SPC / News

Please find below the full text of Julian Smith’s submission and letter to the Planning Minister: 14/10/2011

My constituency, at 900 square miles, is one of the largest, most rural and most beautiful of any in the country. It is important that I play my part in protecting it whilst at the same time recognising the need for economic growth and affordable housing. This must be contained within a planning framework that reflects the needs of and benefits to local communities.

I welcome the simplification of planning guidance that the Draft National Planning Policy Framework provides but there are inevitably challenges in this reduction and, in its present form, I do not believe it is right for Skipton and Ripon. I give my main reasons below and would of course be happy to discuss these further with you. This summary should be taken alongside the many additional representations I have made on behalf of constituents.

Greenfield

Whilst the Framework confirms the protection for the green belt, my constituents are very concerned about the lack of protection for greenfield sites. We have significant amounts of greenfield and there is a very strong feeling that green space and greenfields should be protected and that a brownfield first policy should be adopted in the revised framework. Whilst the protections for selected green spaces are present in the current document these go nowhere near far enough to protect the green and pleasant land across my constituency.

Sustainable Development

Much reference has been made to the term ‘sustainable development’ and I believe clarification is needed over what ‘sustainable’ actually means. Does it, as the Prime Minister has recently suggested, include sustainability of the countryside and environment or does it, as some opposed to this Framework have suggested, solely mean economically sustainable. This lack of definition is concerning to many of my constituents and I would request that there is much tighter definition in the next draft so these can be discussed and debated.

Localism and Local Plans

The principle of Localism has been widely embraced especially in the context of decisions being taken at local level but there are serious concerns as to how this will be reconciled with the presumption in favour of development and other parts of the Framework. As not all local plans are up to date in our area there is an additional concern that under the current Draft Framework the national guidance will prevail. I do not believe the document as it stands would give uniform guidance to planning authorities and the planning inspectorate. This is a recipe for confusion, legal challenges and delays in the process – exactly the situations I know the Government is trying to avoid.

Neighbourhood Plans

I have been keen to promote Neighbourhood Plans since their suggestion in the Localism Bill and they have been embraced by communities across my constituency. However, the Draft Framework is opaque about the priority placed on them when considering developments. Many communities across my constituency have spent significant amounts of time assessing housing need and developing outline plans. If communities agree plans that are accepted by residents and business, these should surely be binding.

There is also a strong feeling that a right of appeal should be afforded to local communities where they believe a decision has been made which is contrary to the agreed Plan. Constituents have also asked that stricter time limits for development to actually take place should also be considered for applications that have been agreed.

General comments

Time after time during meetings with my constituents, I hear allegations of what they claim are, “unacceptable tactics being employed by developers with individuals, groups and councils to try and get proposals approved.” By leaving more aspects open to interpretation, I believe there is a danger that planning authorities, with limited budgets, will be unable to contend with developers with much greater resources. Many communities believe they could be forced down the path of developments even when Neighbourhood Plans and councils oppose them, simply because planners do not want to run the risk of a long, drawn out legal process they do not have the resources to deal with them.

As I stated at the beginning of my letter I welcome the Government’s aims to simplify the planning system. However, it is important that there is clarity in any new system. I believe the document as currently drafted leaves room for contradictory interpretations of the guidelines which would in turn lead to conflict and potentially gridlock in the system. Nor does it offer my constituents the assurances they seek regarding the protection of green spaces and greenfields. The wording of the Framework is of great importance and I hope that the document which results from the current consultation will be open to further discussion and scrutiny.