Meeting Place Communications

Planning success brings cinema to Trowbridge

2012-02-16T15:57:00.002Z

Meeting Place Communications ran a successful campaign ofsupporter recruitment and stakeholder engagement to secure planning consent forthe regeneration of a key town centre brownfield site. The proposal was for anOdeon digital multiplex, an 80 bed Premier Inn hotel and a range of familyeateries, cafes and bars all within a landscaped riverside setting.

A rivaldevelopment for a superstore and multiplex cinema was being proposed foranother site in the town. Through a program of rigorous supporter recruitmenton the ground, including exhibitions and displays in town centre shoppingmalls, deployment of our ViewPoint online consultation tool incorporatingsocial media, and extensive stakeholder and political engagement, Meeting PlaceCommunications won round the overwhelming majority of public support, with over2,000 individual expressions of support registered from Trowbridge residents.

Centre for Cities: Outlook 2012

2012-02-16T14:24:00.003Z

Centre for Cities launched their Outlook 2012 report at asmall event, which took place at City Hall on Monday 26^th January.

Challenges facing cities today

The Chief Executive for Centre for Cities, Alexandra Jonescommented that the report illustrates the difficult year cities haveexperienced. She stated the report highlights the key challenges facing citiestoday such as economic development and unemployment and the importance ofencouraging private sector growth. Jones specified that growth has been low butunemployment has increased due to the recession.

She highlighted cities need to support economic growth giventhe current economic conditions. It is important to recognise that citiesare different both in terms of their levels of growth and unemployment. Threekey challenges were identified:

1) Shortterm and long term focus. The short term focus should be to help alleviateyouth unemployment. The long term focus cities should be to establish ‘citydeals.’ (City deals are designed to give cities new powers to support economicgrowth through Local Enterprise Partnerships).

2) Apartnership between the private and public sector and between cities and governments.

3) Policiesare needed to tailor the needs of cities.

Unemployment

Unemployment is a major issue. Cambridge unemploymentis low compared to Hull, which has seen a rise in unemployment in the area. Thereasons why unemployment varies from each city is due to the structure and thesize of the cities.

1) Structure: The structure ofthe local economy is important for each city. Those cities that rely onmanufacturing have done badly compared to cities that specialise in knowledgeservices. For this reason, London and Cambridge have experienced lowerlevels of unemployment than cities with a more prominent manufacturing base.

2) Size: A large city does notnecessarily mean a successful city. Successful cities tend to benimble and with fast growing populations; such as Cambridge, Milton Keynes andYork.

The relationship between cities and government

The long term focus should be a strong working relationshipbetween cities and the government. The problem is there has been too muchemphasis on solutions originating from Westminster. Central government needs tofoster a greater understanding of the local economy. Cllr Sian, Leader ofCambridge City Council noted that the Localism Act is an important step indecentralising powers to local government.

This was echoed by Greg Clarke MP, Minster of State forDecentralisation and Cities, who believes firmly that the relationship betweencities and governments is crucial. “City deals” will be effective once abalance is reached between the government and the Core Cities outside of London(Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool, Newcastle, Nottingham, Manchester andSheffield). Cities must take the lead on certain key policies and notrely on the government for inspiration. A strong leadership personality atcity level is needed; someone that is visible and able to push through policiesneeded for economic growth.

Cities must cope with population growth in order to createeconomic growth and job prospects. The impact of globalisation has allowedcities to share economic resources, which has paved the way for new forms oftechnology and communication. It is important to create a knowledge driveneconomy, connecting the power of invention with that of production. It will bevital to maintain low transportation costs and a level of trust in order toshare policies amongst cities. Cities need to develop initiatives to attractentrepreneurs. They also need to develop their own vision, with the supportfrom the government. However, cities are not a franchise of Whitehall.

He highlighted the importance of cities being able tocompete globally and to provide high value in goods and services in order toexport goods to other countries. Cities need to market themselves bothnationally and internationally.

In summary, the Outlook Report not only highlighted thechallenges facing cities today but also emphasises their potential to driveeconomic growth. Local authorities must find new ways of investing to ensureeconomic and housing growth, both essential for prosperity.

MPC secures outline consent for retirement village in Mid Sussex

2012-01-31T15:32:00.001Z

Councillors inMid Sussex have backed proposals for the development of a new retirementvillage.

The schemewill provide new bungalows, a care home and a community centre for Age UK WestSussex.

The approvalwas won with 11 votes to 5, after the officer’s recommendation for refusal wasoverturned following a lengthy discussion and some strong opinions.

Councilmembers assessed the need for a new care facility against the principle of astrategic gap between Haywards Heath and Cuckfield.

Councilmembers in favour of the scheme noted its popularity with Haywards Heath TownCouncil, whom MPC had engaged with at an early stage in the consultationprocess.

Furthermore,MPC provided support for the developer and planning consultants during aCouncillor site visit; those members who had attended the event also endorsedthe scheme.

Prior to thecommittee meeting, MPC produced a short brochure explaining the key benefits ofthe proposal. The next stage will involve developing a detailed applicationwhich responds to the concerns raised by members.

Small-l Localism beckons Miliband

2012-01-10T14:44:00.003Z

If Ed Miliband was hoping for a quiet, business-as-usual start to 2012, his post-festive optimism was rudely spurned by a cold – and very much “blue” - reality.

A subtle but stinging attack from Glasman

Last Thursday (January 5), Lord Maurice Glasman – Labour peer and architect of the controversial “Blue Labour” ideology – launched a subtle but stinging attack on the opposition leader. Writing in the New Statesman, Glasman accused Miliband of a failing “sectional agenda, (which is) based on the idea that disaffected Liberal Democrats and public-sector employees will give Labour a majority next time around”.

This is perhaps the most caustic advertisement yet of wavering party faith in the leader. “We (the party) show no relish for reconfiguring the relationship between the state, the market and society,” Glasman argues, “the world is on the turn, yet we do not seem equal to the challenge”. Stark criticism indeed.

The inevitable media hyperbole that followed was rushed out in pretty predictable terms. The Guardian strung a panel of journalists together and asked them to confer judgement on “What Ed Needs To Do Now”, while Labourlist, an independent Labour website, ran the imaginatively entitled piece; “Labour’s Plan A Has Failed”.

Yet beyond the press imbroglio, some important points have been missed: chiefly, that the most significant attack yet on Miliband’s leadership comes from a leftist academic who staunchly espouses local, democratic forms of community management. This indicates the political solvency of general ‘localism’ ideals (emphasis on the small-l), and suggests that localism per se is now firmly rooted in the cross-party political consciousness. Could it be that Ed is hopelessly overlooking a Labour-style localism – such as Glasman’s small-c conservative, Guild socialism-esque “Blue Labour” - in his search for policy alternatives to challenge the coalition? If so, does this mean that localism (or at least strives for greater community politics) will remain a fixed feature of British political discourse?

A politics of responsibility and reciprocity

Jim Murphy, the Shadow Secretary of Defence, followed up on Glasman’s remarks, stating that the Labour leadership cannot stand to gain “genuine credibility” without accepting some cutbacks to government spending. The implication here is that Labour also needs to start thinking out loud about how community politics can foster (as Glasman dubs it) a “relational” politics among people; a politics of responsibility and reciprocity.

Putting aside policy matters for a moment, there are glaring indicators in popular culture that suggest a collective desire for greater community spirit. Forget Tory trees, Labour roses and Lib Dem birds; one of today's most ubiquitous - and pluckily British - political images is the crown of King George VI, sat atop the defining mantra of good ol' Blighty: Keep Calm and Carry On.

Rekindling a cosy British stoicism

This populist reappropriation of a wartime morale-boost sticks, and for good reason. For better or worse, the coalition's austerity measures (as played out against a backdrop of global monetary woe) have rekindled a cosy British stoicism somewhat lost in New Labour's “grand” project. Where once it was “Spend! Spend! Spend!”, the common wisdom now is “Circle wagons! Tighten purses! Show those pesky French what a triple-A really looks like!” Populist attitudes have almost subconsciously endorsed - if not explicit localism – then at least a “community” ideal.

Community politics is very much trending

All of which suggests the following: community politics, whether under the guise of “Localism”, “reciprocity” , “relational politics” or any other branding, is very much trending in the political world right now, and looks set to do so well into the future. Ed Miliband and the Labour leadership would do well to consider seriously the standpoint of figures like Glasman, who articulate viable and alternative political strategies at the local level which simultaneously cater to the majority vogue for greater “community togetherness”. Small-l localism is here to stay; the question is not “will Labour throw their hat into the ring?”, but rather, “when?”

