The country’s second oldest Local Plan has moved a step closer to being replaced after a St Albans council meeting yesterday (Monday, September 23) that saw one councillor accused of “hypocritical nimbyism”.
The draft Local Plan, which identifies sites for 14,603 new homes in the district between 2024 and 2041, will now go to a Regulation 19 consultation ahead of an expected submission to the government later this year.
The plan includes 11 sites where 250 or more homes could be built, including 1,097 homes to the north of St Albans, 738 homes in north east Harpenden, and 545 homes to the west of Redbourn. It also includes sites for 13 proposed schools.
But councillors at yesterday’s meeting of the council’s planning policy and climate committee expressed concerns about the number of homes set to be built on Green Belt land.
Cllr Mike Hobday presented a petition, signed by 556 people, calling on the council to remove plans for 324 homes on land west of London Colney and south of Napsbury Park.
He said the council’s approach to the plan was “wrong”, and suggested they had “chosen the easy option – to concrete over our green fields”, rather than prioritising sites that have already been built on.
Cllr Hobday suggested the 324 homes could instead have been built on ‘grey belt’ land elsewhere on Shenley Lane.
But Cllr Lynn Cunningham said his points “smacked of absolute hypocritical nimbyism".
She said: “All the councillors sitting in this room are looking at sites they’re having to give up because of the numbers that have been imposed upon us [by government].
“We’re being asked to throw out something from London Colney because the people of London Colney don’t like it. I’m sorry, that is not a valid reason to throw something out.”
Chris Briggs, the council’s spatial planning manager, said the authority had “proactively” searched for built-on sites to include in the plan.
The draft Local Plan uses the previous government’s ‘standard method’ for determining housing need, which gave a figure of 885 new homes per year – well above the 401 homes actually built in St Albans in 2022/23, but well below the government’s proposed new target for St Albans of 1,544 homes per year.
The council hopes that by submitting the draft plan this year, it will only have to find room for the 885 homes per year.
Cllr Hobday said it was “a little bit rich to be accused of hypocritical nimbyism when I was proposing to the committee an [alternative] ‘grey belt’ site within London Colney”.
Responding to Cllr Hobday’s suggestion that the council were “taking the easy option”, Cllr Paul de Kort, leader of the council, said: “It didn’t fit with our experience over many years … it’s a really tough and difficult choice, but in no way is that an easy option”.
With the council unable to demonstrate an adequate supply of new housing, it has become harder for the authority to block new developments – with the planning inspector allowing developments to go ahead at Chiswell Green and Bullens Green Lane in recent years.
The proposed Local Plan – which the council hopes to submit to government before reforms to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) are published later this year – would make it more difficult for ‘speculative developments’ to go ahead, council leader Paul de Kort has said.
One key part of the plan is the Hemel Garden Communities Project, a collaboration with Dacorum Borough Council and other partners that would see 5,500 homes built in each district.
But Cllr David Mitchell (Ind, Redbourn) – one of two councillors to vote against recommending the draft plan for approval – raised concerns about the project: “We’re going to end up with housing all the way between Hemel Hempstead and Redbourn with just a park in between.
"It doesn’t seem like that’s a very good idea given the NPPF says you shouldn’t have coalescence.”
Cllr Raj Visram (LD, Marshalswick East & Jersey Farm), meanwhile, said he shared “huge concerns” with councillors, but added there are “other sides to the argument”.
Councillors on St Albans City and District Council’s Planning Policy and Climate Committee voted to move the plan to a Regulation 19 consultation by 11 votes to two.
A broad consultation on the plan has already taken place, and the latest consultation will consider only whether the plan is legally compliant and ‘sound’ in planning terms.
It will last six weeks, beginning on September 26, with feedback to be considered by the Planning Policy and Climate Committee on November 28.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here