Marketing No Comments

London needs micro-homes to solve the housing crisis

Everyday, thousands of city workers are forced into excruciatingly long commutes from the outskirts of London, because living in the city centre – and, frankly, most of the capital – is simply unaffordable.

Micro-housing would allow Londoners to commute less and live more. Never mind if that’s more time to join a gym class, meet friends at restaurants, catch a show or a Spanish class. What matters is that it’s more time for you, and less time stuck on the train or in a car.

Housing is the most crucial problem facing London.

In the past 20 years, London’s population has grown by 25 per cent, but the number of homes has only grown by 15 per cent. More people and not enough housing has pushed up prices, creating an affordability and ownership crisis.

The proportion of income spent on housing has grown from one fifth of incomes 15 years ago to one third of incomes today. If you’re among the city’s lower earners, it’s highly likely to be taking even more of your pay packet.

Because of high housing costs, many are forced to endure insufferably long commutes, live in overcrowded share flats or, most worryingly for the economy, leave the city altogether.

The loss of capable people has serious ramifications for Britain’s economic productivity. All too often people end up taking lower paid jobs elsewhere, which hold them back and mean that they are less productive.

Chang-Tai Hsieh and Enrico Moretti from the University of Chicago estimated that US GDP is 13 per cent lower than it otherwise would be because people are not able to live where they would be most productive.

The damage to the UK’s GDP from people living where they are not the most productive is likely to be even higher.

The housing crisis is not just an economic policy problem – it also has serious political ramifications.

Housing affordability issues, particularly among young people, are damaging trust in the entire free market system. This is driving young people into the hands of extremists like opposition leader

Jeremy Corbyn, whose interventionist policies would only make things worse.

Which is where micro-houses come in. Currently blocked by housing guidelines and local authorities in the UK, this creative solution could help ease some of pressure on the market.

As urban policy researcher Vera Kichanova makes clear in a new paper for the Adam Smith Institute, when it comes to housing, small is in fact beautiful.

Micro-homes are nothing like what you are imagining. They are not cramped sub-divisions of existing units. Rather, micro-houses are stylish, modern homes that use space intelligently. They win prestigious architectural awards. They often include shared game rooms, gardens, co-working spaces, living areas, and additional services. They help combat loneliness with group activities and communal spaces.

In short, they are perfectly suited to the fast-paced inner-city lifestyle craved by many millennials.

There is no standard definition of micro-homes, but they can perhaps be best understood as purpose-built homes that are below the existing 37 square metre space standards for an apartment.

Micro-housing projects have been a huge success in New York City, Hong Kong, Tokyo, and, in the few cases they have been allowed because of legal grey areas, London.

Carmel Place in New York City, which was completed in 2016, contains apartments that are just 24 to 33 square meters. The project won an award from the American Institute of Architects.

London is home to The Collective Old Oak, the world’s largest micro-apartment building, which offers 546 private units and a wide array of communal spaces.

Micro-housing is not a substitute for more fundamental planning reform, such as ending the prohibition on building out or adding extra storeys on famously short London buildings. And it goes without saying that nobody should ever be forced to live in a micro-property.

However, the choice should be available for those who prioritise living closer to work and entertainment over a large house in the suburbs.

These smaller properties would ensure that the land in the city centre is used more efficiently, providing an important piece of the puzzle to address London’s housing crisis.

It is the responsibility of local authorities, particularly in central London, to think more creatively about how to deliver more housing. They can start by abolishing arbitrary restrictions on room sizes, and declaring themselves open to micro-housing.

This would encourage architects and builders to propose such projects across the city.

In designing housing guidelines, local authorities should remember: it’s not the size of your home that matters, it’s how you use it.

Source: City AM

Marketing No Comments

There’s only one way to fix the housing crisis: build more

From free marketeers on the right to proponents of central planning on the left, cries to fix Britain’s broken housing market have become deafening.

The solutions, of course, differ greatly depending on where along the political spectrum you stand.

Yesterday, for example, Shelter issued its latest call to action, proposing three million new social homes to be built over the next 20 years. The housing charity points to the high costs and levels of insecurity among renters, and makes a link between “insecure unaffordable private rentals” and the rise of homelessness across Britain.

