Policy HOU2 – Housing Density, Type and Accessibility

Support

Representation ID: 21823

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Dr Osman Dervish

Agent: RCA Regeneration Ltd

2.7. We are broadly supportive of the densities proposed in the emerging plan, however we consider they are aspirational when it comes to the central areas of the main Black Country settlements, with the exception of perhaps Wolverhampton, because of viability (specifically build costs v likely sales values). Apartments continue to be difficult to sell in much of the Black Country and it is hard to imagine how (post-covid) high density apartment schemes will, in reality, come forward on any great scale. We would urge the BC authorities to reconsider their expectations on this moving forwards.
2.8. We would seek some flexibility in the application of accessibility standards - particularly as a result of the move towards more sustainable personal travel modes, such as electric cars.
2.9. We would also seek flexibility in the application of housing mix standards, where evidence from the availability of second hand stock within the immediate area demonstrates an oversupply of a particular size of dwelling.

Support

Representation ID: 22127

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Brockmoor Properties Limited

Agent: CBRE

Policy HOU2 (Housing Density, Type and Accessibility)
In principle, Brockmoor Properties Limited generally support Policy HOU2 (Housing Density, Type and Accessibility), however the draft policy as currently worded could be clearer and more effective for future residential development proposals.

The draft policy promotes flexibility over the plan period for housing types to be assessed on a site-by-site basis which is important in the dynamic housing market and specific locational requirements. Part 3 of this draft policy however, states that the range of house types and sizes should be 'in line with the most recently available information' and provides no further information within the policy itself as to what this could constitute. For this policy to be prepared in accordance with Paragraph 16 of the NPPF (2021) the following text should be inserted into part 3 (underline shows suggested insertion):

"Developments of ten homes or more should provide a range of house types and sizes that will meet the accommodation needs of both existing and future residents, in line with the most recently available information, such as:

The Black Country HMA 2021 (or any subsequent revision): or
Detailed Local Housing Market Assessments (where applicable); or
Current and future demographic profiles: or
Locality and ability of the site to accommodate a mix of housing: or
Market signals and local housing market trends."

Additionally, paragraph 6.20 of the policy supporting text, provides a Table showing the housing tenures which refers to a housing mix informed by the Black Country Housing Market Assessment (HMA) 2021. The justification follows on to state that "It is important that housing provision reflects the needs of these new households, allowing for at least one bedroom per person, whilst also reflecting the varying needs for each of the four local authorities, as set out in the HMA", This is not however referred to in the policy wording itself nor does the HMA provide evidence that all four authorities will be undertaking further HMA assessments. This makes the policy ambiguous as it is not clear what evidence Developers should rely on in designing residential schemes.

The policy and supporting text need to be clear about which evidence is to be used to inform housing mix and the wording suggested above would assist in removing ambiguity in the policy. Paragraph 6.20 should be reworded to be clearer or omitted if it conflicts with the requirements of the policy.

Support

Representation ID: 22162

Received: 06/10/2021

Respondent: Marlie Civils

Agent: RCA Regeneration Ltd

We are broadly supportive of the densities proposed in the emerging plan, however we consider they are aspirational when it comes to the central areas of the main Black Country settlements, with the exception of perhaps Wolverhampton, because of viability (specifically build costs v likely sales values). Apartments continue to be difficult to sell in much of the Black Country and
it is hard to imagine how (post-covid) high density apartment schemes will, in reality, come forward on any great scale. We would urge the BC authorities to reconsider their expectations on this moving forwards.

2.20. We would seek some flexibility in the application of accessibility standards - particularly as a result of the move towards more sustainable personal travel modes, such as electric cars.

2.21. We would also seek flexibility in the application of housing mix standards, where evidence from the availability of second hand stock within the immediate area demonstrates an oversupply of a particular size of dwelling.

Support

Representation ID: 22176

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Ms & Mr Jill & I Stevens & Huskisson

Number of people: 2

Agent: JVH Town Planning Consultants Ltd (rep Walton Homes Ltd)

Policy HOU2

The density policy is generally supported, because it is noted that the density requirement set out cannot always be reached due to local character and distinctiveness. It is important that new development suits the character of the area in which it is located and adds to a positive built environment rather than meeting a notional density target. The wording of the Policy should go further tor reflect this, and especially on smaller sites where the scale of the overall development leaves less opportunity for a variety of density that can be achieved on larger allocations.

Comment

Representation ID: 22191

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Druids Heath Golf Club

Agent: Harris Lamb

The policy states that the density and type of housing should be informed by a range of factors. These include the need for and type of new housing required, the level of accessibility of a site to public transport and services and the need to achieve well design development that has regard to the surrounding character of the area. We agree that these considerations are key in determining what the density of new development should be. The policy then goes on to state that all new major development should achieve the minimum net densities set out in Table 5, which range from 40 dph to 100+ dph. Whilst the 100+ dph range is intended to be delivered within strategic centres or close to transport hubs, achieving 40 dph on other sites will present certain challenges, particularly in the context of other policy requirements in the Plan.
A large proportion of the development sites within the Black Country are urban brownfield sites. These can often have constraints that can reduce their net developable area, such as mineshafts or undergrown infrastructure such as cables and pipes. These sites are often relatively small and are not regular in shape. This makes achieving an efficient layout problematic. This has the consequence of reducing the net developable area and net density.

Policy HOU2 requires that a range of house types and sizes are provided in new developments. The Table on page 100 of the draft Plan confirms that there is a greater demand for 3, 4 and 4+ bed properties than 1 and 2 bed properties. Table 5.10 of the BCHMA, advises that 54% of the housing requirement should be delivered as three or more bedroom properties, with over 25% of the properties required as four bed and four bed plus. Larger dwellings take up more space and consequently reduce density levels.

The emerging Plan also proposes the introduction of National Described Space Standards through Policy ENV9 – Design Quality. This will result in minimum property sizes applying and consequently the average footprint of properties increasing. Again, this will result in densities decreasing.

