96

Intelligence | Practice

PLANNING Philip Singleton gets to grips with the draft of the National Planning Policy Framework A GOOD START

THE NATIONAL Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out the government’s key planning priorities and demonstrates how these relate to their overarching economic, environmental and social objectives. Its purpose is to rationalise and streamline existing policy and guidance and to set out the parameters within which local authorities (and soon neighbourhoods) will have to develop plans. The government has reduced national planning policy from over 1000 pages to less than 60, drawing together a coherent and accessible document.

Strengthened design policy For those who care about good design, the NPPF will be warmly welcomed. Planning minister Greg Clark has shown himself to be a passionate advocate of design across government and this comes through strongly. Existing design policy has been strengthened and there is a strong emphasis on the importance of high quality housing and even telecom masts. But this is nothing new. Much to its credit, the government has

PROMISES, PROMISES

THE RTPI believes the draft National Policy Planning Framework is a missed opportunity and is deeply concerned by its lack of clarity in many areas. Does this draft of the NPPF offer the conciseness, clarity and certainty we need? Conciseness At 52 pages it does well – web links to related documents may keep it concise.

Clarity It is far from clear – based on a presumption in favour of sustainable development – but nowhere is it more clearly defined. Reference is made to three legs of sustainability – economic, environmental and social – but economic is stressed. Is this rich territory for extended legal case arguments? And the value of ‘weight’ in

proposals is confused – ‘great’, ‘substantial’, ‘significant’, ‘considerable’. More rich territory for extended legal argument ? Certainty It puts local plans and certainty at the heart of the system – so long as they comply with the NPPF. But few will, due to new requirements. The quick change could mean a default of presumption in favour

of poorly defined sustainable development.

We believe the government recognises the need for clarity, certainty and conciseness, and wants the NPPF to deliver them. It is vital we use the consultation to help refine the draft to do this.

Colin Haylock is an architect, planner and RTPI senior vice-president

WWW.RIBAJOURNAL.COM : SEPTEMBER 2011

listened to the RIBA, with the NPPF stating that local authorities should ensure that local design review arrangements are in place and where appropriate, refer major projects for national design review. This will strengthen design review although planning authorities should also be directed to pay regard to advice given by panels. And a signpost to best practice guidance from Cabe, RIBA, RTPI and the Landscape Institute would ensure a consistent and high standard. In my experience the best panels are served by cross- disciplinary groups. Another positive is the emphasis placed

on pre-application consideration and the government’s desire to reduce over-emphasis on development control. So one indicator of the success of the reforms, therefore, would be a shift to front-load the system.

Back to the drawing board With the abolition of regional spatial strategies and the complete overhaul of national planning policy, local authorities will have to take their Core Strategies – part of

the Local Development Framework process – back to the drawing board. All local plans will have to comply with the NPPF, which in their absence will act as the default document for planning decisions and the presumption in favour of sustainable development will kick in. The government sees this as an incentive for

local authorities to put plans in place, although with many planning departments under increasing strain, there are concerns they will not be able to deliver. The NPPF seems an inadequate basis from which to make planning decisions and underlines the importance of proper planning at a local level. There remain clear tensions between growth

and the Conservative party’s localism agenda but there is no doubt that the new planning framework is unashamedly pro-growth and pro-development – it is no Nimby’s charter.

Questions remain It is clearly positive for architects and developers that the framework captures an encouraging attitude to development. But has the right balance been struck between growth and sustainable development? Does its pro- growth tone respond to today’s economic priorities rather than presenting a long-term vision for planning? Does growth mean loosening the control that the current system puts on lateral growth – instead encouraging densification? These questions will be debated and hopefully answered over coming months. n

The RIBA will submit a detailed response to the NPPF by October. Send comments to public.affairs@riba.org Philip Singleton is director of Facilitate Urban Ltd and chair of the RIBA Planning Group