Project

Planning application submissions

Important

Cut-off for feedback May 16

From 16 May, the planning-application data-spec team will no longer proactively address new comments or feedback—see details below.

Draft specifications are now available for testing and will remain so throughout the mandating process.

These specifications are implementation-agnostic to provide flexibility for any tools or suppliers.

MHCLG Digital Planning are developing a set of open, reusable data specifications to underpin planning applications. These will make sure the current templates are underpinned by data.

The specifications will define the structure and format of data that is required when submitting a planning application based on the national legislation in place.

Our intended outcomes are to:

• improve interoperability, accessibility and understanding
• enable integration with existing datasets (for example land use, and infrastructure)​
• foster collaboration among government bodies, developers, planners, software providers​ and everyone else
• improve data flow, quality, consistency and transparency in the planning process

We have a challenging timeline to deliver specifications by the end of March 2025. In order for this to be feasible we are aiming for the minimum viable specifications that underpin the current national system.

We are doing this work in the open. To help us we brought together 2 groups:

• Advisory group - this group consists of a mix of people from industry including software providers, government bodies, LPAs and other interest groups
• Community group - this group consists of everyone else interested in planning applications and the work we are doing to develop data standards, and is open to all LPAs

What's next

As of 16 May, the team designing the planning application data specifications will no longer be proactively responding to new comments or feedback. From this point, changes to the component specifications will only be made in response to feedback already received, or if a show-stopping issue comes to light (which we are not anticipating).

We will then begin working towards mandating the specifications as ‘approved data standards’ under the powers granted by the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act 2023 (LURA23). During this period, the specifications are not yet legally mandatory. While we expect no major changes, we cannot guarantee that the specifications will remain entirely static before formal adoption.

In response to feedback from the advisory group and drop-in sessions, we recognise that software suppliers use a variety of methods and programming languages to ingest specifications. Any defined transfer formats would likely require customisation to fit existing systems, which is standard practice. As such, we are providing the specifications in a human-readable format to support flexible implementation in whichever language or format best suits your setup.

These specifications are already available in draft form for review (Reminder: after 16 May, edits will only reflect existing feedback and no further changes will be considered unless they are critical). Testing will begin with the early adopters group, and the specifications will remain publicly accessible for anyone to view and prepare for implementation ahead of mandating.

Useful links

• Charter for the advisory group
• Members
• Planning application data specification repository
• List of open issues
• Module tracker
• Timeline and progress for the planning application work

---

Updates

Week beginning 2 Jun

• We have run through all the feedback we received: 63 items we were able to resolve or parke for a future iteration, 93 items we've added to github as issues for us to work through.
• We have published a list of the activites we need to complete to get these specifications through to be mandated

Week beginning 26 May

• We have been supporting various suppliers who wish to start testing and using the specifications in their products and services. These conversation emphasised the importance of moving to a more declarative model
• We have documented our proposal for moving to a declarative model.
• We have documented what a declarative model for modules and planning requirements could look like.
• Conversations about restarting the advisory group and community sessions are ongoing.

Week beginning 19 May

• Feedback came in through various channels: on github, via email, in documents, on slack, etc. So we have collated the feedback into a tracker for us work through.
• We kicked off a piece of work to revist the planning application and decisions specification (the output of the process). This was last looked at in 2022 so needs a lot of work to align with the set of submission specifications.

Week beginning 12 May

• We documented how we plan to define fields explicitly, this should help set expectations for the data and with validation
• The deadline for initial feedback passed on the 16th May. We will now work through this and update the specifications where required.

Week beginning 5 May

• We have been working on an initial draft of a standardised list of planning requirements (otherwise known as information requirements) that applicants need to provide when submitting a planning application.
• We have started codifying which requirements are essential for different application types. See national-planning-requirements.csv

Week beginning 28 Apr

• The specifications are currently being reviewed by the Development management policy team.
• We received our first pull request (PR) from the community. It fixed some typos and was very welcome!
• We created a demo repository for an extension module - this is a space for us to experiment with how extending the specifications works.

Week beginning 21 Apr

• We met with GLA and GMCA to discuss early (specification) adopters project and the GMCA data hub project both funded by ODP
• We fixed some discrepancies with the supporting document structure (see issue #234)

Week beginning 14 Apr

• We published a blog post covering the recent events and summarising how we got to this point with the draft specifications.
• We've confirmed we are looking for the initial round of feedback on the draft specifications by 16 May.