Policy ENV8 – Open Space, Sport and Recreation, advises that each local authority will set out specific proposals for open space, sport and recreation provision for new developments in their Part 2 Local Plans. As these standards have not been published it is not possible to confirm what impact they will have on the capacity of sites. However, introducing policies that require on site open space and sport facilities will reduce the amount of land available for development that will in turn reduces the number of dwellings a site can accommodate.

The Environment Bill will introduce a required for new developments to achieve 10% biodiversity net gain. This could require additional land for offsetting on development sites. This will reduce the number of units that can be accommodated on sites and their gross density.

Drawing these factors together, we are concerned that the density levels proposed by the Policy are unrealistic. The capacity of the proposed allocations has been overestimated.

Comment

Representation ID: 22229

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Steve Crutchley

Policy HOU2 – Housing Density, Type and Accessibility

The policy states that the density and type of housing should be informed by a range of factors. These include the need for and type of new housing required, the level of accessibility of a site to public transport and services and the need to achieve well design development that has regard to the surrounding character of the area. We agree that these considerations are key in determining what the density of new development should be. The policy then goes on to state that all new major development should achieve the minimum net densities set out in Table 5, which range from 40 dph to 100+ dph. Whilst the 100+ dph range is intended to be delivered within strategic centres or close to transport hubs, achieving 40 dph on other sites will present certain challenges, particularly in the context of other policy requirements in the Plan.

A large proportion of the development sites within the Black Country are urban brownfield sites. These can often have constraints that can reduce their net developable area, such as mineshafts or undergrown infrastructure such as cables and pipes. These sites are often relatively small and are not regular in shape. This makes achieving an efficient layout problematic. This has the consequence of reducing the net developable area and net density.

Policy HOU2 requires that a range of house types and sizes are provided in new developments. The Table on page 100 of the draft Plan confirms that there is a greater demand for 3, 4 and 4+ bed properties than 1 and 2 bed properties. Table 5.10 of the BCHMA, advises that 54% of the housing requirement should be delivered as three or more bedroom properties, with over 25% of the properties required as four bed and four bed plus. Larger dwellings take up more space and consequently reduce density levels.

The emerging Plan also proposes the introduction of National Described Space Standards through Policy ENV9 – Design Quality. This will result in minimum property sizes applying and consequently the average footprint of properties increasing. Again, this will result in densities decreasing.

Policy ENV8 – Open Space, Sport and Recreation, advises that each local authority will set out specific proposals for open space, sport and recreation provision for new developments in their Part 2 Local Plans. As these standards have not been published it is not possible to confirm what impact they will have on the capacity of sites. However, introducing policies that require on site open space and sport facilities will reduce the amount of land available for development that will in turn reduces the number of dwellings a site can accommodate.

The Environment Bill will introduce a required for new developments to achieve 10% biodiversity net gain. This could require additional land for offsetting on development sites. This will reduce the number of units that can be accommodated on sites and their gross density.

Drawing these factors together, we are concerned that the density levels proposed by the Policy are unrealistic. The capacity of the proposed allocations has been overestimated.

Support

Representation ID: 22276

Received: 21/01/2022

Respondent: Miss Jodi Stokes

Housing Density, Type and Accessibility

6.5 Draft Policy HOU2 (Housing Density, Type and Accessibility) sets out the requirements for the density and type of new housing provided on any housing site. Developments of ten homes or more should provide a range of house types and sizes that will meet the accommodation needs of both existing and future residents.

Comment

Representation ID: 22351

Received: 24/01/2022

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Avison Young

Policy HOU2 recognises that the density and type of housing to be provided on any housing site will be informed by (i) sub-regional and local needs, (ii) access to sustainable transport methods and (iii) the need to achieve high quality design. Insofar as (i) is concerned, our Client considers it will be important to maintain flexibility to allow for changing local market circumstances. In this regard, it will also be important to ensure that housing mix prescriptions are determined in line with up-to-date evidence.
Paragraph 125 of the National Planning Policy Framework states:
“Where there is an existing or anticipated shortage of land for meeting identified housing needs, it is especially important that planning policies and decisions avoid homes being built at low densities and ensure that developments make optimal use of the potential of each site.”
This policy also states that plans should contain minimum density standards for city and town centres and other locations that are well served by public transport, and that the use of minimum density standards should also be considered for other parts of the plan area and that it may be appropriate to identify a ‘range’ of densities that reflects the accessibility and potential of different areas.
The Black Country is a highly constrained District, in terms of Green Belt boundaries and other constraints, and Taylor Wimpey therefore appreciates that available land will need to be used in the most efficient way to ensure that the BCAs are able to meet their future housing requirements. Taylor Wimpey, therefore, as a matter of principle, support the range of minimum net densities set out in Policy HOU2 of between 40 dph and 100 dph.
Notwithstanding this, high densities will not be appropriate in all proposed housing locations, for example in previously developed land within the Green Belt, or sites which are within close proximity to national designated sites i.e. SSSIs etc. Densities should therefore be considered on a site-by-site basis, taking into account local circumstances.
Part 5 of the policy also states that further details of design requirements for housing developments may be set out in Supplementary Planning Documents. If such a document is to be produced, it is essential that it is prepared in parallel with the BCP so that any cost implications can be properly viability tested in conjunction with other policy requirements to ensure that it will not have any detrimental impact upon scheme delivery.

Comment

Representation ID: 22374

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: ROSCONN STRATEGIC LAND

Policy HOU2 – Housing Density, Type and Accessibility details the approach to a range of matters including housing density. Whilst RSL fully support the objective of making the most efficient use of land, we consider some clarity is required regarding the densities expected to be achieved on allocated sites. Part (1) of the policy correctly identifies the 3 key factors that should inform an appropriate density for an individual site, taking account of the need to provide a range of house types and sizes, the site’s level of accessibility to sustainable transport; and the need to achieve high-quality design and minimize amenity impacts. Part (4) of the policy then sets out 3 density ranges depending on accessibility standards as detailed at Table 5, which are applicable to all developments of 10 dwellings or more. Part (5) of the policy then refers to Chapter 13 of the BCP which details the appropriate density to be sought on each housing allocation site.