Shelter has correctly identified two key problems: that home ownership is becoming increasingly unaffordable, and that the rental market is not set up for long-term, stable tenancies, as seen in other countries.

It is also correct that other government policies to fix the problem, such as the Help-to-Buy scheme, are not an effective use of taxpayer money and actually distort the market by tinkering on the demand-side.

Building more social houses, however, is only one small part of a solution that must go far further. After all, the UK is already in the top three European countries in terms of social housing stock.

It’s not the lack of building social houses that is the key problem, but the lack of building full stop. This is set to be the worst decade for UK house-building since the Second World War, continuing a downward trend that has lasted half a century.

The result is that, even with the recent slowdown in house price growth, one in three millennials will never own their own home.

Unfortunately, this is where politics comes in, with endless arguments over who should build what kind of homes where and with what funding. For too long, stringent planning restrictions have prevented building in places where people actually want to live.

This needs to change – and in some cases it finally is, with a cross-party plan to redesignate areas of the so-called green belt within 10 minutes’ walk of a station to build a million extra homes around London.

There are other things we could do, from exploring high-tech construction methods like modular homes to repurposing disused retail and warehouse space to building new commuter towns with cutting-edge transport links, as well as looking into reforming the rental sector.

However, without more building – and lots of it – the housing crisis is only going to get worse, and is set to throw a spanner in the works of any government, from any party, that hopes to improve business competitiveness, social mobility, and standards of living in the UK.

Source: City A.M.

Marketing No Comments

Coventry’s housing crisis: Not enough new homes to go round

Coventry is failing to create enough new homes to keep pace with the population growth in the city.

New figures released show a total an extra 1,095 houses and flats were made available in the city in 2017/18.

The data includes both new build homes, and those created by converting existing buildings for residential use.

The number of new homes actually fell from 1,129 in 2016/17.

It means that since 2010/11, a total of 8,478 extra houses and flats have been created in Coventry.

At the same time, the population has risen from 311,674 in mid-2010 to 360,149 in mid-2017 – the latest figure available.

That represents an increase of 48,475.

Even before this year’s population increase is factored in – the number of people living in Coventry is rising by nearly six for every one new home created.

The average household size across the UK is 2.4.

The latest data – published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government – shows a mixed pattern across Warwickshire.

A total of 1,336 new homes were created in Stratford-upon-Avon in 2017/18, up from 1,219 the previous year.

Numbers were also up in Rugby (from 381 to 578) and Nuneaton and Bedworth (from 400 to 497).

But only 227 new homes were created in North Warwickshire in 2017/18, down from 326 in 2016/17.

Warwick also saw a drop, from 1,060 to 899.

Across England as a whole, 222,194 new homes were created in 2017/18.

That was up from 217,345 in 2016/17.

A total of 1,333,493 new homes have been made available since 2010.

At the same time, the population rose by 2,969,149 to 55,478,093.

It means one new home is being created for every 2.2 extra people living in England.

Source: Coventry Telegraph

Marketing No Comments

Fix the housing crisis and save the high street at the same time

Two “crises” have dominated the headlines in the last year. The first is the pressure on housing, the challenges of the rental market, and the soaring cost of living, especially in big cities. The second is the so-called “death of the high street”, as shopping habits change and the retail sector struggles to keep up.

Let’s start with the latter. At the end of 2017, the UK’s retail market saw occupier demand drop for the third consecutive quarter, with a reported fall in demand from prospective tenants of 22 per cent to the lowest level since 2011. As a result, the retail sector was the only area of the UK market to see an increase in availability of leasable space.

In 2018, nearly 1,000 retailers in the UK – from big names like House of Fraser and Poundworld to small independent traders – went into administration between January and September alone. In these nine months, rents have dropped, vacant commercial spaces have increased, and investor interest has massively wavered.

It is no secret that footfall on our high streets is decreasing as the e-commerce boom takes over. So instead of resisting change and trying to cling to a dying high street, we should see this as an opportunity to move forward and transform how we use empty commercial space for the benefit of the UK economy.

