CPRE Sussex has this week expressed serious concerns regarding the draft National Planning Policy Framework, labelling it dangerous.

A campaign encouraging MPs to push for amendments to the damaging document during the summer months has been initiated.

The government maintains that the updated NPPF draft will stimulate economic expansion and reform the planning framework.

However, without modification, it will inflicting irreversible harm to open spaces, according to the organisation.

Representatives from across the political spectrum are being pressed to weigh up the consequences for local democracy, already strained infrastructure and the natural world posed by these alterations.

The correspondence draws attention to numerous problems with what the group describes as a deeply concerning document.

Residents of Sussex have endured significant water difficulties, including contaminated waterways, sewage overflows and extended periods without water supplies.

Water infrastructure is struggling and cannot accommodate additional residential development without intervention.

The previous NPPF framework made no effort to address this infrastructure deficit.

Instead, it merely advocates construction that would place additional homes on drainage and water systems already buckling under existing pressure.

Climate change poses one of the most serious dangers to rural areas.

It endangers indigenous wildlife, heightens the likelihood of plant diseases and results in declining soil quality.

Increasing sea levels will lead to flooding and accelerated erosion along the Sussex coastline.

Multiple heatwaves have already occurred this year, with severe weather impacting food production and the landscape.

Despite government assurances of commitment to combating climate change, the draft NPPF contains virtually no meaningful measures for climate change adaptation.

Similarly, it falls far short of delivering the affordable housing that Sussex communities urgently require.

Brighton and Hove ranks among the least affordable locations in the nation for housing.

Within Sussex, only Hastings registers as affordable for private rental purposes.

Homelessness is growing in rural Sussex districts, demand for social housing continues climbing and construction of affordable homes has virtually halted.

A genuine requirement exists for housing that is genuinely affordable, enabling residents to reside and work in their home communities.

Yet the NPPF seems to prioritise developer earnings over satisfying community requirements.

Without restriction, it would simply permit construction of executive-style residences on undeveloped land while real housing requirements remain unaddressed.

A further significant worry is that the proposed NPPF threatens areas surrounding rural railway stations.

The document proposes establishing automatic development zones around stations, including those located beyond current town boundaries.

However, policies permitting increased construction simply due to proximity to a station would generate urban sprawl, linear development patterns and greater reliance on private vehicles.

This would be especially problematic for isolated rural stations lacking the amenities and infrastructure necessary for sustainable growth.

Development on suitable previously developed land near urban stations has backing, not construction on undeveloped land in countryside locations.

Remarkably, the newest NPPF also weakens protection of the countryside itself.

It eliminates mentions of cherished landscapes beyond nationally protected zones and the inherent worth the countryside provides, both economically and for public health.

This is not merely distressing but fundamentally flawed logic.

The countryside adjacent to where people live is not simply aesthetically pleasing.

It is essential to the economy, to livelihoods and to physical and mental health.

This is not vacant terrain.

It is productive land, living land.

More than half of Sussex land, specifically 58 per cent, consists of agricultural land producing locally sourced food.

A further 24 per cent comprises woodland, open areas and water bodies.

These impressive landscapes draw visitors to the county.

During 2024, Sussex received over 50 million visitor trips, contributing more than £4 billion to the economies of East and West Sussex combined.

This figure excludes visitors to Brighton and Hove, illustrating the countryside’s significance to the regional economy.

Simultaneously, countryside access supports better physical fitness, health and wellbeing.

Research indicates that regular access to green areas cuts GP appointments by 28 per cent and could save the NHS £2.1 billion each year.

Almost nine out of ten individuals, 87 per cent, report that countryside access enhances their wellbeing.

This demonstrates that safeguarding the countryside and open spaces nearby is not a luxury but essential for both economic and public health.

Perhaps the greatest concern regarding the NPPF is its potential to eliminate public oversight of planning decisions.

In accelerating the housebuilding process, local democracy and independent examination would be removed.

Communities would be unable to challenge harmful development in their villages, towns and countryside.

CPRE Sussex maintains that local perspectives and specialist knowledge must guide planning decisions.

It is essential that MPs understand this version of the NPPF poses dangers.

It threatens the environment.

It threatens the economy and wellbeing.

It threatens local democracy.

MPs are being urged to demand changes to this document during the summer.

Desired modifications include stronger safeguards for community input, the environment and water infrastructure, measures addressing climate change and better delivery of affordable housing.

More than eight out of ten individuals believe the UK can construct necessary homes while preserving the countryside for future generations, a view shared by CPRE Sussex.

To spread awareness, a template letter has been prepared for residents to send to their local MP.

All Sussex residents are encouraged to review the letter and contribute their own perspectives, opinions and location-specific concerns.

MPs must hear from local communities now, just as they must within the planning system.

Those wishing to participate in opposing the NPPF can access the template letter and develop their own version at actionnetwork.org/letters/the-new-nppf-a-dangerous-document.

Further information about efforts to create improved places to live is available at cpresussex.org.uk/what-we-care-about.