On Thursday 25th February Iceni attended a breakfast seminar, at the Tolworth Tower, on the development potential and planned areas of growth in the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames.

When I was at college in Oxford in the early to mid '90s, Headington was dominated by two landmarks - the polytechnic (which had a Doctor Who-style regeneration into Brookes University whilst I was there, and partially explains why an 8ft 'Oxford Polytechnic' sign ended up on the wall of my friends house one night*) and Oxford United's football ground - The Manor.

The Manor was an antiquated, but atmospheric place, and we used to stand behind one of the goals and watch Oxford mainly lose (unless it was the Cup, when they were capable of causing the odd upset). This didn't really bother the hardy fans, who were very good at amusing themselves. My favourite ditty was when the left hand side of the stand I was in sang to their right hand neighbours, 'we are the left side, we are the left side, we are the left side 'London Road!'  The repost was inevitably - and where I was standing - that we were indeed the right side  'London Road.  For a stand that held no more than about 1,000 people, it didn't strike me as crucial to differentiate oneself, but of course the camaraderie and banter was as much about togetherness as separation.

Which brings me in a convoluted, and some might say parochial, route to the proposed Lower Thames Crossing. Which is a bit like the current route to get anywhere east of say Port Tilbury to east of Gravesham.

You may remember that The Housing and Planning Bill (The Bill) laid before parliament in October 2015, proposed to introduce the concept of 'permission in principle' (PiP) on land allocated for development, and to give the Government significant new powers to intervene in the decision-taking and plan-making processes.

Summary

The London Land Commission has today published a database of “publicly owned land” that could be capable of delivering a minimum of 130,000 homes.

Bearing in mind the NPPF waxes lyrical about the presumption in favour of sustainable development, and the 'golden thread' of sustainability that runs through planning, it might appear crass to question what is meant by sustainable development. But I'll do it anyway.

Last year I was preparing for an appeal.  I was reading through various planning committee reports and reviewing the well meaning, but ad-hoc analysis undertaken by the respective planning officers.  They were inconsistent.  They were unsubstantiated.  They were absolutely open to scrutiny.  I looked at my own analysis.  I felt it was robust and capable of defence under cross-examination, but I was conscious that along with the planning inspector that would ultimately determine the appeal, all of the professional planners involved in the process would be applying their own interpretation to what is meant by the term sustainable development, and in turn, the presumption to be applied to the same. God help any members of the community looking on from the gallery.

One might initially say, so what? Well to my mind, it matters a great deal.  The NPPF sets out to increase the pace and volume of development, albeit with the laudable caveat that it should be the right kind of development - sustainable development.  The NPPF identifies the three strands of sustainable development - economic, social, and environmental, and references to these categories, and sustainable development in general, courses through the NPPF. But ultimately, it doesn't say what it is, or at what point (or level) the presumption is triggered.  Is it about carbon neutral development? Is it about being close to public transport? Can you be sustainable if you satisfy one of these credentials but not the other two?

Highways England has today launched a consultation on one of the most strategically important stretches of road in the UK. In developing the options for the Lower Thames Crossing the Government has dropped the previously identified option to provide a new crossing alongside the existing Dartford Crossing. Instead, Highways England is advancing a series of schemes that span from the east of Gravesham to Tilbury.

For the first time since the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework in March 2012, the Government is proposing changes to national planning policy through an updated NPPF. The publication of the Framework marked a watershed in the English planning system and the amendments mooted by Government are expected to have significant implications. Iceni Projects believes these changes could have far reaching implications for both our clients as well as our own day-to-day work as planning professionals operating at the coal face of the planning system. We are therefore making representations to Government on this matter.

Iceni Projects has successfully secured planning permission and listed building consent for the amalgamation of two Grade II listed properties in the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea (RBKC) following an appeal hearing in November 2015.

Central Government has launched a consultation (7 December) on potential changes to national planning policy, these changes are designed to improve the supply of new housing, particularly “affordable” housing and to provide easier access to family housing.