STRATEGIC PLANNING JOINT ADVISORY PANEL

Date: 2 April 2003 Item 8

Report by: Hampshire Director of Environment, Portsmouth City Planning Officer and Southampton Executive Director of Development and Sustainability

HAMPSHIRE HOUSE COMPLETIONS STUDY - OUTCOME OF CONSULTATION

Written by: Antony Payne, tel 01962 846766

Purpose and Summary:

To inform the Panel of the conclusions arising from consultation on the Hampshire House Completions Study. Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) and other organisations with an interest in the issues of house completions were sent copies of the Study and asked to comment, especially in relation to the action points of relevance to them.

Virtually all respondents thought the Study to be comprehensive and thought provoking and there was general support for its conclusions. Comments were made on the proposed actions and additional ones proposed. The main points made are included in the attached appendix .

Since the Study was completed there has been considerable activity at national and regional levels to address low house completion rates, culminating in the Sustainable Communities report published by the Government in February (see report elsewhere on the agenda). The challenge has been laid down to planning authorities and the development industry to deliver the numbers and types of dwellings required.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the three Strategic Planning Authorities agree that:

(i) they will work with local planning authorities, the South East England Regional Assembly, the South East England Development Agency, the Government Office for the South East and others, to help implement actions arising from the Completions Study;

(ii) they will discuss further with the organisations concerned the additional proposals set out in paragraphs 5.1 and 6.1 of this report; and

(iii) a follow-up report on the actions arising from the Completions Study and this report be prepared, following publication and analysis of the housing monitoring information for the period ending March 2003.

1. Introduction

1.1 In November 2002 this Panel considered a report on the reasons why Hampshire has experienced house building rates lower than required by Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) in recent years. The Completions Study concluded by proposing a number of recommendations to key organisations and developers that may help to improve future completion rates. This Panel decided to send the document to these organisations and request their views.

2. Consultation Responses

2.1 The Completions Study was sent to all Local Planning Authorities (LPAs), the House Builders' Federation (HBF), the Ministry of Defence (MoD), the Government Office for the South East (GOSE), the South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA), the South East England Development Agency (SEEDA) and the Learning and Skills Council, asking for comments, especially in relation to the actions proposed in the document.

2.2 Five local authorities, the HBF, the Learning and Skills Council (Hampshire and Isle of Wight), SEERA and the MoD provided responses. No detailed comments were received from SEEDA or GOSE. The HBF response is a coordinated reply from HBF member companies active in Hampshire. The comments have been collated under each proposed action, and are set out in a schedule (see appendix). The schedule also includes other relevant information drawn from the Communities Plan and other sources that have a bearing on the proposed actions.

2.3 Virtually all respondents thought the Study to be comprehensive and thought provoking and there was general support for its conclusions. However, some felt that parts of the Study were based on anecdotal or insufficient evidence and suggested follow-up work to test some of its assumptions. In a number of cases responses were cross-referenced to comments made on the Policy H4 Monitoring Paper 2003 (considered elsewhere on the agenda).

3. Summary of Responses to Actions Proposed

3.1 There was general support for the actions proposed for the Strategic Planning Authorities (SPAs) and it was recognised that they have an important role to play in working with the LPAs, HBF and others to help implement some of the actions arising from the Study.

3.2 The proposed actions for LPAs had a more mixed response. Some proposed actions are already being implemented by a few of them and there was some doubt over the practicality or effectiveness of others. There were a number of additional comments or proposed actions put forward for LPAs to consider, especially in relation to development control performance. Some of the issues raised by the HBF in connection with development control may be discussed further at a joint meeting with planning officers from the various LPAs.

3.3 The proposed action for the development industry and training bodies was generally supported, although the HBF disputes the claim that house builders land bank - it says it is desperate to obtain permission and build houses.

3.4 Many of the proposals for Central Government are being acted upon either through the Planning Bill or the new Communities Plan. The Regional Assembly is working closely with GOSE to monitor progress on the supply of housing. They expect LPAs to take appropriate action if the supply of housing continues to fall short of the RPG9 requirement.

3.5 One comment concerned the uncertainties regarding the new planning framework which, it was claimed, is already hindering longer term planning of district housing requirements. The Planning Bill, due to be passed later this year, sets a framework that should improve the speed of delivery. However, its introduction may itself contribute to further delay as planning authorities get to grips with the new legislation.

