News & Blog

Following this week’s cabinet reshuffle, a number of growth initiatives have come out of Whitehall, aimed at kick starting house building. A Written Statement released by Communities Secretary Eric Pickles on Thursday, detailed the initiatives to be implemented, reaffirming the Governments number one priority, to get the economy growing.

- £200 million is to be pumped into the private rental market, enabling institutional investors better access to high quality, rental units.

- Further guarantees against borrowing and investment of £300 million to be directed towards affordable housing to increase delivery and bring empty units back into use.

- The ‘Newbuy’ scheme will be extended, providing easier access to mortgages with just 5% deposit. An additional £280 million will go towards helping first time buyers.

- Where there is local support for growth and a strong requirement for new homes, ways to fast track such applications will be looked at, and changes announced in the 2013 budget. Bringing surplus local authority land back into use will also be targeted, increasing disposals and making transfers between departments easier.

- In order to reduce planning delays, the Government intends to give powers to the Planning Inspectorate to determine applications on behalf of Local Authorities who have a track record of delays and poor quality decisions. This will require more transparent reporting from Councils.

- With an estimated 75,000 new homes stalled due to site viability, greater negotiation over s106 and affordable housing will be encouraged. New legislation in 2013 will allow developers to appeal against affordable housing requirements, whereby the Inspectorate would set a new, viable number of units to be achieved.

- With regard to homeowners, it is proposed, following consultation, to extend permitted development rights, to free up local authority workloads and provide employment to small traders. Permitted development rights will be further extended to facilitate the change of use from commercial to residential, whilst giving the Local Authorities powers to protect identified areas where this change of use may be detrimental.

If you would like to discuss how these proposed changes may affect your business, please contact us.

There are a lot of very interesting facts and figures in the NPPF Impact Assessment, which explains the reasons behind the Government's new policies in the NPPF (a bit like a bonus DVD with footage taken behind the scenes!).

Appeal Costs

For example did you know that appeals by Public Inquiry cost the Planning Inspectorate £11,500 each (on average) while written representation only cost £1,000 and councils only spend £3,200 on each Inquiry, while appellants spend £10,500?

No wonder PINS is so keen to ensure that as many appeals as possible are dealt with by written representations.

Commercial to Residential Encouraged

In 2010, the Government published a consultation paper, which mooted relaxing the Use Class Order to allow change of use from commercial uses (B classes) to residential (C3) without the need for planning permission.  The NPPF states that here is a "shortage of housing land nationally", but the Government has decided to succumb to pressure from local authorities (who would have lost much need income from application fees and s106 contributions, as well as affordable housing) and make the policy more amenable to such changes of use.
About 1,000 such change of use applications are submitted each year and this is now expected to increase due to more welcoming planning policies. Any owner of an underused commercial building should certainly be looking at submitting a planning application for change of use to residential as a means of adding value to the property - and helping to tackle the housing shortage.

5 Year Housing Land Supply - Fact or Fiction?

All councils have to maintain a 5 year supply of housing land. This is imperative if we are to deliver enough homes for future generations.

Most councils claim that they have got a 5 year housing land supply, In April 2009, 86% of councils, which responded to a Government survey, said that they had a robust 5 year housing land supply. However, a study by the Planning Inspectorate (PINS), in March 2010, found that only 61% of councils sampled actually had a verifiable 5 year housing land supply.

PINS stated that there were a number of reasons why land allocated for development was not coming forward for development, including:

- Time taken for multiple owners to work together and agree a deal
- Infrastructure requirements
- Land allocated in less commercially attractive locations
- Landowner expectations
- Local market situation
- Viability

In order to try to fill this gap between allocation and actual delivery, the NPPF now requires councils to add a 5% buffer to their housing figures, rising to 20% for persistently under-delivering councils.

Paragraph 49 of the NPPF states that if councils do not have a genuine 5 year housing land supply their housing policies will be considered out of date and the presumption in favour of sustainable development will apply. It appears that the Government is placing a great deal of emphasis on ensuring that councils have a robust 5 year housing land supply in place. Any councils that do not, will find themselves, inevitably, facing more appeals, which, as we know, are expensive!

Brownfield Sites in the Green Belt

In a previous Blog I referred to paragraph 89 of the NPPF which encourages redevelopment of previously-developed sites in the Green Belt. It's interesting to note the Government's thinking behind this policy change. The Impact

Assessment states that:

"The rationale for allowing the consideration of development on previously-developed sites is that the sites, by definition, have already been developed and the impact on the openness and purposes of the Green Belt has already been established. By allowing development which does not create a greater impact than the existing development, there could be additional economic, social and environmental benefits, including housing, transport, commercial, employment and decontaminating land without damaging the principles or protection of the Green Belt."

The Government estimates that around 29% or 47,000 dwellings are built on greenfield land. If 1% (470 dwellings) were now built on brownfield sites in the Green Belt, then this would save 17 hectares of greenfield land per year.

It is a shame that the Government hasn't taken this policy one step further, because, although the redevelopment of brownfield sites in the Green Belt is now encouraged, it isn't in the rest of the countryside. The Government needs to encourage the redevelopment of all brownfield sites, both inside and outside of the Green Belt. This would save hundreds more hectares of greenfield land in the years ahead.

Jim Bailey - Director, Guildford

Previously PPG2 stated that limited infilling or redevelopment of major existing developed sites identified in adopted local plans was acceptable. This meant that if you owned a very large Brownfield site in the Green Belt, such as a School, Hospital or Army Barracks, you could try to pursuade your local council to allocate it for redevelopment or infilling in the local plan.

Paragraph 89 has opened up a whole new area of opportunity for landowners in the Green Belt. Now, if you own a commercial building or a group of buildings in the Green Belt, and even if they are still be in active use, you can apply for redevelopment, subject to the new scheme having no more impact on the openness of the Green Belt than the current use.

We are looking at a number of such sites, including a small, run down industrial estate on the edge of a large town, which we consider could now be sustainably redeveloped for housing - a far more valuable use.

If you own or control a Brownfield site in the Green Belt, get in touch and we'll see if we can use this clause in the NPPF to add value to your property.

JB May 2012