Policy HOU2 – Housing Density, Type and Accessibility

Support

Representation ID: 43918

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Barratt West Midlands

Agent: Turley Associates

3.52 It is agreed that a range of types and sizes of accommodation are needed, this is reflected in the Councils’ Housing Market Assessment (March 2021). Notwithstanding this, any housing mix should be agreed based on the most recently available information at the point an application is determined, this is rightly acknowledged by the policy.

Object

Representation ID: 44763

Received: 03/10/2021

Respondent: Churchill Retirement Living and McCarthy Stone Retirement Lifestyles

Agent: Planning Issues

McCarthy Stone and Churchill Retirement Living are independent and competing housebuilders specializing in retirement living housing for older people. Together we are responsible for delivering approx. 90% of England’s specialist owner-occupied retirement housing. Para 1 of PPG states: “The need to provide…. Plan-making through to decision-taking”
The SHMA notes that there is a substantial need for retirement housing accommodation in the Black Country, with a particular need for owner occupied retirement accommodation, stating that: "To meet local demand rates in 2039, the model identifies a requirement for 4,907 additional units of Sheltered housing for older people and 604 additional Enhanced Sheltered/ Extracare units in the Black Country over the plan period (definitions set out in footnotes 66 and 67). Of the 4,907 new units of Sheltered housing for older people, almost two-thirds should be market accommodation, with the remainder affordable"
It is clear that that there is an existing tenure mismatch in specialist older persons' accommodation in the County that needs to be addressed through the Local Development Plan and, unless properly planned for, there is likely to be a serious shortfall in specialist accommodation for the older population, which will have a knock-on effect in meeting the housing needs of the whole Black Country area and wider policy objectives.
Policy HOU2 deals with Housing Density, Type and Accessibility. We were surprised that the local authority did not specify that specialist accommodation for older people should be promoted despite the need for such accommodation forming over 10% of the housing need over the BCP period. The BCP seems to address the need for older persons' accommodation within Policy HW1. While specialist accommodation for older people does provide many health benefits for older persons it is our view that given the critical need for specialist retirement accommodation that Policy HOU2 should be amended to support the delivery of this type of accommodation in this policy in addition to within policy HW1. In addition to this, due to the nature of this type of accommodation it should be made clear that sub section 3 of this policy does not apply to providers of specialist accommodation for older people as a mix of tenures and unit sizes would be inappropriate for this form of accommodation.
RECOMMENDATION
To address the concerns detailed in our representation we would suggest the following amendments to Policy HOU2:
- ADDITION OF SUBHEADER D TO PART 1 supporting the provision of specialist accommodation for older people.
- Addition of Asterix to part 3 to note that this part of the policy will not apply
to specialist accommodation for older people.
Policy HOU3 - Delivering Affordable. Wheelchair Accessible and Self Build / Custom Build Housing
The Black Country Plan (Regulation 18 Consultation) is one of an alarmingly limited number of emerging Local Plans that have set a differential affordable housing rate of between 10% and 30% which is dependent on the anticipated sales prices for housing (i.e. the `value zones') and whether the land is greenfield or brownfield. This is, of itself, highly commendable and suggests a greater focus on viability at the Plan making stage.
The affordable housing targets detailed in the above policy are informed by the Black Country Plan Viability and Delivery Study (BCVDS) undertaken by Aspinall Verdi.
In assessing the BCVDS we note that no viability appraisals were undertaken for specialist older persons' housing typologies - namely Sheltered Housing and Extra Care accommodation. This is disappointing and considered to be contrary to both best practice and the typology approach detailed in Paragraph: 004 (Reference ID:10-004-20190509) of the PPG which states that. "A typology approach is a process plan makers can follow to ensure that they are creating realistic, deliverable policies based on the type of sites that are likely to come forward for development over the plan period.
This is a surprising omission and contrary to industry best practice in our view. We respectfully request that viability appraisals are undertaken for these forms of development and that we are provided with the opportunity for comment prior to the Regulation 19 consultation.
The SHMA identifies a requirement for 4,907 additional units of sheltered housing and 604 units of extra care accommodation by 2039. The Local Plan makes it clear that viable sites bringing these forms over development forward will be required over the Plan period. In burdening these forms of development with an unrealistic planning obligations regime, the Local Plan is considered to be unsound as these obligations are not justified, effective and the Plan is not positively prepared correspondingly.
The BCVDS concludes that all housing development in the Lower Value Zones cannot
deliver 10% affordable housing viably. Flatted housing typologies, which it is
presumed includes retirement living and extra care housing, are generally not viable (paragraph 6.85) and this is most pronounced in lower value areas and previously developed land. Specialist older persons' housing is even more finely balanced than `general needs' flatted developments given the longer sales period, higher build costs and cost of providing communal facilities.
Given the substantial weight attributed to the use of brownfield land within settlements for homes in paragraph 118 of the NPPF and the Council's emphasis on sustainability in Local Plan, it is both surprising and disappointing that it should look to impose an unrealistic planning obligations burden on development in the most sustainable locations.
The PPG makes it clear that `Different requirements may be set for different types or location of site or types of development' (Paragraph: 001 Reference ID: 10-001¬20190509). We are strongly of the view that it would be more appropriate to set a lower, potentially nil, affordable housing target for flatted development in urban areas.
The Local Plan is therefore considered to be unsound on the grounds the affordable housing targets are not justified, positively prepared or effective.
RECOMMENDATION:
McCarthy Stone and Churchill Retirement Living consider that the Black Country Plan Viability and Delivery Study does not provide a credible basis for seeking affordable housing contributions from Retirement Living and Extra Care Housing as unusually, and contrary to best practice, viability appraisals were not undertaken for specialist older persons' housing typologies.
This is particularly concerning as that the viability of flatted development in the Black Country is acknowledged as being finely balanced and specialist older persons' housing have higher build costs and a slower sales rate than `general needs' flats.
In light of the above, we respectfully request that viability appraisals are undertaken for these forms of development and that we are provided with the opportunity for comment prior to the Regulation 19 consultation.

