Planning matters

Our award winning blog gives a fresh perspective on the latest trends in planning and development.

Helicopter operations and the need to balance competing interests
In land use planning, helicopter operations are often seen as a contentious NIMBY issue with multiple competing and conflicting views. There is a need to balance the benefits that helicopter operations can bring against any negative impact.
Helicopter operations have a key role to play in the delivery of sustainable development at a local and national level – providing jobs, movement of people and goods, and inward investment. They also provide a range of functions, including the transportation of people and equipment, military operations, emergency services such as the Coastguard, Police, air ambulance, aid drops and medi-vacs - and the all-important news gathering. They save time and lives by providing point to point access to locations where other forms of transport can’t reach. In an era of increasing security concerns, helicopters are able to move individuals perceived to be at risk, safely and quickly, particularly in urban areas. Helicopter airport infrastructure (airports, helipad and heliports) are hubs for this aviation activity. Within the context of land use planning, it’s important that there is adequate protection of helicopter infrastructure so helicopters are able to carry out and sustain their operations (safely and efficiently) to deliver these benefits.
Negative perceptions surrounding helicopter operations are that they have limited passenger-carrying capacity, limited range and fly time, are a very expensive mode of transport often seen as exclusively for the rich and few, and can result in considerable environmental impact, particularly in built-up urban areas. Within the context of land use planning, proposals for helipads and heliports can be met with resistance, given the perceived low economic benefit and high environmental impact. The exceptions in people’s minds are facilities for emergency helicopter operations, which have a recognised social purpose that offsets the environmental impacts.
To balance the actual and perceived benefits of helicopter operations and the actual and perceived negative impact of helicopters – as well as the need to ensure safe and efficient operations – the provision of helicopter infrastructure is carefully regulated by both the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) (as the regulator), and planning law and policy. The result is a complex regulatory and policy system, which raises some interesting questions:
  • In the UK there are numerous locations being used as helicopter landing sites throughout the year. Others involve seasonal peak activities, particularly during the summer period. At what point do such sites, used on an ad-hoc and informal basis, trigger the need to obtain planning permission and aerodrome approvals from the CAA? Ultimately it will depend on the volume and timing of operations and each case needs to be considered on its merits.
  • Is the socio-economic contribution of helicopter operations properly recognised in national, regional and local planning – or do the potential environmental impacts instantly override this benefit? The London planning system is a good example. Additional helicopter infrastructure is in demand for what is a world city, yet any proposals for new heliports are resisted as a matter of policy by the Mayor of London, with the exception of emergency services provision. The London Plan states that the noise impacts from helicopters can be considerable in an urban environment and that there are few locations in the capital where a heliport could be located without having major impacts on residents. Perhaps it is time to make more explicit just what the socio- economic benefits of helicopter operations are, to counterbalance the strong weight given to avoiding perceived environmental impacts.
  • Is the overarching requirement for safe operations – as laid out in CAA regulations - compatible or at odds with the objectives of land use planning? Can the site be used safely and in accordance with the applicable safety rules? Are there neighbouring congested areas? Does the airspace need to be shared with other aeronautical interests? It’s vital that any existing or proposed development nearby, which could give rise to the creation of obstacles and hazards and impact on a site’s ability to carry out its operations, is carefully monitored and regulated. But how well is this requirement to safeguard being applied in the land use planning process? Are there appropriate and known procedures in place, and are they being implemented?
If the current position on heliport land use planning policy and some recent planning decisions are anything to go by, it would seem that there is still much uncertainty around these questions - that is, how and why there is a need to balance the competing and conflicting views of helicopter operations.

*Lichfields is a member of the British Helicopter Association (BHA).

