It was very interesting to read the outcome, published today, of the Secretary of State's determination of Gladman's application, under s 62A TCPA 1990. This was an application for planning permission (for residential development) made directly to the Secretary of State - the LPA (Blaby DC) having been placed in what are harshly being termed "special measures".

The application has been refused and the statement of reasons is worth a read, especially for those of you who closely follow discussions on full objectively assessed needs (FOAN), 5 year supply and other linked topics. But on a breeze through of the case this afternoon I took away the following:

  1. Never doubt the wisdom of NPPG when it says "Establishing future need for housing is not an exact science. No single approach will provide a definitive answer"
  2. Don't assume the Liverpool method will be rejected.
  3. If the time taken from application submission to decision is to be typical of these applications (23/4/2014 - 22/7/2014) then they will rise in popularity.
  4. There is good practice here in terms of the accessibility and transparency of the decision making process (click through to the link above and you'll see what I mean)
  5. Irony has a place in modern planning.