Contact your Parish Council
MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
CABINET
21 NOVEMBER 2012
REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF CHANGE, PLANNING AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Report prepared by Rob Jarman and Sue Whiteside
1. CORE STRATEGY PROGRAMME
1.1 Issue for Decision
1.1.1 To consider
rescheduling the Core Strategy programme to allow time for officers to review
the robustness of the evidence base supporting the Council’s Core Strategy following
recent examination findings.
1.2 Recommendation of Director of Change, Planning and the Environment
1.2.1 That Cabinet agrees
the Core Strategy programme be rescheduled to take account of the need to review
the evidence base for the Core Strategy including the housing and employment
targets and the Council’s 5-year housing land supply.
1.3
Reasons
for Recommendation
1.3.1 The Publication draft
of the Core Strategy was due to be presented to Cabinet on 21 November 2012 for
approval to undertake the next stage of public consultation (regulation 19) in
December 2012. In parallel with the Core Strategy programme, the adoption of
the Integrated Transport Strategy was due to be considered at the same
meeting. The two documents are co-dependent because of the need for transport
infrastructure to support strategic site allocations.
1.3.2 In recent months a
number of core strategy examinations in other parts of the country have been
suspended because the presiding Inspectors were not satisfied with the evidence
supporting the local authorities’ housing and employment targets. The
implications arising from these suspensions need to be given full consideration,
particularly in the context of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), to
ensure the Council’s evidence base is robust enough to support Maidstone’s Core
Strategy at examination.
1.3.3 There also appears
to have been a shift at examination from locally determined targets to a
greater emphasis on meeting national projections. This includes greater
emphasis on demonstrating cross boundary working and also bearing in mind that
the South East Plan targets have still not been revoked.
1.3.4 The comments received
during recent consultations on the draft Core Strategy Strategic Site
Allocations and the draft Integrated Transport Strategy together with
representations submitted on Core Strategy policies in 2011 will be fully
considered as part of the review of the evidence base.
Unsound core strategies
1.3.5 Three key
Inspectors’ reports on core strategy examinations have been considered: Bath
& North East Somerset (June 2012), Salford (September 2012) and West
Berkshire (July 2012). The first two examinations have been suspended. Following
an initial examination suspension, the West Berkshire Core Strategy was on
balance found sound because of a substantial strategic land allocation that met
the aims of the NPPF in the short term. However, the West Berkshire Core Strategy
will be subject to an early review to address the Inspector’s outstanding
concerns.
Housing targets and the South East Plan
1.3.6 A common theme running
through all three Inspectors’ reports is the local authorities’ inadequate
demonstration of a realistically deliverable supply of housing land to meet
identified housing targets.
1.3.7 The National
Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published in March 2012 confirms that local
authorities can continue to draw on evidence submitted to regional strategies “supplemented
as needed by up-to-date, robust local evidence” (NPPF para 218). Whilst
acknowledging that core strategies needed to be in general conformity with
regional strategies, the Inspector for West Berkshire (in making specific
reference to the South East Plan) stated:
“The
SEP was not able to plan for all need and demand and it indicates (7.6-7.7)
that local planning authorities can test higher numbers through their
development plans. The SEP had a long evolution before its final approval in
2009 and much of the evidence dates from much earlier, eg 2004 household
projections. Its assessment of housing needs and demand is not therefore up to
date”.
Up-to-date demographic information
1.3.8 The West Berkshire Inspector
stipulated that the most up-to-date ONS based household projections (i.e. DCLG
published household projections 2008) should form part of any assessment of
housing need and demand.
Use of environmental constraints
1.3.9 The NPPF gives
emphasis to meeting objectively assessed needs, with sufficient flexibility to
adapt to changes, unless adverse environmental impacts can be demonstrated
(NPPF para 14). The Sustainability Appraisal/Strategic Environmental
Assessment for the West Berkshire Core Strategy did not fulfil this need
because the South East Plan target was assumed to be the local level of need,
whereas more up-to-date evidence demonstrated a greater need. Even where the
need for affordable housing is substantially greater than the annual average
for overall housing provision, the NPPF expects this need to be met in full
unless adverse environmental impacts can be demonstrated. Affordable housing
need must be given weight in assessing the overall level of housing need.
The SHMA and the Housing Market Area
1.3.10
The
NPPF requires local authorities to have a clear understanding of their housing
needs through the preparation of a Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA),
working with neighbouring authorities where housing market areas cross
administrative boundaries (NPPF para 159). Bath and North East Somerset had
failed to examine its housing market area, only looking within administrative
boundaries in its SHMA.
The integration of housing and employment targets
1.3.11
Strategies
for housing, employment and other land uses should be “integrated” and “take
full account of relevant market and economic signals” (NPPF para 158). The
Inspector for Bath and North East Somerset emphasised that this does not mean
there is justification for making this link the primary consideration because
there is not a linear link between homes and jobs (i.e. by the use of a
conversion factor). However, it is important to ensure that there are
sufficient workers to fill planned jobs or to achieve other objectives such as
a reduction in out commuting.
