Flaws and Efficiencies in the Current System of Planning - Assignment Example

PART 1 Outline the flaws and efficiencies in the current system of planning and briefly summarise in your own words, the reasons given for change? According to me the current system of planning has got the following flaws : 1. The planning system that exists at present is pretty multifaceted and is not people friendly in nature: Current Planning has not been successful in engaging local people and communities and is certainly not people friendly. The National Planning Policy is generally burdensome and vague. The system of redressal of grievances through appeals is vague and a loss of valuable public time and also a loss of revenue to the exchequer. The decision-making process is very slow and moves at a snail’s pace. The system severely lacks Transparency. Plans are not seamless and many inconsistencies prevail at the national, regional, county and local levels and they are even contradictory with the national plans in some cases. The people manning the enforcement system in the current hierarchy have failed to act against willful offenders who circumvent the planning control. 2. The areas where the current system of Planning has shown its efficiency beyond words are summarized below: Planning has helped in preserving a lot of flaura& fauna and the best landscapes in a number of National Parks and has helped in keeping the natural beauty of many timeless creations intact. Many of the best-maintained buildings and townscapes owe their current status through listed building and conservation area control systems. The green Belts to an great degree have prevented urban disorder and according to a recent progress the policies on the re-use of Brownfield land have also promoted urban renaissance and the regeneration of town centres.(Planning Delivering a fundamental change; www.communities.gov.uk; P10 3.2) According to the ‘Planning Green Paper of 2001’ one gets an impression that vibes of change are in the air as the current system needed a serious introspection and over-hauling to expand the confidence of public in a good planning system. Winning over the public confidence also translates in to a exercise to again engage local communities and to make sure that they participate in the execution of local plans and also in the preservation and conservation of neighborhoods. There is also a urgent need to eradicate the administrative bottlenecks and to make the whole system much simpler much to the delight of the local populace. In order to encourage entrepreneurship and to make the life of local businessmen more comfortable there is a need for change in the planning process to usher in more transparency and accountability in the whole system for speedy disposal of applications. What is a ‘Plan Led’ system of development control? What proposals are put forward for reform of this system? ‘The meaning of plan-led system of development control is that if applications submitted for getting the planning approval are in conformity with the existing development plan, then they are in all likelihood to be given a green signal to go ahead unless there are important 'material considerations' that suggest otherwise. These might be, like, succeeding national policy statements that might supersede the plan or changes in local circumstance. In practical terms, these kind of material considerations very often do apply as the local plans are frequently out-of-date.’ (Planning Delivering a fundamental change; www.communities.gov.uk; P10 3.5) The following proposals have been put forward for reform of this system: The plan hierarchy should be simplified by reducing the number of tier and also by describing the relationships between them; A effective delivery mechanism should be generated of shorter, better focused, plans at the local community level that can be adopted and revised more rapidly; The local community should be engaged more closely and should play a bigger part in the process of plan preparation; and The system should be integrated with other local plans and strategies in a better manner. (Planning Delivering a fundamental change; www.communities.gov.uk; P12 4.2) A new single level Plan is proposed to replace existing requirements for structure plans, local plans and unitary development plans. What might this be known as and of what will it comprise? The new single level Plan would be known as a Local Development framework and will comprise of: It will set out a declaration of main policies putting in place the local authority's vision and plan to be applied in promoting and controlling development throughout its area; (Planning Delivering a fundamental change; www.communities.gov.uk; P14 4.8) It would also consist of a more comprehensive action plans for smaller local areas of change for e.g. town centers, urban extensions, and neighborhoods undergoing regeneration; (Planning Delivering a fundamental change; www.communities.gov.uk; P14 4.8) A map showing the areas of change for which action plans are to be prepared and existing designations, such as conservation areas would also be a part of it. (Planning Delivering a fundamental change; www.communities.gov.uk; P14 4.8) Do you think the proposal put forward will be effective? Give reasons for your answer. I think there can be 2 scenarios, if these proposals are just eyewash then they can never be effective and will fade away in some time. The proposals put forward would be effective only if they are integrated in to the system with a clear conscience by the authorities. Personally I feel that they can be effective. All the ills and loopholes present in the planning process lies at the local level. As often the local plans are outdated and not in conformity with the national planning policy. Planners should understand that planning at the local level is the most important link upon which rests the success and failure of the whole planning process. They fail to notice this fact and go about their business in a mechanical and insensitive manner because at this level the lives of people are touched in a real manner and that makes all the difference between a good and a bad plan at the community level. In present times the planning system is not simple and in some areas there are multi tier of plans. There are too many inconsistencies between the local plans and the national plans. Plans are very lengthy, serpentine like and unwieldy and inflexible and there is also considerable delay in preparation and execution of plans at the local level. Plans are not flexible enough to include changes that reflect the new policies or changing local flavors and circumstances. I feel that through the proposals put forward by the concerned authorities an attempt is being made to initiate a change for better and to eliminate the shortcomings of the current system of plans. As presented it seems that the new proposals put forward want to wipe out the malice out of the current dispensation and want to simplify the procedure for the common man, in turn increasing his faith on the system. I feel that the proposals if implemented thoroughly will deliver shorter better-focused plans, it can engage the local community more closely and improve integration with other local strategies and plans. These proposals can be like a genie and can grant the wishes to an