Chancellor George Osborne’s raft of new housing and planning policies, unveiled today as part of his Spending Review and aimed at boosting home ownership, have been welcomed cautiously by real estate lawyers.
Claire Dutch, a partner in Hogan Lovells’ planning practice said that it was “no surprise” that housing is near the top of the government’s priorities, but that it was odd that new proposals have been put forward while the Housing and Planning Bill is already going through Parliament.
She said: “It is also no shock that the government has continued with its obsession about home ownership, introducing different products to enable people to buy their own homes. Build to rent seems to have fallen by the wayside. This is remarkable given that surely the greatest priority should be to get new homes built, regardless of their tenure.
” It is odd that the government is already proposing, before the Housing and Planning Bill is passed, another set of major planning reforms relating to public land release and starter homes, which could have usefully been included in the current bill.”
Claire Fallows, partner at law firm Charles Russell Speechlys, said that developers would welcome the government’s intention to remove constraints that prevent private sector organisations from participating and bidding for funding, and the announcement by the government of funding for new housing, including starter and shared ownership homes.
But she said: “Questions remain, however, as to whether local authorities will continue to insist on the provision of social and affordable rented units on larger housing sites and, if so, whether housing associations will have the funding available to acquire those units. Flexibility by authorities will be required to ensure that housing delivery is not stalled.”
She added that the proposals for development of brownfield sites in the green belt were a step towards a thorough review of policy in that area.
She said: “The green belt is an emotive issue and, before today, the government has been firmly in support of its protection. It has now announced that it will support the regeneration of previously developed brownfield sites in the green belt by allowing them to be developed in the same way as other brownfield land, providing the regeneration contributes to starter homes and subject to local consultation.
“The redevelopment of such brownfield sites already has some support in national policy and it remains to be seen how far the government will go with their proposal. Many are calling for a wholesale review of the purpose of the green belt in light of the need for housing. For some, the government’s proposal might at least be a step in the right direction.”
Pointing out that details were limited about reforms to the planning system, she added: “With the Housing and Planning Bill going through Parliament and strategic planning returning through the back door of devolution, there will be much for developers and their consultants to monitor over the months to come.”
Tom Hall, real estate partner and head of Irwin Mitchell’s strategic land group, described the announcements as an “important step in the right direction” in ensuring young people could aspire to home ownership and provided some good news for house builders and other stakeholders involved in the delivery of the country’s “much-needed new housing”.
He said: “The government’s announcements should hopefully assist in getting young people on to the housing ladder, which will in turn help to unlock sites for development and provide real incentives for builders to start work on sites where viability of development was previously at issue. It certainly provides real encouragement for those involved in the delivery of strategic land and in helping to achieve much needed housing number growth across the country.”
Andrew Smith, partner and head of the real estate team at Bircham Dyson Bell, said that an increased spending on transport infrastructure is “particularly encouraging”.
“Projects of this nature are key to unlocking growth opportunities,” he said. “Too often infrastructure is seen in isolation and the arguments become too narrowly focused on how taxpayers’ money can be justifiably spent in this way. But to frame the argument in that way is to overlook the wider benefits and opportunities generated by such projects.”
