Memorandum by the 9 English Regional Development
Agencies (HOU 27)
A decent home for everyone by 2010
Availability of affordable housing in many of
the English regions is the pre-requisite to a decent home for
all by 2010. Some English regions, such as the South East and
South West do not have large areas of housing requiring renewal
although the overall number of sub-standard homes is very high,
whilst the North West, North East, Yorkshire and Humber and parts
of the North Midlands have large areas of low demand housing in
need of urgent renewal. Ironically, even parts of these regions
are also subject to affordable housing problems in their more
attractive rural areas.
A significant increase in funding to greatly
increase the rate of supply of social housing is the only real
option if these needs are to be met by 2010. The current rate
of new homes being completed through the Approved Development
Programme (ADP) and Local Authorities Social Housing Grant (LASHG)
is barely keeping pace with the erosion of social housing stock
as a result of Right to Buy.
However, achieving the Government's target of
a decent home for all by 2010 will not be achieved simply by increased
financial resource, although this, of course, is critical and
very welcome, there are serious doubts as to whether even this
will be sufficient to fully resource the activity required.
The provision of new homes, at market prices
and with public subsidy, along with the improvement of below standard
existing stock requires other resources. New housing particularly
requires land and it is evident that planning policy, interpretation
of that policy and other government targets may, albeit unwittingly,
be conspiring against the "decent home for all" objective.
For example, it is becoming clearer that the government's target
of achieving 60 per cent of new housing on brownfield land is
probably one factor contributing to the lowest housing completions
for many years. As Local Planning Authorities apply the sequential
test, release of sites is delayed. It is an acknowledged fact
that brownfield sites are harder and take longer to bring to market.
Addressing the wider requirements for affordable
accommodation in the regions is critical and there needs to be
a greater supply of affordable "below market" rented
and low cost home ownership options. However, treating this as
purely a supply issue is unlikely to solve the problem. For example
in some regions, the level of public sector pay, and the fact
that it does not allow workers to purchase on the open market,
is a contributory factor. Therefore there is a need to look wider
than the much needed additional funding and to look at pay levels
in the public sector, land availability for housing and new mechanisms
for bringing forward sites. Measures aimed at addressing current
regulations for disposal of land held by public sector landowners
such as the MoD, working with landholding employers, and addressing
skills needs must all be looked at.
The improvement of existing unfit stock is a
significant challenge for this country. It is accepted that the
majority of the unfit stock is in private ownership. Without simple,
effective tools to either encourage, or force, the improvement
of unfit stock, we will make little progress in this respect.
There are still large numbers of council owned
homes in need of repair and updating. Many homes in poor condition
are in the private sector. We need effective fiscal measures to
provide incentives to private owners/landlords to undertake the
necessary improvements. We need simplified Compulsory Purchase
Powers to gain control of unfit stock with unco-operative owners.
Balancing new resources between social housing
and options for owner occupation for those who cannot afford to
buy on the open market, and the mechanisms for their distribution.
The achievement of the balance between social
housing and owner-occupation for those who cannot afford to buy
is best determined at local level through a detailed assessment
of local housing market areas.
There is a pressing need in many of the regions
to reduce the number of homeless households and particularly those
in bed and breakfast accommodation. New resources should be prioritised
to tackle homelessness through the provision of social housing.
There is also an urgent need for key worker accommodation, the
shortage of which affects the ability, particularly of the public
sector to recruit. Many key workers such as nurses and other medical
professionals such as therapists, and police early on in their
careers are unwilling to commit to home ownership and therefore
need affordable rents. However, there is also a need to provide
low cost ownership options for the next stage of their lives in
order to be able to retain them. The supply of small/family homes
to purchase on the open market is not adequate, and often beyond
financial reach, and there is an insufficient supply of low cost
(subsidised) ownership options. Recent research commissioned by
SEEDA, by Roger Tym and Partners with Three Dragons, identifies
that the problem of affordable homes is particularly acute in
the public sector. However it is not only the well publicised
sectors such as nurses, police etc, but the problem exists across
the whole of the public services sector, as well as those in the
private sector who provide public services (eg transport providers,
catering, retail). Early indications are that if left unchecked,
public services are likely to deteriorate.
