The redevelopment of a brownfield site near me has just been approved. It apparently complies with the current Local Plan and was supported by the Parish Council. However, the first application was refused and it has taken over a year to agree amended details.
The development includes four new homes and two new office spaces; but with the current trend and need to work from home, is this an appropriate use of land and resources?
How does the current planning system of local and national policies allow and enable a more forward thinking approach? The term ‘future proof’ has been used many times and it would seem even more important in the age of Covid 19 and changes to the way people are working and from where.
The principle of redevelopment for the site, in my opinion, is fine. It is a brownfield site and there is a significant opportunity to enhance and improve it and its surrounding area. However, is the business case sound? Is the proposal appropriate for the next 25-50 years?
A BBC article, dated 31 July, stated:
According to the ONS, 30% of adults in the UK were exclusively working from home at the start of July. From 1 August, employers in England can allow staff back into offices at their own discretion when they feel it's safe to do so. But now it's time to return to those communal workplaces, research from Eskenzi suggests that 91% of the UK's office workers would like to work from home at least part of the time.
Then on 26 August another BBC piece stated:
Fifty of the biggest UK employers questioned by BBC have said they have no plans to return all staff to the office full-time in the near future.
In a finite office space it is impossible to ensure all staff are safe. Therefore, reduced numbers are required to provide for social distancing measures.
If only a percentage of staff is in the office, then the rest must be at home. So should we keep building new office space? How many office buildings are vacant, underused or in the process of being built?
Does the current planning system enable a more flexible approach? Forget about the latest proposed ‘radical’ changes to the allegedly ‘outdated’ planning system, as that is a red herring.
Development management teams need to agree a way forward whilst still working with an existing set of policies. Should they be more bold and test the system? On what grounds could they have refused the referenced proposal or asked for additional modifications? Does the fear of appeal and costs still dominated decisions?
My point is not about the virus per se, or even about the nature of new developments. However, if planning departments continue to approve proposals without considering the current circumstances then what is built now will either be obsolete or require redevelopment sooner than needed or wanted.
For example, just a few blocks down the same road from the proposed development an existing industrial park was supposed to have been completely redeveloped with numerous new buildings. This was consented in 2017 and only one of the new buildings has been completed. It is a large modern complex with easy access, sufficient parking and yet it has been sitting empty for quite some time. The remaining existing buildings were to be demolished with replacement new ones, none of which has been done.
This may be due to the economy and/or other factors, but it could also be the lack of demand. Where in the process is the business case and demand considered?
I wish the current system had more capacity to test the business cases, challenge current trends, think longer term and not just apply current policy to avoid appeals. A better use of land and resources would create a better outcome not just for the local community, but also for our environment and climate. If more people continue to work from home and if the new office landscape is to change forever, why not start addressing these changes now?
It is rather short-sighted to think that life post-virus will definitely return to the old normal. If anything we need to learn from the lessons the last six months have taught us. What can we as planners, designers, architects, developers do now to create the future spaces that have built-in flexibility and are capable of managing life in a variety of circumstances?
Mind you, you could use the same argument for climate change and buildings currently being built with the current building regulations, which are also ‘outdated’ given the future.
Comentários