The government’s flagship levelling up policy could be used to justify a future bonfire of red tape across England’s planning system, industry experts told The Independent.
Investment zones were pitched in chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng’s growth plan as targeted areas where planning regulations would be relaxed in an attempt to drive growth.
The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) said it wants to do “everything possible to streamline and accelerate delivery” in the zones and has asked local authorities to propose sites in need of rapid development.
Specifics of a promised “liberalised process” for approving construction have not been announced but DLUHC said it will take aim at “unnecessary bureaucratic requirements … and red tape”, including EU rules.
Reports suggest the policy could waive requirements for developers to provide affordable housing and fund community infrastructure such as schools and transport projects.
Environmental campaigners have raised alarm that nature protections will be lost, though the government countered that zones will only be approved if authorities agree to mitigate environmental impacts of developments.
Ciaran Gunne-Jones, a planning policy expert who is helping local authorities draft their bids for investment zones, told The Independent that the government may be planning to use the ”liberalised process” for investment zones to make the case for nationwide deregulation in upcoming planning reform.
He said: “The early thinking that’s happening on investment zones is going to potentially shape that wider reform because if they become test beds of what’s possible, then it may make the justification for those changes being rolled out at a wider level through overall planning system reform.”
“The jury’s out on exactly what that’s going to look like but, you can well imagine, this is part of that process.”
Simon Ricketts, a lawyer who specialises in planning matters, agreed that measures introduced in investment zones could be rolled out across the country.
“Certainly if planning relaxations are found to work in investment zones without causing undue harm, why shouldn’t they be applied more generally?” he said.
But the RSPB, which was already concerned by the impact on nature of deregulation in targeted areas, said lifting restrictions nationwide would be reckless.
Alice Hardiman, RSPB England’s head of policy and advocacy, said: “Nature simply does not have the time for backward steps, and neither does industry. Business thrives when it has the certainty and reassurance that regulations provide.
“Rolling out deregulation more widely, before any opportunity to understand with confidence its economic and environmental impacts would be entirely counter to the UK government’s own commitments.”
Driving the government’s accelerated approach is an industry desperate for reforms after years of promises from successive Conservative governments have failed to deliver any meaningful change.
The ruling party, sensitive to the whim of Nimby (Not in my backyard) voters, has proved squeamish in pushing forward with ideas.
The Johnson government’s radical planning shake-up, which would have introduced a zoning system with automatic approval for certain developments, was dropped after it was viewed to be the cause of a by-election defeat in the formerly safe Tory seat of Chesham and Amersham.
Investment zones aim to skirt around this issue by relying on local consent for developments – though local consent has yet be defined by DLUHC.
Barely any of the traditional Tory heartlands are covered by the 38 Mayoral Combined Authorities (MCAs), such as West Yorkshire and Tees Valley, and Upper Tier Local Authorities which expressed interest in investment zone status.
How investment zones will change the face of the areas where they are implemented remains uncertain. DLUHC promises a “proportionate balance of housing and commercial sites”. Besides loosened planning restrictions the zones will see huge tax cuts for businesses.
Local authorities have until 14 October to deliver their proposals to the government, which said it will set up a “specific number” of investment zones based on their growth potential and an area’s need for more housing.
Almost all of the 38 authorities in the running declined to share details of their proposals with The Independent.
Tees Valley MCA, the Tory-run portion of northeast England which the government holds up as a levelling up success story, said it was seeking an investment zone covering Hartlepool and Middlesbrough town centres and Teesside international Airport, for residential and commercial developments.
A government spokesperson said Simon Clarke, the levelling up secretary “will set out further detail on changes the planning system in due course”.
“Investment Zones are levelling up in action and will drive growth and spread opportunity. The full planning offer will be determined by offers during the expression of interest process and tailored to the specific sites brought forward by local areas.”