Maidstone’s housing target
1.3.12
In
2010 the government announced its intention to abolish regional strategies and,
although that decision was subsequently quashed following judicial review, the
revocation of regional strategies was pursued through the Localism Bill.
Despite the enactment of the Bill in 2011, the regional strategy for the south
east remains part of the development plan. It was in the context of the
proposed revocation of the South East Plan that the Council resolved to test the
regional spatial strategy housing target of 11,080 dwellings for the period
2006 to 2026. There was no nationally prescribed methodology to establish a
local target so the Council had a certain amount of freedom to develop its own
methodology.
MBC housing target – demographic evidence
1.3.13
Part
of the work to determine the local housing target comprised a series of demographic
and labour supply forecasts, which were commissioned from Kent County Council
(KCC), and published in October 2010. The dwelling based forecasts were
produced to gain an understanding of how the different dwelling targets would
correlate with population forecasts based on varying migration trends (i.e.
zero net migration, and 5/10/19 year migration trends). The forecasts used
2006 DCLG household projections which was the latest published data at that
time.
1.3.14
On
9 February 2011, Cabinet resolved to consult the public on a target of 10,080
homes in a dispersed pattern of development. Although the methodology used to
set the housing target was untested at examination, the target was supported by
demographic forecasts and the evidence submitted to the South East Plan
examination. The subsequent publication of the NPPF in March 2012 confirmed
that local authorities could continue to draw on evidence submitted to regional
spatial strategies, supplemented by up-to-date evidence (NPPF para 218).
New recent demographic data
1.3.15
However,
core strategy examination Inspectors are clearly placing little weight on the
evidence submitted to the regional spatial strategy examination, deeming it to
be out-of-date because of being based on 2004 household projections and, in the
absence of up-to-date evidence, are emphasising the need to use the latest 2008
base date DCLG household projections that were published in November 2010.
1.3.16
The
demographic and labour supply forecasts for Maidstone were published in October
2010 and were based on 2006 DCLG household projections which were the latest published
figures at that point. The forecasts are now being updated, using 2008 DCLG
household projections as part of the assessment, and the assumptions that feed
into the new demographic forecasting model now used by the County are being
scrutinised. This review must be undertaken before the Council proceeds to Publication
consultation on the Core Strategy and Submission.
The SHMA and the SHLAA
1.3.17
The
Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) was published in 2010 and
identified Maidstone as a single housing market area (HMA). The SHMA looked at
the extent of the HMA for Maidstone and concluded that, based on 2001 census
data and the results of the SHMA household survey, Maidstone borough had a
relatively high level of self containment. Taking account of the backlog of
need, the SHMA identified an affordable housing need that is double the Council’s
current annual housing target. Such a need clearly cannot be met in full.
1.3.18
The
Planning Inspectorate places great emphasis on the SHMA at examination, because
it is the key document which forms the basis for developing planning policies
by considering the characteristics of the housing market. Maidstone’s SHMA must
be updated to reflect 2011 census data and the latest demographic forecasts to ensure
it satisfies the NPPF requirement for local authorities to identify objectively
assessed needs (NPPF para 14). A review also offers the opportunity to
re-examine Maidstone’s HMA as part of the Council’s duty to cooperate, although
the outcome of a review may confirm Maidstone as a single HMA.
1.3.19
The
Maidstone Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) was prepared
in accordance with national guidance and was published in 2009. Since then the
Council has monitored SHLAA sites that have been granted planning permission
and acknowledged additional sites that have been submitted since the publication
date.
1.3.20
The
starting point for setting a dwelling target is the identification of housing
need through demographic forecasting and the SHMA. The next step is to
understand Maidstone’s capacity to deliver the identified need. This work will
be a crucial part of the evidence base if Maidstone were to be in a position of
having to justify a target lower than its identified need at examination. A
new SHLAA will be required, beginning with a borough wide call for sites, and followed
by an assessment and sustainability appraisal of all sites (similar to that
undertaken for potential strategic site allocations).
Economic development needs and SEDLAA
1.3.21
Maidstone’s
economic development land requirements must be integrated with its housing
needs, taking full account of market and economic conditions. The delivery of
sites to meet the borough’s identified needs and demand must be tempered by its
ability to deliver enough sustainable sites and to provide an adequate supply
of labour. This is particularly important in the context of a continued market
recession.
1.3.22
Further
work on employment demand is currently underway, in parallel with demographic
forecasts. To gain an understanding of the capacity of the borough’s economic
development land, a Strategic Economic Development Land Availability Assessment
(SEDLAA) should be undertaken alongside the SHLAA. This would also be followed
by an assessment and sustainability appraisal of potential sites.