Which brings us back to the other major challenge facing the UK. The country needs high-quality housing now more than ever, at rents that don’t swallow two thirds of the average Londoner’s salary each month.

Research estimates that the government needs to be building 340,000 homes per year – rather than its current target of 300,000 – until 2031, to meet rising demand. Given planning restrictions on new builds and the low availability of land, if politicians actually want to make this happen they need to think outside the box.

And that means taking the opportunity to kill two birds with one stone, to reimagine our high streets and tackle the housing crisis at the same time.

It’s time for the government to be bold and collaborate with private firms that are willing to take risks, challenge outdated manufacturing methods, and build innovative homes in available spaces. From pre-fabricated, shared living spaces created off-site in the UK and built in unused commercial spaces, to simpler existing co-living models, there are feasible options out there that can enable the UK to rapidly fill empty spaces at low cost and at higher capacity than traditional developments.

This isn’t to say that every high street needs to be transformed into a residential asset. But the e-commerce trend isn’t going to be reversed, and it makes sense to use the space that we have.

Unlike previous attempts at collaborating with private firms, there can’t be lengthy multi-year gaps between scaling developments because the government can’t afford to take on partnerships that don’t offer quick turnarounds. That’s why empty retail units might be the most resourceful option for distributor developers at this stage.

And that’s just the start – retail is of course not the only sector suffering from an increase in vacant spaces. Hospitality and commercial offices are also seeing an upsurge with the popularity of platforms like Airbnb, flexible working, and the rise of shared workspaces.

By harnessing opportunities and innovations like these and taking the chance to challenge the status quo with clever commercial transformations, the public sector can work with private property firms to bring a higher volume of homes to our ever-growing cities – and save our high streets at the same time.

Source: City A.M.

Marketing No Comments

How finance caused today’s housing crisis

A decade of stagnant wage growth means that the gradual house price falls in some parts of the country, including London, over the past year have barely dented the affordability crisis.

The standard argument – repeated ad infinitum by politicians, policymakers and commentators – is that it’s a supply-side problem. The solution is to build more homes.

For those on the left, there is a lack of public housing due to decades of underinvestment by the state. For the right, the problem is excessively restrictive planning preventing the market from doing its job.

There are of course major supply-side housing issues in the UK. But there is an elephant in the room (or, more correctly, “house”) on the demand side: credit.

In the textbook model, banks primarily lend to firms for investment and working capital. But in the 1980 and 1990s, a fundamental “debt shift” occurred in the UK and most other advanced economies.

Banks began lending more to households to buy homes than they did to firms.

Outstanding mortgage loans in the UK has grown from just 20 per cent of GDP in 1980 to 60 per cent today, while outstanding business loans have risenfrom just 10 to 20 per cent, with almost half of the latter for commercial real estate purchase.

Regulation used to mean that commercial banks hardly engaged in domestic mortgage lending, which was confined to mutuals with conservative lending practises.

But in the 1980s, budget pressures, competition with the US, and the desire to spread home ownership saw Margaret Thatcher and the politicians who followed her liberalise the banking system.

Banks rushed into property lending. Mortgage loans have one major advantage over business loans: if they loan goes bad, you have the property as collateral.

For a while, it seemed to work: home ownership rates increased rapidly from about 55 per cent of households in 1980 in the UK to over 70 per cent by 2000.

But since the turn of the century, rates have been falling. More and more loose credit has flowed in to an inherently finite supply of desirable locations, pumping up house prices at a much faster rate than incomes.

As prices are driven up, so more financing is required for home purchase, creating a feedback cycle that eventually leads to a bust, as in the crisis of 2007-2008.

Rather than pushing against this feedback cycle, successive British governments have supported it by repeatedly reducing taxes on property, enabling windfall capital gains for those lucky enough to have bought at the right time, as well as fuelling demand with subsidies on mortgage debt and for first-time buyers.

Post-crisis, central banks have introduced stricter regulation on mortgage lending. But this has been offset by the huge quantitative easing programmes that have driven down not just short-term mortgage loan rates, but equally medium to longer rates on governments bonds.

The latter has made property much more attractive as a “safe” asset for domestic and global investors, meaning non-bank financial institutions have also joined the party. Property – in particular in big cities like London – has become the new gold.

The concerted efforts by central banks to reinvigorate asset-backed securitisation markets – a key cause of the financial crisis – has also helped amplify the housing-finance cycle.

Policymakers and financial regulators must recognise that banks will always be able to create credit at a faster rate than new homes can be built if they are allowed to.

In the lead-up to the financial crisis, there were huge construction booms in Spain and Ireland, but prices kept going up as banks poured more credit in to the system. When it finally came, the bust was actually worse than in the UK.

To break the housing-finance cycle, demand as well as supply side policies need a rethink. Fiscal and financial policy needs to do the heavy lifting here.

First, regressive council tax should be abolished and replaced with a tax on the annual increase in the value of the land underneath a property.

Second, banks need to be gradually weaned off domestic property and return to their traditional model of business lending.

Housing’s main role should be to provide shelter for people and businesses, not a source of speculative rentier profits for banks and financial investors.

Source: City A.M.

Marketing No Comments

Build-to-rent holds promise for long-term investment

The housing crisis is a hot topic not just in the property industry but across society as a whole. A report from the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee said that the UK government needed to boost its homebuilding target by 50% to create 300,000 new homes each year to tackle the housing crisis.

But while we all agree more homes are needed, what form they should take is less clear.

Market dynamics in particular locations will dictate what is appropriate, but we also need to consider more fundamental shifts in demand. As people live longer, a range of options tailored to older people becomes increasingly important, as does allowing family homes to be freed up.

With more people living alone, options that suit single people’s lifestyles and budgets are vital and as the millennial generation chooses a more transient lifestyle and prioritises experience over ownership, high-quality homes for private rental are also key.

Figures from the English Housing Survey last year found that almost half of 25- to 34-year-olds live in the private rented sector, up from less than a quarter in 2006. The proportion of families living in rented accommodation has also grown. Knight Frank estimates that by 2021, nearly one in four households in England will be renting.

A major contributing factor to the increase in renting is the difficulty of getting on to the property ladder. The Office for National Statistics said in April that the house-price-to-earnings ratio in the UK had hit 7.77, the highest in the official time series going back to 2002. Meanwhile, rising student debt and a preference for living in urban locations make buying a first property even more of a financial struggle.

However, it would be wrong to assume renting has become popular purely because of the difficulty of buying. Knight Frank’s research found that 21% of renters rent to be able to live in a better area; 8% do not want the responsibility of owning a home; 6% need flexibility for work; 6% are downsizers; and 5% do not want to be stuck in one location.

For too long, renting has been seen as a last resort. But renting has moved on and is no longer the murky world of damp-ridden HMOs that many in the baby-boomer generation may have experienced in their 20s.

For many younger people – some of whom will have been used to living in modern purpose-built student accommodation during their time at university – living in a build-to-rent (BTR) property, with a strong amenity offer and a focus on service, is a natural next step that fits their requirements.

“For many younger people living in a BTR property is a natural next step that fits their requirements [after university]”

The millennial generation, after all, is less focused on the long term. Traditional mortgage lenders have not yet adequately recognised the rise in freelancing and the gig economy and the ability to move anywhere around the world at short notice is worth more to many young professionals than the prospect of home ownership.

BTR shifts the focus for the homebuilding industry, which has traditionally concentrated on short-term capital values rather than long-term stable income. Developers need to adapt and recognise that real estate is increasingly about service as much as product: more than ever before, we need to understand the customer and their changing priorities.

Successful BTR schemes will combine a single-operator management structure with high-quality, sustainable, flexible building design to attract and retain tenants while offering them lease lengths to suit varying circumstances.

Source: Property Week

Marketing No Comments

Co-living and micro-homes most popular solutions to housing crisis, new FMB research reveals

Building more co-living developments and micro-homes in urban areas top the list of people’s preferred solutions to the housing crisis according to new research by the Federation of Master Builders (FMB), while building on the greenbelt is the least favoured solution.

The FMB asked 2,000 home owners across the UK if there is a housing shortage and if so, how best to address this shortage. The key results are as follows:

• Two-thirds (66%) believe that there is a shortage of housing in the UK.

• When asked for views on the most appropriate solutions to the housing shortage, the most commonly cited were as follows:

1) Build more co-living developments (33%);
2) Build more micro-homes in urban areas (31%);
3) Build more granny flats (31%);
4) Extend permitted development rights (27%);
5) Encourage more multi-generational living (24%);
6) Excavate or convert more basements underneath existing properties (18%); and
7) Build on the greenbelt (17%).

Commenting on the research, Brian Berry, Chief Executive of the FMB, said: “Even the vast majority of those who are lucky enough to own their own home recognise that there’s a housing shortage. When asked about solutions to this problem, the most popular remedy was to construct more co-living developments, which are becoming more and more popular in major cities right across the globe. Building more micro-homes in urban areas was the second most commonly cited solution to the UK housing crisis. Both of these approaches would increase density in urban areas where demand is particularly high. The creation of more granny flats was the third most popular solution, which would see more elderly people moving out of their properties and living alongside children or grandchildren in self-contained home extensions. This would free up much-needed family homes, which are being under-used by older people living on their own. Perhaps unsurprisingly, home owners, who are clearly already on the property ladder, see building on the greenbelt as the least desirable option.”

Berry concluded: “While these solutions are food for thought, if we want to solve the housing crisis, we need to reduce barriers to small, local building firms. Recent research from the Federation of Master Builders shows that the lack of small sites and difficulties hiring skilled tradespeople are limiting the amount of homes these firms can build. Removing barriers to SME house builders matters as in the late 1980s, two-thirds of all new homes were built by small local house builders and this was a time when house building was in step with demand. Currently SME house builders build less than one quarter of all new homes and as this proportion has declined, so too has the capacity of our industry to deliver the homes we need. Reviving the fortunes of SME builders undoubtedly has a key role to play in delivering the Government’s target of 300,000 new homes a year in England alone, and is key to solving the housing crisis once and for all.”

Source: Politics Home

Marketing No Comments

Theresa May vows stamp duty hike on foreign-owned properties in bid to tackle housing crisis

Theresa May has unveiled plans for a new levy to be paid by those buying British homes from abroad as part of a wider bid to tackle Britain’s housing crisis.

The Prime Minister kicked off the Tory conference today by insisting it should not be “as easy” for foreign investors to pick off the UK’s housing stock as those who live and work there.

The rise of up to 3% in stamp duty will be paid by individuals and companies not paying tax in the UK, with the cash raised to go towards boosting the government’s rough sleeping strategy.

The PM will reignite her pledge for a “British dream” with a series of policy announcements that will try to divert focus away from heightened party splits on Brexit.

“At Conservative conference last year, I said I would dedicate my premiership to restoring the British Dream, that life should be better for each new generation, and that means fixing our broken housing market,” she said ahead of the four-day event in Birmingham.

“Britain will always be open to people who want to live, work and build a life here.

“But it cannot be right that it is as easy for individuals who don’t live in the UK, as well as foreign based companies, to buy homes as hard working British residents.”

“For too many people the dream of home ownership has become all too distant and the indignity of rough sleeping remains all too real.”

A Tory spokesperson said the rise in stamp duty, which will apply on top of existing rates, will “help make UK homes more affordable for British residents and those paying taxes in the country as they build a new life here”.

‘THE FESTIVAL’

Meanwhile the PM has unveiled plans for a festival to take place in 2022 that will celebrate the country’s culture, sports and innovation.

The move to celebrate the “precious union” of the UK – known as The Festival – is expected to echo the Great Exhibition of 1851 and the 1951 Festival of Britain.

Ministers have so far earmarked £120m for he proposal.

The event will come just months ahead of the next scheduled general election and will coincide with the year of the Queen’s platinum jubilee and the Commonwealth Games in Birmingham.

Mrs May said: “Almost 70 years ago the Festival of Britain stood as a symbol of change. Britain once again stands on the cusp of a new future as an outward facing global trading nation.

“And, just as millions of Britons celebrated their nation’s great achievements in 1951, we want to showcase what makes our country great today.

“We want to capture that spirit for a new generation, celebrate our nation’s diversity and talent and mark this moment of national renewal with a once-in-a-generation celebration.”

‘BACK CHEQUERS’

Mrs May’s plans came alongside a call for warring MPs to stop “playing politics” and back Chequers.

In an interview with The Sunday Times ahead of the conference, the PM took a swing at senior figures such as Boris Johnson – who launched a fresh attack on Mrs May as Tory conference got underway – by calling on them to back the “only proposal on the table at the moment”.

“My message to the Conservative Party is going to be that people voted to leave the EU. I believe it’s a matter of trust in politicians that we deliver on that vote for people,” she said.

“We’re the party that always puts country first and puts the national interest first. And that’s what I want us to be doing.

“The only proposal on the table at the moment that delivers that is the Chequers plan.”

Source: Politics Home

Marketing No Comments

Sustainable housing, the UK’s second biggest problem?

With the battle to deliver the government’s ambitious housing target of 300,000 new homes per year – and with consideration of environmental impacts, climate resilience and net gains even for biodiversity – ongoing, EA’s latest event provided a forum for those delivering solutions to share the latest ideas with those charged with policy-making for, planning and building the dwellings of the future.

Housing delivery in the UK is presently lagging some way behind the official target, with 235k energy performance certificates lodged for new builds for the year ending June 2018. “Behind closed doors we have been told by various government departments that, Brexit aside, housing is the single biggest political issue that will face this country over the next 20 years,” Ross Polkinghorne, partner at law firm Burges Salmon, told delegates gathered at the Building Sustainable Towns & Cities conference and exhibition in central London last week.

There are a number of factors inhibiting the delivery of housing targets, with regional programme manager for the One Public Estate Michael O’Doherty pointing to the need for supporting infrastructure – such as roads – to be delivered, as well as materials shortages and lack of skilled workers in the construction industry. “The UK simply does not have the capacity and skills in the traditional construction sector to build homes at the rate required,” he said. The planning system has also been widely cited as a further barrier to increasing housing supply.

In a bid to make the market more development friendly, the government has implemented a number of funding, policy and programme-based changes. Another speaker, acting head of the housing infrastructure fund (HIF) at Homes England Kate Taylor, explained that initiatives such as the £5bn HIF offer funding to support infrastructure for new housing, aiding the allocation of sites and sparking wider private sector investment.

She also highlighted the £3bn home building fund which supports housing development and associated infrastructure delivery, stating that “our loan sizes can vary [between £250k to £200m] meaning we can look at a wide range of projects”. To date the scheme has contributed to the delivery of over 110,000 homes across the UK, with Taylor noting “we work across the country and don’t just focus on London and the South East”.

Delegates also heard how the One Public Estate initiative is working across the public sector to foster a more strategic approach to managing land and other assets. It is hoped by 2020 the programme will have helped release land for a further 25,000 homes.

NPPF and biodiversity

2018 has seen some important policy and regulatory developments which will help frame housing delivery going forward, most notably the publication of the much anticipated revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (D+I 26-Jul-18). The revamped NPPF’s ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’ encompasses economic, social and environmental objectives, including a goal to improve biodiversity. Strengthening requirements for biodiversity net gain in national planning policy was a key commitment underlined at the start of the year in the government’s 25 Year Environment Plan (EA 16-Jan-18), with the revised NPPF stating that the planning system should achieve net gains for biodiversity.

Lindsay Roome of Defra’s Natural Environment Directorate reported that biodiversity net gain (BDNG) is already being targeted by a number of developers including Barratts, Berkley and Redrow, while several local authorities including Warwickshire County Council and Lichfield District Council also boasting strong net gain policies. “We’ve had developers telling us they are seeing the benefits of this approach as they can sell their homes for more,” she added.

In a bid to help make BDNG more quantifiable and accessible, Roome explained to conference attendees how a refined metric has been developed which uses the quantity, distinctiveness and condition of existing biodiversity features on a site prior to development to calculate biodiversity units. These units are then compared with the amount calculated post-development to identify if a gain has been achieved.

