This site uses cookies, as explained in our cookie policy. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

Privacy Policy

Planning matters

Our award winning blog gives a fresh perspective on the latest trends in planning and development.

Driving housing delivery from large sites: What factors affect the build out rates of large scale housing sites?

Driving housing delivery from large sites: What factors affect the build out rates of large scale housing sites?

Lachlan Anderson-Frank 29 Oct 2018

On the day of publication of Sir Oliver Letwin’s final review report, we release some initial findings from Lichfields’ own new research on the build out rates on large housing sites. This updates our award-winning research report – Start to Finish – from November 2016, which won the RTPI Research Award in 2017, and which is a regular point of reference for plan-makers and Inspectors in considering the realism of housing trajectories in local plans and five-year housing land supply statements.

Planning for housing involves more than just allocating sites in local plans and granting planning permission for development to take place, although the latter is obviously a pre-requisite. With the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requirement for local plans to identify sites and broad locations over a 15-year timeframe, for local authorities to demonstrate five-year housing land supply, and also be confident that they will pass the housing delivery test, planners nowadays require a much sharper focus on what sites will contribute in practice, and thinking about how they can – in the words of Kit Malthouse MP – do more, better, faster.

Sir Oliver Letwin’s review focusses on examining why it is that some large-scale housing sites are not delivering homes fast enough and what can be done to increase the speed of build out. His draft analysis was based on a relatively small number of sites (17, of which 15 had data) primarily in the south of England. This reflects the difficulties gathering good quality information on the build out of sites, and explains why many local plans have consistently over-estimated the speed at which developments come forward and then build out. This reflects that many such developments are inevitably complex to bring forward, with significant upfront infrastructure obligations in many cases.

Nevertheless, paragraph 72 of the revised NPPF makes clear the Government view that:

“The supply of large numbers of new homes can often be best achieved through planning for larger scale development, such as new settlements or significant extensions to existing villages and towns, provided they are well located and designed, and supported by the necessary infrastructure and facilities. Working with the support of their communities, and with other authorities if appropriate, strategic policy-making authorities should identify suitable locations for such development where this can help to meet identified needs in a sustainable way.”

It goes on to require that in identifying locations, plan makers should:

“[…] d) make a realistic assessment of likely rates of delivery, given the lead-in times for large scale sites, and identify opportunities for supporting rapid implementation (such as through joint ventures or locally-led development corporations).”

To help inform that analysis, Lichfields has assembled an updated evidence base on lead-in times and build out rates, based on the identification of additional sites, and with two additional years of build out analysis (2016 to 2018).

 

Our updated analysis considers close to 200 housing sites, including approximately 100 large-scale housing sites and a similar number of smaller housing sites for comparison. These were spread across England and Wales, and ranged from 10  to 15,000 homes. Our analysis considered a wide range of factors which might affect build out rates, including levels of demand, the number of sales outlets, and delivery cycles.

Our analysis measures the “planning approval period” from the validation date of the first planning application on the site, to the decision date of the first application for dwellings in the scheme (whether full, hybrid or reserved matters); as well as the “planning to delivery” period, that is, the period from the approval of the first application for the development of dwellings and the completion of the first dwelling.

The analysis highlights how a site size of 500 units seems to be the tipping point for much longer planning periods (going from 2.3 years to 4+ years, and 5-6 years for sites over 1,000 units). Whilst the planning to delivery period (from planning permission to first completion) is longer for larger sites (on average), this is perhaps less significant a difference than one might expect given the complexities involved.

Our research looks at how fast such sites build out once started. The analysis shows the size of a site is one of the key metrics which determines its build out rate. Whilst some very large sites can deliver upwards of 250-300 dwellings per annum for short periods, many sites do not delivery particularly quickly, with the average for sites of 1,000-1,999 homes being around 100 per annum. Nevertheless, sites for over 2,000 homes in our sample delivered on average about twice as many per year than sites of 500-999 dwellings.

Our research finds that the average number of outlets on a site over the entire build out period has a relatively strong correlation with average annual build out rates as a percentage of total units on site, suggesting that more ‘flags’ and product have a positive impact on the delivery of new housing – a key initial finding of Letwin’s Draft Analysis too. Our sample of sites with outlet data finds that each additional outlet resulted in an average of approximately four homes being completed per month, although a review of annual reporting for major housebuilders suggests the average is closer to three homes per outlet per month (and that there is surprisingly little variation, albeit that they are national averages and may be counted differently be different housebuilders).

Reflecting our original analysis, we also found that very high levels of affordable housing (making up more than 40% of the total units on site) could have a similarly positive impact on build out rates to additional outlets.

We also estimate that greenfield sites may build out up to 21% quicker in delivering, for their size, although on average these take 7% longer from first application until the time they deliver.

