Whose town is it anyway? 10 thoughts prompted by the planning white paper

The planning white paper shows that the government needs to steer the planning system towards the public interest, and not private interests, argues Tony Michael
2. We must remember that the planning system was created to protect the public; not to validate developers’ proposals, but to ensure their compatibility with the public interest.
3. It follows that the principal ‘client’ of the planning system is not the developer, it is the public. Whose town is it anyway?
4. Taking advice on how to change the planning system from developers is naive. They give advice to govern-ment that is in their interests, not those of the public.
5. The planning of towns is not in developers' skill sets. They get approvals (often setting the minimum standards they can get away with), then build, sell the finished building to a pension fund, and disappear. We need their innovative ideas to push things along, but they should have no part in deciding how their proposals are to be judged by the public.
6. Anyone with experience of a zoning system will tell you that it is cumbersome and complex to set up, inflexible, legalistic and highly determinist. Is this a good fit for the British character, which feels happiest when there is room for interpretation?
7. If government wants to improve the planning system, why not ask the public (the principal client) and the profession, which knows how the system works?
"Anyone with experience of a zoning system will tell you that it is cumbersome and complex to set up and highly determinist"
8. Scrapping so-called viability statements (which few believe), the absurd section 79 building in green belt, the hundreds of pages of useless bumf that accompanies applications, setting clear building form constraints, defining neighbourliness protection and land use compatibility, dealing with housing targets and land value capture, bringing the public in to discussions on day one between developer and planner; these would be some of the starting points, as would going beyond the narrow confines of development control to initiating improvements and running the climate emergency programme of works. And leave architecture to architects.
9. Everyone needs to be clear that ‘the planners’ are the professionals who serve the public (via their council), and it is councils who are responsible for every decision, not planners.
10. Finally, shouldn’t government announcements on planning, come from the planning minister, not someone from one of the bit players like housing?
Tony Michael MRTPI is a town planner and architect
Image credit | Shutterstock
-
At the start of 2020, Tower Hamlets’ infrastructure planning team was shortlisted for an RTPI award, but by the time it was announced as the winner, the Covid-19 pandemic had changed the world. Matt Moody asks manager Matthew Pullen about how the team has adapted
-
In the wake of the RTPI’s call for mandatory health impact assessments in development applications, Mark Cope asks whether it’s enough to assess health impacts of the project or is a strategic planning health focus also needed?
-
The NHS Healthy New Towns programme worked with 10 demonstrator sites across England to look at ways in which the development of new places ‘could create healthier and connected communities with integrated and high-quality services’
TOP JOBS
TOP NEWS