NPPF: What you need to know

Andrew PritchardDirector of Policy & Infrastructure

Introduction

● The View from DCLG● Background● What has the NPPF replaced (& what is still there)● What has changed (and what has not)● Transitional Arrangements● What about RSSs?● Assessing conformity with the NPPF● What may be the impact of the NPPF?● Conclusions

The View from DCLG (1)

“The NPPF is a framework for local decision making and it is for councils to make a judgement on its interpretation”

Rt Hon Greg Clark MP, Planning Minister (20 April 2012)

The View from DCLG (2)

“DCLG advice is not geared at telling you: ‘this is what the policy means’”

Steve Quartermain, Chief Planner (18 April 2012)

Background: Coalition Planning Reform Agenda

● Absolute commitment to housing and economic growth

● Continue to protect and enhance the natural and historic environment

● Put power back into the hands of local people through the removal of top down targets

● Delivering a simpler & more effective system

● Introduce powerful incentives so communities gain the benefits of growth

● Restore the idea that development can be a force for good

Background: NPPF Process ● NPPF proposed in ‘Open Source Planning’ and

was part of the Coalition Agreement● Initial ‘issues’ consultation Dec 2010● Highlighted in 2011 Budget Statement● PAG Draft published May 2011 ● Consultation draft published in July 2011● 16,000 responses ● Final NPPF published March 2012 and

implemented with immediate effect

NPPF has replaced…

● 21 PPS/PPGs● 9 MPS/MPGs● 2 circulars ● 11 CPO letters

Which leaves…

● PPS10 (waste)● 5 MPGs● National & Regional Aggregates

Guidelines● 32 circulars ● 54 CPO letters

plus…

● A new separate policy statement on planning for Gypsies & Travellers (replacing Circulars 01/06 & 04/07)

● A new ‘NPPF Technical Guidance’ document covering minerals and flood-risk issues previously part of MPS/PPSs

and…

● Existing PPG and PPS practice guides and some ‘stand alone’ annexes

● A range of other best practice documents including the Plan Making Manual, Housing Market Assessment Guidance etc

● …all subject to review but extant for the time being (so you may want to make sure you have an electronic copy of anything useful!)

in addition…

● 12 National Infrastructure Policy Statements

● Some of which are also relevant to local planning decisions (e.g. Renewable Energy Infrastructure NPS – see footnote 17 in NPPF)

What policy has changed?

Not as much as we might have expected from the draft, but still some significant changes, including:

● Presumption in favour of SD● Viability ● Housing ● Greenbelt & Green Space● Duty to Co-operate (see later presentation!)

Presumption in favour of SD

● Policy presumption (as opposed to the legal presumption in favour of the development plan)

● Emphasis on developing plans that meet ‘objectively assessed’ need and approving applications that are in conformity with plans quickly (subject to footnotes 9 & 10!)

● Without a plan, the NPPF becomes the starting point for decisions

● Model local plan policy available at: http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/planning/planninginspectorate/presumption

Viability

● An important new policy emphasis – driven by the current economic situation

● ‘Investment in business should not be over-burdened by the combined requirements of planning policy expectations’ (para 21)

● Plan policies should provide for ‘competitive returns to a willing land-owner and a willing developer to enable the development to be deliverable (para 173)

Housing (1)

● Plans should meet objectively assessed housing need in full (as long as this is consistent with the rest of the NPPF!)

● Sites should be ‘deliverable’ (capable of being built in 5 years)

● 5 years supply of deliverable sites required– plus buffer of 5% brought forward from later in the plan period, or 20% where a record of persistent under-delivery (para 47)

● No definition of persistent under-delivery – but would seem to include most councils in the current circumstances

Housing (2)● Affordable Housing definition in glossary a

condensed version of that in PPS3 (see Government response to DCLG Select Committee)

● Windfalls can be considered as part of housing supply (para 48) – but only if well evidenced and excludes garden land!

● Conversion to housing from commercial use should normally be approved provided no ‘strong economic reasons’ why not (para 51)

● Garden Cities are back! (para 52)

Greenbelt & Green Space ● Strong political pressure to maintain existing

greenbelts (ref footnote 9), and main substance of PPG2 remains

● Gypsies and Travellers sites are now ‘inappropriate’ in the Green Belt (G&T Policy)

● Some more flexibility within greenbelts for infill, replacing/extending buildings and local transport infrastructure, plus ‘Community Right to Build’ schemes

● New local green space designation – same development status as greenbelts

Other issues

● Brownfield emphasis remains, but no national target and subject to ecological considerations

● Quite a strong emphasis on design including reference to design review process (supported by OPUN/EMC initiative)

● Offices back as part of the town centre test● Employment sites can be maintained unless

there is ‘no reasonable prospect’ of development for that purpose (para 22)

What has not changed?

● The key issue is that we still have a ‘plan led’ planning system

● An adopted development plan is still ‘king’ (as long as it is consistent with national policy – which has always been the case).

● As long as this legal presumption remains, we have a viable planning system and councils can still have a strong measure of local control

Further reading…

● PAS NPPF self assessment checklist: www.pas.gov.uk

● Government Response to DCLG Select Committee Report on NPPF

http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/nppfresponse

Transitional Arrangements

● Adopted plans given full weight for one year, as long as only ‘limited conflict’ with NPPF (para 214)

● Emerging plan policies given weight relative to level of objections and conflict with NPPF (para 216)

● Saved policies still material, but trumped if in conflict with NPPF (para 215)

What does ‘limited conflict’ with the NPPF mean? ● No easy answer – it will be a question of

‘fact and degree’● PAS NPPF self assessment checklist will

help to highlight the issues important to you

● In the end it will probably come down to the extent to which the plan can flexibly meet need in a way that is deliverable and sustainable

What about RSSs?● No date for revocation yet – DCLG still working

through the consultation responses to the SEA reports

● Where it would be appropriate ‘regional strategy policies can be reflected in local plans by undertaking partial reviews…and LPAs may…draw upon evidence that informed regional strategies.’ (para 218)

● You may also want to consider capturing useful regional policies in non-statutory strategic statements

What may be the impact of the NPPF?● Will appeals rise in the short term as a

result of the NPPF?● Will the NPPF reduce the costs to

business?● Will the NPPF reduce delays in the

planning system?

Will appeals rise in the short term as a result of the NPPF?*

*Online survey by Planning Magazine

86.40%

13.60%

Yes

No

Will the NPPF reduce costs to business?*

*Online survey by Planning Magazine

33.30%

67.70%

Yes

No

Will the NPPF reduce delays in the planning system?*

*Online survey by Planning Magazine

22.6%

77.4%

Yes

No

Conclusions

● Do not expect any ‘divine insight’ from DCLG – it is down to you (plus PINS and the lawyers!) to work it out

● We are probably in for an extended period of uncertainty – so you will need to be flexible

● In the meantime, focus on understanding the evidence and working with Members and local communities to create deliverable plans

And Finally…

Good planning is still good planning!