2011: A review

by Cliff Hague, Planningresource magazine, December 2011

Looking at planning and economic development from a global perspective, 2011 was a year that posed more questions than it answered. At the level of headlines, there was little to raise the spirits or to make you confident that the world is on a more sustainable track. Governments still struggle to grasp why urbanisation is a strategic issue. The de-regulatory temper in England has echoes elsewhere. Depressed economies and austerity measures have set back regeneration and stalled housing markets. However, the quiet work of professionals and NGOs still has some bright lights and maybe points a way ahead.

The urban development escalator

This year the world’s urban population passed the 3.5 billion threshold. There are now about 66M more urban dweller than there were last Christmas. The number of cities with populations greater than 1 million reached 447. In 1950 it was 75. The average size of the world’s 100 largest cities is now 7.6M.  However, the fastest growth is in the smaller cities.

Asia and Africa dominate the urban increase. Most of the growth is in developing countries – much of it unplanned and taking the form of slums. Millions of people will look back on 2011 as the year that they built their own house on the edge of a city, quite possibly on a flood plain, and gained a precarious foothold in the urban economy. Unless they were evicted or hit by a natural disaster, life got a bit better for them. They may have managed to send a little money home to their family in the countryside. They may return home for family festivals, but they and their children are not going back to the land.

Shrinking settlements

Elsewhere it was a very different story.  In the villages of Eastern Latvia, on the hill farms of Romania, even in the lonely deserts of Utah or amidst the snows of North Dakota, people packed up and moved on.  They had had enough of the unequal struggle to make a living far from the comforts of a large town. Maybe it was when the school closed, or the local shop owner died and nobody took over. Maybe it was at the graduation ceremony that the young woman decided she was not going back to the parental home. For some of the aging population of such places, it was simply mortality that removed them from the census.

It was not just in the countryside. Places that were once socialist industrial boom towns across Russia or homes to factory workers in America’s rust belt continued to shrink. In the US in particular, people walked away from their houses and the debt they owed on them, but could never hope to pay back. Neighbourhoods were left to rot. Las Vegas had basked in sunshine and gambled on property for much of the first decade of the century, when people were getting rich quick. But 2011 meant foreclosures and collapsing prices, stalled development projects and people moving on in the hope of getting a new start somewhere else. Nearer to home, the ghost estates in Ireland remained just that; spectres of the folly of development led by speculation rather than planned to meet needs. They will be with us for some time to come.

Disasters and Resilience

The floods in Queensland, the earthquake in Christchurch (pictured) and the Japanese tsunami a month later reminded us all of the vulnerability of human settlements to natural disasters and the need to plan to mitigate their effects. The speed with which the engineers in Japan were able to reconstruct roads and other basic infrastructure was testimony to what professional capacity can deliver if backed by resources and effective systems of governance.

The routine of disasters in developing countries attracted less attention or speedy remedy. Thus, many died and hundreds of thousands had to flee their homes as Thailand suffered its worst floods in 50 years. Hurricane Irene battered the Caribbean. The Turkish province of Van experienced an earthquake in which hundreds died, with 80 multi-storey apartment blocks collapsing in the city of Ercis. Drought in southern India has seen wells dry up and the already impoverished farmers reduced to desperation.

UN-Habitat devoted its Global Report on Human Settlements for 2011 to the theme of Cities and Climate Change. Cassandra-like, it warned of humanity of the “unprecedented negative impacts upon quality of life, and economic and social stability.” The world’s governments shuffled to Durban to see what might be done, concluded that the answer was “a little bit, eventually” and returned home for Christmas. Even this was too much for Canada, who became the first country to pull out of the Kyoto protocol. The small island developing states exposed long-term to salination of water and land, and loss of properties and natural ecosystems, could only express their frustration (again).

State of the Cities

Signs of hope? Well, Australia took the brave political decision to introduce a carbon tax, and also took another step forward by updating its State of the Cities report. Its federal government committed to all the capital cities having plans in place to guide government infrastructure investment.  Similarly, South Africa confirmed its continuing willingness to build an evidence base for urban policy by publishing its State of the Cities study. Both these Commonwealth efforts make the connection between effective urban planning and management, economic growth, environmental quality and social inclusion.

