The Full #NPPF Consultation Response in One Post

Cross post from Campaign Against Sprawl

We have the draft of our comments on the NPPF, tracks changes by paragraph and a full alternative version. The last part which we will complete this week is the comments on the impact assessment.

The consultation questionaire responds to the consultation questions.

This isnt a good way to comment para. by para. so a separate database report of track changes has been produced.

You can also see the filemaker original, unfortunately when you export to excel you lose all the strikeouts and ins.

The key document is the proposed alternative draft. Many of the changes are whole new or rewritten sections so not convenient to put in the database. We have tried to keep this aligned with the database but this is difficult. In the event of any conflict the alternative draft takes precedence.

This is the second version of the alternative draft. We have had a lot of feedback and this is reflected in this draft, which has also had a thoroughgoing over for errors and to ensure consistency of language. The section on contaminated land and major hazards has been rewritten. The policy on brownfield first has been refined and brought right to the front, more work on the sustainability definitions and a diagram. The work on the single planning statement has been refined and linked better to other sections. The ‘presumption’ section has been tweaked, especially the section on what happens when the plan is ‘out of date’. Correction of some errors and further clarification over windfalls in the housing supply section.

The alternative draft is getting a lot of attention from different groups many of whom are using it as the basis of their response. There is also wider interest.

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “The Full #NPPF Consultation Response in One Post

  1. Pingback: #NPPF Response to Consultation – Collected in One Post « Decisions, Decisions, Decisions

  2. Pingback: A Better Presumption #NPPF « Decisions, Decisions, Decisions

  3. Pingback: Planning Picks up Story on Our Campaign Against Sprawl Alternative #NPPF draft « Decisions, Decisions, Decisions

  4. I’m confused by this alternative NPPF – it doesn’t include superfluous use of commas, sweeping statements of the obvious (but with no teeth whatsoever) or anything that naïvely/deliberately throws the baby out with the bathwater. What are the odds on the Government making a bold statement that this is what they want as part of the consultation but that they’re going to ignore it and press ahead with their own ideas anyway, before doing a u-turn and adopting any bits of it that they think won’t upset their CBI paymasters too much?

      • Many Thanks. I am building up a list of the most useful points that a northern city like Manchester or Liverpool should be considering when thinking about the NPPF. While the protect the countryside lobby may be useful for reining in the Coalition, it is only the smaller voices that are raising the other NPPF ‘gremlins’ and little seems to have been said about the impact that might be felt in inner cities, from the brownfield no longer first change, to the emasculation of the same for ‘town centre’. Moreover resource starved northern cities will be tempted to welcome the the prospect of being free to allow development more widely so that they can complete important (to them) infrastructure projects for their communities. The headlines shriek of a concreted countryside, but not of hollowed out cities.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s