Between 2011 and 2031, it is estimated that 245,000 new homes need to be built to meet current demand, according to figures released by The Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA). This has opened a debate about the importance of regenerating brownfield land and whether current planning policies are adequate in such regard to help kickstart the ailing market.
What is brownfield land?
Brownfield land are those sites which have been previously developed but are no longer in use (such as old industrial sites). The National Land Use Database (NLUD) estimates that around 55,000 hectares of brownfield land are currently available for development in England. Of course, not all these sites will be suitable for housing development and many will have high remediation costs.
Accordingly, to help identify suitable brownfield land for housing development, from the 31st December 2017 all local planning authorities in England have been required to maintain a Brownfield Land Register. Such registers consist of a comprehensive list of all identified brownfield land that are suitable for housing (irrespective of their planning status) (Part 1).
Additionally, local planning authorities now have new powers, with or without application, to grant permission in principle on brownfield land listed in the register. This means that such sites are principally approved for housing development subject only to technical detail consent. These sites will be listed in the register (Part 2) with the expectation that it will both encourage and speed up development of such sites.
What more is the government doing?
On 5th March 2018, the government published for consultation its proposed changes to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The consultation closes on 10th May 2018. The proposed changes reaffirmed the government’s key ongoing objective of making more land available for homes in the right places by maximising the contribution from brownfield land by requiring:
- the use of brownfield land for housing to be given ‘substantial weight’ in local and neighbourhood planning policies and planning application decisions;
- the reduction of affordable housing contributions for housing development on brownfield land by such sum proportionate to the equivalent existing gross floorspace of the existing buildings;
- local planning authorities to take a proactive role in identifying and helping to bring forward land that may be suitable for meeting development needs, such as brownfield registers, using the full range of powers available to them; and
- strategic plans to contain a clear strategy for accommodating objectively assessed needs in a way that makes as much use as possible of brownfield land. Additionally, in such plan making, the local planning authorities must demonstrate as much use as possible of suitable brownfield land before Green Belt boundaries can be amended.
Are brownfield land registers and the proposed NPPF changes enough?
The brownfield land registers, and the associated benefits of those listed sites with planning in principle, are in their infancy. The potential benefits and incentive of bringing sites through, from listing to technical detail consent, will take some time to materialise (and therefore assess and review) due to non-planning issues such as site ownership and capital funding for developments.
The proposed changes to the NPPF which emphasise the importance of brownfield land within strategic local and neighbourhood planning should help in maximising the benefits of the brownfield land registers, and more generally the re-development for housing of brownfield land.
A common constraint for the redevelopment of brownfield land can be the additional construction costs associated with the poor condition and/or limitations of the site. Therefore, the proposed NPPF changes to require significant weight to be given in planning decisions together with the reduced affordable housing contributions (and any further reduced financial contributions arising on viability assessment grounds) should greatly assist the deliverability of such brownfield land sites.
But is this enough? These changes are strong and positive steps forward in re-enforcing the government’s objective in maximising the use of brownfield land. However, it should never be considered that development of brownfield land alone will solve the housing crisis.
