‘Planning for an Ageing Population’, RTPI The Planner Magazine, Dec 2014

A slight irony that a young planner writes about an ageing population for the RTPI’s magazine, but young planners are central to creating better places for the future and the diverse needs of older people forms a major part of this.

Here is a copy of the article below to have a gander.

“There is often talk in planning circles about addressing the housing shortage as a numbers issue. Demographic need can run in danger of being secondary to this dialogue, when it is intrinsically linked. We are all living longer, some leading more active and healthy lifestyles into our 80s and beyond, yet the homes we live in are not suitable or diverse enough to meet our needs later in life.

The scale of the problem is highlighted in the 2013 report ‘Top of the Ladder’ by Demos which indicates that just 2% of the UK’s housing stock can meet the needs of older people. The ‘construct’ that a person over 55 is presumed to require the old fashioned form of managed retirement housing is receding, and has to change at a faster pace to meet future needs.

The Government has recently made several policy announcements that may indicate change. In August, the Planning Minister Brandon Lewis said he was keen to see developers build more bungalows (The Telegraph). This could assist older people downsizing from their former home to free them up for families with children. Bungalows were previously thought of as footprint intensive and less profitable than conventional housing. Lifestyle changes and improved layouts mean this disparity has reduced, for instance not everyone over 55 requires a high maintenance garden or an excessive number of bedrooms.

Indications also point in favour of CIL changes, use classes separating retirement housing from conventional dwellings and care homes (Knight Frank 2013), or for Local Plans to require improved lifetime homes standards or proportions of homes for older people. All could be helpful collectively to address the issue.

With more active lifestyles not everyone will necessarily wish to live in potentially car-borne and isolated developments. Increasingly, housing for older people with communal facilities is establishing within or on the edge of our city and town centres. This provides added value to sustainable neighbourhoods and the desired housing   choice. Such development also recognises that more people are living alone and renting in the current generation which may inform long term needs for older people. Firms including UKR are pushing forward in this market with its pilot village concept in the Midlands.

Changes are also afoot among key housebuilders. This month Barratt Developments announced it will alter some of its housetypes for the over 55s, while retirement housing provider McCarthy & Stone will target the downsizer with its new Ortus Homes branded developments.

All cases indicate the situation is improving and there is a market for it, but it may require a mixture of policy and legislative incentives to genuinely plan for an ageing population.”

(CJesson, RTPI The Planner Magazine December 2014 p19).

East Midlands Young Planners Christmas Social, Nottingham – Wed 17 December

Please share among your colleagues if it may be of interest. RSVP me for the Council House tour by 12th December, either through the email address on the flyer or the contact me page of this website.

PDF version available below:

EM Young Planners Christmas Social 17 Dec 2014

We look forward to seeing you.

Designing and building inclusive play spaces

Hello,

I have been doing a bit of research recently into play areas and wanted to share some thoughts on how they can be made more inclusive, both by design and by functionality. Please read and enjoy the blog post and submit any comments if you have some.

–

While it is a legal requirement under the Equality Act (formerly DDA) and the Public Sector Equality Duty to construct play spaces that are accessible to all, there is more that can be achieved out of making a local play space inclusive. This requirement does not mean that play equipment will be less enjoyable to use, but because everyone can be a recipient there is so much more potential from disability compliant apparatus. There should be emphasis in making each item of equipment inclusive, rather than just new contraptions. That action only serves to maintain the divide between those who can and cannot use the play area, and therefore presents the provider back to the source of the problem rather than creating means to avoid it.

The Inclusive Play Good Practice Briefing states that disabled children and young people have the right to play and be included in their communities. The provider has the upmost duty to evaluate opinions made by local children and young people who have self-defined as disabled, as well as their parents or guardians to ensure they have been consulted and can feel proud to be a part of the development process.

Inclusion in play areas does not just consider disabled people; as part of the Equality Act 2010 it extends to all groups that have/are currently experiencing or have experienced disadvantage in the provision and quality of open space and facilities. With this in mind, consulting local community groups is vital so their representation and democracy rights are met. This has numerous benefits for the provider and installer of play facilities as it is indicative of their effort to include all in their work.

Criteria

For any area it is most important to consider the main principles of inclusive design, notably:

Diversity and difference: Catering for differences of personality, disability and culture. Good consultation methods are crucial.

