New visions for old issues means paradigm shift for transport planning

A major discussion on 8 November organised by LTT and TPS will consider the provision of transport for the Government’s intended major new housebuilding drive. James Williams takes a look at how radical new thinking needs to be to make a real difference to the established car-focussed approach

Release of the proposed National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) reforms by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has prompted a lot of positive noise amongst those concerned about the future of sustainable transport planning.

But is this over-optimistic, and are more drastic changes needed? We certainly need healthier, less carbon-intensive, and safer ways of getting from A to B to underpin the travel patterns of those occupying the wave of new housing developments the new government wants to see, in addition to changing travel behaviours of existing communities.

But to achieve what’s needed it is important for developers, communities, and local authorities to understand what this future is going to look like.

The lack of the industry being able to visualise a different way of travelling, coupled with the current long-established planning approval processes in respect of transport, may have stifled the sector’s ability to spearhead change. So, can we use this moment to create a better future?

It’s great to see all the relevant discussions taking place and the excellent programme for the LTT/TPS Transport and Housing event taking place on November 8th. We’ve got some crucial issues to tackle in setting a genuinely new course.

Interpreting the proposed NPPF

The revised NPPF moves away from the basis of simply planning for more highway capacity to serve new development, and towards planning more connected places, healthier communities, and a better environment.

The crux of this is the NPPF’s acknowledgement that “planning for travel too often follows a simplistic ‘predict and provide’ pattern, with insufficient regard for the quality of places or whether the transport infrastructure which is planned is fully justified.” It rightfully asserts the default assumption for our future is too focused on roads with more private vehicles.

That’s definitely not the best future we can imagine. We need to test and understand what our desired travel patterns and behaviours look like in the future and set a workable vision for how tomorrow’s communities will want places to be.

Knowing this, we can work backwards, designing transport and behavioural interventions to help us achieve the vision. Along the journey, we should monitor and manage progress to ensure our vision is actually realised, modifying our approach appropriately with further sustainable interventions, if required.

This approach is known in our profession as ‘vision and validate’. It’s something we’ve been passionate about in Stantec for some time. We know, through Stantec’s Bridging the Gap research programme, that to reach a net-zero transport sector, we need to reduce car use by at least 20 percent by 2030. To do this we investigated three alternative ‘futures’, testing the potential impacts of each of them in reducing car travel. By adopting vision and validate, we can realise significant levels of health, environmental, social, and economic benefits.

While the proposed NPPF changes are positive in this mission – there are nuances to consider, and some key aspects to address:

1 Putting the vision into Local Plan making

Whilst ‘vision-led’ planning is in one section of the NPPF relating to development, these principles should equally apply at the Local Plan Making stage – with the NPPF stating: “a consistent approach is taken to planning the delivery of major Infrastructure”.

To realise a ‘vision’, we must refocus Infrastructure Delivery Plans away from highway capacity schemes to joined up sustainable transport schemes producing tangible benefits. Early consideration is key.

2 Who defines the ‘vision’ When we’ve held discussions with local

authorities and land developers, the question has always been raised; “who defines the vision?”

The revised NPPF refers to the need for residents, local authorities, and developers to work together to define this. But how? A vision and validate approach must include meaningful community engagement with

a diverse group vested in the area’s future. This must embrace an understanding of the ‘readiness of society’ to adopt a new vision, which is a whole challenge itself, as we plan for new demands, and not current travel behaviours.

3 The importance of ‘validate’

There are two parts to ‘Vision and Validate’ so it’s interesting there’s no reference to the term ‘validate’ in the NPPF. For larger developments, once a vision is agreed this logically means there should be a process by which its delivery can then be then validated (or proven) as they progress.

This validation is crucial for large sites to enable the sustainable transport strategy to adapt as opportunities present themselves. How do we know a site is on course to successfully achieve its vision if we don’t check? Proving the success of sustainable transport schemes can only happen once these supporting measures have started to be delivered. So, this isn’t just about scenario testing, pre-delivery. Scenario testing doesn’t prove anything on its own, it acts as an initial guide as to whether the vision is plausible, and a measure of its progress.

Validation is important from a stakeholder perspective, with local authorities then able to ensure targets are continually being met and not forgotten about following the planning committee’s decision.

In terms of development planning, the omission of ‘validate’ from vision and validate within the proposed NPPF reforms might be acceptable for smaller sites to be consented based on a vision being delivered, where there aren’t the available timescales to incrementally adjust the strategy before the scheme is built out. There is surely still a need for a holistic validation of the delivery of a Local Plan’s strategy for the area, however.

Another approach we need to consider is adaptation.

Although its presence has been used rarely in the past, largely due to planning policy, adaptation should not be treated as just a theoretical idea. In some ways the idea we now call validation, otherwise known as ‘Monitor and Manage’, has often seen fallback highway schemes brought to life should the intended mode-shift not be successful.

This approach must now change as there needs to be a wholesale reallocation of investment away from both car-led schemes, or fall-back car-led schemes, to a full commitment to the vision of sustainable communities.

Good examples are invaluable here. We’ve recently been successful in incorporating vision and validate in Maidstone Borough Council’s local plan, which is thought to be the first of its kind. But more guidance is obviously needed to transform our approach nationwide.

Looking at the proposed NPPF reforms, it’s clear we’re moving in the right direction - but there will be complexities ahead. Therefore at Stantec, we’re offering workshops with highway authorities and land developers about working in new ways to new objectives, as we navigate specific challenges associated with the proposed NPPF reforms.

The New Era of Housing Development Conference on 8 November at Regents Park Conference Centre - with representatives of the Department for Transport and MHCLG present to hear our thinking - will provide an excellent forum for the discussions we need. I’ll be speaking on the development of local plans and how we must avoid fall-back highway schemes, and I look forward to seeing you there.

If you would like to attend, please visit:

https://landorlinks.uk/a-new-era-of-housing-development/. Use code LTT2024 for a 25% LTT reader discount.

James Williams is an associate transport planner at Stantec and will be speaking at the event on 8 November.