MAIDSTONE BOROUGH COUNCIL
Planning, Transport and Development Overview & Scrutiny Committee
Tuesday 17 September 2013
REPORT OF HEAD OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Report prepared by Sue Whiteside
1. Five Year Housing Land Supply
1.1 Issue for Consideration
1.1.1 To consider the
methodology of and the judgements made in the calculation of the council’s five
year housing land supply. A PowerPoint presentation will be given at the
meeting, to further clarify the methodology used for calculating the various
elements that contribute to land supply and the judgements which have been
applied.
1.2
Reason
for Urgency
1.2.1 This item is considered urgent as it will support the Committee in its deliberations. The item was not available earlier due to insufficient time between the request for the meeting and agenda publication.
1.3 Recommendation of Head of Planning and Development
1.3.1 That Planning, Transport & Development Overview and Scrutiny Committee recommends to Council that the methodology and judgements that have been made to calculate the council’s five year housing land supply are sound.
1.4
Reasons
for Recommendation
1.4.1 At a meeting held
on 2 September 2013, full Council approved a motion that the Planning,
Transport & Development Overview and Scrutiny Committee scrutinise the
methodology and judgements made in calculating the council’s five year housing
land supply.
1.4.2 Why the council
must demonstrate a five year housing land supply
1.4.3 At any given point
in time the council has a duty to maintain a five year supply of housing land
against its housing target. In the absence of a five year supply, the
presumption in favour of sustainable development set out in the National
Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) prevails.
“To boost significantly the supply of housing, local planning authorities
should … identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites
sufficient to provide five years worth of housing against their housing
requirements with an additional buffer of 5% (moved forward from later in the
plan period) to ensure choice and competition in the market for land. Where
there has been a record of persistent under delivery of housing, local planning
authorities should increase the buffer to 20% (moved forward from later in the
plan period) to provide a realistic prospect of achieving the planned supply
and to ensure choice and competition in the market” (NPPF paragraph 47).
“To be considered deliverable, sites should be available now, offer a suitable
location for development now, and be achievable with a realistic prospect that
housing will be delivered on the site within five years and in particular that
development of the site is viable. Sites with planning permission should be
considered deliverable until permission expires, unless there is clear evidence
that schemes will not be implemented within five years, for example they will
not be viable, there is no longer a demand for the type of units or sites have
long term phasing plans” (NPPF paragraph 47 footnote 11).
“Local planning authorities may make an allowance for windfall sites in the five-year supply if they have compelling evidence that such sites have consistently become available in the local area and will continue to provide a reliable source of supply. Any allowance should be realistic having regard to the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment, historic windfall delivery rates and expected future trends, and should not include residential gardens” (NPPF paragraph 48).
“Windfall sites: Sites which have not been
specifically identified as available in the Local Plan process. They normally
comprise previously-developed sites that have unexpectedly become available”
(NPPF Glossary).
“Housing applications should be considered
in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development.
Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date
if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of
deliverable housing sites” (NPPF paragraph 49).
1.4.4 Paragraph 14 of the
NPPF makes clear that the presumption in favour of sustainable development for
decision making means granting planning permission where a development plan is
absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, unless any significant and
demonstrable adverse impacts from the development would outweigh the benefits,
or specific policies in the NPPF would indicate development should be
restricted. Policies are not considered to be up-to-date if the council cannot
demonstrate a five year supply of housing land.
Methodology used for calculating five year housing land supply
1.4.5 Five year housing
land supply is updated annually at 1 April each year. The calculation takes
account of dwellings that have been built (also referred to as completions),
planning permissions that have not been fully implemented, land allocations in
local plans and, if evidence supports their inclusion, windfall sites.
1.4.6 Five year calculations
are currently based on the former South East Plan housing target for Maidstone of
11,080 for the period 2006 to 2026, which has been tested through public
examination. Legal advice has confirmed this is the correct interim target to
use for five year supply calculations.
1.4.7 The five year land supply
position is updated annually and included in the council’s Annual Monitoring
Reports (AMR). These reports are given consideration each year at meetings of a
Member Advisory Group or Overview & Scrutiny before being approved by
Cabinet Member.