Ease of use: Superior access to and within sites.

Freedom of choice and access to mainstream activities: Surveillance and help when needed and to those most vulnerable.

Quality: Matching or exceeding minimum standards. Being creative yet realistic at the design stage.

(Source: Inclusive Design for Play, KIDS and Department for Education, formerly DCSF)

HOW CAN PLAY SPACES BE IMPROVED TOWARDS INCLUSION?

Suggestions for sensory improvement – Items that compliment inclusive play equipment

To accomplish an inclusive play environment it would be helpful to take into account that the senses are vital for many disabled children and young people to interact with an open space. The guide ‘Inclusive Design: The principles in Practice’ encourages planting as a method of permeability to highlight routes around the space. In addition to this, children and young people may gain a sense of pride and enjoyment at having vegetation that contributes to the vibrancy of the play area. Most people appreciate the natural environment and like to touch, smell and in some conditions taste the surroundings. Planting can go some way towards meeting Inclusive Design principles of diversity and difference, quality and legibility/predictability.

Another item to consider is the request for enclosed areas, although we have to be careful here for reasons of privacy and segregation. This can still be achieved in many parks and play areas through partial enclosure. Items to consider include:

• How much of the site is covered by vegetation, including grass and lawns?
• How can existing vegetation be tailored to be more inclusive?
• Is the site well enclosed or is there scope for improvement in this respect?
• How much surveillance will the site need?
• What is the distance from the play area to other important amenities?
• Are routes to the play space sufficient for wheelchair users and people with mobility conditions?

Fencing is another item. Too much can create major access problems for disabled children and their families. Too little can heighten the risk of roaming animals. How far do we go to enclose play areas? Do we separate them into sections or look at partial enclosure as mentioned? As full enclosure can be considered excessive by the public, as well as limiting internal access routes, it would be more appropriate to look at the latter option. Fencing should still be particularly strong on the periphery to create a distinction between leisure space and other zones (residential, commercial etc).

Suggestion 2: Play apparatus

Thought must be given towards the use of tactile surfaces when considering different options for new inclusive play equipment. Also to factor in could be the following questions:

• What is the topography of the site?
• What surfaces are currently used?
• In what state of repair are the current surfaces?
• What equipment do local children and young people want in a play area?
• Can the desired equipment be adjusted for the purpose of inclusion?

A common misconception is that for play equipment to be inclusive, it must be toned down and would therefore be less successful as a recreational space. This does not have to be the case – considering that many surfaces and colours can be used to enhance the sensory experience of a play area, inclusive play spaces can actually be a more creative and original example of a play area. This suggestion complies with all six principles of Inclusive Design.

What may determine the success of an inclusive play space?

A number of factors are instrumental in achieving a good, well used play area. Most obvious is the proximity of a school which has significant weight on the number of children and young people using the play area for recreation. This is particularly the case if there are pupils disclosing a disability who rely on amenities close by due to a mobility condition or sensory impairment. Other factors include the size of the population around the site, and whether the play space has potential for use from residents outside the immediate boundary.

While it is important to ensure that apparatus and approach to the site is inclusive, careful consideration needs to be made towards potential obstructions in the way of users on their journey to the site. This also ties in with managing risk, itself another major component in the creation of new and refurbished play areas. A thriving leisure space will serve disabled chilren and young people well if the infrastructure is sufficient – dropped pavements, effective lighting and up to date signage in alternative formats are just three examples of how this can be achieved. The Play England guide ‘Managing Risk in Play Provision’ used an example in Wolverhampton of successful signage that encouraged children to read about the site as well as use it. It also provided good information to parents in the event of safety being compromised at the play area. What could be expanded here are the use of Braille and more details of the inclusive equipment. This does not mean that instructions have to be provided for each individual piece of apparatus, instead it clarifies to the user that the play area has been designed with the needs of disabled children and young people in mind.

I hope you have found this blog post insightful and interesting, please subscribe to the blog if you wish!

Thanks for looking,

Chris

The Big Society and Localism: My thoughts

The government is widely endorsing the Big Society and the localism agenda as key principles to drive their policies forward. I admire many aspects of this but cannot help thinking that it is very disjointed and the relationship to place has been woefully underestimated. I argue that the government has so far been missing some of the point, is not radical like it proclaims and has been far too unilateral with geography in the projects that support localism. Ultimately I state that localism and schemes initiated to deliver it have potential to leave people out spatially and that this has a far more detrimental impact on our society and planning, outweighing the importance of putting people at the heart of decisions that localism aims to meet.