Elsewhere the Cities Alliance continued to drive forward the practice of producing national state of the cities studies, with work pushing ahead in India and Tanzania, for example.  Bangladesh established a national urban Forum for the first time and their planners rejoined the Commonwealth Association of Planners – thanks to the efforts of young planners inspired by discussions on this blog.  Commonwealth ministers responsible for human settlements met in Nairobi as the Commonwealth Consultative Group on Human Settlements and endorsed the work being done to try to build capacity in new and inclusive forms of urban planning.

Europe

The Hungarian EU Presidency worked hard to produce the evidence on the Territorial State and Perspective of Europe. This was then the platform for the policy document The EU’s Territorial Agenda 2020 that was agreed by ministers from the member states.  It reiterated many of the themes from the European Spatial Development Perspective, which had been a clarion call for many in 1999.

The Polish Presidency followed with a characteristically ambitious attempt to advance the territorial development and cohesion agenda. In the end not all the countries could keep pace and the meeting in Poznan in late November ended with some loose ends about a road map.  The Poles forged the necessary inter-governmental consensus to begin to lay the foundations for a continuation of the work of ESPON beyond 2014. More importantly, the Poles oversaw the delivery of the EU’s Cohesion Policy for 2014-2020, frustrating some UK government wishes in the process. Last, but certainly not least, came David Cameron’s decision to row away from Europe. How that might impact on the roll-out of the details on Cohesion Policy is something to look for next year.

source: planningresource

edited by: 4D Planning Consultants

An Appeal Court challenge has been heard against the government's overhaul of planning rules for houses in multiple occupation (HMOs).

The policy, which was introduced last year by housing minister Grant Shapps, means that planning permission is no longer needed to turn single houses into HMOs.

It was challenged at the High Court in April, by councils from Milton Keynes, Oxford and Newcastle, which complained that they had not been properly consulted about the new regulations.

The authorities claimed that HMOs cause difficulties for residents, including extra traffic, and increased crime and anti-social behaviour.

Their claim was rejected by Judge Sir Michael Harrison, who said there was no unfairness to the councils in the consultation process, as it came just a year after a wider consultation on HMOs by the previous government.

Milton Keynes Council, with the backing of a number of councils across the country, today took their fight to the Appeal Court, in a fresh bid to have the policy overturned.

Lawyers for the council told the court that the authority and local residents have suffered problems caused by HMOs for many years, including increased littering and anti-social behaviour.

Timothy Mould QC said Milton Keynes had the support of councils "up and down the country" in bringing the challenge against communities secretary, Eric Pickles, whose office approved the policy.

The barrister said the support was from "urban" councils, including Leeds, Charnwood, Nottingham, Bristol and Torbay, rather than from rural areas - where HMOs are not as big an issue.

The court heard that, following a consultation in 2009 - in which every council was involved - the Labour government introduced regulations which meant planning permission was needed to convert houses into HMOs.

However, when the coalition government was formed, it was decided the policy should be reversed, in a bid to prevent would-be landlords being put off by the red tape involved in converting a house into flats or bedsits.

Mould said: "The government apparently formed the view that the legislation introduced in 2009 was an unjustifiable burden on those areas where HMO development was not a concern.

"It considered that the legislation deterred prospective landlords from entering the market and endangered low-cost housing in many areas."

There was a second consultation in June last year, but councils were only represented collectively by the Local Government Association, and were not asked directly for their views.

Mould told the court that the regulations were then changed so that planning permission wasn't needed to create HMOs - despite the fact this was the least popular option in the 2009 consultation, with just one per cent of the responses supporting it.

Milton Keynes Council contends that the exclusion of local councils from last year's consultation was "unfair and unreasonable".

The Appeal Court heard the council has in fact changed its own planning policy - so that permission from the authority is needed to convert a house into an HMO - but still faces the prospect of having to pay out compensation to landlords under the new regulations.

