The Times - UK (2020-08-07)

6 2GM Friday August 7 2020 | the times

News

Boris Johnson is facing discontent from

Tory-controlled local authorities by or-

dering England’s more affluent areas to

release the most land for housing.

Under a reform of planning laws,

local control over the rate of building

will effectively be removed. Instead,

central government will “distribute” an

annual target, at present 300,

homes, among local authorities, which

will be required to designate enough

land to meet it.

The consultation document propos-

es a new “standard model” to replace

the existing system under which each

council negotiates its own targets with

the housing department.

It also proposes a new test to see how

a development will affect its surround-

ings and abolishes the duty to co-oper-

ate with public bodies, such as English

Heritage and the Environment Agency,

on cross-boundary matters, which

could dismay campaigners.

While ministers will take account of

local factors such as national parks and

green belts, councils that have tradi-

tionally failed to make enough land

available to keep pace are being put on

notice.

The document states that the new

system will ensure “that the least

affordable places where historic under-

supply has been most chronic take a

greater share of future development”.

The reforms, which also limit local

politicians’ power to block individual

developments, have caused unease

among Tory MPs and councillors.

James Jamieson, the Local Govern-

ment Association’s Conservative chair-

man, said: “Any loss of local control over

developments would be a concern.”

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, Tory

MP for the Cotswolds, said: “We do

need some reform, but as people who

have tried this before have found, if you

are not careful it does have knock-on

effects.”

“Whilst I’m all in favour of building

more houses, they need to be good-

quality houses, we have got to be really

sure that we are not building slums of

tomorrow by building today at low

quality,” he told the BBC.

Hugh Ellis, a director at the Town

and Country Planning Association,

said the greatest factor in building de-

cent social housing for rent was invest-

ment, not planning, and warned it was

“really troubling” that “this is not a

democratisation of planning”.

At present, he said, critics of a build-

ing project “get two bites of the cherry,

they can have an involvement in the

The number of new affordable homes

could fall sharply in some areas under

an exemption for smaller develop-

ments in the planning reforms.

Developers are at present required to

contribute to affordable housing on

sites involving ten or more new homes.

The planning white paper proposes lift-

ing that threshold to 40 or 50 homes

“for an initial period of 18 months” to

boost building during the economic

recovery.

Paul Miner, head of planning at the

Campaign to Protect Rural England,

said that many rural areas and small

towns tended to have developments of

Fear of big cut in

affordable property

Ben Webster Environment Editor fewer than 40 homes, meaning that

they would miss out on gaining much-

needed affordable housing.

The government said that the change

to the threshold would “balance the

aim of supporting SMEs with the need

to deliver new affordable homes”.

The Royal Town Planning Institute

called on the government to give

“cast-iron guarantees” that the reforms

would deliver affordable housing.

Victoria Hills, its chief executive, said

that there was a risk that replacing the

two existing financial contributions

developers are required to make, the

community infrastructure levy and

Section 106 payment, with a single levy

could result in less money for

T

he model for

Robert Jenrick’s

planning reforms

is the Cornish

town Nansledan,

insiders suggest. If that is

true, the proposals should

be welcomed, not least by

the Prince of Wales (Hugh

Graham writes).

Last year, I visited

Nansledan, the prince’s

latest planned town on the

outskirts of Newquay. It is

nicknamed Surfbury, after

Poundbury, the prince’s

original planned town in

Dorset that was derided in

the 1990s for its pastiche

architecture but which

has become a thriving

A debt to prince’s thriving model town

community. Though

Nansledan is still being

built, it already felt like an

established town. It had

230 homes on 500 acres

with a plan for 4,000 over

30 years, built in a variety

of architectural styles.

It was the opposite of a

cheap, identikit housing

estate where the streets

are dead and residents

have to drive to get an

ice-cream. The new rules

could make it easier for

more Nansledans to be

built.

Anthony Breach, an

analyst from the Centre

for Cities think tank, says

that the reforms will

loosen the stranglehold

that volume housebuilders

have on land supply and

level the playing field for

smaller builders

committed to higher-

quality schemes. He says

that developers will have

to compete on quality.

In the past the

discretionary nature of

the planning system

meant that planners could

reject a project on a

whim.

“That discretionary

element, where planners

do a case-by-case

rationing of new homes —

that is causing the housing

crisis,” Mr Breach says.

Under the new, more

predictable, system, under

which automatic

permission is granted,

small builders will have

greater incentive.

