9th August 2012, 03:35 PM
I think that there are probable potential improvements amongst the options, and I'm less antagonistic to the consultation than some I have spoken to. I agree with them that it's a short consultation period at a time of holiday/international sporting events distractions.
Provided that local planning authorities continue to have appropriately experienced staff to review and decide applications, an arrangement whereby applicants provide detailed expert reports which consider the implications and recommend consent or refusal is close to the NPPF process.
The system of accreditation for those expert report writers could be a stumbling block (at least for those with professional objections to joining the suggested accedited bodies).
I'm opposed to the suggestion that the local authority could delegate the grant of Listed Building Consent to accredited agents - it's important that the elected authority members continue to hold a responsibility for the decisions taken.
Provided that local planning authorities continue to have appropriately experienced staff to review and decide applications, an arrangement whereby applicants provide detailed expert reports which consider the implications and recommend consent or refusal is close to the NPPF process.
The system of accreditation for those expert report writers could be a stumbling block (at least for those with professional objections to joining the suggested accedited bodies).
I'm opposed to the suggestion that the local authority could delegate the grant of Listed Building Consent to accredited agents - it's important that the elected authority members continue to hold a responsibility for the decisions taken.