 

CONTINUE READING

Burnham means business on affordable homes
My original plan was to write a blog on the outcome of the Greater Manchester Combined Authority Mayoral election on 4th May, Andy Burnham’s first month in office and the impact on the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework [GMSF]. So much for plans. These seemingly important issues have been completely dwarfed by the horrific terrorist attack that took place at 10:30pm on 22 May 2017 in Manchester.
This was without question one of the most challenging scenarios that any public figure can face, particularly so soon after taking office.
Prior to the attack, it may not have been obvious to all quite how important the mayoral race was to Manchester’s future, particularly in the context of the snap General Election on 8th June 2017. However, Andy Burnham’s actions in response to  all these events has brought the Mayor’s powers into sharp focus.
Whilst not all Greater Manchester residents may be aware, the Mayor has control over the following:
  • Policing: in effect, replacing the Police and Crime Commissioner.
  • Fire service: previously managed on a Council by Council basis.
  • Spatial planning: has a pivotal role in the adoption or otherwise of the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework.
  • Housing: overseeing the administration of a £300m housing fund.
  • Transport: tasked with road management responsibilities currently managed by TfGM including road safety, bus lanes and congestion as well as influence over bus services, the tram system and cycling schemes.
  • Influence over NHS spending in Greater Manchester.
Those that followed the news in the aftermath of the 22 May attack will be aware that Mr Burnham put his autonomous powers as Police and Crime Commissioner into action, regarding information sharing with the US.
He was also one of the first public figures to spring into action following the Grenfell Tower fire in London on 14 June 2017, by calling for a meeting with all high-rise landlords to explain how they had to have their buildings safety-checked.
Whilst the national press has described the minority Government asgoing from ‘strong and stable’ to ‘weak and wobbly’ in the face of the General Election results and the declining popularity of the Government following the handling of the Grenfell Tower fire, Andy Burnham’s popularity has stood strong.
At a time of ongoing uncertainty nationally, Mr Burnham’s appointment does give a sense of stability to Greater Manchester, even though some of his more assertive pledges, e.g. for no net loss of Green Belt, were not popular (particularly as those in the industry don’t think the emerging Plan does enough to provide the homes and jobs Greater Manchester needs). We have already provided a synopsis of the GMSF and our views where we suggest that the GMSF does not go far enough, if the Northern Powerhouse is to succeed as a driver for economic growth in the North of England.
However, Andy Burnham’s more strident comments were made when he was in full campaign mode and he has since stated he is broadly happy with the number of homes and jobs proposed. He also remains on board with the concept of the GMSF, unlike his Liberal Democrat opponent. As such, the development industry can breathe a collective sigh of relief that he won’t be throwing the baby out with the bath water any time soon.
Moreover, whilst he is proposing to significantly reduce the amount of Green Belt allocations, this is a much watered down version of his ‘no net Green Belt loss’ pledge.
Mr Burnham has put Salford’s Mayor Paul Dennett in charge of the Plan re-write, with the stated aim of prioritising affordable housing. However, there has been radio silence since the initial announcement and therefore much second guessing about what format the ‘radically re-written’ plan will look like.
There is one matter that is almost certain; Paul Dennett has played a central role in the decisions which led Salford Council to publicly announce their intentions to build new council housing. It is probably no accident that Mr Burnham has appointed Dennett as the portfolio holder for housing, when one of his key pledges is to use the Housing Investment Fund to provide loans to councils and registered providers (RPs) to build affordable homes, including rent-to-own.
Nationwide, there has been a trend away from council-owned housing over the last 30 years, with many local authorities opting to transfer their existing housing stock to RPs. It looks like Greater Manchester could be bucking this trend under Andy Burnham’s term.
Mr Dennett’s public comments regarding affordable housing also closely align with another of Mr Burnham’s election promises – providing a mix of housing and reducing the perceived over-reliance on executive-style homes. Mr Dennett has previously suggested that the Government’s definition of affordable housing is out of touch with the reality for everyday people. This suggests that a range of low cost housing options could be on the agenda, which could be brought forward on greenfield sites and publicly-owned land. Affordable and low cost housing requirements could end up being toned down for constrained strategic sites and development on brownfield land, as Paul Dennett will be well-aware of the issues surrounding viability and affordability which have plagued many of the housing schemes that have come forward in his own authority’s area over the last few years. This is however conjecture at this stage, as details of the re-write have yet to be announced.
Going forward, our view is that:
  1. Those initial Green Belt site allocations proposed in the first draft GMSF which do not score so highly on the sustainability appraisal within the integrated approach may be at risk of being removed;
  2. Developers should prepare for increased affordable housing requirements on allocated sites and / or providing a broader mix of housing; and,
  3. Further delays on the GMSF and final adoption date are almost inevitable.
In summary, Andy Burnham has had an exceptionally strong start to his term in office, and others may have had difficulty navigating the challenges he has had to face.  We understand that he has yet to meet with the GMCA which makes it difficult to say with any certainty precisely when he will pick the reins back up. However, this is perhaps understandable given recent tragic events in Manchester and London, which have rightly pulled his attention in a different direction.
For bespoke advice on the implications on the latest events regarding the GMSF and up to date information on its progress please contact our Manchester Office on 0161 837 6130.

