Professional Documents
Culture Documents
27/02/10
200524134
27/02/10
27/02/10
The Gordon Stephenson Building, 74, Bedford Street South, Liverpool, Merseyside, L2 2DH
27/02/10
CONTENTS
Preface Introduction Causes & Consequences of Rural Housing Crisis Understanding the Planning System The Taylor Review Conclusion Bibliography 6 8 10 12 13 4 5
27/02/10
PREFACE
Elinor Goodman, the Chair of the Rural Housing Commission (2006) argued that without a significant expansion in the number of affordable rural housing units many rural settlements might look picturesque but will have lost much of their lifeblood. Through a range of sources, this essay will attempt to critically explore the causes of the affordable housing crisis and evaluate plannings role in helping to deliver sustainable rural communities.
27/02/10
INTRODUCTION
With sharp increases in housing prices across the UK in the early years of the new millennium, housing prices became significantly unaffordable to those who were not already on the property ladder. Between 2002 and 2007, house prices in the UK rose by 90%, faster than any other nation in the EU except Spain1. A common misconception when people talk of such a housing crisis in the country is that they immediately presume the biggest issues are faced with in urban areas, when in fact the problem today can be felt strongest in rural areas of Britain. A rural area can be defined as somewhere that is a remote, isolated, pressurised area, located on and outside the urban fringe. According to the Commission for Rural Communities, 9.7million people lived in rural England in 2007, yet 928,000 rural households were living below the official poverty line. It wouldnt be unfair to say that often it seems these people in rural areas are forgotten about, and that rural Britain is treated as another country to be dealt with (Thomson, 2008).
1 http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/mortgages-and-homes/house-prices/article.html? in_article_id=423872&in_page_id=57
27/02/10
2 http://www.ruralcommunities.gov.uk/files/CRC%20Web%2042.pdf 3 http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/joepublic/2009/nov/18/rural-housing-crisis
27/02/10
we create vibrant dynamic communities - we need to build homes for young families4. The majority of reports that have been processed with regards to the needs of affordable rural housing all lead to the same damning conclusion that there is simply not enough houses being built, nor is it likely that enough will be built in the future. The issues of land purchasing, planning, construction, energy supply and water treatment all add to the complications of building affordable housing in rural areas5. In 2008, the government set a target of building 2,800 new affordable homes in rural England. With nearly 3 quarters of a million people on waiting lists for rural housing6, the governments target was missed by almost 14%, with only 2,415 units completed7. It is little wonder that such targets are not being met when there are many people in rural communities who do not want to see affordable housing in their communities, and thus there is vociferous opposition against affordable housing needs (Flint, 2008). Regardless of any cases of NIMBYism, it is clear that the government must address this need for more social homes in the countryside otherwise Britain will be dotted with unbalanced rural communities that dont include or cater for all ages and financial needs8.
27/02/10
The overriding theme of the Barker review is that, if land is available, then it should be made available to facilitate the demand for affordable housing and thus reducing the disparity between house prices and wages. Essentially this means that those rural areas that are in desperate need of affordable homes should be allocated land to be developed specifically for social housing. Barkers work leads to a conclusion that England needs 40,000-48,000 socially rented homes annually, yet it ignores all households that seek to own or rent in the private housing market with support from the government and no attempt is made to differentiate between rural and urban areas (Commission for Rural Communities, 2006). The CRC highlight two key actions in an attempt to supply affordable housing: 9
27/02/10
1. Housing cross-subsidised by market developers through planning agreements, which, as well as providing rented housing through housing associations, may also be targeted at meeting the intermediate needs of those unable to afford market housing, but who do not qualify for social housing. 2. The provision of subsidised social housing(Social Housing Grant) for those unable to compete in the market or unable to afford intermediate housing, including the homeless, families in unsatisfactory accommodation and, often in rural areas, those on low wages etc. One of the best practices of the above actions recommended by the CRC is through the use of Section 106 Agreements. Section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 allows Local Planning Authorities to enter into legally-binding agreements or planning obligations with a landowner in association with the granting of planning permission9. Such agreements have the power to be used in improving levels of affordable rural housing in rural areas where people wish to submit a development application, as the Section 106 agreement presents the opportunity to gain land to develop for affordable housing. This form of policy is becoming increasingly important as it remains difficult to secure sites to provide affordable homes (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2005). Between 2000/01 and 2002/03 the proportion of affordable homes built with a planning agreement increased from 30 to 47%. On the contrary, the number of Social Housing Grant homes completed fell from 21,451 in 2000/01 to 13,949 in 2002/03 (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2005), representing a decline. It is clear that in order to significantly improve the provision of affordable rural housing, both Section 106 agreements and Social Housing Grants must be used in tandem to drive levels of social housing development in the countryside. In response to the Barker review, the government published Planning Policy Statement 3 (Housing) in 2006. The PPS document states a need for a visionary & strategic approach to planning for housing, based on market responsiveness and the use of market information (Gallent et. al, 2008). Furthermore, the document explains that the need for affordable housing will mean using the development control process to negotiate the inclusion of low cost housing products in new housing schemes (Gallent et. al, 2008). In replacing Planning Policy Guidance 3, the new policy statement sets out how the government is committed to providing high quality housing for people who are unable to access or afford market housing (including social rented and intermediate housing). The new policy places emphasis on local authorities to set targets for affordable housing; specify the size/type of affordable housing needed; set out the circumstances in which affordable housing will be required; and set out an approach to seeking developer contributions. One of the key points made in PPS3 is that local authorities are able to reduce the national indicative minimum size site threshold from 15 dwellings to suit the circumstances required. This
9 http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=71631
10
27/02/10
means lower minimum thresholds can be set, particularly in rural areas, encouraging a larger proportion of affordable homes to be built as part of the overall housing mix. Following on from PPS3, and in an attempt to develop previous discussion, Kate Barker produced a Review of Land-Use Planning, which called for a local review of green belt boundaries, a streamlining of national planning policy, an improved strategic framework for infrastructure provision and a new approach to planning at the local level (Gallent et. al, 2008).
