36 C O N T E X T 9 9 : M A Y 2 0 0 7 controls tied to their designation, so that stakeholders, managers and regulators, as well as the environment, can more easily benefit from the kind of informed management their designation is intended to support. Regulations and research There are clear gaps between our knowledge of how best to manage existing places and properties, and the research and regulations underpinning that management. There is an opportunity to encourage more relevant research into the energy performance of traditional buildings, building processes and associated services. Arguments in favour of new build as opposed to reuse are often advanced on grounds of efficiencies.We all appreciate the value attached to embodied energy in existing buildings, alongside which the waste generated by their demolition further enhances the economic value of managing the resource, rather than disposing of it. With appropriate vision, the white paper can help support the creation of more empirical evidence to show the costs and benefits of various enhancements (from replacement buildings to replacements windows, boilers, insulation and so on). Recent research by the BRE into refurbishing Victorian and Edwardian terrace housing is showing the way, and defining the opportunities even with the current, and exceptionally imbalanced, markets. The environmental and financial benefits of, for example, a taxation system that supports proper management of our buildings and places should be a natural part of the thinking underpinning the white paper. We are convinced that this would support further the fiscal case for reuse, and complement the cultural and environmental cases. Targets and performance Barker is weak on the need for targets to be reformed. Legislative reform should be accompanied by reform of best value performance indicators for local authorities. There should be a shift of emphasis from speed and process to quality of outcomes. In particular, community engagement and the ability of the planning system to add value to development through constructive negotiation should not be compromised by a narrow focus on speed alone. The development industry does not want excluded communities of planners who are not willing to negotiate due to time constraints. National planning framework The IHBC would like to see provisions for a national planning framework, similar to that introduced in Scotland by the Planning etc Act 2006. Regrettably, this option is not supported by the Barker report. Global warming The IHBC takes the findings of the Stern report very seriously and hopes that this will provide the main foundation for changes to the planning system. Addressing global warming climate change should be a fundamental aim of the planning system. The planning white paper will be a crucial test of the government’s commitment to addressing global warming. The underlying theme of the white paper should be to deliver culture change in the private and public sectors, with an emphasis on practical solutions to address global warming. There should be a statutory duty on local authorities to consider the impact of development proposals on global warming. Land values Land values should not be a material planning consideration. This would undermine the system’s ability to balance competing social, economic and environmental interests. Major infrastructure The Eddington report suggests a threetier approach to major infrastructure projects. The IHBC accepts that this model may work in principle. However, it is essential that local communities be given an opportunity for meaningful participation in decisions at all levels. Indeed, failure properly to engage communities at an early stage is often a cause of delay at a later stage. While appreciating the importance of national benefits, it is essential that full weight be given to local social, economic and environmental factors in the consideration of major infrastructure proposals. Government policy on major infrastructure projects should make clear that harm to areas of built or natural heritage value should be avoided when considering options for major infrastructure projects. Planning gain supplement The IHBC considers the proposed planning gain supplement to be an anti-regeneration and anti-development proposal. It will prevent proper resources being allocated to provide essential infrastructure for development proposals. Especially in underperforming areas, it will act as a weight around the neck of developers. The IHBC is committed to the improvement and regeneration of under-performing areas, using design and heritage to help deliver public benefits. The institute deeply regrets that the government does not share this proactive and progressive approach. National planning policy The IHBC would like to see a shift in emphasis in planning policy to recognise regional variations. It is often impossible to develop detailed policy at national level. For example, PPS3 and the Housing and Planning Delivery Grant are designed for areas of high demand housing, but they are having a harmful impact in areas of over-supply, including some of the housing market renewal areas. It is essential that national policy be flexible enough to cater for regional and local conditions.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=