Propertyfinder.com’s survey looked at public attitudes towards the planning process and new residential developments and reveals a lot of criticism of the system, but also conflicting attitudes.
An overwhelming number of people who had been involved in a planning application found it overcomplicated, hard to understand, and involving too much red tape. 67.9 per cent of people said the process takes too long, but only half felt that enough consideration was given to local objections.
Warren Bright, chief executive officer of Propertyfinder.com, said: “The labyrinthine planning process is a serious obstacle to solving the UK’s housing shortage. When you take into account the DCLG’s projected increase in households of 209,000 per annum until the year 2026, the current new build rate of 160,000 new homes a year is clearly falling short of requirements.
“Tony Blair speaks of the need to release land quicker for development and for more houses in the south and Gordon Brown talks about building thousands of new homes. But local authorities have far too much control over the planning process. Firmer direction from central government is essential.”
Home extensions top the list of most popular planning applications
An obvious solution to needing more space for your own home, is to extend.
88 per cent of respondents said they would not object to a neighbour wanting to extend his home. An additional room may cost only £20,000 to £35,000 to build, depending where you are in the country. In most cities, this is well below the cost of buying a larger home, especially when you consider the impact of stamp duty.
Bright said: “A sensitive, well-planned extension can be an excellent way of adding space and value to your home. Only a planning application to restore of a neighbouring building from flats to a single family home would be more popular with the neighbours than an application to extend.
“However, Britain’s cities are very densely built and additional rooms may be impossible to fit in or prohibited from a planning and conservation perspective. A badly planned add-on can be a disaster and can detract from the value of your house.”
People support affordable housing – somewhere else
Considering the addition of more housing supply, 61.2 per cent of people believe more affordable housing is needed for key workers. However, when asked about the prospect of new developments in their local area, people were less accommodating.
In principle most people backed the idea of new housing to address supply problems (an estimated shortfall of 50,000 new homes every year). When it came to their own area however, only 39.1 per cent wanted more housing built. The findings come as it was announced last week that buying a home is out of reach for key public sector workers in more than two thirds of UK towns.
People were also hostile to high density developments. They had a strong preference for building houses rather than flats. Only 8.6 per cent of people actively supported converting a nearby house into flats, while a mere 11.3 per cent favoured a new block of flats. Over three-quarters of people (77.6 per cent) were open to a planning application for a single new dwelling close by however. The use of brownfield land was overwhelmingly supported.
Bright commented: “It seems the Not-In-My-Back-Yard mentality is alive and well in the UK. While most people are sympathetic about the struggle facing would-be first time buyers and workers such as nurses, they are opposed to large new developments in their area.
“People tend to support local development that will increase house prices in the area – using brownfield land, restoring houses from flats to single dwellings, converting industrial buildings or old schools into homes, rather than anything that will increase densities.”
Concerns for the environment is a case against development
Environmental concerns were a significant factor for many people. 75.3 per cent were against using local green space for residential projects. There was also a clear preference for any new developments to be inconspicuous and in keeping with other properties in the area. Only one in ten people wanted 'different and eye-catching' new residential developments, and mock period-style architecture was most favoured.
Respondents also offered their views on the impact of new residents, which goes some way to explaining people’s resistance to new developments. Traffic was a key objection. Almost three-quarters of people feared an influx of new cars would mean a lack of parking, as well as more congestion. The extra noise caused by potential new residents was a concern for 53.9 per cent of people, but they were also worried about the ability of local services to cope with an increase in population.
Bright concluded: “With space at a premium and with opposition to housing such as new flats, reconciling the calls to address the housing shortage with local opinion appears even more complicated.”
