Last month’s highly anticipated housing white paper provided long-awaited recognition of the challenging state of the UK housing market. In addition to the headline announcements, the release also came with a flurry of press releases and consultation documents underpinning the policy positions outlined in the white paper, writes Zena Foale-Banks, planner at Nexus Planning.
With regard to development in London, the outcome of the consultation on upward extensions, completed by the Department for Communities and Local Government, was of particular significance.
Within the development industry there had been much speculation that height restrictions in London would be relaxed, with some suggesting that developers would be free to extend to the height of the highest existing building in any development block. Regardless of whether or not this is a realistic or sensible policy proposal, it led to a general anticipation of relaxed building heights. However, despite these expectations, it appears that such policies are yet to come to fruition.
Additional storeys
Viewed as a potential solution for densely populated areas, upward extensions are a proposed method to deliver more housing in London by allowing a limited number of additional storeys to be added to existing buildings in brownfield areas. As confirmed in the most recent consultation however, the government will not bring forward a permitted development right to make it easier for developers to build upwards for residential development in London.
The NPPF will instead be amended to support the delivery of homes through a presumption in favour of building up in London, as well as across the country. As the consultation states: ‘Our intention is therefore to take forward the policy option through the National Planning Policy Framework to support the delivery of additional homes by building up.’
Through issuing this statement it is clear that support has been demonstrated for upward extensions in principle. However, the general consensus following the consultation is that upward extensions are too complex to be assessed in a one-size-fits-all approach. While the permitted development route has been identified as too generalised for upward extensions, it is clear that an effective mechanism needs to be put in place to serve as a catalyst for such developments.
Key tool
There is an overall recognition that upward extensions are a key tool in providing much-needed additional housing within brownfield areas across the country. However, it appears that while there are good intentions to promote upward extensions, there is still a lack of specific policy intervention. As a result, developers would be wise to resist proceeding too optimistically.
While there is overarching support at a broad level in principle, we have not yet seen whether this will cascade down to the local authority level.
In relation to London, an effective mechanism for the promotion of upward extensions may be to include a policy in the London Plan, providing more certainty for developers. A London Plan policy would allow boroughs to encourage such activity through development plan policies. A planning application submitted in line with a plan policy would allow for appropriate consideration of the effects of proposals and ensure that they are complementary to the character of an area.
A London Plan policy would allow for flexibility in delivering more homes. This method was promoted in the original consultation stage, and while there appeared to be support from the development industry overall, it has not been implemented at this stage.
Although the housing white paper and associated consultation documents had the potential to turn words into action, there is an overall lack of necessary change being implemented. The opportunity for legitimate policy advancement has seemingly been wasted, and the issues thrown into the “too hard basket”. While a complex form of development, upward extensions represent an excellent opportunity for increasing densities and providing additional housing in areas where it is most needed. A practical method of implementation must be identified in the near future to ensure real progress can be made.