 

What do I read localism to be?

It was true to form that I first became aware of localism upon the release of the Conservative Party’s green paper ‘open source planning’ but only began to take it more seriously when the coalition government was elected. Localism is conveyed as a radical change to sideswipe the centralised state and provide less barriers to ‘the people’, who in the government’s mind should be at the forefront of decision making. I read for localism to be one of the more powerful tools in exhibiting the government’s Big Society agenda, again a pinnacle of Conservative policy prior to the election as a coalition in May 2010. By encouraging civic pride and responsibility, it is envisaged that local people will feel empowered to make change in their areas.

My initial perceptions

I am quite an unusual character in that I am quite unforgiving and hostile to this government’s attitudes to the built environment and always have been. This is despite supporting some of their work in other sectors and initiatives. I am a strong proponent of regional planning and have been sad to see it lost without a chance to let it breathe. There has been widespread criticism of that particular framework but it was only implemented for a small number of years as part of sectors that are well known for a rhetoric of slow progress (see Barker and Killian Pretty, among others). So how can it be commented on with such distaste? It comes as little surprise that I am finding localism rather difficult to interpret, but am a personality that is open to reconstruction on this matter.

I show a somewhat mixed reaction, but must stress that not all of it is negative. It is all too easy to start pinpointing the opposing argument; exhibiting a bullish personality and a vanguard of emotion. But even with a subject such as localism I cannot bring myself to respond in this way. The majority of  government policy does actually have meaningful elements to it, reflecting the aspirations of their creator.  I have tried to underpin those values instead of taking the lazy route towards nitpicking.

Unease but hope

At the moment there is more unease to be displayed than joy to endorse localism, but this is because I am holding back, wanting to (and willing to) understand more about the subject and its objectives. I feel that localism has been a mass of buzzwords launched too early in advance before government has convened most of the substance together, and that is worrying. Indeed most of the uncertainty does not stem from the continual pattern of frontloading that is taking place that others might transpire to state as their concern, such as the rapid but thwarted abolishment of the regional tier and frontloading of local government spending reductions. I admire cutting to the chase, being specific and going ahead with what you stated you would do. But in order to represent true grit and determination, there needs to be some dialogue of what happens, how are conflicts going to be mitigated and a transparent framework to evaluate success. With the localism agenda I see little thought on this, and a constant drizzle of policy introductions. While I would like concrete, all I see is blancmange – that is at least until we have a proper breakdown of localism’s powers, which are slowly creeping in. I see the ideas born out of localism and the big society to have a poor spatial understanding, with policies that are too simplified. For example the New Homes Bonus, intended to incentivise house building in areas of demand, will work extremely well in the South East and other areas with housing pressures. But this will be woeful in places with negative take up, causing a funding shortfall for local authorities who will receive little merit from the Bonus. I would endorse that if Localism is to provide these kinds of measures, there needs to be multiple versions to specify not just who but where will benefit from them.

Radical? Not quite!

 I find localism to be less radical than previously thought – take the whole concept of ‘decentralisation’ for example. Under the new localism based principles local communities would have obligatory powers to produce their own neighbourhood development plan, but the housing numbers still have to either match or be higher than any previously proposed under regional planning or the local plan. We also have environmental directives to consider from Brussels, which we have little enforcement of. Therefore I would argue that true ‘pure’ localism cannot be achieved, instead an uneven patchwork quilt of civic responsibility will be encouraged across the country.

Civic responsibility is something I find a virtue here, albeit with caution

Civic responsibility is a fundamental feature of society that has in part been lost. I treasure attempts to bring some of this back into the wider rhetoric on the street and at the local level. However, the reality put into practice is that our lifestyles do not always arrange well to being responsible, supporting others and working for nothing. It is something I personally advocate, but know many personalities who would not work with the concept. Having said that, I can imagine that the element to embrace civic responsibility will work well in certain places, but will be severely dictated by geography. Places including rural areas that still have community spirit and diverse urban neighbourhoods such as student areas with higher levels of volunteering rates could benefit from localism principles and the big society. But in places that are comparatively deprived and facing similar budget reductions, or rural areas that have lost their soul to poor attitudes and wrong decisions, localism is bound to be a struggle. The big society motive may be better in these areas to rally people together as part of a wider social welfare remit, but it will be particularly weak when applied to planning. Big society and localism will no doubt fuel the power relations of whoever has the greatest stake, and the greatest influence on development proposals. With the advent of neighbourhood plans, this is likely to get larger as the prospect of developer funded plans may become a reality.

