New NPPF published

What does the new NPPF mean for economic growth and development?

Hardisty Jones responded to the NPPF consultation back in March and it’s good to see movement on several of the issues we and many others raised. A few points stood out to us:

– PPG update confirmed: Government has committed to updating Planning Practice Guidance, which is long overdue given how heavily it’s relied on for Economic Development Needs Assessments and similar plan-making evidence base work.

– Well-connected stations redefined: The threshold has moved from the top 60 to the top 80 Travel to Work Areas (TTWAs). We raised concerns about the TTWA approach in an earlier article (see link in comments), including the fact that TTWAs don’t allow places to sit within more than one area – a limitation in polycentric economies where commuters head in multiple directions – and that the underlying commuting data is now well over a decade old. Widening the net to the top 80 helps, but doesn’t resolve the underlying methodological issues.

– Development outside settlement boundaries: Government has expanded and clarified the supported categories, including telecommunications infrastructure and minerals processing. We’d argued for this to go further – recognising, for example, defence-related and other ‘bad neighbour’ uses needing separation from residential areas – but this hasn’t been taken forward.

– Annex C missing economic evidence: Economic assessments are absent from the information requirements for planning applications set out in Annex C. We flagged that this may leave a gap in the consideration of socio-economic impacts in decision making, particularly given proposals to remove economic impacts in the move from EIA to Environmental Outcomes Reports. Despite a change in Prime Minister, the Labour Government’s first mission is still to kickstart economic growth, and revisions to the planning system should be working to achieve this. However, Government has noted requirements should be considered on a case-by-case basis, and with economic benefits now afforded substantial weight, this is an opportunity for applicants to centre the economic case and strengthen their position in the planning balance.

– Renewable energy: We welcome recognition that the economic benefits of renewable energy are considered substantial, but supporting infrastructure such as supply chain and employment land requirements still isn’t explicitly factored in.

– Freight and logistics: A clearer definition has now been provided, which should help bring more consistency to how these uses are assessed.