Planning Advisory Service (PAS) Logo
Planning Advisory Service (PAS)
Open group | Started - July 2012 | Last activity - Yesterday

Viability & the Imperial-Metric Dilemma

Former Member, modified 11 Years ago.

Viability & the Imperial-Metric Dilemma

Hi all, I have noticed that there is an inconsistency in how the Planning and Development industry measures value. This is particularly applicable in the realm of viability. As an illustration it seems that the private sector - market economy generally value space in square feet whereas the regulatory industry - government, administration and bureaucracy tend to work in square metres. I am trying to get to the bottom of what this inconsistency is and what part the European Union plays in all this as it strikes me as one of those obvious glitches within the Planning system that only adds to the general confusion making people's lives that little bit more difficult than it needs to be. If anyone has any comments or light to shed on this theme of imperial versus metric systems or the wider issue of how it might (or might not) impact on viability related considerations then I'd be interested and would appreciate any tips or clarification on this subject. Thanks.
Former Member, modified 11 Years ago.

Re: Viability & the Imperial-Metric Dilemma

There was an EU directive in the early 90s that required government to use metric units in most instances, with sensible exemptions for things like road signs. However, clinging to imperial units is not a private sector thing - architects, engineers, highway consultants, landscape architects, etc. all work in metric. Even greengrocers do. Its about surveyors - but why? (If the update I did on the LGA web site still hasn't got through to PAS, I'm at Hambleton DC.)