mattd

Leading land agent Aston Mead says that Brexit may have subdued the property industry, but it has also led to a pent-up demand, which is likely to feed back into the market next year.

Aston Mead Land & Planning Director Richard Watkins said: “Any degree of political or economic uncertainty means that buyers tend to sit on their hands. People with important and costly decisions to make tend to pause and reflect, waiting for a time when the outcome is more predictable. The ongoing machinations of the Brexit process for the last two years are no exception – so little wonder that the property market has become increasingly subdued as time has gone on.

“But it’s also true to say that this situation has led to an undeniable pent-up demand – especially in London and the South East – which is likely to make itself evident, once Britain leaves the European Union on the 29th of March next year.”

Asking prices of new stock entering the market rose by just 1% last month – the lowest rate of asking price growth for October recorded by Rightmove since 2010. In addition, Nationwide has reported that monthly sale prices remained at a standstill, and the annual rate of house price growth of 1.6% is the lowest rate seen for over 5 years.

However, Richard Watkins says that these circumstances could provide real opportunities for those buyers who are ready to trade up in the second quarter of 2019. He explained: “There’s no doubt that trading conditions have been pretty sedate in the past few months. Even the traditional spike in market activity ahead of the run-up to Christmas has failed to materialise.

“But the Budget offered the sector a few crumbs of comfort. The additional 1% Stamp Duty Land Tax for non-resident buyers was lower than the 3% previously suggested, and the two-year extension to Help-to-Buy should assist first-time buyers who want to get onto the property ladder.

“What’s more, despite the risks involved in the current challenging market conditions, we expect that come April 2019, those hoping to trade up will find that the gap in sale values and onward purchase prices will be the narrowest it has been for half a decade. So there continue to be real opportunities out there.”

Leading land agents Aston Mead are calling for government intervention to prevent the death of the UK High Street.

The company says that many town centre premises are crying out for redevelopment, but without action by the local authority nothing will ever change because not all asset-holders share the same objectives.

Aston Mead Land & Planning Director Adam Hesse said: “The grim truth is that many of our High Streets are no longer fit for purpose. Companies which are failing to move with the times are going under, not helped by the boom in internet shopping. But leaving these business to their own devices will only mean that the situation is likely to stagnate further.

“For example, why don’t local authorities employ retired planning officers to go around the towns in each of their boroughs, to see which sites – often secondary retail parades, garages and car showrooms – are currently under-utilised? Then, if the government gives local authorities enough power, the councils could compulsorily purchase those premises which are struggling, and relocate the thriving businesses to empty retail units in the heart of town.”

Adam Hesse says that this process would encourage town centres to become more vibrant, with fewer empty shops, more residents moving in, and the opportunity to redevelop the sites on the edge of the town centre.

He explained:  “People often want to go into town to socialise – and we need to make the surroundings more conducive to this, rather than presenting them with row upon row of charity shops – and, dare I say it, estate agencies – as at present.

“The newly vacated buildings on the edge of town could then be redeveloped – often adding extra floors if necessary. For example, a former two-storey parade of shops could be turned into a luxury retirement scheme over many storeys, with perhaps a doctors’ surgery and pharmacy on the ground floor. This would create a win / win situation, with more vibrant town centres and new medical facilities precisely where they are needed.

“Admittedly, we also need new planning regulations to be more flexible than in the past. Perhaps start-up shops should have business rates waived for six months to give them a chance to get going. And we need councils to be more creative in their approach to making our town centres more attractive to shoppers – such as pedestrianising the High Street for part of the day, or providing free parking for those spending over £25.

“So the death of the High Street is definitely not inevitable. But we believe it will take government intervention to prevent it from happening. And as time is running out, such action needs to happen soon.”

Leading land agents Aston Mead have welcomed new government planning rules designed to speed up house building under a National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

The new policy announced last week by Housing Secretary James Brokenshire states that a council’s local plan for its overall development strategy will become invalid if house building dips below 75% of targets.

