Couple of planning updates leading from the catch up call earlier. Re strategic sites, I mentioned the auto referral for schemes of over 150 dwellings which LPAs are going to refuse. Steve Reed (Housing Sec) stated: "Given the scale of the housing crisis, and the imperative of building the homes we need, I want to use these [call-in] powers in a more focused and active way”. Accordingly, LPAs will be required to notify the Housing Secretary of their intention to refuse an application for 150 homes or more. Once notified, the Housing Secretary will decide whether to take the application over. This kicks in from tomorrow. Potential helpful independent scrutiny ahead of a refusal. No idea how long this might take in practice though... Grey Belt - happy to talk to any of you more on this. I have one application running (120 units), one in pre-app (20) and two being prepared (160 and 10). Happy to talk requirements and risk. Whilst I'm on... I'd already flagged that application fees are going up by 3.8% on 1 April. I was at an event with the Chief Planner for England on Monday, and she relayed info about a potential new application fee scale. With costs only going one way, and a couple of worrying details... Consultation went live yesterday. See my LinkedIn post here for more info: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/nick-stafford_fees-for-planning-applications-share-7442147721324621824-BaGv?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAAVnzbMBopLmayIDgc_qomtPf3ja_fepEFY

As promised, I’ve uploaded all the documents I have on this site above. This one is openly marketed via Savills, so it’s not off-market. The edge here isn’t exclusivity — it’s interpretation. The Basics • Consent for 3 houses (still needs verifying but assume for now) • 2,400 - 2500 sq ft each • Small, manageable scheme • Executive end product End Values (My View) Conservative: ~£1.4m Strong market: up to ~£1.75m I would not underwrite this at the top end without strong evidence. Where I Think the Opportunity Sits 1. The GDV assumptions in the marketing feel optimistic in parts. 2. Build cost sensitivity is everything here. 3. If build cost per sq ft is controlled properly, there is margin. 4. If build costs drift — margin evaporates quickly. 5. This is not a lazy deal. It requires discipline. What I’d Be Stress Testing • Build cost per sq ft • Professional fees & abnormal allowances • Sales rate realism • Specification level vs achievable value Where I Think the Agent May Be Slightly Loose There are a couple of areas in the marketing material where I think assumptions are being presented as certainty. That’s our job — to challenge those. Sometimes value is created not by finding secret sites — but by spotting where numbers have been framed too confidently. My Early Traffic Light View......This is probably Amber. Not a walk-away and not a no-brainer. It becomes Green only if build cost discipline is real. I'm here to talk on the deal if of any interest.

I’ve been using the same site finance appraisal since I was 21. It’s detailed, it works, and I’ve shared it for years. It's here in the classroom btw... But the question I’m asking now is different....What if you could assess deals far more quickly, without losing the signal that actually matters? Not full feasibility. Not spreadsheets and hours of work. Just a fast, reliable way to assess the numbers and returns and decide: - worth digging into - or move on I’m exploring a much simpler appraisal that gives a clear Red / Amber / Green outcome, so time is spent on the right sites. So a quick question for those assessing deals regularly: - Does an Ai inspired workflow make you nervous? - or do you still want detail upfront, even if it slows things down? I know from talking to developers what my thoughts are.. But it's you we need to help and I've made it easy with a poll below...

I’ve now scheduled a weekly coffee hour in Skool for every Wednesday at 2pm (UK time/GMT). If you push the link in the calendar it puts a link in your diary as a reminder! There’s no agenda. No presentation. No pressure to attend. I’ll simply have the link open while I’m working. If someone drops in for a chat about a deal, a site, finance, or a problem they’re chewing over, great. This is another step to committing to the growth of the group, consistently. One day, one week, one month from now, someone will join for a chat, and that’s how real connections start. So: - Come along if you fancy it - Drop in for five minutes or fifty - Or ignore it completely and just know the door is open - No expectations. No awkwardness. Just a standing invitation. See you if you’re there.

They said something along the lines of: “When a genuinely good deal lands on your desk, your instinct isn’t to shout about it. Why would you? The last thing you want is to draw attention from competitors.” And they’re right. Most serious developers don’t broadcast deals. They quietly pressure-test them with a very small circle of trusted people — an architect, a planner, a broker, maybe one investor. People who can help improve the deal, not compete for it. That presents an interesting challenge for a community like this. If everyone feels they can only share deals once they’re fully de-risked, publicly identifiable, or already gone… we’ll never really talk about deals at all. So I want to be very clear about something. It is absolutely fine to use a masked or invented address here! No shame. No judgement. No need to explain yourself. If you want to call it “12 ABC Avenue” instead of the real site.... do it. If you want to change the town but keep the planning context, numbers, constraints, and strategy please do it. What matters is not the postcode. What matters is the thinking. This community works best when: - The deal logic is real - The numbers are real - The questions are real And the learning is shared with people who are here to help you think better, not to race you to the site. My hope is that this becomes a place where: - You can safely workshop a deal before it’s ready for the outside world - You can stress-test assumptions with people who understand development - You can improve outcomes without increasing risk So please don’t hold back because you’re worried about being “found out” for protecting your position. That instinct is sensible. We just need a structure that allows good conversations to happen anyway. If you’re ever working on something and unsure how to share it (real address or masked) post it and say what you want feedback on. That’s how this community gets useful.