How Environmental Issues, Zoning and Planning Affect Land Value

Environmental, zoning and planning considerations affect Land investments.

The Localism Act 2011 reset the rules for land investing. Concerns for local control in planning, zoning and environmental matters can be an opportunity.

Among the many implications of the Localism Act 2011 are those that affect UK investors in land. Formerly, a land investor needed to heed regional decisions regarding land use if the goal was to convert undeveloped property to residential or commercial uses. But a new set of rules shifts those decisions to local councils. The effects of the act are only beginning to be felt, but no one should characterize it as all good or all bad for the investor.

The Act altered the landscape, so to speak. That is not necessarily a bad or good thing – as illustrated by the following points:

• Sustainable communities/Environment – The imperatives to develop in ways that are favourable to the environment are necessary and satisfy the consensus of thought about such matters. While this may negate some plans to use certain properties for certain uses, we now have a clearer idea on what can and cannot be done. It is that certainty that the investor needs.

• Sustainable communities/Local economy – The land investor is now required to make a case for the long-term impact a land use designation change might have on the local economy. So be it! The land investor wants only to increase the value of property, and that cannot happen if the end-use fails to meet a market need.

• Planning – With planning functions now distributed to local councils, there will be theoretically smarter decisions made and plans drawn. We say “theoretically” because it assumes expertise and rational thought in all municipalities, which may not always be the case. Investor groups are tasked with providing a convincing case for how a development will ultimately benefit the community at large.

• Zoning/Land use designation changes – As local decisions are made about zoning changes, they can also be subject to a voter referendum where the majority vote wins. Is it a good thing when citizens overrule elected officials on land use? There are probably as many answers to that question as there are sheep in Australia.

What should be clear is that entering into UK land investment is not a casual affair. One needs to go about it strategically with a convincing land site assembly plan. As more UK investors are drawn away from the stock market to alternative investments, many elect to work with UK land fund managers who are schooled in all of the factors cited above and who can best predict how to achieve asset growth from strategic land development investments.

As should be the case with all investments, individuals should work with a personal financial consultant to identify which investment strategies fit their individual needs and risk tolerances.

Might the Answer to the UK Housing Shortage Be Found on Disused Farms?

Relaxed rules on the conversion of farm buildings and other structures to alternative uses illustrate a trend: the UK is open to adaptation and change.

The increased productivity of farms in the United Kingdom has worked its way into national planning policies in a surprising way. Beginning in May 2013, existing agricultural buildings that measure less than 500 square metres can now be utilised for other purposes with a “light touch” neighbour consultation.

This means that farm outbuildings and homes might adapt quickly to serve as retail, financial services, office, leisure, assembly, restaurant, pub and hot food takeaway businesses. According to Communities Secretary Eric Pickles, this can have a positive impact on rural economies. “There is huge untapped potential in many disused existing buildings,” he told a website serving academics and professionals engaged in urban development. “We’re determined that every one of them is put to good use. By simplifying the process and relaxing some stringent rules we can provide a helping hand to those eager to boost their high streets or rural communities by cutting the time and costs needed to start up new businesses.”

In some of those communities, conversions to free schools might be accomplished as well. The programme also includes disused office buildings, which can also be converted to residences.

Why is this happening – and how might it address the country’s serious housing shortage?

It is largely due to the increased efficiencies in farming over the past several decades. Wheat yield as measured in tonnes per hectare rose from about six to eight from 1980 to 1995, for example. Yields have come about through more intensive use of fertilizer, increased use of pesticides, greater knowledge and expertise in farming, removal of hedges that enable more efficient farming, and European Union guaranteed pricing. Over this same period of time, the proportion of UK workers engaged in farming declined from 175 per 1,000 workers to about 100, a 42 percent reduction. With fewer people needed to work the land, it’s understandable that there has been so much consolidation of farms and the abandonment of farm buildings that go with that.

The conversion of farm buildings to pubs and office buildings to residences speaks to a generalised effort overall to open up building and land to alternative uses that fit a changing world. The UK population grew by 7 per cent between 2001 and 2011, an astonishing rate of growth in comparison to most countries in the Eurozone. This is due to a combination of immigration, higher birth rates and senior longevity. This last factor, seniors living longer, includes them remaining in their own homes longer, which contributes to the housing shortage. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) has advised that more local authority be allowed to drive decisions on how land is used, in part to speed up the process of conversions of property and buildings from a former use to something more appropriate for contemporary needs.

Strategic land investing is also an attractive investment opportunity when those conversions can be made. Specialists in conversion schemes – property fund partners who purchase disused farms, for example, that can contribute more to the local economy by conversion to residential use – will work with investors to identify appropriate sites, achieve a zoning change, and build the infrastructure necessary to enable homebuilders to build and sell residences. In some areas, those may be rental homes and in others homes for purchase.

