<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
	<rss version="2.0">
		<channel>
			<title>Green Building Forum - Consulation on planning reform</title>
			<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2026 04:33:20 +0100</lastBuildDate>
			<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/</link>
			<description></description>
			<generator>Lussumo Vanilla 1.0.3</generator>
			<item>
		<title>Consulation on planning reform</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282677#Comment_282677</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282677#Comment_282677</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2020 18:03:50 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>djh</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Has anybody looked at the govmint's latest proposals yet? - <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/planning-for-the-future" target="_self" rel="nofollow">https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/planning-for-the-future</a><br /><br />I've started reading it but am having trouble with my attitude, so I'd like to hear if anybody else has formed an opinion yet?<br /><br />PS Not sure whether this topic should be here or under Politics?]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Consulation on planning reform</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282681#Comment_282681</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282681#Comment_282681</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2020 21:30:06 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Jonti</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[I would have thought it would have been better to devolve the planning process to the local level rather than giving it to the private sector. SO big builders are going to make an absolute packet and the tax payer will have to foot the bill.]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Consulation on planning reform</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282685#Comment_282685</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282685#Comment_282685</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2020 03:25:15 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Mike1</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[<blockquote ><cite >Posted By: Jonti</cite>SO big builders are going to make an absolute packet and the tax payer will have to foot the bill.</blockquote><br />No idea why the Government might do that.<br /><br />https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/dark-money-investigations/exclusive-property-tycoons-gave-tories-more-than-11m-in-less-than-a-year/]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Consulation on planning reform</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282688#Comment_282688</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282688#Comment_282688</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2020 10:06:40 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Jonti</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[I know Mike it seems a bit far fetched but I just can't shake the feeling it will go that way. We are already facing a problem that in the next 20 years a good proportion of new builds of the last 20 years will be condemned as unfit for habitation dramatically increasing the housing crisis and this new planning law will only increase the amount of shoddy construction.]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Consulation on planning reform</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282690#Comment_282690</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282690#Comment_282690</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2020 10:45:13 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Artiglio</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Iâ€™ve not read the document only listened/watched the various interviews etc. But my take is that in very simple terms the proposal is to force councils to designate land for building but that what actually is built still falls under the planning process. So effectively doing away with the initial period spent arguing over whether  or not a parcel of land can be buitl on.<br />Thereâ€™s no real interest in building houseâ€™s  properly, we donâ€™t have a motivated or sifficiently skilled workforce, with all the S106 and CIL requirements adding to build costs already additional cost will be resisted plus HMG want numbers as a priority the rest is just rhetoric to appease the green lobby and make it look as though there is a green agenda.<br />Those buying the houses donâ€™t care either as theyâ€™ll still perform better than most houses more than 20 years old. Major issues with rot and repair will be unlikely to occur within the guarantee period so insurers donâ€™t care either.<br /><br />Basically  there are more votes in housing people than there ever will be in quality and energy efficiency. Whilst the demand is there the builders will always be the ones calling the shots.]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Consulation on planning reform</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282697#Comment_282697</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282697#Comment_282697</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2020 15:08:11 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Mike1</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[It's hardly likely to improve the situation reported by UCL: '75% of new housing in England should not have been built' - see <a href="http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16531" target="_self" rel="nofollow">http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16531</a><br /><br />Which, among other things, found that housing developments that benefited from the use of Local Authority site-specific design codes were almost five times more likely to be â€˜goodâ€™ or â€˜very goodâ€™ than â€˜poorâ€™ or â€˜very poorâ€™.]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Consulation on planning reform</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282740#Comment_282740</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282740#Comment_282740</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Aug 2020 17:26:55 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>CWatters</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[I fear its just going to make it worse for self and small builders. <br /><br />I reckon only large developers will be able to afford land in areas designated for "Growth" because they will be mostly large large or brown field sites.  <br /><br />The document does say.. <br /><br />"We also want to allow local planning authorities to identify sub-areas in their Growth areas for self- and custom-build homes, so that more people can build their own homes"<br /><br />but who wants to build a house on the left over bit of a large housing estate?]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Consulation on planning reform</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282741#Comment_282741</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282741#Comment_282741</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Aug 2020 18:44:56 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Peter_in_Hungary</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[<blockquote ><cite >Posted By: CWatters</cite>The document does say..<br /><br />"We also want to allow local planning authorities to identify sub-areas in their Growth areas for self- and custom-build homes, so that more people can build their own homes"</blockquote><br />So it's up to the LPA to decide if they want to support self build - or not<br /><br /><blockquote ><cite >Posted By: CWatters</cite>but who wants to build a house on the left over bit of a large housing estate?</blockquote><br />on the bit that was not profitable for the large developer - e.g. problematic ground conditions or contamination on the brown field site.]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Consulation on planning reform</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282744#Comment_282744</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282744#Comment_282744</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Aug 2020 20:14:20 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Jonti</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[But would it not also allow LPAs to designate large areas of their growth areas as sub areas?]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Consulation on planning reform</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282749#Comment_282749</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282749#Comment_282749</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Aug 2020 21:40:05 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Peter_in_Hungary</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[<blockquote ><cite >Posted By: Jonti</cite>But would it not also allow LPAs to designate large areas of their growth areas as sub areas?</blockquote><br />Yes it would - but given the clout of big business which way do you think that decisions would go?]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Consulation on planning reform</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282756#Comment_282756</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=16680&amp;Focus=282756#Comment_282756</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2020 08:24:58 +0100</pubDate>
		<author>Jonti</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[<blockquote ><cite >Posted By: Peter_in_Hungary</cite><blockquote ><cite >Posted By: Jonti</cite>But would it not also allow LPAs to designate large areas of their growth areas as sub areas?</blockquote><br />Yes it would - but given the clout of big business which way do you think that decisions would go?</blockquote><br /><br />SO the system is not bad but how it might be abused is.]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	
		</channel>
	</rss>