| 000 | 01031cab a2200265 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ABS59718 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1998 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u89911 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 100 | _aArnold, S. | ||
| 245 | _aProof that need is not an issue | ||
| 260 | _c1998 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aPlanning (for the Natural and Built Environment) _v(1295) 20 November 1998, 10(1) |
||
| 520 | _aDiscusses the interpretation of government retail planning policy relating to whether applicants have to prove a need for their developments and, whether all retail proposals should positively enhance town centre vitality and viability. Considers the the High Court decision in "Queen v Hambleton DC ex p Somerfield Stores". | ||
| 650 | _aDEVELOPMENT | ||
| 650 | _aEFFECTS | ||
| 650 | _aNEED | ||
| 650 | _aPLANNING POLICY GUIDANCE NOTE SIX | ||
| 650 | _aQUEEN V HAMBLETON DC EX P SOMERFIELD STORES | ||
| 650 | _aTOWN CENTRES | ||
| 690 | _aPLANNING LAW AND PRACTICE | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c24/11/1998 | ||
| 999 |
_c56927 _d56927 |
||