National Planning Policy Framework

Consultation questions

We are seeking your views on the following questions on the Government’s proposal for a new National Planning Policy Framework.[1]

Email responses to:

Written responses to:
Alan C Scott
National Planning Policy Framework
Department for Communities and Local Government
Zone 1/H6, Eland House,
Bressenden Place
London
SW1E 5DU

(a) About you

(i) Your details

Name: / Cllr M White
Position: / Deputy Leader of the Council
Name of organisation (if applicable): / Borough of Poole (BoP)
Address: / Civic Centre, Poole, Dorset, BH15 2RU
Email Address: /
Telephone number: / 01202 633328

(ii) Are the views expressed on this consultation an official response from the organisation you represent or your own personal views?

Organisational responsex

Personal views

(iii) Are your views expressed on this consultation in connection with your membership or support of any group? If yes please state name of group.

Yes
Nox

Name of group:

(iv) Please tick the one box which best describes you or your organisation:

Private developer or house builder

Housing association or RSL

Land owner

Voluntary sector or charitable organisation

Business, consultant, professional advisor

National representative body

Professional body

Parish council

Local government (i.e. district, borough, county, unitary,etc.) x

Other public body (please state)

Other (please state)

(v) Would you be happy for us to contact you again in relation to this consultation?

Yesx

No

DCLG will process any personal information that you provide us with in accordance with the data protection principles in the Data Protection Act 1998. In particular, we shall protect all responses containing personal information by means of all appropriate technical security measures and ensure that they are only accessible to those with an operational need to see them. You should, however, be aware that as a public body, the Department is subject to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, and may receive requests for all responses to this consultation. If such requests are received we shall take all steps to anonymise responses that we disclose, by stripping them of the specifically personal data - name and e-mail address - you supply in responding to this consultation. If, however, you consider that any of the responses that you provide to this survey would be likely to identify you irrespective of the removal of your overt personal data, then we should be grateful if you would indicate that, and the likely reasons, in your response, for example in the comments box.
(b) Consultation questions

Delivering Sustainable Development

The Framework has the right approach to establishing and defining the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

1(a) – Do you agree?

Strongly agree

Agree
Neither agree or Disagree
Disagreex
Strongly Disagree

1(b) Do you have comments?(please begin with relevant paragraph number)

Spatial Planning
As a starting Point, BoP raises a fundamental concern with the NPPF in that is does not set out a clear national spatial planning strategyclarifying the Government’s vision for how and where the individual components such as housing, transport and employment need to inter link and be considered together to achieve better places (i.e. place shaping).
The NPPF is clearly focused on stripping back the role and function of planning to be a delivery mechanism for new housing and jobs and does not retain the principles of creating social responsibility and sustainable communities.
Presumption in favour of Sustainable Development
The Borough of Poole supports the principle of having a presumption in favour of sustainable development. This is not actually a change as the current planning system is already designed to encourage and approve sustainable development. However, BoP does raise concerns at the lack of a suitable and appropriatedefinition of sustainable development. There is a long standing and internationally accepted definition of sustainable development that originates from the Brundtland Commision 1987. The concept supports strong economic and social development while underlining the importance of protecting the natural resource base and the environment. This should form the basis for articulating what is then meant by sustainable development as the 2005 UK strategy did.The wording of the final NPPF should therefore be clear and unambiguous in its intent otherwise there will be continued uncertainty and delay within the planning system.
The primary concern is that the long accepted concept of spatial planning and sustainable development could be undermined by the NPPFs emphasis on economic growth over and above social and environmental capacities. This over emphasis on the government’s interpretation of a growth driven planning system runs like a thread through the document. This defeats much of the work of the past decade in building up evidence for ensuring the environment and communities can sustain growth and places should be shaped to respond to their unique capacities.
This approach is confirmed in Para 14 which states that LPA should grant permission where the plan is absent, silent, indeterminate or where relevant policies are out of date. This is a potentially dangerous national policy approach to take as it actually will promote development which is not sustainable in areas for whatever reason (and there could be many legitimate reasons) the plan is “absent, silent, indeterminate or where relevant policies are out of date”. Currently, where the local plan is insufficient, there is at least a strong national planning policy in place which can help make an informed decision on whether a development is sustainable or not. In the proposed new system, there is no so such national planning backup with the emphasis simply on permitting development where a local plan is perceived to be weak.
BoP strongly recommends that the Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development is reassessed and at the very least amended to provide a clearer steer of what should happen when a plan is deemed to be insufficient. The current wording is too vague and will lead to protracted discussions at the local level about whether a particular policy is relevant, out of date etc. or not.
In particular, the presumption in favour of sustainable development will also have significant ramifications for the many local authorities who have yet to adopt a Core Strategy (which are many). This will create a policy vacuum which could see opportunistic (rather than sustainable) development to proceed in the period between the NPPF coming into force and Local Authorities having an up to date Local Plan in place. There is a real risk of planning by appeal across the country.