By Callum Barton

Can the Lib Dems halt their local government decline?

2012-01-10T14:39:00.001Z

As we say goodbye to 2011, I am sure many of our Liberal Democrat friends will be pleased to see it go. In a recent poll, Lib Dems reportedly close the year with just a 15% approval rating. 2011 was a year that saw them nearly get wiped off the electoral map in Scotland, their defeat on the AV referendum, and the loss of just under 700 local government seats across England and Wales. With 2012 local elections fast approaching, the question remains, can the Lib Dems halt their local government decline?

Local election results last May

The results for the Lib Dems in May last year can be interpreted in many ways. These local elections were the first time that the public had a chance to comment on the coalition. While these were local elections, austerity measures implemented by the coalition have been passed through to local authorities and front line services have been affected. This has made coalition politics, local politics.

Voters who do not like the policies of the coalition that, in the past, had been inclined to vote Lib Dem, either did not show up at the polls or turned to Labour who profited hugely from the Lib Dems misfortune. The Labour vote increased by an average of four points more in wards that a Lib Dem was defending than it did in those that had previously been held by a Conservative.

It may have been that Lib Dem voters who sit more to the ideological left within the party were punishing the party for getting into bed with the right. These voters were voicing their distaste for the 'cosy' relationship that Lib Dems have been exhibiting with their coalition partners. Similar concerns were echoed senior Lib Dem politicians who called for a more concerted effort to establish an independent voice within the coalition.

Why have the Tories done ok?

The Conservative Party, however, did not do too badly in 2011 finishing with a modest gain of 77 local council seats. You may be wondering if this was about punishing the coalition, then why did the Tories do OK? Nick Clegg and his party were perceived by voters as passive enablers to a Tory lead government. Conservatives were given the credit for coalition successes while Lib Dems took the blame for coalition failures. After rolling over on tuition fees and the party's muddied stance on NHS reform, Lib Dems have simply lost the faith of much of the electorate.

It also could be that being in opposition is easier than being in government. Electoral downturn is common for the party in government at the time. You only have to look across the pond to America to see the truth in this. Obama’s party got a beating in the midterm elections for House of Representatives and lost control of the chamber.

This however has not ruled him out as a presidential contender in 2012. Although the US and Britain are different political contexts - this is the nature of politics, support from the electorate fluctuates. The Lib Dems are new to government and to coalitions. In this case, the first vote post-general election turned out especially bad for the 'rookies'.

Glimmers of hope

While it all may seem like doom and gloom, there are some interesting anomalies in pockets across the country that could bring a glimmer of hope to the Lib Dem 2012 campaign. Take Bath and North East Somerset (BANES) for example. In May 2011 the Lib Dems took three seats from the Conservatives and, with backing from the Labour Party, have taken control of the council. But, can the success in BANES be replicated in other areas?

Before we get ahead of ourselves, there were some unique circumstances in BANES that helped the Lib Dems do well. Paul Crossley, the Lib Dem leader of the council, attributes this success to their ability to communicate with voters and differentiate local elections from a referendum on the coalition. This may be true but there are other factors that also added to their success.

Firstly, up until 2007, the Lib Dems ran the council. Under their control, the council funded a number of controversial schemes that they ultimately paid for in the ballot box. The elections in 2011 had given the Lib Dems enough time to re-group and meant that they no longer suffered from the incumbency factor. Secondly, the size and density of Bath means that it is an ideal place to run an on the ground campaign (leaflet drops, door canvassing etc). This is something that the Lib Dems are known for being effective at and is partly why they usually do so well in local elections.

Finally, the local Lib Dem MP, Don Foster, did very well in the last general election. This gave the BANES Lib Dem campaign organisers a lot of canvas data along with a large core of supporters to call on. These three ingredients combined made BANES a recipe for success but also a unique case and unlikely to be transferred to other councils.

Voters turning away from the party

Given that local government elections are usually a strength for the Liberal Democrats, last year was without doubt a setback for the party. The voters that the Lib Dems have relied on in past are turning away from the party in favour of others or not voting at all. BANES may have bucked the trend; however it is unlikely that other areas will be able to replicate the series of factors that lead to their success.

Recent polling figures paint a picture of a steadied decline in support but can the Lib Dems stop their loss of local government seats? In the short term, the brief answer is no but do not count them out just yet. With all political parties, support ebbs and flows. 2012 may prove to be another unsuccessful year but their future will be pinned on their performance nationally and their ability to establish an independent, truly Liberal Democrat voice within the coalition.

By Nikki Davies

Urban regeneration: Can it continue under the same steam in this period of economic uncertainty?

2012-01-10T14:33:00.005Z

The concept of urban regeneration is seen as one of the defining hallmarks of the previous New Labour administration. Ever since Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott set up the Urban Task Force in 1999, following Lord Rogers’ report into ‘Towards an Urban Renaissance’, the previous Labour government directed considerable resources towards regenerating our key towns and cities, particularly through quangos such as the Homes & Communities Agency, Regional Development Agencies and public-private Urban Regeneration Companies.

While the inner sanctum of a number of cities and towns have seen marked social and economic improvement throughout this period, such as Liverpool, Sheffield, Salford and Derby, the wasteful nature of the organisations responsible, both in terms of the organisations themselves and the densely layered, ‘trickle-down’ structure through which they were funded, has been lambasted by the current Conservative-led government. The conclusion was the rather clumsy destruction of the RDAs, the drastic cutting back of funding to the HCA, and the resulting direct demise of URCs, with most winding up or continuing to run on skeleton staff.

A lack of gap funding

This left a number of important urban regeneration projects, including housing, commercial and retail developments, without the gap funding that they needed to continue. There is a strong argument that a large number of schemes were not designed to be respondent to market demand in the long term and did not survive because there was simply not the potential or current market for certain types of accommodation in certain areas. However a number of schemes simply required gap funding to ensure that complex urban brownfield development sites got ‘off the ground’, where difficulties presented themselves in the form of land ownership, ground contamination, demolition and remediation costs or, most crucially, the risks and difficulties involved in generating the finance required to invest in areas undergoing make-or-break social and economic transitions.

We are in an era where banks are likely to be, and already are in some cases, more selective and more cautious in their lending patterns and policies. Therefore, in order for these projects to continue in the storm of economic uncertainty, it is vital to reduce the perceived risk to the financiers of private sector developers and expanding businesses, both in terms of short term capital finance and the long term revenue potential of the development.

Short term financing options

In terms of the short term financing of regeneration projects, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has mooted the idea of Tax Increment Funding on a number of occasions, whereby local authorities can borrow from the Treasury against resulting rises in business rates from large development schemes. This could provide the funding required, reducing the risk for private developers in transitional areas to make schemes more attractive. However, this would place the risk firmly at the feet of local authorities, who in many cases have been accused of lacking the commercial awareness and ambition to enable development.

Funding for regional development that was previously provided by Regional Development Agencies now arrives through Local Enterprise Partnerships, under the guise of the Regional Growth Fund. While this arrangement is likely to be seen as a more efficient method for channelling funding towards regional and local job creation, a number of organisations have raised concern at the delay in establishing the LEPs and the resulting delay in accessing RGF funding. A large food-processing company in County Durham has recently entered into administration, having previously been promised funding from the Regional Growth Fund to expand its facilities. In the same news day, the Interim Chairman of One North East expressed concern that European Regional Development Funding for job creation and development is being lost with the inability to match it with local funding.

Long term viability

In terms of the long term viability of regeneration schemes, it is important for developers and occupiers to see the long term potential of the town or city, in terms of vibrancy, economic activity and most importantly, accessibility. It is therefore vital for the government to invest in making our towns and cities more accessible, making it easier and therefore more desirable to live, work and do business. After all, time is money.

In December 2011, the Secretary of State for Transport Justice Greening announced a £1.5 billion programme of investment in major road and public transport schemes, where schemes devised under the previous Labour administration were invited to submit revised bids for funding. This is undoubtedly a positive move for those places where transport schemes were approved, albeit with revised-down funding requirements, and will surely enhance the development potential of a number of towns and cities undergoing transformation change. However, the policy think-tank IPPR North recently noted a severe disparity in government spending on major transport projects, highlighting that £2,700 is spent on major transport schemes on average per person in London whereas only £5 is spent per head in the North East. If the government is to make a real commitment to regional growth and market-ready regeneration, it must reverse its policy of reinforcing the dominance of London as an economic centre and hence relieve the stress and strain placed on it in meeting the demands of Britain’s population.