Aston Mead Land & Planning Director Charles Hesse said: “The new framework is certainly a step in the right direction because it puts pressure on councils to keep up with their house building targets over the long term. It’s all very well local authorities paying lip-service to these objectives, but without an approach like this, there’s no way the country will achieve the Government’s aim of building 300,000 new homes in the UK per year.

“For far too long there has been a presumption against development, with planning regulations so complicated that prospective developers have come across impossible hurdles to jump at every step of the way. Either that, or the time taken for proposals to go through planning has made development in any given area unsustainable. We hope that the new policy framework will provide councils with the incentive to increase the speed of house building across the country.”

The new framework has come in for criticism from organisations like the Campaign to Protect Rural England, which claims that the rule change will make it easier for builders to put up expensive homes on green-field sites because councils will no longer be able to use the local plan as grounds for objecting to such developments.

But the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government responded to the criticisms, saying that the new policy would ensure that quality homes are built more quickly and in the right places. It also said that the new framework contained a provision for councils to block developments for a year if they were not building within the confines of the local plan.

Charles Hesse added: “The simple fact is that we are not building enough homes and they are not being built quickly enough. Even the Treasury recognise this; a recent select committee report concluded that ‘the only sustainable way to address housing market affordability, both for first-time buyers and other households, including those in the rental sector, is to significantly increase the supply of new housing’.

“So supplying new housing is unquestionably the way forward – and we hope the new framework goes some way to helping developers do precisely that.”

Leading land agent Aston Mead has welcomed the preliminary findings of an independent review into housebuilding, being carried out by former Conservative policy chief Sir Oliver Letwin.

Back in November last year, Sir Oliver was asked by the Chancellor Philip Hammond to identify and reduce the gap between the number of properties given planning permission, and those which are actually built.

Aston Mead Land & Planning Director Adam Hesse said: “Sir Oliver’s review concludes what we’ve been saying all along. Not only do we need to build faster, we also need to put a greater variety of homes in the mix. People are turning to the second hand market to find homes for retirement or student accommodation, when they should be able to find new-build versions of these homes as well.

“Developers need to widen their understanding of what people out there are looking for – and it should be more than just a choice of either a three bedroom house with a bay window, or one with four bedrooms.”

Adam Hesse says that small and medium sized developers are perfectly placed to bring these different types of accommodation to the market, making use of sites that simply would not interest the larger developers.

He explains: “The Letwin report makes it quite clear that there is no evidence of land banking taking place. Instead, the fundamental driver of build-out rates is the ‘absorption rate’ – the speed at which those homes can be sold into the market without materially disturbing the market price.

“It’s entirely reasonable and understandable that developers don’t want to flood the market with too many homes at any one time because doing so would depress prices. But what they can do is accelerate the absorption rate by offering more housing of varying types, designs and tenures. The settings, landscapes and streetscapes should also be more distinct, and so appeal to a greater range of housebuyers – meaning that the overall build out rates could be increased, without impacting on the market price of any of them.

“None of this takes away from the fact that we need simpler planning regulations, more staff in planning departments, and a huge increase in bricklayers. But these suggestions in the interim report are a sensible start, and we await Sir Oliver’s final report in the autumn with interest.”

Leading land agent Aston Mead says a system which enables councils to charge developers twice for studies into the viability of their building projects is unfair, causes months of delays, and discriminates against SME companies.

Currently, planning authorities can set an affordable housing contribution for a new scheme, which developers can challenge by commissioning an independent viability study. But even if the report comes out in the developer’s favour, the council can commission a second study, which also has to be paid for by the developer, even if reaches the same conclusion.

Aston Mead Land & Planning Director Charles Hesse said: “This situation is absurd. Developers are making little enough profit at the moment without having to pay the council to duplicate the work they’ve just carried out. What’s more, even if the result of the second report mirrors the first, they can’t claim the cost of the study back. Not only does this involve further delay, they are left paying twice for the council to come up with a conclusion they had already reached in the first place.