Lord Justice Pill, Lady Justice Arden and Lord Justice Macfarlane are expected to reserve giving their judgment on the case until a later date. (source: court reporter in PLANNING)

http://www.londonplanningpermission.co.uk

DCLG receives over 13,700 responses to NPPF consultation

Speaking yesterday during a debate in the House of Commons on the NPPF, Stunell said: "As of this morning, 13,700 responses have been received to the consultation, of which some 3,700 are substantive individual ones."

The consultation on the draft NPPF closed earlier this week. On Monday, the National Trust – one of the most vocal critics of the proposed reforms – handed over a petition containing more than 200,000 signatures calling on the government to make changes to the controversial document.

Speaking during yesterday’s debate, Stunell said: "Of all the thousands of comments that have been made about the NPPF so far, very few have challenged the importance of both the simplification and the localisation that we have set out." He refers to the size of the document which has been reduced from 1000 pages to just over 50.

Responding to a question from Labour MP Tristram Hunt, decentralisation minister Greg Clark told MPs that property developers "had no influence whatever on our draft policy framework".

Clark added that "transitional arrangements" would be put in place to help councils adapt to the reforms. These arrangements would inevitably cost the tax payer a fortune to implement.

Countryside campaigners have warned that the NPPF could result in a development free-for-all in areas without adopted local plans. It stipulates that councils should grant permission where the local plan is "absent, silent or indeterminate".

Clark said: "In the transitional arrangements we will put in place … we will be clear that no local council or authority that has developed a plan that expresses the future of its community will be at all disadvantaged. This is truly hard to believe!

"We are not going to take decision making from them. Part of the transitional arrangements will ensure that the community is advantaged rather than disadvantaged from the outset."

Shadow communities secretary Hilary Benn accused the coalition government of approaching planning reform in a "ham-fisted" way.

He said: "The Government hope that planning reform will help growth to get going again, and we all want that.

"However, their actions in rushing reform in a way that has lost people’s confidence and hurrying to try to abolish the regional spatial strategies have led to uncertainty among planners, councils, developers and the courts. As a result, the system may slow down while everyone works out what the new words mean." Chaos as usual!

source: Jamie Carpenter

Planning and Community

Community

by 4D Planning

27/11/2010

Introduction

The word community is originally derived from the  Latin words communitat and communita,  the latter word being a noun that means “ joint possession or use, participation, sharing, social relationship, fellowship, organized society, shared nature or quality, kinship” (Oxford English Dictionary).   The word then entered the Anglo-Norman and Middle French languages, with expanded use of the term to include  “relations, association (c1150 or earlier in Anglo-Norman), nation or state (12th century), body of people who live in the same place, usually sharing a common cultural or ethnic identity (c1370), religious society (1378)” (Oxford English Dictionary).

Even from the early use of the word “community”, it appears to have enjoyed wide application and there are today tens of ways of relating to its use, making it a challenge to give a clear description of its meaning and use.

Different Categories

A number of writers have tried to categorise the term such as Brown & Isaacs (1994) where they introduced the model for successful community engagement into the six C’s, namely Capability, Commitment, Contribution, Continuity, Collaboration and Conscience.  This is an individual way of cleverly finding six words which begin with the letter “C” to identify aspects of the community; however, the categories seem to provide a rather general description. For example, the "C" for "Conscience" is stated as meaning "guiding principles/ethics of service, trust and respect that are expressed in the actions of the community". This relates more to the writers' wish how the community should function, than a definition of the term.

In my view, the most effective and simple categorisation is nevertheless contained in Wikipedia that anonymously suggests that the term can be broken down into three categories: geographic communities, communities of culture and communities of organisation.

The first category “geographic communities” relates to communities of location, both on the micro and macro scale, ranging from village communities to the planet as a whole.   The international community includes people from around the world who have diverse religions, culture and ethnicity, yet have a common interest in international issues, such as human rights and world peace. The United Nations is formed of 192 member states and is an example of a community whose members represent geographical locations.

The second category “communities of culture” relate to groups that have a common identity other than location including religions, sexual orientation, sports, politics, the arts and communities of the needy such as the disabled.  Members of such communities often feel a closer bond to each other, especially when they are living in an area where they are the ethnic or religious minority - they may be more inclined to greet each other on the streets even if they have never met before so long as they are recognised as being a member of their community.  Some have charity organisations set up specifically to support the needy of the community, and to provide care and support for mothers and babies, adults and children.