Our findings point to the ongoing need for realism and depth in understanding the rate at which large-scale housing sites build out, and also that the most significant element of the time it takes for such sites to move from conception to delivery remains the time it takes to be granted a full, implementable planning permission. There are clear factors that determine the different rates at which sites build out – notably the differentiation in product, the number of outlets and so on – and the extent to which there are policy levers to pull in speeding up build out once sites have started has been a focus of the Letwin Review.

Whilst public sector market interventions – e.g. by Homes England in unlocking sites, or pump priming new infrastructure such as access roads to open up new ‘frontages’ – are already part of the solution, there are limits to the capacity for this type of intervention, and the vast majority of large sites will be privately-delivered. In this regard, interventions will inevitably be via the planning system and how infrastructure is at the very least part-funded via planning obligations and community infrastructure levy for delivering homes. Here, there are risks of unintended consequences of possible planning policy changes that could stall large-scale site promotion, thereby stymieing the necessary investment in up-front infrastructure.

If you would like to speak to someone at Lichfields to find out more about our latest research on build out and land supply calculations, please contact Matthew Spry or Rachel Clements.

 

 

CONTINUE READING

Getting on the ladder – could entry-level exception sites be part of the solution?

Getting on the ladder – could entry-level exception sites be part of the solution?

Bethan Haynes 18 Oct 2018
When the new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in July 2018, several notable topics dominated much of the discussion: design policies, viability, the housing delivery test, land assembly and the definition of affordable housing in particular.
But, buried within the new NPPF was one small change – an addition – which could potentially have a significant impact on the Government’s aim of delivering the right homes in the right places. But it has attracted little attention so far. This small change is the introduction of entry-level exception sites – as the name suggests, exception sites providing housing suitable for first-time buyers or renters.
In the draft version of new NPPF, entry-level exception sites were required to comprise a “high proportion” of entry-level homes for discounted sale or affordable rent. In the final version, “high proportion” has gone (now implying that the site must be wholly comprise of entry-level homes), and sites can now provide one or more of any of the types of affordable housing set out in the new NPPF. Sites could therefore provide, for example, 100% discounted market housing, 100% affordable rented housing, or a mix of these and/or other types (such as shared ownership, rent-to-buy or starter homes). They should be on unallocated land adjacent to existing settlements, and are subject to a few other criteria, e.g. not being more than 1ha. in size or exceeding 5% of the size of the existing settlement[1]. It isn’t explicit in the NPPF how ‘entry-level’ exception sites relate to the Green Belt, but the provision of [limited] affordable housing for local community needs (i.e. ‘rural’ exception sites) remains an exception to inappropriate development in the Green Belt, and the new definition of ‘affordable housing’ encompasses affordable homes for purchase.
Despite the housing crisis, the great British dream of home ownership remains alive for many young people; 59% of privately renting households expect to buy at some point in the future, but of those who don’t, affordability is by far the main reason[2]. Yet households increasingly find themselves in expensive rented accommodation, spending just over one-third of their income on rent, which is more than any other tenure, and the private rented sector has become the fastest growing in the last decade[3]. Unsurprisingly, many first-time buyers increasingly look to family for help when buying a home.
In many areas, particularly the South East, there are significant shortfalls in the income households need in order to move out of the private rented sector and into home ownership. This is likely to be contributing to trends of growth in the private rented sector, given households simply cannot move into home ownership as easily as previous generations. It could also have implications for economic prosperity, given that having affordable housing within reach of employment represents a central facet of any efficiently functioning economy. So, providing affordable homes for purchase on entry-level exception sites (like discounted market housing) in areas where households otherwise could not access market housing could provide a much-needed to home ownership.
Figure 1 shows the gap in annual household income needed to rent and to buy by local authority in England. It is these households ‘stuck in the gap’ – i.e. those who can afford to rent in the market but can’t afford to buy – that affordable homes for purchase on entry-level exception sites are most likely to help.
Figure 1: Difference between annual household income needed to rent and buy in the market

Source: Lichfields based on ONS/VOA

In locations where the cost of housing is lower, households that can afford to rent an entry-level, 2-bed home in the market are likely to have enough income to buy entry-level housing (subject to having the necessary deposit, etc.). However, in many parts of the country, the cost of even entry-level housing in the market is so high it is out of reach for many living in the private rented sector. Unless these households can raise a substantial deposit (all the more difficult, given the amount of income spent on rent) and/or raise funds from family, the ability to move into home ownership in these areas is limited.
Table 1 shows the top three areas by region with the largest gap in annual household income needed to rent and to buy in the market. As expected, the greatest gaps are in London, but large gaps also exist across the wider South East, particularly in Metropolitan Green Belt areas. Many such areas could benefit from entry-level exception sites providing affordable homes for purchase, particularly where those areas rely on attracting and maintaining a workforce to support a strong economy.
Housing affordability issues are not limited to London and the South East however, with parts of the Midlands (particularly in Northamptonshire and Warwickshire) seeing gaps of up to £17,000 between income needed to buy, and rent. In the northern regions, the greatest gaps are found in rural areas, which may wish to attract and retain young people and families so as to maintain services.
Table 1: Top 3 LPAs by Region - Gap in annual income needed to buy and rent

