Peter
The London Plan sounds like one of the Structure Plans that we used to have. LA’s were consulted and inputed into the County Structure plan with regard to housing numbers for each district in the County. The numbers were site specific following a land availability study in each area, rather like your HCS. There were always some authorities trying to get their numbers down so at the end of the day the County Council had to “make a fist if it” but at least the compromise was reached at local level i.e. County and District. Once the county structure plan was adopted that was it. If a developer went to Appeal but the proposal was contrary to the Local Plan, Structure Plan or National Policy as set out in the Planning Circulars, they wouldn’t stand much hope. The only grounds for further Appeal was on a point of Law through the courts.
There is a serious shortage of affordable housing in the UK and the changing demographics are making this problem more acute. As you say developers are faced with significant increases in costs which cannot be recouped in selling prices, so their margins are under pressure. The only way they can offset these costs is to pass them on to the land owners by paying less for the land. Land in the SE and London in particular does not grow on trees complete with planning permission, so the planning system is a constraint on supply. Knowing this landowners tend to hold out for the maximum price.
Does the planning process have a part to play in all this and if so how is it respond. We are building less new homes now than at the end of WW2 and have managed to upset at least half the population in the process. Quite an achievement if it wasn’t so serious!
There’s no simple answer of course. All that happens is that we try to change the emphasis from time to time. Sometimes we go into constraint mode with lots of policies designed to slow down the rate of house building and at other times we try to remove the obstacles to building more houses- like a presumption in favour of sustainable development, whatever that means exactly.
The Localism Bill is attempting to square a difficult circle. The government want more houses which they see as in indicator of economic growth, which they can tax, but they also want to stop the way development decisions are forced on communities and neighbourhoods that say they don’t want them. But as my maths teacher at primary school used to tell us, “Two into One won’t go”. I suspect that the long term solution is to get our leaders to explain that we just can’t go on like this and we are just going to have to manage with less. I can’t see any politician doing that can you? Well perhaps Mahatma Gandhi but he practised what he preached and that’s the difference.
John