But there surely will be a  rise of the third sector even during times of restraint and potential austerity

Overall, I see much potential for the third sector, despite their own financial pressures brought on by questionable times, to experience a rise of take up or interest in their work from local people as a result of localism. This is inevitable, no matter what the variety of opinion is on the matter, and is accentuated if protest goes unheeded.  If the government acts on its ideologies and mobilised campaigns to protect the built environment fail, then in certain places people will have no choice but to join such organisations to try and make their areas work once again. Furthermore, the voluntary sector can be a means with which to represent a stronger unified voice to inform the government on best ways forward. I can increasingly see the third sector starting to lean on the side of pressure groups as a result of localism; their bargaining power increased but the eventual decision not necessarily as decentralised as first imagined.

 Thanks for looking,

Chris

This article is written from a personal perspective.

New developments for 2011

Dear all,

This is actually my first blog post of 2011, which is pretty shameful. But today is Autism Sunday and marks a good time to write a new blog post. Tthere have been many work developments during the tail end of 2010 that were part of a ‘restructure’. For example, while work in the student movement is still alive it is now more compact than it once was. Some of the earlier work had been inspiring roles with mostly excellent people and projects but I often misjudged the complexity of characters and structures I had to work with. The end of 2010 also represented a time whereby I was operating in a clique situation which is one of the more detestable frameworks to be part of for a person with Asperger Syndrome. I do however miss the work at the NUS Disabled Students’ Campaign which was accompanied to the other NUS roles and had to go with it. The restructure had nothing to do with the student protest movements occuring (unfortunately) at the same time, even though I had made it quite clear on some of the important advantageous (and disadvantageous) effects of that on the students  I was representing.

I firmly believe that representing students is still very important, but now possess a greater understanding of the most efficient avenues where success can be achieved for student welfare. I felt bizarrely drowned out of the wider concept of ‘who has the loudest voice’ for a short while, but now I am back and willing to be involved in more items. Incidentally, I took the choice of being a commuting student in autumn 2010 which was not one of lifes greatest decisions and both of these emotional drawbacks led to the restructure. Hopefully for 2011 I am back once again to develop new opportunities for students. I have started to engage with new extra-curricular society and built environment roles, including as a Parish Councillor from November 2010. Hopefully I can give balance to local issues and concerns and be pragmatic with solutions. I am no NIMBYist which can often (rightly) go attached with local representation. On a personal note I am quite a vociferous objector to the emerging localism agenda but if this is preferred locally to me then I am of course willing to endorse it. Expect a new blog article on the big society and localism principles very soon.

Recent work

Degree and work

Recently I have been busy completing coursework assignments on the National Infrastructure Plan, Local Area Action Planning and a Strategic Planning debate. I have also been completing the Green Space Strategy at work which is a great scheme to be given the opportunity to be involved in, especially for developing competencies of forward planning. It feels terribly odd to be finishing the degree this June, but exciting to be looking forward to the rest of the year. In terms of where I would like to be, transport planning or environmental planning is the most favourable but developments in the disability field since participating in voluntary activities has led me to consider this field in the future. The likes of the National Autistic Society and Equality and Human Rights Commission are always on the agenda.

Aspergers and Me

2011 is an important year as I finish my final year of the Masters in Urban Studies and Planning. It also marks a year where I will restart parts of my book, ‘Aspergers and Me’ to develop it into an exciting collection of major interest areas that form educational life. I am putting more attention into finishing it off this year but have always had no set end date for the book – it is something that has to be developed, not rushed. If you are a publisher that specialises in books on autism and Asperger Syndrome please contact me for more details. It would be excellent to discuss the book in person.

Aim Higher and National Autistic Society lecturing

In November 2010 I lectured on the “student and personal experience” the Postgraduate Certificate in Asperger Syndrome for the National Autistic Society/Sheffield Hallam University. This took place in Glasgow and I have been asked to do a third session in Nottingham in March 2011.