Week beginning 7 Apr

• We've updated the "index" specification file to include all the codelists.
• Updated the application specification to include an expanded file sub-structure (see issue #229).
• Added a uprns[] field to the Site details module (see issue #8)

Week beginning 31 Mar

• We've added a few more issues based on comments from the advisory and community sessions.
• We ran a session with a group of local planning authorities and suppliers about how they can help us test the specifications
• We published an index specification file that includes all the modules and codelists covering all application types

Week beginning 24 Mar

• We published a "compiled" specification for each application type and sub type.
• We held the advisory group session on the 27th March (slides, minutes)
• We held a community drop-in session on the 28th March (slides, video)

Week beginning 17 Mar

• We have been grouping the issues into issues we can close right now, issues that need policy input and issues that we are parking for a later iteration
• We have set up a discussion thread per application type - each discussion lists the components needed for the application type

Week beginning 10 Mar

• We arranged the next sessions - these will be on the 27th and 28th of March and we will be presenting the first drafts of the specifications.
• We have published a discussion for each of the codelists we need to support the specifications

Week beginning 3 Mar

• We held a drop-in session on Wednesday 5 March (recording)
• We published the list of modules required for each application type, including sub-types where applicable.

Week beginning 24 Feb

• We held an advisory group session on 26 Feb where we discussed numerous open issues (slides, minutes)
• We finished an initial draft of an information model for each module/component.
• We identified more codelists that are required to support completing an application. There is a discussion for each one.

Week beginning 17 Feb

• We have prepared a lean coffee style workshop for the next advisory group session.
• We have created a first draft of the information models for each component
• We have learnt that in some cases the application type isn't the only piece of information needed to determine what modules are required (see issue #158)
• We have started setting out the codelists needed to support the planning application specification.

Week beginning 10 Feb

• We added a Notification of proposed works to trees in a conservation area application type to the list.
• We have been designing the next advisory group session where we’ll be working through the open issues and discussions in a lean coffee style workshop.
• We have started pulling together a list of planning requirements - the documents that applicants need to prepare along side their application. We opened an issue where we can continue discussing the planning requirements.
• We started drafting a set of information models for the modules needed for Householder applications.

Week beginning 3 Feb

• We add Hedgerow removal notices to the list of application types. We still need to confirm the modules for the application type (see issue #1)
• We published a list of the application forms we've looked at
• We published a list of the modules we are working through as data
• We proposed combining the "Declaration" and "Declaration - trees" modules

Week beginning 27 Jan

• We held a community drop in on Wednesday 29 Jan (slides, video)
• Set the dates for the next sessions. Advisory group on 26 Feb. Community drop-in on 5th Mar.
• Continued adding to and working through the open issues. Thank you to all those that are contributing.
• Published the original list of application types we are working with. We will up this based on the currently open issues related to application types

Week beginning 20 Jan

• We held the second advisory group session (slides, minutes)
• We set up a dedicated repository for the Planning application data specification work. We will use this to publish work, such as supporting datasets and specification, as we progress.
• We have started converting the various questions and ideas we have received into individual issues that can be resolved one by one.
• We have set up a module tracker spreadsheet. We are using this to track progress on each of the individual modules. You can view this to follow along.

Week beginning 13 Jan

• Preparing for the next advisory session - will be held on 22 Jan 2025
• Reply to contributions on the discussion thread, specifically on different application types we could look at
• Exploring ways to manage issues openly

Week beginning 6 Jan

• The Data Design team returned after their Christmas break.
• Confirmed the next advisory session will be held on 22 Jan 2025, at the ARUP offices
• We have been watching contributions (see components and fields activity) coming in from various community members, which is great to see.
• Collating comments community members have made on the Planning application submissions discussion thread

Week beginning 16 Dec

• Held a drop-in session on Tuesday 17 Dec to demo the spreadsheet and answer any questions (slide deck, video of session)

Week beginning 9 Dec

• Published a blog post about the first 2 events we held

Week beginning 2 Dec

• Held the first community drop-in session
• Fleshed out and shared a spreadsheet of components and fields that we’d like the community to use to share their thoughts on the existing 'standards'

Week beginning 25 Nov

• Held the first advisory group meeting on the 27 November
• Pulled together a spreadsheet with the 80+ components and 1300 fields from the analysis of the planning application forms

Week beginning 18 Nov

• Analysed the existing application forms
• Created a charter for the advisory group
• Prepared for the first advisory group session

Week beginning 11 Nov

• Shared the set of planning application types we’ll be looking at first

Start of the initiative

• Published a blog post setting out this piece of work