A local solution for a national problem

There’s no doubt that anyone involved in property over the past decade, would have endured a few alarming highs and lows in that period. While few would be brave enough to predict with any certainty what the next few years will bring, one thing is sure – major change is on its way. The government has made it clear that the concept of localisation will define its new planning and housing policy. At the heart of this radical transformation is the Decentralisation and Localisation Bill. Announced back in August, the bill outlined the Government’s aim to devolve the responsibility for planning strategy from national and regional to local control.

This underlying principle driving the government’s new strategy was clearly outlined by Communities Secretary Eric Pickles, speaking after the Royal Town Planning Institute conference in the summer when Mr Pickles declared that his main priorities for planning in the future are: “localism, localism, localism”, combined with a desire to scrap the top down housing targets and Regional Spatial Strategies which were originally introduced to create a more coherent vision and strategy for each region.

Putting policy into practice
The Decentralisation and Localisation Bill aims to ‘devolve greater powers to councils and neighbourhoods’ and ‘give local communities control over housing and planning decisions’ across England and Wales. While the idea of empowering local residents by giving them a greater say in how their communities grow and develop is a laudable one, with so many different interests and perspectives involved, it remains be seen just how effectively this principle will translate into practice.

Decentralisation and localisation – a summary of the changes
The Bill proposes a number of strategies to stimulate this movement from central to localised power. Prominent areas will be the return of decision-making powers on housing to local council, including giving communities the right to bid to take over local state-run services in a step to save local facilities and services. Some of the key changes contained within the bill include:
- The abolition of Regional Spatial Strategies.
- Local councils having the power to make decisions about housing and planning in their area.
- The abolition of the Infrastructure Planning Commission, an independent body that decides applications for nationally significant infrastructure projects. It is to be replaced by a fast-track process for major projects.
- The creation of new trusts designed to make it simpler for communities to provide homes for local people.

In line with the transparency agenda on the Conservative Manifesto, the Bill will require all public bodies to publish online the job titles of every member of staff and the salaries and expenses of senior officials. The move will include giving councils a general power of competence.

Some of the government’s proposals will be met with initial relief from investors, estate agents and surveyors across England and Wales. However, other changes may well prove far less popular. For example, the decision to do away with the established Regional Plan, if passed, could well prove to be an ill-informed call, causing more confusion than clarity.

This is because, despite the proposed removal of housing target numbers, it seems likely that local authorities will still adhere to the numbers set out in the Regional Plan. While the government has taken steps to address this by offering incentives to any local authorities who accept and encourage development in their region, it remains to be seen how persuasive these incentives will prove to be.

Not in your backyard
One issue which has regularly divided those involved in selling, purchasing and developing property is the practice commonly known as ‘garden grabbing’. This phrase is often used to describe the system of building new houses on what were once private gardens, resulting in a greater concentration of development taking place on the land. Decentralisation Minister Greg Clark has indicated that councils and communities will be given the power to end this practice, so that communities are more able to determine the density and type of new schemes, particularly housing, within their region. Garden land has been re-categorised by amending Planning Policy Statement 3 to remove the classification of gardens as ‘previously developed land’. By doing this, they are then removed from brownfield designation.

In justifying the change, Clark quoted figures from 2008 which show that 80 percent of homes were built on brownfield land, an increase of 24 percent from 1997. However, this includes development on previously residential land that includes gardens, which has risen from 11 percent to 23 percent over the same period of time.

The advantages of this are deceptive: at first glance, the change will be welcomed by those opposed to this form of backland and tandem development. However, given that the majority of gardens are usually within built up area of towns and villages, there is still likely to be a presumption in favour of development, subject to the normal planning considerations. This means that in reality the only real change will be to the annual government statistics on where new buildings have been built.

The principles behind the government’s new property agenda seem sound and sensible, but some critics feel that central and regional planning bodies, which have played a valuable role up to now, have been rejected too hastily – and on too large a scale. It’s possible that a greater compromise between local, regional and national may prove to be the more prudent path, but with so much change on the agenda, it is difficult to predict exactly how the changes will play out. Inevitably there will be teething problems, and those involved in property will need to stay alert to keep abreast of all the changes. We can only hope that, after the state of flux of previous years, the changes bring some much needed stability and structure to the property market.