On January 28th, I spoke at the Action on Access Aim Higher National Forum, University of Greenwich. This was on the importance of the outgoing Aim Higher programme to disabled students to an audience mostly confined to disability practitioners in higher education. The session included a rountable discussion at the end and I gave suggestions to the audience as to how the more successful aspects of Aim Higher could be incorporated into a new rationalised framework, and the importance of student unions on the concept of “student experience”.

It is planned that I will be working on multiple projects during Autism Awareness Week. If you would like me to be involved in your organisation’s preparations please send a message via the contact page.

Thanks for looking.

Chris

AimHigher Nottinghamshire OMEGA Disability event, University of Nottingham July 6th 2010

Hello,

On the evening of Tuesday July 6th I was a guest speaker at the AimHigher Nottinghamshire Disability outreach event, entitled ‘OMEGA’. This was held at the University of Nottingham and aimed to provide inspiration to prospective students in secondary and further education that their additional support needs need not be a barrier to going further and reaching your potential.

Full details of my presentation, entitled ” Asperger Syndrome and Communication Difficulties: A Personal Perspective and why Higher Education is a possibility” can be found here: Nottingham AimHigher AS Presentation

Thanks for looking,

Chris

What will the Coalition Government mean for Town Planning?

The full coalition government document can be found here: http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/documents/digitalasset/dg_187876.pdf

Good evening,

Its my first post for a few days, but I delayed posting on the Coalition Government and town planning reform before more information became available as to how far such change would extend and who would be leading it. As a planning student, I attended the RTPi Yorkshire Annual Development Control Conference in York yesterday which provided an insight into some of the viewpoints in planning to the coalition government’s intentions. We now know that Eric Pickles will be Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, and a very vague responsibility of Planning policy for minister Greg Clark, and ‘planning’ for Bob Neill. Very inspiring.

In this post I will disect the main policy objectives for the planning system and note how I regard these changes. Initially though I will cover briefly the labour planning system. While there are many qualms about the system under the 13 year long previous Labour Government, I am also confident of the positives that era brought to planning reform.  Aspects of the Local Development Framework (LDF) process have worked, notably in the arenas of sustainability and economic development. Planning Policy Statements have been updated accordingly, some written without conviction but generally appreciating a modern spatial planning vision in line with the Royal Town Planning Institute, academic sources, local government and recommendations from NGOs being unsuccessfulTown Planning. Lets also note the importance of the Barker Reviews (Housing 2004 and Land Use Planning 2006) and the Killian-Pretty Review (2008) in facilitating improvements to economic development and the development control process respectively. While not a labour supporter on all issues I take allegiance to them on the built environment. I think they brought in sufficient reform and there was consensus in 1997 that planning applications were taking too long to process; by 2001/02 improvements started to emerge and now authorities generally reach a 75-80% target for meeting applications within 8 weeks. Yes, the Killian-Pretty Review outlined difficulties in the process (many) and yes, there may be funding/other implications to not meeting the given deadline but there needs to be that kind of an ‘incentive’ (almost) to ensure efficient procedures here. The list of suggestions by Barker and Killian/Pretty would be far longer if they had been commissioned in 1997 to look at improving the system.

And now for the proposed coalition changes:

The government says it will create Local Housing Trusts to develop ‘homes for local people’ where there is strong community backing (no more than 10% opposition in a local referendum.

Verdict: Nonsense, because there is an extremely high doubt over the definition of “local people”. It will be ‘local people’ that will be in the majority that dislike affordable housing, unless it is for their own benefit or family arena. Local Housing Trusts will have the ability to approve housing of most given types, I can just see a further prevalence of large housing in affluent areas enforcing affordable homes to the ‘pathetic end’ of housing sites in urban areas.

• It also states that all affordale housing delivered will qualify for a council tax incentive scheme with every new built affordable home earning the local authority 125% of council tax raised by that unit, for 6 years.

Verdict: Acceptable in principle, funding process required for the incentive. How would this work with the Local Housing Trusts system?

• The Local Planning Authority will lose the right to decide applications in respect of new schools. Planning applications to build new schools will be assessed by short planning inquiries followed by the decision by the Secretary of State for Education.

Verdict: Approve. We need better planned allocation of education places and new schools. Planning applications for schools should still be dealt taking note of the Local Planning Authority being a major material consideration. 

