Planning

Yesterday I started my fortnight of work experience at the Planning Consultancy. I got an overview of their work in the morning and also sat in on a meeting with two consultants and two engineers, who are to prepare detailed information regarding traffic control for a forthcoming planning application. I was given a brief introduction into S.106 applications (which I'd never heard of before) and read through a fairly hefty and somewhat tedious document on 'obligations'. I'll get shot for seeing it this way, but the long and the short of it is: if you have a planning application that's a bit dodgy, offer the Council a bung and the job's a good un. Of course it's all far more formal and transparent than that, but as a newcomer to planning law, it made me feel quite uncomfortable that in certain situations a controversial planning application can be eased along the process by the offer of certain pecuniary enticements. What a cynical old bag I am:-)

In the afternoon I did some reading into a matter that the Consultancy had taken on regarding a topic close to my heart - garden extensions. I have been carrying out research on this topic for some time and was very pleased to discover that my work to date is correct.

I also looked at some model S.106 agreements. The style of drafting used is very different to that taught during BVC and the complete absence of any punctuation, save for fullstops, makes the drafts difficult to follow. I read through some background information for an appeal against an enforcement notice that the Consultancy are dealing with. Later this week I shall be drafting part of the appeal and have been searching databases for policy that supports my section of the appeal (it's thin on the ground)! I came across a case that I'd encountered before on my BVC travels, but alas, on closer inspection it doesn't help me out.

I was rather hoping to impress the Planners with my research skills, but Council planning databases are not the easiest or quickest things to research, particularly when looking for historic applications. I imagine the Planners saying "nice enough woman, but she's a bit, you know, slooooow".

The Managing Director of the firm is very knowledgeable on planning law and also has a very firm grasp of public law/judicial review and procedure. He gave me a lift into work yesterday and the journey went very quickly due to the chatter about law (not sure it went quite so quickly for him:-)). The firm have a forthcoming judicial review hearing and I have been invited along to give submissions on behalf of the appellant watch.

I was quite concerned that my work experience with the Consultancy wouldn't give me much exposure to planning law, but the job is (thankfully) very heavy on law, particularly policy. Due to the vast nature of property law in general, there's always something new to learn about, even for those who have been in planning for many years. The downside of the work is that it can be very tedious and dry, but I had rather expected as much.

Keen to impress, I have brought some work home with me and have the job of trying to figure out how many houses have been built in a town over the last 10 years. Not the easiest task when the information is contained in a mish mash of Council documentation and statistics.

Well, they say that a change is as good as a rest, and I'm pleased to say that I fully agree with that adage. I've learnt such a lot in the 2 days that I've been with the firm and feel that the experience will add far more to my pupillage applications than a mere box ticking exercise.