Affordable housing target weakened in English planning shake-up

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.

UK ministers have dropped a promise that half of all homes built on low-grade greenbelt land must be affordable, as they unveiled an overhaul of England’s planning system.

Under the changes, scrappy greenbelt land such as disused petrol stations will be classed as “grey belt”, and open for redevelopment.

But a previous proposal that 50 per cent of grey belt homes must be classed as affordable has been ditched, after ministers conceded it would undercut the financial viability of some sites.

Matthew Pennycook, the housing minister, said that ministers will require grey belt developments to have 15 percentage points more affordable housing than the standard for other developments in that local authority.

This would still mean that the majority of councils meet the redundant 50 per cent target, he insisted.

The decision — which was seized upon by the Conservative opposition — was reached after a length consultation that attracted more than 10,000 submissions, he said.

Pennycook added that without the greater flexibility there would have been a risk that some sites were rendered unviable with no homes — affordable or otherwise — being built there.

Kevin Hollinrake, the shadow communities secretary, said the change “will mean fewer affordable homes” and accused the government of pursuing a “war on rural England”.

He said: “Now see a massive shift to mass housebuilding to rural areas and on greenbelt, we do not welcome the bulldozing of democratic accountability.”

Planning experts and developers had warned that applying the 50 per cent affordable homes requirement would have made it financially impossible to build any homes on much of the “grey belt”, particularly because previously developed land is often costly to clean up and make ready for housing. 

Pennycook said the government wanted to avoid a raft of developers asking for case-by-case exceptions to the 50 per cent requirements by having a clear standard that reflects the cost of land in different parts of the country. 

The government is forcing councils to put in place up-to-date local plans setting out future housing delivery to meet a nationwide target of 1.5mn new homes over five years. 

Local authorities will have to meet at least 80 per cent of the government’s “new standard method figure” or have to rewrite their plans. 

The housing minister said the government’s previous definition of grey belt had left “too much room for subjectivity and debate”. 

Instead the government has set out new wording for grey belt, which is “previously developed land” or any other land that does not check the sprawl of large built-up areas, prevent neighbouring towns from merging, or preserve the character of historic towns. 

The new definition will no longer stop development in the name of “safeguarding the countryside from encroachment”.

But Victoria Du Croz, head of planning at Forsters law firm, warned: “Without increased clarity the definition of grey belt will be played out at appeal and in the courts, delaying planning applications and fundamentally delaying the provision of new homes.”