• An end to re-writing of Development Planning Documents (DPDs) that include the Core Strategy, Adopted Proposals Map etc by inspectors on independent examination. So long as they comply with national policy, developed fairly, and are equitable to neighbouring communities, they will be approved.

Verdict: Against. There have often been valid reasons to rewrite DPDs on the basis of soundness. They are being rewritten because of an unsound process; non-compliance with a policy, unfairly developed or because they are not equitable to neighbouring communities!

• If new local plans have not been completed within a prescribed period, a presumption in favour of sustainable development will automatically apply,  in accordance with national policy, making applications acceptable in line with this.

Verdict: Mostly agreed with but can understand the contentions. The speed of development plans has long been disputed. Most Local Development Frameworks have still not been finalised 6 years after the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 necessitated on their creation.  I can see problems in the appeal and planning law process with the principle of turning to national policy if the local authority meets the deadline. Using national objectives will obviously not specify planning to local issues and it may enforce the local planning authority to get their act together. But authorities in return will want the government to free up the system to allow them to do that.

• We will abolish the unelected Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC)

Verdict: disagree. I think we needed a separate (yes centralised) body that dealt with the more major applications for the likes of power generation, airports, roads and so forth. It would be wrong to turn this case backwards now and would clog up the workload of local authorities. We do not want a situation where the major applications, representing a minute proportion of planning applications crowd out the smaller applications that equally matter, especially when public service resources may be cut further.

Regional Planning

• Rapidly abolish Regional Spatial Strategies and Regional Development Agencies.

Verdict: Fair enough. Labour has taken hold of more councils than it hoped but generally most are Conservative controlled and this works in their favour. I have long been dubious about Regional Spatial Strategies particularly for housing allocation, but do not mind Regional Development Agencies

• More right to neighbourhoods to shape the places they live in.

Verdict: Incredibly dangerous. From an equal opportunities perspective this is worrying. We need a continuation of integrated planning, not giving those who are the loudest the power the judge.

• We will publish a consolidated national planning framework covering all forms of development. Planning Policy Statements will be slimmed back to one statement and guidance notes on each individual characteristic.

Verdict: I agree. I very much agree that we need a consolidated national planning framework, but I am slightly unsteady on the cutback of PPS’s – how long will that take and will there be any ambiguities in the transition period?

• Abolish the government office for London.

Verdict: I approve. This is a whirlwind subject and London should not warrant a separate identity. It already has much going for itself in the built environment to define itself from other areas.

• We will cut local government inspections and abolish the Comprehensive Area Assessment.

Verdict: disagree in the short term, prospects possible in the long term. I understand that the past government has been very target driven, planning included but given major shortfalls in certain cases (social care, fraud cases etc) I see no reason at the moment why we should scrap CAA.

• We will promote ‘home on the farm’ schemes that promote the conversion of farm buildings to affordable housing.

Verdict: Utterly impractical. This would go against strict local policies on development in the countryside, and would be an unsustainable location for affordable housing.

The full coalition government document can be found here: http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/documents/digitalasset/dg_187876.pdf

Nothing set in stone: The aspirations of creating quality play areas

 

Good morning,

I write to you this morning from my peaceful abode to voice out about a recently opened new ‘play area’ in Millfields, Sunderland (above) and more generally, the relative importance of having a well designed facility in your neighbourhood.

I work in the same Playbuilder (or as documented in the articles Play Pathfinder) investment programme at a different Local Authority, rejuvenating existing play spaces and providing new ones with guidance from Play England. Some of the work I have been involved is to create ‘design plans’ for each play area to send off to contractors and to process the consultation for each site with local schools and community groups. I also assessed deprivation indexes to the local area to make sure that wards with a distinct lack of amenities were being effectively listened to.

What should a play area represent?

