New ways forward for housing and planning

Last year, we asked three key figures in the sector for their responses to new Government policies coming forward, including the latest revisions to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). With the Government this week announcing new changes to the planning system and the New Towns Report now out, we look back on where we were a year ago.

Below are reflections from Meeta Kaur, founding partner at Town Legal LLP, a specialist planning law firm; Pete Gladwell, Legal & General’s Group Managing Director, Public Investment; and Kathryn Turner, Planning Director at Lands Improvement Holding. We asked them to reflect on the current challenges and opportunities in housing delivery, focusing on planning, finance and inclusivity in design.

In my view, the new NPPF is generally being positively received. With various other updates and consultations that were issued simultaneously, you can see it is consistent with and reinforces the government’s strong pro-growth agenda. You can debate whether or not it goes far enough, but the messaging is clear. All this is helpful given the inconsistency in policy and political leadership—some would say lack of leadership—at a central government level, which was unfortunately a strong feature of recent years, particularly towards the end of the previous administration.

We will need strong and consistent leadership from the government if we are going to make any meaningful progress in addressing the crisis in housing delivery that exists currently. In my view, given the position we are in today, local authority is going to need a change in mindset and culture. Changing behaviour, culture and attitudes requires consistency and a strong and steady government to bring forward new legislation and policy in order to have any impact.

New legislation takes time. In the immediate term, the government has various planning policy levers that it can use, hence the new NPPF. But there are also other tools such as written ministerial statements, the National Planning Practice Guidance and National Development Management Policies.

The focus on new towns and settlements is ambitious and exciting, albeit this seems to have two developing strands: first, the well-publicised conversation about new towns at a significant scale; and a second, quieter one around urban extensions. It will be interesting to see how both of these develop. It has of course led to much commentary about the previous new towns programme. It did not necessarily deliver vast amounts of new housing, but it delivered at pace; establishing a way to deliver at pace with any new towns programme for the future will be key.

Of course, the previous new towns programme benefited from significant public sector funding. How new town programme will be financed today is probably the single most important thing in securing success.

From a funding point of view, I hope to see more of the public’s pensions and savings allocated to providing homes that society needs. There is work to be done to translate the framework into practice, but the general momentum feels positive.

The conversation around housing and financing has become quite one-dimensional. As a society, we have lost that inclination towards long-term, patient, socially orientated financing to create new housing communities, leaving the task almost exclusively to housebuilders. While they have their important role to play in the sector, they are typically funded by one type of capital that needs a quick return with a limited pot. We can have a greater effect if we combine different forms of financing, allowing us to take a longer-term view and to create a better place.

This is not anything fancy or about financialisation. Historically, we were more inclined towards patient capital that aligned with social good: many of the housing associations were set up with precisely this model in mind. But it is not easy to achieve; certainly, housing associations, local authorities and the public sector have more limited finances than in previous times. However, we could be looking at other ways of, for instance, investing pension funds—using them to support the creation of healthy and sustainable communities. We should be focused on long-term, patient, socially oriented capital which can provide infrastructure, affordable housing and build-to-rent housing. This does not have to detract from the catalytic capital other organisations and housebuilders offer; they also have their role.

It is also positive to see health and health inequalities mentioned in the latest NPPF. Legal & General’s housing and sustainability teams have been working with the Quality of Life Foundation and the Institute for Health Equity at University College London to set out the housing industry's role in tackling health inequalities. It is clear that the design quality, planning of housing and its management are essential in addressing the stark disparities that affect how long people live healthy lives. There is a considerable amount more the industry can do to support this work.

The revised NPPF's intent is positive when it comes to the growth agenda. At Lands Improvement Holdings, we are moving ahead with planning applications, engaging with councils and looking for opportunities to do things positively and proactively in consultation with local communities.

Design, place and inclusivity are key elements we consider in our approach to any scheme we deliver. Hand-in-hand with the NPPF changes, we would like to see a continued focus on collaborative working and buy-in with councils to deliver high-quality schemes based on a shared vision. Often, policy is devised through a one-size-fits-all framework. This can be restrictive in terms of maintaining inclusivity in response to the future phases of certain projects. At times, planning officers fall back on policy without necessarily considering the specific dynamics and how a different approach could facilitate a healthier, more inclusive environment, which we strive to achieve.

For our master developer schemes, we begin the development process by reviewing the policy context and its relation to the objectives of the scheme. We then create a vision document that encapsulates the aspirations of all parties involved in the project. By collaborating with the council and key stakeholders, we can reach an agreement that clearly outlines the vision for the area and how we see its evolution, whether concerning sustainability, inclusivity, or health and wellbeing.

Securing buy-in for the vision document at a senior level is crucial to the process. It fosters confidence within the rest of the team, particularly at the planning officer level, allowing teams to make more proactive decisions which, while they may deviate from standard policy guidance, could lead to more inclusive, healthier and better-designed spaces.

This process is aligned with our placemaking strategy, Happy, Healthy Places in New Developments: the Spaces in Between. It is centred on five pillars: places with engaged and proud communities, places that are inclusive for all generations and demographics, places that protect, preserve and enhance nature, places with dynamic and thriving public spaces and places that make healthy and sustainable ways of living the natural choices.