Joe Ellis, Operational Director for Transport Planning and Engineering, takes a look at the three pillars of the Government’s White Paper ‘Planning for the future’ in England and discusses the impact for transport.
The Government wants “to establish a clear and predictable basis for the pattern and form of development in an area”.
The transport verdict: the aim to simplify the planning system is welcomed but without better integration between transport management and land use planning, the transparency and certainty the White Paper seeks is unlikely to be achieved.
Key point to note:
This is similar to the existing challenge in promoting strategic development, as is attempting to define “no reasonable prospect”. So despite good intentions, from a transport planning perspective there's unlikely to be any substantial shift in the volume and complexity of the evidence base to support deliverability.
The Government wants to create “beautiful” and sustainable places.
The transport verdict: this will be challenging for the transport sector, and in particular highway design which is governed by extensive design standards, advisory notes and guidance; most of which is ‘conservative’ and geared towards motorised vehicles.
Key points to note:
The objectives to: build better-build beautiful, introduce updated codes and guidance, and to appoint ‘chief officers for design and place-making’ are all positive steps towards inclusivity and sustainability. However, to make this achievable it’s important to ensure that local highway authorities have the resource to focus on place-making. A revision to the Traffic Management Act 2004, which requires highway authorities to secure and facilitate the expeditious movement of traffic on the road network, would also be helpful as its requirements often run counter to efficiently delivering new homes.
The Government wants to capture “more land value uplift generated by planning decisions to deliver new infrastructure”.
The transport verdict: Proposal 19 to replace CIL and s106 planning obligations with an Infrastructure Levy may lead to new infrastructure but more clarity is required.
Key points to note:
The White Paper is also rather silent on the non-financial obligations often included in s106 e.g. securing a Travel Plan and its contents, and the phasing of development against infrastructure provision.
The White Paper makes only a few references to transport, and is silent on integrating transport management and land use planning. However, it appears that:
Overall, the White Paper is a step in the right direction but it’s unlikely to result in any major change in how the transport implications of land use developments are planned, designed and assessed.
Your contact information:
All fields are mandatory *
RPS is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. We will only use your personal information to administer your account and to provide the products and services you have requested. We would also like to contact you about our products and services, as well as other content that may be of interest to you.
Your contact information:
All fields are mandatory *
RPS is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. We will only use your personal information to administer your account and to provide the products and services you have requested. We would also like to contact you about our products and services, as well as other content that may be of interest to you.