31 Oct 2024
Like Boris and Brexit, Paul de Kort has got the job done. Both men tackled head-on a controversial issue which had polarised politicians for years and pushed it to a resolute conclusion.
And just as it took some time to see the consequences of Johnson’s policies, how the St Albans Local Plan will pan out over the next 17 years is also something of a waiting game.
But for now, the leader of St Albans district council is hoping councillors and officers have done everything necessary to push the Plan across the finish line.
“We have to be a little bit careful, as there is one more hurdle,” he said cautiously.
“We’re in the middle of this Regulation 19 consultation, which is a technical consultation and very different in scope.
Anybody who’s going to object now has to say why [the process] was done incorrectly.
“It’s not a question of saying we like these sites or not these sites. To be honest, I think we’re just at that point now where the government inspector is going to decide.
“It’s possible that there will be what they call a show-stopper, which means anybody, a developer, whatever, says this is fundamentally unsound and you can’t go ahead, but at this stage I’m not expecting it.”
The focus of recent debates in the council chamber has been that the Plan has been rushed through: “These are, to be honest, ongoing arguments. It was actually one of our councillors, Chris Brazier, who has been around a lot longer than me, who said ‘We’ve been doing this for 30 years, we’re not really rushing’, and that kind of brought the house down.
“Obviously we wouldn’t be putting it through if we didn’t think that this was a Plan that was going to meet approval. Of course we wouldn’t. And we’re certainly not playing a game.
“We’ve been looking at Elmbridge, which is in Surrey somewhere, because it’s similar to us. There’s a requirement to build a large number of new houses, lots of Green Belt, not a lot of brownfield.
“They basically went in for inspection and said we can’t do those numbers, so here’s a much lower number, and they were told to withdraw their Plan, which is a bit like being told by a teacher to withdraw your essay and resubmit it.
“They’ve now been very open and frank about it, and basically said, ‘Oh, we don’t really know what to do now’.
“It’s very difficult, because of course there are conflicting pressures, and most residents would rather it didn’t happen. But the previous Government and now this Government are saying it will.
“It was quite interesting in the Full Council debate about Michael Gove’s decision. He created bad vibes by suggesting that the [housing] targets might have been advisory, and he is now able, out of politics, to say that they were mandatory in any way that you can understand it.”
So what are the next steps? “We have to assume it’s going to be considered sound. I want to be careful I don’t get quoted as someone who says he’s not even bothering to consult their Regulation 19, but if it is considered to be sound the planning policy and climate committee will vote and we submit ASAP afterwards, within two or three days.
“There are two big things we then want the Government to follow-up on. One is how quickly they will now do these things. They ought to reward – and they haven’t used that term – those councils who have played their game and the rules that they’ve set.
“They’ve said they don’t want these things that go on for years and years where basically there is sort of an extended haggle between the inspector and the council. I think North Herts and Welwyn Hatfield staggeringly took five years for their Plans to be inspected.
“We haven’t got any option to mess around here. We’ve done what we think is appropriate. Remember, there’s loads of work that goes on behind the scenes with the officers. Particularly after the second Plan was withdrawn, we dotted the Is, crossed the Ts and double-checked with other peer reviews.
“Basically what’s happening is there are two camps, those councils who can meet the short deadline to get their Plan looked at, and those who are stepping away because there’s nothing else they can do.
“The Government are saying that one month after they stand up and say this is the new National Planning Policy Framework, you have to have your [Local Plan] submitted, which s why we moved to our deadline. A lot of other councils are asking for three months, and there’s some suggestion they might get it, but I have to say not with enough confidence that would make us wait. It’s too big a risk, and it’s now not really obvious what we’d gain from it.”
So will submission of the Local Plan protect us from the Government’s revised housing targets, which would see up to 70 per cent homes on top of those already included?
“To be brutally honest the answer is I don’t know. My view is the Government, all Governments, make early broad brush statements and play tough at the start, but they will hit some real practical problems with that.
“It will become increasingly clear that reaching the next set of targets will be harder for local leaders to defend, whether that’s MPs or leaders of councils, and many of them will be Labour ones who will say look, do we really want to do this?
“I’m hopeful that the Government will have some success with their New Town strategy, which is reporting back within 10 months. And if they find they can get enough housing this way then they might say OK this is a better route to go.
“There could definitely be one in Hertfordshire, somewhere near here, I’m not saying right in St Albans, but one or two places I’ve heard are not so far away, and that might make sense, but they’ll still have to face the issue of putting pressure on things like train infrastructure and the broader road network.
“The other practical problem is the speed at which they say they want this to be done. I can’t remember how much it is across the whole country, but the increase in targets can’t be done the way they want it to be done.
“They’ve said they still want all the appropriate infrastructure for the Green Belt developments, they’ve said they want 50 per cent affordable housing, not 40 per cent, which is currently the guide, which means, as a minimum, they’ve got to be properly worked out.
“You know we put together 1,700 pages of documents [for the Local Plan] and were told by Herts county council that no-one’s done something as detailed as this one, but there aren’t enough planners and experts in the field.
“So the long answer is I think when they get into this, and start seeing houses built to the Conservatives’ target methodology, they will hit reality and nuance that in timing and also possibly in numbers.”
SADC is also highlighting the national infrastructure developments in the form of the strategic rail freight terminal to the south, and London Luton Airport to the north, both transport-intensive on railways and roads.
“I’m sure there are other authorities somewhere who face the same pressures, but I haven’t heard a lot from other authorities when they have that national infrastructure south and north of their already congested space. I think that argument will carry more weight than the Green Belt loss. I don’t think they care as much about that.
“From a national perspective they say some Green Belt’s good, some is bad, and that’s what they really mean by grey belt. They’re not saying it but they really mean some Green Belt is pro-environment and some isn’t.
“The infrastructure thing is the killer for us, I think, that’s the really strong argument.”
