Professor Chris Balch

Land and Planning for Community Developers: - Locating Viable Building Land

10th July 2012 MADE, Birmingham

Structure of presentation• Role of planning – negative and positive• Traditional planning approach to identifying residential land

– Windfall sites– Forward planning

• Emerging planning approaches– Neighbourhood Planning– Community Right to Build

• Working with landowners and house builders – possible approaches• Assessing development viability

The negative role of planning• Restricts the supply of land e.g. Green Belts, AONBs, village envelopes.• Results in high cost of land with planning permission. • Complex, time consuming and costly process of obtaining planning

permission.• Reduces competition in supply of new homes – dominant role of

speculative, volume house builders.

‘Finding and buying the right plot is generally regarded as the most important barrier faced by self-builders. The main problem is not the availability of land but managing its acquisition and acquiring planning consent’ JRF Report on the Self Build Market, 2001.

The positive role of planning• Provides an objective assessment of the need for market and affordable

housing.• Identifies key sites critical for the delivery of future supply and broad

locations for growth consistent with principles of sustainable development. • Aims to ensure a 5 year supply of residential development land capable of

being delivered (available, well located, viable). • Provides mechanism for securing funding for physical and social

infrastructure (Community Infrastructure Levy and s106).• Protects local amenity and encourages good design

Allocated SitesWindfall Sites

Housing Land Supply

Windfall Sites• Windfalls are ‘sites which have not been specifically identified as

available in the forward planning process and become ‘unexpectedly’ available.

• Typically small (up to 0.4 ha. and 0.4 to 1 ha.) • Sub-division of plots or ‘left over’ land.• Previously developed land e.g. former institutional or

employment uses.• Experience suggests that ‘windfalls’ accounts for significant

proportion of new homes completions

Potential sources of information on windfall sites• Growing number of websites specialising in land for ‘self

build’ e.g. Plotfinder, UK Land Directory, UK Land Agent, Self Build ABC used by surveyors, estate agents and individuals seeking market exposure and sale by ‘private treaty’.

• Auction sales will typically include land with development potential. Auctions tend to be locally/regionally based and require ability to acquire at short notice.

• Registration with local surveyors and estate agents who can provide local market knowledge and ‘intelligence’.

Con• Too small for co-housing

projects?• Will require detailed planning

consent.• Potential neighbour objections.• May be subject to legal

restrictions

Pro• Manageable scale.• Usually well located.• Generally close to services.• Limited competition from

house builders.

Pros and Cons of windfall sites

Forward Planning approach

Establish local housing

requirements(SHMA)

Determine potential supply

of sites(SHLAA)

Develop plans and policies for

accommodating housing growth

(LDF)

Grant planning permission in

accordance with Development Plan

….but its not as easy as it looks!

SHLAAs as a source of information on potential housing land• Landowners and developers invited to submit potential sites• Local planning authority assesses sites against set of criteria:

• Is it developable?• Is it suitable? (policy, physical limitations, impact and environmental conditions), • Is it available?• Is it achievable? (market factors, cost and deliverability)

• Published findings guide Core Strategy and allocation of development sites.

Sources of information used to identify potential housing land

Source: CLG (July 2007) Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessments: Practice Guidance

Con• Tend to be larger scale sites.• Land likely to be controlled by

house builders under option agreements.

• Requires proactive and long term engagement with planning.

• Highly competitive and ‘political’ environment.

Pro• Identifies potential sellers.• Provides an objective

assessment of site potential.• Provides greater planning

certainty.

Pros and Cons of Forward Planning approach

Emerging Planning approaches• Localism Act 2011 and Neighbourhood Planning (General)

Regulations 2012 have given substantially enhanced powers to communities to develop statutory development plans for their area.

• To date 223 localities have been granted ‘frontrunner’ status and many more are exploring potential of new powers to deliver housing to meet local need.

• Communities can also use Neighbourhood Development Orders (NDO) and Community Right to Build Orders as a mechanism for granting consent for development locally.

Neighbourhood Plans - key requirements• Community group must be designated by local planning authority

as ‘neighbourhood forum’ – minimum of 21 people with written constitution.

• Plan has to be subject to an independent examination to establish that it has: – has appropriate regard to national policy advice and guidance (National

Planning Policy Framework - NPPF)– is in general conformity with the strategic policies – not breached or is incompatible with EU and Human Rights obligations.

• Plan must command support of a majority in a local referendum

Atmos Project, TotnesPotential Neighbourhood Plan?

Con• Does not deliver control over key

sites and assets.• Requires major commitment by

local community in time and resources.

• Potential ambivalence of local planning authority.

• Unpredictability of referendum.

Pro• Opportunity to address gap in

land and planning process.• Provides leverage with land

owners and house builders.• Potential to address specific

local needs.• Puts community ‘centre

stage’ in planning process

Pros and Cons of Neighbourhood Planning approach

Use of planning policy to promote self build/co-housing

Source: Teignbridge District Council (Jan 2012), Core Strategy Development Plan Document 2013-2033 Preferred Options

Possible ways of working with landowners and house builders1. Gaining access to publicly owned land. Mechanisms exist for

disposal of land at ‘less than best consideration’ where justified by indirect benefits e.g. K1, Orchard Park, Cambridge.

2. Helping developers gain community support for their proposals. Partnering with self builders/co-housing groups can help ‘de-risk’ conventional speculative housing development by providing ‘up front’ receipts, individual design/house type e.g. Baltic Wharf, Totnes

Addressing development viability

Gross Development

ValueNo of units x price per unit