1.4.8 For the purpose of
explaining the methodology for the calculation, the table set out in the latest
published AMR for 2011/2012 has been used. This document was considered by the
Spatial Planning Strategy Advisory Group on 22 January 2013 and was approved by
the Cabinet Member for Planning, Transport and Development on 8 February 2013.
|
|
Housing Target 2006-2026 |
11,080 |
|
1 |
Residual target after deducting 4,250 dwellings that were completed between 2006/07 and 2011/12 |
6,830 |
|
2 |
Annual target over remainder of plan period (residual target divided by 14 years remaining to 2026) |
488 |
|
3 |
Annual target including 5% buffer |
512 |
|
4 |
5 year housing land supply target (annual target x 5 years) |
2,439 |
|
5 |
5 year housing land supply target (annual target x 5 years) including 5% buffer |
2,561 |
|
6 |
5 year housing land supply 2012/13 to 2016/17 |
1,983 |
|
7 |
5 year supply of housing land as a percentage of the target at 1 April 2012 |
77 |
|
8 |
Number of years housing land supply at 1 April 2012 |
3.9 |
Table 1: Five year Housing Land Supply 1
April 2012 (Annual Monitoring Report 2011/12)
1.4.9 To calculate the
5-year target, the cumulative total number of dwellings completed since the
base date of the plan period is first deducted from the 20-year plan target (11,080
less 4,250 = 6,830) (line 1). As part of the monitoring process, an annual
survey of all sites with planning permission is undertaken each April to establish
how many dwellings have been completed in the previous year. In the example
above there is a total of 6 years’ worth of completions so there will be 14
years remaining to the end of the plan period. Thus, the balance of 6,830
dwellings needs to be built over the remaining 14 years of the plan period.
This represents an annual average of 488 dwellings (6,830 ÷ 14 = 488) (line 2).
1.4.10
Maidstone
has a good record of delivery against past housing targets so a 5% buffer is
appropriate to meet NPPF requirements (488 x 105% = 512) (line 3). The annual
target of 512 dwellings is multiplied by 5 years to establish the council’s 5-year
housing target of 2,561 dwellings[1] (line 5).
1.4.11
To
demonstrate how the council can meet this 5-year target, the council must
examine the elements of its housing land supply (line 6). The supply comprises
sites with planning permission at 1 April 2012 where dwellings have either not
started or are under construction (all dwellings recorded are net of any
dwelling losses), together with sites allocated in the Maidstone Borough-wide
Local Plan 2000 that had not been granted planning permission at 1 April 2012.
In 2012, the supply calculation also included a small number of previously developed
sites (brownfield land) identified through the Strategic Housing Land
Availability Assessment 2009 (SHLAA).
|
Sites with planning permission at 1 April 2012 |
1,433 |
|
Maidstone Borough-wide Local Plan 2000 allocations |
468 |
|
SHLAA 2009 previously developed sites |
82 |
|
Total |
1,983 |
Table 2: Housing Land Supply 2012/13 to
2016/17
1.4.12
All
planning permissions down to sites of one dwelling are surveyed annually. For
each site of 5 units or more, the planning agents/ developers are contacted to
confirm that their site is deliverable (NPPF paragraph 47 footnote 11) within
five years from the base date of the calculation, i.e. between 1 April 2012 and
31 March 2017 in the case of the example being used to demonstrate the
methodology. Where it is clear that schemes will not be built within five
years, the dwellings are removed from five year supply. The breakdown of the
list of sites that contribute to the total of 1,433 dwellings is attached at
Appendix A.
1.4.13
Planning
agents and developers were also contacted to discuss the phasing of allocated
sites in the Maidstone Borough-wide Local Plan 2000. Sites included Land west
of Eccleston Road; Hook Lane, Harrietsham and Oliver Road, Staplehurst; and a
proportion of the dwellings from Langley Park and East of Hermitage Lane. All
of these sites contributed 468 dwellings to five year supply. With the
exception of Eccleston Road, the sites are greenfield allocations in the
Maidstone Borough-wide Local Plan 2000. Hook Lane and Oliver Road were permitted
as exceptions to a moratorium on the release of allocated greenfield sites, for
reasons set out in Planning Committee reports. A proportion of the yields from
Langley Park and Hermitage Lane were included in the latter years of five year
supply in the expectation that these sites would be the first to come forward
following the adoption of the local plan.
