What are development frameworks?

With a sector steeped in jargon, let’s clarify what we’re talking about.

It’s important not to conflate them with “Local Development Frameworks” (LDF), the spatial planning strategy introduced by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. LDFs were “a suite of development plan documents” that replaced local plans to streamline the forward planning process.

Development frameworks are known under many different guises. Sometimes they’re called masterplans. Some areas – often more popular in rural authorities like Cheshire East – draw up neighbourhood plans. 20 years ago, you may have come across Area Action Plans.

Confused, yet?

Whatever their name, these planning documents focus on a well-defined localised area providing guidance and parameters on the type and nature of development that planning authorities want to see delivered.

Here’s why we have a soft spot for the development framework, the planning document that punches well above its weight with impact it can have in shaping a place for good.

Plugging a gap

The planning system is “plan-led”.

Which, as an aside, isn’t the case is all countries. But here in the UK we generally agree that it’s better to plan ahead, setting the strategic vision for the next 15 to 20 years on how a place should develop, and then devise proposals that align with the plan.

So far, so sensible.

The problem is, these authority-wide plans take years to prepare. Something that the 2004 shake up didn’t solve.

Because of that, too often they’re out of date by the time they’re published. A plan can be prepared based on one approach to calculating housing need, and before it’s adopted, the government has changed its approach. 17 housing ministers in 14 years hasn’t helped.

Development frameworks are quicker to prepare because they’re more focused. They’re not trying to cover every possible aspect of planning and development. They can have a very specific remit, like responding to the latest government guidance or changes in the market.

They plug the policy gap and are useful resources for LPAs and developers alike in their mutual quest to see sites unlocked and brought forward.

Facing the market

Because they’re quicker to write, development frameworks area brilliant vessel for capturing the direction and aspiration for an area.

Local plans fulfil a legal role and are important documents, but the market moves in its own ways, not adhering to the vision of a local plan no matter how well thought through.

It might make good planning sense to allocate a large, accessible brownfield site for new housing, but if remediation costs or landownership issues are too high or complex, the site won’t come forward without more intervention. Inevitably, market forces will make clear that a plan B might be needed.

Where local authorities can see that more intervention is needed, drawing up a development framework can focus on surmounting specific hurdles like market values or land ownership issues. They allow local authorities the opportunity to flesh out its ambitions, sign posting the scale, massing and land uses they want to see in an area.

In doing that they provide certainty and clarity to developers for land acquisitions and more.

Being responsive

A local plan is like a tanker in the ocean. Once its journey is set in motion, it’s not easy to turn course.

Local plans are not nimble enough to respond to changes in the economy, the national direction (such as when a new government comes to power) or market influences. They are resource heavy to prepare and consult on. And once adopted the only way to make changes is through a formal plan review.

In our sea faring analogy, development frameworks are the speedboat. Agile enough to change course when the weather changes.

Much change can happen in the market as Salford’s Greengate Development Framework demonstrates. The original historic core of Salford, Greengate was earmarked for transformation and growth but, at the time of the original 2005 guidance, this was envisioned to be largely low-rise in nature.

The redevelopment of Exchange Greengate should [be] generally 8-10 storeys in height, punctuated with the occasional higher towerblock… Typically, the generally narrow street widths across the Greengate area lend themselves to predominantly six storey building heights, perhaps rising to over ten storeys adjoining public open spaces and reducing to four storey accommodation around historic buildings.

After the 2008 global financial crisis came and went, the economic landscape was very different and so were the city council’s ambitions for the city.

The updated 2018 regeneration strategy reflects a different set of market circumstances and identifies plots where potential additional height would be welcomed.

Greengate is a great example of how responsive frameworks can be. The updated plan, which better reflected market circumstances, helped to unlock numerous high-profile sites continuing the momentum achieved at sites like Abito and Norton Court. The framework area is now completely unrecognisable from when the original 2005 guidance was prepared.

‍