Comment

Representation ID: 44781

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Consortium of Developers

Number of people: 4

Agent: Turley Associates

Size and type of housing needed

2.10 While this section has focused on the overall number of homes needed in the Black Country, the size and type of housing needed is also an important consideration. The NPPF is clear in stating that the planning system should ensure that ‘a sufficient number and range of homes can be provided to meet the needs of present and future generations’, and therefore requires ‘the size, type and tenure of housing needed for different groups in the community’ to be ‘assessed and reflected in planning policies’15.

2.11 The BCHMA rightly, in this context, seeks to estimate the sizes of homes needed in each tenure. This is summarised at Table 2.2 below, with the addition of totals to aid interpretation.

See attachments for Table 2.2: Size of housing needed by tenure (2020-39)

2.12 While this modelling suggests a need for property of all sizes, it indicates that the greatest need is for larger homes with at least three bedrooms, with this accounting for 54% of the overall need for housing in the Black Country.

2.13 This profile of need has clear implications for the type of housing needed to deliver such a mix, even if this is not explicitly considered by the BCHMA. Houses, rather than flats or bungalows, will undoubtedly be required for instance to meet the need for larger homes with at least three bedrooms, where some 97% of the existing homes of this size in the Black Country are houses16. Indeed, when combining the above with these statistics from the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) – which show the proportion of one bedroom properties in the Black Country that are flats, for example – it can be argued that two thirds (66%) of the overall need for housing in this area relates to
houses, with a much smaller need for flats (27%) and bungalows (6%). The Draft BCP should, therefore, identify a supply of sites capable of delivering such a mix, a point considered further in section 4 of this report.

Comment

Representation ID: 44793

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Consortium of Developers

Number of people: 4

Agent: Turley Associates

Considering the type and size of housing likely to be delivered

4.24 The NPPF requires planning polices to reflect the size, type and tenure of housing needed, and the BCHMA – as summarised in section 2 – identifies a prevailing need for larger homes that could require two thirds of all new homes over the plan period to be houses.

4.25 From review of the Councils’ evidence base supporting the Draft BCP, it is unclear if any assessment of the proposed sources of housing supply has been undertaken to ascertain whether this prevailing need for houses will be met. Draft Policy HOU2 (‘Housing Density, Type and Accessibility’) sets out generic requirements, stating that density and type of new housing provided on any site should be informed by the need for a range of types and sizes to accommodate local needs.

4.26 The Councils’ forward housing supply is heavily distorted and relies on previously developed land, with circa 85% of all supply coming from non-greenfield sources. This is reflected in draft Policy HOU2 which drives higher densities when certain criteria are met and the site is located within a Strategic Centre or Town Centre. The densities in draft Policy HOU2 are also increased from the previous policy context, with justification included in Section 2 of the Urban Capacity Study.

4.27 Given the Councils’ forward supply is so reliant on non-greenfield sources, where traditionally certain types and sizes of housing are more readily delivered due to factors such as viability and density, the Councils should closely consider whether the Draft BCP is clear or justified in the approach to supplying the size, type and tenure of housing needed, and what modifications should be made if it comes to light that the BCP is not meeting needs.

