[ad_1]
The government has recognized its goal of building 300,000 houses a year. But he also promised to do more to give local communities control over the planning process.
A new report from the Center for Policy Studies examines the main options for the abolition or weakening of “top-down objectives”, and their likely impact on the housing system. These range from reducing the power of the Planning Inspectorate to allowing local authorities to fix their own housing needs.
The document warns that three of the proposed policies in particular would do “serious damage” to house building and the housing sector – precisely at a time when the economic recession and rising interest rates are already putting in danger the goal of 300,000 houses per year and the health of the country. sector.
These were to cut the housing targets on greenfield sites in favor of brownfield sites; scrapping the test of five-year supply; and gives councils the ability to assess their housing needs.
Two other measures were found to have a more manageable impact, i.e. guaranteeing that approved local plans are treated as up-to-date for a specific period, and reducing the power of the planning inspectorate to reject local plans that are close to meeting their objectives.
The document accepts that the top-down targets have been greatly resented, and agrees that, in the long term, it is right that the government should aim to provide homes in more consensual ways. However, they warn that removing it without developing credible alternatives could lead to a 20% drop in house construction, with some estimates as high as 40%. A 20% slump could see as many as 800,000 job losses in construction and related sectors.
The report, co-authored by Alex Morton and Samuel Hughes, the new CPS head of housing, offers a number of alternative options to help get local support for the developments:
- Street votes
- More control over design and layout to local people
- Support for SME builders
- Ensuring faster construction on sites
- Potentially limit the required land supply to five or 10 years
Hughes said: “Instead of throwing out top-down targets, the government should be looking at ways in which it can mitigate its inflexibility, as well as address other unpopular features of the house building system.
“Whatever happens, the structure of any new system must be put in place before the existing system is torn down, otherwise we could see fewer homes, job losses and a blow to SMEs just when the country can afford less.”
[ad_2]
Source link