 Image credit: A.P.S. (UK) / Alamy Stock Photo

CONTINUE READING

3D printing in construction, health and manufacturing
It’s one of those internet memes that appears on social media every once in a while, but it’s hard to track down the first iteration but it essentially goes like this:
It gets a chuckle from me every time, swiftly followed by memories of the clunking staccato rhythm of loading a floppy disk into my first PC home (it still doesn’t beat the noise of loading a cassette tape-based game into the old BBC Acorns but I fear I may be showing my age now).
Nostalgic memories aside, the meme confirms that 3D printing is slowly becoming a well-established, socially recognised technology medium.
It’s a technology that is on the cusp of simultaneously shaping multiple industries and is destined to change the definition of design, manufacturing, construction, retail, medicine and space exploration. It’s also one of those technologies that I’m a self-confessed fan of and follow its progress as avidly as some like to watch their local team play football.

This blog sets out how 3D printing will soon impact on three industries – construction, retail, and health, and how it will become as standard as the floppy disc drive once was!
 
Construction
Industrial 3-D printing is at a tipping point, about to go mainstream in a big way. Most executives and many engineers don’t realise it, but this technology has moved well beyond prototyping, rapid tooling, trinkets, and toys.

Harvard Business Review

 

Image Source: Total Kustom

The construction industry has been doing the same thing for well over a hundred years now. Houses for example are still very much set to rectangular standardised plans, mostly built from single materials joined together by mortar and nails, and constructed over a number of weeks. Not for much longer. Say hello to the Rudenko 3D printer which is a gantry-based concrete extrusion printer. Rudenko is one of a growing number of start-up companies using concrete to print structures such as the above example of a castle, or the World’s first 3D printed hotel suite.
The castle was very much a proof of concept for the makers and took around 3 months to print back in 2014. However the technology is moving fast. How fast? Well the below example of a 3D printed house prototype was printed earlier this year. But the most impressive part of the house isn’t just the fact that it was 3D printed, it’s that it only took 24 hours to print.
It’s no longer a giant leap to imagine a similar system employed by housebuilders in the coming years. If we could turn these systems into a mobile platform (some of which already are), housebuilders could one day park up a printer, programme it with designs for a row of houses (houses which could have been designed by the future residents, to perfectly match their needs and wants) and away it would go. It could greatly speed up house building, which could minimise disruption to the surrounding area and boost affordable housing provision. In addition it could open up a whole new market of custom homes, allowing prospective home owners to tell the housebuilders how they want their house to look and what the layout should be.   
Its potential for house builders is obvious but it could go much further than that. Such a system could also be deployed to disaster zones to quickly build shelters to house those who have lost their homes.
 
Manufacturing & Retail

Image Source: PC Advisor

Any rail traveller or music lover knows it’s far more convenient and easier to simply print your tickets rather than collecting them at the station or waiting for them to arrive in the post. Convenience can be a killer of the high street shop however.
Just as the rise of the digitally downloaded album or movie saw a corresponding fall in high street sales and ultimately a swathe of retailers like HMV closing stores, other retailers could soon feel the effects of 3D printing as it will ultimately change the way we purchase our goods. This would foreseeably have a knock-on effect on supply lines and the need for a physical high street presence.
With more and more materials being developed for use with 3D printing and more 3D printers having the capability to print multiple materials simultaneously,  the idea of on-demand printing of products no longer seems to far-fetched. Home 3D printing has many advantages over the more traditional retail models. Why go to the shops to replace the broken door handle when you could just print a replacement at home? Or why stand in the cold and rain waiting for the latest iPhone when you could just pay apple direct for a download link and print it yourself?
And even if the convenience of not having to physically go to the shops isn’t a selling point for consumers, the ability to then customise those products are virtually limitless. Imagine being able to print a pair of shoes that are customised - from the colour and style right down to a perfect fit for your foot. 
Health
3D printing is making a noticeable impact in hospitals across the world. In Birmingham for example, the Queen Elizabeth Hospital recently announced that it is saving an average of 3 to 4 hours and £20,000 per surgery by printing 3D models of patients’ organs using their new in-house 3D printer so that doctors and surgeons can see what needs doing before ever picking up a scalpel.
Final thoughts
If I were to take one thing away from this blog, it’s that I’m going to be buying a 3D printer for my daughter for Christmas soon. Why? Because we are in the early days of 3D printing and like my old BBC Acorn, they are expensive and have limited functionality.
However it’s those limitations that encouraged the Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Tim Berners-Lee’s of the world to start playing with the technology, developing new programming languages and new ways of using it. It’s my feeling that it will be the kids of today who grow up with these 3D printers in their homes and schools who will really push the technology in the next 10/20 years - and jobs in the industry will increase in number exponentially. It’s a technology that is here, and must not be ignored.