RSL consider Parts (4) and (5) appear to therefore contradict each other. Chapter 13 comprises detailed guidance for each allocated site and provides an assumption of the appropriate density, presumably informed by the specific circumstances relevant to the site, which must have taken account of the 3 key factors detailed at Part (1) of the policy. It is notable that some of the proposed allocations are for densities below 40dph, the lowest of the 3 density ranges at Part (4) of the policy. RSL therefore consider that this contradiction should be rectified to ensure appropriate minimum net densities are clear for each site.

Support

Representation ID: 22405

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: RCA Regeneration Ltd

HOU2 - Housing Density, Type and Accessibility
2.8. We are broadly supportive of the densities proposed in the emerging plan, however we consider
they are aspirational when it comes to the central areas of the main Black Country settlements,
with the exception of perhaps Wolverhampton, because of viability (specifically build costs v
likely sales values). Apartments continue to be difficult to sell in much of the Black Country and
it is hard to imagine how (post-covid) high density apartment schemes will, in reality, come
forward on any great scale. We would urge the BC authorities to reconsider their expectations on
this moving forwards.
2.9. We would seek some flexibility in the application of accessibility standards – particularly as a
result of the move towards more sustainable personal travel modes, such as electric cars.
2.10. We would also seek flexibility in the application of housing mix standards, where evidence from
the availability of second hand stock within the immediate area demonstrates an oversupply of a
particular size of dwelling.

Comment

Representation ID: 22561

Received: 06/10/2021

Respondent: DNA Investment Holdings Ltd

Agent: Lavata Group Ltd

Policy HOU2 – Housing Density, Type and Accessibility

We are broadly supportive of Policy HOU2 with regards to housing types and densities being informed by their location, access to amenities as well as public transport access and choice. We welcome the increase in minimum net density for developments in a Strategic Centre or Town Centre of Very High – 100+ dwellings per hectare (dph) which is a significant increase of 65+ from Table 8 of the adopted BCCS. This clearly takes into account the conclusions made by the Urban Capacity Review 2021 which set out that the centres have an important role to play in accommodating future residential growth, particularly in creating more capacity and enhancing the rates of delivery. Given the importance of the Strategic Centres, Walsall should be systematically and proactively planning for it now via updated Town Centre AAP work which could show clearly how 100+ dph will be achieved across sites in the town centre (given some will be higher and some lower density).

We also note that part 4 of this policy caveats the minimum density requirements “…except where
this would prejudice the historic character and local distinctiveness as defined by Policy ENV5.” .
paragraph 6.16 states “Not all developments with good sustainable access to services will be suited to the highest densities – in some cases a lower density will be more appropriate, for example in areas of historic character, to reflect the density of adjacent uses or to meet the need for a mix of housing types.”. whilst this may be the case in some circumstances, it is certainly not the case for all sites. The policy does not take any account of footprints of existing sites or typography, which will dictate the level of density which can be provided, as well as heights.

Like much of the Black Country, Walsall Town Centre is not ‘flat’; there are significant changes in typography within relatively short distances. Our Site is elevated above the rest of the Town Centre, as is the Grade II* Listed Church. The existing building on site as a result of the elevation and the change in levels on the site itself, means that the re-use of the existing footprint and building ‘up’ in the only efficient option for development. As a result of this any development on the Site will have significantly higher densities than the current 100+ in the DBCP. Density calculations do not take into account typography and as a result can be a misleading quantitative marker for development if this is the only marker used.

We believe that the current wording of part 4 of the policy does not give sufficient flexibility for development on sites where they are physically constrained by typography/gradient of the land. Such inflexibility goes against the NPPF paragraph 16 (b) of plans to be “be prepared positively, in a way that is aspirational but deliverable”. The policy wording should be amended to remove the word “except” and replaced with wording which is more flexible and allows the LPAs to have the ability to take into account physical constraints which are specific to sites (something which the review of the AAP could do). Wording could be as follows: “…(4) All developments of ten homes or more should achieve the minimum net density set out below. Where this would impact the historic character, or townscape and local distinctiveness as a result of physical layout or constraints, proposals should demonstrate the level of impact on these, as defined in Policy ENV5”.

The suggested working would still connect the need to meet minimum density requirements, and the requirements for proposals to take into account the matters listed in Policy ENV5 and have formed part of the design rationale, with robust evidence to allow LPAs to apply the policy flexibly.

Comment

Representation ID: 23061

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: St Philips

Agent: Savills

Policy HOU2 – Housing Density, Type and Accessibility
The policy sets out criteria that housing mix for development sites will be based on which includes being in line with the most recently available information. Paragraph 124 of the NPPF sets out the importance of planning policies to make efficient use of land taking into account: the identified need for different types of housing, local market conditions and viability, the availability and capacity of infrastructure, the desirability of maintaining an area’s character and setting and the importance of securing well-designed and attractive places [Savills emphasis].
The housing mix set out under paragraph 6.20 of the plan sets out the housing needs identified in the BCA Housing Market Assessment (2021). Market demand changes so this ‘latest’ evidence may not be representative of need when planning applications are submitted in the future. As developers and national housebuilders have vested interests in building products that are deliverable and meet market needs, the BCA should not have a fixed size and type guidance, as this could affect development viability, lead to inflexibility and result in obstructing development. We consider that the Housing Market Assessment figures should be used as guidance only and housing mix should be determined on a site by site basis based on market evidence at the time of application submission.
Although we support the Council’s ambition to make the most efficient use of land (NPPF paragraph 125), we do not support the proposed approach to calculating density requirements within this policy. Policy HOU2 has based its proposed density requirements on Table 5, which assesses accessibility through the proximity of the site to local centres, health facilities, shops and education. The Planning Practice Guidance (‘PPG’) sets out a range of considerations which should be taken into account when considering densities for a site or area which includes accessibility to services, as the BCA have assessed but also characterisation studies (urban form and historic character), environmental and infrastructure capacity and market/site viability which the plan has not considered (Reference ID: 66004-20190722). Additionally, the PPG also states that it is “important to consider how housing needs, local character and appropriate building forms relate to the density measures being used” (Reference ID: 66-005-20190722). We consider that it is important that density is considered on a site by site basis, particularly for proposed allocations which are adjacent to lower density housing such as Site WSA9.
Paragraph 6.18 states that investment will be sought to improve any facilities where there is an identified gap in service provision. We understand that Walsall Council has not received input from health or Education to date to confirm their requirements. Therefore, the ‘Key Large Sites Viability and Deliverability Study’ (May 2021) has not been able to assess the level of investment which may be required for the strategic allocations and how the contributions sought are reasonable. Health and education requirements for each site should be confirmed and addressed accordingly within the plan. If these are required on site, then adjustments will need to be made to the housing figures proposed for sites which will likely result in an increased housing shortfall or a need for additional land to be identified around site allocations which could deliver a larger development to support the required infrastructure, such as land to the west of Site WSA9.

