NewsBreakingOnline

The draft national planning policy framework risks ushering in a level of roadbuilding not seen since the 1930s, say campaigners Proposed planning laws risk destroying the character of many towns, and ushering in a level of countryside destruction and roadbuilding not seen since the 1930s, environment, transport and development groups warned on Tuesday. Four powerful organisations, including the National Trust, the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), the Campaign for Better Transport (CBT) and Friends of the Earth individually lambasted the proposals, saying that if they were not amended they could backfire on the government in the same way that proposals to sell off the forestry estate in England this year forced the government into an embarrassing U-turn . Ominously for the government, many of the same groups that opposed the sale of the forests are at the forefront of the criticism of the draft national planning policy framework (NPPF) , published on Monday by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). Most of the groups objecting have strong representation in Tory-held constituencies. “Planning is for people, not for profit,’ Dame Fiona Reynolds, director of the 3 million-strong National Trust, wrote in a statement . “This finally sounds the death-knell to the principle established in the 1940s that the planning system should be used to protect what is most special in the landscape, creating a tool to promote economic growth in its stead … Weakening protection now risks a return to the threat of sprawl and uncontrolled development that so dominated public debate in the 1930s.” A spokesman for the DCLG said the National Trust was wrong, telling Press Association: “The draft policy framework fulfils the commitment in the coalition agreement to protect the green belt and areas of outstanding natural beauty. There are similarly strong protections for the historic environment, which have been welcomed by heritage bodies. These protections are crystal clear in the document.” Shaun Spiers, director of CPRE, said : “This will make the countryside and local character much less safe from damaging and unnecessary development. If it is not amended, there will be battles against development across the country that will make the public revolt against the sale of the forests look like a tea party.” . Richard Hebditch , campaigns director for CBT, said: “It removes the ability of local communities to stop damaging out-of-town retail or office development. It will add to traffic on already congested roads and streets.” Paul de Zylva, of Friends of the Earth, said: “Ministers have come up with a developers’ charter which puts the interests of business ahead of people and the environment. Behind some nice buzz words the planning system is now so loaded in favour of building projects that it puts local communities and environmental protection in jeopardy.”. The NPPF, put out for consultation yesterday, is intended to speed up and simplify often complex laws at the same time as encouraging economic growth. It will replace 1,000 pages of national planning guidance with a 52-page document, whose key new criteria will be to presume in favour of development. The planning minister, Greg Clark, said on Monday : “Today’s proposals set out national planning policy more concisely, and in doing so make clearer the importance of planning to safeguarding our extraordinary environment and meeting the needs of communities, now and in the future.” The environment secretary, Caroline Spelman, added that the draft proposals “will give local communities the power to protect green spaces that mean so much to them”. The groups, who all support the principle of planning law reform and economic growth, argue that economic development must not come “at any price”. Their main arguments are: • It will focus developers’ and local authorities’ attention on the narrow grounds of short-term financial gain, rather than delivering the wider public benefit that good planning can deliver. • The NPPF’s idea of sustainable development puts too little weight on benefiting people and the environment. • Developers will only need to show that their proposals will deliver growth. Other considerations, such as impact on communities, nature and landscape, will be pushed aside.• Town centres will be further eroded as developers get easier permission to build on out-of-town greenfield sites rather than more expensive brownfield sites. There is also strong concern that communities will have to rely on a development plan to protect what they treasure and shape where development should go. Yet only some local authorities have plans in place and many local authorities and neighbourhood groups do not have the resources or specialist skills to create plans that integrate social, environmental and economic considerations. “Existing local plans will have to prove that they are in conformity with the new NPPF. Many areas have also not yet formally adopted existing local plans, so this could mean that the bulk of planning applications have to be assessed against the weak NPPF,” said Hebditch. The National Trust said: “If there is no up to date development plan, planning applications will automatically get consent.” Planning policy Travel and transport Green politics Rural affairs John Vidal guardian.co.uk