New Planning Tsar Says Guildford Should Double in Size

Published on: 6 Oct, 2015
Updated on: 6 Oct, 2015

Lord Adonis wrote that forty towns in the South East need to double in size to solve housing crisis.

Two of the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s decisions made public yesterday (October 7) during the Conservative Party conference in Manchester could have a significant impact on Guildford’s future.

One is the announcement that George Osbourne has poached Labour peer Lord Adonis, a former Labour Cabinet minister, to be his new planning “tsar” the other that local authorities will be able to retain all the business rates they collect described as the “biggest transfer of power to local government in living memory”.

Lord Adonis is on record as saying that 40 towns and cities in southern England must be doubled in size to deal with the country’s housing crisis.

If carried out, Guildford – a town he specifically named – would shoot up from a population of 100,000 to 200,000.

George Osbourne, chancellor of the exchequer

In his speech Mr Osborne said: “I’m not prepared to turn around to my children or indeed anyone else’s child, and say: I’m sorry we didn’t build for you.

“We’re going to get many more homes built for families to buy… We’ve had enough of people who own their own home lecturing others why they can’t own one too.”

Lord Adonis outlined his vision for planning in an article for Prospect magazine. In his article entitled, How to fix the housing crisis, he wrote: “The state—central government—once again needs to take a lead by systematically planning new transport infrastructure to support new housing, and by becoming a planner of major new settlements in its own right.

“I am persuaded that the best course is to develop ‘garden city’ extensions to successful existing towns and cities in areas of high housing and employment demand, rather than developing entirely new towns like Milton Keynes, on the model advocated by David Rudlin, the urban designer who last year won the Wolfson prize for his work on tackling England’s housing shortage.

“Rudlin proposed doubling the size of 40 towns and cities with good existing infrastructure and public transport connections which could be further enhanced, including Oxford, Guildford, Norwich, Reading and Stratford upon Avon.”

Council to Retain Business Rates

The unexpected news that local authorities will be able to retain all the business rates they collect has taken Guildford Borough Council (GBC), along with other councils, by surprise.

Council officials will be trying to work out the consequences for GBC’s budget which is thought to receive £85 million annually from business rates, most of which, under current arrangements, is passed to the central government .

The policy change reverses a decision made under Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s taken when she was concerned about Labour controlled authorities raising local taxes.

Guildford, a town with a high business base, might do well financially out of the change but other less prosperous areas of the country would suffer if there is less redistribution of business rate revenue. Some observers suspect that some system of re-allocation will remain.

Council leader Stephen Mansbridge (Con, Ash South & Tongham) said: “In all honesty it is far too early to comment. As with the three counties devolution deal, the devil will be in the detail.

“We need to understand much more, as the quid pro quo may be onerous. We shall have to wait and see, although the prospect of have control over business rates is an aspiration that we have long held.”

Caroline Reeves (Lib Dem, Friary & St Nicolas), leader of the GBC opposition, said: “It was Liberal Democrats in Government that pushed for a review of business rates, so we are in support of this announcement as a step towards power being returned to local communities and this is progress towards local democracy.

“The chancellor has also announced an infrastructure tax which only an elected city mayor will be able to levy. Once again, the chancellor’s obsession with mayors is disadvantaging other local communities.”

Susan Parker (GGG, Send), leader of the Guildford Greenbelt Group said: “Retention and setting of business rates by councils will become a major incentive to build offices, shops or commercial spaces rather than homes. This will inevitably distort the balance of local decision-making.

“In the Local Plan, we should decide if we need offices or shops without that decision being biased by business rates, especially when funds from central government are shrinking.”

Responses to New Planning Tsar Says Guildford Should Double in Size

Helen Johnston Reply

October 6, 2015 at 7:59 pm

Slightly concerning that he thinks Guildford has “good existing infrastructure” when the road system is already over capacity.
Bernard Parke Reply

October 6, 2015 at 8:37 pm

Guildford to double in size from 100,000 to 200,000?

Do these people, who do not live here, really know the pressure put on the confines of our gap town?

I read this this article, perhaps as many readers have also read it, after struggling through the traffic chaos that is now a daily problem to us who live here and have to face every day when going about our basic tasks.

I do hope that sanity will prevail, but then again I am sure that we, the residents of Guildford, will not hold our breath.
Stuart Barnes Reply

October 6, 2015 at 10:18 pm

It is frightening that such a person has been put into a position of power.