Object

Representation ID: 23104

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: St Modwen SL&R

Agent: RPS

Paragraph 4.6 - 4.9 - The 40dph minimum rate is challenged on the grounds that it is inflexible, lower density housing has provided 14% of completes (2011-2020) and to rely on the flexibility of ENV5 might be ambiguous contrary to NPPD requirements.

Comment

Representation ID: 23194

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Bloor Homes Midlands

Agent: Cerda Planning Ltd

5.2. Whilst the general principles behind the requirements of Policy HOU2 are supported, to ensure that appropriate housing densities are delivered in sustainable locations we are concerned that the densities proposed on a number of the proposed allocations have failed to consider the individual circumstances of each site. Rather a density of 45 or 35 net dwellings per hectare (dph) has been applied without proper consideration of the site constraints and as such, the number of homes to be delivered across the proposed allocations will not be as great in reality as the capacities indicated in the plan.

5.3. It is clear that as a consequence of the critical delivery and capacity issues facing the Black Country there is a need to consider all options, including increasing housing densities across the plan area. In all likelihood however, on the majority of allocated sites which are on the edges of the urban area, a substantial increase in density is unlikely to be achievable based on individual site characteristics, constraints and market demand for family housing

Object

Representation ID: 23216

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Heyfield Development

Agent: Harris Lamb

Density

As detailed in our response to policy HOU2, we are concerned that the density requirements identified are unrealistic. The emerging plan seeks to adopt a space standard policy which will increase dwelling sizes impacting upon density. It is not unusual, in our experience, for brownfield sites within the Black Country to have constraints that adversely affect density, such as mineshafts or due to their relationship to surrounding uses. In addition, Table 5.10 of the BCHMA, advises that 54% of the housing requirement should be delivered as three or more bedroom properties, with over 25% of the properties required as four bed plus. Larger dwellings take up more space. This will drive down the density that can be achieved.
It is, therefore, our view that the density policies are over ambitious and unrealistic, and the densities suggested will not be achieved. This in turn suggests that the capacity of the
allocations has been over estimated and housing delivery will be reduced accordingly.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we are concerned that the identified sources of supply will be incapable of meeting the housing requirement identified by the Plan. In addition, given the housing requirement should be a minimum there is clearly a distinct advantage in erring on the side of caution, and applying robust and realistic lapse rates to the various sources of supply as if additional housing does come forward this will be of no detriment to the Plan. However, a housing delivery shortfall has the potential to be extremely problematic, causing five-year housing land supply issues, failing the Housing Delivery Test and failing to provide much needed market and affordable housing within the Black Country for those that need it.

Comment

Representation ID: 23227

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Heyfield Development

Agent: Harris Lamb

Policy HOU2 – Housing Density, Type and Accessibility

Density

Three density categories have been identified – 40, 45 and 100 dwellings per hectare. As the policy is drafted, these categories are one of three considerations that go into determining what density and type of dwellings are appropriate for different sites across the Black Country. The other two factors are the range of type and size of accommodation, and high-quality design and amenity.

In practice, the implications of the other two categories are that, in the most cases, this is going to result in the density reducing below the target in the categories. There are always exceptions to the rule, but the average densities will be lower than the targets in the categories.

The nature of the housing market in the Black Country is that there is limited demand for apartments. We would expect these to be delivered in the ‘very high’-density areas, where this product becomes more attractive. In the ‘high’ and ‘moderate’ density areas the pressure from the development industry will be to deliver housing. This is what the demand is for and apartments on housing sites are just not attractive when there will be houses near by that can be purchased for the same/less money.

Our comments on the impact of design are set out above under policy CSP4 and demonstrate that high-quality design will need to be rethought if the target densities are to be met. Our fundamental concern is that historically, seeking to achieve better design has pushed densities down, which conflicts with the desire to increase densities. It will need to be demonstrated that these are not competing objectives.

There are other competing policy objectives when it comes to increasing densities. These are the requirement for NDDS and M4(2) and M4(3) under Policy HOU3. In our submissions earlier this year we highlighted that we work with, and have spoken to, most of the major developers who operate across the Black Country. In doing so all of these developers confirmed that they did not currently deliver house types to meet these standards in the Black Country. This includes affordable housing developers, with Homes England accepting 85% NDDS for grant applications. Introducing these standards will increase house sizes and this is not compatible with higher densities.

In terms of M4(2), this tends to have the biggest influence on 3 / 4 bedroom units, because it requires a wet room down stairs, which cannot be delivered within the existing footprint when all other factors are considered. This will further increase the footprint of the dwellings going forwards.

None of the above is to say that the target figures in the density categories should be reduced. After all, the Framework requires us to make the most of previously developed sites and there is no harm in driving for higher densities.

