding our performance against the rest of the UK," he said.
"It is critical because we are all competing for the same investment and all get benchmarked against cities elsewhere in Europe."
He said that it wasn’t just the application itself but everything that goes along with it – dealing with building control, roads, legal agreements, pre-application community engagement and Section 75 planning gain – and it could be two to three years before a complex planning application was determined.
"Inability to get on site and get started can have a hugely detrimental effect on our success, particularly trying to capture funding and put it into a project within a market cycle.
"There is a disconnect between how the planning system operates and how the markets constantly change, whether it be funding or political change or the economy."
Stewart said it was important not to criticise hard working councils: "Lately the market has been needing the planning system to respond more quickly, to encourage capital to invest, but this is at a time when the local authorities are getting stripped of their budgets.
"Our engagement with them is always hugely positive. They want things to happen but just don’t have the capacity."
He said that the difference in fees paid in Scotland and England (£25,000 compared to £250,000) was startling and developers had a responsibility to pay more to fund the industry. But he warned this should be ringfenced for the purpose intended and not sucked into wider public spending.
"The link between planning and investment was highlighted by the investors at Downing Street, who see this as a bellwether of a city. They want to see energetic, high performing cities who encourage them to invest. If they have a bad experience, external investors thinking about Scotland may think again."
The Scottish Government established an independent review of the planning system last year which reported six months ago, identifying six key themes now being examined by working parties.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article