already mute populace. They can be the mouthpiece of their aspirations and will give rise to public – government cooperation in a better manner. The current system will also have many advantages over the plan-led system of planning and in a nutshell it can be said that these proposals are just a beginning but in future will shape up the most effective form of local planning module. Outline important shortcomings with the current system of Building Control and briefly summarize in your own words, the reasons given for change? The important shortcomings with the current system of Building Control are as follows: At present there is a serious lack of direction pertaining to future of building control – and also there is no undisputed and clear vision of the future in terms of what exactly building control stands for and also what its not for, knowledge about the responsibilities and roles assigned to the different groups within it and how the system should run; (The Future of Building Control; www.communities.gov.uk/publication/planningandbuilding/future ; P8,P9 2.2) There is a lot of uncertainty around the edge between building control and other relevant regulatory regimes and a feeling is there that they often clash and duplicate instead of providing a clear end-to-end service over the whole life of a building; (The Future of Building Control; www.communities.gov.uk/publication/planningandbuilding/future ; P8,P9 2.2) Stakeholders feel that they are not consulted effectively on various matters and due to that their confidence has also been shaken, they also feel that their concerns should be properly addressed or that they have sufficient ability to influence the development of standards pertaining to building control. (The Future of Building Control; www.communities.gov.uk/publication/planningandbuilding/future ; P8,P9 2.2) A feeling prevails that the regulations are too complicated and can sometimes be conflicting – there is ample scope for simplification and to make them easier to comprehend and to reduce the burden associated with observance; (The Future of Building Control; www.communities.gov.uk/publication/planningandbuilding/future ; P8,P9 2.2) Regulations are changed very quickly and at too recurrent intervals and in the process never allowing sufficient time for industry to get used to or plan ahead effectively in time. There is a urgent need for a clearly planned programme of changes with clear short-term and interim targets and planned pauses; (The Future of Building Control; www.communities.gov.uk/publication/planningandbuilding/future ; P8,P9 2.2) Some parts of the regulations have a low compliance rate due to various factors but primarily a lack of understanding about what is required and the lack of means within the building control profession to inspect everything all the time; (The Future of Building Control; www.communities.gov.uk/publication/planningandbuilding/future ; P8,P9 2.2) Most regulations are very technical in nature and do not do enough to cater to the needs of different types of consumers. A variety of guidance is needed for different types of users and different types of jobs if compliance levels are to be taken on a higher level; (The Future of Building Control; www.communities.gov.uk/publication/planningandbuilding/future ; P8,P9 2.2) Enforcement mechanism could have been taken care of and the sanctions imposed are weak; (The Future of Building Control; www.communities.gov.uk/publication/planningandbuilding/future ; P8,P9 2.2) In Future the amount of resources will make realizing better levels of compliance and enforcement much harder to attain. The profession of building control is also aging and is not catching the attention of the recruits that it needs while at the same time rates of development are increasing and demanding greater capacity; (The Future of Building Control; www.communities.gov.uk/publication/planningandbuilding/future ; P8,P9 2.2) There is a requirement to further improve and adjust the performance management of the building control system, and putting in place the processes needed in order to enable effective review and evidence based decision-making. (The Future of Building Control; www.communities.gov.uk/publication/planningandbuilding/future ; P8,P9 2.2) In my opinion the system of building control that exists in the presently needs a change to ensure that buildings are safe, energy efficient and accessible for everyone who lives and works in and around them. The current system of building control demands a change to ensure that new buildings that are coming up are more environment friendly. Other than that people feel that there is no co-ordination between different regulatory bodies and there is no clarity over accountability. Adequate resources is also one big problem that needs redressal quickly with the Building Control Bodies that is leading to low levels of inspection and compliance. Serious offenders go scot free because of low level of resources with the building control bodies. There is an urgent need for computerisation and making the operations and offices paper free for better efficiency and cutting the cost of running things. There should be a system in place to assist the common man in understanding the technical jargon of approved documents. People from every single strata of society should not feel left out and there needs and aspirations should be taken care of in every planning. Operations should be made pacy to help the construction industry so that they can plan accordingly and make provision for any eventuality. There is an urgent need for trained and professional workforce in the building industry to cater to the future needs. What are the ‘options’ in the package? Do you think the proposal put forward will be effective? Give reasons for your answer. The following options are given in the package: A. The Future of Building Control through establishing the Strategy and Vision for Future Delivery B. Modernising the System by effective Risk Based Inspection and Enforcement C. New Routes to Compliance by minimising the Burden D. A Customer-Centric Approach should be followed by improving Guidance and Other Tools to Aid Individual Compliance E. Improving our Approach to Regulation through stability and Forward Planning F. Future Capacity and Performance Management (The Future of Building Control; www.communities.gov.uk/publication/planningandbuilding/future ; P11, 4.1) I think the proposals put forward would be quite effective if they are implemented in the right letter and spirit. The new building control document is defining and charts out a forward-looking policy. It takes a pragmatic approach and has serious feel to it. It is moving in the direction of modernizing the system and try to move with the times. The proposals also suggest some new compliance mechanism to lessen the burden on the already deplete resources. It shows that the system is taking an open-centric approach to things. Customer is the King that seems to be the mantra of the new system. Keeping the taxpayer happy is not such a bad idea. It ensures better involvement from the people and they don’t feel isolated and uncared for. To sum up the whole thing, the proposals look very forward-looking and on the face of it grab the necessary eyeballs and have grabbed sufficient attention to see the light of day. Read More