4. Action at the National and Regional Level

4.1 In July 2002 the Deputy Prime Minister announced that he would take action against those local authorities who were considered to be failing to meet their housing targets. Since the Study was published GOSE has undertaken its own research to identify those authorities that are not delivering their house figures and has commenced discussions with them on the steps being taken to improve matters.

4.2 In February 2003 the Government published the Communities Plan. This requires local authorities to take a proactive role in identifying and responding to housing needs. Comprehensive Performance Assessments (CPAs) will include consideration as to how planning authorities are delivering planned levels of new housing and the Audit Commission will seek to reflect housing market issues in the annual refresh of CPA scores for unitary and county councils in 2003/04. Where an assessment finds an authority is failing to tackle housing needs satisfactorily the Commission will consider an urgent and more detailed inspection or refer the authority to the Secretary of State for statutory intervention

4.3 Local authority performance in determining applications will also be closely monitored and the Government will intervene if need be. Over the last two years, the Government has set performance standards for those authorities that have been performing poorly against the Best Value development control targets. There are 78 authorities subject to standards in 2002/03, four of which have been subject to formal intervention. Further investigation with detailed involvement from the authorities is due to take place in 15 authorities to determine if further action needs to be taken. In 2003/04, 90 authorities will be subject to performance standards.

4.4 The expectation from Government is that planning performance, including house completions rates, must improve. To this end additional funding has been provided for 2003/4 via the `Planning Delivery Grant', with further money promised in subsequent years for those authorities which improve. It has also stated that sanctions may be used in cases where improvements do not occur.

4.5 The issue of low completions is also high on SEERA's agenda and two workshops for planning officers involved in housing provision were recently held in the region to discuss the issue and highlight best practice, etc. The Regional Assembly has also identified a number of actions all designed to increase the supply of housing in the South East, some of which are for local authorities, but others will also need to act. The actions were agreed by the Regional Planning Committee on 12 November 2002 and can be seen as complementing those put forward in the Hampshire Study.

5. Further Actions

5.1 Some LPAs proposed additional actions that they could, with the assistance of the SPAs, undertake to assist the planning process. They were that:

(i) LPAs and SPAs should agree local targets for housing supply on a common system;

(ii) LPAs could share `best practice' in development control procedures and processes to help raise performance;

(iii) training for public sector planners (and also developers and consultants) should be extended to include Environmental Appraisals, Traffic Impact Assessments, etc;

(iv) SPAs and LPAs should consider organising joint seminars with the development industry using case studies of development schemes to promote better understanding and awareness. This could include practical examples of joint working to overcome constraints that are holding back residential sites;

(v) LPAs should consider working together to prepare model planning agreements or clauses; and

(vi) SPAs and LPAs should lobby Government for the removal of the Town and Country Planning (Residential Density) (London and South East England) Direction 2002 from applications that accord with site densities set down in local plans adopted after the date the Direction came into force.

5.2 These proposals appear reasonable and the SPAs and LPAs should consider how to implement them.

6. Other Improvements

6.1 Other improvements were proposed by respondents for others to consider and take forward:

(i) Improving the processing of planning applications by undertaking joint scoping exercises between parties before applications are submitted, giving more delegation to officers and concentrating on providing a `quality' rather than a `faster' service.

(ii) Outline permissions should be `fast tracked' to establish the principle of development, over and above the local plan allocation, to give comfort to potential developers. The detail could then be resolved through detailed application, permission and planning conditions. (This proposal is addressed in the Planning Bill, with the introduction of a new procedure for any person wishing to obtain an indication from an LPA as to whether a proposed development would be acceptable in principle. The statement will not be a consent, but its existence will be a material consideration for the purpose of determining a future planning application for similar development.)

(iii) A short circuit for handling the need for environmental assessments and impact studies would be to grant or resolve to grant planning permission, subject to satisfactory result of these studies, rather than delay the whole matter until they are finished (which can take up to a year, covering breeding or growing seasons).

(iv) The development industry should undergo design training in order to rise to the challenges of PPG3 (higher densities whilst enhancing/greening the local environment). This would enable LPAs to process applications quicker and reduce the likelihood of attracting a refusal.

(v) LPAs should devote more resources to the discharge of conditions, particularly relating to landscaping, as developers see this as a further source of delay.