Support

Representation ID: 44840

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Ruskin Properties

Policy HOU2 – Housing Density, Type and Accessibility
The principle of increasing densities is supported with minimum densities based on accessibility criteria and proximity to local services and facilities. Limited reasons are set out for schemes to not achieve the minimum net densities set out within the draft policy with only reference to historic character and local distinctiveness given. The policy needs to include reference to physical constraints on a site such as sewers and easements, culverted watercourses, steep slopes, unstable land, and stand-off distances required from mine shafts post treatment.

Comment

Representation ID: 44841

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Ruskin Properties

The draft policy refers to the need to achieve high-quality design and to minimise amenity impacts. Whilst this is supported, for this policy to be effective, there needs to be a step change from Local Planning Authorities on the definition of high-quality design. Developments of between 40-45 dph will not deliver long-established housing layouts of 2/3/4-bedroom homes with side-parking, 21-22m rear gardens, 5.5m wide carriageways with 2m footways and tracking for large refuse vehicles, which is heavily pushed for by Highway Authorities. Unless there is buy-in for a change in the way housing is laid out, designed, and serviced by Local Planning Authorities, this policy will fail.

Object

Representation ID: 44895

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Folkes Holdings

Agent: Harris Lamb

P1661
SUBJECT: BLACK COUNTRY PLAN – DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY

RESPONSE TO POLICY CSP1 – DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY (HOUSING DELIVERY)
Housing Requirement
Policy CSP1 – Development Strategy, of the draft Plan provides the overarching policy guidance on housing delivery during the course of the Plan Period. Part 1.(a) of the policy states that during the course of the Plan Period “at least” 47,837 net new homes will be provided in the Black Country. However, the housing target of 47,837 dwellings will not deliver the total number of houses that are required. Table 2 – Black Country Development Strategy 2020-2039, of the draft Plan identifies a need for the development of 76,076 dwellings. The residual requirement of 28,239 dwellings will be directed to other local authority areas through the duty to cooperate.

We have a number of concerns with the overall housing requirement identified in the Plan and the sources of housing land supply that have been identified to meet the target. This has consequential implications for the quantum of development that will be needed to be exported to other local authority areas.

In the first instance, Table 2 of the draft Plan suggests that a total of 76,076 dwellings is required
during the Plan Period. This is, however, less than the Standard Method housing requirement identified by the Black Country Housing Market Assessment 2021 (“BCHMA”), produced by the Black Country Authorities. At paragraph 4.13 it is advised that “the final housing need in the Black Country, assessed using the revised Standard Method, is 4,019 per year”. The Plan period runs from 2020 to 2039. As such, the BCHMA concludes with a total of 76,361 dwellings required during the course of the plan period (4,019dpa x 19 years).

The National Planning Policy Framework (“the Framework”) advises at paragraph 61 that to determine
the “minimum” number of homes needed, strategic policies should be informed by a local housing needs assessment conducted using the Standard Method, unless exceptional circumstances justify an
alternative approach, which also reflects current and future demographic trends and market signals. The draft Plan suggests a minimum housing figure below that identified by the BCHMA, and consequently fails to meet the requirement of the Framework. That being the case, as a very minimum, the overall housing requirement needs to be uplifted by 285 dwellings to be consistent with the Council’s evidenced based documents.
Paragraph 4.14 of the BCHMA advises that whilst paragraph 010 of the PPG identifies a series of
circumstances where it may be appropriate to pursue a higher housing needs figure than is indicated by the Standard Method “this assessment is carried out on the basis that the Standard Method figure set out in the above will apply”. That being the case, the BCHMA does not test whether the minimum standard of housing requirement figure should be increased, in accordance with the requirements of the PPG.

Paragraph ID:2a – 010 – 20201216, of the PPG advises that “there will be circumstances where it is
appropriate to consider whether the actual housing need is higher than the standard method indicates”. This will need to be assessed prior to, and separate from, considering how much of the overall need can be accommodated (and then translated into a housing requirement figure for the strategic policies in the plan). Circumstances where this may be appropriate include, but are not limited to situations where increases in housing need are likely to exceed past trends because of:
• Growth strategies for the area that are likely to be deliverable;
• Strategic infrastructure improvements that are likely to drive an increase in the homes needed
locally; or
• An authority agreeing to take on unmet need from neighbouring authorities.