1.4.14
Three
brownfield sites were identified through the 2009 SHLAA, yielding 82 dwellings:
Brunswick Street; Smarden Road, Headcorn; and Syngenta Phase 1, Yalding.
1.4.15
Consequently
at 1 April 2012 the council could only demonstrate the ability to meet 77%
of its five year housing land target (supply of 1,983 ÷ target of 2,561 x
100) (line 7). This represented 3.9 years of housing land (supply of 1,983
÷ annual requirement including 5% buffer of 512) (line 8). Regard was given to
the option to include windfall sites in five year supply, but were excluded for
the reasons set out in this report.
1.4.16
Since
the five year housing land target and the sites that contribute towards supply
are updated annually, some of the sites identified in the example used in this
report will have been built since 1 April 2012 or received planning permission.
As the calculation is rolled forward to reflect these changes, the target is updated
to a new base date and new previously unidentified planning permissions are
added to supply. Whilst the figures change at 1 April 2013 (85% of the 5-year
housing target, representing 4.2 years of land supply), the methodology is
fundamentally the same.
Judgements made in the calculation of the council’s five year housing land
supply
1.4.17
Local
authorities may, at their discretion, include an allowance for windfall
calculations in their five year housing land supply, but only if there is
compelling evidence to support this approach.
1.4.18
There
has been no fundamental change in national policy with regard to a local
authority’s discretion to include windfall sites in five year housing land
supply following the introduction of the NPPF. Former Planning Policy
Statement 3: Housing (PPS3) stated:
“Allowances for windfalls should not be included in the first 10 years of
land supply unless Local Planning Authorities can provide robust evidence of
genuine local circumstances that prevent specific sites being identified. In
these circumstances, an allowance should be included but should be realistic
having regard to the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment, historic
windfall delivery rates and expected future trends” (PPS3 paragraph 59).
Windfall sites are those which have not been specifically identified as
available in the local plan process. They comprise previously-developed sites
that have unexpectedly become available. These could include, for example,
large sites resulting from, for example, a factory closure or small sites such
as a residential conversion or a new flat over a shop (PPS3 paragraph 59
footnote 31).
1.4.19
For
clarity, in the context of determining past windfall rates, the “local plan
process” comprises the SHLAA which informs the local plan land allocations.
1.4.20 In its calculation of its five year housing land supply the council has exercised its discretion to exclude future windfall sites for several reasons.
· All sites down to one unit (net) are monitored;
· Planning agents and developers are contacted to discuss the phasing of all outstanding planning permissions on sites of 5 units or more (net);
· Previously developed sites identified through the 2009 SHLAA have been included in calculations; and
·
Sites
with planning permission that are unlikely to be delivered within five years
are removed from the calculation.
1.4.21
The
NPPF states that local authorities may make an allowance for windfall
sites but it does not say that they should. The decision is left to the
local authority’s discretion to include a windfall allowance provided there is
compelling evidence to support the approach. A windfall allowance coupled with
the depth of assessment of the council’s land supply runs a high risk of double
counting dwellings.
1.4.22
Kent
County Council acknowledged the risk of double counting through the inclusion
of windfall sites in five year calculations in its final publication ‘Kent –
KCC Area Housing Information Audit 2007/08: Housing land supply from
unidentified sources (windfalls) report’ (Appendix B). The report was written
pre-NPPF, but some of the points are still valid. The County makes clear that
the information contained in the report is for “discussion, consideration
and information purposes” to assist local authorities in making informed
decisions regarding the release of deliverable sites and that the information
could be used to support longer term housing land assessments. ‘Extant
figures’ are dwellings with planning permission that have not yet started to be
built or are under construction. A planning permission lasts for 3 years.
· “Extant figures represent land supply at a particular point in time (31st March each year). They are based and phased on the years monitoring data.
· The advantage may not always be in favour of using small site extant permissions over windfall estimates.
