1 / 15

NLUD Scoping Study nlud.king.ac.uk Research Findings and Ideas Emerging

NLUD Scoping Study http://nlud.king.ac.uk Research Findings and Ideas Emerging. Tony Vickers tonyvickers@phonecoop.coop www.landvaluescape.org Kingston University Project Researcher. Aim today. Outline the methodology of the Study Present findings Share ideas gained through research

alamea
Download Presentation

NLUD Scoping Study nlud.king.ac.uk Research Findings and Ideas Emerging

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NLUD Scoping Studyhttp://nlud.king.ac.ukResearchFindings and Ideas Emerging Tony Vickers tonyvickers@phonecoop.coop www.landvaluescape.org Kingston University Project Researcher AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  2. Aim today • Outline the methodology of the Study • Present findings • Share ideas gained through research • Explain why we focus on Planning Pipeline – not just PDL or “Full NLUD” • Stimulate discussion AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  3. What we did • ‘outsider’ bid Jan 2007 • Pitch emphasised LPA/GI policy issues • Analysed EP ‘operational’ NLUD survey 2005/6 • Piloted ‘strategic’ LA survey • Main survey Oct-Dec (38% / 152 LPAs) • Stakeholder interviews Nov-Jan (18) • LA visits Jan-March (15 = 25 LAs) • Workshops (2 – 6&10 March) • Literature review, correspondence AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  4. LA Survey findings • If ‘data were better connected to other information they hold’, LAs would give higher priority to NLUD (10:1) • Link NLUD to Plan monitoring (10:1) • PDL data on small sites are ‘robust and accurate’- 80% disagree (or don’t know) • Want ‘an online internet-based system’ for NLUD (2:1) • Want parcel/map-based returns (13:1) • 77% use planning applications to maintain PDL dataset • 1/3 use PDL returns to help with LDF/UCS/SHLAA • 1/3 use PDL data for nothing • ‘Develop a comprehensive and complete land use database from which PDL data could be derived’ (7:1) AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  5. The best LAs do it by… • A once-off thorough field survey • Maintain thro’ Apps • Corporate LLPG for all property-related functions – daily updates • Corporate GIS, kept up-to-date daily – all Apps included as parcels • NLUD return done as extract from GIS AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  6. Status of LAs’ GIS • None found without one • Most have Authority-wide GIS • GIS expertise mainly outside Planning • Strikingly high awareness of & high regard for NLPG and its importance for NLUD’s future • Most already create or acquire land polygons • NLIS, INSPIRE & PSI Directives: low awareness but high expectations of relevance to NLUD • MSA, Location Strategy & Transformational Government: very high expectations AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  7. Other stakeholders views • Distinction between ‘brown’ and ‘green’ unclear and not v. important to industry • Little faith in current NLUD figures, hence… • Almost no use for NLUD • Support need for PDL data – but also want whole ‘planning pipeline’ • Expect • LAs to remain source of data, but…. • no improvement unless tied to LDFs • Considerable support for market-driven dataset • Envisage wider uses for data + potential for public/private collaboration AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  8. Ideas for future • Spatial planning ‘domains’ • Two-level attribution of sites (EP ‘core’ and other) • Parcel-based data framework • Use LDF & development management processes • Plan Making (SHLAAs, EAAs etc) • Plan Monitoring (AMRs, ‘Planning 360’) • Plan Maintenance (1APP) • Use existing infrastructure • Policies (INSPIRE / PSI / MSA) • Data standards & structures (DNF, BS7666) • Channels (esd-toolkit, Planning Portal) • Products (MasterMap, LLPGs, NPAR?) • Make change-makers pay to record change! AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  9. Current NLUD-PDL PDL in database EP sites PDL missing AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  10. 15-year planning pipeline LDFs >> SHLAAs PDL in database PDL missing AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  11. 15-year actual urban land use change Land passing thro’ planning system >>1APP LDFs PDL in database PDL missing AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  12. All urban land Every record in NLPG +(?) MMAL2 PDL in database AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  13. Why NPPD? • Current NLUD-PDL system not fit for purpose • Exploits data LPAs already need to have • Robust PDL dataset a spin-off • Self-checking and updating • Minimum central infrastructure • Reinforces need for LAs’ corporate GIS • Meets wider needs of development industry AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  14. Issues • Who pays for… • Standard polygon data transfer software • Polygonisation of LLPGs • Retrospective site data capture • Who benefits and how much? • NPPD market analysis needed • Trading Fund model uncertainty • Who decides? • NLUD is EP responsibility • Spatial Planning Policy: CLG • Environmental & UK GI policy: Defra • Knowledge, PSI and Land Rights: Dept of Justice! • Foresight Study (of UK Land Use Futures): Dept of Innovation, Universities and Skills (sponsored by CLG & Defra) AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

  15. Whither NLUD Full? Or ‘wither’?! AGI Seminar Mapping the Planning Pipeline

More Related