Just when we were laughing nervously about the policies espoused by Corbyn’s socialist party, our “call me Dave” prime minister appoints a man like Lord Adonis to his so called Conservative party.

The Lib Dems and Greens have always been strange – to be kind to them – but I find it difficult to decide now which party is the most eccentric.
Jim Allen Reply

October 7, 2015 at 12:10 am

Is the man sane? Double in size? We can’t cope with the proposed increase noting the proposed job creation is already way below the claimed need for housing. We’ll be awful short of jobs if we double in size.
Jules Cranwell Reply

October 7, 2015 at 12:50 am

What can we expect from the Blair ‘education Tsar’. Did he not muck up education, education, education in the UK?

I suggest we all, including GBC, ignore this.

However, expect the GBC executive to seize upon this as justification for their flawed trajectory.
Ben Paton Reply

October 7, 2015 at 8:48 am

What about ‘Localism’?

How is appointing some remote Tzar, devoid of any local knowledge, consistent with ‘Localism’? Those of us who have lived in and around the borough for fifty years may legitimately wonder if he knows ‘fanny adams’ about what he’s talking about.

“Good local infrastructure”? Relative to the Democratic Republic of the Congo that is no doubt true. But relative to what facilities were like only ten years ago let alone twenty there has been a dramatic deterioration. Neither GBC nor central government are addressing that. The draft Local Plan will only make matters worse.

For a man with a hammer everything looks like a nail. For a property developer, everything looks like a development site. It’s a shame that the government, like Natural England, seems to be led by people whose main experience is in property development.
John Robson Reply

October 7, 2015 at 9:55 am

We do need housing in the UK but numerous studies have shown there are enough sites if we’re prepared to resolve problematical brownfield sites and regenerate other areas as well as just the South East.

But it’s ironic that the reward for decades of unstinting Conservative support will be the obliteration of some of the Conservatives staunchest towns.

But hey, that’s politics.
Roland McKinney Reply

October 8, 2015 at 12:37 am

Both of these policies are bad news, not just for the South, but also for other regions. They indicate the government has abandoned any attempt to rebalance the economy away from London and the South East.

Both measures will concentrate future investment in London and the South East, to the detriment of other regions, resulting in ever more migration to this region, already one of the most heavily populated in Europe.

Although at first blush it may seem a sensible policy to allow councils more control of business rates, those areas that most need to cut business rates to attract inward investment are the areas least able to afford this.

They need the income – and rely on the redistribution of business rates. Instead richer areas will grow richer at the expense of poorer areas.

Then of course there is the fear of corruption in local government – Tower Hamlets may have been an extreme example, but there are other examples – some of which feature on a regular basis in the columns of Private Eye. Above all else, Tower Hamlets showed the oversight of local government is inadequate.

So much for all the promises by the Conservatives to protect the green belt before the election. This news may cause a seismic shift in voting patterns in the south east. The need for a credible opposition has never been greater.
Peta Malthouse Reply

October 8, 2015 at 9:28 am

I think it is important to remind everyone that Lord Adonis has resigned the Labour Party whip to work for the Tory Government.

So much for their promises to protect green belt. Perhaps Cllr Mansbridge has been receiving the right messages from Central Government all along? Or he has been encouraging Tory Central Office that we want or need this level of development? Who will ever know?

Our Guildford MP Anne Milton told us very early on that Guildford was part to the ‘Tiger economy’ of the South East and that our national economic problems needed to be addressed by encouraging it.

We can all agree that but how to go about it? Whatever the answer we don’t want it at the expense of the green belt and we must hold our Tory government to the pledges given.

It looks like we will have multi-storey flats like Woking whatever way you look at it.

Into the next round.
Jeremy Varns Reply

October 10, 2015 at 10:02 pm

Walking to the train station everyday breathing in significant amounts of pollution isn’t a lot of fun and its getting worse on an almost daily basis. New homes need to be matched with significantly improved infrastructure and sustainable transport options.
Adrian Atkinson Reply

October 13, 2015 at 9:42 pm

The new traffic proposals for the new look Guuldford with its already great transport system according to the new planning tsar who has his finger on the Guildford pulse.

http://m.firstpost.com/world/highway-to-hell-chinas-traffic-jam-makes-indias-traffic-trouble-seem-trivial-2465896.html