But the 25 YEP does not stop at biodiversity net gains and has set a long-term aim for new developments to deliver environmental net gains more broadly. Natural capital improvements such as flood protection, improved air quality and recreational space will be expected. So it may not be long before specialist consultants from fields such as water, waste and air quality see increased demand in natural capital accounting.

According to Roome, the Environment Agency, Defra and Natural England are also collaborating on producing a metric – similar to the biodiversity metric – covering a broader range of environmental features and factors. This they hope will make calculating environmental net gain possible for non-specialists, with Roome stating: “We are trying to get the balance right between making something which is easy to use, for local planners, etc…but that is also accurate enough.”

However, with EA having canvassed opinion from those attending the conference who work on the front-line of housing delivery – both within and alongside developers – the consensus appears to be that this is unlikely to completely replace the need for external experts as developers typically prefer to involve an independent consultant where environmental assessments are concerned.

Moving away from the minimum approach

A number of delegates on the day also noted the continued reluctance of many public sector and some private sector organisations to deliver beyond the minimum environmental requirements, which is a barrier to the uptake of the best practicable environmental solutions. With this in mind, Froome outlined how her team is exploring another 25 YEP commitment – to action a consultation into whether BDNGs should be mandated.

“We are currently looking at what the government could do in this space,” she said, “providing consistency and a level playing field to ensure that at an aggregate level we can have net gain overall through development.”

If mandated any organisations still dragging their heels when it comes to BDNG will be forced to step up their efforts. Given the attrition of in-house environmental planning expertise within local authorities as a consequence of the austerity era, this all seems to suggest the market for specialist biodiversity services has the potential to grow and broaden quite significantly.

Homes of the future

Another factor which could considerably alter the state of play in the sustainable housing field is the rise of modular and panelised fabrication techniques. With the ability to be largely constructed off-site these homes offer the advantage of relatively speedy assembly times, thereby reducing costs and environmental impacts such as air quality and noise, as well as regulating demand on the UK’s construction workforce.

Until recently many lenders were reluctant to make mortgages available for this type of build creating a major barrier to delivery. But as director of UK research at property management and development group JLL, Nick Whitten, noted this is no longer the case: “It’s now assumed that at least the top 20 biggest lenders in the UK are now comfortable lending against these [offsite] homes”. Such developments also offer benefits in terms of reducing waste and arguably utilise more sustainable building techniques. So, with the issue of finance largely overcome it seems reasonable to expect prefabricated building methods to soon become the norm.

The issue of climate resilience also featured repeatedly during the course of the day with many speakers underlining the need to better prepare housing and infrastructure for the increasingly variable and extreme weather. Ramboll infrastructure and regeneration director Chris Fry looked at some of the rapidly emerging design approaches to improving climate adaptation through the digital revolution.

According to Fry, the Internet of Things and next-generation sensors could facilitate self-maintaining sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) and blue green infrastructure as well as adaptive (robotic) flood defence systems. But he also noted: “Although there are some opportunities for big disruptive changes, in established cities with finite budgets incremental innovation is more likely.”

Source: Environment Analyst

Marketing No Comments

Redefining the green belt to tackle the UK’s housing crisis

Mention the words ‘green belt’ and most people will conjure up romantic images of rolling fields, fresh air and luscious countryside. It is what we dream of as we rush down overcrowded concrete streets, but the reality of England’s green and pleasant land is far different and the green belt is in urgent need of redefining. By lifting self-imposed planning restrictions and building on the least attractive and lowest amenity parts, we could remove the shackles on the UK’s severe housing crisis.

Britain is in the midst of a dangerous housing shortage. Homelessness is on the rise, with over 77,000 households living in temporary accommodation last year and the limited housing we do have is unaffordable due to rising rent prices, falling wages and a stagnant construction industry. This is exacerbated by stringent planning constraints, which drive house prices up by restricting the land available for development – one recent study found that an oppressive planning system increases house prices by 35%.