Summary

Regeneration can continue and power through a challenging economic climate, but it needs the access to funding, whichever form it arrives in, and it needs it fast. It is difficult to argue against claims that Labour’s quangos have been inefficient and frivolous with the public purse; however, the current Government must maintain the momentum created throughout the last 15 years and quickly establish mechanisms to protect the future of regeneration schemes in the UK.

By Paul Erskine

Regenerating the former Gloscat College site

2011-11-04T12:50:00.000Z

This week Gloucester City Council's Planning Committee voted 11-1 to consent the regeneration of the former Gloscat college site in the city centre.

This was the cullmination of one of the most comprehensive programmes of consultation undertaken by Meeting Place Communications on behalf of Linden Homes in co-operation with the HCA and Gloucester Heritage Urban Regeneration Company.

The currently dis-used site will be transformed with new family homes, appartments, a medical centre and community facilities. There are also exciting public artwork plans to evoke the rich history of the site.

During the project Meeting Place Communications ran public consultation events, liaised with the business community, worked with local politicians and community groups.

Nick Webb, Associate Director at MPC, said: "there can be no doubt that through the consultation undertaken the final proposal, approved by the Council, has been the result of work not just from the developer but also the people of Gloucester".

Are we going to see a BLUE London next year?

2011-10-24T10:00:00.001+01:00

A resurgence for Labour?

Last year the Conservatives won the most votes across the country but in London there was resurgence for Labour in some London Boroughs. While the Conservatives gained some MPs, there was also disappointment in seats such as Westminster North and Hammersmith and a recent YouGov poll showed Labour leading the Conservatives across the capital by 19%.

With this in mind, the challenger and former London Mayor, Ken Livingstone should be confident in defeating the Conservative incumbent Boris Johnson in next year’s London Mayoral Election. While these figures demonstrate how Londoners are likely to vote in a General Election Peter Kellner, of YouGov has undertaken an interesting piece of research, in the latest issue of Prospect Magazine.

‘Boris Reds’

Kellner revealed that when given the direct choice between Livingstone and Johnson, Livingstone is actually trailing behind Johnson by eight points.This suggests that a number of Labour supporters simply dislike Livingstone or rather see Johnson as the London Mayor. The polls reveal that one in five Labour voters is rooting for Boris Johnson; now known as ‘Boris Reds.’

Kellner commented, ‘They tend to think Ken has lost touch with Londoners, and that Boris is decisive and sticks to what he believes in.’ A defeat in next year Mayoral elections could see the end of Livingstone’s political career and problems for the Labour leader, Ed Miliband.

It is true to say that an independent-minded Conservative can win in London. Boris is not afraid to differentiate himself from Cameron’s policy and in a recent interview with Prospect; he stated that he would continue to oppose David Cameron on “housing, policing, transport infrastructure, aviation, and the burden of taxation.”

Putting the village back into the city.

He spoke as the protector for London in the Conservative Conference in Manchester last week and suggested to the Coalition government that despite of the economic climate, financial contributions towards projects in London should continue than this could drive economic growth. On housing, he stated he aims to put the village back into the city, referring that Mahatma Gandhi was wrong to suggest in 1948 that the ‘future of India lay in its 700,000 villages.’ Johnson commented, ‘We are on target to build a record 50,000 affordable homes over four years and we will do even more over the next four. But we are also insisting on homes that are big enough for families and with rooms big enough for human beings rather than hobbits. By next year this mayoralty will have planted 50,000 trees including street trees and we are not only protecting back gardens from development and consecrating green space.’

Johnson charismatic approach proved a hit at the Conference but will he triumph at next year Mayoral election, recent polls suggest so.

Invitation to seminar hosted by Pioneer

2011-10-21T12:51:00.002+01:00

"Residential Development: the new way(s) forward"

Thursday 24th November 2011, London

The Seminar, to be Chaired by Gareth Capner (ex-Senior Partner at Barton Willmore), will examine the emerging central trends in residential development and hence will focus on Localism, NPPF, CIL, community consultation, build to let, new investment/funding opportunities, the changing role of RP's and how this (might) all add-up to stimulate economic growth. The event will include Peter Village QC (4-5 Grays Inn) and Ian Ginbey (Clyde & Co) as keynote speakers, plus MPC’s own Anna Sabine talking about the need to engage.

Many of the leading firms in the sector have attended previous Seminars and the popular format of concise presentations with a concluding panel session is combined with opportunities to meet and hear advice from some of the leading players in the sector.

How to Book

The Seminar will commence with Registration & Breakfast between 9:15am - 10:00am and will finish with a Buffet Lunch between 1:15pm - 2:00pm. The venue has limited capacity and, as the Seminar is likely to prove extremely popular, early booking to guarantee your place is strongly recommended.

The cost of the Seminar is £165 plus VAT per delegate and includes a networking breakfast, all refreshments, conference pack, copies of the presentations and a networking lunch following the event.
Please use Pioneer’s online registration form to book a place (or places) at the seminar.

Feel free to forward this e mail to colleagues or acquaintances you feel may be interested in attending the seminar.

If you are having difficulties viewing this e mail please click HERE to view the content on Pioneer’s website

Quiet conferences and gentle reshuffles

2011-10-21T12:49:00.001+01:00

You may not have noticed it, but three weeks of party political conferences have just taken place. For the second year running the media sniffed around the Lib Dem event hoping to find dissent, but largely failing to track down any.

In Liverpool with Labour, the conversation around the conference was more about why Ed Miliband couldn't connect with voters rather than policy.

Finally, the best the Conservatives could manage was an inter-cabinet spat about a cat and the immigration laws. It was one of the least memorable conference seasons for years. Perhaps this is unsurprising, the Government have demonstrated hard -nosed economics in seeking to reduce the deficit but have yet to convince that they have the policies to grow the economy.

Labour remain tarnished by their economic record over recent years and still have some way to go to gain voters’ trust. When one option offers a slightly better solution than the other, it is no wonder that enthusiasm is in short supply.

Perhaps the most important moment for the development industry came in David Cameron's closing speech. He risked the ire of some of the rural membership by pinning his colours firmly to the National Planning Policy Framework. He may have been light on detail, but to mention a controversial policy in a high profile speech when he did not need to shows his determination to drive the policy through with the minimum amount of amendments.

A reshuffle

Following conference season we saw a reshuffle on both the Government and opposition benches. Firstly, Labour changed their front bench team; Stephen Twigg returning to the front bench as Shadow Education Secretary, Caroline Flint moving from Shadow Local Government to Shadow Energy Secretary and Hilary Benn taking Caroline Flint’s place as Shadow DCLG. Shortly, afterwards the Government were forced into a minor reshuffle following Defence Secretary Liam Fox's decision to resign over access he provided to an unofficial advisor. Philip Hammond moved from the Transport portfolio to Defence. Justine Greening was promoted to become the new Secretary of State for Transport. Hammond had been steadfast in his support for High Speed Rail 2 and eyes will be on Greening to see if she is as focused as Hammond on the project. Both Hammond and Greening have worked for Chancellor George Osborne, leading some to suggest that the treasury's strength has grown.

The end of pre-determination: a revolution in planning politics?

2011-10-21T12:46:00.002+01:00

In the wake of MPC’s newly released market research study on the end of pre-determination, Nick Chancellor speaks to Cllr. Peter Dean (Chair, Bromley Development Control Committee) about some of the key implications. Cllr. Dean reflects on how the Localism Bill will affect his role as committee chair, and what it could mean for thousands of planning committee members up and down the country...

In light of the changes being proposed in the Localism Bill, what is your take on how this will affect the role for elected members?

I’ve certainly got a few observations on that – firstly I think you’ll find that more members will put themselves forward to sit on planning committees than previously was the case. Secondly, I think that planning members will be less reticent to speak to applicants and objectors in relation to specific planning applications.

There may be a perception among the public that the Members may pre-commit to things without giving the application a fair hearing – but this will only be a minority view in my opinion. This is the only the real negative consequence that occurs to me. On the positive side, Members will be more comfortable in speaking out about applications. In so doing, they will feel that they’re representing the electorate in a better, more effective way.

Three quarters of councillors in our survey consider that members will have more freedom to speak out in favour of development. Do you think they will 'speak out', for the most part?

For me, that’s a difficult question to answer. Speaking out ‘in favour’ is not the way I approach things as a councillor. I prefer to ‘facilitate’ meetings between developers and residents, allowing for them to discuss matters directly; although I am not against the principle of speaking out publicly. For example, in Bromley we have a Town Centre Action Plan and I’m happy to talk publically about this and to lend my support. However the Action Plan consists of over a dozen individual projects each one a major development in its own right that will dramatically change the town centre over the next decade. In these cases I’d much rather that developers consult extensively with residents and reach a mutually agreeable position before an application is submitted. My preference is usually not to speak out in favour of or against specifics, but rather to assist in generating dialogue between interested parties.

