Over the last few weeks much has been said about the need to revolutionise the planning system. Finally, the big announcement arrived with the headline “build, build, build”. Will our housebuilders be urgently taking on more bricklayers, or will they still be complaining about the same old system in 12 months’ time?
There are several issues that need to be resolved, including taking too long to get planning permission, too much information having to be submitted, small groups of objectors getting too much attention and too many local councils being anti-development because they fear they will lose votes. Too much time is spent arguing over affordable housing viability, and the green belt policy is far too restrictive.
Let’s change the Model T Ford for a sleeker electric vehicle that’s fit for today’s development needs. To really move planning forward, the government should adopt this alternative and truly radical 10-point plan.
Set up planning panels. Too many planning applications are turned down because of local opposition and politicians are concerned about getting re-elected. Planning committees should comprise a mixture of councillors and independent industry experts, including architects to improve design.
Rebalance the public consultation process. Most neighbours and interested parties only write to the planning authority if they want to object. This gives a very biased view and frequently tilts the consideration of an application to a refusal. To rebalance this, weight should be given to the large numbers who have been consulted and not responded.
Replace affordable housing requirements with a tariff. Too much time is spent on viability reports and the public has lost faith in the system. Remove the adversarial approach by legislating that local authorities can only ask for a payment based on a tariff that has been viability tested through the Local Plan process.
Abolish the Community Infrastructure Levy. This is just a developer tax where the immediate local community sees no discernible benefits. Return to a Section 106 system where only contributions and infrastructure directly related to the scheme are able to be requested.
Review viability assessments. Once the design of the scheme is agreed by the council, the FVA is submitted to an independent expert for determination drawn from a panel appointed by MHCLG/PINS/RICS. The expert determination is final.
Encourage schemes to be built via CPO. It is time to allow councils to CPO land for housing and capture the land value increase to fund high quality affordable housing. Introduce this for allocated housing sites that are not being built out. This would incentivise developers and landowners to build on land that is not being developed.
Address the green belt elephant. All designations should be reviewed, and brownfield sites identified for development if they are within half a mile of a train/tube station/transport hub. There is a need to get the message across that development in green belts does not have to be on green pastures, which seems to be the public perception. Give no weight to the protection of green belt if a local planning authority is not allocating sufficient sites to meet its housing needs from 1 January 2023 onwards.
Affordable housing, first homes or rural exception schemes. Schemes that are 90% affordable/first homes should be considered as ‘sustainable development’ and benefit from the tilted balance under the NPPF. This will ease the passage of these schemes which are promoted by the NPPF but are not being accepted by councils.
Save the high street. Immediate action is needed to save our high streets. We should temporarily allow the interchange between use classes A1, A2, A3, A4, B1, C1, C2, D1 and D2 for two years. All uses can interchange to allow local high streets to recover from post Covid-19 quickly. This will, for example, allow small restaurants to expand next door into vacant charity shops and increase their floor area given the need for social distancing.
Rebalance the imbalance of HIF funding. The Housing Infrastructure Fund affordability test threshold (average house prices are more than 8.8 times the average household earnings) is biased against the very areas it was initially designed to help. Northern and regional towns lose out on much-needed funding to unlock regeneration sites. A fairer methodology is required that focuses on the overall housing, employment and regeneration opportunities for any given site.
John Walker is executive director at C|T Local
