A new deal for transport? - Transport Policy and Planning in Great Britain - page 132

use and re-use of sites and properties, including conversions from non-residential uses.)
The Government set a national target of 60% of future housing requirements to be met
from development of previously used (so-called 'brownfield') land. To help achieve
this the minimum density for new housing developments was raised to 30 dwellings
per hectare and planning authorities were required to follow a 'sequential test' in the
phasing of major developments, demonstrating that all brownfield opportunities had
been exploited before the go-ahead was given on new greenfield sites.
There is a general synergy between this emphasis on the use of brownfield land and
the transport interest in promoting development within urban areas so as to lessen
car use. However not all brownfield sites are within urban areas (e.g. former military
airfields) and of those which are, some of the largest are often relatively inaccessible
(e.g. major industrial installations). Hence it was important that a revision of PPG13
Transport published in 2001 (DETR 2001) emphasised the need for development sites
to offer good accessibility by non-car modes.
Greater emphasis on land use/transport integration was also pursued in the
Government's review of arrangements for regional planning guidance (RPG). A new
version of PPG11 (DETR 2000c) required inclusion of a separately identifiable Regional
Transport Strategy (RTS) which, amongst other things, allowed for consideration of
trunk road proposals as part of the overall planning of a region.
The most controversial element in RPGs was typically the projection of future
housing requirements and the amount and distribution of proposed 'greenfield'
development. The Panel Report on RPG9 (for South-East England outside London)
created shock waves by recommending much higher housing provision than
the shire counties had proposed. With the 2001 general election in the offing the
Government took refuge in a compromise position. However public concern over
housing affordability continued to grow along with fears that difficulties in recruiting
and retaining 'key workers' in the public services would threaten economic prospects
for the capital. The issue rapidly assumed national significance and the Government
responded with a bold, but controversial strategy.
As it happened the timing of the Government's initiative came soon after the
cabinet reshuffle removing Stephen Byers. The DTLR empire was split and John
Prescott was given charge of a resurrected planning, housing and local government
department which he insisted should be referred to as the Office of the Deputy Prime
Minister (ODPM).
The launch of the 'Sustainable Communities Plan' (ODPM 2003d) provided
Prescott with another opportunity (after transport and regional government)
to apply his crusading zeal. This was a wide-ranging review of the Department's
housing-related activities but its main thrust was to increase the supply of housing,
especially in the South-East. This was focused on four 'growth areas' (Milton Keynes/
South Midlands, London-Cambridge, Thames Gateway and Ashford) which had
previously been identified in RPG9. The Government was now proposing that they
should make provision for an additional 200,000 houses up to a total of 900,000
by 2031. Implementation of this very ambitious programme was to be progressed
through a variety of 'delivery vehicles' including urban development corporations and
regeneration companies (ODPM 2003a).
The environmental credentials of the Plan were suspect, not least because their
travel implications were uncertain. Local authorities and regional assemblies flagged
their opposition to the proposed population increases in the absence of Government
commitment to funding the public service infrastructure needed to turn the aspiration