The changing tide within the UK’s planning system
In case you’ve not heard; the planning system is undergoing something of an identity crisis.
The bold and visionary 2012 NPPF that supported growth gave us industry folk something to smile about. Now, with the proposed changes currently under consultation, it is looking fairly unrecognisable.
Does it really matter to developers?
Only time will tell if all of these proposals will make their way into the final revised NPPF, but one thing is clear: the tide is changing in the government’s agenda when it comes to planning and development. No longer is growth the synonym of development. The overall tone of the consultation document is decidedly anti-growth.
So, whilst there’s still time to have your say on the proposals, here are three key things that affect developers that we think you need to know.
A renewed emphasis on beauty
The 2021 NPPF elevated “beauty” (distinctly different from high-quality design) as a key consideration, marking a shift from the 2012 NPPF which doesn’t use the word beauty at all when discussing design.
The latest proposed changes continue along this trajectory with added emphasis. And just to make sure we got the memo, Chapter 12 will be renamed “Achieving well-designed and beautiful places”.
The government’s consultation document states that beauty should be the benchmark that all new developments should meet.
The overall message seems to be that addressing housing need is all well and good but if a proposal doesn’t pass the beauty pageant it’ll become a lot harder to secure support.
We’re strong believers that you don’t have to sacrifice good design in a commercially-savvy scheme. But beauty is far too subjective and amorphous a concept to base planning decisions on. The standard for a beautiful affordable housing scheme will be vastly different from a beautiful bespoke house in an AONB.
We recommend positive, proactive discussions with the local planning authority at the outset the reach a scheme that’s mutually supported, to avoid having to open pandora’s beauty box at planning committee or, worse, the appeal stage.
A watering down of the five-year housing land supply test
Reading these proposed changes in the draft NPPF, you’d be forgiven for thinking that housing delivery is a bad thing.
Through a variety of proposed changes (scrapping the 20% buffer, reducing the requirement to four years for plans undergoing examination, and deducting past over-delivery from new plan requirements) NPPF 2023 will water down the five-year housing land supply mechanism significantly.
Plus, the presumption in favour of sustainable development will clarify that “densities significantly out of character with an area” (resulting from having to meet housing need in full) would count as an adverse impact you can refuse permission for.
In other words, it’s OK not to meet your housing need.
It’s part of the government’s efforts to get local plans adopted more quickly (alongside its decision that plans no longer have to be “justified”. Oh dear). But it also reveals the government’s true feelings on housing. Our government no longer sees delivering housing in the same category as positive growth.
If you’ve ever benefitted from the “tilted balance” (where housing policies are deemed out-of-date because of a lack of housing supply and so permission should be granted unless adverse impacts “significantly and demonstrably” outweigh the benefits) then this proposed change is really significant.
Plans are less likely to be considered out-of-date (because of the watering down of housing tests) and even if they are, the government is now saying that preventing increased densities is a justifiable reason to outweigh the benefits that your proposal would generate.
A renewed focus on brownfield
It’s not all doom and gloom though. We’ve picked out one proposed amendment that will be welcomed by many of our clients.
The government has long struggled to grapple with the tension of providing sufficient housing and preserving the Green Belt.
Their latest answer to this is to reinforce that development should be focused on brownfield sites in cities and urban centres. (Clearly increasing densities in urban areas doesn’t count in ministers’ minds as something that would be an adverse impact, see above).
It’s not exactly a new concept (NPPF 2012 plainly encouraged the effective use of brownfield land), but by stating that urban local authorities should take on proportionally more of the nation’s new housing, the government is putting out its stall: housing proposals in urban centres are to be encouraged.
Setting aside the wider debate about whether this is really the right response to ensuring a suitable supply of housing to meet needs, it’s good news for developers whose portfolio of sites focuses on previously developed land. So if you’ve got a tricky infill site that you’d been sitting on for a few years, now might be the right time to build a planning case for it.
And one close shave (for now)
One of the Tory rebels’ more outlandish proposed amendments was that of the “community right to appeal”.
Yes, you heard us correctly.
Allowing a community to appeal against a planning approval would bring even more uncertainty to an already uncertain and risk-filled development process.
No longer would you be able to pop that champagne after your approval (and JP period). You’d also have the added uncertainty of knowing that the community would be able to rally itself together to appeal your approval.
It’s enough to give you sleepless nights.
Whether it does eventually make it further than the backbenchers or not, we know from experience that the more emphasis put on genuine community engagement, the smoother the planning process will be, regardless of whether the community can take you to appeal.
The proposed NPPF changes represent something of a sea change in the overall thrust of our most important national policy framework, and there are a whole host of proposed changes to the NPPF that may impact on the planning prospects of your site. If the planning system seems to be changing faster than you can keep up, get in touch and let us help. We’ll make sure you don’t miss a beat.