The Government has an unarguable electoral mandate to create new towns. Wherever possible, the government should therefore use Acts of Parliament to supply infrastructure. This route reduces the likelihood of judicial review and, with political will, can be completed long before any planning application, which is itself likely to be appealed in the courts. Acts of Parliament should authorise the new towns, and should minimise, if not remove, the need for any secondary approvals. This will avoid the ridiculous situation HS2 has landed itself in of having to obtain over 8,000 individual consent after it was authorised by legislation. To support the creation of new settlements in circumstances where Acts of Parliament are inappropriate, the National Planning Policy Framework should be amended to designate new towns as being a Critical National Priority, thereby smoothing their consenting. At least three other national policy changes would also support the creation of new towns.
- Whilst none of our proposed new towns are within National Landscapes, the duty under section 85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 should be changed back to requirements made before 2023. The recent change has a deleterious impact on projects, even when outside National Landscapes and is causing developers to pay millions, which could damage the viability and value of new towns.
- The need to protect important and unique natural habitats must be balanced with the need for homes, but some of the current laws have been severely impacting housing delivery. The biggest challenge comes from the Habitats Regulations which protect Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and Special Protection Areas (SPAs).
One such problem is the requirement to limit recreational activities that SACs and SPAs are sensitive to, such as dog walking, through the adoption of Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM) measures, and the provision of Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspaces (SANGs). The burden of providing these now falls on new housing, leading to increased development costs and long delays and It is not clear that this approach is always reasonable or actually based in fact.
The interpretation of the legal requirements by the relevant authorities appears to be overly risk averse, and the policy implementations gold plated. The government should commission an independent review of the scientific evidence base that underpins the policy of SANGs and SAMMs to ensure that it is robust, reasonable and effective. This should also take into account the urban characteristics of new developments, as it may be that places that are denser and more walkable are less likely to generate as many trips. Following this review, if any new towns do require a SANG then this would be a relatively simple task. The current regime favours a strategic approach, so a SANG could be planned from the start and delivered early and should be designed to be multifunctional and beautiful. - Nutrient neutrality is an even bigger blocker on development, affecting schemes across the whole country. The issue is discharges from wastewater treatment works; any increase in housing will lead to a very slightly higher increase in nutrients (such as nitrates and phosphates) being discharged. In line with the 'precautionary principle', the relevant authorities cannot permit any increase whatsoever where it might impact an SAC or SPA.
Unfortunately the burden has once again fallen on housing and planning, despite the majority of nutrients in our rivers coming from diffuse sources such as farmland and runoff from roads, and the fact that the water industry has a robust regulatory scheme that is meant to deal with such issues. The burden should fall on water companies and they must upgrade water treatment works to provide a higher level of treatment to reduce nutrient discharges. A written ministerial statement to this effect should suffice to remove the risk of nutrient neutrality holding up new town delivery.
The outsized impact of Chiltern Beechwoods SAC
Chiltern Beechwoods SAC covers a 1,300 hectare area on the Hertfordshire Buckinghamshire border and is protected for its unique beech forest and grassland habitats, and a population of stag beetles. It attracts a large number of visitors, partly due to the popular Ashridge Estate owned by the National Trust.
A Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) was undertaken in 2021 which found that the habitat may be under threat from too many visitors. The reaction to this was an effective ban on housebuilding for the best part of a year within a 12.6 km radius of the SAC until a mitigation plan was put in place. The plan requires any new development to either deliver, or pay into the delivery of, a new SANG to divert visitors away from the SAC as well as a per property contribution to the management plan (costed at £18 million). This impacted the delivery of homes across several authority areas and added to costs. Each new home in Dacorum will need to contribute £914 to the management plan and £4,252 to a new SANG.
It also prevented the delivery of up to 150 homes through a neighbourhood led brownfield housing delivery scheme in Chesham, some 10km away, as it would not be possible for brownfield sites to provide a SANG. The council investigated creating a strategic SANG for the town, but did not have the funds to do so, this is despite the fact that the town has unrivalled access to open countryside (it’s a destination for walkers) and a great park and the new housing would be 'car light' and generate less trips, and not to mention that only 2 per cent of existing trips to the SAC came from Chesham.