The third and last category, “community organisations”, has certain relevance to planning, as these include professional bodies (f0r example, the Royal Town Planning Institute), unions, local organisations involved with the community such as local sports and cultural activities (Wikipedia under definition of “Community”).

In the last decade, the above categories have blended more and more and some indeed overlap.  The internet is a prime instance, as it connects all populations (geographical communities), hobbies and interests, for example through social networking (communities of culture) and is a source of knowledge and communication and bringing local people together (community organisations).

Changes in the Community

In my view, community feeling on a local basis has been declining in the United Kingdom, and also the Western world, over the last fifty years with more of the population living in metropolitan areas, commuting and working long hours and generally being more involved with their colleagues at work and networking through the web (for example, Facebook) than relating to their neighbours and local community (Daily Mail, 2010).  Even on a national level, there is more resistance to be involved in foreign affairs and wars in areas such Afghanistan. 

In 1997, Prime Minister Tony Blair explained how communities were becoming more divided, and the government needs to take action and to intervene by challenging the existing decline in community life.  Blair was quoted as saying “We all know the problems of our poorest neighbourhoods - decaying housing, unemployment, street crime and drugs.  People who can, move out.  Nightmare neighbours move in.  Shops, banks and other vital services close. Over the last two decades the gap between these 'worst estates' and the rest of the country has grown. It has left us with a situation that no civilised society should tolerate” (Blair, 1997).

A market research was published that showed that most British people do not know their neighbours’ names and would not recognise them in the streets and more than a quarter of those interviewed replied that they admit to being suspicious to those living nearby (Coulthard et al., 2002).

In this context, in recent times, leading world politicians have been seeking to revive the ethic of engaging in the community and encouraging individuals and organisations to go beyond their individual boundaries and personal needs, and using more encouraging oratory to inspire a change of direction.  The Unites States President Barak Obama was quoted as saying: “Yes, our greatness as a nation has depended on individual initiative, on a belief in the free market. But it has also depended on our sense of mutual regard for each other, of mutual responsibility. The idea that everybody has a stake in the country, that we're all in it together and everybody's got a shot at opportunity.  Americans know this. We know that government can't solve all our problems - and we don't want it to. But we also know that there are some things we can't do on our own. We know that there are some things we do better together” (Palmieri, 2008).  The President was clearly not just referring to government intervention, but also to the need for the commitment of Americans citizens to develop the community participation. 

In England, recent governments have understood that the public needs incentives to encourage and promote their individual communities and create ‘places where people will want to live and will continue to want to live’ (ODPM, 2003 p.5).  David Cameron’s “Big Society” echoes this theme. A short document setting out policies agreed by the coalition government includes introducing a national citizen service programme for sixteen year olds, reforms to the planning system to give communities more control over developments, letting public sector workers form cooperatives and giving the public access to government data (Cabinet Office, 2010).

Relevance of the Community to Planning

The new coalition government’s agenda for planning is to create a localism approach by decentralising the planning powers and giving them to the local communities, to the extent possible.  The proposals are intended to engage the community in the planning process and decision making.  The needs of the local community will be taken into account for all planning permissions, whether commercial or residential.  Local interest groups, from those concerned with the environment to businessmen, will be part of the process.  The needs of the community, both present and future, will be considered, such as parks and facilities for the local population, including schools, hospitals and leisure centres.

The above programme will hopefully revive the interest of the local residents in their communities.  This will, in turn, promote social cohesion, make them more committed to society and encourage local industry and commerce.