Source: Lichfields based on ONS/VOA

If entry-level exception sites do take-off, they have the potential not only to directly assist those looking to buy their first home, but could help with a wider re-balancing of local housing markets. A move of households from the private rented sector into new affordable homes for purchase could moderate growth in the cost of renting, potentially increasing the supply homes for sale in the market and reducing relative price growth.
It’s clear that entry-level exception sites have the potential to provide a discrete but important contribution to achieving the Government’s ambition of planning for the right homes in the right places but the case will not make itself. Lichfields has developed a new framework to help clients and local authorities assess the need and demand for affordable first-time buyer housing and understand what type of housing (e.g. discount market, shared ownership, etc.) could best meet those needs. Our framework can be used to identify opportunities for entry-level exception sites, as well as provide evidence to support applications and appeals. It can also inform local plan policies.
If you would like to speak to someone at Lichfields about entry-level exception sites, including site-finding, development appraisal and evidence preparation, please contact Martin Taylor or Bethan Haynes.

[1] As set out in paragraph 71(b) of the new NPPF[2] Source: English Housing Survey 2015/16: Future home owners report[3] Source: English Housing Survey 2016/17

CONTINUE READING

Planning for the future of war memorials in the UK

Planning for the future of war memorials in the UK

Amy Booth 15 Oct 2018
11 November 2018 marks the centenary of the end of the First World War and at home and abroad, war memorials will be the focal point for commemorations. Their role will not end after this November’s remembrance services and their futures need to be planned for. War memorials are a strong, characteristic feature of public spaces in cities, towns, villages and communities across the country yet there are a number of facts about war memorials that will surprise many people[1]: 
  1. They can be anything;
  2. They can be anywhere;
  3. They can be dedicated to anyone, as well as to animals (or dedicated in general e.g. to ‘the people of this parish’);
  4. The can be dedicated to those affected by war as well as those killed;
  5. They can be dedicated to any conflict;
  6. There is no official definition;
  7. There is no official register[2]; and
  8. They have no additional/special protection purely because they are war memorials.

As a former Conservation Officer for the War Memorials Trust[3] I would urge you to pay closer attention as you go about your day and you will notice the vast range of styles, types and locations of war memorials. A plaque in the post office, school or train station; a cross in the churchyard; a stained glass window in the church; a memorial hall in the village; a wing of the hospital, or a statue in the city centre. The National Memorial Arboretum houses a wide range of memorials and Lichfields has been its planning advisor for a number of years. The photographs on this page are all war memorials near our office in Kings Cross in central London.
Owners of buildings may not realise that there is a war memorial present or thought about its future. Ownership issues can be complex.
War memorials were often provided by communities and the nature of that community can vary greatly from a town or village, a choir, rugby club, religious group, place of employment…the list is extensive. The reality is that some of these communities no longer exist, 100 years later, or the memorial can no longer fulfil its original role (e.g. if located in a factory, church or hospital which has since closed). In other cases, changes in the local area may result in proposals for a memorial to be moved (e.g. as a result of road works or to improve access to it). As many memorials are approaching 100 years old (or more), there is also their conservation, repair and maintenance to consider as like all historic structures, their condition will inevitably deteriorate over time if they are not properly maintained.
Therefore the futures of war memorials require careful consideration. Organisations such as the War Memorials Trust are working tirelessly to help and educate the public on this but owners, ‘custodians’ and communities need to think about their future too.
As well as their importance for commemoration, war memorials may also have significance as the work of a noted architect or sculptor: Edwin Lutyens; Eric Gill; Reginald Blomfield and Albert Toft to name but a few.
Therefore war memorials mean different things to different people. Proposals relating to war memorials can elicit strong local opinion and this year therefore provides a particularly poignant opportunity to plan for their future.

