Local area requirements #52
Replies: 3 comments 2 replies
-
After digging a little deeper into the numbers, it can be seen that the local validation checklists are highly variable in both the level of detail and the conveying of information. Of the 335 LPAs, 271 have provided enough information to satisfy our chosen criteria of providing a hosting page, a document, and a start date. The 64 LPAs not currently included in the following statistics are omitted due to difficulty in satisfying the above criteria. Of the 271 LPAs:
In terms of the content of local checklists, although this hasn't been deeply analysed as of yet, there are some datasets that are beginning to appear more common that could be of value going forwards, for example, Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs). More to follow. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
We've been looking into local area requirements as we think that understanding more about the various planning requirements and what triggers them will help us when it comes to prioritising which datasets might offer the greatest value when added to planning.data.gov.uk. We're fairly early on in our analysis, and have written a short blog post summarising where we've gotten to: https://digital-land.github.io/blog-post/digging-into-local-area-requirements/ |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
This is great work as always - and really key to unlocking a more streamlined submission system - whether that's via the planning portal, PlanX, or some other platform. The Airtable you've produced is great and the triggers split by consideration, rule, and app type will really help us rationalise the triggers I think - they're currently too varied and sometimes not very objective. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
We've started exploring the local validation checklists to help us understand which planning considerations might add the most value if added to planning.data.gov.uk
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions