Eddie Millar is a Policy Adviser at the RTPI
Another year draws to a close, and we get another revised National Planning Policy Framework, but from a new government. Labour have put planning reform at the heart of their mission for growth, and while planning has been in the news consistently over recent months, this revised NPPF is the first set of major changes to English national planning policy.
When we submitted our consultation response back in September, we were encouraged by many of the proposals set forth in the initial consultation but warned that local authorities needed sufficient support and guidance if they were being asked to step up to help the government achieve its housebuilding targets.
Almost three months later and we have the government’s response. Many of the proposed changes have been retained, but there have been a few new changes in the revised document published yesterday. The main thrust of the reforms focuses on strengthening the plan-made system, with higher housing targets for local authorities as well as further clarification on the ‘grey belt’ and the ‘golden rules’ for green belt release.
The focus of this blog is to digest some of the key changes for planners, what they might mean, and look forward to what further changes may be coming soon.
Housing need and the green belt
The revised Standard Method proposed in the consultation sparked concern and scepticism for many local authorities who will see their housing targets increase, some dramatically so. The bulk of the new stock-based formula remains, but with some tweaks to the affordability uplift. This slightly increases the numbers for those areas with significantly unaffordable housing stock, with equally decreased targets for more affordable areas, but the national target of 370,000 homes a year remains.
Much has been made of the challenge this will pose for local authorities. In our initial response to the revised NPPF, we re-stated the need for strategic planning arrangements to help ease the burden - particularly for those local authorities that have much bigger targets alongside land constraints - and direct housing to the most sustainable locations.
In this vein, we are pleased to see specific reference to sustainable locations included in the presumption as well as in the guidance for green belt release. In situations where the presumption is triggered, or where green belt land must be strategically released, it is vital that the development is sustainably located. As findings from our recent Location of Development 4 report showed, the right locations are key to healthy and sustainable communities.
We are also pleased that the government listened to concerns we raised around the ‘golden rules’ which govern released green belt land for major housing developments. While we encourage ambitious affordable housing provision, we argued in our consultation response that the blanket 50% requirement for affordable housing (as floated in the consultation) could undermine the viability of sites in some locations and stop sites coming forward.
Following publication, the requirement for affordable housing provision in the green belt remains high, but councils now have the ability to set their own requirements. Where land values allow, this should mean that councils can continue to pursue ambitious affordable housing policies for homes on the green belt.
Transitional arrangements and the route (map) ahead
With Local Plans across England at various stages of adoption, examination, or consultation, the NPPF also includes transitional arrangements that give local authorities three months before the new requirements kick in. These guidelines for plan-making are outlined in Annex 1 of the document.
It is imperative that the government continues to provide clear guidance to local authorities on plan-making, so councils can be confident in bringing forward local plans in a timely manner.
Back in October (at the request of our members), we published details on a proposed route map that would explain how local authorities can continue working on local plans before and as strategic planning arrangements come into effect.
If councils are forced to delay their plans due to confusion over what is required, this will result in prolonged spells of speculative development proposals, which would undermine the plan-led system, as well as public trust in the vital work that planners do.
Further reforms on the horizon
The revised NPPF has much for all those involved in planning to get their heads around. It also marks the start of further reforms expected before the New Year and in 2025, which are expected to include, among other things, National Development Management Policies.
The much anticipated devolution white paper should include further clarification on how strategic planning should function, and the government has just this week laid the groundwork for reform of planning committees in their working paper.
Matthew Pennycook pledged further funding for the planning profession in his new letter to the President of the RTPI. There are also expected changes to planning fees, which formed part of the consultation response but are not in the NPPF itself.
It is positive to see the government acknowledging the resourcing required to ensure the planning system is sufficiently resourced to help support the government’s mission for growth. We hope that 2025 will continue this positive direction of travel – watch this space.