 


Figure 1: London and North Western Railway Company and London Midland and Scottish Railway, Euston Station, Euston Road, London NW1

Figure 2: Part of the Great Northern Railway and London and North Eastern Railway memorial, Kings Cross Railway Station, Euston Road, London N1


Figure 3: St Mary's Church, Eversholt Street, London, NW1 1BN

Amy is a Senior Heritage Consultant at Lichfields. Prior to this she worked as a Conservation Officer at the War Memorials Trust where she provided conservation advice to members of the public; managed grant schemes and undertook policy and guidance work including writing technical guidance on the conservation of bronze. She was also a member of the project board for Historic England technical guidance on ‘The Conservation, Repair and Management of War Memorials’. In 2014, Amy made two BBC TV appearances discussing metal theft and the importance of war memorials and their conservation and had an article published in the Garden History journal on ‘War Memorial Landscape Heritage in England’.

 

[1]This blog is focused on war memorials not maintained by the Commonwealth War Graves Commission

[2] The War Memorials Trust and Imperial War Museums are trying to create a record of all war memorials with the help of the public: https://www.warmemorialsonline.org.uk/ and https://www.iwm.org.uk/memorials[3] The national conservation charity that works for the protection and conservation of war memorials across the UK http://www.warmemorials.org/ 

CONTINUE READING

Joining Lichfields as a Graduate

Joining Lichfields as a Graduate

Sally Furminger 09 Oct 2018
I joined Lichfields in September 2016 as a graduate planner after studying for a Masters in Spatial Planning at the Bartlett School of Planning (University College London). I had undertaken work experience in both the public and private sectors in the past but this was my first real step into employment. My experience had shown me that I wanted to work in the private sector, promoting development on behalf of clients and contributing to the innovative solutions that shape our built environment. Therefore choosing the right private planning consultancy was key.
From the start, I knew that I wanted to work in London, as the development sector in the capital is at the forefront of the industry and at the heart of much wider planning and development solutions to the  ever-increasing needs of a growing population. Lichfields’ London office is one of eight across the UK, which together provide expertise extending far beyond. However, for me, throughout the graduate application process, it was the culture of Lichfields that stood out. It was so easily expressed by current employees that I felt enthused to apply. The people of Lichfields were genuinely interested in me and keen to understand where and how I wanted to develop my career.
As many graduates will agree, the job application process is not an easy one and Lichfields was certainly competitive - but it was also personal. The first stage consisted of an interview and two tests which were maths and English-based but planning and development-focused. This allowed me to apply my knowledge and demonstrate my skills from the very beginning. Shortly after my interview, I was delighted to learn that I had been offered the job and would soon become part of Lichfields.
In terms of my career progression, Lichfields’ Graduate Development Programme is a three-year course which has been designed to offer exposure to a wide variety of on-the- job project work, as well as more formal learning opportunities through workshops and training. I have now worked at Lichfields for over 18 months and I am in my second team rotation: I am now part of the Strategic Land Promotion (Housing) team, following my first year in Tourism & Leisure. I am due to make my third rotation this month into a team which focusses on town centre, residential-led mixed use development. The aim of rotation is to help graduates to develop their skills and knowledge of particular types of development and planning, before choosing the right career path. The Programme has exceeded my expectations, as I have already gained exposure to large national clients and been involved in an array of project tasks which have included cross-office working with Lichfields’ teams in Cardiff, Newcastle and Edinburgh. I continue to learn from the wide expertise at Lichfields and draw on our array of specialist teams, such as Daylight and Sunlight, Economics and Regeneration, and planning law and policy. I regularly attend in-house breakfast and lunchtime seminars here in the London office (all of the offices hold similar events), which provide interesting insights into the roles of co-consultants as well as useful updates on emerging development-related policy and legislation. I can say with confidence that I am on track with obtaining the skills and experience expected at Year 2.
In terms of my personal development, I was allocated a ‘buddy’ on my first day and within the first month, I had joined other graduates from across the eight Lichfields’ offices for a day of team building. I have a Lichfields’ mentor who I can speak to separately from my daily tasks, and also a qualified RTPI member to guide me in the preparation of my APC, which I am due to submit this month.
The social calendar at Lichfields is particularly active and encourages a positive working environment. The socials vary and include: team meals and activities; whole office events such as summer BBQs, picnics, games nights and quizzes; the annual walking weekend; and the entire Company meeting up for the Christmas party. As well as taking part, this year as one of the second year graduates, I have had the opportunity to organise the London office socials. It is a great way of getting to know colleagues outside the office and really helps in creating those important working relationships that will go beyond the immediate tasks that have to be dealt with.
Accepting my graduate position at Lichfields has definitely been the right decision. On a daily basis, I appreciate that I have become part of a team, that I have already learnt a huge amount in my time here and that there is still so much more that I can gain. I would strongly recommend that you find out more about the graduate and internship opportunities at Lichfields and show your enthusiasm by applying online. 

CONTINUE READING

Subscribe

Receive our latest thinking direct to your inbox.

I want to receive…