Introduction It is that time of year when many of us will be having some time out, away from the office or site and maybe heading off to the sun. After what has been another difficult year, it is well deserved! However, there are still some important ongoing issues that need to be dealt with. Not least, this week saw the publication of the NPPF document for consultation. I believe the NPPF is potentially the most important planning change since the 1947 Town and Country Planning Act and I urge you to read it carefully – there is a link below for you to access it. Overall it is very pro-growth and as such will undoubtedly come under attack from those opposed to development. Getting the framework right will be vital for future housing supply and we must ensure that we respond accordingly. HBF will be consulting widely through the summer and will be making a submission on behalf of the industry so please make sure you let us have your comments through the usual channels. Green and anti-development groups will no doubt be very vocal in their opposition so I would urge each of you to make your own submission. The Government will be closely watching the response from business. Other areas remain extremely busy as usual and hopefully this report will ensure you are well briefed on all the significant issues of the day. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) The Government published its draft National Planning Policy Framework on 25th July. The framework is open to public consultation for the next 12 weeks until 17th October 2011. Please click here to view the full document HBF has also prepared a briefing note in association with Barton Willmore <media 22571>please click here to view</media>. The document is extremely pro-growth and pro-development and is a far cry from the position set out in the Conservative Green Paper “Open Source Planning”. It will, however, rely on local authorities for its implementation, yet the evidence to date suggests that many of them are not quite as keen to embrace the government’s growth agenda as they are to reflect the minority views of local anti-development groups. The brevity of the document (which will replace all 25 existing PPGs and PPSs and associated guidance) will inevitably lead to a call for further guidance to be produced, yet government has consistently stated that they will not be producing any such documents. Although there is some early indication that Ministers might change their stance on this following the responses to the draft NPPF the current situation suggests that other groups, such as HBF, will be able to publish guidance and best practice. We have already held a number of meetings with other bodies with a view to producing joint publications to ensure the best possible buy in to what threatens to be a rather random process. CLG are holding a series of workshops in September on the content of the NPPF in London, Leeds, Birmingham and Bristol. Full details are available at the above website but places are sure to be limited and generate a lot of interest so I urge you to sign up quickly. ECONOMIC AFFAIRS Mortgage discussions Last month I mentioned that we had instigated discussions with the Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML) and major lenders. Our objective is to see if we can devise a 95% LTV mortgage for some new homes, something that is desperately needed but is almost entirely lacking at present. The prize would be a significant increase in new home sales. It is however clear that a solution will not be easy and will inevitably take some time. We also continue to talk to other organisations and the Government about other potential solutions to the mortgage famine. CML has been working on revisions to the Disclosure of Incentives Form (DiF). The new DiF, which takes effect from 1st October, along with some explanatory material, has now been distributed to HBF members. They are also available on the HBF web site. FirstBuy FirstBuy was heavily oversubscribed. The HCA announced the successful allocations to home builders and RSLs on 20th June. These totalled just short of 10,500 units, with the HCA 10% equity shares valued at £169.5m. Adding in the fees paid to local housing agents gives a total value of £180m. I understand a number of HBF members have already signed contracts and others are expected to follow shortly, so the scheme is now live in the market. Our special FirstBuy Working Group continues to meet senior HCA officials regularly. Burden of regulation You will remember we convinced the housing minister, Grant Shapps, that a Local Standards Framework was not the right solution to the local regulatory burden. I am very pleased that our alternative proposal is now being progressed. HBF and home builders, working with the Local Government Group (previously the LGA), Planning Officers Society, NHBC, HCA, Planning Inspectorate, DCLG and Treasury, has now established a Local Housing Delivery Steering Group, chaired by Sir John Harman. This time-limited Group will have two objectives: to look at viability testing of local plans, and to review the range of standards imposed by local authorities on home building. It is early days, but I am optimistic that the Group’s work could bring real benefits to housing delivery and home builders by curbing excessive local authority demands. I am very grateful to those planners who responded to our questionnaire on local standards. We had an excellent response. We are now collating the results which will feed into the work of the Steering Group. Surplus public sector land Our newly-established Public Sector Land Working Group has now met senior officials from the HCA. We were briefed on the HCA’s recently published land disposal strategy. We also discussed the different methods for disposing of public sector land. This is an especially sensitive issue because companies already on the HCA’s Delivery Partner Panels (DPPs) naturally favour this method of disposal, whereas those who are not on the DPPs believe there should be greater use of other disposal methods. Several Government departments will be publishing similar land disposal strategies over the next few months. While there has been plenty of talk for many years about disposing of surplus public sector land, this Government seems genuinely committed to making it a reality. Affordable housing success The Government expects to exceed its target of 150,000 new affordable homes by 2015. The original target was made up of 94,000 existing commitments and a number