Contact us
Visit CPRE.org
Donate
'Tear it down and start again': the Queen's Speech and the Planning Bill
Yesterday’s Queen’s Speech (Tuesday, May 11) confirmed the government’s intention to push on with radical reforms of England’s planning system over the next year.
While no new substantive details were released regarding the reforms, the rhetoric accompanying the announcement was disheartening enough.
The stated purpose of the Planning Bill is to “create a simpler, faster and more modern planning system to replace the current one that dates back to 1947”. This focus upon speed, and the notion a complicated planning system is the cause of a lack of housing building, was repeated throughout yesterday’s media release.
Kent is already suffering the consequence of a planning system that prioritises how quickly and how many ‘units’ are granted above almost everything else. If a council is not meeting its centrally-set government housing targets, there is an automatic presumption further housing development will be permitted. This often trumps local concerns regarding the environment or whether there is sufficient infrastructure.
Kent is also already suffering the consequence of an increasingly deregulated planning system, which often leads to new houses in wholly unsustainable locations. This includes ever-expanding permitted development rights for new residential use and other new light-touch routes to gaining permission such as the permission-in-principle route.
While CPRE Kent agrees that more genuinely affordable houses in the right places are required, we absolutely reject the notion that it is a lack of speed or the complexity of the current planning system that is providing a barrier to housebuilding.
With councils approving nine in 10 planning applications and research by the Local Government Association finding that over the last decade more than 1.1 million homes have been granted planning permission in England than have been built, the evidence simply does not support that argument.
It is our view the government should focus on improving the current system, including using its powers to ensure developers actually build the permissions granted by councils rather than rewarding them with more permissions.
We are becoming increasingly concerned the Planning Bill will prove to be a developer’s charter that diminishes the views and role of local communities, ultimately at the expense of Kent’s countryside.
Wednesday, May 12, 2021
- A number of important documents have yet to emerge. For example, a rigorous transport plan and a finalised air-quality assessment. The latter is critical given that allocations at Teynham will feed extra traffic into AQMAs.
- There seems to be no coherent plan for infrastructure delivery – a key component of the plan given the allocations being proposed near the already crowded Junction 7.
- There seems to have been little or no cooperation with neighbouring boroughs or even parish councils within Swale itself.
The removal of a second consultation might have been understandable if this final version of the plan were similar to that being talked about at the beginning of the consultation process. It is, however, radically different in the following ways:
- There has been a major shift in the balance of housing allocations, away from the west of the borough over to the east, especially around the historic town of Faversham. This is a move that raises many concerns.
- A new large allocation, with accompanying A2 bypass, has appeared around Teynham and Lynsted, to which we are objecting.
- Housing allocations in the AONB around Neames Forstal that were judged “unsuitable” by the council’s own officers have now appeared as part of the housing numbers.
- Most of the housing allocations being proposed are on greenfield sites, many of them on Grade 1 agricultural land – a point to which we are strongly objecting.
Concerns about the rush to submit the plan
The haste with which the plan is being prepared is especially worrying given the concentration of housing in Faversham. If the town is to take a large amount of new housing, it is imperative that the policies concerning the area are carefully worked out to preserve, as far as possible, the unique nature of the town. The rush to submit the plan is likely to prove detrimental.
As Swale does not have a five-year land housing supply, it is open to speculative development proposals, many of which would run counter to the ideas contained in the current plan. Some are already appearing. This is a common situation, and one that, doubtless, is a reason behind Swale’s haste.
Our overriding fear, however, is that this emphasis on haste is ultimately going to prove counterproductive. This is because it is our view that the plan, in its current form, is unlikely to pass independent examination. We are urging Swale to listen to and act upon the comments being made about the plan and to return the plan to the council with appropriate modifications before submitting it to the Secretary of State.
Essentially, this means treating the current consultation not as the final one but as the ‘lost’ second consultation.
The consultation ends on Friday 30 April and we strongly urge residents to make their opinions known if they have not already done so.
Further information
