© Iryna / Adobe Stock
PB rounds up the industry reaction to December 2024’s revisions to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Read on to find out what’s changed and what to expect from housebuilding in the future.
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), first published in 2012, has long been seen as a hurdle to new developments rather than a help, particularly for small builders. Under this framework, (now on its sixth revision) strict regulations requirements without much advice, no clear country-wide plan and understaffed and inefficient planning authorities have all had a part to play in holding back housing growth.
The most recent revision to the NPPF came just a few months ago, in December, and sought to rectify these issues and “Get Britain Building Again”. The revision is something that’s been hotly anticipated by the industry, in the hopes it will put words and promises into action and show just how the Labour Government intends to reach that lofty 1.5 millions homes by next parliament.
The revised NPPF is the result of over 10,000 responses from those in the industry to the Government’s consultation, which ran from July to September. Here are the change highlights:
- Mandatory housing targets for councils
- Increased housebuilding targets that work with communities for areas with the highest unaffordability for housing and greatest potential for growth
- A brownfield first approach, coupled with green belt ‘golden rules’ that will redefine lower quality areas as ‘grey belt’ land and make sure necessary infrastructure is provided
- Council and developer social housing responsibility for genuine affordable homes
- £100m additional cash for councils’ planning officers, along with 300 additional planning officers, will see faster decision making to turbocharge growth and get families onto the property ladder
So what does the industry think of all this?
Federation of Master Builders (FMB)
Brian Berry, Chief Executive of the FMB explains: ”The pragmatic approach to the green belt and local targets is much needed as they may help push through homes where they’re needed most. But not revising the small site allocation in local plans is going to come as a disappointment for small house builders, who desperately need available land to build on, which they’ve been reporting as a blocker for years.”
Berry continued: “Other fundamental issues are also at play. Small house builders are at the sharp end of the planning system, often having to jump through the same hoops as volume developers. While any increase to planning officer numbers is welcome, the 300 proposed is a drop in the ocean and will not turn the tide for the nation’s local house builders.”
National Federation of Builders (NFB) 0
Richard Beresford, Chief Executive of the National Federation of Builders, summarises:
“These changes are vital in stepping up the challenge of building 300,000 homes a year and ensuring we one day have a parliamentary term where 1.5 million homes can be built. We particularly welcome the ‘stick’ of central government intervention if councils continue to avoid making or updating local plans.”
Rico Wojtulewicz, Head of Policy and Market Insight at the NFB and House Builders Association (HBA), praised “delaying spatial planning until a strategic framework is in place” but highlighted concerns elsewhere: “The planning conditions discharge fees are set to rise, without any indication that their abuse will be limited.”
“Planning fees are also set to rise, without any announcement of recourse if services are poor.”
Federation of Small Businesses (FSB)
Tina McKenzie, Policy Chair at the FSB, thinks that while these planning announcements are “welcome”, Government “now needs to seriously consider how these homes are going to be built:
“It simply cannot happen with a focus purely on larger volume builders, who cannot efficiently address the smaller sites needed to achieve the target number of new homes. The only way Government can hit these targets is to involve and utilise the nation’s army of small housebuilders.
“We’re calling on Government to publish a Small Housebuilder Strategy that includes a long-term plan and programme of support for the sector, so they can achieve their potential in contributing to the targets.”
The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE)
Commenting on the National Planning Policy Framework, CPRE chief executive Roger Mortlock reflects:
“The broken housebuilding market is to blame for the painfully slow delivery of much-needed new homes. When big housebuilders deliberately limit the supply of new homes to maximise their profits, supercharging the current system will not lead to the change the government is looking for.
“The government’s plans risk a huge hike in the number of unaffordable, car-dependent homes. Building on England’s 1.2 million shovel-ready brownfield sites would do far more to unlock growth, regenerate communities and provide sustainable, genuinely affordable new homes.”
Home Builders Federation (HBF)
On the NPPF, Neil Jefferson, Chief Executive at the HBF says: “The swift moves to address the constraints in the planning system are welcome and underline the Government’s commitment to increasing housing delivery, but further policy interventions are needed if we are to meet the ambitious target.
“Demand for new homes is suppressed by a lack of affordable mortgage lending and support for first-time buyers in particular is desperately needed. We also need to release the tens of thousands of unsold affordable homes provided by house builders as part of their planning permissions, that cash-strapped Housing Associations are not able to currently acquire; and a solution to the unnecessary nutrient neutrality issue that is holding up around 160,000 new homes. Ensuring local authority planning departments have sufficient capacity to process applications efficiently will also be key.”
Leaders Romans Group (LRG)
Ian Barnett, National Land Director, LRG comments:
“The new NPPF gives an opportunity for the whole narrative on development and housing delivery to change. Whilst some would like to have seen more in terms of strategic planning, today’s NPPF at least gives a new window of opportunity for many sites that are suitable for development and which have been held up by inefficiencies and lack of resources, meddling local politics and NIMBYism to come forward.
“Delivering 1.5m houses in the first term is ambitious and unrealistic but it was utterly impossible under the previous planning system. The time for delivery is here and it’s the responsibility of everyone in the industry – developers, landowners, planners and local authorities to do what is needed. The framework is there – but it will take time to bed in and what we need now more than anything after a new NPPF update for the last two Christmases is stability so we can get on with the task ahead.”