· Extant figures have a short and finite life span; they will cease to be included in the land at the expiry date of the permission (Current 3 years).
· They will be phased for the short term rather than considered for long term planning (If a small ‘windfall’ site is developed it is usually completed within 5 years of the permission being granted).
·
Extant
figures cannot be used as well as ‘windfalls’ if this happened there will be an
element of double counting” (Extract from KCC Area Housing Information Audit
2007/08).
1.4.23
The
council’s five year housing supply includes extant figures but excludes
windfall sites so there is no risk of double counting. This is because, for
example, an unidentified site on previously developed land which is granted
planning permission after 1 April 2012 will be included in the rolling five
year supply calculation at 1 April 2013 as an extant permission.
1.4.24
For
the same reasons that a windfall contribution is not included in the five year calculation,
a discount rate is not introduced for the non-implementation of planning
permissions that contribute towards supply, i.e. for permissions that ultimately
may not materialise. The use of a non-implementation discount is not addressed
by the NPPF but there must be a reasonable balance. If a local authority goes
to great lengths to quantify the unexpected windfall contribution, then it
should be reasonable to factor in a discount for planning permissions that will
not be built within the five years.
1.4.25
A
moratorium on the release of greenfield sites allocated in the Maidstone
Borough-wide Local Plan 2000 was introduced as a result of former national
planning guidance that led to the production of the council’s Urban Capacity
Study in 2002 and its update in 2006. The Studies identified previously
developed land that had potential for housing redevelopment. The 2009 SHLAA
also identified previously developed sites with housing potential, in addition
to greenfield sites. Consequently, for the past 13 years the council has been
relying on identified previously developed land as a major contributor towards
its rolling 5-year supply of housing land. This has been possible through the
granting of planning permission for the majority of the unconstrained sites
identified in the Urban Capacity Studies, many of which were located within and
adjacent to the town centre and have been redeveloped for flats at very high
densities.
1.4.26
Windfall
calculations are not a pure arithmetic extrapolation of past trends based on
past completion rates. An element of judgement has to be used. On 13 February
2013, Kent County Council produced a schedule of estimated completions of large
and small “unidentified sites” for all Kent districts between 1991/92 and [for
Maidstone] 2010/11 (Appendix C). This table has been populated by Maidstone
Borough Council data from the annual housing land availability surveys. The
total of 332 dwellings for Maidstone comprises all completed units on
previously developed sites that have not been allocated in a local plan. To
include an allowance for this level of windfalls in the council’s five year
supply would most likely result in double counting because the supply
calculation (table 1) includes an assessment of all extant planning permissions
at 1 April 2012. The same reasons for excluding windfall sites from five year
supply apply at April 2013, especially as the council is producing an up-to-date
SHLAA and making land allocations in the emerging Maidstone Borough Local Plan,
some of which will be completed within the next five years.
1.4.27
There
is no compelling evidence that past windfall rates will continue to materialise
at the same rates in the next five years or that they would provide a reliable
source of supply. In fact, although completion rates in Maidstone have remained
high[2], planning
permissions on previously unidentified sites are not materialising at the same
rates as before.
1.4.28
The
council has historically included a windfall element in the latter years of its
20-year housing trajectories where land supply is far less predictable, but the
trajectory is not the same calculation as that for five year supply.
1.4.29
The
rigorous assessment of the council’s housing land supply and the identification
of sustainable development sites continues, through two recent calls for sites
together with an assessment of previously developed urban sites for the
emerging new SHLAA, which will support the proposed allocation of sites in the
consultation draft of the Maidstone Borough Local Plan. This will cover
numerous housing sites down to five units. Meanwhile, all sites that are
granted planning permission between 1 April 2013 and 31 March 2014 will help to
address the council’s shortfall in five year housing land supply when the
calculation is rolled forward at 1 April 2014. It is important to understand,
however, that all components of the calculation will be updated including an
additional year of the housing target.
