Test

Cross fingers that the problems with Blogger are solved.

Did Mr Mair steer the right course with the Mayor? That Boris Johnson interview; a wasted opportunity?

I was getting on with my chores yesterday morning - which is pretty much what I do every morning - so I missed, what is turning out to be, a much talked about interview between Eddie Mair and the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, on BBC One's 'The Andrew Marr Show'.

I have since listened to the interview  on iPlayer and,  more interestingly, tried to read as many as possible of the public comments posted against the newspaper articles that the interview has spawned.  

I am not going to go into details about the above mentioned BBC encounter, suffice to say that towards the end of the conversation, Mr Johnson indicates that he felt the interview had taken a different course from that which he was expecting:

"...thought I was coming on to talk about the budget and housing in London"

Well, the EM/BJ Q and A session certainly didn't cover much about the Mayor's jobs and housing targets, and his potential willingness to intervene on behalf of applicants.  To find out more about that, readers will need to pop over to the link here to catch this written account of an interview by the Editor of Planning, Richard Garlick.

The account begins:

'...Boris Johnson may present himself as an amiably unrehearsed public speaker, but he is not too proud to repeat his best gags. One, which became familiar to journalists following him around the Mipim property conference in France earlier this month, would follow his boast that London's population had risen by more than 600,000 people during his time as mayor. At that point his brow would furrow. "Nothing to do with me personally, of course," he would say, worriedly, to roars of laughter from his audience.'

The article then continues by giving details of an interview, at Mipim, with the deputy mayor of London for planning, Sir Edward Lister.

It seems that the Majoral team has big plans and the teams's big plans will need a big boost of cash, In Sir Edward's words, "We are really trying to line this all up for a big bid to the spending review in the summer."


Will it be a question of, 'If lots of money goes to London where will that leave the rest?'


And how will this affect those living in the areas affected?


Perhaps Mr Mair should have focused on the housing in London after all...

Update on timings for NPF3 and SPP public consultations

PLEASE, PLEASE, FOR THE SAKE OF YOUR FAMILIES, FRIENDS, COMMUNITIES AND YOUR OWN FUTURES; TREAT THE FORTHCOMING THIRD NATIONAL PLANNING FRAMEWORK, NPF3, CONSULTATION SERIOUSLY

Here is the latest from the Scottish Govermnent Newsletter:

The NPF3 Main Issues Report and draft Scottish Planning Policy will be published after the Easter Parliamentary Recess ( Recessed until 14th April). This will be followed by a 12-week period of public consultation on the two documents which will begin when they are available online. Revised Participation Statements will be published at the same time, which will set out opportunities for stakeholders to get involved in the next stage of the process.

I think that this NPF could effectively end up being a National 'Local' Development Plan for the whole of Scotland.  And we thought the Highland-wide 'Local' Development Plan sounded strange as a concept!

Remember, I really cannot emphasise strongly enough that this National Planning Document will have great power over the local plans - Local Authorities, it appears, will not (and were not, remember 'Tornagrain' and the other developments in the 'A96 Corridor'?) be allowed to deviate from what is set out in NPF3.  And Local Authorities themselves, along with all other parties (landowners/developers/their agents/agencies/'pressure groups/ individuals, will be seeking to influence the content of the NPF3.
(Highland Council NPF3 'Call for National Developments' response here).

 Remember, as far as being in the NPF3 is concerned:

• The purpose of the designation is to facilitate the developments through the consenting process.

As far as the 'consenting process' is concerned; planning applications must be determined in accordance with development plans - unless material considerations indicate otherwise.  So,  if something, which is later likely to be the subject of a planning application makes it into the National Plan then this influences the Local Plan and the weight of both National and Local plans count in favour of granting the application therefore the development is facilitated through the consenting process.  Well, that is my layperson's take anyway.  I'd welcome input from anyone with more planning expertise.

Even if Reporters were to suggest a different course from that set out in an NPF in their  'Examination Reports' , the Authorities would be empowered to go against the Reporter.  

This is because, although:

'61 Examination reports are largely binding on planning authorities...'

Regulation allows for local authorities to depart from Reporter's recommendations that:

a) Would have the effect of making the LDP inconsistent with the National
Planning Framework, or with any SDP or national park plan for the same area;

b) Are incompatible with Part IVA of the Conservation (Natural Habitats etc)
Regulations 1994; or

c) Are based on conclusions that could not reasonably have been reached based
on the evidence considered at the examination.

Section 19(11) of the Act also allows authorities to environmentally assess the
plan following modification in response to recommendations, and to not make
modifications that are not acceptable having regard to that assessment. 

[For more details on Development Planning See Circular 1/2009]