As far as ‘speaking out’ is concerned, I rarely see any reason to do this. Therefore the Localism Bill, in relation to pre-determination, will only have minimal impact on the way I work. However, it will remove the theoretical possibility of criticism being levelled at me in the event that any party believes I have compromised my impartiality one way or the other.

Another outcome of the survey was that councillors think they will be freer to meet with stakeholders – be they developers or residents. How comfortable do you think the average councillor will be meeting with a property developer?

I think that they will be more comfortable. Speaking personally, I don’t have any difficulty meeting with developers that I already know - once there is an on-going and established working relationship. However, when I’m talking to developers I haven’t met before – I’ll still meet with them, but for peace of mind I will bring the ward councillor or another colleague to attend with me. I have seen developers on my own in the past, but it’s nice to have an element of personal security, to avoid any possible issues further down the line.

Tell me about your approach to meeting with residents, and how do their views play into the role that Planning Committee performs?

I meet with residents a lot. If talking about a major application, I will often go to the ‘leading’ stakeholder residents. These individuals are usually self-identified – the resident association officers, local school employees, medical practices, etc. Besides meeting residents myself, I also encourage developers to consult with residents directly, and at a very early stage. The last couple of developers I’ve had contact with have held open days for local residents to come and see their plans. This is before they’ve laid any solid plans down - and I strongly encourage this approach. I want them to get the residents involved early, as it almost always leads to a better outcome. It also makes my life as Development Control Chairman a lot easier, as neither myself nor the committee members are working for one side or the other. We are genuinely working for the benefit of the general community!

I also want to hear directly from residents about their concerns and often meet with them face-to-face. I make the planning process clear to them and will tell them about the part they can play in the consultation process. I also share with them my own experiences on similar applications – including the potential up and downsides to supporting or opposing a particular scheme. I can let a resident know whether in my opinion an application is likely to be approved or refused and on what basis.

If a resident asks me my own views, I usually tell them that there is a committee of 17 councillors that will debate the pros and cons, and that I will not commit myself to a position until I have heard their views. I would say the same thing to a developer. I’ve got to hear the view of my colleagues; however if residents (a clear majority of them) are supportive of a particular development it is likely that the committee will also take a positive view provided there are no flagrant breaches of planning policy.

Provided the residents are involved from an early stage, my experience is that you usually come up with something that is broadly acceptable to most residents. However, sometimes there is no agreement, and then you have to look only at planning policy. If it fits policy, and you have an appeal precedent somewhere else, you’ve got no option but to support the scheme (even if residents are against - although wherever possible residents should be advised of the reasons).

What was most surprising to you in terms of the research’s findings?

Broadly, the results didn’t surprise me as I’ve served on Bromley’s Planning Committee for a long while now. If anything, I was surprised that there is a significant contingent that is opposed to the prospect of change.

Why do you thinks some oppose councillors oppose this change?

They may feel that they have to make a decision one way or another before the committee. Previously, they could reserve judgement. Now they may feel placed under pressure to offer their support or opposition at an earlier stage.

How do you think planning officers are likely to react to the changes, if implemented?

I think it depends on the calibre of the planning officer. In Bromley we’re very fortunate: our officers are very good. By and large, I don’t think they will be concerned with pre-determination. I don’t think councillors will put them under any pressure to change their recommendations; they will continue to perform the same essential role in the same way.

Some of the policy is subjective (for example, development size, character, design or visual amenity), and officers can be open to different interpretations if the application is marginal. Good planning officers will always present their genuine views. If you have high calibre officers, they won’t allow themselves to be influenced by councillors, developers or any other third party.

When do you think the greatest impact will be felt – in the long, or short term?

The only changes you may see in the short term are that more councillors will be willing to put themselves forward for planning committees. When you assess a change like this, it’s got to be over a long term period – and it may be that there are unintended consequences. The draft National Planning Policy Framework is designed to reduce the number of guidelines and policy directives into a shorter but more flexible framework. The Localism Bill will come under the umbrella of this as yet untested legislation - so there are some unknowns about the future. My general view is that doing away with pre-determination will be a positive change for most planning committee members. However, I’ll reserve my final judgement until this new system has been in place for a few years!

What are your views on localism?

My view is that it should work well. However, I am always concerned that when you seek the views of local people, there can be a self-selection bias that distorts the reality of true local opinion. For example, the leader of a residents association may claim to speak on behalf of several thousand people, and present this as being ‘the local view’. It’s very difficult to know whether this is true without holding a wider consultation. A planning decision can affect tens of thousands of people, so it’s very important that you get it right! I want to see Localism done properly – with as many stakeholders as possible involved in the creation of Local Plans- and if this necessitates wider consultation than currently envisaged then so be it.

Pre determination - Ground-breaking survey launches

2011-09-23T09:11:00.000+01:00

Commissioned from leading market research consultancy ComRes, the Meeting Place Communications Pre-determination report is currently the industry’s only insight into the views of councillors directly and what effect they believe these changes will have, if indeed they are aware of them.

Our survey asked planning committee members from across England what they currently understand about predetermination, what they know about the changes and what effect they believe they will have.

The results – in particular the degree of confusion among members – were quite startling.

To find out more about the events or for a copy of the report email: vickiday@meetingplacecommunications.com or call us on 01225 422243

Enterprise Zones - time for an urban renaissance?

2011-07-22T16:12:00.000+01:00

On 23^rd March 2011, Chancellor George Osborne’s budget announced the location of 11 new Enterprise Zones in England, to be set-up in areas covered by the newly formed Local Enterprise Partnerships.

This formed part of the new Coalition Government’s commitment to rebalancing the regional economy and promoting new business and sustainable economic growth outside of the South East of England; however, the focus of the EZ framework, within which financial incentives and relaxed planning policies will promote creation of business and jobs, remains quite broad at this stage. The DCLG has set out broad guidelines for the size and broad economic aspirations of the EZs; however, it is not clear whether the zones, the exact location of which is to be decided between the relevant LEP and central government, will focus on enhancing economic growth in manufacturing and low-carbon industries around inter-city transport corridors, or whether they will focus on restabilising the role of Britain’s towns and cities in enhancing the growth of Britain’s burgeoning services sector.

On 7^th June this year, the West of England Local Enterprise Partnership announced that the Temple Quarter site, covering 70 hectares on a key urban gateway site in Bristol, had been named as a Local Enterprise Zone, setting a precedent for Urban Enterprise Zones; but will other LEPs follow suit?

Manufacturing remains at the heart of Britain’s economic growth, despite declining heavily throughout the latter 20^th century. Where Britain was once a hot-bed of coal mining, shipbuilding and steel production, it failed to adapt to changing world markets and demand for the British product declined and moved to the Far East. However, manufacturing still accounts for 26% of Britain’s GDP, despite the realisation that Britain will never reach the peak that it achieved at the turn of the 20^th century. Many UK towns and cities, whose heart and lifeblood was once heavy industry, have struggled to adapt in the wake of post-industrial decline and suffer from population out-migration and institutionalised unemployment. Some have seen a reprieve in the form of modern growth industries, such as motor manufacturing and service-based employment, such as call centres; however, in many cases employment clusters have shifted away from traditional centres and had a huge destabilising effect on urban cores. Manufacturing remains truly vital, with Britain currently showing strength in pharmaceuticals, aerospace, motor manufacturing and defence industries; however, the role of our urban centres in the continued development and growth of this sector is limited, with most concentrated around major transport hubs on vast sites which cannot be accommodated in urban areas. Despite this, the potential for towns and cities to accommodate services ancillary to these large industrial operations cannot be underestimated.

In September 2010, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg announced that the Government will explore the concept of Tax Increment Funding, a mechanism by which local authorities could borrow from the Treasury against resulting future increases in business rates from development, in an attempt to kick-start stalled comprehensive development schemes in urban areas. However, the timescale for its inception remains unclear. If Enterprise Zones were to be focussed on urban areas, it would present a real opportunity to re-establish the role of traditional centres, tap into existing transport infrastructure, swathes of brownfield land and existing population centres and combat the effects of out-migration and unemployment caused by a failure to act on post-industrial decline throughout the last third of the 20^th century. Furthermore, it would act to relieve the pressure on green belt and rebalance the regional demand for housing, taking pressure away from the South East in accommodating new homes to address the national housing deficit.