(vi) To reduce the likelihood of future delays caused by plan making, a request was made for the new Regional Spatial Strategy, including a sub-regional strategy for South Hampshire, to be prepared as soon as possible.

(vii) The County Council, as landowner, could play a more positive role in assisting the supply of land by bringing forward sites in its ownership for development, particularly in built-up areas.

6.2 The above appear reasonable proposals and there is merit in taking them up with the organisations concerned.

7. Conclusions

7.1 The Study was generally welcomed and has helped focus minds on actions that can be taken to improve house building rates in the county. There has been considerable activity at national and regional levels and the expectation is that completion rates will improve. The SPAs can have a role in working with LPAs, the HBF and others by continuing to provide comprehensive monitoring information and to help implement the actions identified in the Study.

7.2 The next Policy H4 Monitoring Paper, coupled with the housing monitoring information for the year ending March 2003 (both due late 2003), is likely to be the first opportunity to assess the extent to which improvements across Hampshire have been made. Key indicators to measure success are:

(i) the extent to which completions 2002-03 met the forecast;

(ii) whether there is an increase in dwellings with planning consent;

(iii) whether there is an increase in the overall housing supply; and

(iv) the extent to which urban capacity sites are contributing towards overall levels of housing supply and completions.

7.3 If completion rates do not increase the Government may find it expedient to intervene in the affairs of individual planning authorities, as indicated in paragraphs 4.2 and 4.3.

7.4 It is recommended that a follow-up report on the actions arising from the Completions Study be prepared following publication and analysis of the housing monitoring information for the period ending March 2003.

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

NB the list excludes:

1.

Published works.

2.

Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

TITLE

LOCATION

None.

Action Proposed

Response

Should undertake enhanced monitoring, including at sub-area level

The SPAs should be able to do this where it does not give rise to significant additional demands on staff resources.

Seek to maintain a supply of between 34,500 and 36,900 dwellings on large sites (was just over 30,900 in April 2002)

This will be undertaken as part of future monitoring by the SPAs.

Some respondents wished the supply figures to be broken down into their constituent parts (e.g. full permission, outline permission, allocations in adopted and draft local plans), especially for meeting housing needs in the short term. It should be possible to meet this request.

Maintain 36 months supply of planning consents (April 2002 supply was 34 months, up 1 month from previous year)

General support for proposal.

Some respondents thought that the supply period should be 5 years in recognition that it take longer to bring forward large sites for development. This is probably an unrealistic request given the present levels of consents, and perhaps unnecessary given the `plan monitor and manage' approach to housing land supply.

The forecast of annual completions should be discounted in recognition that the figures have been consistently overestimated.

General support for proposal, although one respondent thought that discounting did not accord with the `plan, monitor and manage' approach.

There was a suggestion that the discount should be set at 15% rather than the 7% used in current H4 Monitoring Paper . The percentage could be changed following analysis of the outturn figure for 2002/03.

When calculating future annual house building delivery rates the SPAs should account for the long lead in times required to develop MDAs

The Policy H4 Monitoring Paper 2003 highlighted and took account of the possibility that the MDAs may not deliver their full requirement by 2011.

Those involved in implementing MDA proposals are actively looking at ways that the timescale for these developments can be advanced.

Proposed action

Response

Set local targets for housing supply as a component of `plan, monitor and manage'

General support from LPAs to this, although more than one sought further guidance on what their targets should be from the SPAs. There was also a view that the targets should be based on a common system.

Place a high priority on adopting local plans in conformity with the current Structure Plan

All LPAs are making steady progress on this action.

The HBF believe that inappropriate political interference has delayed some plans from entering the public domain. It also thought that the lack of definitive guidance from the SPAs as to whether conformity with the Structure Plan could be achieved by Eastleigh without having an MDA was not seen as helpful.

Ensure that local plans meet the Structure Plan baseline and reserve housing requirements

All LPAs are planning to meet their baseline requirement. Two LPAs currently have deposit local plans that do not make any reserve provision and the County Council has declined to issue Statements of Conformity with the Structure Plan. Formal identification of reserve provision in the two local authorities with local plans adopted prior to the Structure Plan may be delayed until after the planning reforms come into effect.

See also concurrent report on Policy H4 for the likely consequences for authorities who choose not to identify the reserve.

