Agenda item

Our approach to our housing land supply shortfall in advance of the new LDP: dealing with unallocated sites

The purpose of this meeting is to discuss two related topics.  Firstly, to seek Members’ views on affordable housing delivery, to feed into a Welsh Government call for evidence.  Secondly, to discuss the Council’s approach to housing delivery in advance of the new LDP, with specific reference to our lack of a five year housing land supply and consideration of unallocated sites for development.  The latter topic will come to Council on 20th September 2018 for a decision, but Member input beforehand would be valued.

 

Minutes:

Context:

 

To consider the Authority’s approach to tackling its housing land supply shortfall, specifically how it deals with planning applications for unallocated sites in advance of the new LDP being adopted in December 2021.  This matter will be considered by Council on 20th September 2018 for a decision on the Council’s position.

 

Key Issues:

 

Some of the challenging issues and opportunities facing Monmouthshire’s communities over coming years, include:

 

·         The increasing proportion of Monmouthshire’s population aged over 65 and over 85, increasing well in excess of the Wales average.

 

·         The relative absence of 20-40 year olds and Monmouthshire’s median age of 48 years (compared to a median age of 34 years in Cardiff).

 

·         The resulting impact of the above two factors on Monmouthshire’s economic base and future prospects of economic growth.

 

·         Cardiff Capital Region City Deal and associated opportunities.

 

·         The economic growth of the Bristol / South West region and the opportunities for Monmouthshire as a border county.

 

·         The imminent removal of the Severn Bridge tolls.

 

·         Monmouthshire’s average house price now exceeding £300,000.

 

·         Monmouthshire’s affordable housing waiting list of 3000+.

 

·         Monmouthshire’s dual economy, with high-earning residents who work elsewhere, and a low paid workforce that lives elsewhere but works within the County.

 

·         Associated commuting patterns, with 40% of Monmouthshire’s economically active resident population commuting out of county.

 

·         The challenges of rural isolation and sustaining rural services.

 

·         The wealth of social capital in Monmouthshire’s communities.

 

·         Monmouthshire’s well-performing schools.

 

·         The beautiful landscapes and heritage that make Monmouthshire special.

These factors will be key considerations as the vision and strategy for Monmouthshire’s new Local Development Plan (LDP) is developed.  However, consideration needs to be given to what can be done in the interim (between now and December 2021).

 

Options Appraisal

 

There are two options: 

 

·         The first option is that the Authority gives no weight in its planning decisions to its lack of a five year housing land supply. This means that the Authority retains a Plan-led system, and proposed development on sites not allocated within the current LDP will be unacceptable in principle and planning permission would be refused.  This option is essentially process-focused and would provide certainty to Monmouthshire’s communities in that the current LDP would be adhered to.  Development in other areas could come forwards via the new LDP, and planning permission could be sought in 2022 onwards.

 

·         The second option is that the Authority gives some weight in its planning decisions to its lack of a five year housing land supply.  This could be anywhere from ‘none’ to ‘considerable weight’.  This option is essentially outcome-focused and would seek to make timely progress in tackling some of the issues identified.

 

Member Scrutiny:

 

·         Monmouthshire currently has a 3.9 year land supply.

 

·         It is important to give considerable weight to look at and consider new sites as they arise.

 

·         Affordable housing is needed across the whole of the County.

 

·         Freedom should remain for smaller unallocated sites to be brought forward for consideration by the Planning Committee for development.  This will help in delivering local affordable housing needs within villages.  This matter could be looked at in the next LDP.

 

·         The hybrid option, (2(e) in the report, provides flexibility around development of the rural areas and the main towns providing a more balanced approach.

 

·         Obtaining 35% affordable housing provision is essential.

 

·         Adopting the ground rules identified in the report provides more flexibility within the County.

 

·         The intention of the 60/40 sites was to deliver affordable housing in and around Monmouthshire’s main villages. The policy allows for rural exception sites around main villages.

 

·         The next LDP will include small scale developments.

 

·         The Welsh Government Cabinet Secretary recognises that there is pressure on local planning authorities and communities from speculative development on unallocated sites.

 

·         A Member stated that the Authority should be considering that no weight should be given to the lack of a five year land supply and only some weight should be given if there are various options that are met. The advantages of this approach, by determining the weight that is given, gives the option to follow the current LDP and argue that no weight should be given to unsuitable developments. It was considered that not all issues had been addressed and the Member was not content with the approach being taken.  In relation to the five year land supply, comparing Monmouthshire with other authorities in Wales, Monmouthshire is in a better position than other authorities. It was considered that a better approach would be to be plan led rather than developer led.  The Head of Planning, Housing and Place Shaping informed the Committee that the figures outlined in the presentation were correct.  The next LDP will provide opportunities to do things differently via different models.

 

·         The next LDP needs to include sites for cemeteries within the County.

 

·         Where 60/40 sites have not come forward, this is due to landowners aspirations.

 

·         Highways capacity, school infrastructure and Air quality are some of the factors that will be factored into the new LDP.

 

 

 

Committee’s Conclusion:

 

·         There is a need for more affordable housing across the County. The Authority cannot afford to take forward a shortfall of housing provision to the next LDP without trying to address some of the issues in the interim.

 

·         Smaller development sites need to be considered to encourage smaller developers to come forward.

 

·         Challenge the 60/40 concept and the affordability factor as a part of the LDP review.

 

 

 

·         There are challenges regarding infrastructure, particularly in the south east of the County in terms of being impacted by the Forest of Dean and Gloucestershire.

 

·         There are also practical infrastructure implications, such as the need to consider suitable locations for cemeteries in the new LDP.

 

Recommendation to Council on 20th September 2018:

 

Option 2(e) - a hybrid of options 2(a)-(d), as outlined in the report, namely to allow otherwise acceptable development on unallocated sites throughout the County, with the extent of housing reflecting the current LDP’s spatial strategy.  In other words, the Main Towns would see a greater level of potential growth than Rural Secondary Settlements.

 

In response to a question raised by a member regarding paragraph 4.4 of the report in respect of the ground rules, the Head of Planning, Housing and Place Shaping stated that he would liaise with the Head of Law regarding this matter.

 

It was proposed by County Councillor R.G. Harris and seconded by County Councillor J. Becker that the Joint Select Committee supports Option 2(e) - a hybrid of options 2(a)-(d), as outlined in the report, namely to allow otherwise acceptable development on unallocated sites throughout the County, with the extent of housing reflecting the current LDP’s spatial strategy.  In other words, the Main Towns would see a greater level of potential growth than Rural Secondary Settlements.

 

Upon being put to the vote, the following votes were recorded:

 

In favour of the proposal     -     8

Against the proposal           -     1

Abstentions                         -     1

 

The proposition was carried.

 

We recommended to Council that consideration be given to supportingOption 2(e) - a hybrid of options 2(a)-(d), as outlined in the report, namely to allow otherwise acceptable development on unallocated sites throughout the County, with the extent of housing reflecting the current LDP’s spatial strategy.  In other words, the Main Towns would see a greater level of potential growth than Rural Secondary Settlements, as the Joint Select Committee supports this option.

 

 

 

Supporting documents: