Transcript Document

Why do we need more housing?
• The East Midlands Regional Plan is still in force, which
requires 510 houses to be built per annum between 2006
and 2026
• Although the Regional Plan is soon to be revoked by the
Localism Act, the latest Government’s projections which
reflect past migration trends suggest there is a need for
584 houses per annum to be built up to 2028
• To provide more up to date figures, a Housing
Requirements Study for the Derby Housing Market area
has been commissioned. It is likely that the figures
produced by this study for Amber Valley will not be less
than those required by the Regional Plan
How do we calculate how many
Strategic Sites to allocate?
Housing Requirement for the Borough, minus:
• All sites that have been granted planning permission since 2008
• All undeveloped suitable allocated sites in the existing Local
Plan
• An estimate of how many empty properties will be brought back
into use by 2028
• All smaller sites that have the potential to be suitable
• All brownfield sites that have the potential to be suitable for
housing, including poor quality employment sites
• Vacant public houses and associated land, vacant upper floors
to town centre properties etc.
Allocating strategic sites for housing
The Core Strategy process
Previously - All sites that individually or together could form a
potential strategic site were chosen from the Strategic Housing
Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA)
• Consultation on Options for Housing Growth – July/September
2011
Now – Consultation on the potential of a new local settlement at
Denby and ongoing technical work on identifying preferred sites
Future – Identification of preferred sites for further consultation –
Late Spring/early Summer 2012
• Plan submitted to central government – late 2012*
• Examination by an Independent Inspector – early 2013*
• Adoption of the Plan – mid/late 2013*
* Indicative dates
Why does the Core Strategy have
to look as far ahead as 2028?
Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3) requires Local
Planning Authorities to put in place policies and
strategies to enable a continuous supply of housing
for at least 15 years. Local authorities are required to
meet and seek to exceed their housing targets
Why does the Core Strategy have
to look as far ahead as 2028? cont..
Planning Policy Guidance Statement 12:
“The time horizon of the core strategy should be at least
15 years from the date of adoption”
“Core strategies represent a considerable body of work
and are intended to endure and give a degree of
certainty to communities and investors. In particular
they give a guide to where long term investment in
infrastructure should be made”…
“It is critical that core strategies are produced in a timely
and efficient manner. This is essential for the supply
of housing and other development to meet need”
What is the Strategic Housing Land
Availability Assessment (SHLAA)?
• Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing requires Local
Development documents to be based upon the findings of
Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessments
• Produced in 2008 following a ‘call for sites’. Renewed annually.
• Merely a long list of potential housing sites of all sizes, many of
which have very little prospect of becoming allocated sites
• It is not a site allocations document
• Inclusion of a site in the SHLAA in no way implies any decision
by the Council regarding its suitability. A site may have the
potential to become a housing site, but there may be many
reasons why it is not suitable and other sites are more suitable
Why can’t sites be removed from
the SHLAA?
CLG SHLAA Practice Guide 2007:
“The primary role of the Strategic Housing Land Availability
Assessment is to:
• Identify sites with potential for housing;
• Assess their housing potential; and
• Assess when they are likely to be developed
It should aim to identify as many sites with housing potential in and
around as many settlements as possible”
Why Can’t Sites be Removed from the
SHLAA? cont …
CLG SHLAA Practice Guide 2007:
“Except for more clear-cut designations such as Sites of Special
Scientific Interest, the scope of the Assessment should not be
narrowed down by *existing policies designed to constrain
development, so that the local planning authority is in the best
possible position when it comes to decide its strategy for
delivering its housing objectives”
*The Green Belt and greenfield policies in the Local Plan are
designed to constrain development
What would be the consequences
of removing sites from
consideration now?
• Threat of a legal challenge
• Could actively lead to a developer submitting a planning
application, which if refused could be won on appeal
• It would be very difficult to convince an Inspector at examination
that all options for housing growth had been thoroughly explored
• This would lead to the Core Strategy being found unsound,
which would be very expensive for taxpayers and lead to more
planning applications being submitted and won on appeal with
no proper consideration of what are the most suitable sites
Why are no brownfield sites being
considered at present?
• CLG Planning Policy Statement 12 requires that the Core
Strategy only allocates large strategic housing sites (normally
500+) and progress “should not be held up by the inclusion of
non strategic sites”. It is not a Site Allocations document.
• There are no vacant brownfield sites of this size available in the
Borough
• However, those brownfield sites that are considered to be
suitable will be allocated in a Site Allocations document that will
be produced shortly after the Core Strategy. The amount of
housing that can be provided from these brownfield sites will be
subtracted from the total amount of housing that is required as
determined by the Housing Requirements Study before deciding
what strategic sites will be allocated in the Core Strategy.
Why don’t you consider brownfield
sites first?
We always consider brownfield sites first, and in the past 10 years
85% of the housing in Amber Valley has been provided on
brownfield sites. It is due to this success that the number of
vacant brownfield sites in the Borough is now very limited.
Those brownfield sites we are aware of are being assessed, and
the number of houses that these sites can provide up to 2028
will be taken account of when we decide how many strategic
sites need to be allocated.
We are in discussions with potential developers of sites such as
Stevenson’s former Dye Works and Butterley Engineering
What can we do about sites that
have permission but have not yet
been developed?
• Not in the control of the Local Planning Authority
• However, there is the opportunity to re-negotiate
when permissions come up for renewal
• However, to not renew a permission would only
increase the demand to allocate other land for
housing and it would be highly likely that the site
promoter would win an appeal against the refusal of
permission
Conclusion
• The Council has always had a policy of allocating brownfield
land first – to not do so would be contrary to existing national
policy
• No decisions have been taken as to how much housing is
required and what strategic housing sites should come forward
as preferred sites
• To take any sites out of consideration until all sites have been
properly considered would be in breach of government
guidance, it would leave the Council open to a legal challenge
and could lead to the Core Strategy being found unsound