This is part of a Press Release - 24th March 2014 - by the Campaign to Protect Rural England
Planning reforms putting rural England under siege
· Countryside at risk as councils forced to accept two thirds of major development on appeal
· Towns and villages under siege while brownfield land remains unused
· Over 100 local authorities could be without valid local plans by General Election
· Improved planning policies needed to prioritise regeneration and reduce loss of countryside
The Government’s planning reforms are unnecessarily damaging the countryside and undermining local democracy while failing to prioritise the reuse of brownfield land and regeneration of urban areas, concludes a new report launched today (Monday) by the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE).
[The full report can be accessed by clicking on the button at the bottom of this article]
CPRE’s report Community Control or Countryside Chaos? analyses the impact of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) on the countryside in the two years since it was adopted. The research has found that the reforms are forcing local councils to accept major developments against their will in all parts of the country from Devon to Derbyshire and Suffolk to Staffordshire. It reveals plans for over 700,000 houses in the countryside - including 200,000 allocated for the Green Belt.
As a consequence, the countryside surrounding towns and villages across England is under siege (footnote 1). Sites already earmarked for housing are being left undeveloped while councils are under increasing pressure to allocate more and more land for future development.
This pressure has significantly slowed the rate at which local plans are being adopted, meaning councils are powerless to decide what land should be developed in the best interests of local communities.
The report also reveals that only a quarter of local authorities propose to prioritise brownfield sites over greenfield because the NPPF does not give enough support for them to do so.
CPRE’s research shows over two thirds of appeals for major housing have gone in favour of developers in the last year (footnote 2). Councils are increasingly reluctant to defend an appeal due to the risk of incurring costs, which can go into the hundreds of thousands of pounds if they reject inappropriate development that is ultimately overturned (footnote 3).
Shaun Spiers, Chief Executive of the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said:
‘This report provides firm evidence from across England that the Government’s planning reforms are not achieving their stated aims. Far from community control of local development, we are seeing councils under pressure to disregard local democracy to meet top-down targets.
‘Local authorities are having to agree fanciful housing numbers and allocate huge areas of greenfield land to meet them. Where they lack an up to date plan, the countryside is up for grabs and many villages feel under siege from developers. But tragically the result is not more housing, and certainly not more affordable housing – just more aggro and less green space.
‘The Government urgently needs to rethink its planning policies. Otherwise, its defining legacy will be – in the words of Nadhim Zahawi MP – the “physical harm” it does to the countryside. In recent weeks there have been some signs that Ministers are willing to do more to promote brownfield development and protect the Green Belt. This is welcome, but much more needs to be done to protect the countryside, put communities back in the driving seat, and build the new homes the country needs.’
Case studies
1. Developers are increasingly seeking to target green fields around several small towns and villages. CPRE has compiled a number of case examples from across England that are set out in p.10 of our new report. For example, there are proposals for development in Kentford, near Newmarket in Suffolk, that if successful, would double the population of that settlement.
2. CPRE analysed 58 Government planning appeal decisions covering ‘major’ proposals (i.e. for ten or more houses) in the period between April 2013 and February 2014. Of these, 39 developments (67% of the cases analysed) were granted. Full details of areas of the country affected are available from CPRE’s press office. The latest Government figures run to the end of March 2013 and show a steady increase in the proportion of ‘major’ appeals granted to 46%, from 31.7% in 2008/9.
3. For example Fylde Borough Council lost £100, 000 in costs following failure to defend an appeal in the area.
Planning reforms putting rural England under siege
· Countryside at risk as councils forced to accept two thirds of major development on appeal
· Towns and villages under siege while brownfield land remains unused
· Over 100 local authorities could be without valid local plans by General Election
· Improved planning policies needed to prioritise regeneration and reduce loss of countryside
The Government’s planning reforms are unnecessarily damaging the countryside and undermining local democracy while failing to prioritise the reuse of brownfield land and regeneration of urban areas, concludes a new report launched today (Monday) by the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE).
[The full report can be accessed by clicking on the button at the bottom of this article]
CPRE’s report Community Control or Countryside Chaos? analyses the impact of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) on the countryside in the two years since it was adopted. The research has found that the reforms are forcing local councils to accept major developments against their will in all parts of the country from Devon to Derbyshire and Suffolk to Staffordshire. It reveals plans for over 700,000 houses in the countryside - including 200,000 allocated for the Green Belt.
As a consequence, the countryside surrounding towns and villages across England is under siege (footnote 1). Sites already earmarked for housing are being left undeveloped while councils are under increasing pressure to allocate more and more land for future development.
This pressure has significantly slowed the rate at which local plans are being adopted, meaning councils are powerless to decide what land should be developed in the best interests of local communities.
The report also reveals that only a quarter of local authorities propose to prioritise brownfield sites over greenfield because the NPPF does not give enough support for them to do so.
CPRE’s research shows over two thirds of appeals for major housing have gone in favour of developers in the last year (footnote 2). Councils are increasingly reluctant to defend an appeal due to the risk of incurring costs, which can go into the hundreds of thousands of pounds if they reject inappropriate development that is ultimately overturned (footnote 3).
Shaun Spiers, Chief Executive of the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said:
‘This report provides firm evidence from across England that the Government’s planning reforms are not achieving their stated aims. Far from community control of local development, we are seeing councils under pressure to disregard local democracy to meet top-down targets.
‘Local authorities are having to agree fanciful housing numbers and allocate huge areas of greenfield land to meet them. Where they lack an up to date plan, the countryside is up for grabs and many villages feel under siege from developers. But tragically the result is not more housing, and certainly not more affordable housing – just more aggro and less green space.
‘The Government urgently needs to rethink its planning policies. Otherwise, its defining legacy will be – in the words of Nadhim Zahawi MP – the “physical harm” it does to the countryside. In recent weeks there have been some signs that Ministers are willing to do more to promote brownfield development and protect the Green Belt. This is welcome, but much more needs to be done to protect the countryside, put communities back in the driving seat, and build the new homes the country needs.’
Case studies
1. Developers are increasingly seeking to target green fields around several small towns and villages. CPRE has compiled a number of case examples from across England that are set out in p.10 of our new report. For example, there are proposals for development in Kentford, near Newmarket in Suffolk, that if successful, would double the population of that settlement.
2. CPRE analysed 58 Government planning appeal decisions covering ‘major’ proposals (i.e. for ten or more houses) in the period between April 2013 and February 2014. Of these, 39 developments (67% of the cases analysed) were granted. Full details of areas of the country affected are available from CPRE’s press office. The latest Government figures run to the end of March 2013 and show a steady increase in the proportion of ‘major’ appeals granted to 46%, from 31.7% in 2008/9.
3. For example Fylde Borough Council lost £100, 000 in costs following failure to defend an appeal in the area.