You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles
Sector’s responses to planning changes: London Councils warns government over ‘potentially disastrous’ impact on affordable housing
The government’s proposals to overhaul the country’s planning system are “potentially disastrous” and could significantly reduce the number of affordable homes built in London, the body representing the capital’s local authorities has said.
Darren Rodwell, executive member for housing and planning at London Councils, said that at a time when the capital is experiencing the most severe homelessness crisis in the country, it would be a massive step backwards to undermine boroughs’ ability to ensure new development in London includes affordable homes.
The comments come after the government this morning published a raft of planning changes as part of what prime minister Boris Johnson called the biggest overhaul of the planning system since World War II.
This incorporates both short and long-term changes to the planning system, including plans to scrap Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy planning agreements and replace them with a new, overarching Infrastructure Levy as part of the move to a zonal planning system.
Shorter-term plans propose increasing the threshold for the size of development before developers need to make affordable housing contributions, and promoting the First Homes tenure for first-time buyers on new sites.
READ MORE
Mr Rodwell said: “These changes are potentially disastrous for Londoners and could reduce the amount of affordable housing built in the capital.
“Councils play a crucial role in the planning system, safeguarding our communities’ long-term interests and upholding quality standards. While we support ambitions to build more housing, we strongly oppose any moves towards a planning free-for-all – which would lead to lower-quality and fewer affordable homes in London.”
The National Housing Federation (NHF) also raised concerns over the scrapping of Section 106 and the impact it may have on affordable housing numbers.
Kate Henderson, chief executive of the NHF, said: “These are the single biggest contribution to building new affordable homes in the country – last year, Section 106 agreements delivered almost 28,000 affordable homes, about half of the total.
“This policy also helps ensure that every town and community across the country is made up of people on different incomes, living in a range of homes.
“Any alternative to Section 106 must ensure we can deliver more high-quality affordable homes to meet the huge demand across the country.”
More details on the Infrastructure Levy that will replace Section 106 were published in consultation documents today. The levy will be charged according to the final development value of the project and will be paid at the point of occupation.
Councils will be able to borrow against future levy payments, to bring in infrastructure early. A certain value will be set, below which no levy will be charged.
The levy can fund affordable housing, which can continue to be provided on site and sold to an affordable housing provider – as per Section 106 agreements in the current model. The discount applied to the affordable homes would be charged against the sum of the levy.
The Local Government Association (LGA) warned against any changes that may give it less control over planning decisions and said any changes must protect its power to accept or reject proposals.
James Jamieson, chair of the LGA, said: “It is vital that these [changes] are delivered through a locally led planning system with public participation at its heart, which gives communities the power to ensure new developments are of a high standard, built in the right places, and include affordable homes.
“We also need to ensure that new homes are supported by new funding for community infrastructure such as schools, playgrounds and roads.
“Nine in 10 applications are approved by councils, with more than a million homes given planning permission over the last decade yet to be built. The system needs to ensure planning permissions are built. Any loss of local control over developments would be a concern.”
Other sector responses
Fiona Howie, chief executive, Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA): “The TCPA is obviously disappointed that our long-standing calls for a more people-centred system focused on health and well-being have not been taken up.
“As an organisation, we are determined to work with communities and government to ensure future reforms preserve a democratic system which works in the public interest.
“Above all, the TCPA is interested in outcomes for people and particularly how we can navigate the challenges of housing, health and climate change. We will be campaigning stronger than ever to ensure that we have the creative, open and progressive planning system this nation deserves.”
Suzanne Benson, partner, Trowers & Hamlins: “There has been much speculation on the detail of the new proposed Infrastructure Levy and the proposed abolition of Section 106 planning obligations – particularly in terms of the potential to reduce affordable housing supply.
“The consultation does set out a policy aim to maintain and where possible increase supply of affordable housing using a combination of a nationally set Infrastructure Levy spent locally. This proposal to base the charge on the sales value of the development is a significant shift and there are interesting proposals around local authorities borrowing against future payments to support forward funding of infrastructure.
“This combined with the potential for local authorities to accept land transfer in lieu of payment and form partnerships with affordable housing providers to accelerate delivery may go some way to support this.”
Richard Brown, deputy director, Centre for London: “The government’s proposals are radical and far-reaching. They offer potential – for more meaningful community engagement, higher design standards, a less costly and risky planning system, and more clarity for smaller builders and developers.
“However, implementation will be complex, and a reformed planning system will need to be backed up by other incentives to accelerate housebuilding. London already has a ‘pipeline’ of 280,000 homes that have planning permission but have not been built.
“And the white paper is silent on London, the role of the mayor and the London Plan, and the role of other metro mayors and combined authorities. The complexities of England’s cities call for intelligent and engaged regional as well as local planning.”
Riëtte Oosthuizen, head of planning, HTA Design: “Zoning can work and does work in many other countries, but it needs to be built on the right foundations. Can we afford the luxury to get this wrong, following a pandemic? The whole planning system is not at fault although some of its component parts certainly require thorough interrogation.
“Even a zoning system can’t be implemented effectively through local authority planning departments stripped of resources and cash.
“Labelling areas for ‘growth’, and supporting development through ‘planning permission in principle’, which appears to form part of the ‘renewal’ classification, would mean local authorities taking on a much more proactive role in assessing sites for their suitability to deliver high-quality homes – this will require the right skills, including in-house architectural skills to test capacity through design proposals.
“It will also require a huge culture change. This presents two options: either resource local authorities better or involve the private sector as a partner in effectively giving sites planning permission.
“It appears that design quality comes as an inherent promise by the government in its overhaul of the planning system. Compiling a design code requires a thorough understanding of the basic components of long-term residential quality. Ideally, they need to be co-designed with residents. They need to be context specific and appropriate for local demographic profiles and need. They cover more than the appearance of homes.”
Jonathan Stoddart, head of London and South East Planning, CBRE: “There is a lot to like coming through these proposals and it feels like a restorative shift backwards to the art of town planning and a greater focus on place outcomes.
“Taking evidence nationally has merits if local reflection can be applied, but it seems that the ultimately pointless arguments over competing scheme evidence may have finally had their time.
“The front-loading of decision-making has been becoming more prevalent over the years, but the government reforms place enormous emphasis on plan preparation. This is brave when England has never had universal plan coverage at any one time, in fact that coverage has been extremely poor.
“Yet give the proposals the benefit of any doubt; if resources are freed up in terms of evidence gathering, development plan policymaking, and the embedding of planning in principle, then that will undoubtedly help.”
