24 COMMENT © Super Straho © Yves Cedric Schulze


Strategic sites can spend years going through the planning system, with delays increasing both risk and cost. By the time consent is secured, the market conditions on which the original viability assessment was based may have changed considerably.


Beyond this, Section 106 agreements and Community Infrastructure Levy contributions are placing growing demands on development. Investment in infrastructure and local services is essential, but there comes a point where cumulative obligations can undermine the very developments that are intended to deliver these wider benefi ts High rise residential development has been fundamentally reshaped by the introduction of the Building Safety Act. The industry’s commitment to safer, higher-quality homes is unquestionable, but stricter compliance requirements, additional design considerations and gateway approvals have inevitably increased both programme lengths and development costs. These are challenges that developers must navigate long before construction begins.


LOWER PREDICTABILITY AFFECTS CONFIDENCE Taken together, these factors are creating a development environment characterised by uncertainty, which is increasingly infl uencing funding decisions Lenders and investors continue to recognise residential property as an attractive investment, but their confi dence is built on certainty. When planning outcomes, regulatory requirements,


delivery timescales and construction costs become harder to predict, risk appetites become dampened down by caution. The impact is perhaps most visible in the affordable housing sector, where many schemes, particularly in London and the south east, are facing intense viability pressure. This is particularly frustrating because these locations remain the strongest housing markets in the country, with sustained demand and signifi cant housing need. Many developments are being delayed, redesigned or, in some cases, not progressing at all. We need to recognise that viability is the mechanism that determines whether homes get built. If housing targets are to translate into delivery, a more pragmatic approach is required from everyone involved in the development process.


THE VIABILITY CONVERSATION Local authorities should be willing to engage openly on viability where market conditions have materially changed. Policy aspirations remain important, but they must be balanced against commercial reality. A development delivering fewer affordable homes than originally envisaged may still represent a positive outcome if the alternative is no development at all.


The principle is straightforward – 20% of something is better than 40% of nothing. Similarly, a scheme that delivers 80% of its original ambition still provides much needed homes, creates employment, supports local economies and contributes to housing supply. Allowing sites to


remain stalled while stakeholders pursue perfection helps nobody.


Ambitious proposals are important, but viability assessments must refl ect maret realities rather than best-case scenarios. Robust business planning is becoming increasingly critical as market conditions remain uncertain.


PLANNING PROCESS RECOMMENDATIONS onfi dence within the planning process could also be improved. Dedicated offi cer resources for maor housing sites and earlier engagement between planning authorities, consultees and applicants could help reduce delays and improve certainty. Even modest improvements in predictability can have a signifi cant impact on viability and investment confi dence Ultimately, if the UK is serious about increasing housing delivery, the conversation must move beyond housing numbers alone and focus more on what is genuinely deliverable.


The country has housing demand and development opportunity t ust needs conditions that allow viable schemes to come forward and proceed to construction.


A more collaborative, realistic and deliveryfocused approach would benefi t the sector. Without it, we risk continuing to approve housing developments that never materialise, while the gap between housing need and housing delivery grows ever wider.


Michael Holloway is a director at Urbana


THE PRINCIPLE IS STRAIGHTFORWARD – 20% OF SOMETHING IS BETTER THAN 40% OF NOTHING


WWW.HBDONLINE.CO.UK


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76