Welcome to Planning Blog

Welcome to the PlanningBlog. The idea of the blog is to write about things which may not necessarily get covered on www.planningresource.co.uk or Planning magazine – amusing things, ridiculous things and wider planning issues.

This blog needs your participation so please feel free to email anything you’ve spotted that may be of interest to other readers. We hope you enjoy the blog.

The Planning team

All blogs are the author’s personal opinions and do not represent those of Planning magazine.

  • alex kendall

    The conservative manifesto launch reminds me so much of Battersea power station awful external frontage while on the inside it’s occupied by dead political rats. David you talk about decentralisation but this is panacea for cost cutting you talk about power in the community but where are the resources as a nation we are bust??? If we vote on a referendum will you provide the resources? The manifesto suggests that local planning referendums will occur, again `third party rights’ are at play will housing associations be blackmailed over planning permission? What about the 25 billion of housing debt? Nothing said. No mention of the two million on the waiting list. Somebody once said `a society is judge by how it treats its people’. Is there such a thing as society David…..

    • http://davidlock.com Robert M Purton, Partner at David Lock Associates

      It has been a long time in gestation – but what in planning is not? Mr Justice Keith Lindblom QC has now heard the evidence and passed judgement on behalf of the High Court of Justice Queen’s Bench Division of the Administrative Court. Cala II, in a tightly written judgement of some 107 paragraphs today concludes, somewhat pragmatically that: all statutory development plans (and decisions taken with them in mind) must conform to the extant RSS; however, in line with the question of weighting and judgement that we are all used to, the actual weight being attached to the RSS by any party should be less than 100% as it should be appropriately discounted by the specific circumstances of the proposal. So, the RSS figures are still a material consideration. The real step forward however for determining authorities on the progression of numerous Core Strategies and those of us promoting strategic sites is that from today all planning documents should now be futureproofed. Consequently, to safeguard our plan–led system policy documents now need to address what may change if the New Localism Bill becomes an Act at some future date (in an altered or unaltered form) and the RSS targets are replaced with an empirically based bottom up figure In short, the much needed housing society continues to require now needs to have both RSS and post RSS policy support for it to be robust.

  • http://questiontime. Fraser

    University Assignment:

    ‘It could be asserted that the move to more emphasis on localism is a move to bottom-up planning, giving communities more voice and more influence at the same time removing the needless bureaucracy of a regional tier. ‘

    Critically discuss whether this opinion has merit with reference to the pre-July 2010 system and the changes proposed.

    Any advice on how to answer the question? I would be most grateful.

    Thanks.

    • Tom

      Firstly read the localism bill. It may sound like that this is the case, but as a neighbourhood plan has to accord with an LDF, and even if it does the localism bill does not allow for refusals of applications by local communities, only the issueing of permission, it is very easy to agrue that far from being a bottom up approach to planning, its just the same system as at present, with a load of politically acceptable waffle thrown in.
      The local referendum clauses in the localism bill are particularly ridiculous, requiring vast resources beyond your average person to enact, and even if you have a referendum that 99% of the population agree with, the Council can choose not to act on it, and dont even have to give susbstantial reasons for not doing so.
      I’d personally be comparing the stated intentions of ministers with regards to localism, and then comparing them to the actual wording of the bill, and with reference to the reaction of other bodies such as the RTPI, CPRE and such.

      • http://questiontime. Fraser

        Thanks Tom, very helpful!

        • Malcolm Haviland

          I have been trying to obtain planning permission for an old cottage for nearly 10 years,I have had two planning applications,three appeals,The reason for refusal, is that it is regarded as new build in the open countryside,it was last occupied in 1954,and because of the time since last occupied,its use is deemed to be abandoned,I have all the deeds of transfer,from the first sale in 1897 to my ownership, (when the orignal planning application was submitted it had to go before the community council,and it was
          overwhelmingly decided to approve the application.)
          My argument is, How can somebody decide, that an owner has abandoned the use of something ,surely what an individual wants to do with there possessions , is his or her business, and in my case,its a cottage,my point is this, the law is not democratic and dosn’t represent,the individual, If I put a car in a garage for 50 years,it would still be a car and as long it was put in a roadworthy condition you could drive it.The law is an ass,the law in some European countries states that if a building is legal i.e.that it was built with permission, has documentation, that building can be renovated and its size increased by 30%. This Laws leaves nothing to misinterpretation,corruption,or individuals prejudices
          Its black and white with no grey areas,a fair and responsible approach.
          Saves the councils and the applicant allot of money

Latest jobs Jobs web feed