RIBA says words in proposed framework are not defined enough
Proposals to update national planning rules to increase focus on maintaining the existing “character” of local areas and promote “beauty” in new development could be counterproductive and will require an influx of design talent at local planning authorities, architects have said.
RIBA also warned that changes to the National Planning Policy Framework outlined in the Levelling-Up and Regeneration Bill, such as a relaxation of requirements for local authorities to demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable land for housing, could slow the delivery of new homes in some areas.
Its concerns come in a 20-page response to a government consultation on the planning reform elements of the bill.
RIBA said the use of descriptive words such as “character” and “beauty” were “problematic in the context of the proposed revisions of the NPPF” because they were subjective issues open to interpretation.
“While the NPPF stipulates that principles in local design guides or codes will be one measure of character or beauty, we are not fully satisfied that these will provide the level of definition necessary to ensure that character is not used as a reason to refuse necessary and otherwise high quality development,” it said.
Elsewhere, the RIBA consultation response argues that while “beauty is an objective of architecture” it is “only one element” of creating a successful building or place. It adds that affordability, accessibility and sustainability also needed to be key considerations.
“Beauty must be incorporated into a broader definition – quality design – which is focused on securing positive outcomes for the people that will use and interact with the place,” RIBA said. “This in turn can only be achieved through the improvement of the wider planning and development process, rather than overtly prescriptive guidance on the style of new development.”
RIBA said members who fed into its consultation response felt that discussions about the importance of beauty that were not accompanied by a commitment to include architects and qualified designers in planning departments felt “short-sighted”.
It added that one outcome could be a focus on schemes considered to be “beautiful” but which had poor sustainability credentials. Another concern was that a requirement to fit in with the “existing character” of an area could be a counterproductively low bar for areas “characterised by poor-quality development and a lack of amenities”.
The consultation closes later today.
1 Readers' comment