For what it’s worth (not that I posted much on here), but my pedestrian contributions to debate are available over there:

It’s a hill I will die on, but it is not ‘reducing housebuilding in London’. Its ‘need’ estimate is greater than the one it replaces (before the latter was arbitrarily uplifted by 35%) and is hugely stretching, more than any London Plan + more than double historic delivery rates

Amidst this week's planning changes, the most important news for me are these v. pleasing and well-deserved @LichfieldsUK promotions (incl 8 from London team): Highlights the strength and depth of our team, and points to a bright future. Well done to all

ICYMI The suite of @lichfieldsUK analysis of the Government's two-day blitz of planning reform changes (in the form of interactive maps on 'housing targets', and commentary) can be found here:

New @LichfieldsUK blog from yours truly on the New Towns Taskforce and how it might go about its mission to identify these largescale new communities: It digs into some questions around local support and additionality. And has a nice map.

Pleased to see this @mhclg blog on the question of the Standard Method make use of @LichfieldsUK maps and analysis. Makes a serious point about how the proposed approach is benchmarked in making local and regional comparisons - points also made here:

More info at the @LichfieldsUK online resource including whizzo maps and some commentary.

Whilst the numbers in 20 biggest cities with 35% uplift come down in some (but go up in 7), the reality is those numbers were never realistically going to be delivered and the proposed changes on duty to cooperate policy will see any unmet need addressed within wider areas.

Compared to current local plans, some of the greatest increases are in LPAs immediately surrounding London.

A more accurate view of the proposed method is the map below which shows proportionately higher levels of growth are focused in the south, including in London, greater south east and the arc between Oxford and Cambridge

Yes, the new SM has some proportionately bigger % increases from the current SM in northern regions but this is in context the current SM was widely criticised as setting numbers *too low* in those areas, less than recent delivery and existing Local Plan targets.

This @FT map of the proposed Standard Method below is being cited as suggesting the Govt is proposing to direct growth away from the south to the north, and away from tackling affordability. That’s not the right take IMHO. 🧵

The @LichfieldsUK analysis of the Government's proposed reforms to the NPPF and other changes to the planning system is here Analysis of the NPPF and proposed Standard Method (including interactive maps) is up and further content is on its way

A welcome reminder of this important fact from @paul_slg as also recorded in this very droll 2016 @lichfieldsuk blog from @OwainNedin here:

Great to host @LichfieldsUK client event this evening at @britishmuseum receiving a guided tour of the Greek galleries without the crowds

I’ve written some nonsense for @thetimes on the planning policy challenges facing the Government in the race to deliver 1.5m homes in this parliament (£).

My comments on the need to act quickly to deliver on the 1.5m home challenge feature in this @PlanningMag run through the sector reaction to the new Labour Government (£). My words drawn from this morning's @LichfieldsUK blog

A new dawn has broken, has it not? A change of government prompts thoughts about what Labour means for planning and development. My @LichfieldsUK blog with some (dodgy) speculation on what NPPF reforms might be needed to achieve 1.5m homes.

Prefacing today’s headline promising a Green Belt ‘building blitz’, @thetimes on Friday included granular analysis and comment from @RachelCIements and the @LichfieldsUK team in a piece by @Lees_Martina on how Labour’s planning reforms might shape up (£).

Me pontificating in @PlanningMag on Labour’s planning reforms, complete with the usual wild stabs in the dark and a regrettable reference to pumping big shots of adrenaline. It’s all going to be embarrassing if the polls are badly wrong….