Furthermore, key to Britain’s economic success is establishing a cultural identity and enhancing the ‘wonder’ of its towns and cities, creating an environment in which people want to live, work and play, whether from home or abroad. A focus on Urban Enterprise Zones would have substantial economic benefits on ancillary retail and leisure industries and in cultivating what we have come to know as the ‘evening economy’, whereby those who live and work in a town or city will invariably spend their money nearby and enhance the overall economic activity of an area, breeding further investment and creating a pleasant urban environment and more attractive amenities. Tourism accounts for 8.6% of the UK’s economy, and key to the UK’s tourism offer is attractive and vibrant towns and cities; after all, you would struggle to find a tourist who travels to the UK to visit a pristinely landscaped business park off the A19.

It is time for an urban renaissance, which will re-establish Britain’s cultural identity and rebalance the regional economy, taking the strain away from the South East, which is bursting at its green seams. This is not to suggest that we should attempt to rekindle the industries that were once upon a time the ‘raison d’être’ for our provincial towns and cities, but reinvent and rebalance our regional economy, creating a sustainable urban environment which is conducive to economic growth and prosperity in services sector and other growth industries, cultivated by the public sector but shaped by the private sector.

Why the planning industry should say Yes! to Twitter

2011-07-12T13:14:00.002+01:00

Twitter has become an important tool for quickly communicating a message to a group of people. It is a useful micro-blog for quick updates containing limited number of characters and a great platform for keeping people informed what you are up without the need to craft an entire blog on a particular subject. As well as, an ideal way for social messaging with the ability to follow people and have followers to allow online engagement.

In the planning industry, twitter is an ideal way to engage with a wider audience and keeping people up to date on latest developments in the area. It is a perfect way to have an online consultation on a particular planning development, allowing people to provide feedback and engage with planning developers and planning consultants.

Micro-blogging is useful for planning developers and planning consultants, a quick tweet telling people what new schemes you are doing and what they entail provides a good base for news reporting.

Quick responses, allow people to ask all sorts of questions regarding traffic, parking, the number of dwellings a particular scheme will have. Twitter search feature can be a good way to track trends or keep up with a particular subject. It keeps people in the loop concerning the progress on planning applications or if public consultations or workshops will take place in the area. Twitter, is a useful way for people to track down news.

Twitter gives the ability for people to voice their opinions and find out what people really think. The localism bill which will hand power from central government to local councils and neighbourhoods, as part of the government’s ‘Big Society’ will give people a greater voice concerning planning developments in their area. Social media sites like Twitter, has the ability to find not only supporters, but ‘silent supporters’ for your scheme, people who feel comfortable participating online rather than facing outspoken people at public consultations.

Twitter, gives the chance for the planning industry to become involved with politics. Politicians and local councillors have increasingly turned to social media sites like twitter. This provides an excellent platform for the public, planning developers, planning consultants, politicians and local councillors to engage on one platform.

Keeping the lights on – is the debate about energy or proximity?

2011-06-02T13:39:00.000+01:00

Just days after renewable energy projects were under fire in Wales, Germany announces a plan to go nuclear free.

It has been widely reported that the protest taking place last Tuesday in front of the Senedd building in Cardiff Bay was the largest since the Assembly came into existence. The objection from the protestors was focused on electricity pylons, sub stations and wind turbines in the Mid Wales countryside. In particular they sought a change to the emphasis favouring wind power in TAN 8.

The politics of nuclear power has always been hot to handle and especially acute in Germany. Protests there following the Fukushima disaster have led to Angela Merkal’s centre-right Government announcing that the country will phase out all nuclear power generation by 2022. This will please the protestors but already concerns have been raised as to whether this will lead to a greater reliance on carbon emitting energy generation or over-reliance on imported power from neighbours, most notably the nuclear-friendly French. Should Germany seek to retain its current domestic energy production levels with new infrastructure, then that could see just the same clashes as the politicians of Wales experienced last week.

As much as the debate is focused on energy sources, subsidies or reliability often the protests come down to something far more simple – proximity. The people of Mid Wales see the wind farms as an industrialisation of their landscape: the argument appears not to be “no to wind turbines here” it is “no to major energy development here”. It is easy to understand the residents’ concerns, but at the same time we need to ask ourselves how are we going to keep feeding this energy hungry nation? Imports from abroad can be costly and often from dubious regimes. Generation in the UK is likely to be opposed by the people living near by.

The only way that politicians can hope to make the case for controversial energy projects is to bring people into the debate as to how we will power the country. Both wind turbines and nuclear power encourage some very emotive views. In Wales, those views have come to the fore in protest. In Germany, the decision made has pleased protestors, but may have just opened the door to a great deal more popular protest as alternative energy sources are explored.

Alternative Vote Referendum - What it means for British Politics

2011-04-15T10:09:00.000+01:00

The Alternative Vote (AV) referendum, scheduled to take place on May 5^th, has the potential to dramatically change the UK political landscape in coming years.

Drawn up as part of the Coalition Agreement, the referendum will ask voters a yes/no question on whether or not they are in favour of changing the system:

At present, the UK uses the “first past the post” system to elect MPs to the House of Commons. Should the “alternative vote” system be used instead?

The terms of the Coalition Agreement specify that the usual rules of cabinet collective responsibility are not applied to the referendum. As such the parliamentary Conservative (‘no’ camp) and Liberal Democrat (‘yes camp’) parties are campaigning on different sides (with some exceptions). The Labour Party leadership is campaigning in support of AV, although some 200 Labour MPs and Peers are campaigning for a ‘no’ vote. So too are Labour’s natural allies in the GMB and ASLEF trade unions.

The result of the referendum (determined by a simple majority opposed or in favour of the motion) will be legally binding on the government. A win for the ‘yes’ campaign will mean that AV is certain to be adopted at the next general election.

AV Explained

The UK Electoral Commission has produced concise and impartial explanation of the First Past the Post and Alternative Vote electoral systems:

AV: The Debate

Opposed to AV

AV will remove the principle of one person, one vote counted once.
AV is a discredited system used only by Australia, Papua New Guinea and Fiji (Fiji are planning to stop using AV and opinion polls in Australia show a majority of voters would prefer First Past the Post). 50 nations use First Past the Post for elections.
AV will lead to more hung parliaments and as a result programmes for Government being drawn up behind closed doors rather than manifestos which are voted on by the public.
Under AV the person finishing third after everybody’s first preference is counted could end up becoming the MP.
During the 20^th century, First Past The Post helped keep the UK stable while other nations were more politically volatile.
Either the drama of election night will be lost as a manual count will take a long time or the manual count will be replaced by expensive machinery to tally the votes.

In favour of AV

Making your MP seek 50% of the vote would make them work harder.
“Safe seats” would be less likely to occur removing the “job for life mentality” perceived in some MPs.
You will have a bigger say on who your MP is. If your first choice is not elected you still can have input into who gets elected.
AV is often used for selecting party leaders and in trade union ballots, so why not for Parliament?
At the last General Election, more than two thirds of MPs were elected without an overall majority of the votes in their constituency.
The way we elect MPs has continually evolved over the last 200 years; there’s no reason why it needs to remain exactly the same.

What is the expected turnout?

The ‘yes’ and ‘no’ camps are currently locked in a heated battle to secure majority support from the electorate. Voter turnout is likely to be a key factor in determining the result. Proponents of AV had worked to secure a referendum on the same day as elections to the Scottish parliament, Welsh assembly and many local English elections on the assumption that a higher turnout in the referendum would work in their favour in some of these areas. Conversely, some MPs were critical of the decision to hold the vote on May 5^th, arguing that it would artificially inflate turnout on an issue they did not perceive the electorate to consider important. Even so, since there is no minimum participation threshold required for a decisive result, the issue of turnout is likely to stir controversy, whatever the outcome of the vote.

What do the polls tell us?

At the time of writing, political polling on the issue does not yet provide clear insight as to the likely result on May 5^th. This is mainly due to there being a large proportion of voters (approximately one quarter) that are undecided on the matter. Voter turnout will also be crucial in determining the result. With English local elections rarely exceeding 35% turnout, the AV referendum is unlikely to fare much better in England, although it may be higher in Wales and Scotland where elections for the devolved parliaments are being held simultaneously. Both of these factors mean that polling on the subject is inconclusive at the present time.