Plan-making

The Framework has clarified the tests of soundness, and introduces a useful additional test to ensure local plans are positively prepared to meet objectively assessed need and infrastructure requirements.

2(a) Do you agree?

Strongly agree

Agree
Neither agree or Disagreex
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

2(b) Do you have comments?(please begin with relevant paragraph number)

BoP welcomes the retention of the existing tests of soundness in plan making and supports the high profile role afforded to plan making in the NPPF.
There is no objection in principle to the additional test of soundness but request that further clarification and guidance is provided in terms of how it is to be examined and what is required for Local Authorities to demonstrate it has been met at EiP.
In terms of neighbourhood planning the draft NPPF requires neighbourhood plans to be in general accordance with the Local Plan’s strategic policies. However, the NPPF also states that a non-strategic based neighbourhood policy takes precedence over a non-strategic local plan policy. This will be important on matters such as design which whilst usually framed in more general terms at the Local Plan level to allow flexibility in decision making, could be quickly superseded by strict controls at the neighbourhood level thereby indirectly hindering development. The potential conflicts between Local Plans and Neighbourhood Plans need to be addressed in the final NPPF to provide the clarity required to ensure that they contribute to achieving the positively framed planning system the draft NPPF seeks to establish.

The policies for planning strategically across local boundaries provide a clear framework and enough flexibility for councils and other bodies to work together effectively.

2(c) Do you agree?

Strongly agree

Agree
Neither agree or Disagree
Disagreex
Strongly Disagree

2(d)Do you have comments?(please begin with relevant paragraph number)

The referenceto the need to carry out strategic planning across boundaries is welcomedand it clearly provides flexibility for Local Authorities.
However, BoP considers that this section needs to be strengthened by including further guidanceon how the relationship between statutory Local Plans and non-statutory joint plans is expected to work. It would be helpful if the ‘duty to co-operate’ that is in the Localism Bill reinforced the need for strategic planning on a sub-national basis to ensure timely and ‘joined-up’ planning e.g. of infrastructure.
The principle and concept is right it is just lacking in detail and a national steer on how Local Authorities are expected to do this would be helpful. In particular, there is no identifiable co-ordinator of strategic planning in any given area with Local Authorities given the flexibility to decide who to cooperate with. This section would be strengthened by advising who should take the lead on overseeing strategic planning issues e.g. upper tier authorities.

Decision taking

In the policies on development management, the level of detail is appropriate.

3(a)Do you agree

Strongly agree

Agree
Neither agree or Disagree
Disagreex
Strongly Disagree

3(b)Do you have comments?(please begin with relevant paragraph number)

The onus in this section is clearly on decision makers to approve development and not delay that decision with considering environmental and other considerations too closely.
The implication in this section is that Local and Neighbourhood Plans will need to include detailed yes or no style criteria to allow decision makers to make quick decisions. The emphasis in this section is very much geared towards approving schemes which are generally acceptable and negotiating schemes to an approval which are submitted as generally unacceptable. This could lead to the erosion of planning judgement and opportunities for betterment. The end result will be the approval of a lot of missed opportunities to create better and more attractive environments.
This section should therefore be re-worded to provide more detail on where development management can really be an asset to delivering sustainable development and achieve better outcomes and not just be a decision making procedural function. As it stands it does not reflect development management principles but rather managing development.

Any guidance needed to support the new Framework should be light-touch and could be provided by organisations outside Government.

4(a)Do you agree

Strongly agree

Agree
Neither agree or Disagree
Disagreex
Strongly Disagree

4(b)What should any separate guidance cover and who is best placed to provide it?