As a priority, adequate resources should be
targeted in those areas of greatest pressure. Local circumstances
will dictate appropriate balance between social housing at below
market rental, or low cost ownership. Overall, it is important
that there is a diversity of product and that funding is available
where it is most needed. We must seek to build well balanced communities
as it would be dangerous to build a disproportionate number of
social homes in certain areas. Growth should be managed to ensure
that the supporting infrastructure of jobs, services, schools
etc is put in place in order to avoid future problems. Definitions
of key workers should be flexible to respond to local needs and
not restricted to crime, health and education.
Role of planning obligations
We do not believe that planning obligations
have so far proved effective in delivering value for money affordable
housing. The role of a planning obligation should be to provide
both the land and the financial subsidy by discounting the value
of the land attributable to the planning permission for open market
housing. Too often, obligations for affordable housing are agreed
and attached to specific consents, only for Registered Social
Landlords(RSL) to outbid each other for the social housing element.
The private sector developer, and more importantly, the landowner
can then demand a high value for this element of their permission
as well. The Housing Corporation then allocates resource to subsidise
the housing. Effectively, therefore, the government is paying
the landowner/developer for the privilege of building the social
housing.
Where, on larger sites, a social housing planning
obligation is imposed, this should be a genuine cost to the developer
properly reflected in what they pay for the site. The Housing
Corporation should not provide any further subsidy. Local Authorities
could pre-determine which RSL will develop/manage the social housing
units to avoid any element of competition in that respect.
Affordable housing coming forward as a result
of planning obligations is not adequate to meet the scale of demand
and is likely to remain a marginal mechanism for dealing with
the affordable housing problem. However, improvements to the present
arrangements can always be made. For example, simplified, quicker
and more transparent processes for section 106 agreements are
needed to secure implementation once the planning permissions
are granted. Local authorities often lack negotiation skills and
knowledge of development economics. Clear and streamlined procedures
are required, based on an improved skills base (planning/housing
policy and practices, funding law, development economics etc),
together with clear targets linked to robust and up-to-date assessments
of local housing need. These assessments of need must go beyond
social rental housing and take into account key workers and a
mix of affordable housing "products" that is required
locally.
The effectiveness of the Housing Market Renewal
Fund (HMRF)
It is still too early to judge whether the HMRF
will be effective in tackling the huge housing needs in areas
of low demand and greater clarity is needed surrounding the Government's
intentions and the levels of resource to be applied.
In introducing the HMRF it is critical that
it must not provide resources for housing alone if the objective
is, as it must be, to achieve integrated and holistic neighbourhood
renewal. HMR areas must be the subject of a comprehensive analysis
of their economic strengths and weaknesses so that actions to
address these can be taken by the RDAs and others before investment
takes place in bricks and mortar. Otherwise, the problems of low
demand will not be removed and sustainable development not achieved.
Ensuring the quality or affordable housing
It is important that future house building programmes
are well planned and designed. New housing should be directed
to town centres where possible. New developments should be sustainable,
be close to jobs and services. Housing should be a mix of market
and affordable to promote mixed communities. A long-term vision
including design, sustainability, regeneration and maintenance
should be developed. Higher levels of skills in design, planning,
regeneration, and community and urban management are needed. The
Regional Centres of Excellence being developed in the regions
will address these issues.
Public attitudes are a barrier to the provision
of affordable housing. This is based on a perception that affordable
housing comprises large single tenancy estates, poor quality design,
environments that are out of keeping with surrounding areas and
with high levels of unemployment and crime. This must be addressed
through good planning and design if these perceptions are to be
challenged.
There are two control mechanisms over the design
of new affordable housing. The first is the planning system, which
is the primary means of control over the design of all new development.
In order for the planning system to deliver
higher quality design it needs the powers and authority to demand
quality. Local Planning Authorities need the skills and experience,
or easy access to the skills, to know what better design is and
how to promote and procure it. It is expected that Regional Centres
of Excellence being established by the RDAs will address this
latter issue.
The second control mechanism is the government
agencies that provide the funding for social and affordable housing.
The Housing Corporation's Total Cost Indicators set cost parameters
according to location and can act to minimise cost per unit, rather
than encourage higher quality design, which will often cost more.
By refining procedures the Corporation needs to encourage good
design rather than discourage it. Appraisal systems need to reflect
the importance of good quality design and housebuilders required
to follow the EP/CABE/Housing Corporation Design manuals such
as the Design Compendium and Better by Design and other initiatives
such as the Northwest Development Agency's plans to introduce
a North West Design Code.
| 
