10th July 2012
MADE, Birmingham
Land and Planning for Community Developers:
- Locating Viable Building Land
Professor Chris Balch
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
Housing Land
Supply
Windfall
Sites
Allocated Sites
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’.
Pros and Cons of windfall sites
Pro
• Manageable scale.
• Usually well located.
• Generally close to services.
• Limited competition from
house builders.
Con
• Too small for co-housing
projects?
• Will require detailed planning
consent.
• Potential neighbour objections.
• May be subject to legal
restrictions
Forward Planning approach
Establish local
housing
requirements
(SHMA)
Determine
potential supply
of sites
(SHLAA)
….but its not as easy as it looks!
Develop plans and
policies for
accommodating
housing growth
(LDF)
Grant planning
permission in
accordance with
Development Plan
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
Pros and Cons of Forward Planning approach
Pro
• Identifies potential sellers.
• Provides an objective
assessment of site potential.
• Provides greater planning
certainty.
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.
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, Totnes
Potential Neighbourhood Plan?
Pros and Cons of Neighbourhood Planning approach
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
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.
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 builders
1. 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
Value
No of units x
price per unit