Highways Investment Remains Government Focus for its Housing Vision

Government Continues to Prioritise Highways as Key to Unlocking Housing – Despite Concerns Over Car Dependency

The UK government’s recent announcement of a ￡90 million investment in four major road schemes across England underscores its enduring commitment to highways as a fundamental enabler of housing delivery. This decision comes despite its stated ambition to curb car dependency in new developments, highlighting an ongoing contradiction in its approach to planning and infrastructure investment.

Highways: A Cornerstone of Housing Growth

For decades, road infrastructure has been seen as a critical tool in unlocking housing development, improving connectivity, and supporting economic growth. The latest funding from the Department for Transport (DfT) is intended to facilitate new housing by enhancing access to key sites, ensuring that new communities are not left disconnected from essential services and employment opportunities.

Among the recently funded projects is the A34 Lodge Hill interchange in Oxfordshire, a scheme explicitly linked to housing development, with the DfT highlighting its role in enabling thousands of new homes. Similarly, the A38 improvements in Bromsgrove and the A39 Camelford bypass in Cornwall are being justified on the basis that they will improve access to future housing growth areas.

These investments follow a well-established pattern of highways being prioritised as the primary enabler of housing delivery, despite growing concerns about the long-term sustainability of car-dependent development.

The Contradiction: Roads vs. Reducing Car Dependency

At the same time, the government has acknowledged that housing development in the UK is locking in car dependency, and has outlined a policy shift towards planning reforms aimed at reducing reliance on private vehicles. The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) has called for a fundamental rethink of how housing is planned and delivered, with a greater emphasis on mixed-use, walkable communities, and stronger public transport links.

This contradiction—expanding highways while attempting to reduce car reliance—raises serious questions about the consistency of government policy. While DLUHC is advocating for fewer car-dependent housing developments, the DfT continues to channel investment into road infrastructure that will inevitably encourage more car use.

Critics argue that this approach risks undermining broader sustainability goals, particularly given the government’s commitments to reducing transport emissions, promoting active travel, and investing in public transport.

Can Highways and Sustainable Housing Coexist?

Despite this policy shift, the government continues to view highways as integral to enabling housing delivery, especially in areas where existing road infrastructure is inadequate. Many large-scale housing projects are contingent on improved road access, and for some developments, there are no immediate alternatives to highway expansion.

However, if the government is serious about addressing car dependency, future road investments must be more closely aligned with sustainable transport priorities. This could involve:

• Ensuring that all new highway schemes are integrated with public transport corridors, such as prioritising bus rapid transit or rail connections alongside road expansions.
• Mandating active travel provisions, ensuring that new road schemes include high-quality cycling and pedestrian infrastructure.
• Aligning housing allocations with existing and planned public transport investment, directing growth towards areas with established transport networks rather than relying on new road capacity.

Striking the Right Balance – Or Fueling Inconsistency?

The government’s dual approach—investing in highways while aiming to reduce car dependency—exposes an underlying inconsistency in its decision-making. While the ambition to shift away from car-reliant development is clear, the continued prioritisation of road-building risks reinforcing the very problem that policymakers claim to be addressing.

Unless the government reconciles these conflicting priorities, the UK risks continuing the cycle of unsustainable, car-dependent housing growth, rather than fostering a genuinely integrated and future-proofed transport system. The challenge ahead will be whether it can move beyond traditional highway-led development models and instead deliver housing and infrastructure solutions that genuinely support both accessibility and sustainability.

?