Challenges ahead for the Community; Vision

The community is clearly a vital ingredient for civilization.  The challenge is how to integrate the lives of individuals into the community and how to blend not just different social and economical classes into the community (as was the challenge until the last few decades), but to intermingle and unify the different racial and religious groups into the community, both on global and on local levels.  Terrorism and crime result partly from the failure of the community to address the individual interests and differences.  Politicians should continue inspiring their peoples with a vision for the future but at the same time, change is required to instil a more communal spirit and caring world; it is time, for instance, that the international community understood the importance of combating global warming and overcoming the shortage of food in many parts of the world when at the same time food is destroyed and dumped in the more prosperous Western countries.  The global communication through the internet community, with instant news and the ability to contact and reach any part of the planet should be used as the means to make the required changes. The former Vice President and Nobel Peace Prize winner Al Gore wrote concerning global warming “There is an old African proverb that says, ‘if you want to go quickly, go alone; if you want to go far, go together.’ We have to go far quickly” (Gore, 2009).

Bibliography

Blair, T., (1997) "Bringing Britain Together". Political Speech presented at Stockwell Park School, Lambeth, UK.

Brown, J., & Isaacs, D., (1994) ‘Merging the best of two worlds the core processes of organisations as communities’ in P Senge. Available: <http://www.theworldcafe.com/articles/mergingbest.pdf>. [Accessed 25th Nov 2010].

Cabinet Office, (2010). Building the Big Society. Press release, issued 18th May 2010. Available from: <http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/407789/building-big-society.pdf> [Accessed 25th Nov 2010].

Coulthard, M., Walker, A., & Morgan, A., (2002) Rep. People's Perceptions of Their Neighbourhood and Community Involvement - Results from the Social Capital Module of the General Household Survey 2000. The Stationery Office.   Available from: <http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_social/Peoples_perceptions_social_capital.pdf>. [Accessed 27th Nov 2010].

Daily Mail [online]. (2010) [Accessed 25th November 2010]. Available from: <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1303521/1-4-distrust-neighbours-suspicious-online-friends.html>.

Gore, A., (2009). Our Choice. Illustrated. ed. New York: Rodale Books. P.418 (2)

Legal and General (2010). Next Door Strangers - Research on the changing face of the British neighbourhood divide in values and sense of community [online]. [Accessed 27th November 2010].   Available from: <http://www.legalandgeneralmediacentre.com/imagelibrary/downloadMedia.ashx?MediaDetailsID=468>.

Office of Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) (2003), Sustainable Communities: Building for the Future, February 2003, ODPM

"Community, n." Oxford English Dictionary Additions Series. 1997. OED Online. Oxford University Press. 27 Nov. 2010 <http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50045241>.

Palmieri, C. (2008). Obama in his own words. Pre Election. ed. New York: BookSurge Publishing. (1)

Wikipedia (2010). Community [online]. [Accessed 25th November 2010]. Available from: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community>

4D Planning, (2010). Submitting a planning application. [online].. Available from: http://www.4dplanning.com [Accessed 25th November 2010]

Our sister website 'London Planning' has been launched recently!

At London Planning, planning consultancy is a speciality. We are a team of planning consultants, architect technicians and designers who specialise in obtaining planning permission for our clients.

Our primary focus is on planning applications located in and around London. We operate in all development sectors particularly in residential, retail and mixed use development. London Planning has notable expertise in preparing and negotiation of residential and retail assessments.

Many of our clients want to increase value to their properties by obtaining planning permission for their extension/ conversion etc. Others are looking to expand due to high costs in relocating and exorbitant property prices.

Even if you are not ready to build your extension, we can help you get planning permission which will last for at least 3 years. Your property value will increase instantly which is ideal for home owners wishing to eventually sell.


Contact London Planning for a FREE consultation: 0776 046 8910

Visit our website: http://www.londonplanningpermission.com

London Planning Permission Website has been launched recently!

London Planning Permission Website has been launched recently!

At London Planning, planning consultancy is a speciality. We are a team of planning consultants, architect technicians and designers who specialise in obtaining planning permission for our clients.

Our primary focus is on planning applications located in and around London. We operate in all development sectors particularly in residential, retail and mixed use development. London Planning has notable expertise in preparing and negotiation of residential and retail assessments.

Many of our clients want to increase value to their properties by obtaining planning permission for their extension/ conversion etc. Others are looking to expand due to high costs in relocating and exorbitant property prices.