11
27/02/10
of the reach of many who work in the country side as, the average wage in most rural areas is just 20,289 compared to 27,487 in urban areas. The overriding objective of the report is to help ensure the planning system brings a positive, lasting legacy of places in which people actually want to live. It suggests changes to the planning system necessary to deliver vibrant communities with a distinct identity, in keeping with the character of their surroundings, and which enhance the local landscape and bio-diversity. The objectives are delivered through five core chapters, each touching upon different areas of rural planning and concluding with problems in the current system. Taylors first four chapters relate to ways in which we can develop a living, working countryside that will encourage new development and advancement in rural planning. Over 49 recommendations are presented throughout the document as means to improving the state of our countryside, with the 1st stating that Planning policy should be reviewed by the government as a body to create a more coherent set, reducing apparent conflicts between interpretations of sustainability, and the means by which competing priorities are assessed, and by doing so aid consistent interpretation and application at the local and regional level. This was met by the government by producing the first streamlined PPS document: PPS4 in December 2009; while committing to rural proofing all policies to take account of rural circumstances and needs. Further recommendations build on the need for affordable rural housing, as recommendation ten requests a pathfinder fund for an exemplar programme should be set up to develop best practice for local planning authorities in master planning housing and economic growth to create new neighbourhoods and community extensions for their communities with a focus on rural areas. Although the government did not agree to dispense with the PPS on eco-towns, it did take on board Taylors advice on consulting more widely on ways to promote Masterplanning by publishing the Rural Master Planning Fund prospectus in November 2009. A large proportion of the recommendations within the report have some relation and effect upon affordable rural housing and economy, and the overwhelming response from the government has been of a similar outlook to the two examples given. It is clear the government have taken on board much of what the Taylor Review has put forward, and have already responded in delivering what is required of them whether it be through policy reform, or increased funding.
Recommendation 28:
12
27/02/10
CONCLUSION
13
27/02/10
The lack of affordable housing is a national problem, but the need is clearly even more acute in rural areas across the country. Low wage levels; a high proportion of second home ownership; an increase in commuter homes; a shortage of land available for development; the high price of building land; and, the need for quality design to fit in with the surrounding environment, are all factors that play a big role in the rural affordable housing problem. These problems can be met head on, but only with the guidance of the Government and Local Authorities in developing strategic policies that encourage the building of affordable homes in areas of greatest need, while overcoming the opposition of NIMBYism and the development versus conservation argument.
Recommendation 12:
BIBLIOGRAPHYmm
ndat 13:
Barker, K. (2004), Barker Review of Housing Supply: Delivering Stability: Securing Our Future Housing Needs, HM Treasury: London Barker, K. (2006), Barker Review of Land Use Planning: Final Report: Recommendations, HM Treasury: London Commission for Rural Communities (2006), Tackling Rural Disadvantage: Calculating Housing Needs in Rural England, CRC: Cheltenham Communities & Local Government (2010), Government response to the Taylor Review, DCLG: London Communities & Local Government (2006), Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing, DCLG: London 14
27/02/10
Gallant, N., Juntti, M., Kidd, S., Shaw, D., (2008), Introduction to Rural Planning, Routledge, New York Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2005), Findings Informing Change: Have Planning Agreements Increased the Supply of Affordable Housing, The Homestead Lake District National Park Authority (2006), Supplementary Planning Document on Demonstrating Housing Need, LDNP: Kendal Taylor, M. (2008), Living Working Countryside: Taylor Review of Rural Economy & Affordable Housing, DCLG: London http://www.barleymanor.co.uk/index.php/affordable-housing/affordablehousing-the-facts/ (accessed: 1/3/10) http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/joepublic/2009/nov/18/rural-housingcrisis# (accessed: 26/2/10) http://www.hmtreasury.gov.uk/barker_review_of_housing_supply_recommendations.htm (accessed: 28/2/10 http://www.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=71631 (accessed: 28/2/10) http://www.lakedistrict.gov.uk/index/planning/planning_policies/planningpo liciesweuse.htm (accessed: 26/2/10) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7640256.stm (accessed: 28/2/10) http://www.ruralcommunities.gov.uk/files/CRC%20Web%2042.pdf (accessed: 1/3/10) http://www.ruralhousing.org.uk/ (accessed: 1/3/10) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/alicethomson/3555846/R ural-Britain-remains-another-country.html (accessed: 27/2/10) http://www.24dash.com/news/Housing/2009-03-25-Government-putsaffordable-housing-at-heart-of-rural-communities-action-plan (accessed: 2/2/10)
15