Justine Greening, transport secretary
Greening has told the House of Commons that she expects to announce in January whether or not the High Speed Two London to Birmingham rail link will proceed. Whichever way it goes, her decision will be hugely controversial, either alienating conservationists in the Chilterns, or champions of big cities in the North and Midlands.
Retail guru Mary Portas’s review into the future of high streets is wide-ranging. She understands that the problems facing town centres are complex, and that the battle to support them needs to be conducted on many fronts. Among these are planning. She does not accept the Government’s contention that the draft National Planning Policy Framework maintains existing levels of protection for town centres, and calls for its wording to be made more precise “so it’s really clear that people and place come first and the policy is less vulnerable to legal disputes”. She calls for more research to understand the impact of retail developments on town centres, and a requirement for all large schemes to be given an “exceptional sign-off by the secretary of state”.
How much real power do the Government’s proposed neighbourhood planning reforms put into the hands of local communities? The reforms, which will take effect in April if the Localism Bill stays on schedule, give town or parish councils (or, in places where these don’t exist, local authority-endorsed community groups) the opportunity to create plans with statutory weight. They also empower the groups to allow certain kinds of development without planning permission.
Local people should play a key role in making planning decisions, but they are not the only group to which the system needs to pay heed, one of Britain’s most prominent planners said last night. Patsy Healey, professor emeritus at Newcastle University’s planning school, is one of only twelve people ever to have been awarded the Royal Town Planning Institute’s gold medal (a distinction she shares with Planning columnist Professor Sir Peter Hall).
Imagine a juror giving an interview before the first day of a trial, in which they pledge to give a guilty verdict. “I’ve listened to the anger in this community about this crime,” the juror might say. “Whatever the defendant says, he’s going down”.
It would, of course, somewhat undermine your faith in the trial-by-jury system, which relies on jurors going into court with an open mind.
There’s been a huge response (31 comments at the time of writing) to Michael Donnelly’s blog inviting opinions on the Government’s plans to make certain financial benefits that a council would gain from granting a planning consent a material consideration in determining the application in question. Read more »
Latest news from PlanningResource.co.uk
Haymarket Business Media © 1957 – 2012 | Terms & Conditions | Contact us