However, when it comes to establishing what a realistic capacity of the sites is within the existing urban area, we do not consider it is appropriate to use these target densities. The average density will be lower than this. By applying these target figures, this will inflate the capacity figures and under-represent the need for sites to be release elsewhere and fundamentally not lead to the enough homes and jobs being built/delivered for local people

Object

Representation ID: 23229

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Heyfield Development

Agent: Harris Lamb

Housing mix

The policy also requires that a range of house types and sizes should be provided in new development. We do not disagree with this objective and agree that delivering the right type and size of houses in the right locations is clearly the right approach to meeting housing needs of the Black Country. However, we object to the policy as written on the basis that it is not the correct way of achieving these objectives as it is an incredibly blunt object for developers to comply with when it comes to delivering the houses that are needed.

Whilst the policy seeks to differentiate between the need for market and affordable housing, another key determinate of where housing is to be delivered is geographical location. Developments in the strategic centres or regeneration corridors are likely to be better served by public transport and existing shops, services and facilities which would lend themselves to higher density developments that could include apartments. An apartment scheme, however, is unlikely to be able to deliver the full mix of dwellings sought in the policy. Whilst NGAs are better placed to deliver a higher proportion of 3- and 4-bedroom dwellings to assist in meeting the target of delivering at least 54% of the dwellings with 3 or more bedrooms. The policy, as worded, does not consider these different market areas and seeks to apply a one size fits all approach to delivering housing in both. This is not a sound approach.

Comment

Representation ID: 23234

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Member of Parliament

The Plan states, "the density of housing development in the existing urban areas will be increased to ensure that the land is used efficiently". There is widespread support to ensure the better utilisation of existing development land especially were it allows an increase in density and infilling for new homes, however there are no details or examples contained within the Plan as to how this can be fully achieved.
Whilst such an approach is to be welcomed, to fully understand whether this approach has been adopted by the Plan more information is required, particularly to understand if these are reflected in the proposed numbers.
Strategic Priorities 3 and 4 contained within the Plan carry widespread public support: ­
"to provide a range and choice of accommodation, house types and tenures to meet the needs of current and future residents".
"to improve and diversify the Black Country housing offer".

Comment

Representation ID: 23293

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Redrow Homes Ltd

Agent: Harris Lamb

Furthermore, as detailed in our response to policy HOU2, we are concerned that the density requirements identified are unrealistic. This is on the basis that:

• The emerging plan seeks to adopt a NDSS policy which will increase minimum dwelling sizes impacting upon density.

• It is not unusual, in our experience, for brownfield sites within the Black Country to have constraints that adversely affect their capacity and density, such as mineshafts or due to their relationship to surrounding uses.
• Achieving biodiversity net gain could reduce net developable areas.
• On site POS provision could reduce net developable areas.

It is, therefore, our view that the density policies are over ambitious and unrealistic, and the densities suggested will not be achieved. Site densities should be based on agreed masterplans for the strategic sites as the process is refined, rather than a blanket approach. This in turn suggests that the capacity of the allocations has been over estimated and housing delivery will need to be reduced accordingly.

Comment

Representation ID: 23311

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Redrow Homes Ltd

Agent: Harris Lamb

Policy HOU2 – Housing Density, Type and Accessibility

The policy states that the density and type of housing should be informed by a range of factors. These include the need for and type of new housing required, the level of accessibility of a site to public transport and services and the need to achieve well design development that has regard to the surrounding character of the area. We agree that these considerations are key in determining what the density of new development should be. The policy then goes on to state that all new major development should achieve the minimum net densities set out in Table 5, which range from 40 dph to 100+ dph. Whilst the 100+ dph range is intended to be delivered within strategic centres or close to transport hubs, achieving 40 dph on other sites will present certain challenges, particularly in the context of other policy requirements in the Plan.

A large proportion of the development sites within the Black Country are urban brownfield sites. These can often have constraints that can reduce their net developable area, such as mineshafts or underground infrastructure such as cables and pipes. These sites are often relatively small and are not regular in shape. This makes achieving an efficient layout problematic. This has the consequence of reducing the net developable area and net density.

Policy HOU2 requires that a range of house types and sizes are provided in new developments. The Table on page 100 of the draft Plan confirms that there is a greater demand for 3, 4 and 4+ bed properties than 1 and 2 bed properties. Table 5.10 of the BCHMA, advises that 54% of the housing requirement should be delivered as three or more bedroom properties, with over 25% of the properties required as four bed and four bed plus. Larger dwellings take up more space and consequently reduce density.

The emerging Plan also proposes the introduction of National Described Space Standards through Policy ENV9 – Design Quality. This will result in minimum property sizes applying and consequently the average footprint of properties increasing. Again, this will result in densities decreasing.

Policy ENV8 – Open Space, Sport and Recreation, advises that each local authority will set out specific proposals for open space, sport and recreation provision for new developments in their Part 2 Local Plans. As these standards have not been published it is not possible to confirm what impact they will have on the capacity of sites. However, introducing policies that require on site open space and sport facilities will reduce the amount of land available for development that will in turn reduces the number of dwellings a site can accommodate.

The Environment Bill will introduce a required for new developments to achieve 10% biodiversity net gain. This could require additional land for offsetting on development sites. This will reduce the number of units that can be accommodated on sites and their gross density.

Drawing these factors together, we are concerned that the density levels proposed by the Policy are unrealistic. The capacity of the proposed allocations has been overestimated.

Object

Representation ID: 23325

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: St Modwen SL&R

Agent: RPS

Paragraph 7.6-7.8 - "RPS objects to the proposed increase in the density standards in the dBCP and recommends that the addition of 476 dwellings should be discounted from the overall supply included in Table 3 of the BCP." Minimum densities are not flexible enough and contrary to the NPPF para 125a in locations outside of the main city and town centres.