However, what AV polling can and does show are trends. In recent weeks, a series of polls from Populus and YouGov point to the ‘yes’ campaign having lost the advantage it enjoyed in the latter half of 2010. These polls suggest that, especially when explanations of the systems are read to respondents, there are now more people opposing the motion than are in favour

. In its research, Populus asked half of respondents the bare referendum question, while the other half was prompted with descriptions of each electoral system before being asked to state their preference. That opposition to the motion becomes more entrenched once AV is defined may prove a bad omen for those in the ‘yes’ camp, as it suggests that the more citizens are told about AV, the more they tend to oppose it.

In the run up to May 5^th, the way in which the debate is framed in the media will therefore be critical, as a large tranche of undecided voters will be choosing if and how to vote.

Media Coverage

The AV referendum has attracted significant media coverage in recent weeks, with much attention focused on the activities of campaigners, and in particular, prominent MPs in each camp. With the Conservatives campaigning for a ‘no’ vote, David Cameron and much of the Tory front bench have been dispatched to oppose the motion, with frequent interviews frequently being given in newspapers and on the radio. Similar coverage has also been given to the Liberal Democrat proponents; the most prominent being Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister.

In addition to the coverage of the major political parties, a large number of celebrities have also become involved in each respective campaign. In favour of AV, notable personalities in favour include Colin Firth, Helena Bonham Carter, Greg Dyke and Stephen Fry. James Cracknell, Esther Rantzen, Darren Gough and Professor Robert Winston (Lord Winston) have campaigned against AV.

In early April, the ‘yes’ campaign received criticism for its decision to produce two versions of a leaflet it was distributing. In one version, used in London, the leaflet included the face of black poet Benjamin Zephaniah, who supports AV. However, in leaflets distributed to other parts of the country, Zephaniah had been airbrushed out and replaced with actor Tony Robinson.

Media coverage of respective campaign can be expected to intensify throughout April. However, it is likely that coverage will not be as readily absorbed by the public in the week before the vote, with many Britons taking holiday over the Bank Holiday weekend, or celebrating the Royal Wedding.

What would AV mean for the UK?

The likely impact of AV on the UK political landscape is disputed and will not become entirely clear until such a time as it is implemented. It has been suggested that AV will lead to more ‘hung’ parliaments, although this assertion is not always borne out in other countries (such as Australia) that already use the system. Neither is it clear whether AV would lead to more ‘proportional’ election results; again, with differing opinions put forward by each camp. In short, there is no clear answer as to how AV will affect the composition of the House of Commons. For this this reason, the debate has ostensibly been centred around which system more fair or practical.

The actual impact of AV on electoral outcomes will in any case depend on local conditions within constituencies. In the South West England for example, where the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives compete for seats, it might be expected that second preference votes among Lib Dem voters would be allocated to the Labour Party. Similarly, many first preference Labour voters might be expected select the Liberal Democrat candidate as their second preference. As such, a front-running Conservative that failed to win majority first preference support could easily be defeated through second and third preference votes. In other areas of the UK, with different combinations of party support, one might expect different outcomes. However, on a national level, there is circumstantial evidence to suggest that the Conservative Party would lose seats overall, at the expense of the Liberal Democrats.

To complicate matters further, the same bill that set the AV referendum in motion, the Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act (not yet law), has an additional constitutional aim. In addition to holding a referendum on AV, the bill proposes to reduce the current number of seats in the Commons by redrawing the boundaries of some constituencies; so that each is more equal by population size. The boundary changes, if implemented as proposed, are likely to help the Conservatives by reducing the overrepresentation of seats in the north of England and Wales. The bill is currently being passed through the legislature, but if it became law, would certainly create yet more speculation about changes in the UK political landscape.

In the short term, perhaps what is most interesting is potential for the outcome of the referendum to split the Coalition government. There are MPs in both of the coalition parties deeply uneasy about their alliance. At the time the Coalition Agreement was signed, many Conservative MPs were furious at having ceded the electoral reform issue to the Liberal Democrats. For some Lib Dem MPs, the prospect of electoral reform is a primary motivation for remaining in government with the Conservatives. Whatever the outcome on May 5^th, there will be MPs in either or both parties who may start hinting at an end to the Coalition.

MPC attends “Budget 2011: A plan for city growth?” event

2011-04-05T17:57:00.000+01:00

MPC recently attended an event hosted by the Centre for Cities, an independent, non-partisan research and policy institute committed to improving the economic performance of UK cities.

Entitled “Budget 2011: A plan for city growth?”, a panel chaired by James Crabtree of the Financial Times discussed the coalition government’s Budget, in terms of its impact on Britain’s cities. Responding, panellists Rt Hon Danny Alexander MP (Chief Secretary to the Treasury), Mike More (Chief Executive, Westminster City Council) and Alexandra Jones (Chief Executive, Centre for Cities) offered their views on how the Budget will affect Britain’s cities.

There was certainly a lot in Budget this year for those of us in the planning sector to ponder. MPC provides its analysis on some of the key points raised:

· Announced in the Budget are 21 new urban Enterprise Zones, designed to stimulate growth in urban areas that lag behind in terms of growth. Ten Local Enterprise Partnerships (in addition to one in London chosen by the Mayor) will be allowed to decide on a geographic area within their partnerships to locate an Enterprise Zone (ten further zones will be set up following a competition among other LEPs). Firms setting up business within the Zone will be able to take advantage of substantial discounts in business rates, while manufacturing businesses will have access to new super-fast broadband services. Crucially, the new Zones are to benefit from a simplified planning regime where applicants are not subject to the same bureaucratic hurdles as would normally apply.

o MPC Response: Discussion at the event raised an interesting point about how the simplified planning regime proposed for Enterprise Zones sits with the Coalition’s broader localism agenda. On the one hand, businesses are being given much greater freedom to determine the shape of development (local authorities will have less room to scrutinise plans), yet under localism it is communities that are meant to be given more say on development (think Neighbourhood Plans). In short, we may expect a very different flavour of localism within Enterprise Zones.

· Beyond Enterprise Zones, George Osborne also announced that there would be a new “presumption in favour” of planning applications for so-called “sustainable development”.

o MPC Response: If, as the Chancellor says, the default outcome for such applications will be affirmative, then where does localism fit in? Under localism, residents are meant to determine how development is progressed in their area (although not whether it occurs at all). A built-in presumption in favour of ‘sustainable’ planning applications may simply override the idea of Neighbourhood Planning as touted by the DCLG. This indicates how flexible the Treasury is when it comes to localism. Developers will, of course, wonder what is meant by sustainable.

· A theme that ran throughout the 2011 Budget was an effort to “re-balance” the economy, in which geography is identified as an important factor. Re-balancing economic growth across the

may seem like an obvious goal, but is it realistic? Responding to this provision in the Budget, Alexandra Jones raised some interesting points. While growth in London and the South East may recently have far outstripped that in other parts of the country, it does not have to be this way moving forward, she argued. It is reported, informally, that many business organisations choose to locate in London not only for its strategic location, but also because of a greater ‘certainty’ of outcome where planning and development are factors in their business models. Local authorities are more likely to approve planning applications in densely populated London than many other parts of the country. Objections by residents to applications are often less prolific within the capital. By ensuring greater certainty in the planning process across other high-potential cities, some firms may be prepared to locate (and develop) in these regions instead, helping to redress this ‘imbalance’ in the process.

o MPC Response: It is indeed greater certainty that developers and the wider business community would like to see in the planning process. MPC experience in recent months in fact points to less certainty, as some local authorities pause the advancement of Local Development Frameworks in the face of the announced dissolution of Regional Spatial Strategies. Without the certainty of RSS, some councils are now questioning the basis on which their Core Strategies are founded, and with it, those Strategic Development Locations (SDLs) that had previously been a cause for optimism among would-be developers. It remains to be seen when this sense of ‘certainty’ will return, and with it, a better chance of re-balancing growth in the way the Coalition would like to see.

· From a planning perspective, one of more eye-catching announcements in the Budget was the decision to pilot Land Auctions. Under the proposals, local government will be able to benefit from a purchase option on private land. Local authorities would receive a future right-to-buy assurance at an asking price set by the owner. The authority would then able to grant outline planning permission for the land, and subsequently auction it to a developer. In so doing, it is highly likely to profit from an increase in land value derived from the allocation of planning permission. Furthermore, this encourages development within the locale that is compatible with its Core Strategy.

o MPC Response: The government’s proposals are an interesting approach to promoting economic growth and provide greater certainty for developers. They also appear to be compatible with localism, since authorities will have more power to shape development within the framework of Neighbourhood Plans. The key will be if landowners are prepared to sell assets to local authorities at what may prove to be a below-market value. Our analysis, however, is that there will be a nationally varied uptake, with some areas embracing the auctions, and others shunning them. The auction approach is more likely to be rejected in areas where anti-development sentiment is high on the local agenda and Members prefer to play it safe.

o The changes, as proposed, will certainly mean a (potentially) more proactive role for local government in promoting and enabling development. Instead of councils simply reacting to planning applications received, they may now find themselves acting as speculators. This will put planning centre stage in some local authorities, where Members will be held more accountable for the land they themselves select for development.