Complete the planning stages of the baseline MDAs as soon as possible

Both Winchester City Council (West of Waterlooville MDA) and Test Valley Borough Council (Andover MDA) are looking at ways to speed the delivery of these proposals. Basingstoke has produced the North Basingstoke Action Plan to take forward its proposals. Eastleigh Borough Council currently has no plans to identify the South East of Eastleigh MDA.

Build a contingency into calculations when using `plan, monitor and manage' approach to releasing housing sites to account for no or delayed starts

Some LPAs are already acting to raise building rates, although one thought that discounting did not accord with the `plan, monitor and manage' approach. A further concern was that this approach may result in more difficult sites (i.e. previously developed land) that is the most suitable for housing in PPG3 sequential test terms not coming forward and remaining undeveloped.

Consider `fast tracking' planning applications for large residential developments

Support for the proposed action but some LPAs thought that it should not be at the expense of other important development proposals, nor if it was to the detriment of the quality of the development.

Support initiatives to provide more training on negotiating `planning gain'

Some LPAs (e.g. East Hampshire) have already initiated training for officers and members in conjunction with Oxford Brookes University. Others thought that there was a lack of evidence for the view that planners lacked experience and skills in development finance.

One LPA suggested additional training related to Environmental Appraisals, Traffic Impact Assessments etc., which could also be extended to developers and consultants.

Consider supporting `job swap' initiatives between developers and planners

This did not find favour amongst LPAs who were concerned over issues of confidentiality and conflicts of interest. In the current climate of staff shortages and pressures to deliver and meet targets there were doubts as the whether it would happen. They did, however support more dialogue - e.g. joint seminars and specific development sites to be used as case studies (provided it was accepted that discussion should be looking for positive outcomes).

Consider putting more resources into drafting legal agreements to improve performance

One LPA thought there could be advantage in authorities working together to prepare model agreements or clauses.

It is possible that some the new Planning Delivery Grant could be used to improve performance in this area.

Consider serving `completion notices' on developers who fail to complete sites within a reasonable timescale

LPAs saw this as a last resort that may not necessarily work.

Consider using Compulsory Purchase Powers to address land ownership and other constraints

LPAs had some reservations about this and thought that it would be most appropriate in larger urban areas. In any event, sites should only be allocated in local plans if they will be made available for development.

Ensure staff resources are capable of delivering the required planning outputs

It was generally recognised that there is a shortage of planners.

A total of £2 million has been made available to all unitary and district planning authorities in Hampshire for 2003/4 through the Planning Delivery Grant. The funds are not ring fenced and LPAs have complete discretion as to where it is spent.

The Government has yet to decide on levels of grant for 2004/05 and 2005/06, although they will continue to be linked to improved planning performance as an incentive for authorities to reach and even exceed targets.

Proposed action

Response

Put in place measures and initiatives to address labour and skills shortages

The Learning & Skills Council concurs with the findings of the Construction Industry Training Board concerning the acute skill shortages within the industry and the lack of experienced management. It is working closely with the other skills councils in the South East and SEEDA to address sector skill shortages. Construction remains a high priority and it will be working closely across the region to identify appropriate actions. A profile of the construction sector for Hampshire and the Isle of Wight and an associated implementation plan will be available by the Autumn. This will be further supported through the South East Regional Adult Learning and Skills Pilot - a collaborative approach to the planning and funding of adult learning. A key feature of the pilot is that all LLSC and SEEDA budgets relating to adult learning will be polled for planning purposes, together with the funds from other bodies where appropriate. In the first year the pilot will focus on four priority areas to address some of the region's skills shortages, including construction.

The HBF has advised that measures are in hand through the Construction Industries Training Board and HBF to encourage more new entrants into the house building sector through expanded and improved training programmes and education programmes in schools and universities.

Although acknowledging that a skills shortage exists, the HBF does not generally see it as a constraint on implementation of development at present. However, without the certainty of long term planning stability and the ability to bring further land forward for housing supply the industry remains cautious about increasing its workforce.

Proposed action

Response

Provide information to help improve the accuracy of forecasts of future rates of development.

The HBF, on behalf of the house building industry, has offered to work with the planning authorities to share information to help improve monitoring and forecasting of housing developments, providing it is not too resource intensive.

