Sustaining a growth agenda

David Merson looks at the issues raised by the emerging National Planning Policy Framework and the draft presumption in favour of sustainable development.

National Planning Policy Framework

The Planning Minister Greg Clark recently announced a review of planning policy with the intention of consolidating all policy statements, circulars and guidance documents into a single National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). This is not to be new policy but a convenient re-statement of relevant existing policy in a single document.

The NPPF will however, it is said by CLG, be: “localist in its approach, handing power back to local communities to decide what is right for them; used as a mechanism for delivering Government objectives only where it is relevant, proportionate and effective to do so; and user-friendly and accessible, providing clear policies on making robust local and neighbourhood plans and development management decisions.”

The document is to be shaped, at least in part, by planning professionals, local authorities, community groups and members of the public; and organisations and individuals have been invited to offer their suggestions on priorities and policies to be adopted. The intention is to produce a shorter, more decentralised and less bureaucratic NPPF.

Following the initial call for comments, a proposed draft NPPF has been produced by the Practitioners Advisory Group set up by the Minister to advise him. This will be subject to formal consultation in due course.

Whether the formal consultation document is to be available before the finalisation and Royal Assent to the Localism Bill later in the year remains to be seen. What is clear however is that there has been a significant shift in emphasis from the Conservatives’ original Open Source Planning green paper with its populist localism ideal to a much more growth orientated permissive approach as the default setting.

Presumption in favour of sustainable development

As part of a more streamlined planning system Greg Clark has now also published (15 June) the new 'presumption in favour of sustainable development'. This draft wording is published to give an early indication of the Coalition’s intentions, but this is not a formal consultation. The presumption will be at the heart of the new National Planning Policy Framework, on which Ministers plan to consult formally in July of this year. The presumption is said to be a “work in progress” which suggests that DCLG is open to revising it. Whether the Treasury will let it do so is an entirely different question.

The presumption is designed, with the growth agenda very firmly in mind, to get development underway whilst keeping some of the more vital environmental protections in place.

This should not come as any great surprise to those with a passing interest in all things planning. The Coalition has made no secret of its antipathy to planning and all those associated with it including planners and planning lawyers. The planning system is said to be one of the biggest barriers to development that will provide the homes wanted and the businesses need. The continuing mantra is that the system is slow, costly and lacks certainty. Not unsurprisingly the proposals are wholeheartedly endorsed by the business and the development industry.

The answer is said to be the presumption in favour of sustainable development but this requires that councils have a Local Plan in place which provides the basis for the local communities having a say in the sort of development they want and need in their areas.

The downside of not having an up to date plan in place will be that decisions on applications will be made in accordance with national policy. An interesting proposition when one considers that the current Local Development Framework (LDF) regime dates from 2004, yet only 30% of authorities have adopted a Core Strategy and only 53% have even published one. A cynic might suggest that the coalition’s approach was specifically designed to ensure that development proposals were approved without local input or scrutiny.

That said these plans, if in place, will set out the opportunities for local development and will form the basis for planning decisions which, where proposals are in accordance with Local Plans, should mean approval without delay and sustainable development getting underway faster.

Clearly development will not be allowed if it is clearly in conflict with the environmental and other safeguards in the National Planning Policy Framework.

The full draft presumption is as follows:

"There is a presumption in favour of sustainable development at the heart of the planning system, which should be central to the approach taken to both plan-making and decision-taking. Local planning authorities should plan positively for new development, and approve all individual proposals wherever possible.

Local planning authorities should:

• prepare local plans on the basis that objectively assessed development needs should be met, and with sufficient flexibility to respond to rapid shifts in demand or other economic changes
• approve development proposals that accord with statutory plans without delay and
• grant permission where the plan is absent, silent, indeterminate or where relevant policies are out of date

All of these policies should apply unless the adverse impacts of allowing development would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policy objectives in the National Planning Policy Framework taken as a whole."

Greg Clark and the Coalition’s position is promulgated on the basis that the proposals will ensure “the right sort of development, that everyone agrees is needed, gets approval without delay” while “placing a strong emphasis on the protection of the environment and local communities' interests”.

The problem however is that the Coalition’s approach is also founded on the proposition that “sustainable development involves making the necessary decisions now to realise our vision of stimulating economic growth and tackling the deficit, maximising wellbeing and protecting our environment, without negatively impacting on the ability of future generations to do the same”. This means that decisions will inevitably be based on whether or not the project represents sustainable development on the basis of its potential economic or fiscal benefits. This is of concern, not least of all, when considered in the context of the Localism Bill provision specifically legitimising the materiality of financial considerations in planning decision making.

Conclusion

All of this presupposes that local communities will accept the sort of development that the Minister is talking about – otherwise this goes nowhere, especially if there is an up to date Local Plan which excludes the development from the area. In which case the ‘localist’ position should, on the basis of the approach advanced, prevail unless we are to return to the form of top down centralist diktat from the previous Labour administration that the Coalition so vociferously rails against.

The lesson for local planning authorities and local communities is that if they wish to retain control of their own destinies and the development of their own local areas they should look to ensure that they have up to date local plans in place at the very earliest opportunity in order to underpin their ability to do so.

David Merson is Head of Planning and Environment at Steeles Law and can be contacted at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or telephone 020 7421 1742.