Laying the foundations for new Rotherham town centre housing

Gallery

Proposals for new housing in Rotherham town centre are moving ahead despite the £32m “investment” via the Government turning out to be a loan rather than a grant. The recently adopted Rotherham town centre masterplan places a greater emphasis on … Continue reading

Integrity! Integrity! Integrity!

.

.

Local planning authorities need integrity

Thursday, 02 August 2012

Chris Shepley (Planning 13 July) helpfully reminds us of the integrity and rigour of PINS. We need these qualities in LPAs and his comments should prompt us to look at how they measure up to them. I fear some would be found wanting.

While recent cuts, and those to come, will have severe consequences, we must ask: even before the Coalition Government, were some authorities adequately resourced? Local plan preparation is to be expedited. Many authorities will have to use consultants, a second best solution, but one in which professionally informed, in-house, guidance is essential. Will it be in place?

Some authorities undertake consultations subject to a fee. It is not unknown for a development manager to be given a target for application fees. Actions such as these and the attitudes they reflect are an affront to public service.

One suspects that many councillors, perhaps some planners, fail to see that the introduction of application fees, now irreversible, was a deplorable step, perhaps the start of a distorted view of service provision. The rot set-in long ago and some now see planning as a means of trading a permission for various benefits, and to hell with standards. This is an approach which could be attractive to cash strapped authorities: the control of development as a revenue/capital earning opportunity. Failures, since 1947, in the need to find political agreement on recouping some of the enhanced value of development land is no excuse.

Yet another trend inimical to good practice can be seen in placing the planning function into the hands of some chief officer devoid of any relevant experience or qualification. This damages career structures and can readily lead to the head of service being seen as a ‘fixer’, an officer more responsive to political whim than consistency and good practice. A professionally led planning department will more readily save time and costs for the benefit of all.

We have always had those in the development industry who approach planning and environmental protection as predators. Do some in the public service feel justified in taking a comparable attitude, as it were, from the other side of the fence?

Many thanks to our observant source, for bringing our attention to this, rather thought provoking piece, from Planning.

Planning reform: what are the facts? from fullfact.org!

Found this when researching the new planning rules, just had to share it with readers:

Planning reform: what are the facts?

21 September, 2011 – 17:35 — Jenny Gulliford

In Monday’s edition of The World at One there was a heated debate between the Director General of the National Trust Dame Fiona Reynolds and Managing Director of Pimlico Plumbers, Charlie Mullins. Under discussion was an issue which has been bubbling away in both the news and in Parliament over the last few weeks- the new Draft Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Read on….