LETTING rural people build their own homes without planning consent may not create better communities, experts have warned.

Proposals to give local communities the power to build much-needed homes were unveiled by housing minister Grant Shapps on Friday (23 July).

Local people will be allowed to expand or create developments – so long as they first secure proof of agreement via a local referendum.

Rural policy expert Rob Hindle described the idea as a “living embodiment” of the government’s Big Society drive to empower communities.

But the questions asked in any local referendum would be crucial to its success, he warned.

“Critically, we don’t know what level of support is going to be required from a community,” said Mr Hindle, founder of Rural Innovation.

It remained to be seen what sort of questions the referendum would pose, he wrote on his weblog.

“Depending on the height the bar is set this may actually make it easier for opponents of development to block it than the current system.”

Building new houses had the potential to improve rural communities – but only if the people living in them supported local services.

“The truth is that many residents of small villages (especially those with good connections to towns and cities) do not behave in this way.

“They work elsewhere, shop elsewhere and access services in a way that best suits their daily lives.

“It does not necessarily follow therefore that the provision of new housing will improve the sustainability of the host community – at least not just by itself.”

New residents who commuted to work, failed to patronise local shops and played no part in local life were unlikely to improve rural sustainability.

“The way that the right-to-build is applied will therefore have a significant influence on the value of the outcomes that it produces.”

A full version of Mr Hindle's analysis can be seen here.

Questions over the government’s proposals were also raised by the National Association of Local Councils, which represents parish and town councils.

It called for more details about the types of community organisations that would have the freedom to give the green light to local developments.

NALC chairman Michael Chater said: “There appears to be very little detail in these proposals, so we as an association can only give it a cautious welcome.”

The association argues that suitable development schemes brought forward by a community should be granted if supported by the local council.

But it believes this should apply to all development schemes, not just those involving community ownership.

“We want the government to clearly state what it defines as ‘community organisations’,” said Mr Chater.

The Royal Town Planning Institute, which represents 22,000 planners, said the proposals threatened to undermine local authorities.

The key role of elected councillors within the planning system would be overturned said RTPI spokesperson Jamie Hodge.

“It is clearly vital that we look at innovative proposals to provide more much-needed affordable housing and other developments, especially in rural areas.

“However we believe that local plans, developed by elected members in partnership with local people and businesses are the most democratic.”

Proper planning scrutiny had served communities well, said Mr Hodge.

But the government’s proposals appeared to disempower local authorities by removing their right to determine developments.