#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
A
Z
Variety in urban living: innovation is key
Current
2020
list Article list

Variety in urban living: innovation is key

Posted 14.08.2023
By Make's residential sector team

In March 2023, Make invited leading UK voices in the residential industry – including architects, developers, investors, consultants, agents and market observers – to a roundtable discussion of new and long-standing issues affecting the urban housing sector. Here, we sum up our attendees’ final thoughts.

#

Problems with viability

Cost of funding and the price of land remain key obstacles to innovation. For one developer, “land is the only thing that should come down in price but never will because of the political situation. You’ve no option but to go for maximised site value. Otherwise, you don’t win.”

Planning slows development and makes programmes unpredictable, said another developer. More problematic is lack of certainty in the process. Finding viability in the current market is the biggest issue.

Development is “simply unviable” as interest rates and build costs soar. Factors include the erosion of margins by the Community Infrastructure Levy, S106 agreements, levels of affordable housing and, more recently, the requirement for second fire staircases.

“Margins are skinny, really skinny, in urban housebuilding. We will not see a lot happening,” said one developer.

These pressures throw up tough choices for planners and developers. “What’s better? Bigger private flats – for example, 3-beds – with less affordable housing, or boxes of 50m2 with more affordable housing?” asked a guest.

Do planners really have a grip on what their area needs? Many guests felt even when underpinned by research, policies are “three or four years out of date” by the time they’re enacted and often encourage a cookie-cutter approach.

There’s also the problem of timing. “By the time you get permission, the economic cycle is in a different place.”

#
 

Rising inequality

Given current levels of affordability, will young adults continue to buy homes, or will we see them switch to a more European model of long-term renting instead of ownership?

“No, I don’t think we will,” was the response from a build-to-rent (BTR) developer. “Renting your home is not the same as renting your phone, TV or car. We ask our tenants about their plans, and a huge number are on their way to buying.”

The UK’s shortage of all types of housing is driving more people into renting and increasing the cost of rents. Occupancy rates for new apartments are near 100%. However, “people seem happy with 50m2 apartments because it’s the only thing available,” was the BTR developer’s view.

It isn’t easy to sell BTR schemes to local authorities. “Every local authority we’ve gone to, particularly in London, says BTR’s a different model, worth a bit less than for-sale, so we get less affordable housing out of it.”

One size doesn’t fit all

The discussion kept returning to the difficulty of delivering profitable, suitable 3-bed homes in urban areas. Developers often provide three double bedrooms to meet planning requirements but don’t tailor them for families. They’re neither family homes nor fit for sharers, only an expedient to meet planning.

Developers’ response is that “we don’t want to do anything bespoke, because it might limit our market.” This can inadvertently lead to a one-size-fits-all approach that is oversized and therefore overpriced.

One solution is that 3-beds could be smaller – perhaps two single bedrooms, more workspace and a separate kitchen, for example. Likewise, a more tailored 2-bed could also be smaller – a master bedroom accompanied by a smaller bedroom that could double as a work room, study or nursery. Couples might prefer the flexibility of this spare room rather than a second bathroom.

The imperative is designing for specific groups to achieve variety and better values for the developer and the customer.

#
 

The pressures of short-termism

Would making more land available – through planning, enforced housing targets, sale of public land, and compulsory acquisition – enable or compel developers to innovate?

“If there was more land, values would come down. There would be more entrants and more differentiation,” felt one participant.

There are developers who choose to introduce more variety. “If your buyers are thinking there’s a scheme with all the amenities and another down the road without them, the choice becomes clearer.”

Often innovation boils down to looking at what the competition is planning and figuring out how to offer something different. “You might win extra value and get faster or sustained sales in difficult times.”

Speculation often drives land prices to levels that become unsustainable for projects. It’s a process that continues to inflate land values: one developer gives up and sells, and the next has to build a bigger scheme to compensate.

“We’re so attuned to low interest rates since 2008, but we’re in a different environment. Banks are talking about lending only 45% of development costs. Interest rates are 5%. Land cannot continue to grow in value,” said one guest.

If you have a site, and you’ve got bank debt, you’ve got to get on with it. Our investors have a three or four-year investment model. You don’t have time for refining the product. Trying to find evidence to support doing something innovative is hard.

#
 

Conclusion

The rise of longer-term projects – like BTR developments or new public housing – that require successful placemaking, sustained management and specific sources of funding will increase demand for better homes and places.

This might also deliver more stability in prices and rents, and in supply and demand, as more of a balance is achieved between renting and owning. This, in turn, will have a crucial impact on rising social inequality.

The generation inheriting the UK’s cities – and their attitudes to what’s right, wrong, equitable or good for the planet – will drive change.

It’s imperative for developers to find the right typologies for today’s young adults, who are increasingly renting. We need to create products that suit families, sharers and single-person households of all ages.

Placemaking and community-building are of particular importance when it comes to the delivery of new homes and neighbourhoods. We need to innovate to suit local need, designing and delivering home types that meet people’s needs across the spectrum of their lives. By the same measure, we need to avoid building non-specific homes that are bigger than people need or want, set in generic urban contexts.

#
 

Pursuing these principles can provide an edge in winning sites and generating extra margin. It could generate faster, more sustained sales, better prices and lower vacancy rates – especially if coupled with smarter, greener construction.

To win land, you have to innovate, not just count the numbers. You have to design new products that increase margins and reduce costs, make lasting places that sustain communities. In doing so, we can generate more value, of all varieties, for everyone.

 

This is the third of three articles summing up Make’s 2023 roundtable on urban living.