In July this year the Government published a draft of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) that aims to condense several hundred pages of separate planning polices into a single 50 odd page document. Its aims are twofold:
- Reduce the red tape that is endemic in the current planning system
- Promote positive planning for sustainable development and economic recovery
The draft publication was accompanied by a loud hoo-haa over changes to policy in areas designated as Green Belt with the CPRE (among others) decrying the end of the Green Belt is nigh. However, in relation to renewable energy schemes the NPPF says that “many” such schemes are still “likely” to be incompatible with the Green Belt. It does, however open the door where it can be demonstrated that “special circumstances” exist such that the wider environmental benefit outweigh any harm to the Green Belt. This seems eminently sensible since in most Green Belt areas there are parcels of land close to major road or rail networks or other man-made structures such as electricity pylons etc.
In such areas, for example like Talbot Farm (South Glos) it seems daft to argue about inappropriate development when the site is right next to the M4!
Outside of Green Belt areas the NPPF says planners should plan positively for sustainable development of which, it says, renewable energy schemes are a key enabling technology in the transition towards a low carbon (ie sustainable) economy. It goes further to suggest there should be a “presumption in favour” of such schemes providing that national policies are adhered to.
Here lies the rub. Does the NPPF actually replace PPS1, 2, 3, 4, 5 etc? Because the NPPF is quite sparse on detail it suggests that planning authorities will still use the companion guides to existing national policies (eg PPS5 for heritage and PPS22 for renewables). In a March 2011 written statement Greg Clark (the Minister of State for Decentralisation) informed planning authorities to start using the new guidelines with immediate effect. Adding:
“The Government’s top priority in reforming the planning system is to promote sustainable economic growth and jobs. Government’s clear expectation is that the answer to development and growth should wherever possible be ‘yes’, except where this would compromise the key sustainable development principles set out in national planning policy.
The Chancellor has today set out further detail on our commitment to introduce a strong presumption in favour of sustainable development in the forthcoming National Planning Policy Framework, which will expect local planning authorities to plan positively for new development; to deal promptly and favourably with applications that comply with up-to-date plans and national planning policies; and wherever possible to approve applications where plans are absent, out of date, silent or indeterminate.”
According to the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) …
“the document represents an attempt to condense more than 1,000 pages of existing guidance into just 52. [The NPPF is] a significant step forward in enabling the growth the UK requires.”
It would appear that the NPPF represents a major shift in emphasis and it will be interesting to watch the first batch of planning refusals as they proceed through the appeals process should planning authorities not head the call to action from Mr Clark. That said, in the Impact Assessment document published alongside the NPPF the government clearly hope that the presumption in favour of sustainable development will lead to fewer planning applications ending up at appeal. Tax payers in Cumbria might appreciate this after it was leaked that just one authority alone spent over £80,000 fighting wind turbine appeals.