Critics say that

automatic permission will

let developers to get away

with poor quality. Under

the reforms, permission

will only be granted

automatically if builders

meet rules and established

codes, which communities

will help to write.

Ben Bolgar, a senior

director at the Prince’s

Foundation, said: “What

matters most is how these

ideas are implemented.”

And that is the key: the

ideas are good but this

government does not

always have a good track

record for execution.

Arts, Times2, page 6

Analysis

Changing places

Convert gasometers to flats

THE THREE ZONES

Growth areas: suitable for substantial development,

and where outline approval for development would

be automatically secured for forms and types of

development specified in the plan

Renewal areas: suitable for some development,

allowing increased housing density

Protected areas: green belt, areas of outstanding

natural beauty, sites of special scientific interest

and national parks

1

2

3

3

Encourage attractive

development with

use of flora

News Planning

Homes target places Johnson on

Francis Elliott Political Editor

Louise Clarence Smith, Melissa York

plan, they can comment on planning

applications”, he told Toda y on BBC

Radio 4. “Half that process is going to

effectively disappear.”

Shares in Britain’s biggest listed

housebuilders fell yesterday amid con-

cerns that the changes would create

years of uncertainty around planning

policy while the measures were con-

sulted on and brought forward.

Persimmon, Taylor Wimpey and

Barratt Developments all lost about

4 per cent of their market value.

David O’Leary, head of policy at the

Home Builders Federation, said: “The

big fear is this could result in a bit of

paralysis for a year or two as local

authorities stop working on current

local plans.” However, he said that

there were no major “red flags” for the

big developers, which broadly wel-

comed the proposals. John Tutte, the

chairman of Redrow, said: “I welcome

anything that streamlines the planning

system. It’s long overdue.”

Anthony Codling, a housing ana-

lyst, said that if the changes were

implemented it could be a huge

boost to big listed developers

and their shareholders

because they would not

need to hold such big land

banks. “For the largest UK

housebuilders, this could

free up around £1 billion of

each of their balance

sheets, which could fund

dividends for the future.”

Smaller builders also wel-

comed the changes to a com-

plex planning system that has

put them at a disadvantage.

James Forrester, managing dir-

ector of Stripe Homes, said: “For too

long the big house builders have had a

stranglehold over the sector, allowing

them to drip feed developments as they

see fit in order to keep house prices and

their profit margins buoyant.”

The Centre for Policy Studies said

that the plan for locally agreed building

design codes could reduce opposition

to development and make it faster and

more profitable.

“Abolishing national prescriptions

will clear the way for local people to set

design codes on the issues that really

matter to them through neighbour-

hood planning,” Alex Morton, the think

tank’s head of policy, said.

“More broadly, these planning re-

forms are an intelligent first step in re-

form but much more detail will be

needed and many vested interests will

try to slow and stop reform.”

Philip Collins, page 23

Letters, page 26

Leading article, page 27

Case study

L

ocals locked in a

four-year battle against a

proposed 3,000-home

development have

described the news that

planning laws are to be loosened

as “heartbreaking” (Tom Ball

writes).

Jacky Nabb, who is opposed to

the building of a new village in the

Oxfordshire countryside, said that

it felt as though “somebody just

twisted my stomach” when she

heard that the government had

announced plans to slash the red

tape around house building.

The proposed development near

Chalgrove would feature a market,

a town centre, two primary

schools, a secondary school, a

sixth-form college and a road

bypass.

After years of opposition to the

plans, residents fear that the

reformed planning laws would

render them powerless to prevent

the development from going

ahead.

Ms Nabb, a Chalgrove resident,

told BBC Radio 4’s Toda y: “It

sounds really dramatic, but it

broke my heart.”

Simon Reynolds, another

resident, wrote on Facebook:

“Fast-tracking will simply

mean the local people get even

less of a say than we do at

present, and we are not really

listened to now. South Oxfordshire

district council have paid lip

service to local objections but it’s

all we can do.”

He urged fellow residents to

oppose the planning application

“while you can” before the

deadline of September 1.

“Over 200 objections so far.

Let’s make it three times that.

Obviously the more detailed the

better, but even a short objection

with relevant points is good,” Mr

Reynolds added.

Robert Jenrick, the housing

secretary, said that claims that the

draft laws for England would

create a generation of low-quality

homes were “complete nonsense”.

Homes England, which owns

an airfield that is earmarked

for the development, said that

it would help to “meet the unmet

housing need of the area” and

protect the green belt and local

jobs.