One proposal is so-called ‘brownfield passports’, which would see automatic planning permission given to certain sites.
These sites are known as brownfield because the land has been previously developed but is no longer being used.
An example of such a site would be a disused industrial estate.
The development schemes would be required to meet certain design and quality standards.
Mortgage Solutions spoke to some people in the industry to gauge their reactions to these brownfield proposals, and whether they would be good for the new-build sector.
The big BTL planner: Key dates landlords need to know
Sponsored by BM Solutions
Golden ticket?
Some have suggested that the idea could prove to be the “golden ticket” to achieve the additional housing that the country so desperately needs.
Others warn that not all brownfield sites are suitable for residential properties.
They also say that the scheme may still take too long to implement amid the burden of even more regulation.
Gabriel McKeown, head of macroeconomics at Sad Rabbit Investments, said: “As the government unveils plans for brownfield passports, this could be a golden ticket for housebuilders or simply a Pandora’s box of regulation that stifles urban development.
“Making ‘yes’ the default answer for development that meets certain standards could be a game-changer for the sector by fast-tracking the planning process on previously used land.
“However, this could quickly become a bureaucratic maze, with developers in a race to the bottom regarding quality and design.”
McKeown continued: “Furthermore, this could significantly increase the burden at the post-planning stage, with the potential for the default ‘yes’ system to greenlight subpar projects that fail to consider local needs or environmental impacts.
“Therefore the scheme’s success will largely depend on its implementation and the fine print of the ‘design and quality standards’ required.
“As the government embarks on a new chapter of urban planning, it’s up to developers and planners to ensure this doesn’t become a cautionary tale.”
Will it pass the test?
Jeremy Leaf, North London estate agent and a former Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) residential chair, said: “Brownfield developments have been a priority for some time among local authorities but, like all these measures, we are in the midst of a housing crisis and all must pass the test of whether they will deliver affordable housing to buy and to rent, which is in such desperate need.
“In this case, the answer is maybe. Any new initiative is welcomed, but will we see a difference on the ground sooner rather than later?
“Brownfield is usually a favourite for development as it is more likely to take advantage of existing infrastructure and repurpose land and buildings, creating a better environment as well as much-needed environmentally friendly housing.”
Leaf continued: “There is, of course, brownfield and brownfield – not all is suitable for redevelopment and may remain uneconomic without significant investment.
“So any measures [that] perhaps try to stimulate development of unsuitable property may not be so beneficial.
“It still remains for local authorities to identify the most appropriate land and buildings [that] fit the bill.”
Will it speed up the planning process?
Adam Stiles, managing director at Helix Financial Partners said: “Whatever can speed up the planning process to greenlight consent will be very welcome, however this initiative doesn’t solve the real issue.
“The real issue is that the entire planning system needs large investment and we need training and recruitment for planning officers.
“This is a great initiative but the devil will be in the detail and, as always with these things, beware the unintended consequences.”
Time limits required
Rohit Kohli, director of The Mortgage Stop, said: “The problem isn’t identifying brownfield sites and getting permission to build under current legislation: this can happen easily enough.
“The problem is developers acquiring these sites, securing permission and then sitting on the sites for years to allow land values to increase.
“None of the new proposals will work without setting time limits on the permission with enforceable action if developers just sit on the land.”
