Research findings from the Place Alliance.
00:00:00 – Introduction. Katja Stille, Urban Design Group (Chair)
00:03:21 – Appealing Design research findings. Matthew Carmona, The Bartlett, UCL | Chair of the Place Alliance.
00:18:16 – Response from Joanna Averley, Chief Planner, DLUCH
00:28:02 – Response from Tim Crawshaw, President, Royal Town Planning Institute
00:34:03 – Response from Justin Webber, Senior Building Conservation Officer, Leicester City Council
00:40:14 – Response from David Morgan, Professional Lead for Planning Appeals, Planning Inspectorate
00:47:12 – Response from Christine Thorby. Urban Design Learning
00:52:17 – Concluding questions and answers from the panel.
Summary of the research background:
Is the planning appeal process giving any weight to design quality, and rejecting applications for poor and mediocre housing development? Surprising answers are contained in Appealing Design, a new study of over 30 planning appeals, launched at this UDG event.
For decades local planning authorities up and down the country have been reluctant to refuse poorly designed residential and other developments on design grounds.
Six perceptions have underpinned this reluctance:
1: Costs will be awarded against the planning authority should it lose the appeal
2: Design is too subjective to argue easily
3: Quantity and demonstrated housing land supply is given a greater weight than quality of design
4: Housebuilders are too formidable to take on.
5: Negotiating good design with an applicant takes too long and requires too much officer time
6: Design can be dealt with after the principle of development has been established
Drawing on recent planning appeals data, this new Place Alliance report reveals that none of these perceptions are any longer true (some never were).
Appealing Design is supported and endorsed by Civic Voice, the RTPI, the Urban Design Group and Urban Design Learning.
source
