Monday, 24 February 2014

NPF3 - 'What the Committee heard'

Further to the previous post on NPF3 progress, 

I have not read through all of the submissions to the latest stage of scrutiny (see below for the list of submissions on NPF3 to the Local Government and Regeneration Committee - and others - and how I located this list) but it appears that some groups are not too happy with quite a few things in and about the Proposed NPF3 (they are not happy with the 60 day parliamentary scrutiny period particularly) and are telling the Parliamentary Committee just that.

'Planning Democracy' remains very concerned as does  'The John Muir Trust' and 'RSPB Scotland'.  'Planning Aid Scotland' expresses some concerns too.  All these submissions are well worth a read.

Regular readers will recognise the sentiments expressed here, taken from the list response '10' from 'Nestrans':

"...However, very little consideration is given in the Proposed Framework to the implications of the projected growth, particularly as it applies to infrastructure requirements to facilitate that growth. "

Responses '4' and '6' on the list (Holder Planning and Brodies LLP) put forward the idea of merging National Planning Frameworks and Scottish Planning Policy, NPF and SPP, into one document.

I will need to read the RTPI response more thoroughly as well as that from the 'Heads of Planning Scotland' which was submitted by their chairperson, Malcolm Macleod.

[I clicked on the link Scottish Parliament's 'Committees' page then visited the 'Local Government and Regeneration Committee's' web page.  

From that page I clicked on the link to NPF3 and SPP under 'Current Business' and then clicked on 'Written Submissions Received' - which is under the 'Evidence' section.

The list below can be found at the 'evidence' link 

Submissions received as part of NPF3 and SPP Inquiry

No comments:

Post a Comment