Vacant Buildings Credit - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)
Vacant Buildings Credit
The Written Ministerial Statement of 28th November 2014 was introduced with an express aim to provide "Support for small scale developers, custom and self-builders" Much of the focus has been on the threshold for when an affordable housing contribution should not be sought i.e. sites of 10 or less dwellings or less than 6 dwellings in designated areas. Toward the end of the statement is reference to the Vacant Buildings Credit which applies to brownfiield sites and the WMS and now NPPG confirms that the floorspace of any buidings to be demolished should be deducted from the calculation, i.e.
"The existing floorspace of a vacant building should be credited against the floorspace of the new development. For example, where a building with a gross floorspace of 8,000 square metre building is demolished as part of a proposed development with a gross floorspace of 10,000 square metres, any affordable housing contribution should be a fifth of what would normally be sought."
This would appear to indicate that for large sites with large volume buildings to be demolished would significantly reduce any affordable housing contribution and further more this would also be a step away from the aim of "support for small scale buildiers and self-builders"
The NPPG does not link the vacant buildings credit to sites of any particular size. I would be grateful to hear from anyone who has already considered this point
Ian Kilby
Will Morris, modified 7 Years ago.
RE: Vacant Buildings Credit
New Member Posts: 4 Join Date: 24/05/11 Recent PostsHi Ian,
Not sure I read it as relating to small scale builders etc as directly. The conclusion para says:
We expect implementation of these measures to have a significant positive impact on housing
numbers by unlocking small scale development and boosting the attractiveness of brownfield
sites.
That would seem to reference unlocking of small scale devmt and brownfield sites as two separate things. The NPPG also seems to back this up... 'National policy provides an incentive for brownfield development on sites containing vacant buildings.' Its not great wording in the Ministerial Statement either way!
Will.
As with the 10 unit threshold, the VBC is national policy to be given weight to. A decision maker may however decide, if there is an acute need for affordable housing locally, to apply significant weight to the development plan. In such a case the decision maker may conclude that a decision should be taken in accordance with the development plan, which could mean enforcing a requirement for affordable housing rather than applying the VBC.
The 10 unit threshold and the VBC have the same status, they are national policy. The Court of Appeal decision clarified that such policies should not be applied in a blanket fashion:
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2016/441.html
This article provides a useful take on the current VBC situation:
http://www.planninglawblog.com/vacant-building-credit-an-own-goal
Of those local authorities that are putting in place policies for calculating VBC, it is clear that there is no standard approach; others will be reviewing whether they apply VBC at all. The West Berkshire appeal confirmed that the VBC policy is a material consideration and is not capable of being applied in a “blanket” manner; many local authorities will be taking comfort from this, possibly even reviewing how Local Plan policies can be formulated to disapply VBC altogether.
VBC was introduced on the basis it would assist smaller developers deliver viable schemes, however the Government has failed again to build the necessary clarity into the guidance to ensure that it is only small developments which benefit from VBC.
Left to local authorities to put in place their own mechanisms provides no guarantee that VBC will assist those it was intended to; as a consequence VBC’s long-term impact on affordable housing remains potentially damaging at a time when the need for affordable homes remains critical, while the ability to rely on it to bring forward otherwise uneconomic schemes remains unclear.