Modern play areas are a lot more difficult to cater for everyone’s needs – indeed in past eras it was all too simple to add a generic collection of slides, swings, see-saws and roundabouts without thinking of local consultation properly. Play areas now require a vibrancy, originality and constructive thought to attract the immediate community (even that is more difficult now because the over 60s want play areas too!); each site must answer the question “what makes this play area better and different as the one down the road?” effectively for it to succeed. We also face the added chapter of ruthless health and safety procedures, and the growing principles of inclusive play equipment and funding regimes. Crucially, local schoolchildren can pinpoint the given needs of an area and suggest something different to what the authority had in mind for the area. Some of the request I have received have been pretty wild, notably a swimming pool, tree houses, and even a horse racecourse. Worryingly, in August 2009 a colleague came across a consultation form with a request for a brothel – somehow I don’t think that one will be given the nod. At the end of the day this job is to invest in a programme that encourages safer, healthier communities whereby the amenity open space is central to livelihoods. Play areas should not be about neglect; instead they should represent creativity. In planning, I am consistently aggrieved when play areas and open spaces are shifted to one side or corner of new housing developments – with the freedom to build an entirely new estate there should be no reason to consider such provision down the pecking order, it should be centralised as a focal point near the shops and services, with the route networks radiating outwards.

What does this play area represent?

The first thing you might think me to say in answer to this question is nothing. The second thing you may consider is concrete. But that is quintessentially the problem with the whole consultation process in planning and the built environment – nothing is ever concrete because the aspirations of individuals will not always be matched; some will be but at the opposite interest of others; some suggest wild ideas (above) that cannot be achieved while other ideas are consistently boring and generic. The play area in Sunderland, while horrific at face value, appears to be a classic case of communication breakdown. But that goes against the view that the public wanted a change of material from wood to concrete. Either way, the photograph above embodies the lack of imagination in creating a successful play area – instead the children will be on and off the site in five minutes not knowing what to do next. After all, there is only so much thought you can conjure up about a concrete  block…

A key weakness in this play site is that it does not take advantage of colour and topography (everything is on flat land, and artificial mounds, tunnels etc could have been constructed on this budget). Play areas should be just as much about a colourful ‘break’ in the street scene, a bit like a park would be. The millfields site looks very similar to the dreadfully poor rendition of a designer amenity open space once shown in Fryston, Castleford (Channel 4: Kevin McCloud’s big Town Plan).

Summary

• In the case of new housing developments large enough for a new amenity space, play areas should be centralised to the residential area as a focal point – peripheral play areas do not work in new neighbourhoods due to geographical extradition.
• In existing play areas careful thought of the local catchment is preferred – make use of local schools and community groups in your goal of reaching out to people. Give the play space weight to be important in local provisions.
• Play areas should represent colour and vitality, different surfaces and zones to direct people to a given part of the area – encourage routes and paths for local children to follow and be inspired in remembering them.
• Equipment should be inclusive and taken on a case by case basis, not applied to each and every play area in a monotonous fashion. The same type of apparatus in every play area is generally unimaginative.
• Play areas are graded by Play England by the size of the space and the number of potential people it may serve. This is a correct strategy to follow.
• Best practice is essential, along with creative contractors with the knowhow to be flexible to your requirements.

For more information about the Millfields play area please visit the following:

The Daily Telegraph

http://wwhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/7676678/Councils-70000-playground-is-a-pile-of-concrete-blocks.html

The Daily Mail

w.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1272740/Family-fury-Sunderland-council-spends-70-000-deathtrap-playground.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

The Sunderland Echo

http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/New-70000-play-park-branded.6273172.jp

BBC article “Lincolnshire Wind Farm rejected to help autistic boys” 27th April 2010

It was particularly strange and coincidental that this article cropped up on BBC News after I had attended a degree seminar on the role of power, justice and information in the Town and Country Planning process. The article also covers autism, and I have many connections to this being on the spectrum itself.

What is the planning system supposed to achieve? The background that should be used for all cases, this included:

The Planning system of England and the devolved nations has been outlined in the Killian Pretty Review to be fair, proportionate, customer-focussed and transparent. It is not always so and there are a number of (thankfully) minority cases like recent prosecutions and corruption at Doncaster Council. Planners are supposed to mediate between the conflicting interests of the market and the general public. It involves the power of politics, descending down from a rather target driven central government and the regional tier, to the power of business and economic development.

The system aims to do its best to calculate an optimum solution (strategic decision making) in meeting policy criteria on the likes of housing demand, regeneration, economic and sustainable development, transport and preserving the historic environment. It should make decisions that give people enough say in the consultation process and for that to make a difference, providing that say is reasonable. Resulting from this (hopefully) is a modest amount of social justice because community needs have been met or a development has been altered in favour of those needs. There is a long running argument that planning does not favour the needs of the public when it comes to the appeal or inquiry process, instead preferring evidenced consultancy based representation.