Five year housing land supply
1.3.23
Each
year local authorities must demonstrate a 5-year supply of deliverable housing
sites. Maidstone has maintained a 5-year supply to 1 April 2011 but is
unlikely to meet this requirement from 1 April 2012. Although the Council
continues to experience high levels of dwelling completion rates on sites with
planning permission, the windfall sites on previously developed land that
formerly contributed towards this supply at a steady pace are no longer
materialising at the same rate. This issue must be addressed.
Implications of rescheduling the Core Strategy programme
1.3.24
Rescheduling
the Core Strategy programme will take the document’s Submission date beyond
March 2013, which is the end of the transitional period for local plans set out
in the NPPF. In April 2013, due weight will still be afforded to policies
adopted since 2004 according to their degree of consistency with the NPPF (NPPF
paras 214-215). Maidstone’s development plan document policies for affordable
housing and open space were adopted in 2006 so can be given due weight. Due
weight will also be given to emerging plans and policies depending on their
stage of preparation (NPPF para 216).
1.3.25
Given
the Inspectors’ reasons for suspending core strategy examinations, together
with the impacts of the recession and the need for up-to-date data, a rescheduling
of the programme is required to ensure the evidence supporting the Maidstone
Core Strategy is sound. To a large extent it is “business as usual” for the
development management process because the saved local plan policies used to
determine planning applications generally accord with the NPPF, and affordable
housing and open space policies are given (and will continue to be given) due
weight until such time as they are superseded by new policies. Furthermore, the
Council has had a good record of winning appeals since the NPPF has come into
effect.
1.3.26
Meanwhile,
successful consultations on the draft Core Strategy strategic site allocations and
the draft Integrated Transport Strategy were completed in October 2012. The
consultation events were very well attended, and the Council has received 2,654
comments from 1,170 individuals and organisations on the draft strategic site
allocations; and 594 individuals and organisations submitted 1,869 comments on
the draft transport strategy. The strategic site allocations policies will be
merged with the draft Core Strategy policies, and the document will be
appropriately amended as a result of the two consultations undertaken in 2011
and 2012. The Integrated Transport Strategy will be reviewed in the light of
comments received and amended accordingly, and will reflect any modifications
to the Core Strategy.
1.3.27
A
progress report on the Core Strategy, Integrated Transport Strategy and related
documents will be presented to Cabinet by March 2013.
1.4 Alternative Action and why not Recommended
1.4.1 Cabinet could resolve to proceed with the current Core Strategy programme and to not review the evidence base supporting its housing and employment targets. This approach is not recommended because of the exceptionally high risk that, without up-to-date evidence to support its targets, the Core Strategy will not be found sound.
1.5 Impact on Corporate Objectives
1.5.1 The Core Strategy assists in delivering the Council’s objectives of economic prosperity and providing for decent housing.
1.6
Risk
Management
1.6.1 Rescheduling the Core Strategy programme to build in time to assess the robustness of the evidence base for housing and employment targets will minimise the risk of the Core Strategy being found unsound at examination. If the Core Strategy is found unsound there would be cost implications for the Council.
1.7 Other Implications
1.7.1
1. Financial
|
X
|
2. Staffing
|
X
|
3. Legal
|
X
|
4. Equality Impact Needs Assessment
|
|
5. Environmental/Sustainable Development
|
|
6. Community Safety
|
|
7. Human Rights Act
|
|
8. Procurement
|
X |
9. Asset Management
|
|
1.7.2 There is an initial
requirement for further consultants’ reports on demographic forecasting and
employment demand, which can be funded through the LDF budget. A new Strategic
Housing Market Assessment would require a re-profiling of the LDF budget but
the Strategic Housing and Economic Development Land Availability Assessments
can be undertaken in-house. Consultants are appointed in accordance with the
Council’s procurement procedures.
1.7.3 The assessment of the evidence base and management of new work streams can be accommodated within the existing staff structure. Legal advice will be sought on the issues arising from the Inspectors’ reports, and will continue to be sought at each stage of the plan making process.
1.8
Relevant
Documents
Report
on the Examination into the West Berkshire Core Strategy (July 2012) http://www.westberks.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=31491&p=0
Bath & North East Somerset Core Strategy Examination: Inspector’s
Preliminary Conclusions on Strategic Matters and Way Forward (June 2012) https://consultations.southglos.gov.uk/gf2.ti/f/251202/7331269.1/PDF/-/RD68%20BANES%20CS%20Inspectors%20Preliminary%20conclusions.pdf
Salford Core Strategy Examination Inspector’s Report (September 2012) http://www.salford.gov.uk/d/120926_Letter.pdf
1.8.1 Appendices
None.
1.8.2 Background
Documents
None.
IS THIS A KEY DECISION REPORT?
Yes No
If yes, when did it first appear in the Forward Plan?
This is a Key Decision because
Wards/Parishes affected
|