+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: A better brighter Britain but not for watching brief conditions (/showthread.php?tid=3619)
A better brighter Britain but not for watching brief conditions - gwyl - 8th December 2010
Talking of WSIs above i gather that Bucks CSA will shortly be introducing charges for reading and approving WSIs as well as the same for reports
Are there any other counties which currently operate such a system? If so, how successful a system is it?
A better brighter Britain but not for watching brief conditions - vulpes - 8th December 2010
depends how you measure success I would imagine
A better brighter Britain but not for watching brief conditions - gwyl - 8th December 2010
vulpes Wrote:depends how you measure success I would imagine?$?$?$?$?$?$?$?$?$?$?$?$?$?$?$
hemhem
A better brighter Britain but not for watching brief conditions - kevin wooldridge - 8th December 2010
gwyl Wrote:but if you don't need planning permission for a small extension, who will there be to monitor the works,
Then proposal (as outlined in the Guardian article) doesn't say that you won't need permission, it says you won't need traditional planning permission.
' Under the plans, to be outlined in a localism bill.......new groups will be allowed to draw up agreed categories of development known as "neighbourhood development orders". The reforms would mean that homeowners could add to their homes without the need for traditional planning permission if they won support within their neighbourhood group'.
Homeowners would still need to seek permission from someone (neighbourhood group) and even that permission might be subject to local referendum (cost picked up by the applicant I am guessing). So tell me how that simplifies or lessens the cost of the current system? ..... Also I remember when this proposal was first mooted there was talk of as little as 10% opposition spelling an end to any proposal rather than a straight majority. So it might be just a NIMBYist charter rather than an opportunity for unbridled development.
A better brighter Britain but not for watching brief conditions - kevin wooldridge - 8th December 2010
This discussion seems to be running in parallel threads on BAJR forums at the moment. I like this link from the other thread about the Royal Town Planning Institute's response to localism.
http://www.rtpi.org.uk/item/4259/23/5/3
I particularly like point 11, which I can already see getting up the noses of those Tory burghers who oppose traveller groups being able to extend and expand their current sites....
'11. It gives an equal opportunity for all communities to be involved in shaping their own futures, including those communities and groups whose engagement has often been neglected and have been served by Planning Aid in the past and we hope will continue to do so in the future;'
You know I am beginning to like this bill.
A better brighter Britain but not for watching brief conditions - moreno - 8th December 2010
gwyl Wrote:Talking of WSIs above i gather that Bucks CSA will shortly be introducing charges for reading and approving WSIs as well as the same for reports
Are there any other counties which currently operate such a system? If so, how successful a system is it?
How interesting, and to be honest, I'm suprised this hasn't happened sooner. Some of the specifications, reports etc. I've come across and have seen sent out, could have used a bit more editing and proof reading. Then, on the other hand, specifications and reports have been sent back with unecessary edits that require time and cost to address before the document (s) receives approval. Before the critics/cynics pile in, yes I'm well aware of what should happen as oppose to what does happen to allow this to happen in the first place. The charge for editing and approving WSI's ( I should think this will eventually incorporate other germane documents to meet approval) appears reactive and revenue generating. Obviously this is something that those whom are involved in this side of things will have to address. I can't help think that this will be incorporated into client charges. Interesting times for archaeology and all that it entails.
A better brighter Britain but not for watching brief conditions - gwyl - 9th December 2010
kevin wooldridge Wrote:So it might be just a NIMBYist charter rather than an opportunity for unbridled development.my fear is that there is more likely to be - as you point out a NIMBYist effect - or if you will a pocket borough effect, with a little bit of back-scratching thrown in for good measure
it's a charter for corrupt individuals to do what they like; as pointed out above these neighbourhood groups are unaccountable, whereas LPAs are; stuff your chums into such a group with the tacit agreement that when you get yours, they'll get theirs; if anyone were to complain, then they won't get anything ever, and to whom will they have effective redress? without access to legal aid they don't stand a chance.
sorry, i see this as furthering a return to the 18th C, which seems to characterise much of this government's policies
that said, we could have a Tory U-turn on this, too, if we can raise consciousness beyond the profession. but who is going to be interested in protecting a few archaeologists' jobs
A better brighter Britain but not for watching brief conditions - vulpes - 9th December 2010
Although it sounds a frightening prospect. I suspect this move is likely to be unworkable, who ever heard of a majority of village residents agreeing on anything? Destined to be a damp squib.
A better brighter Britain but not for watching brief conditions - GnomeKing - 9th December 2010
damp, but possibly noxious
A better brighter Britain but not for watching brief conditions - Oxbeast - 9th December 2010
I look forward to a storyline about this in The Archers...perhaps a Borchester Land development being opposed...
Although, @Gwyl "if anyone were to complain, then they won't get anything ever, and to whom will they have effective redress? without access to legal aid they don't stand a chance."
Surely the existing planning system will still be running in paralell, so people could just use that if they thought that the 'neighbourhood group' would just veto their development...