natco

Blogs

Riding Sunbeams, Chasing Moonbeams

If I were to say in this blog that I remain committed to the Smart Growth principles that regular readers are familiar with and then say that I thought they would be best achieved by pursuing policies like housing sprawl, motorway building, airport expansion and distribution shed sprawl, you might r...

Posted by Jon Reeds on 06 April 2020

Negotiating With Nature, Two Examples

In my previous blog on Nature and Negotiation, I described the process of negotiation recommended by Roger Fisher and William Ury of the Harvard Negotiation Project. Since examples are helpful to see how this might work with Nature, here are a couple of illustrative cases. Among the many responsibil...

Posted by Nigel Pearce on 30 March 2020

Nature And Negotiation

For too long humans have forgotten, or have failed to realise, that our relationship with Nature is based on negotiation. Instead, we have treated this relationship as an imposition by one party, humanity, on the other, Nature, with no clear voice of its own. So, for the most part, we have not negot...

Posted by Nigel Pearce on 26 March 2020

go back

Supreme Court quashes AONB housing consent

Added on 06 December 2017

The Supreme Court has upheld the Court of Appeal decision to quash planning consent for more than 600 homes in the Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

The Court agreed with CPRE Kent that Dover District Council did not give adequate reasons for approving the homes despite acknowledging the significant harm to a protected landscape. The Court of Appeal quashed the consent for the Farthingloe Valley in 2016.

“This case is not just important to the people of Dover but for the principles of planning law,” said CPRE Kent director Hilary Newport. “AONBs merit the highest possible level of protection. Today’s judgment confirms that not only was the decision flawed, but so was the planning committee’s decision-making process.”

Kristina Kenworthy of Richard Buxton Environmental and Public Law said the decision would bring much needed clarity to the need for public authorities to give reasons for their decisions.

“The Supreme Court has confirmed that planning is not a special case: the need for transparency and scrutiny means that people are entitled to know what has been decided and why, and if necessary enable effective recourse to the courts,” she said. “This decision should lead to more rigour, better planning &ndash and less argument.”

CPRE Kent

go back  |  top