This offer will be taken up by the SPAs.

Consider supporting `job swap' initiatives between developers and planners

The HBF supports more dialogue between developers and LPAs (see also comments from LPAs above).

Building homes rather than stockpiling land

The HBF dispute the claim of land banking. House builders are desperate to obtain permission and build houses. There is no time lag between receipt of full permission and implementation, save for a few complicated sites. Some delays attributable to land banking are actually caused by other factors e.g. delays in development plan preparation.

Working with local authorities to overcome constraints that are holding back the development of residential sites

No specific response from HBF.

It was suggested that practical examples of this happening to date should be publicised.

Proposed action

Response

Delivering proposals set out in `Sustainable Communities - Delivery through Planning'

No response from GOSE. However:

The Planning Bill is currently before Parliament and is expected to become law at the end of the summer 2003. Other changes are being implemented concurrently.

Proposals to provide training and best practice to planners

No response from GOSE. However:

LPAs can use some of the funds from the Planning Delivery Grant to train existing and new professionals, and local politicians who oversee the system. The Government is supporting SEEDA in establishing a Centre for Excellence for skills and training in urban renaissance. It is also working with the Commission for Architecture an the Built Environment and others to improve the quality of design of development.

Delivering proposals set out in `Compulsory Purchase Powers, procedures and compensation: the way forward'

The Planning and Compensation Bill is expected to become law by the end of the summer 2003.

New performance targets for GOSE in handling planning applications

New targets have already been set to improve performance by March 2004.

Review the impact PPG3 has had on the planning process and house building rates

No response from GOSE.

The HBF thought that PPG3 was a fundamental reason why theoretical supply has not been translated into sites with permission. Much of the theoretical supply is greenfield sites which were allocated pre-PPG3 and were put on hold pending their re-assessment as part of the local plan review process to consider their compatibility with PPG3 policy requirements.

One LPA and the HBF thought that another source of delay arising from PPG3 was that local plans progress had slowed in order to carry out urban capacity studies. The HBF also thought that the new order introduced by PPG3 was beginning to bed down and delays attributable to it would be a thing of the past.

Removing the Greenfield Directive from sites that are allocated in local plans adopted post PPG3

No response from GOSE .

Other respondents believe that PPG3 does not always deliver the use of brownfield sites because of the sequential test, and this should also be reviewed.

Requiring Government departments to justify, on an annual basis, why allocated sites in local plans are not being released for development

No response from GOSE. However:

The Communities Plan for the South East states the Governments intention to work with English Partnerships and public sector landowners (particularly the MoD) to ensure public sector land releases take account of the needs for housing and affordable housing.

The MoD itself was not aware of any cases where it has delayed bringing sites forward and it does not support the proposed action. Such cases would be few, if any, and prior consultation at the local plan stage would ensure that only sites that will be released are allocated. It is anxious to discuss these matters and to identify potentially surplus sites in the local plan system.

Issue

Response

Strategic planning delays

More than one LPA thought that the delay in finalising the housing figures in RPG and the current Structure Plan has led, in turn, to a lack of progress being made on the production of local plans and the subsequent granting of planning permission. In particular, the long lead in times mean that the Major Development Areas are unlikely to start being developed before 2006. Fareham Borough believe that one reason why they have met Structure Plan requirements is because they based their Plan on the deposited version and made provision for the period 2001-6, rather than waiting for approval of the current Plan. Most other authorities have not used the same procedure and currently have plans that make provision to 2001 only.

Developing brownfield sites

One LPA drew attention to problems that can occur in the development of complex brownfield sites where issues such as contamination, safeguarding historic buildings, archaeological research, access constraints etc. can all contribute to delays.

Shortfall in completions 1996-2001

The HBF argue that the full scale of the shortfall in completions is not recognised in the Study. It believes that the shortfall based on RPG 9 (1994) between 1996-01 (some 3,200 dwellings) should be rolled forward post 2001.

Note that GOSE and the SPAs do not share this view - see concurrent report on Policy H4 Monitoring Paper.

Releasing the Reserve

The HBF argue that because of the serious problems in ensuring continuity of supply in some authorities the SPAs should act by making alternative provision through the proper use of the Plan Monitor and Manage mechanism and the release of reserve sites.

More research

One LPA thought that it was worth investigating further the time between granting of consent and start of development