Consultation on Glos County Cricket Club's plans this Feb

2011-02-07T19:46:00.000Z

MPC is working with Gloucestershire County Cricket Club and Linden Homes on their plans for development at the County Ground in Bristol.

After receiving a resolution to grant planning permission to expand their ground last year, Gloucestershire County Cricket Club has now decided to implement only one part of their planning application. For the foreseeable future they will not be building the stands adjacent to Kennington Avenue, resulting result in a capacity of circa 17,500, rather than the 20,000 originally envisaged, of which circa 7,500 will be permanent.

They have also reached an agreement with Linden Homes which will see the proposed student accommodation being replaced by a range of 1 and 2 bedroom apartments as there is no longer the demand for this accommodation. These new apartments will include underground parking. Linden Homes with GCCC will be submitting a full application for this in the spring.

These revised plans will the subject of a public exhibition held as follows:

Friday 11th February, 3.00 – 7.30pm
Saturday 12th February, 10.00am – 2.00pm
In the Grace Room, The County Ground, Nevil Road

Localism Seminars kick off (in a good way...)

2011-01-13T16:25:00.000Z

Several major housebuilders joined Meeting Place Communications at a localism round table discussion in Bristol. A presentation of the evolving planning policy was followed by comments from the local councillors from the region who attended. The discussion, which was led by Rob Peters of Turley Associates, focused on the differing ways in which localism was being interpreted by developers, councillors and council officers. There were mixed feelings about the effectiveness of the New Homes Bonus but unanimity on the need to engage widely with the business community and service providers near proposed new development.

Nick Webb of Meeting Place Communications said "There are different interpretations as to what localism will really mean and it is good to get together as a group and share experiences of how different local authorities are reacting to the evolving policy. What is clear is the need to engage effectively across the community."

Localism Bill unveiled

2010-12-13T17:22:00.000Z

Localism Bill – Local politicians free to engage with developers as predetermination swept aside

After much discussion, a fair amount of confusion and two court cases, today saw the publication of the Localism Bill which is billed as bringing power closer to the people, no least in matters of planning. Prior to publication there had been some policy coverage in the Sunday Telegraph where an interview with Planning and Decentralisation Minister Greg Clark. Clark prefaced the announcement by stating:

“We want to move away from a system with significant elements of imposition from above, to one with participation and involvement at its heart – not just warm words, or a commitment in principle, but real opportunities for people to have a say”.

The Localism Bill sets out a radical programme of shifting power from the centralised state to local communities. The Coalition Government has identified six essential actions required to deliver centralisation and the Localism Bill provides the legislative foundation for these actions.

Action 1 – “Lift the Burden of Bureaucracy”

· Regional strategies – The Localism Bill abolishes top-down regional targets, such as the Regional Spatial Strategies, in devour of local decision-making and introduces simpler, focused local plans to reflect a local area’s vision.

· The Standard Board – The Bill abolishes the Standards Board regime, allowing councils to come up with their own regimes to govern propriety and behaviour and empowering local people to hold their elected representatives to account.

· “Predetermination” rules – The Bill sees the end of the situation where councillors are prevented from acting on local issues because of the risk of challenge that they are biased.

Action 2 – “Empower communities to do things their way”

· General Power of Competence –The Localism Bill gives local authorities a General Power of Competence, allowing them to do anything which is not specifically prohibited by law. The intention is to free them up to innovate in response to local needs.

· Community right to buy – The Bill gives communities powers to save local assets threatened with closure, allowing them to bid for the ownership and management of such assets.

· Neighbourhood plans - The Bill will reform the planning system to give local people new rights to shape the development of the communities in which they live.

Action 3 – “Increase local control of public finance”

· Council Tax referendums – The Localism Bill will end the central imposition of Council Tax caps on local government. Local residents will instead be given the power of veto over excessive increase by requiring local authorities to hold a referendum on rate increases above a certain threshold.

· Business rate discounts – The Bill gives councils the power to grant a discount in business rates.

· Community Infrastructure Levy – The Bill requires local authorities to allocate a proportion of Community Infrastructure Levy revenues back to the neighbourhood from which it is raised. The intention is to allow those most directly affected by development to benefit from it.

Action 4 – “Diversify the supply of public services”

· Community right to challenge – The Localism Bill gives communities a right of challenge to run local authority services. This means that local communities will be able to get more involved in the delivery of public services, for example local bus services.

Action 5 – “Open up Government to public scrutiny”

· Transparency on pay – The Localism Bill places a requirement on local authorities to produce annual statements setting out their policy on the remuneration of their chief officers.

Action 6 – “Strengthen accountability to local people”

· Local referendums – The Localism Bill gives local residents the power to instigate, via a petition, local referendums on any local issue.

· Elected Mayors - The Bill includes measures to provide for directly elected mayors. 12 cities in England will have mayors from 2012, subject to local referendums.

What DCLG Ministers said

"The Localism Bill will herald a ground-breaking shift in power to councils and communities overturning decades of central government control and starting a new era of people power.

"It is the centrepiece of what this Government is trying to do to fundamentally shake up the balance of power in this country. For too long, everything has been controlled from the centre - and look where it's got us. Central government has kept local government on a tight leash, strangling the life out of councils in the belief that bureaucrats know best.

"By getting out of the way and letting councils and communities run their own affairs we can restore civic pride, democratic accountability and economic growth - and build a stronger, fairer Britain. It's the end of the era of big government: laying the foundations for the Big Society."

Eric Pickles

"This Bill will provide the enduring legislative foundation for a new, decentralised Britain, where power is returned to the people to which it belongs. We believe that communities should have the freedom to manage their own affairs in their way, and be empowered, not suppressed, by Government. The Bill will enact new rights allowing local people to shape and influence the places where they live, revolutionising the planning process by passing power down to those who know best about their neighbourhoods."

Greg Clark

"With housebuilding at its lowest peacetime level since 1924, the time is right for radical shake up of the entire system. The Bill will end top-down targets - in their place communities with the vision and drive to build more homes will be given the freedom to achieve their ambitions, and this will be backed up with powerful cash incentives for councils that allow new development in their area.

"With five million people languishing on social housing waiting lists, social housing is ripe for reform. Councils will now be able to manage social housing in a way that genuinely meets the needs of local people, and will be able to offer fixed tenancies that give people the helping hand they need, for as long as they need it."

Grant Shapps

Comprehensive Spending Review

2010-10-20T20:51:00.000+01:00

Billed as the toughest spending review since the end of the Second World War, George Osborne set out the government’s plans to save £81 billion. Included in the announcement was a reduction in housing benefit, a cut to the DCLG budget of 33% by 2015 and what appears to be the axing of CABE. However, a number of transport infrastructure projects have been given the green light to continue. Perhaps the most significant announcement from the planning point of view was that council funding would be cut by 28% over the next four years. Could this decision be the spark that is needed to generate some enthusiasm from councils to take advantage of the New Homes Bonus? Time will tell, but surely if local authorities remain unincentivised to approve development in this economic climate the New Homes Bonus will never achieve what the Secretary of State intends.

DCLG Budget

· 33% real term budget cut over spending review period (SRP)

· 7.1% annual cut in council budgets for four years

· £6.7bn in spending to be devolved to local GVT over SRP

· Capital spending to be reduced by 74% during SRP

· Ring fencing of Local Authority Grants ended

DCLG Policy

· Social housing reform promised as well as a pledge to build 150,000 affordable homes during the SRP

· Councils to get power over Housing Finance System

· Greater emphasis on sustainable growth and ability for councils to respond to needs of local communities.

· As stated in spending review: “New presumption in favour of sustainable development”.

· Pledge to reduce the regulatory burden on the house building industry over the SRP.

· Introduction of Tax Increment Finance powers to allow councils to fund key projects by borrowing against future increases in locally collected business rates.

· DCLG will no longer be funding CABE (Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment). As a sponsor body this appears to suggest CABE ceasing to exist.

· English Heritage Funding will be cut by almost a third which equates to £130 million over the next 13 years.

New Home Bonus Scheme

· It is hoped that the scheme “will directly reward and incentivise local authorities and local communities to be supportive of housing growth”.

