Cora’s Post

The Highland Council met today (Thursday 14 December 2023) and agreed to a new approach to future strategic Capital Planning to enable the Council to determine priorities for capital spend and help to accelerate #assetrationalisation. The Council owns more than 3,500 assets and is conducting a full review of its asset base in light of significant challenges in maintaining its estate, which includes schools, public buildings and offices, roads, bridges, parks, and monuments. This will map current Council and partnership provision. The approach will bring better coordination, strategic oversight and direction and improved utilisation of available capital and revenue budgets. Chair of Housing and Property, Cllr Glynis Campbell Sinclair said: “The Council owns a vast number of properties and other assets, and it is time critical that we reduce, manage and improve the functionality and efficiency of each. This work, together with the proposed land audit, will help us to reduce our costs, seize economic opportunities and maintain risk appropriately. “We are facing incredible cost pressures in the shape of inflation, high rates of interest, reduced funding and inflated construction costs which together are all extremely challenging. Our #property maintenance and energy costs far outweigh the available budget. “This approach outlines robust methodology to assess need and risk, will enable us to better streamline our assets and align them to ensure effective and sustainable public service delivery in #Highland.”

The year to March 2024 saw the fewest new housing sites receive planning permission in any 12-month period since data collection began in 2006. 📉 The strategic shift in the planning system over the last two years has resulted in fewer homes being planned for, shaking confidence, reducing investment and painting a bleak picture for future housing supply. To stop this downward trend, our blueprint for the next government suggests… 🔹 Ringfencing planning application fees for planning purposes. 🔹 Increasing the threshold for reserved matters submissions to be determined by committee. 🔹 Introducing a presumption of favour of development of small sites. 🔹 Accelerating the implementation of National Development Management policies. Interested in our other proposed policies? Read our blueprint for the next government 👉 https://lnkd.in/dTY8Pn_3

Whoever forms the next Government following the general election will need to address this chronic under-performance as an immediate priority. We need to build for the future not only for those currently in need of housing but for future generations too. A home is a fundamental requirement for everybody and their provision has got to be a key component of any new government’s political strategy.

Wonder if any of the political parties that are promising huge numbers of new housing to be built in the next 5 years have any clue how many years it takes to get through the planning and design process before we even put a spade in the ground. #housingstrategy #landsupply #NationalPlanningPolicy

Detailed Planning Application for 5 units in Alresford – Winchester City Council - 24/01547/FUL I posted about this application recently, entitled “When NIMBYs are reasonable”.   I was full of hope that a convivial conversation with a neighbour had smoothed the effect of irrational objection – naively pleased with myself that I had diffused rather than defended our application. Fast forward a few weeks and this relatively small application has now received nearly 20 letters of objection, two of which are from ward councillors. Several, I should add, are from residence that are too far to be affected. The very same neighbour has rallied objection and the tide has turned. Some important points; 1.       The Application has been through two rounds of pre-app and is fully policy compliant 2.       None of the statutory consultees have objected 3.       We designed one of the units as a bungalow to purposefully appease the objecting neighbour 4.       The local authority does not have a 5 year land supply. No way near in fact 5.       This is a ‘brownfield development’ – BUILD BROWNFIELD FIRST is on the lips of every politician So here’s the critical point. We have a ‘brownfield’ within settlement planning application that is fully policy compliant, within a local authority that can’t demonstrate a 5 year land supply. Will it be refused by the planning committee in October ? It’s a Liberal Democrat controlled Local Authority who have gained a Liberal Democrat MP from the Conservatives in the last local election. Will that have a bearing ? I get most annoyed when local councillors fight tooth a nail against greenfield applications and exclaim to anyone that will listen, that development should be prioritised on brownfield first and then act to refuse brownfield development. Whilst this is only a small development it makes a big point.  I also please ask that if you have a minute please review our application and write a note of support (you can do it electronically on the councils website) – Winchester City Council, application number 24/01547/FUL – about 72 Jacklyns Lane Alresford SO24 9LJ. Please take a minute to help and repost this to anyone who is interested. Ill update with another post next week.