Comment

Representation ID: 23328

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Bloor Homes

POLICY HOU2- HOUSING DENSITY, TYPE AND ACCESSIBILITY

Proposed Policy HOU2 requires all developments of 10 or more dwellings to achieve a minimum density of 100 dwellings per hectare in a Strategic Centre or Town Centre; 45 dwellings per hectare where accessibility standards for high density housing are met and 40 dwellings per hectare where accessibility standards for moderate density housing are met except where this would prejudice historic character and local distinctiveness.

BHL welcomes that the proposed policy allows a degree of flexibility and sets out a range of densities that reflect the accessibility and potential of different areas, rather than one broad density range. However, BHL consider that when setting density requirements, BCA should ensure that they have taken into account all of their policy aspirations to ascertain that they are achievable
in practice. For example, BCA should ensure that the proposed set density requirements are attainable for developers when also considering the proposed sett requirements for M4(2) and M4(3) properties (proposed Policy HO3) when they have greater land take; and the proposed design requirements as stated in proposed Policy ENV9 etc.

Object

Representation ID: 23349

Received: 08/10/2021

Respondent: Barberry

Agent: RCA Regeneration Ltd

WOH265 - objection to density proposed
1.1. This is a representation to the Regulation 18 Draft Black Country Plan which is subject to
consultation until 11 October 2021. It is made on behalf of Barberry in respect of land they are promoting for residential development at Perton Court Farm, Wrottesley Park Road, Perton.
1.2. The site itself falls entirely within South Staffordshire, however, a neighbouring area of land
(which falls within the Wolverhampton City boundary) to the south east at Perton Road (Ref
WOH265 WTNA) has been proposed to be released from the Green belt as a housing allocation.
1.3. This is relevant to Barberry and the site they are promoting as they are directly adjacent and share a boundary.
1.4. Barberry have submitted a Vision Document to South Staffordshire Council communicating the
constraints and opportunities of the site, together with a proposed masterplan.
1.5. Barberry would like Wolverhampton City Council to consider this and how their site might better
tie in with the proposed allocation at Perton Road.
1.6. Clearly, Barberry intend to make representations to the South Staffordshire Preferred Options
plan, where consultation is due to begin in the coming weeks.
1.7. Barberry reserve the right make further representations to the Black Country Plan as
opportunities arise. It should be noted that not commenting on an aspect of the emerging plan
does not mean they agree with that content.

2. REPRESENTATION
2.1. Barberry would like to begin by expressing their support for the allocation of the land (inside the
Wolverhampton CC boundary) East of Perton Road, Wightwick (Ref WOH265 WTNA) particularly
as it relates well to the existing established settlement edge, with the opportunity to provide a
more definitive boundary to the Green Belt beyond.
2.2. Barberry agree that there should be mitigation for green belt loss to be provided through
accessibility, biodiversity and environmental quality improvements to nearby Smestow Valley
Local Nature Reserve. However, Barberry dispute the fact that the ‘track to the north west, which
runs along the Wolverhampton / South Staffs District boundary’ , (which forms at the junction
between Pattingham Road and Perton Road) is capable of providing a defensible new green belt
boundary. The track itself is neither robust nor enduring and could easily change over time.
2.3. Paragraph 143 (f) of the NPPF is clear that when defining new Green Belt boundaries, plans
should ‘define boundaries clearly, using physical features that are readily recognisable and likely
to be permanent.’
2.4. We consider a better solution would be to holistically plan for the wider site, which is controlled
by Barberry, as shown in the attached Vision Document. Here, it is shown that the development
of the site would result in new parks and play spaces, as well as a safe route to school for children
living in Perton itself.
2.5. The following table summarises the policies that we have commented on in this representation:
Table 1 – Policies/Paragraphs subject to comment:
Policy/Para Title Page
HOU1
and
WOH265 WTNA
Delivering Sustainable Housing Growth 89 (Table 3 and
Table 4)
HOU2 Housing Density, Type and Accessibility 96
HOU1 – Delivering Sustainable Housing Growth and WOH265 WTNA - Land East of Perton Road,
Wightwick.
2.6. The land east of Perton Road is proposed to be allocated for about 4 dwellings on 0.6 ha of land,
which is substantially low in terms of density, and an inefficient use of land. We consider this
could be increased because there are opportunities within the wider site for compensatory
access to open spaces. Of course, the wider site would have to be included as an allocation in the
emerging South Staffordshire Local Plan. Moreover, a development density of around 30
dwellings per ha would be more aligned to the established densities within the immediate
vicinity of the site. An extract of the proposals map is shown overleaf:
2.7. We consider, in reality, that if this site were to be allocated that it is unlikely just 4 dwellings
would be delivered, particularly with the added burden of delivering any noticeable
improvements to the Smestow Valley Local Nature Reserve. Nor would 4 dwellings deliver any
affordable housing or tangible public benefits, other than marginally improving housing choice
within the local area. Developers of this site are likely to push for more.
2.8. Clearly, Green Belt is a strategic planning policy which exists on a permanent basis, transcending
plan periods. It should only be released in exceptional circumstances. To that end, a small ‘nibble’
of the Green Belt as proposed is unlikely to pass the exceptional circumstances test, nor is it
likely to be warranted on such a small-scale site. It is our view that the wholesale removal of the
wider site, together with the small site should be considered, where the exceptional
circumstances test could be met and where the compensatory measures as set out in the NPPF
at para 142 could be properly addressed: ‘Strategic policy-making authorities should……. also set
out ways in which the impact of removing land from the Green Belt can be offset through
compensatory improvements to the environmental quality and accessibility of remaining Green
Belt land’.
2.9. There are some strategic allocations included in the BC Plan proposed at Linthouse Lane, Cross
Green and Bilbrook, all of which will require substantial lead-in times, smaller strategic sites like
the land at Perton Court Farm could conceivably come forward quicker as they do not require
substantial infrastructure investment.
2.10. The BC authorities aspire to deliver 47,837 new homes over the course of the plan period 2020 to
2039. We note that in Table 4, there has been a lapse rate allowance of 10% discounted to allow
for some sites which may not come forward over the course of the plan. We would like to know
whether this truly represents the historic lapse rate pattern, as we are aware of a substantial
number of sites within Wolverhampton that have not come forward because of persistent
viability problems associated with heritage, site contamination and other issues which include tensions between commercial/industrial land values being similar to those of residential (postremediation).
We are not clear whether this has been considered carefully enough.
2.11. Further, the BC authorities propose to ‘export’ 28,239 dwellings outside of its boundary – but as
South Staffordshire Council have just publicised their preferred options Local Plan, it remains the
case that they propose to take c.4,000 dwelling as (unmet need), but it is not clear whether this is
unmet need from the GBSLEP area, or the Black Country. This needs clarification.
2.12. At 7,657 (Table 3), we consider the windfall allowance to be high – it represents around 16% of the
total housing target for the plan period, which is a considerable proportion. Given the
requirements of the NPPF, we consider the plan is at risk of not being ‘positively prepared’ given
this (we feel) overreliance on unallocated housing in the emerging plan. Paragraph 71 of the
NPPF sets this out clearly: ‘Where an allowance is to be made for windfall sites as part of
anticipated supply, there should be compelling evidence that they will 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. Plans should
consider the case for setting out policies to resist inappropriate development of residential
gardens, for example where development would cause harm to the local area.’
HOU2 - Housing Density, Type and Accessibility
2.13. We are broadly supportive of the densities proposed in the emerging plan, however for reasons
already given, we consider that the densities on the proposed allocation at WOH265 are far too
low and represent an inefficient use of land, contrary to paragraph 124 of the NPPF, which states:
‘Planning policies and decisions should support development that makes efficient use of land’.
4. CONCLUSION
4.1. Overall Barberry welcome the inclusion of the land at Perton Road, Wightwick as a housing
allocation and its removal from the Green Belt. Barberry will make further representations to the
emerging South Staffs Local Plan when the consultation begins as they believe there is an
opportunity for further land to be included in this allocation within their administrative
boundary.
4.2. Barberry consider a holistic and strategic approach is clearly preferable and this is demonstrated
within the Vision Document, which is submitted with this representation.
4.3. We have made comments on more generic planning policies where we consider it is justified,
and we urge the BC councils to consider the points we have made.

