PLANNING


Sounds like a plan?


Paul Clarke, reviews the changes and potential impact of the National Planning Policy Framework.


T


he new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) finally arrived at the end of March in a slightly longer format than was promised


and in a more watered down version than its draft published in July 2011. The NPPF does, however, deliver on its


intentions to simplify the huge amount of Government advice that has built up over a number of years on planning policy. This has to be welcomed in a world that has become ever more confusing in terms of gaining the most straightforward of planning permissions for development. Whilst it could be argued that the advice is now somewhat vague and imprecise, the main thrust is positive and proactive in terms of promoting growth within a plan lead environment. The starting point for the advice is in


achieving sustainable development and, while misquoting the resolution, it reiterates the Brundtland Commission Report in defining sustainable development. It also makes reference to the five principles of sustainable development established by the UK Sustainable Development Strategy. The approach to sustainable development seeks to create a balance between the three main issues of promoting a strong economy, having a strong, vibrant and healthy social community, and protecting the environment. The document is uninhibited in seeking


to make planning a positive tool for delivering sustainable development and clearly states that local planning authorities should look for solutions rather than problems. Whilst there are a number of other points to raise regarding this particular document, we believe this is its most important role in trying to change the mind-set of decision makers in seeking to gain the public perception that


32 MAY 2012 PROPERTYdrum


development is not necessarily a bad thing. Planning should be perceived as creating and enhancing the places where we live and work, it should be seen as pro-actively making things happen at the right place within the right timeframe. The NPPF reiterates that the


Development Plan remains the starting point for any planning decision. Proposed development should accord with an up to date Local Plan and any Neighbourhood Plans will be part of the structure. Councils have been given 12 months from the


THE MINISTER SAID:


“In recent years, planning has tended to exclude, rather than to include, people and communities. In part, this has been a result of targets being


imposed, and decisions taken, by bodies remote from them. Dismantling the unaccountable regional apparatus and introducing neighbourhood planning addresses this. In part, people have been put off from getting involved because planning policy itself has become so elaborate and forbidding – the preserve of specialists, rather than people in communities. This National Planning Policy


Framework changes that. By replacing over a thousand pages of national policy with around fi fty, written simply and clearly, we are allowing people and communities back into planning.”


RT HON GREG CLARK MP, MINISTER FOR PLANNING


publication of the NPPF (ie until 27th March 2013) in order to prompt them into securing the adoption of plans. To date, the Councils generally have been very slow at getting to grips with adopting Core Strategies and this is directed at speeding this process up. In terms of economic growth, the


document requires the planning system to do everything it can to support economic growth and give significant weight to it. The ‘Town Centre First’ policy has been strengthened and office development re-included with an exception for rural businesses. It draws attention to large-scale residential developments having to have a mix of uses, with key facilities such as schools and shops within easy walking distance. Also, hidden within the policy details,


is a note that sustainable development needs careful attention in terms of viability and costs in decision-making. The scale of obligation should still provide competitive returns to a willing landowner/developer to enable the development to be deliverable. Reference is also made to the


Community Infrastructure Levy that should support an incentivised new development “particularly by placing control over a meaningful proportion of


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70