CONTINUE READING

The end of the road for Grammar Schools?

The end of the road for Grammar Schools?

Justine Matchett 20 Jun 2017
So two weeks have elapsed since the election and we are no closer to understanding the likely impact on education policy. Whilst Prime Minister Theresa May has taken the opportunity to reshuffle her cabinet after losing her Commons majority, limited changes have been made and she has retained Justine Greening in the post of Education Secretary. Ms Greening retained her Putney seat in the election, but saw her majority of 10,180 reduced to 1,554. Ahead of the election, there had been speculation that Ms Greening could be replaced by a more enthusiastic supporter of the Prime Minister’s plan to create new grammar schools. The leaders of the NUT and NAHT teaching unions were both quick to welcome her re-appointment, as was National Schools Commissioner Sir David Carter, who said it meant they could continue their work on school improvement and social mobility.

The Conservative manifesto had promised to:

  1. Scrap free school lunches for infants in England, to instead offer free breakfasts for all children at primary school level.
  2. Pump an extra £4 billion a year into schools by 2022.
  3. Introduce new funding arrangements to open specialist mathematics schools in all major cities.
  4. Scrap the ban on setting up new grammar schools.
  5. Involve universities which charge maximum tuition fees and independent schools in the sponsorship and founding of academies and ‘free schools’.
Now the Party has lost its Commons majority, it’s difficult to see which of the manifesto promises it will concentrate on trying to deliver and which will be side-lined.
One area of particular contention is the idea of establishing new grammar schools. Whilst Ms Greening has in the past publicly supported plans for more of them, there have been recent indications that perhaps she is less enthusiastic. In the week before the election, she failed to give a direct answer when asked on Radio 4 whether she personally believed in grammar schools.  In the context of the alliance with the DUP which is still being negotiated however, it is noteworthy that the DUP is pro-grammar and Northern Irish schools are intrinsically selective. The DUP  website outlines five key priorities, of which the fourth is to raise standards in education for everyone. Its 2017 manifesto referred to the need to defend and improve the education system in Northern Ireland to ensure that every child has the opportunity to succeed in life. It expresses clear support for academic selection and Arlene Foster has publicly emphasised her support for grammar schools explaining that, ”…the perception of grammar schools as only for the privileged class is a gross misrepresentation’’.
Notwithstanding the potential support from the DUP, the feedback from industry experts on Twitter is that Ms Greening's re-appointment is likely to signal the end of the push to create more grammar schools. Graham Brady, chair of the 1922 Committee of backbench Tory MPs and a prominent supporter of grammar schools, said the party would have to “trim down our policies carefully to what we think Parliament will support”. He suggested that the government should perhaps look at a “rather modest sort of pilot looking at opening some state grammar schools in inner urban areas”.
Even with the DUP support the Government is likely to find itself unable to push forward with grammar school proposals. Indications from the Independent’s Education Correspondent Rachael Pells are that only seven Conservative ministers would be needed to oppose such a bill and there are around fifteen who are known to be outspokenly against new grammar schools. In this context the feeling is that Government education policy will need to concentrate on addressing school funding cuts whilst delivering much needed new school places. Whether these places will be delivered in the form of Free Schools or the development or expansion of existing local authority schools will remain to be seen but the delivery of new grammar schools looks certain to consigned to the history books…at least for the time being.

CONTINUE READING