of special programmes (e.g. empty homes) and 56,000 units under the new Affordable Homes Programme. In the event, the HCA announced that 80,000 homes would be provided under the new programme, valued at almost £1.8 billion. This will bring the overall total to more than 170,000. A number of HBF members were among the 146 organisations receiving allocations, including six of the Majors. The 80,000 units were split between 63,000 affordable rent units and 17,000 affordable home ownership. Customer Satisfaction Survey We are now working with NHBC on the details of a small/medium sized developer survey to complement the current survey among larger HBF members. Meetings HBF staff recently met the official responsible for housing at No.10 Downing Street to discuss a range of housing issues, including the key obstacles to increased home building. HBF Director of Economic Affairs John Stewart and I both attended Grant Shapps’ second First-time Buyer Summit on 5th July, along with two senior house builders and a range of other housing stakeholders. It was an interesting discussion, although I think any material improvement in the mortgage situation must rely on our own discussions with the CML and lenders. HBF staff also briefed officials from the CBI and Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS), both of whom are undertaking research into housing and planning. There is considerable benefit in the government hearing some of our key messages via third party organisations or government departments. PLANNING NEWS Localism Bill The Localism Bill finished its committee stage in the House of Lords on Wednesday 21st July. In actual fact there wasn’t enough time to discuss a number of the tabled amendments or clauses and these will now be discussed at the Report stage of the Bill when the Lords return in September. This stage of the Bill will now take five days rather than the programmed four, but it means that the Bill is still on course (depending on the level of agreement between the Lords and the Commons) for Royal Assent and commencement before the end of the year. We continue to press for further amendments to exclude planning decisions on both development plans and planning applications from the scope of possible local referendums. Although the Government has introduced an amendment to give discretion to the local authority as to whether to hold a referendum, we believe that this should be a mandatory exclusion to avoid the introduction of third party right of appeal of planning decisions through the back door. The Lords debated and retained the introduction of a clause allowing for local financial considerations to be material to planning decisions. However, their Lordships were at pains to stress that this was a very limited power and did not threaten the long held principle that planning permission should be neither bought nor sold. Given the size of the Bill and its potential far-reaching effects on both planning and housing policy it has been curious how little has been amended by either house thus far. We are, therefore, somewhat fearful that, as with so much legislation, a number of amendments may be made at the last minute as the Bill passes between the two houses prior to enactment. We will, of course, be watching the final stages of the Bill’s progress to seek to minimise any potentially damaging changes at the last minute. Binding nature of Regional Strategies housing targets confirmed The CALA judgement by the Court of Appeal of 27th May confirming that the Regional Strategy (RS) remained very much part of the development plan is beginning to cause significant reverberations across England. It is being felt especially by those councils who had or were poised to advance Core Strategies containing reduced housing targets compared to those within the RS, and those who are fighting appeals where the pivotal issue is the calculation of the five year land supply. The situation regarding the status of the RS had become a little confused in the wake of the first CALA appeal following which the Government had issued a letter to Chief Planning Officers stating that while the RS remained part of the development plan, the Government’s intention to revoke the RS could be taken into account by local authorities as they formulated new planning policy. This had given rise to many local authorities advancing core strategies with reduced targets prior to the passing of the Localism Bill, and, possibly more alarmingly for the housing industry, adopting reduced housing targets through the use of ad-hoc interim housing statements. One of the most troubling examples of this practice was Leeds City Council who had attempted to reduce its housing target by 50% in this way until it was found in error following a series of costly appeals. HBF has been working with members up and down the country over the last year challenging such practice. Perhaps the clearest statement to date confirming the status of the RS housing targets is contained in the Inspector’s letter issued at the conclusion of the examination of the Central Lancashire’s (Joint) Core Strategy. The councils had advanced a plan with a reduced target, but the Inspector concluded that the plan was unsound because it was not in conformity with the RS. Furthermore, he was not persuaded that such matters could be rectified in a subsequent Site Allocations DPD. The letter also refers to the RS targets being minimal and contains a valuable reference to the Government’s growth agenda. A number of local authorities have been gearing up for examination of core strategies with significantly reduced housing targets (South Gloucestershire, Bath and North East Somerset, North Somerset, Swindon, West Northants to name a few). We expect that the Councils concerned will pause for thought and withdraw these documents from examination and await the formal revocation of the RS before advancing plans with reduced targets. We anticipate, therefore, little work continuing on the production of Core Strategies over the next six months. This means - if the provisions of the NPPF come into force - that they will be vulnerable to the presumption in favour of sustainable development while they prepare fresh evidence to support their plans and wait for a place in the queue for examination. Just over 90 Local Authorities currently have an adopted Core Strategy with a similar number in the pipeline expecting to be adopted over the next 12 months. However, just how these programmes will be influenced by the emerging