The context of wind power

Onshore windfarms are a classic case of community opposition and power versus planning delivery of government targets. But the UK has the highest availability of windspeeds in Europe, and Lincolnshire is one of the prime target areas for sustained renewable energy growth. The county already has a substantial proportion of England’s onshore wind sites, and further development off the East Coast. I live near the site of a proposed windfarm that was rejected for planning permission and dismissed on appeal – it certainly is a contentious issue. I am personally very much in favour of onshore and offshore wind although I appreciate that disadvantages of the former are well marked. In my local application, there was strong opposition on the grounds of noise which is simply unacceptable given the proximity of the A1 trunk road to the settlements.

What are my views on this particular planning decision?

In this case at Burton on Stather it appears there is an additional personal framework to consider – the livelihood of the Glathorne family. This appears to be a complex case because there is already a wind farm in the vicinity of the family’s home, and that would have no doubt necessitated the application for a second renewable development. The article does not refer to other objections which means I cannot really comment on that side of the decision made, however it does state that the Planning Inspector dismissed the appeal solely on the basis further wind farm expansion constitutes as injustice towards the family.

A distinguishing characteristic of autism can be of intense personal interest in a topic, subject, hobby, routine, object and so forth. I must state however that this is not a behavioural feature in all autistic people.  The children here had an intense satisfaction in spinning objects and a wind farm is likely to be a major aggravator towards this behaviour.

I consider this decision to be wholly acceptable in the planning profession although it could be likely that some planning inspectors would be prepared to accept the appealed wind farm development rather than rejecting it because the wind farm is in an appropriate area for wind power where there is already such a land use and that they constitute environmental benefits to outweigh the disadvantages.

The inspector John Braithwaite acted in a very sequential way in the appropriate method of working to come to his decision that the personal effects on the Glathorne family was a contravention of Local Plan policy DS21 which says permission will be granted for renewable energy development providing that any detrimental effect on features, including local character and amenity is outweighed by environmental/economic benefits (including acknowledged features). Clearly Mr Braithwaite considered that the wind farm would be a detrimental effect on such features and I tend to agree because the Glathorne family turned out to be a major acknowledged feature of the appeal procedure.

Here the livelihood of the family was likely to be compromised beyond repair if the Grange wind farm was to be constructed. The decision represents a major victory for planning in the public interest, which all too often is crowded out except in the adoption of conditions on development. The inspector considered the case of morals, social justice, welfare and residential amenity in this application and I do have tendencies to accept that the site would have gone through had it not been for the representation of the Glathornes. With the wording of the article it seems that the family has lived at their dwelling for considerably longer than the wind farms. I do however have a slight concern about this case setting precedent for the future because the family was unclear as to the effect of the original Bagmoor wind farm (from reading the planning appeal) and this raises questions about the legibility of planning information. Were they misinformed or was planning complying correctly with Bagmoor? Was the family fully aware of the children’s tendencies even after diagnosis? The answer to the latter is probably not, as these characteristics can develop differently over time.

The Planning Inspector’s report can be found here:NLincs Wind Farm Appeal Decision

Original BBC News article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/humber/8646326.stm

RTPi Manifesto for Planning – Can somebody tell me what is new?

Hello all,

After printing it off at work yesterday and getting the chance to read through it this afternoon on the train from London, I thought I’d give a review on the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPi) Manifesto for Planning. This has been produced particularly with the forthcoming General Election in mind (May 6th) to reaffirm the RTPi’s stance and values as to how the current system is working and the direction they would prefer to see it take.

I read with bemusement come page 14 (the final page) that the manifesto was not inherently radical – instead it appeared to be a basic and hastily defined set of values that we already came to expect from the RTPi.

It went on to suggest that the planning system should not have any radical changes because this would cause ill feeling and uncertainty at local planning authorities who are barely getting to grips with the process of Local Development Frameworks (LDFs), incidentally anow 6 years old. But further down the manifesto it was suggested that LDFs were not the way forward and a slow process of implementing local planning. But in order to solve those frailties, I personally think a radical overhaul would again be needed and that would then constitute a contradiction to the RTPi’s values. The rest of the document was very much part and parcel of what we already knew the RTPi stood for, but I suppose the Institute was very strenuous to advocate that those values and objectives still very much exist strongly.

Thanks for looking

Chris