Investors interested in any such land or building conversions need to go about it carefully, of course. Real estate is a means by which many have achieved significant asset growth, but it should be done in balance with other financial assets and growth strategies. An independent financial advisor should be enlisted to make an assessment of this type of capital growth fund.

When Buildings are Better than Open Land

The need for UK housing is challenging the greenbelts and rural lands.

Britain’s natural beauty is indeed one of its greatest assets. But a critical need for housing is forcing a discussion on the sacrosanct nature of open lands.

A primary point of debate around the UK’s critical housing shortage is whether or not to build on greenbelts and the open countryside beyond, typically agricultural and forested areas. The argument often boils down to a two-dimensional, either/or choice between increasing density in towns versus building outside the metropolitan areas, accepting a certain degree of American-style sprawl that loses forever some of the best characteristics of the country.

But in truth, the choices need not be quite so distinct. Neither side of this argument has to count themselves winners or losers, as more hybrid approaches can be considered – and in fact are already being implemented on a limited scale. This is not just wishful thinking. Research indicates that there are many choices that allow for different means of expanding land availability to the single goal of increasing the supply of housing.

Considering how investors in the development of strategic land have land investment funds ready to go to work, this is a topic that needs creative thinking. The housing need is great, and developers and homebuilders are also raring to go.   The question is, where can they build?

The greenbelt concept, first implemented in the 1930s, was remarkably prescient in what it sought to achieve. While other countries (in particular the United States) were expanding their metropolitan regions far from core cities – allowing automobiles to become the primary means of individual transport, enabling middle class workers to have larger homes and gardens while they commuted to downtown employment – cities such as London, Cambridge, Nottingham, Bristol, Dorset, West Midlands, and on the Continent (Germany in particular), preserved their dense and compact downtowns with designated greenbelts.

The vision of what greenbelts should be is a region of land enveloping the cities that democratically provide recreation and fresh air to the populace. For the most part, that is what was created. The more densely populated cities of the UK keep people closer to workplaces, stores and community amenities, much of it accessible by foot, public transport or bicycle. Conversely, those sprawling suburbs in the States mean that workers spend onerous stretches of time in traffic, traversing 8-lanes-wide of asphalt from one suburb to the next, leaving little time to enjoy those larger houses and gardens.

The British have a distinct love for greenbelts and in fact have added about 25,000 hectares to the 14 greenbelts in the country since 1997. Local authorities have further plans to increase various greenbelt lands by 12,000 hectares in the future.

But while greenbelts have largely succeeded in their initial goals, they face increasing scrutiny largely because of the housing shortage. The policy is attacked for being too rigid. Also, greenbelts don’t always achieve the intended goals of preserving environmental quality as they are poorly managed in some locales. Among those who criticise the current configuration of greenbelts are the Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA), which decades ago had championed their existence. Since 2002, the TCPA has suggested the greenbelts instead be broken into wedges, gaps and corridors, largely in response to the housing needs.

Baroness Hanham, communities minister in the House of Lords, is critical of absolute policies that protect greenbelts as sacrosanct. She is quoted as advocating for more rural development, so people “can live in the villages in which they were born,” as well as for social housing because some of the land is “not absolutely brilliant” and therefore would be put to better use as sorely needed housing.

For example, an abandoned powerhouse in Formby (Borough of Sefton, Merseyside) sits in greenbelt land. A draw to vandals, it is regarded as an eyesore yet a proposed 62-home development (10 per cent dedicated to affordable housing) is encountering resistance from a community group. The development would require some additional use of greenbelt land, but would also put derelict land into productive use. Should the old building continue to stand and deteriorate, or would it be better to build sensibly and add community infrastructure improvements along with it?

Of note, development of any housing on raw, open lands need not favour social housing over more expensive private homes – or vice versa. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF), which advocates for affordable housing, looked at eleven countries that are similar to England in how they approach land supply, including restrictions on sprawl and protection of agricultural land. The Foundation concludes that a more sophisticated, layered approach to growth management, “rather than urban containment,” should be considered.

JRF also argues for proactive planning, such as compulsory purchase, because the current housing approach is often incoherent. As an advocate for social and affordable housing, the organization also champions land auctions and land assembly as a means to effect sound development.

Private and institutional investors increasingly are interested in building new housing, both to buy and to-let, wherever such development fits into town growth strategies. Strategic land advisors who engage real asset funds to build are typically cognizant of those town strategies. Clearly, the questions around greenbelts and raw land have to be answered in many areas where development is needed.

With investors ready to build, such conversations and decisions are being pushed forward, making these kinds of debates more likely in the future as more capital is freed up to build much-needed homes. Individuals who invest in development that requires planning permission should consider whether strong opposition exists in that planning authority; they should also discuss such investments with an independent financial advisor who can determine if the risks and rewards of property development fit the portfolio of the investor.