Strategic Solutions LLC’s Post

Eminent domain allows the government to take private property for public use, like building roads, schools, or parks. The government uses eminent domain because these projects are considered to benefit the whole community. However, when they take a property, they must pay the owner “just compensation,” which means a fair amount of money for the property. While this might seem straightforward, disputes often arise about whether the compensation is truly fair or if the property should be taken at all. Learn more about the legalities of eminent domain, and reach out to Evans Law for assistance. (410)626-6009 👉https://lnkd.in/gTW_gwuc

Mark O'Brien O'Reilly, instructed by Joe Walker at Sharpe Pritchard Solicitors & Parliamentary Agents, recently obtained summary judgment from the High Court on behalf of a local planning authority in a claim against a developer for unpaid section 106 contributions. Mark obtained an order from the High Court for over £1.5m along with interest and costs. The unpaid contributions related to affordable housing contributions and contributions towards education and open space. Mark acted for the successful Council throughout the proceedings. The case is a useful example of a LPA successfully obtaining a judgment in its favour by way of a civil action for a debt from the High Court, reflecting the essentially contractual nature of a s106 agreement.

New laws in California impact housing & education. Legislation aims to facilitate affordable housing development and expand in-state tuition benefits. For a deeper dive, visit our blog! 👇

What is the implication of the recent appeal decision regarding s73 applications? Planning specialist, Chrisa Tsompani explains: ’In the appeal decision reference APP/L5240/W/23/3332225, the London Borough of Croydon argued that an application under s73 of the TCPA is not the correct legal mechanism to alter the level of affordable housing previously secured through a planning obligation in the form of a s106 Legal Agreement. The reason given by the Council was the lack of a link between the alterations being sought to the drawings and the amended level of affordable housing now proposed in the planning obligation. The Inspector re-emphasised that planning agreements made under s106 of the Planning Act are free standing legal instruments, which don’t need to be attached to a planning permission. The inspector further reviewed Norfolk Homes Limited v North Norfolk District Council & another [2020] EWHC 2265, which confirmed that entering into a planning obligation appropriate to the terms of new permission should be a contemporaneous decision based on the circumstances at the time and that sometimes in the context of a s73 application it will be appropriate or even essential for a planning obligation to have different terms to the original obligation. The Inspector concluded that the circumstances for this case were such that there is was need for a planning obligation in different terms to the original to facilitate the delivery and that the s73 application was in this instance an appropriate means to reduce the level of affordable housing relative to that previously secured. This decision reinstates the principle that s73 applications lead to a separate planning permission and that all the material factors, including the need to include planning obligations to make the amended development acceptable, must be reviewed by LPAs at the time of the s73 application. However, the merits of this case were also crucial for the outcome of the appeal. ” https://lnkd.in/eFGyYfry #davittjonesbould #planning #commercialproperty #realestate

A BATTLE OVER FAIR FUNDING FOR SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION Gov. Newsome must decide whether to reform a method of sharing state matching money that has favored property-rich districts over their property-poor neighbors. The threat of a lawsuit challenging the legality of the present system face Newsome and legislative leaders. Read more here: https://lnkd.in/d6QEYTSU #schooldistricts #fairfunding #schoolconstruction

Part two Story Part Single Story Side and Rear Extension Planning Appeal Hillingdon Council This case study video is detailing a recent planning appeal in the London Borough of Hillingdon for a part two story and part single story side and rear extension that we undertook for a client. This case started for us when we were contacted by our client after their recent application had been refused by the London Borough of Hillingdon and a decision notice had been issued to our client refusing the application. The refusal was issued on the 21st April 2021 and as a House holder Application, the appeal had 12 weeks from the decision notice to be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate. Our client informed us that they felt the decision. Was unfair as others in their area had received approval for similar schemes. As such the client instructed us to appeal on 7th June 2021 leaving a reduced time to produce a comprehensive and robust appeal. Further details relating to this appeal can be found in the case study video. https://lnkd.in/e3UhmeVV

‘Nations begin by forming their institutions, but in the end, are continuously formed by them or under their influence.’ - Lord Halisham Read Michelle Clement on our new ‘History of the Civil Service’ module, in partnership with Cabinet Office https://lnkd.in/edm-ab6r The Policy Institute

🎓 Exciting News! 🎓 Dive into the intricacies of public housing authority (PHA) policies with "Criminal Records and Disparate Impact in Tenant Selection," a NEW course available from HAI Group Online Training! 🌟 After taking this course, you will be able to: 🔍 Distinguish between mandated and optional public housing authority policies for denial of admission. 💡 Understand the meaning of disparate impact and its importance. 👉 Don't miss this opportunity to enhance your knowledge and skills! Enroll today: https://lnkd.in/enbhzSwi #PHA #OnlineTraining #HousingPolicies #VAWA #ContinuedLearning

Following the recent High Court decision in R (Dennis) v LB Southwark [2024] EWHC 57 (Admin), we have received a raft of queries over the issue of ‘drop in’ consents, and the future-proofing of planning permissions for large multi-phased developments. Reflecting on these queries, we've collated our thoughts and provide in the article below practical guidance on: - Setting up a planning permission from the outset to maintain maximum flexibility, without falling foul of the issues that arose in the Hillside and Dennis cases; and - The scope to alter the approved development once planning permission has been obtained. Our analysis seeks to focus on ways to ensure that the decisions reached in both cases do not become further barriers to development, in a market and political environment that is already very difficult. #needtogetthingsdonenow #planning #shoosmiths

Learn about Truth and Reconciliation Learn about the impact of the residential school system, the experiences of former students and the 94 calls to action made by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in its final report. See https://lnkd.in/gKahWcDn. #nihm24