Director of MSC Planning Associates David Lomas and DevComms director Jade Uko balance the development market with the political discourse and ask where NIMBYISM fits within society’s wider social and economic needs.
Politicians often state that housing must be ‘in the right place’. But is ‘the right place’ exactly where the market decides it is?
Investors and developers place significant amounts in market research and demand to invest in development strategies in locations that will be fruitful to that investment. There are, of course, risks involved in engaging with the planning process, and those risks, financial, social, historical, and environmental, mean that it is essential that the market does build in ‘the right place.’ We explore the relationship between location and rhetoric.
Location, Location, Location (LLL)
We all remember when the then-Prime Minister Tony Blair mentioned, ‘education, education, education’. Well, location matters. For a private developer, location is finding the right site with the least risk.
The country’s build profile means that the areas most likely to be developed are those green fields that we all find precious. You could argue that the creation of the Green Belt is a direct consequence/reaction of the perceived’ building at all costs’ and is now firmly ingrained within our social culture.
The main driver of LLL is supply and demand, especially in the South East, London and the East. It is no coincidence that these three areas are the only regional net contributors to GDP. Limited supply leads to higher prices. London boroughs are constrained by limited land for development and rely on Permitted Development Rights (PDR), which impacts social cohesion and street character.
Our culture and market demand determine the houses we build, impacting infrastructure and transportation costs.
The recent hike in inflation and interest rates has led to increased costs, providing even greater constriction. Land costs are lower in areas where land is more readily available, making suburban or rural areas more attractive for development.
However, overall operating costs have increased due to the Buildings Act imposing more constraints on development. Development is resource-intensive and requires thousands of different materials from all over the world.
With Brexit and global pressures, the industry has seen an astronomical increase in the cost of materials, making developments more challenging to construct. In some cases, readjusting pricing and strategy means renegotiation of S106 agreements.
Recent developments since the Labour Government took office have been positive, but the devil is always in the detail. Governments have traditionally favoured PD rights over express permission, which increases the risks involved. There are very few incentives, tax breaks, subsidies, or free land to attract development to certain regions. This can significantly influence how and where development is created. Furthermore, areas of nitrate sensitivity have seen a dramatic drop in approvals in recent years, with Natural England still needing to offer a practical mitigation option.
Coupled with the increased demand for planning to be a catch-all for everything without the certainty is essentially driving development down the PD routes – which has untoward consequences for everyone.
While everyone understands the need to consider environmental impacts when selecting a location, including the availability of green energy, waste disposal and compliance with sustainability goals, the increased pressure for these aspects, including biodiversity net gain, etc, is also driving up costs.
A World Bank policy research working paper states: “Planning has been concerned with public health and quality of life at its very core.”
Yet, it doesn’t seem to appreciate that to do so, it’s not merely about one development here and there; it needs a co-ordinated and collaborative approach. Without it, it creates divisiveness within development areas and galvanises opposition in the extreme.
The New Towns Act was designed to combat this; these new towns had better healthcare, education, safety and their amenities considered more attractive than their forbearers.
The market decides the development location through demand, cost structures, resource access, incentives, infrastructure and competition. The company’s specific needs and objectives and whether also impact the future design and viability of a scheme coming forward.
Is ‘the right place’ a rebrand of NIMBY?
Is ‘not in the right place’ just classic NIMBYISM then? It is rare to listen to residents and politicians claim proposed developments are in the right place and welcome. Jade Uko, associate director for DevComms East, says NIMBYISM is a reaction to the unknown and change. Objections come from many directions and developers and planners must think creatively to overcome these fears.” Jade says: “It is common for proposed developments to face opposition due to concerns about their impact on the community. There needs to be more local understanding of the planning process and more integration between a community’s needs and the development’s commercial and legal desires. Effective communication is essential to address these concerns.”
Is the market always right?
Using a business-as-usual model, the market always favours the best economic outcome. The variability and dimensions involved in the spatial environment are so complex that the market could never appropriately deal with social injustice or community cohesiveness, for example.
While market forces can be powerful drivers of efficiency, profitability and resource allocation, they don’t always align with broader social, environmental, or long-term sustainability goals.
For example, the key to a healthy life is not gyming or eating the right foods seven days a week. It’s a balance. In the spatial world, combining factors creates better planning outcomes – blind adherence to restrictive and often nonsensical policies or legal mechanisms can produce lousy planning decisions. A recent visit to the Housing Museum in Hoxton, London, showed that a home is much more than bricks and mortar and a community more than just a house. It is about the ‘secret sauces’ that bind us rather than divide us, and what we do with it matters. Given its focus on money and short-termism, the market could never achieve this even if it tried.
Looking ahead
The new Labour Government aims to get Britain building again by focusing on brownfield sites and the ‘Green Belt’. Because of these constraints, councils are struggling to meet their housing targets (also back on the agenda).
The Green Belt’s importance is recognised, but it feels like council culture is almost cancel culture as far as Green Belt development is concerned. It forgets that people live in these policy areas and need to access services, so the policy needs to enable rather than constrict development.
It is likely that the ‘Grey Belt’ will be hotly contested due to the political issues involved and the democratic machinations therein. Although a review is expected to examine the effectiveness and role of the democratic process in planning, it is not an immediate priority.
Keir Starmer emphasised the importance of focusing on infrastructure to overcome opposition to development. However, large-scale infrastructure projects often face significant opposition, impacting development in strategic locations like the proposed East West Rail route in the East of England. They also miss the crucial point of integrating schools, hospitals, and doctors’ surgeries into the planning processes and making them more accessible.
Although the Government has been focusing on a build agenda, it’s important to create a system with a national plan for sustainable development, considering global and local concerns. The ideal location for development is utopian thinking.
A development considered ‘not in the right location’ risks jobs, investment and economic growth and equally, a build-all policy risks harm to the environment and the long-term sustainability of the globe at the expense of us all.
© Thames Tap (powered by ukpropertyforums.com).
Sign up to receive our weekly free journal, The Forum here.
