The 50 Shades of Planning Blog

What is to be done about BNG? Something apparently, because, according to this paywalled Ends Report story, "questions have been raised by Number 10 about whether the flagship policy as it stands is required following the announcement of plans to shake-up development and nature and rules". In the longer term the proposed Nature Restoration Fund could be a mechanism for providing for BNG, but what does that mean for the period before the long term?  First things first, any attempts to assess the success (or otherwise...) of BNG after only one year ( like this one ) misunderstands the time it actually takes to secure planning permission, let alone then get on site and create BNG solutions. That being said, it is apparent that everybody involved has encountered teething problems and there are many areas that are unnecessarily complex and challenging (and certainly more complex and challenging had BNG been a policy requirement rather than a legal requirement).  These teething p...

Compulsory purchase, as a Government consultation on reforming the process notes, is the power to acquire land and property without the consent of the owner. Out with capital punishment it is arguably the single most significant imposition upon an individual’s rights that a state can make. It is very legitimately not, therefore, a straightforward process. As the current (at the time of writing) consultation material also notes, compulsory purchase is an important land assembly tool needed to help deliver social, environmental and economic change in the public interest. Given though that it is not a straightforward process, compulsory is the tool of last resort. It used infrequently because, also arguably, it should be used infrequently. That is the broad context for the current consultation, but the narrow context, as the background material further notes, is that the Government committed in it's manifesto for the 2024 General Election to further reforming compulsory purchase comp...

If you listened to the 50 Shades of Planning podcast and would be interested in it's possible return, please do read on. If you did not and are not, please feel free to move on. A few months ago a material change in circumstances meant that I drew the podcast to a close, but, pleasingly, another material change in circumstances means that I can think about starting it back up again. First things first though. I will need to solicit financial support in order for the pod to operate in the same way that it has done. If then you have control over a marketing budget, or know somebody that does, please let me know. Second things second. In the hope that support is forthcoming from somewhere, I will be thinking about how a refreshed and reinvigorated pod can come back bigger and better than ever. To that end I would welcome any feedback from anybody that has ever listened to it in the past. What did you like? What did you not like? Should fewer topics be covered in more detail or more to...

The rock and roll world of town and country planning is, as you know, Readers, fast-paced and ever-changing at the best of times, but it was especially fast-paced and ever-changing in December. This is an attempt at a recap, with a few initial reflections thrown in.  Planning Reform Working Paper: Planning Committees On 9 December a working paper was published on welcome proposals to modernise planning committees. The paper puts forward three reforms to “support better decision-making in the planning system”, which are: The introduction of a mandatory requirement for training for planning committee members; The creation of smaller targeted planning committees specifically for strategic development; and The introduction of a national scheme of delegation. The working paper can be found here and the MHCLG press release can be found here . When this emerged in the press under headlines such as “ property developers could bypass planning committees in bid to 'overhaul' process ” i...

I am finishing this blog at the start because as I dot the i’s and cross the t’s on something that I have been cogitating over for the last week or so the  Prime Minister  has today empathised that building 1.5 million homes before the end of the parliament is a key part of the Government’s ‘plan for change’. To that end, building 1.5 million homes I mean, I have read a few bits and pieces recently that lead one to wonder whether the obstacles to doing so are systemic, and so can be legislated or mandated away, or are perhaps more deep-seated than that. Many in the housing sector are hard-wired to oppose new owner-occupier housing or housebuilders themselves. The reasons are endless – design quality, landbanking, ecology, sprawl, profit, water, nutrients, heritage, traffic, doctor’s capacity, sufficient permissions already, etc, etc. So wrote Philip Barnes in a recent blog, within which Mr Barnes seeks to draw a line between Trapped , Daniel Hewitt’s podcast on the housing em...