Exploring Planners’ and Developers’ Perspectives on Young Adults’ Attitudes Towards Car Dependency and Emerging Impacts on Housebuilding and Planning Policy

There is wide-ranging international debate on, firstly, the degree to which young adults – defined in this study as in other studies as 18–29-year-olds– are shifting travel behaviour away from driving towards other modes of transport, especially to active travel and public transport. Secondly, the debate centres on the reasons or causality of this shift and how far it is caused by pragmatism, particularly due to the cost of learning to drive and running a car, or principle related to environmental concerns and reducing carbon emissions.

This study aimed to investigate these broader trends within the context of housing development with the report focusing on three main themes:

1) The extent to which young adults’ attitudes are changing towards residential and locational preferences within the context of evolving attitudes towards driving, public transport and active travel use.
2) The differences in attitudes towards driving and residential preferences between London, which has a high-quality public transport system and has been moving away from car dependency in the built environment in recent years, and the regions which have less reliable and widespread public transport systems and more dependence on the bus network.
3) The extent to which the housebuilding industry and planning policy are evolving and responding to changing societal trends among young adults.

The report drew on the case studies of Grand Union and Meridian Water (London) and Langley Sustainable Urban Extension and Birmingham-Smethwick Canal Corridor (Birmingham) with three key aims:

1) To establish the degree to which young adults’ (aged 18-29) perspectives are evolving in relation to car dependency and residential preferences, drawing on a cross-comparison study of London and the West Midlands.
2) To examine the perspectives of professionals working in the housebuilding and transport industries and in planning policy regarding the views of young adults on driving and housing development. This is to establish whether both development practice and planning policy is evolving in response to changing attitudes.
3) To develop recommendations for planning policy and development practice based on the findings of the project.

The report has the following principal conclusions:

1) Issues of time lags and looking to the future: There are the trends of driverless cars, electric cars, net zero etc. but the planning system largely deals with the present in terms of schemes consented. Evidence is very important but planning, housebuilding and transport professionals need to take a more future-oriented, visionary approach to car dependency.
2) Integrated Approach: A collaborative effort between councils, developers, and transport providers is essential to address the desire of many young adults for high quality public transport options alongside new development, e.g. Meridian Water.
3) Geographical difference is key as there are significant differences between London and the West Midlands although this report has tried to draw lessons from London. However, with the scale of housing challenge alongside the Labour Government’s priorities around net zero, there is a real possibility to attempt to move beyond car dependency and learn the lessons of the past as seen, for example, in the proposed Programme of New Towns.
The report therefore develops the following recommendations:
1) Collaboration between developers, local/national government and transport companies: Many interviewees highlighted the need for stronger collaboration between government bodies, transportation companies, local authorities and housebuilders to improve the quality and timing of public transport infrastructure alongside new housing development. The revival of strategic planning is very important here, but the integration and timing of national and regional funding streams needs to be carefully considered in order to make transport provision feasible and delivered in a timely manner.
2) Improving public transport accessibility: More broadly, there needs to be a focus on making public transport more accessible and reliable to provide a viable alternative to car use. Addressing gender safety is particularly important here.
3) Considering parking standards in local and national policy: This needs to be carefully reflected on, especially the potential role for national policy in relation to parking standards, perhaps through the National Development Management Policies.
4) Housebuilders need to carefully reflect on changing societal trends: This report has presented evidence regarding the changing perspectives of young adults towards car dependency. More research and evidence are needed on this, but this probably needs more consideration in the design, consenting and implementation of housing developments to ensure that schemes are not being consented or delivered which will be redundant in the future in terms of excessive car parking.
5) There are new opportunities for local authorities now with the scale of housebuilding proposed and the possibility of a ‘vision-led approach’ in relation to transport outlined in the NPPF (MHCLG, 2024, p. 80).