As the consultation on proposed changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) drew to a close in late September 2024, the future of Britain’s housing landscape hung in the balance. To delve deeper into this critical issue, I spoke with Caroline Mitchell, a senior planner at Urban Futures Consultancy, who has been closely following the developments and their potential impact on the housing market.
Focus360 Energy: property compliance services – pre-planning to post-construction. Learn more.
Meeting Caroline in her cosy office in central Manchester, I was struck by her passion for urban planning and her deep understanding of the intricacies involved in shaping the future of our cities. Over a steaming cup of tea, she shared her insights into the proposed planning reforms and what they might mean for Britain’s ambitious housing goals.
Marcia Snyder: Caroline, can you tell us about the proposed changes to the NPPF and their significance?
Caroline Mitchell: Absolutely, Marcia. The proposed changes are quite substantial. The reintroduction of mandatory housing targets is a key element. Previously, local planning authorities (LPAs) were only required to meet housing needs “as much as possible,” but now they must meet the identified needs in their areas. This marks a shift towards a more prescriptive approach, which is necessary given our ambitious target of building 300,000 homes annually.
MS: That’s quite a target, considering the historical averages. What challenges do you foresee?
CM: Indeed, the target is ambitious. One of the biggest challenges is ensuring that LPAs have the resources to handle the increased workload. Many councils have been struggling due to a lack of funding and personnel, which means they might not have the capacity to process complex planning applications efficiently. The government’s commitment to recruiting 300 planning officers is a step in the right direction, but it’s not enough. We need a coordinated strategy to recruit and train more officers and improve the skills of existing staff.
MS: How do you see the introduction of the “grey belt” affecting development plans?
CM: The grey belt is an intriguing concept. It includes previously-developed land and parts of the green belt that contribute less to its intended protective purpose. By prioritising these areas for development, we can potentially unlock more land for housing without resorting to extensive green belt development, which is often contentious. However, if brownfield and grey belt sites are insufficient, LPAs might still need to release green belt land, which could face significant opposition from local communities.
MS: Speaking of communities, how important is their role in the success of these reforms?
CM: Local communities play a crucial role. Often, the adversarial nature of planning can lead to a “Not In My Back Yard” or Nimbyism mentality. It’s important that developers and councils engage with local residents from the outset. By involving them in the planning process and addressing their concerns—perhaps by offering local benefits like improved amenities or infrastructure—we can foster a more collaborative environment. This approach helps not only in gaining community support but also in ensuring that developments are beneficial to all stakeholders.
MS: What about the long-term local plans that many councils lack?
CM: Long-term local plans are vital. They provide a blueprint for sustainable development and help manage growth effectively. Unfortunately, many councils are working with outdated plans, and this hinders progress. Updating these plans with a revised “test for soundness” would streamline the planning process and ensure that developments align with national targets while meeting local needs.
MS: Are there any concerns that the new planning reforms might not achieve their intended goals?
CM: There are always concerns with such sweeping changes. Without adequate resources and community engagement, even the best-laid plans can falter. Moreover, political changes can disrupt continuity, as we’ve seen in the past. It’s crucial that the government remains committed to these reforms and supports LPAs with the necessary tools and funding.
MS: Finally, what do you see as the key takeaway from these proposed changes?
CM: The key takeaway is that planning reform is just the beginning. To truly get Britain building again, we need a holistic approach that includes legal changes, resource allocation, and community engagement. It’s a complex puzzle, but with the right pieces in place, we can meet our housing needs and create vibrant, sustainable communities.
As I left Caroline’s office, it was clear that the road ahead for planning reform is challenging yet full of potential. The proposed changes to the NPPF represent a significant step towards addressing Britain’s housing crisis, but success will depend on the collective efforts of the government, planning authorities, developers, and communities. It’s a journey that requires patience, collaboration, and a shared vision for a better future.
By Marcia Snyder
Be the first to comment