Support

Representation ID: 23355

Received: 30/09/2021

Respondent: Seven Homes

Agent: RCA Regeneration Ltd

HOU2 - Housing Density, Type and Accessibility
2.7. We are broadly supportive of the densities proposed in the emerging plan, however we consider
they are aspirational when it comes to the central areas of the main Black Country settlements,
with the exception of perhaps Wolverhampton, because of viability (specifically build costs v
likely sales values). Apartments continue to be difficult to sell in much of the Black Country and
it is hard to imagine how (post-covid) high density apartment schemes will, in reality, come
forward on any great scale. We would urge the BC authorities to reconsider their expectations on
this moving forwards.
2.8. We would seek some flexibility in the application of accessibility standards – particularly as a
result of the move towards more sustainable personal travel modes, such as electric cars.
2.9. We would also seek flexibility in the application of housing mix standards, where evidence from
the availability of second hand stock within the immediate area demonstrates an oversupply of a
particular size of dwelling.

Object

Representation ID: 23374

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: West Midlands CPRE

Agent: Gerald Kells

Policy HOU2
CPRE supports the policy on densities in terms of the Minimum Density Standards. However, we would add a further sentence to the Policy requiring developers to provide evidence that they have sought to maximize the efficient use of land, both in terms of the houses themselves but also in terms of the overall layout of the site. We particularly support an approach which encourages permeable sites, so that walking and cycling in particular are attractive, and do not require lengthy travel round complex road networks.

Support

Representation ID: 23421

Received: 15/02/2022

Respondent: L&Q Estates

Agent: Barton Willmore

7.9 Draft Policy HOU2 (Housing Density, Type and Accessibility) seeks to assess the accessibility of all housing developments to a range of residential services by walking, cycling or public transport to determine housing densities. Whilst we are supportive of this approach, the policy states that all major developments should achieve a minimum net density of 40 dwellings per hectare (dph) where accessibility standards for moderate density housing are met. However, Part 5 of Draft Policy HOU2 states:

‘Chapter 13 provides details of the appropriate density and, where appropriate, house type mix, to be sought on each housing allocation site, in accordance with the requirements set out in this policy. Further details of design requirements for housing developments may be set out in Supplementary Planning Documents.’

7.10 Draft Policy WSA4 (Yieldfields Farm) within Chapter 13 identifies that the Site should deliver a density of at least 35 dph, which is lower that the density requirements set out within Draft Policy HOU2, which requires higher densities of at least 40 dph. We consider that only Part 5 of the Draft Policy HOU2, and thus the requirements set out within Chapter 13 of the Plan, applies to Yieldfields. However, we do consider that an average density of 40 dph is achievable on the Site and Masterplan 1 contained in the Vision Document is based on this density. This ensures that Masterplan 1 can deliver 978 homes, in accordance with Draft Policy WSA4. Due to site constraints, it is considered that the net developable area of Masterplan 1 is 24.7 hectares and if this was delivered at a net density of 35 dph, it would result in 864 homes being delivered