Counsel Advice
1.4.30
At
the meeting of the Maidstone Borough Council on 2 September 2013 the council’s
legal advice on housing land supply and windfall allowance was attached to the
agenda (attached at Appendix D of this report). The advice concludes:
“There is no doubt that officers correctly understood paragraphs 47 and 48
of the NPPF. They were well aware that a windfall allowance can be included if
there is compelling evidence to do so. The core of the NPPF policy is for
councils to identify sites which will deliver housing and in that sense
including a windfall allowance is against the grain of policy. It is possible
to include an allowance, but in this instance officers were not convinced there
was the compelling evidence to do so for the 5 year housing supply
calculations”.
Conclusion
1.4.31
Until
very recently, the council has been able to demonstrate a five year supply of
housing land but, using the methodology outlined in this report, it was not the
case at 1 April 2012 or at 1 April 2013. The presumption if favour of
sustainable development (NPPF paragraph 14) prevails.
1.4.32
The
NPPF does not state that it is mandatory to make an allowance for windfall
sites in five year housing land supply calculations. There is no compelling
evidence for the council to do so. Consequently, there is no risk of double
counting projected windfalls and extant planning permissions.
1.4.33
The
council has sought advice from its own specialist Planning Counsel, which has
endorsed the position on how five year housing land supply has been calculated,
including the exclusion of a windfall site contribution.
1.4.34
Sites
granted planning permission since 2013 will count towards five year supply as
the calculation is rolled forward.
1.4.35
The
Committee will receive a PowerPoint presentation at the meeting that will
further clarify the methodology used for calculating five year supply and the
judgements applied. This report is to assist the Committee in their
deliberations, and it seeks a recommendation to Council that the methodology
and judgements that have been made to calculate the council’s housing land
supply are sound.
1.5 Alternative Action and why not Recommended
1.5.1 Members could conclude and advise Council that they are not satisfied that the methodology used and judgements applied in calculating the 5 year supply are sound.
1.6 Impact on Corporate Objectives
1.6.1 A sound and robust methodology used to calculate the council’s five year housing land supply is crucial, in order for Members and Officers involved in the development management process to make proper decisions on planning applications. This supports the objective of corporate and customer excellence.
1.7 Risk Management
1.7.1 There is a risk
that a flawed methodology underpinning the calculation of five year housing
land supply could result in an over or under estimation of the council’s
position, which would lead to unsound decisions on planning applications by
Members and Officers, which could lead to those decisions being judicially
reviewed. Scrutiny of the methodology for the calculation to the Council’s
satisfaction will mitigate this risk.
1.8 Other Implications
1.8.1
|
1. Financial
|
X |
|
2. Staffing
|
|
|
3. Legal
|
X |
|
4. Equality Impact Needs Assessment
|
|
|
5. Environmental/Sustainable Development
|
|
|
6. Community Safety
|
|
|
7. Human Rights Act
|
|
|
8. Procurement
|
|
|
9. Asset Management
|
|
1.8.2 Legal services have been retained to advise the council on the robustness of its methodology for the calculation of five year housing land supply. Provision for legal advice has been made within the local plan budget.
1.9
Relevant
Documents
National
Planning Policy Framework 2012 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf
Annual Monitoring Report 2011/12 http://www.maidstone.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/21673/Annual-Monitoring-Report-2011-12.pdf
Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing June 2011 http://www.housinglin.org.uk/_library/Resources/Housing/Policy_documents/PPS3.pdf
Maidstone Borough Council Agenda 2 September
2013 http://meetings.maidstone.gov.uk/documents/g2049/Public%20reports%20pack%2002nd-Sep-2013%2018.30%20Council.pdf?T=10
Appendices
Appendix A: Sites with planning permission and five year phasing 2011/12
Appendix B: KCC Area Housing Information Audit 2007/08
Appendix C: KCC schedule of estimated completions of large and small
unidentified sites for all Kent districts between 1991/92 and [for Maidstone]
2010/11
Appendix D: Maidstone Borough Council Housing Land Supply & Windfall
Allowance Advice Note
Background Documents
None
|
IS THIS A KEY DECISION REPORT? THIS BOX MUST BE COMPLETED
Yes No
If yes, this is a Key Decision because: ……………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Wards/Parishes affected: …………………………………………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
|
||||||||||||