· The New Home Bonus Scheme will be “equivalent to matching the additional council tax from every new home for each of the following six years”

Infrastructure Scheme

· £10 billion on road, regional and local transport schemes

· £14 billion for Network Rail

· £6 billion for London Underground maintenance

· Crossraill funding secured

· Mersey suspension bridge

· Tyne and Wear Metro upgrades

· Funding will be stopped for 7 waste PFI projects, saving £3 million by 2014-15 and more in the longer term

We are opening a new office in the South East

2010-09-28T14:00:00.000+01:00

The team at Meeting Place Communications is delighted to announce that we are opening a new South East office.

MPC has for some time worked across the UK, but the growth in number of clients and variety of schemes has resulted in the decision to open a second office. This will help us better serve our existing clients in the south east, and enable us to grow our work in this area.

The office will be led by my fellow Director Anna Sabine, and supported by new colleagues in Reading and by our existing Bath-based team.

Please email Anna for more information or phone our new office on 0118 949 7055.

Emerging Local Enterprise Partnerships

2010-08-31T10:55:00.001+01:00

Launched to replace the Regional Development Agencies of England, Local Enterprise Partnerships are beginning to take shape. When launched Communities Secretary Eric Pickles and Business Secretary Vince Cable called for the joint local authority bodies to tackle the issues surrounding planning, housing, local transport and infrastructure improvements. The proposals for the new L.E.P.s are due to be submitted on 6 September.

While the exact make up of these new bodies remains unconfirmed, a picture is emerging of what geographic form they will take. Many have simply opted to use the existing county boundaries. This is without doubt easier to pursue and less controversial, but it may not be the most appropriate economic area. For example the potential of a Thames Valley authority containing Reading, Swindon and Oxford appears to have very little support, despite these natural links being a good argument against dividing the area by the old regions. In some instances where one authority sought to form cross-county alliance they found a lack of support from the neighbouring authorities. According to the Local Government Chronicle this was the case for both Leicester and Peterborough, where in both instances it now looks likely that the proposals will be rather less radical.

Writing for the Local Government Chronicle Allister Hayman notes “In recent weeks it has become increasingly clear that in some regions councils are becoming engaged in increasingly fractious disputes about who they ought to partner with as they put together LEP proposals ahead of the 6 September deadline.”

Nick Webb of Meeting Place Communications commented: “It is interesting to see local authorities trying to define which of their neighbours they feel they have a strong economic bond with. For some, such as Greater Manchester, the geography for the LEP was obvious from day one. However, for the more rural settings there is a real risk that the LEP will be too small to punch its weight when it comes to fighting to bring new business and infrastructure improvements to the area”.

GWE Business West has published and update on progress on its website. It states the following are work in progress :

North East - 2 or 3 LEPs

· The prospect of a single regional LEP has faded after Tees Valley Unlimited decided to push ahead with its own proposal for a Teesside partnership, leaving the Tyne & Wear City region to either go alone or joining with Durham and Northumberland.

North West - 6 or 7 LEPS

· Cumbria

· Blackpool & Fylde Coast

· Central Lancashire

· Merseyside

· Pennine & Lancashire

· Greater Manchester

· Cheshire & Warrington

· Plus - the sub-regions are committed to retaining ‘some form’ of residual regional body to take on high level strategic functions and make the case for investment in the NW

Yorkshire & Humber - 4 LEPs

· Leeds City Region: has agreed to submit proposal based on existing geography (including three districts in north Yorkshire and York) rather than a West Yorkshire partnership as has been reported.

· North Yorkshire (York may choose to sit in both North Yorkshire and Leeds City region LEP*)

· Hull & Humber Ports

· Sheffield City Region (Barnsley will sit in both Leeds and Sheffield LEPs*)

· Plus - like the NW the LEPs may also create a residual regional body

West Midlands - 6 LEPs

· Greater Birmingham (Solihull has yet to decide whether to join this or Coventry

and Warwickshire, and may decide to sit in both)

· Black Country (Dudley, Sandwell, Walsall, Wolverhampton)

· Herefordshire, Shropshire and Telford & Wrekin

· Worcestershire

· Staffordshire with Stoke

· Coventry & Warwickshire (possibly including Solihull)

East Midlands - 3 LEPs

· Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire

· Leicestershire, Rutland and Northamptonshire

· Lincolnshire (also in discussions with North Lincolnshire and possibly Hull & Humber)

South West - 3+ LEPS

· Devon & Cornwall

· Greater Bristol

· Bournemouth Dorset & Poole

· Wiltshire and Gloucestershire in discussions, with a range of possible options

· Somerset not clear

Greater South East - 10+ LEPs

· Here things are most messy and uncertain, with county councils courting unitaries to form LEPs based on traditional county council boundaries. Cambridgeshire, for example, is courting Peterborough, but Peterborough wants to form its own LEP with its hinterland, which would include South Holland, Fenland, East Northamptonshire.

· The Partnership for Urban South Hampshire has submitted a bid, while Suffolk, Hertfordshire, and Surrey, are understood to be pursuing single county LEPs.

· Kent may form a LEP with Medway, Norfolk with Norwich, and East and West Sussex are expected to submit a LEP including Hastings and Brighton.

· Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire may join, perhaps with Slough, Reading, and other

unitaries. Milton Keynes, Bedford, Central Bedfordshire and Luton may also form a LEP.

Sources and recommended further reading:

GWE Business West

Local Government Chronicle

2010-08-23T12:36:00.001+01:00

40 leading developers and planning consultants attended a breakfast briefing in central Bristol, one of seven held around the UK, hosted by Meeting Place Communications to discuss the impact of the General Election result on the industry.

Ian Thorn, Director of Meeting Place Communications, gave an in-depth assessment of what the Conservative - Lib Dem coalition will mean for the industry. Simon Prescott, Partner at Barton Willmore, looked at the technical constraints of the new approach and Bristol City Council Leader Barbara Janke assessed the opportunities to deliver more pleasant and liveable developments while acting responsibly in ensuring adequate numbers of affordable housing is forthcoming.

There were questions from an audience which included housing developers, renewable energy developers, planners and transport specialists.

Permission granted for University Science Park

2010-08-23T12:35:00.002+01:00

Proposals for the University of Reading’s Science and Innovation Park at Shinfield have been approved.

The Science and Innovation Park will bring together innovative knowledge and technology-based companies from both the local and international business communities. It will create an environment that encourages the exchange of ideas and knowledge among the businesses based on the Park and across the wider Thames Valley region, as well as linking with research and enterprise activities at the University.

The successful planning application was the result of years of work on the project, including two exhibitions designed for the local community, run by Meeting Place Communications. MPC Director Anna Sabine said “We’re absolutely delighted to be involved with such a prestigious project and we look forward to seeing the scheme come to fruition.”

The University now has permission for Phase One of the project to devise 18,580 sqm of floorspace with associated shared facilities and services. The Science and Innovation Park will create both employment opportunities for a highly skilled workforce, working with the knowledge base and technical facilities in and around the University, as well as providing jobs for support and service staff.

Team MPC expands again

2010-08-23T12:35:00.000+01:00

Meeting Place Communications is delighted to have appointed Vicki Day as their Sales And Marketing Manager.

A new post, Vicki will be focusing on securing new business and managing all aspects of MPC’s marketing. With a background running a multi-million pound trading arm of a national charity, Vicki says “MPC is expanding fast and I hope that having someone dedicated to this area of this business will free up the team to focus on projects.”

MPC Director Ian Thorn said “Vicki is already proving a great asset to the company and we’re delighted to have her working with us.”

Leading on response to Conservative Green Paper

2010-08-23T12:34:00.000+01:00

MPC took the lead on responding to the latest Conservative Green Paper, issuing a briefing note to clients.

MPC is Rebuilding Britain!

2010-08-23T12:31:00.000+01:00

The public launch events for Rebuilding Britain have now concluded, having culminated in a London launch event with the Rt Hon John Gummer MP.

Rebuilding Britain: Some thoughts from critical friends, is a joint venture with Barton Willmore, and consists of articles from major industry figures on what they would like to see from an incoming government. The booklet is being launched at a series of events in Birmingham, Leeds, Bristol and London.

MPC Director Anna Sabine says “We’ve been delighted with the impact our publication has had, and plan to use it in the run up to the election to engage with key politicians. The planning world has been alarmed by some proposals emerging from political parties, but we felt it was really important the industry responded in a constructive way, which is what we, Barton Willmore, Crest, St Modwen and all the other contributors have done in this publication.”

MPC and Barton Willmore now plan to brief key national politicians and think tanks using the document, in the hope that the industry's collective voice will be heard in the next Government, whatever its political makeup.