In the absence of a detailed national strategy for key planning issues of national importance included in the NPPF, it will be critical to substitute this with supplementary guidance. A key example would be for the section on housing which talks broadly of allowing for 5 years land supply of deliverable sites with an additional allowance of 20%.
The allocating of land including 20% additional allowance is not going to increase house building in itselfand requires supplementary guidance on how Local Authorities can develop policies to assist with delivery over and above identifying sites.
Ideally additional guidance would come from the national level or at least from public sector bodies, impartial industry professionals and think tanks with endorsement by Government. The impact assessment states that the Government expect that good practice guidance would be developed by relevant external bodies. The Government need to be clear that if this occurs how:
  • The external bodies are selected and endorsed by the Government;
  • How the guidance should be treated as material considerations in decision making as well as informing the development of plans.

Business and economic development

The 'planning for business policies' will encourage economic activity and give business the certainty and confidence to invest.

5(a) Do you agree?

Strongly agree

Agree
Neither agree or Disagreex
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

5(b) Do you have comments?(please begin with relevant paragraph number)

There is no guarantee that the NPPF will encourage economic activity by simply applying and promoting the presumption in favour of development. In the case of Poole, the Council has a good supply of employment land which is available for new businesses to use should they want to. However, it is market conditions, land value, hope value of landowners and the difficulty in securing finance and not restrictive planning policy which is preventing investment in the Borough.
Further, a relaxation of allocations as is proposed in paragraph 75 is likely to have a negative impact in the long term on delivering employment as overtime and with market fluctuations there will naturally be pressure to release sites for other uses. Should the presumption in favour of sustainable development be applied during a particular market cycle employment allocations could be released for other uses. This will then in the longer term put pressure on Greenfield and Green Belt sites to be developed for employment when market conditions change and suitable land (which ordinarily would have been safeguarded) has already been used up.
We would suggest paragraph 75 is revised to stress that long term strategic sites need to be retained to allow Local Authorities to plan effectively over a reasonable time frame and to be robust to market fluctuations. Para 75 could then include a caveat to allow for early release where there is clear evidence to do so.

5(c) Whatmarket signalscouldbe most useful in plan making and decisions, andhow could such informationbe best used to inform decisions?

  • Take up of employment land;
  • Viability issues
  • Market projections
  • Local market knowledge
  • Identification of business needs

The town centre policies will enable communities to encourage retail, business and leisure development in the right locations and protect the vitality and viability of town centres.

6(a) Do you agree?

Strongly agree

Agree
Neither agree or Disagree
Disagreex
Strongly Disagree

6(b) Do you have comments?(please begin with relevant paragraph number)

The implied retention of PPS4 policy with regard to seeking a town centre first approach to retail and leisure is welcomed although it is not clear that this will actually be implementable due to the wording in the draft NPPF. The town centre first approach for retail, leisure and office has been successful in helping to regenerate town and city centres. For retailing the door appears to have been opened that allows retail development to go out of town. The final NPPF needs to be clear that town centres are where retail development should be and also make reference to the need for retailing to be flexible to respond to the urban grain of a location rather than impose standard formats wherever the location.
It is noted that offices have been removed from the sequential approach which raises the prospect of out of centre offices being brought forward. This policy shift has the potential to undermine centres if large scale new office development is directed away. This may impact on the delivery of sustainable locations with out of centre offices less likely to be able to offer a choice of transport options to and from workplaces than town centre locations. More land is also likely to be required for car parking that could have been used for other office space or landscaping.

Transport

The policy on planning for transport takes the right approach.

7(a) Do you agree?

Strongly Agree

Agree
Neither Agree or DisagreeX
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

7(b) Do you have comments?(please begin with relevant paragraph number)

The Borough of Poole would welcome some additional text that makes reference to the importance of transport infrastructure facilitating sustainable communities i.e. transport schemes need to be part of the wider package of creating better places for social cohesion and community integration and not be barriers to social engagement. Too many transport schemes fail to respond to their setting and discourage rather encourage alternatives to car borne travel. A statement upfront in the NPPF would help this cause.

Communications infrastructure

Policy on communications infrastructure is adequate to allow effective communications development and technological advances.

8(a) Do you agree?

Strongly Agree

Agreex
Neither Agree or Disagree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

8(b) Do you have comments?(please begin with relevant paragraph number)

Minerals

The policies on minerals planning adopt the right approach.

9(a) Do you agree?

Strongly Agree

Agree
Neither Agree or Disagreex
Disagree
Strongly Disagree

9(b) Do you have comments?(please begin with relevant paragraph number)

European Sites (Natura 2k) should be included in the list of areas where reserves should not be sought.

Housing

The policies on housing will enable communities to deliver a wide choice of high quality homes, in the right location, to meet local demand.