Experts suggest that we need up to 300,000 additional homes to be built every year. The question, then, is how we can generate the homes we so urgently need when there is not enough available land on which to build them.

Should such strict planning barriers remain in place, a growing population will continue to be confined to smaller and smaller homes, and the government will be forced to carry on spending upwards of £2 million a day on temporary accommodation for the homeless  – simply because no housing is available.

So does building on the green belt offer a solution? Certainly, it is a politically and socially sensitive subject. However, the green belt itself is actually a somewhat arbitrary designation – and a significant portion of the land within it is not actually green.

In fact, a sizeable element of the ‘green’ belt is actually brownfield land with little or no environmental value. That means that disused petrol stations, warehouses, railway sidings and scrubland are all designated green belt land despite, firstly, not being green, and secondly, having little to no purpose for communities. The hedgerows, fields and woodlands that we associate with the green belt are typically protected areas of outstanding natural beauty or ancient woodlands meaning that they, rightly so, remain untouched.

There are claims that maintaining the green belt is necessary to prevent urban sprawl and protect the environment. But while the environmental benefits of undeveloped land are plentiful, there are a number of problems associated with maintaining the green belt in its current form.

Over a third of it is devoted to intensive farming and by forcing developments to be in areas further away from cities and towns, car use and travel is boosted and commutes lengthened. The system also encourages further urban densification, taking green space away from the city dwellers who value it most and putting pressure on local parks due to harsh urban containment policies.

The nation has a preoccupation and nostalgic attachment to green spaces and a misunderstanding of how much green land there really is. One in ten English adults thinks that 75% or more of the country is already effectively built on. In reality, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS), England has one of the lowest levels of built environment per capita in the whole of the European Union (EU), behind only the Netherlands and Cyprus, with only 2% of the UK being concreted over, and 98% being classed as natural land.

This has finally led to suggestions that the green belt is redefined and opened up to development by lifting some of the planning restrictions currently in force. Strategically located developments on green belt land could be critical in enabling an increased supply of houses, evening out land use and affordability so that homes are built in the right places, closer to major cities with the supporting jobs and infrastructure.

Such jobs and infrastructure could take the form of new schools, shops, community centres, GP surgeries or hospitals, all of which would help take pressure off green belt communities and the cities around which they exist.

In July, the government published the revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which referenced that councils may lose some of their powers to control development if house building falls below 75% of government targets.

While concerns have been expressed that developers might try to “game” the government’s new NPPF, by sitting on land to slow down the rate of development, triggering a relaxation of planning rules – how justified they are is debatable.

Developers have little interest in slowing down development of housing projects, as has been suggested, in order to force councils into allowing them to build on green belt plots. Delays would most likely affect the profits of larger developers, most of whom are responsible for the vast majority of house building in the UK and lead to objections from shareholders.

The stated intention of the new NPPF is actually to require higher environmental standards of house builders while protecting green belt land and ensuring that houses are being built on time.

To truly combat the failing housing market, we need to make sure we are building the right homes, in the right places. And while no-one wants to see property developments in the wrong places it is equally true that not all green belt land needs to be kept free from any development at all.

Analysis by estate agency Hamptons found that building on green belt land around 80 railway stations could provide 509,000 homes across Britain, and a recent study by the Adam Smith Institute stated that one million people could be housed by developing on 3.7% of London’s green belt areas close to existing commuter stations, with potential for a further three million new homes by building on less than 5% of green belt land in the ten least affordable UK cities.

It is crucial, however, that people can actually afford to buy these houses. Currently, promoting affordability does not seem to be the direction developers are moving towards: according to a CBRE report, 2017-18 alone saw 460,000 houses planned for the green belt – of which close to 80% were unaffordable. Developing yet more luxury projects, which often remain unoccupied, will do little to ease the housing crisis as people remain priced out of owning a permanent home.

Clearly, a fine balance needs to be struck, between preserving the best of the green belt, while also thinking creatively about how to solve the UK’s housing crisis. Currently, it shows no signs of abating and the country is in serious need of affordable homes. The weight of evidence suggests it is on England’s brown, unpleasant lands that we could find them.

Source: Open Access Government