Abstract
THERE pamphlets issued by the Cheam Architectural Press (price 6d. each) in "The Planning Bogies" series are too good to be popular. Those who dislike Prof. H. J. Laski are unlikely to be pleased with the way in which in "Will Planning Restrict Freedom?" he disposes of the bogie of bureaucracy, and the more ardent planners may be restive under his trenchant delineation of the conditions which planning machinery must serve in a democracy—his insistence on the participation of the ordinary citizen is, moreover, reflected in the other pamphlets. Mr. E. S. Watkins in "How Will Planning Affect Land Ownership?" deals with nationalization; but the pamphlet also gives an admirably lucid explanation of the existing land ownership system in Britain and of proposals for reform as contained in the Uthwatt Report and elsewhere. The broad objectives of land control—to ensure both the best economic and the best social use of our land and resources—are well stated, and also the basic requirements of control; they lead to concrete suggestions as to the composition and areas of planning authorities and amendments to the Town and Country Planning Act, which would transfer the responsibility for planning from the existing local government authorities to ad hoc area planning committees.
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
The Case for 'Planning'. Nature 155, 422 (1945). https://doi.org/10.1038/155422b0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/155422b0