Sam Stafford's Blog

Of the very, very many things announced by Michael Gove in the ‘Falling back in love with the future’ speech of December 2023 one of the most interesting and potentially most significant was the “rapid three-month review into the statutory consultee system” to be led by Sam Richards. Richards is campaign director and chief executive at Britain Remade and had been a special advisor on energy and the environment at Number 10. The then Secretary of State said that he believed that stat cons are "an important check and balance within our planning system, safeguarding the environment, respecting heritage and ensuring health and safety considerations are properly taken into account", but expressed worry about “delay and procrastination". "A superficial glance at the statistics suggests that most statutory consultees respond within the expected 21-day limit, but look a little closer, and you can observe the regular use of holding responses - effectively an 'I'll g

Picture the scene. In the back of a taxi on the way to giving a speech about housing, a Minister solicits ideas from their team for putting “ rocket boosters ” under housebuilding. “Come on people! We need to tear up planning rules and allow more homes to be built in urban areas where they are most needed!” “Brownfield passports, Minister?” “Go on”. “Well, developments on brownfield land could be fast-tracked for approval as long as they meet high design and quality standards. Less wasted space in cities. Fewer bungalows and more dense housing in high demand areas.” “Splendid....” There we have it. A brownfield passport policy paper and a call for evidence on options to further increase certainty in relation to brownfield development that includes bold proposals that provide far greater clarity as to the principle, scale, and form of brownfield development with a view to lowering the risk, cost and uncertainty associated with securing planning permissions.’ Flippancy aside for one mom

As I was chatting to the BBC’s Nick Robinson about the idiosyncrasies of the planning system whilst on a building site in Ipswich the other day (now there’s a start to a blog…) I shared with him my supposition that objecting to planning applications is fast becoming the country’s favourite pastime. Whether it is a high-speed railway line, or a first reservoir to be built since 1992, or just 80 homes on the edge Ipswich, there are those, seemingly a growing number, who go beyond simply refusing to entertain any discussion about the whys and wherefores, and for whom the very notion of the proposition is taken as a personal affront. After meeting me, Nick (as I can now call him…) went to visit the site on the edge of Ipswich upon which an application for 80 homes was refused against the officer’s recommendation recently. Access was a “big point of contention” apparently, but the local paper also reported that “reasons for refusal included concerns over drainage and flooding, the number o

Episode 135, which is the final episode of 50 Shades of Planning, is available now via this link or from iTunes and Spotify . Back in March this year friend of the podcast Catriona Riddell gave a lecture at UCL’s Bartlett School of Planning that she called ‘Strategic Planning in England - Where did we go so wrong?’. I could not be there, but Catriona shared her slides on LinkedIn and they read to me almost like a ‘Brief History of Planning 2010-2024’, which I thought a good subject for an episode. Attention was being turned around that time to where a new Government, most likely then a new Labour Government, might take the planning system, so a good time to take stock of and try to learn the lessons of what is now the last Government. As well as Catriona, who was Director of Planning at the South East England Regional Assembly when the Coalition Government came to power in 2010, I approached another friend of podcast, Steve Quartermain , Chief Planner between 2008 and 2020, who was

Episode 134 of the podcast is available now via this link or from iTunes and Spotify . Saturday 12 October 2024 marked 100 days of the new Labour Government. In anticipation of this milestone Landmark Chambers and Town Legal hosted a seminar in London to provide an in-depth review of Labour's first 100 days in power and the impact on planning law and policy. The session was recorded so that I could share it by way of the podcast and planners will be glad that it was recorded because it contains analysis and insight of the highest order. The episode includes: Rupert Warren (not on LinkedIn...) talking about the NPPF, local plans and housing; Meeta Kaur talking about new towns; Russell Harris talking about London; Simon Ricketts talking about infrastructure and commercial development; and Isabella Buono talking about Grey Belt and affordable housing.

Episode 133 of the podcast is available now via this link or from iTunes and Spotify . I was in Manchester recently (NPPF deadline day actually) and took the opportunity to catch up with friends of the podcast Katie Wray , David Diggle , Greg Dickson , Mark Parkinson and Claire Petricca-Riding at the studios of Reform Radio . Conscious that the podcast has covered the revised NPPF in episodes 128 and 131, we talked about some of the other current hot planning topics. We talked about brownfield passports and why existing tools in the box are not being used already; we talked about the Labour Party Conference, which led on to conversation about a Plan for England; and we talked about what the New Towns Taskforce would need to do to meaningfully advance that agenda... and then we talked a bit more towards to the end about brownfield passports again. We did try not to mention the NPPF, but, as you will hear, were unsuccessful in so doing...