Transport Insights

Ministers have been trumpeting changes to planning rules in England that aim to build many new houses close to train, tram and underground stations – but without any real plan to improve services or discourage car dependent development.

In a press release, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government under Angela Rayner has announced “common-sense changes” that aim to build on the principle of ensuring “that planning decisions give proper consideration to the proximity of public transport links”.

Under the government’s new National Planning Policy Framework, there will be a default ‘yes’ for homes within reasonable walking distance of well-connected stations, alongside new minimum expectations for how much housing should be built in these areas. It will also prevent excessive gold-plating where there are clear national standards already in place.

Presumably there will be a reasonable level of gold-plating.

I’m not sure that there is a “default ‘yes’”, as described here, but Transport Action Network (TAN) has warned that the government “risks forcing councils to agree to the first development proposal they receive for these crucial sites, rather than being able to get the best out of them”.

Chief executive Abby Coften said:

Councils need the freedom to secure funding from developers for other local transport improvements, and to make walking, wheeling and cycling as easy as possible too. This won’t happen if their negotiating hands are tied behind their backs.”

Rayner described the policy of “densification” as “unlocking thousands of homes around well-connected transport hubs” – an indication that it isn’t about improving transport but rather making use of existing services.

It won’t either prevent thousands of homes being built far away from transport hubs, creating more car-dependent communities, particularly as the government’s priority is getting houses built, with the new framework being about removing obstacles, rather than improving quality.

TAN repeated its call for additional guidance to councils on how they should use the Department for Transport’s new Connectivity Tool to distinguish between developments that are well-connected by walking, cycling and public transport and those that would worsen car dependence. It said it was disappointing that a forthcoming Planning Practice Guidance document on transport and new developments has not been published.

Coften added:

If the Government wants councils to build the right homes in the right places, it needs to help them prevent the continued spread of terribly-located homes in car-dependent places.

Transport secretary Heidi Alexander does make an appearance in the press release, where she is quoted as saying:

Densification, combined with high-quality walking, wheeling, cycling and public transport, will support healthier lifestyles, improve access to jobs and services, and protect important public transport services.

I think what this is saying is that if, as well as densification, you improve walking, wheeling and cycling access to public transport including for people beyond walking distance, you get good outcomes, but that is not a given under current plans, so it looks like wishful thinking.

The other point here is that protecting public transport services seems to imply that you are taking up unused public transport capacity, rather than increasing capacity.