For housing wonks/
Will Upton pointed me to the Greater Norwich Inspectors report which found in favour of the Liverpool method. That was a special case in that it was a partially remitted plan and the rest of the area used (pre NPPF) the Liverpool method. I have previously blogged on here that taken nationally the Sedgefield approach is impractical as the numbers quickly go exponential meaning you might as well do away with plans and strategic allocations as you would always be allowing piecemeal development.
I think the South Glocs decision is much more definitive paras. 95 onwards. As the inspector said ‘There is no indication in the NPPF, however, that one method is preferable to the other.’ and simply and wisely went on what was practical.
First time I have seen a proper terms of reference.
From the Shadow Chancellors Speech today
‘at our conference in September, Ed Miliband set out our commitment to build at least 200,000 new homes a year by 2020 – through a roadmap to support the private sector in building more homes, including more affordable homes, and a planning system that helps, not hinders, house-building.
In setting out our ambition, we have asked Sir Michael Lyons to lead a new housing commission to advise us on what needs to be done to achieve our goal.
The Independent Lyons commission will look at:
• How we can get much more residential land to market;
• What flexibilities could be granted to local authorities to they can build more affordable homes;
• How we can ensure that communities that want to expand but do not have the land on which to grant planning permission can do so;
• Whether the current planning gain system is fit for purpose;
• And whether land made available for development is being land-banked in a damaging way and how this can be prevented.
We will certainly want to hear your views on all of these issues.’