NPPF, particularly the new requirement for existing plans to be certified as being in conformity with the Framework, remains unclear. Similarly, the situation remains far from certain for those councils in the former South West and West Midlands Regions where the RS never achieved formal adoption. Even so, in these areas it appears that the emerging RS targets will provide the starting point for discussion (as confirmed in the appeal case of Barton Farm, Exeter). Also some significant weight is being attached to the RS targets because they had been subject to lengthy public consultation and examination (reference: Kipling Road, Stratford-upon-Avon appeal decision). We are continuing to monitor the emerging situation and ask members to continue to provide any information they receive either via timetables for emerging development plans or on appeal decisions. Members who want further information on any of the cases referred to above or who want to pass on new information should contact James Stevens, Strategic Planner at HBF. Local planning application fees It is understood that, despite fundamental objections from HBF and others as part of the consultation process, the Government intends to introduce the necessary legislation to allow Local Planning Authorities to set their own fees for planning applications, based on an assessment of local costs. The new provisions will be introduced by statutory instrument (date currently unknown but clearly at least not until parliament returns in September), but will require Local Planning Authorities to produce an evidence base establishing their charges and a charging schedule which may take up to three months to produce. The Planning Advisory Service has produced a model for local authorities to more easily produce an evidence base. This suggests that there should be many more fee categories than at present, particularly with regard to residential developments where more bands are thought appropriate to better reflect the actual multiplier effect of different size applications. Obviously there will be winners and losers out of the new system. It is thought likely that “average” residential applications will not change significantly. However the charges for discharge of conditions will inevitably increase meaning that applicants should work harder to reduce the number of conditions placed on consents. It is also likely that the “free go” application following refusal or withdrawal will also be removed. This will significantly change the approach of applicants as to when to submit applications and the amount of pre-application agreement sought on development proposals. HBF continues to discuss total reform of the development process to incorporate pre-application discussions and fees and post decision monitoring with both central and local government since the former is not covered by the current proposed reforms. We will, of course, issue a full briefing note on the new provisions as soon as we know the details as set out officially in the Statutory Instrument. POLITICAL / EXTERNAL AFFAIRS Zero carbon The Zero Carbon Hub has now published its report proposing a basis for Allowable Solutions for off-site carbon mitigation. It is seeking views on its proposals by the end of the summer. The report reflects the broad consensus to have emerged from the Hub’s informal discussions with HBF and other interested parties in recent months. It suggests an approach that would enable house builders to make a contribution to a fund to deliver off-site projects when carbon emissions above the minimum on-site requirements under building regulations are not feasible or cost-effective. The proposals would allow local authorities to adopt policies that relate to the delivery of Allowable Solutions in their area, but these would need to be properly justified as part of a local plan and would also be subject to a national cost cap in terms of the price per tonne of carbon saved. In addition, competitive pressure on the cost of Allowable Solutions would be brought to bear by allowing house builders to engage third party providers to deliver qualifying projects where this was the best option. The 2016 Task Force and the Government will consider the responses to the Hub’s proposals in the autumn before a final policy decision is reached. Green Deal for new homes We have held further discussions about the possibility of a Green Deal financing option to help defray the up-front costs of meeting the higher energy and carbon efficiency standards entailed under the zero carbon policy. It has been agreed to undertake further analysis of whether there is in principle an opportunity for involving third party finance in covering the initial capital costs of relevant improvements consistent with the thinking behind the Green Deal for existing homes. The existing homes Green Deal is predicated on the basis that householders should not pay more in annual repayments of the finance advanced than the savings achieved in their energy bills. The Zero Carbon Hub and the NHBC Foundation have kindly agreed to support this further analytical work and I will let you know its conclusions in due course. Political liaison We held a further, very successful, breakfast briefing meeting for Conservative MPs last month. The high turnout and generally receptive tone of the discussion at the meeting indicates that behind the newspaper headlines, housing is an issue that politicians generally are concerned about. We have found both an interest in understanding the current issues and a willingness to engage on means to improve the climate for housing delivery. Given this essentially positive atmosphere, we plan to continue and build on this series of briefings in the autumn and beyond. We are also firming up arrangements for our contact programmes at this year’s party conferences. We are planning discussions with Ministers, Shadow Ministers, MPs and councillors at both the Conservative and Labour conferences and will also be participating in a fringe debate on housing at the Conservative conference. Labour Party housing policy review We will shortly be submitting the HBF’s response to the Labour Party’s housing policy review. Senior members from the Major Home Builders Group also recently had the opportunity to discuss current issues informally with the Shadow Communities Secretary, Caroline Flint. It remains important that HBF maintains dialogue with all the main political parties. Design and the future of Building for Life The Government has indicated it