MY TOP THREE PLANNING STORIES OF THE WEEK 🥇🥈🥉 My selection of planning stories from the w/c 29 January below. 1.    Four year land supply guidance to be issued imminently Paragraph 226 of the NPPF sets out that for two years from 19 December 2023 local authorities who have an emerging local plan that has either been submitted for examination or has reached Regulation 18 or Regulation 19 stage (including both a policies map and proposed allocations towards meeting housing need) will only be required to identify and update annually a “supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide a minimum of four years’ worth of housing” (with a buffer, if applicable) against the housing requirement set out in adopted strategic policies, or against local housing need where the strategic policies are more than five years old. This has led to debate as to how this four year supply should be calculated. The Chief Planner has now confirmed that planning practice guidance will be updated imminently to provide clarity on this. 2.    List of designated responsible bodies for conservation covenants published The list was published on 1 February but only currently includes Natural England. 3.    Planning permission for 350 dwellings quashed by the High Court Judgment in R (Pratt & Anor) v Exeter City Council [2024] EWHC 185 (Admin) was handed down on 2 February. The project involved restrictions being imposed on the vehicular use of a road which affected the claimant’s ability to turn left out of her drive. This access option avoided the use of an access to the site which was envisaged in an adopted masterplan and in which one of the claimants had an interest. The court considered a local authority’s duties to carry out a sufficient inquiry before making its decision and to take into account material considerations. The court identified that the Council did not give proper regard to the substance of the masterplan and the officer’s advice to committee on the access in the masterplan was seriously misleading. The court found the Council failed to assess and weigh detriment to local amenity, the safety and convenience of the local and trunk road network and the availability of highway access to and from the homes of existing residents of the road on which restrictions were to be imposed. The court also commented that the Council should have made further investigations in this regard as no reasonable planning authority could have been satisfied that it possessed the information necessary to make its decision. #planning #NPPF #top3

So here it is - the review of the London Plan. A new presumption in favour of brownfield development is recommended: "The Presumption For qualifying local planning authorities, there is a strong presumption in favour of granting planning permission for proposals which comprise or include residential development on Brownfield (Previously developed) land. Qualifying local planning authorities are those where the net housing completions since 2019/20 have fallen below the cumulative annualised total of their Table 4.1 ten-year target. The presumption does not apply to sites which are in the Green Belt or Metropolitan Open Land or a Strategic Industrial Location. In the case of proposals which would cause harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, the presumption only applies where any such harm is clearly outweighed by the public benefits of the proposals. Where it applies, the presumption means granting planning permission as quickly as possible unless the benefits of doing so would be significantly and demonstrably outweighed by any adverse impacts which would arise from not according with policies in this plan. In applying the presumption substantial weight is to be given to the benefits of delivering homes." Lots of other new stuff at DLUHC today: https://lnkd.in/eiHS8hy2 #planning #brownfield #London #presumption #planningpermission

National Planning Policy Framework 2024 (NPPF) and it's controversy As I am sure you are aware the new NPPF was released yesterday for LPA's which has already stirred a bit of controversy, One of the areas for discussion is the release of Green Belt for Grey Belt which in essence is Labour justifying the means of how they are going to hit their substantial target of 2 million homes to be built within their 5-year stint.   When having a look at the Proposed Revised Method on the increase in expectations council by the council, do you think this is possible for you to hit these targets with your current resources? Regarding the targets set, not only will councils be forced to use green belt land if they haven't been building enough. They are basically is saying to councils "Look you can have your greenbelt, just hit your targets first".    This may have a bigger impact on councils that do not have a 5-year housing supply as they will be subject to developers having a more justified reason to build the infrastructure they deem more profitable rather than the council's need for housing as they would not have an allocated area for within their Local Plan.  I'd love to hear your thoughts on the impacts?

Back in 2018, due to local planning authorities (LPAs) failing to meet housing delivery targets and an increase in applications on unallocated sites going to appeal, a decision was made to temporarily disapply paragraph 6.2 of Technical Advice Note (TAN) 1. This decision removed the significant weight given to the 'lack of a 5-year housing land supply as a material consideration in determining planning applications for housing'. Fast forward to March 2020, this temporary measure became permanent with the complete revocation of TAN1, eliminating the need for LPAs in Wales to calculate a 5-year housing land supply. Instead, a new policy was introduced to monitor delivery against either an average annual requirement or a housing trajectory agreed upon as part of a Local Development Plan (LDP). Now, five years after the initial consultation and in light of recent updates to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) in England, it's time to reflect on how these changes have unfolded in Wales.