2022美国代写指导英国essay
propertyweekPlanningThe housing crisis has dominated the planningdebate in recent years and on the whole,commercial developers have been largelysilent. But dramatic changes to the planning systemthat have been made since the government cameto power have important implications for theindustrial sector. When the appetite for industrialunits returns, many developers will find the planninggoalposts have moved a considerable distance.Local authorities will become more powerfulwhen it comes to making development decisionsand opinions differ on whether a proposedincentives system to encourage development willresult in a smoother planning process. Work on anational planning framework and revisions to localplans will also soon gather pace, and this will provideopportunities, but also challenges, for stakeholdersin the industrial sector.Gazeley UK managing director Nigel Godfreysums up the situation: “Planning is the fundamentalobstacle that has to be overcome for land to haveany development potential. It’s the first thing welook at when considering a site. There is a surprisingamount of naivety surrounding this.”The key question for all developers now is whethera planning system can be devised that successfullyconsiders the negative impacts of developmentlocally against the positives at a regional andnational level.So far, the answer to this question is far fromcertain. Regional plans used to make the case forstrategically important development, includingemployment uses. These have already beenabolished, and a replacement framework is yetto be announced.Prologis UK managing director Andy Griffithssays: “The government is intent on changingthe planning system, which creates uncertaintyand a lack of clarity for us. We spent a lot of timeengaging with the planning process at a regionallevel. If that disappears, it is potentially problematic.”Griffiths remains hopeful that the work done tocreate regional plans will not be wasted, and thatconsideration of issues above the local level willremain in place.“The evidence base that backed up the regionalplans is still valid,” he says. “It’s just that we don’tknow how it’s going to be applied. The natureof our product means it will have some kindof regional impact, so should be consideredin a regional context.”Positive signsThe need to consider some applications in aregional context informs a typical fear amongmany developers — that returning power to alocal level risks losing sight of the wider positivebenefits of development.Some developers are positive about the proposedchanges. Evander Properties managing directorJeremy Greenland argues that local authorities havebeen hamstrung by regional planning policies andshould benefit from increased freedoms. “It might#p#分页标题#e#make life easier if local authorities are autonomousand don’t have to defer to anyone,” he says.There are other positive signs as well. MindfulSHEDS16 24|09|109 Developers are fearful that a localist planning policy willallow nimbys to give shed development the thumbs-down.Mark Wilding reports. Illustration by Noma Barlocaldiscordpropertyweek.comSHEDS24|09|10 17Planningof the need to encourage local authorities to acceptdevelopment, the government has proposed anincentive scheme to provide financial rewards tocouncils that grant permission for both residentialand commercial uses that then go on to be built.In principle the government has agreed to matchfund business rates on new development for sixyears. However, details of the scheme are not dueto emerge until after October’s spending review.Doubts also remain about whether the incentivewill be enough to overcome the political implicationsof approving unwelcome development schemes.CB Richard Ellis head of national planning IanAnderson says: “You could argue it will get easierto secure planning permission, because councilswill be motivated by money. But at the other endof the spectrum you will have increasing nimbyismfrom people who quite often don’t want industrialor commercial development” (box, overleaf).Abolition of regional plans will have an impacton the “big box” developers whose projects haveregional or even national significance. But it is notjust the likes of Prologis and Gazeley who are likelyto be affected by the changes. Until now, planninghas worked on a cascading basis, whereby local plansare dictated by regional and national policies. Manyare local authorities who had made good progresswith local plans under the old system now look likelyto take this opportunity to revise these documents —a process that may involve a reassessment ofemployment land sites. Anderson argues thatdevelopers of all sizes would be well placed totake a keen interest in this process.“Councils will be carrying out employmentPlanning is thefundamental obstaclethat must be overcomefor land to have anydevelopment potentialNigel Godfrey, Gazeley UK››18 24|09|10 propertyweek.comSHEDS Planningland assessments that anyone who hasan active interest in development really shouldbe focusing on,” he says. “It is vital that thosewith an interest in development get in earlyto engage with local authorities.”Some areas have seen a quick reaction toplanning changes from those eager to ensure thatthe environment for industrial investment remains#p#分页标题#e#指导essay，英国essay指导positive. In Bristol, a city that has establisheditself as the main distribution hub for the southwest,it is not developers but industrial agentswho have taken the lead.Bristol City Council is in the process of revisingits local plan. The city’s Industrial Agents Society,concerned by several aspects of the document,has responded to the consultation with severalcriticisms and is lobbying the authority to makechanges. Among its concerns are a failure to identifynew land for development, an underestimation ofland required for industrial uses, an inadequateevidence base being used to identify locations anda lack of detail relating to industrial uses.BNP Paribas Real Estate industrial director JeremyHughes explains the situation in Bristol. “It’s inoccupiers’, developers’, investors’ and agents’ bestinterests to contribute to the development of localplans. If agents don’t have enough land allocatedto deal with, there won’t be any signifi cant newdevelopment, let alone fees.”He continues: “The land that has been proposeddoes not help city-based occupiers. Our researchdepartments have recently concluded that thewaste sector, which requires B2 consent,is the next burgeoning market after retailers.The council’s proposals simply don’t makeenough provision for these issues.”Watershed momentInff uencing plans at a local level is one way to ensureadequate allocations of employment land to allowdevelopment in the future. If industrial uses are notgiven adequate consideration, and if developmentincentives do not materialise, local oppositioncould lead to a lack of industrial and distributionspace for years to come.But as more details emerge of the government’sintentions for planning, a further opportunity willpresent itself as the proposed national planningframework is put out to consultation withinterested parties.Segro masterplan manager Stephen Lord says:“Industrial developers have got an opportunityto engage with the government on this. It’s awatershed moment in the history of the planningsystem. It’s important that the industry workstogether to maximise its voice.” 9Major infrastructure Unit:replacing the iPcVery few people want a nuclear powerstation or rail freight terminal at theend of their garden. Given the nationalimportance of these types of facilities,how do you decide where they go?This is the problem the InfrastructurePlanning Commission (IPC) was set up totackle. A Labour government initiative,it was intended to provide a fast-trackprocess for all infrastructure projects#p#分页标题#e#of national signifi cance. Developers wouldbe obliged to carry out large amounts ofpre-application consultation. In return,the IPC would make a decision removedfrom local political pressures.However, just as developers beganpreparing for the new system, thecommission’s future started to lookuncertain. With a general electionapproaching, the Conservativesannounced they would abolish theorganisation. They have now confi rmedthat the commission will soon be replacedwith a Major Infrastructure Unit.The announcement has not beenwelcomed by the business sector.Neil Bentley, director of businessenvironment at the Confederation of BritishIndustry, says: “We already have delayedplanning applications inherited from theprevious government, and there is stilluncertainty about how the new MajorInfrastructure Unit will work in practice.“In the next six months, the governmentmust clear the backlog of delayed planningapplications. This will show investorsthat it is serious about fi xing theplanning system.”Despite concerns about the future ofthe commission, very little looks likely tochange. Sta are likely to remain in postand the secretary of state taking the fi nalsay on projects. Angus Walker, partnerat Bircham Dyson Bell and co-author ofA Practical Guide to National InfrastructureProjects, advises developers to continueworking with the new process.“The new government has pledged toclose the IPC, so developers are nervousabout promoting projects when there isthis uncertainty about its future,” he says.“But people should be assured that theprocess will remain relatively unchanged.”IPC’s chairmain Sir Michael Pitt adds:“We can reassure any developers whoare working towards the submissionof an application that examination willnot be delayed due to any future changes.”Trained o : the proposed rail freight terminalat Radlett is the type of unpopular schemedevelopers fear will fall victim to local protestsfl