Even if you are not ready to build your extension, we can help you get planning permission which will last for at least 3 years. Your property value will increase instantly which is ideal for home owners wishing to eventually sell.


Call London Planning for a FREE consultation: 0776 046 8910

Visit London Planning's website: http://www.londonplanningpermission.com

London Planning Permission Website has been launched recently!

At London Planning, planning consultancy is a speciality. We are a team of planning consultants, architect technicians and designers who specialise in obtaining planning permission for our clients.

Our primary focus is on planning applications located in and around London. We operate in all development sectors particularly in residential, retail and mixed use development. London Planning has notable expertise in preparing and negotiation of residential and retail assessments.

Many of our clients want to increase value to their properties by obtaining planning permission for their extension/ conversion etc. Others are looking to expand due to high costs in relocating and exorbitant property prices.

Even if you are not ready to build your extension, we can help you get planning permission which will last for at least 3 years. Your property value will increase instantly which is ideal for home owners wishing to eventually sell.


Call London Planning for a FREE consultation: 0776 046 8910

Planning and the supply side of the economy

Supply side liberalisation should be at the top of any government's agenda. It is particularly important during a recession when economic resources need to be re-allocated towards alternative uses and the skills of the unemployed start to deteriorate. In these circumstances, high taxes, the welfare system, labour market controls and planning regulation can all be impediments to employment - with the least productive suffering most. In its first few months, the current government has compounded the errors of the previous government by making productive employment and enterprise even more difficult. In this series of blogs, IEA experts suggest another path.

There is so much wrong with the UK planning system that it is difficult to know where to start. There is much to be said for a private approach to planning and the use of economic mechanisms to deal with externalities from development – especially with regard to small-scale development. However, I shall leave that aside and focus on the difficulty of getting planning permission under the current system.

Our planning system

• Restricts severely the supply of land for development.
• Includes ‘town-centre first’ restrictions that prevent the development of ‘out-of-town’ retail space.
• Includes height controls which act to restrict office and residential supply.
• Has perverse incentives whereby local authorities cannot benefit financially (from tax flows) arising from new development. This makes NIMBYism a one way bet.
• Uses a very bureaucratic system for processing applications with a high degree of bureaucratic discretion and almost no use of economic mechanisms to establish preferences for development as opposed to conservation.

This leads to some of the highest property prices in the world in all sectors which has an effect on labour mobility as well as business expansion in retail, industrial and service sectors. All these problems reduce growth and prevent resource re-allocation in recession that follows a boom. Just to give one example, retail space per head of the population in the UK is approximately 23 sq ft per capita as opposed to 53 sq ft in the US where land markets operate more freely.

There may be legitimate concerns about environmental issues. These would best be dealt with, in my view, by more private planning mechanisms and the use of more economic incentives within the planning system. However, these environmental issues are overstated. We currently have 1.2bn sq ft of shopping space in the UK: the square footage of the Isle of Wight is 4.1bn. So, we could fit all the shops in the UK into 30% of the IOW. Only 10% of the UK is built-over space – and this figure includes parks and gardens. In any case, more development would lead existing developed areas to be less congested and could lead to the development of better transport to areas that currently are not well served. The environmental issues do not just run in one direction.

The problems of lack of permitted development impact indirectly on the supply side of UK economy too:

• It fosters quasi-monopolistic groups and can indirectly help create ‘clone towns’.
• It militates against the independent sector – and new entrants – and therefore competition and innovation.
• Productivity growth is impeded, through several mechanisms. These include the problems of businesses not being able to obtain the best property portfolio for business purposes; the full adoption of modern logistics is impeded (because much of the retail stock is antiquated); the retail sector is a sub-optimal size; retail prices are higher than they would be if commercial property space was cheaper; labour mobility is reduced.
• Business people are more likely to become property entrepreneurs who are involved in the economically wasteful activity of gaming the planning system. 
• The construction sector is sub-optimal as people are prevented from buying the housing space and so on that they would like if there were fewer restrictions.

In summary, no supply side liberation will be complete unless we ease planning restrictions. This can be done directly but should also be done by the back door of radical fiscal decentralisation.

This article was written by Phillip Booth from http://www.iea.org.uk