Professor Chris Balch

1. 10th July 2012 MADE, Birmingham Land and Planning for Community Developers: - Locating Viable Building Land Professor Chris Balch

2. 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

3. 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.

4. 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

5. Housing Land Supply Allocated Sites Windfall Sites

6. 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

7. 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’.

9. Con • Too small for co-housing projects? • Will require detailed planning consent. • Potential neighbour objections. • May be subject to legal restrictions Pros and Cons of windfall sites Pro • Manageable scale. • Usually well located. • Generally close to services. • Limited competition from house builders.

10. 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!

11. 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.

12. Sources of information used to identify potential housing land Source: CLG (July 2007) Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessments: Practice Guidance

15. 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. Pros and Cons of Forward Planning approach Pro • Identifies potential sellers. • Provides an objective assessment of site potential. • Provides greater planning certainty.

16. EmergingPlanningapproaches • 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.

17. 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

18. Atmos Project, Totnes Potential Neighbourhood Plan?

19. 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. 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

20. 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

21. Possible ways of working with landowners and house builders • 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. • 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

24. Addressing development viability Gross Development Value No of units x price per unit