89% of councils think the NPPF puts greenfield land at risk, report says

One in 27 councils has indicated that the definition of sustainable development in the draft NPPF is adequate. The survey found that 96% of councils are not happy with the definition, according to the report.

CPRE analysed the responses to the draft NPPF consultation from a cross section of 27 councils and its research shows that many English authorities are "highly critical of the Government’s proposed planning reforms".

When asked whether or not they think that greenfield land will be protected, only 11% of councils responded positively, which shows that only one in nine councils think that greenfied land will be protected.

Three quarters of councils are unhappy with the transitional arrangements; 75%of those councils questioned believe that the transitional arrangements for moving from the ‘old system’ to the ‘new’ one are insufficient, the report found.

Councils’ main concerns are about the definition of sustainable development; the lack of emphasis on re-using brownfield land, and the need for appropriate transitional arrangements to ensure a smooth shift to a ‘new system’.

Only one of the nine councils which commented on the issue thought ‘ordinary’ (non-designated) countryside would be adequately protected from development.

 “It’s clear that many of the experts working at the coal face of local planning share similar concerns to CPRE about the draft NPPF," said Kate Houghton, planning officer at CPRE.

"Anxiety over the definition of sustainable development and transitional arrangements are especially prominent. This confirms that a lack of clarity in these areas could severely undermine the planning system."

CPRE concluded that "the Government cannot afford to push through its reforms without taking account of these widely held concerns. Changes need to be made to the planning system, but if we don’t get them right we risk causing long term damage to both our urban and rural landscapes”, said Houghton.

The draft planning reforms have been billed as one of the Government’s key tools for stimulating economic growth, but CPRE does not believe that the current planning system acts as a barrier to growth. Local councils have criticised what they themselves believe is an over emphasis of economic aims in the draft planning proposals, at the expense of social and environmental factors, the report said.

Councils have expressed concern that ambiguities in the draft NPPF could lead to a raft of appeals which would lead to further cost and delay for councils and developers, the report said.

“[Sustainable development] will not provide a suitable foundation for decision-making in an adversarial planning system unless it is defined in precise terms for that specific purpose. At present, the NPPF does not do this. It uses a number of different definitions,” said Tunbridge Wells Council.

Rural councils questioned how well the changes will protect the ordinary, undesignated countryside that makes up over half of England’s rural landscape.

"Protection of the wider countryside has been weakened as there is no longer an explicit reference to the need to protect it for its own sake,” said Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council.

City councils are also unhappy with the draft NPPF. Their concerns, however, are focussed on housing challenges in combination with a lack of protection for greenfield and green belt land, the report finds.

“The NPPF is not fit for purpose in tackling housing challenges and opportunities in Leeds and will lead to a significant pressure upon greenfield and green belt land, undermining priorities to promote regeneration in inner city/brownfield locations,” Leeds City Council said.

CPRE has used its findings to urge the Government to reconsider the councils’ responses to the draft NPPF and "if the Government is serious about localism, it must listen to and act on the very real concerns raised by local councils" said Houghton. “We hope that the final framework will offer clear policies which properly integrate economic, environmental and social objectives. Only this will allow planning to fulfil its important role in facilitating genuinely sustainable development.”