“Whilst this is something that the big companies may be able to shrug off without concern, it puts a real strain on SME developers, who are struggling in the current climate anyway.”

Charles Hesse says that the costs to the bottom line can be substantial. He explains: “For example, we are currently working on a new development of three flats above a shop in Elmbridge in Surrey. Despite the fact that government directives are calling for precisely this sort of scheme, the developer was hit with an affordable housing contribution of £66,000, which would have made the project unviable. So £1,500 was spent commissioning a study, which came out in the developer’s favour. But the council also required their own £1,500 study – which also had to be paid for by the developer, even though it reached the same conclusion – to be submitted with the application. That has added a total of £3,000 and another six months of delays into the process.”

Charles Hesse says that small and medium-sized developers could contribute tens of thousands of properties to the national housing stock, but are being held back by unnecessary red tape along the way.

He adds: “The ironic thing is that SMEs are perfectly placed to provide exactly the sort of small-scale, town and city centre housing stock that government directives are suggesting are needed. Yet they are constantly met with hurdles in the planning stages. It can cost thousands of pounds for site surveys, and weeks waiting for a pre-application meeting with the council, after which there’s often no real indication as to whether the project can go ahead.

“There needs to be more ownership of the pre-application meetings, more commerciality to the process, and less wasted time and costs for the SME developers – who are sometimes left wondering why they are bothering to stay in business at all.”

Leading land agents Aston Mead have accused the government of sidelining small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the battle to build more homes.

The company says that whilst the larger developers are currently delivering the fastest increase in output ever recorded, SME developers are being left behind, with many struggling to survive.

Aston Mead Land & Planning Director Adam Hesse explained: “It’s no surprise that 80% of SME developers have gone out of business in the past thirty years. The triple whammy of funding problems, a tortuous planning process and lack of suitable sites has really hit them hard. Consequently, the big companies have been able to dominate the market – in 1960, the top 10 housebuilders accounted for only 9% of all new homes; today it’s over 50%.”

Adam Hesse says that at the moment, funding is the real bugbear for SME developers. He explains: “Whilst the extra £1.5bn added to the £3bn Home Building Fund announced last year was very welcome, the money is taking time to trickle through and the means of getting hold of it are laborious and complicated. Most SMEs building fewer than 100-150 homes per year are now reliant on project finance agreed on a site-by-site basis. This is inefficient for both lender and borrower, with hefty extra fees for entry, exit and legal agreements.

“But the truth is that our outdated planning system also leaves a lot to be desired. There seems to be a presumption against new construction in this country unless a very good reason can be found to allow it – whereas in reality, it should be the other way around. While big companies can mitigate risk across dozens of sites, small firms encountering delays on just one or two of them may make the difference between company survival or going under.”

Ultimately, Adam Hesse says that a balanced mix between larger developers and smaller companies is necessary for the future success of the sector. He adds: “SMEs are better placed to unlock the potential of smaller sites which larger developers wouldn’t want and would otherwise be left vacant. What’s more, SMEs hold smaller cash balances and so are motivated to turnover sites quickly. SMEs are also vital in increasing investment and jobs which are sensitive to the needs of local communities.

“In every other sector – whether it’s technology, retail, travel or finance – it has been the nimble and hungry start-ups who have provided the ideas and talent which have driven growth. But the construction industry is almost unique in being dominated by companies which were established over 40 years ago.

“We need the government to improve access to land and finance for smaller builders, and prepare sites for development by providing the necessary infrastructure. The planning system needs to stop being politically motivated, and the length of appeals needs to be halved from what currently takes more than six months to a maximum of three – perhaps by re-employing retired planning officers to work part time and sit on panels, in order to fast track applications that have previously been turned down.

“Until then, this country will remain over-reliant on a small number of high-volume developers, who are driven by commercial self-interest and with little incentive to build any more quickly than they are at present.”