During the plenary debate on the housing task last Thursday, a new reality emerged in the House of Representatives. Grid congestion, industrial and grid-conscious building are becoming increasingly important ingredients in the already complicated cocktail of the housing task. The minister responsible promises improvement, but not at any cost.
In this article, we take you through three relevant discussions for the construction and installation industry during this debate.
Grid congestion as the biggest construction risk
Top of the list is the lack of available grid capacity. Grid congestion has grown into a many-headed monster that pops up in all parts of the country. Whereas previously it was mainly about nitrogen, several members of parliament, both on the left and on the right, warned that grid congestion in various regions is putting a direct brake on housing projects.
According to Habtamu de Hoop (Groenlinks-PvdA), grid congestion is currently a greater practical obstacle to housing construction than many other regulations. Also there was BBB MP Femke Wiersma, who explicitly asked Minister Mona Boekholt-O'Sullivan if she shares the concern that this problem is spreading nationwide. A resounding "Yes, I certainly share those concerns," was her answer to that question. Moreover, Boekholt-O'Sullivan indicated that she herself is conducting intensive consultations with grid operators to prevent new construction sites from being announced without adequate electricity capacity.
A striking statement from the minister followed: "I want to make sure, when we talk about new districts and large-scale housing locations, that I don't fall into the trap of arriving here very enthusiastically in the summer with four locations, only to find the following day that there are no connections at all." With these statements and the urgent discussion, the minister is sending out an important signal. Whereas for years grid capacity was primarily a technical issue, it now seems to be becoming a precondition for area development.
Chamber sees opportunities for prefab acceleration
A second notable discussion was about industrial building. For this, too, the lead came from the BBB. During the debate, Wiersma launched a proposal to recognize certified industrial building concepts nationwide. According to Wiersma, municipalities should not have to evaluate the same prefabricated concepts over and over again when they have been technically approved before.
She made explicit reference to concept builders such as Fijn Wonen. According to BBB, nationwide certification of both building concept and production process can lead to less paperwork, less pressure on municipal capacity and significantly shorter procedures.
D66 immediately concurred. MP Rob van Asten even asked whether municipalities should eventually be required to accept such certifications. "After all, if municipalities are still going to do it all themselves, we won't make much progress with a single national certification." For precast builders and concept developers, such a system could significantly speed up permit procedures.
Enthusiasm about grid-conscious building, concerns about affordability
That the overloading of our power grid is now towering on the political agenda is obvious. Grid capacity also comes up in the next topic. Grid-conscious construction is becoming increasingly important, and with good reason: because why put an extra burden on the grid if you can also design new homes and neighborhoods so that they put less strain on the electricity grid?
The minister left little room for interpretation of her position on the subject. "I am very much in favor of that," she said. According to her, standards are currently being researched to make grid-conscious construction easier. At the same time, Boekholt-O'Sullivan placed an important caveat. "We need to look very carefully at what this does to affordability. That is an emphatic part of the study. It's also crucial for feasibility, because otherwise it's a good idea but unaffordable."
Migration and affordable rent as familiar fault line
Of course, in addition to technology and feasibility, other issues were discussed. For example, it crackled along the familiar political fault lines. A fierce discussion ensued about the influence of migration on the housing shortage, with parties such as JA21 and FVD arguing that population growth further increases the housing challenge, while others pointed to years of inadequate public housing policy.
In addition, the future of the Affordable Housing Act, the leasing of rental housing, the role of investors, the financial position of housing associations and the mortgage interest deduction were hotly debated. Topics such as vacancy rates, housing for the elderly, land policy, building resources and the question of how to attract sufficient investment capital for new construction projects were also discussed.
Technology shifts to the center of housing policy
What was striking about this debate was that technical feasibility seems to be increasingly central to the political discussion about housing. Where previous debates often revolved around land prices, rent regulation or investors, this time it was about grid capacity, industrial building methods and smart energy solutions.
Meanwhile, behind the ideological clashes over migration, rent regulation, investors, corporations and the mortgage interest deduction, a new reality is taking shape. Whereas for years the political discussion revolved primarily around money and regulation, attention is increasingly shifting to practicability.
Can a new neighborhood still be connected to the power grid? Can prefabricated concepts speed up permit procedures? And will grid-conscious construction soon become the norm? It was precisely on these points that a remarkable amount of political agreement seemed to emerge during the debate, while on topics such as migration, rental policy and market forces, the trenches are still deep.
The message from the House and the cabinet thus seems clear: the housing crisis will be solved not only with more locations and more money, but also with a smarter power grid, faster building concepts and new ways of designing and installing.
Chamber feels more urgency than cabinet exudes
Virtually all opposition parties, from SP to GroenLinks-PvdA and JA21, outlined a sense of crisis and in doing so immediately cast doubt on the cabinet's pace of action. Whereas MPs repeatedly urged acceleration, Minister Boekholt-O'Sullivan, in her response, opted mainly for an administrative line. She repeatedly emphasized the importance of careful agreements with municipalities, corporations and other partners before new measures are introduced. That sounds administratively wise, but not revolutionary.
One exception is the net congestion dossier. Here the minister did take a clear stand and a clear urgency spoke from her answers. She warned that the cabinet should not present new housing developments that cannot then be connected to the electricity grid. With that, there seemed to be broad agreement during the debate about the technical challenges surrounding housing construction, but much less about whether the cabinet is making sufficient pace to actually meet the ambitious building goals.
Also read
-
t
- 'Building code needs a shake-up'
- Modular builders want to start building without final permit
- Builders are fed up with grid congestion bureaucracy
t
t