attaches importance to promoting good standards of urban design in the context of its planning reform agenda and this has been confirmed in the draft National Planning Policy Framework published this week. Conscious of this and the need for design to be addressed in a way that facilitates rather than complicates the planning process, we have been continuing discussions with our partners in the Building for Life initiative about its future role. It is heartening that we are now jointly very clear that Building for Life should be positioned as a reference tool to inform discussions about relevant design issues in the early stages of the planning process rather than as a quasi-regulatory standard. It is important we ensure this view informs the NPPF and the future activity of Building for Life. Abolition of Land Remediation Relief HBF has written to Treasury expressing our concerns about the proposals from the Office of Tax Simplification to abolish Land Remediation Relief in the Budget. HBF feels that the proposal was not subject to an adequate prior consultation and has not fully appreciated the implications for housing supply. <media 22570>Please click here to view the letter</media> TECHNICAL NEWS Flood and Water Management Act (FWMA) Following the concerns previously raised with Ministers HBF met with officials from DEFRA and DCLG on 7th July to discuss the many issues surrounding the implementation of the Flood and Water Management Act. HBF, DEFRA and CLG are currently in the process agreeing a joint ‘Summary of Points Discussed and Agreed’. This note will be released to HBF members as soon as it is finalized. Discussions at the meeting focused on; The transfer arrangements for existing private sewers and transitional arrangements. This included leaving existing Section 104 agreements in place until there is a need for change. The Mandatory Build Standards (MBS) for adoptable foul sewers. Until such time as the MBS becomes mandatory, house builders should be free to secure design approval under existing arrangements, i.e. conventional sewers designed and constructed to SfA 6th Edition and adoptable, private (domestic) sewers to Part H of the Building Regulations. Compliance with these standards should be sufficient for Section 104 technical approval and the completion of a Section 104 agreement. Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDs) Standards and the related statutory guidance. It was accepted that above ground SuDS have significant land take implications – this will be a key area for discussion at future workshop(s) that are planned as part of the consultation process. It is likely that there will be a phased introduction of the SuDS Standards but there are no specific details at present. The legislation dealing with the first phase of the automatic transfer of existing private sewers serving two or more properties came into force on 1st July 2011. Formal transfer of all sewers covered by the transfer, which have been constructed as at 1st July 2011, is likely to take place on 1st October 2011. The consultation on the Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDs) Standards was due to be released on the 15th July, but at the time of writing, had not yet emerged. It should run for 12 weeks. The MBS consultation is expected to be issued within the next four weeks, even though Defra still need to undertake some additional work on the RIA. Given the extent of the work that has already taken place in respect of the ‘standards’, this is expected to be a relatively short consultation period and so less than the usual three months. By default, the consultations covering both the MBS and the SuDS Standards will run concurrently. This has always been the HBF’s preferred option given that it will provide for comprehensive consideration of any conflict/inter-action of the respective standards. DEFRA have said that they will be running at least two dedicated workshops during these consultations. As mentioned previously, HBF will be holding member meetings/workshops to consider these consultations. We would urge members to attend these meetings to help formulate an industry response, as well as submitting your own company responses. Any members interested in attending these please contact Rosie Hinchliffe – e mail rosie.hinchliffe@hbf.co.uk Building Regulations Part L 2013 Review HBF recently wrote to the Minister responsible for building regulations, Andrew Stunell, setting out our views on how we can work to establish confidence in achieving assured building performance levels under the future requirements of the Zero Carbon policy and, in particular, seek to clarify and address the reasons for the apparent gap between designed and actual performance. Steps to tackle this issue will feature in the 2013 Part L review currently under way. Indeed DCLG has already indicated that the 2016 Part L requirements will be based on ‘actual performance’ as opposed to the existing method of ‘as designed’. The findings from the four working groups set up to look at the 2013 Part L review have presented their findings to DCLG and BRAC Technical Working parties. The groups set up looked at Domestic Standards and Calculation Methods, Non Domestic Standards and Calculation Methods, Compliance and Performance and Retrofit and Green Deal for existing. The work from these groups will progress to a December 2011 consultation. We will keep members updated on the progress. Other Building Regulations Other Sections of the Building Regulations are being reviewed by CLG which might result in further consultations in December 2011. These will cover issues such as security, changing places and structural Eurocodes. An evaluation of Part P (electrical safety) and a rationalisation of Parts M (access), Part K (protection from falling) and Part N (glazing). Any consultations that come out as a result of the reviews surrounding the above issues are expected to be light touch affairs compared to Part L. DCLG will probably be looking to find some savings from any consultation/s to help balance the books in a one in one out world. We will keep members updated as this work progresses. AND FINALLY… As you can see, there is a lot going on and as ever should you have any questions on any of the issues raised in this report, please do not hesitate to contact me or a member of the HBF team on 0207 960 1600. I will report to you again in September. In the meantime, have a great Summer, whatever you are doing. Stewart Baseley Executive Chairman E-mail: info@hbf.co.uk