Object

Representation ID: 23600

Received: 10/11/2021

Respondent: HIMOR Group

Agent: Emery Planning

7.6
Policy HOU2 - Housing Density, Type and Accessibility
Paragraph 60 of the Framework states:
"To support the Government's objective of significantly boosting the supply of
homes, it is important that a sufficient amount and variety of land can come
forward where it is needed. that the needs of qrouos with specific housinq
requirements are addressed and that land with permission is developed without
unnecessary delay". (our emphasis)
Paragraph 62 Of the Framework explains that within this context:
"the size. tvoe and tenure of housing needed for different qrouos in the
community should be assessed and reflected in plannina policies (including,
but not limited to. those who require affordable housing, families with children,
older people, students, people with disabilities, , service families, travellers,
people who rent their homes and people wishing to commission or build their
own homes". (our emphasis)
Paragraph 2a-023 of the PPG: "What is the relationship between the current housing stock and
current and future needs?", states:
"Strategic policy-making authorities will need to look at the current stock of
houses Of different sizes and assess whether these match current and future
needs. '
Policy HOU2 does not provide any specific mix relating to need. It simply requires the density and
type of housing to be informed by "the need for a range of types and sizes of accommodation
to meet identified sub-regional and local needs". The policy then sets out minimum density
requirements, the lowest of which is 40 dwellings per hectare (dph), which would still be relatively
high density for a housing development.
The plan fails to properly address the need for different types of housing, in particular family
housing. This goes to the heart Of the strategy Of predominately relying upon brownfield sites in
the urban area. We refer to the analysis undertaken by Turley in their review of housing need and
supply in the Black Country (see Appendix EPI. paragraphs 2.10 — 2.13 & 424 — 4.27).
Furthermore, we question whether the need for different types and sizes of housing identified in
Section 5 Of the BCHMA is robust. The methodology for adducing the required housing mix is not
specified in the BCHMA, but it appears to be based upon demographic modelling assumptions
(i.e., the bedroom standard referred to on page 60, footnote 36 for the BCHMA. Or similar) rather 7.7
than any analysls of current and future market demand
Fo xample, a farm y of four may In
demographic terms require a three-bedroom house. However. that family may aspire to live in,
or need for other reasons, a four or five-bedroom house. For example, spare bedrooms may be
required for a home Office or guest accommodation. Such issues have become particularly
relevant post-COVID with the shift towards increased home working.
We therefore consider that the Overall strategy needs to be re-assessed to ensure that the need
for specific types of housing, in particular family housing, are met.

Comment

Representation ID: 43822

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: HIMOR Group

Agent: Emery Planning

20

7. Policy HOU2 - Housing Density, Type and Accessibility
7.1 Paragraph 60 of the Framework states:

homes, it is important that a sufficient amount and variety of land can come
forward where it is needed, that the needs of groups with specific housing
requirements are addressed and that land with permission is developed without
(our emphasis)
7.2 Paragraph 62 of the Framework explains that within this context:

the size, type and tenure of housing needed for different groups in the
community should be assessed and reflected in planning policies (including,
but not limited to, those who require affordable housing, families with children,
older people, students, people with disabilities, , service families, travellers,
people who rent their homes and people wishing to commission or build their
(our emphasis)
7.3 Paragraph 2a- What is the relationship between the current housing stock and
current and future needs?

Strategic policy-making authorities will need to look at the current stock of
houses of different sizes and assess whether these match current and future
needs.
7.4 Policy HOU2 does not provide any specific mix relating to need. It simply requires the density and
type of housing to be informed by s and sizes of accommodation
to meet identified sub- . The policy then sets out minimum density
requirements, the lowest of which is 40 dwellings per hectare (dph), which would still be relatively
high density for a housing development.

7.5 The plan fails to properly address the need for different types of housing, in particular family
housing. This goes to the heart of the strategy of predominately relying upon brownfield sites in
the urban area. We refer to the analysis undertaken by Turley in their review of housing need and
supply in the Black Country (see Appendix EP1, paragraphs 2.10 2.13 & 4.24 4.27).

7.6 Furthermore, we question whether the need for different types and sizes of housing identified in
Section 5 of the BCHMA is robust. The methodology for adducing the required housing mix is not
specified in the BCHMA, but it appears to be based upon demographic modelling assumptions
(i.e., the bedroom standard referred to on page 60, footnote 36 for the BCHMA, or similar) rather

21

than any analysis of current and future market demand. For example, a family of four may in
demographic terms require a three-bedroom house. However, that family may aspire to live in,
or need for other reasons, a four or five-bedroom house. For example, spare bedrooms may be
required for a home office or guest accommodation. Such issues have become particularly
relevant post-COVID with the shift towards increased home working.

7.7 We therefore consider that the overall strategy needs to be re-assessed to ensure that the need
for specific types of housing, in particular family housing, are met.

Object

Representation ID: 43846

Received: 05/10/2021

Respondent: St Philips

Agent: RCA Regeneration Ltd

2.9. We are broadly supportive of the densities proposed in the emerging plan, however for reasons already given, we consider that the densities on the land controlled by St Phillips within the Fallings Park allocation could be increased without compromising on the design quality and need to ensure the character of this edge of the site is maintained.

2.10. We would seek some flexibility in the application of accessibility standards – particularly as a result of the move towards more sustainable personal travel modes, such as electric cars.

2.11. We would also seek flexibility in the application of housing mix standards, where evidence from the availability of second hand stock within the immediate area demonstrates an oversupply of a particular size of dwelling.

Object

Representation ID: 43864

Received: 05/10/2021

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Pegasus

7.5 Policy HOU2 refers to housing density, type and accessibility. It sets out that density requirements will be dependent on accessibility standards. It also refers to developments providing a range of house types and sizes that will meet accommodation needs of existing and future residents "in line with the most recently available information". It would be helpful if the policy identified what sources of information would be utilised to identify the range of house types and sizes being required, such as an up-to-date Strategic Housing Market Assessment ('SHMA') or housing needs survey.
7.6 In terms of accessibility standards, it identifies a number of key services/ facilities which should be provided within certain distances from development. Whilst Taylor Wimpey does not necessarily object to these, the Plan should clarify the evidence upon which the travel times are based (notwithstanding that some clarification is provided at paragraph 6.17), and the mode of travel (walking is assumed).
7.7 The Black Country Housing Market Assessment 2021 is referred to in the supporting text regarding housing mix and extracts from it set out detailed percentages for each type of accommodation and tenure. In order to provide suitable flexibility in the market and in particular to reflect the location of specific sites, the supporting text and policy should both make clear that these figures are a guideline and will be informed by other evidence dependent on-site location and specifics applying at the time that planning applications are determined. Currently the text is overly prescriptive and inflexible.