With planning for new housing still high on the political agenda, John McLarty, Strutt & Parker’s Head of Planning, asks whether we should be looking at small sites or more joined up development
With planning for new housing still high on the political agenda, John McLarty, Strutt & Parker’s Head of Planning, asks whether we should be looking at small sites or more joined up development
We often hear about the amount of land that’s available to solve the UK’s ever-growing housing crisis. But one aspect of the argument that is less commonly brought up is about the size of these land packages.
They can vary from an acre to enough space to hold hundreds, if not thousands, of new homes.
So which plots should the Government target? And how can we go about making the most of them?
Small nibble
The government wants to promote growth and more homes. As part of this, they are encouraging small-scale developments of 10 to 20 houses in and around villages, which they hope will have limited negative impact on services but a positive effect on sustaining local schools and businesses.
Usually, these new homes would increase a village’s size by a maximum of around 5-10%. But there are still some logistic problems with green belts and greenfield sites stopping even small scale developments and many parish councils are against any kind of growth.
Another problem with small scale development is that there’s no requirement to include affordable housing. So even if they do get the go-ahead, the villages may end up seeing the 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation of locals being forced to move out as prices for properties become unaffordable. They become haunts of the super-rich only.
Bigger bites
As villages and small towns expand they tend to hit capacity when homes reach the bypass. But there is the possibility to grow beyond these borders with larger developments. But only if local councils are willing to build on greenfield sites.
The issue then becomes ‘what size’? Something between 300-400 homes can add undue pressure on local schools, the road systems and drainage – but can be manageable.
Move up to 1,000-plus homes and you’re past the point of using (or overusing) current amenities and into the realm of having to create new ones.
At this scale, developers need to start looking at subsidising new schools, affordable housing and more, which will add to the cost of the new homes. Any cost savings made from economies of scale could be lost.
Joined up thinking
One of the main problems is the disjoint between government and local authority policies. Despite what the government might pledge on housing, they don’t always have enough political influence at a local level to make these policies a reality.
NIMBY-ism plays a big part in it. Few local council members would expect to find themselves re-elected after having approved a large housing development in their constituency – despite the fact that it might be much-needed.
The government and local planning authorities need to work more closely to form detailed strategies that will tackle the housing crisis. The existing approach is leading to sporadic developments that end up putting local infrastructure under pressure without actually provide the right housing in the right places and additional amenities.
Ideally, we need brave local politicians to step up and review their local green belts – whether that will happen is another matter.