Industry experts have broadly embraced the government’s plans to speed up urban housing developments by prioritising brownfield sites, but expressed doubts on whether new measures for permitted development rights will deliver stock of the required quality.
Levelling up secretary Michael Gove has said councils will be told to follow a “brownfield presumption”, under which England’s 20 largest cities will be expected to make it easier for permission to be given for brownfield development if housebuilding drops below expected levels.
Gove also intends to extend permitted development rights to make it easier for commercial buildings to be converted to residential use. A consultation on the proposals has been launched today and will run until 26 March.
Mixed messages
British Property Federation chief executive Melanie Leech welcomed the focus on unlocking the potential of urban brownfield sites, but pointed out that the extension to PDR “is not a silver bullet for housing delivery”.
“Only a small number of buildings are likely to be suitable for homes, and it is paramount that there is effective quality control in place to make sure we do not end up with poor-quality homes in our town centres,” said Leech.
She also warned that planning departments will struggle to operate with the required speed unless councils are given the necessary funding. “The government must now ensure that local authorities are properly resourced to take advantage of these opportunities at pace,” she said.
Other industry figures warned that the proposals will potentially clash with the National Planning Policy Framework.
Claire Dutch, co-head of planning at law firm Ashurst, said there are “mixed messages”. “The new proposals come within weeks of a revised NPPF which states that urban densification should not happen if the uplift is out of character with the existing area,” she said.
Dutch added: “The government continues to single-mindedly focus on more brownfield development as the panacea to solve the housing crisis, while the green belt remains sacrosanct.”
Building on brownfield
Landsec chief executive Mark Allan commended the focus on prioritising brownfield development as a way to harness new opportunities. “Landsec has been campaigning to unlock more economic growth, more homes and more jobs by refocusing national planning policy on the opportunities provided by brownfield urban regeneration,” he said.
“The emphasis on maximising housing development in urban areas set out today means that we can seize some of those opportunities, deliver more homes and secure better outcomes for cities and the people who live there.”
Ask Partners co-founder and chief executive Daniel Austin was positive about the potential for converting shops and offices to residential use, citing financial and environmental benefits as well as fewer objections in the planning process.
However, Austin noted that both of the main political parties are vowing to fix the planning system as an election looms, and as political agendas become more populist, the question is whether either party can propose measures that will “genuinely accelerate growth without losing them votes”.
“[That] is the exact reason why central and local government should not be involved in the planning process at all as they cannot be impartial in controversial decisions which have a major impact on their electorate,” he said.
The Conservatives’ plans to boost housebuilding within England’s largest cities contrast with Labour’s proposals to create new towns and open up parts of the green belt.
More of the same?
Howard Bassford, real estate partner at DLA Piper, said Gove’s plans are nothing new and are a continuation of all government policy since Lord Rogers of Riverside’s Urban Task Force review of 1999. He believes fresh impetus needs to be given to developers.
“Anything that takes pressure off valuable land resources can only be a good thing,” said Bassford. “What is needed now in order to drive these recommendations home is for the Treasury to double down on the clear message from planning by giving tax-break incentives to encourage brownfield land development.”
Montford senior adviser Andrew Teacher criticised the focus on city centre development as an attempt to assuage rural voters and backbench Tory MPs. “This is more of the same, with not a single shred of policy designed at bringing in new money or making it easier to actually build,” he said.
“This government has wasted a period of free money and, rather than being radical during a period when it really has nothing to lose, it is still bowing to nimbys and shuffling the deckchairs while the country’s housing crisis – and its emerging rental crisis – gets worse.
“We have an opportunity to attract institutional capital and build homes for rent, which is something the industry has been saying for years. Yet ministers still seem hell-bent on pursuing ownership at all costs, and because of their unwillingness to face down nimby Britain, they will likely lose the support of millions of people who desperately want to see housing built for all tenures.”
Image © Adam Vaughan/EPA/EFE/Shutterstock
Send feedback to Jim Larkin
Follow Estates Gazette
