Land agent Aston Mead says government plans to introduce time limits for building on land with planning consent, with levies if developers miss deadlines, are fundamentally misguided.
The company’s comments follow news that a ‘use it or lose it’ scheme is being considered by ministers, to try to increase construction rates in the industry.
Aston Mead Land & Planning Director Charles Hesse said:
“Unfortunately, the idea of time limits on land lays blame for slow build rates at entirely the wrong door. It suggests that developers are deliberately holding back from starting construction on sites, even when planning permission has been approved.
“But as a government report concluded as recently as 2018, there’s no evidence that delays are down to land being deliberately hoarded by developers. Instead, the finger of blame should be pointed fairly and squarely at the planning system – which, frankly, is currently not fit for purpose.”
Hesse says that rather than beating developers with a stick, time and money would be better spent on making sure planning departments were fully funded, to enable permissions to be given more quickly.
He explains:
“Take one of the UK’s biggest housebuilders, Taylor Wimpey. They have around 40,000 plots with implementable planning permission and have started developing on 94.5% of them. The remainder have issues like Tree Protection Orders or other pre-conditions preventing construction from getting underway. They simply don’t have any sites that they are not currently progressing.
“But the same is true for smaller developers as well. To suggest otherwise demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding about how housebuilders run their businesses.
“Developers’ profits are generated from selling homes, not from an increase in the value of land they own. They never sit on sites, even when market conditions are tough. The idea that they spend their time acting like financial investors, speculating over future land values is a complete and utter myth.
“Without question, of course there are barriers to development out there. But they lie in under-funded and over-worked planning departments, each trying to deal with an avalanche of requests, without the staffing or capabilities to handle them.
“Yes, we could do with a wider variety of homes in each development, differing in size, design and setting, to increase the appeal to a range of markets.
“But the government seems deaf to the results of a series of reviews it has itself commissioned, which have warned of the downsides of such a policy. They need to listen to what the industry is telling them, reform the planning system to make it simpler, faster and more agile – and then perhaps the target figure of 300,000 homes per year could be reached after all.”
No no this article is all wrong, the Government are doing a bang up job with developers… have you not heard of their Help to Build Scheme?!
*heavy sarcasm*
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It has got many FTB on the market rather than renting
Anyone who thinks that there are loads of developers holding onto land rather than building knows diddy squat about new build.
There are clearly times when a developer holds on until he gets planning or a change to planning or wants to buy adjacent land as I have done myself sometimes.
Planning depts in developers have a target to get planning asap and often get incentives to do so.
Same as construction directors who also have construction targets to hit and will lose end of year bionuies if thiese are not acheived.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Exactly, the only time a developer “holds” land is when they’re waitng for something (usually planning of some description). However the Government has no concept of what building a property actually entails and thinks as soon as you buy land you can do somthing with it i.e. have permission, builders and materials ready to start.
Unless they overhaul the current system to expedite things like planning and permissions, there isnt going to be much in the way of change. For crying out loud half the battle is finding land that would likely GET planning permission…. then you need to do surveys, get builders, procure materials. Lets say for example an archeological dig is necessary… well thats 6 months+ easy of waiting (plus costs).
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
“They need to listen to what the industry is telling them, reform the planning system to make it simpler, faster and more agile – and then perhaps the target figure of 300,000 homes per year could be reached after all.”
Maybe Mr Hesse should also consider a lack of certain other component factors involved in the delivery process – materials such as sand, cement, bricks and timber… and then the labourers, brickies, chippies, sparkies, plumbers, dry-liners/plasterers, painters et all that actually make those piles of materials into something people can call “home”.
Plan to build as many as you want – you can only deliver as many as you physically can. The difference between the two numbers is the problem… and a faster planning system isn’t the answer to it.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register