13
had been delayed or stalled in the previous three years because no buyer could be secured for the affordable homes. Registered Providers have become
more cautious for understandable reasons. Their balance sheets are under strain, not least because of heavier spending on existing stock, compliance. They are also being more selective about the homes they will accept. Service charges, management complexity, design, defects risk, unit mix and tenure mix each become increasingly scrutinised when margins are tighter. This especially applies potted affordable units and projects with awkward estate arrangements. In London, where affordable housing led development is common, the problem has been especially visible. Outside of sites, especially those promoted by SME developers, can be badly impacted because they need certainty on the affordable element before they can Rising expectations, weaker delivery machinery The sector is trying to solve two problems at once. Policymakers are asking development to deliver more affordable housing, or to deliver it in forms that are more genuinely affordable. At the same time, the machinery that has to make that happen has become more fragile. Registered construction costs remain high, borrowing is more expensive, regulation has grown and values in many locations do not leave much room for error. There is a policy issue too: the planning system is loading higher affordable housing expectations onto some of the very sites ministers most want to see come forward. Grey Belt development can now carry an affordable housing ask 50% under the Golden Rules. Proposed new towns are being shaped around a 40% expectation, with at least half of that intended to be social rent. London’s standard threshold approach still requires 35% on private land and 50% on public and industrial land, even though the Homes for London
WH200
package has introduced a temporary route at lower thresholds to get stalled schemes moving again. A more practical settlement The solution must lie in looking at whether affordable housing requirements are structured in a way that results in homes being built. A high quota attached to a site that never starts is not a success. Equally, a race to the bottom would serve neither of the market. This requires policy makers to have
greater understanding about viability at site level. While some schemes can still support ambitious affordable at least not immediately and in the form merely lengthens negotiations and increases the risk that land, consent and capital sit idle. Early engagement with Registered Providers should become far more routine, not an afterthought once a scheme is designed. Greater willingness to review tenure mix, phasing and
timing would also help. On some sites, grant support or joint ventures may be needed to bridge the gap. On others, alternative delivery models, including Build to Rent (BTR), may provide part of the answer where they can create a more dependable route to delivery. London has already offered a blunt
lesson. The Homes for London package is, in effect, an acknowledgement by both government and City Hall that rigid policy settings can leave too many schemes stuck. In this case, policy has had to confront the fact that some delivery is better than no delivery and that planning must respond when circumstances change. So the crisis in affordable housing must
be resolved to get new sites moving, not because affordable housing is the problem, but because the present model for securing and funding it is under such strain that it is increasingly holding back the wider system. To enable more sites to move forwards, we need a framework that is ambitious, fundable and realistic about the market it is operating in.
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