We are not aware of any assessment to establish whether the minimum Standard Method housing
requirement should be exceeded. It could be the case that the minimum Standard Method housing requirement is not sufficient to meet the housing needs of the Black Country.

In this regard we note that Table 5.1 of the BCHMA identifies that the percentage of people of working
age in the Black Country will be less in 2039 than it is in 2020. In order to meet the emerging Plan’s economic growth aspirations it is necessary to ensure that a sufficient number of houses are provided to meet the jobs which will be created during the course of the Plan Period. An assessment should be undertaken to establish if the housing requirement needs to be uplifted to support economic growth.

In addition, the demand for affordable housing is a significant factor that should be considered in establishing the housing requirement. Paragraph 6.6 of the BCHMA advises that there is a requirement for 867 affordable properties per year in the Black Country. This is the equivalent of approximately 21.6% of the annualised housing requirement (including the proportion of the housing requirement that will be directed outside of the Plan area). It is expected that the principal way of
delivering this affordable housing would be via Section 106 agreements.

Policy HOU3 – Delivering Affordable Housing, Wheelchair Accessibility and Self Build/Custom Build
Housing, advises that 10% affordable housing will be sought on sites in lower value areas and brownfield sites in medium value zones. 20% affordable housing will be sought on greenfield sites and in medium value areas. On all sites in higher value areas 30% affordable housing will be sought. That being the case, only the sites in the higher value areas deliver more than 21.6% affordable
housing.

The draft Plan does not identify what proportion of the housing requirement is expected to take place
in each of these zones. However, paragraph 6.4 of the Plan advises that 81% of the housing requirement is expected to be provided on brownfield land, and 19% on greenfield land. That being the case, this strongly suggests that the affordable housing policy within the Plan will be incapable of delivering a sufficient quantum of affordable housing to meet their identified need.

We are not aware of any assessment that seeks to establish the relationship between the quantum of
affordable housing required by the BCHMA, and the likely level of affordable housing that it is expected by Policy HOU3 of the Plan will deliver. This is a key piece of evidence that is missing from the emerging Plan. An increase to the minimum housing requirement may be required to ensure that a sufficiently supply of affordable housing is provided.

Drawing these matters together, it is our view that the housing requirement within the plan is not justified given that it is below the minimum Standard Method requirement, and there appears to have been no supporting work undertaken to establish if there is a requirement for an uplift to the minimum Standard Method Housing target on economic or affordability grounds.

Housing Delivery
We also have a number of concerns with the deliverability of various sources of the housing demand supply identified by the Plan. Table 3 – Black Country Housing Land Supply Indicative Phasing 20202039, identifies
the various sources of housing land supply. We have
a number of concerns with the sources of supply,
including:
• Sites with Other Commitment – The sites in this category are expected to deliver 3,802 dwellings during the course of the plan period. It is understood from the Black Country authorities SHLAAs that an “other commitment” is a site with a resolution to grant planning
permission but the Section 106 has not been signed. This source of supply is discounted by 10% in order to allow for non-delivery. It is not clear from the draft Plan how the 10% discount rate has been calculated. However, it is noted that the SHLAAs (eg. Walsall SHLAA 2019 paragraph 17) advise that Other Commitments are discounted by 10% as the adopted Black Country Core Strategy (“BCCS”) applied a discount rate of 10% to commitments. It is advised that a discount rate that is based on past trends may not be an appropriate way of establishing future delivery rates. Housing delivery in the Black Country has been affected by the 2008 recession and a number of government initiatives for improving future delivery, such as help to buy and ISA for first time buyers.

Whilst this may be the case, we would also suggest that it is equally unreliable to take a discount rate from the adopted BCCS, which was published in 2011. The BCCS is in excess of ten years old, and its supporting evidence documents even older. At the very least, a past
trends based analysis should be undertaken in order to see if the discount rate is robust for the Other Commitments category. There is insufficient information available to determine whether or not the discount rate suggested is robust. Furthermore, it is not clear whether
there are sites with a resolution to grant planning permission, but the S.106 has not been signed, where the resolutions are several years old. If the resolution to grant planning permission is more than 6 months old the site should not be included as a source of supply.

• Existing Housing Allocations in Strategic Centres – These sites are expected to provide 4,973
dwellings. This is excluding those sites within the Strategic Centres that already have the benefit of planning permission, a resolution to grant planning permission, or are completed. The Walsall Site Allocations Document was adopted in 2019. The Dudley Borough Development Strategy was adopted in February 2017 and other various Dudley MBC AAPs
were adopted between 2011 and 2017. The Sandwell Site Allocations and Delivery DPD was adopted in December 2012. The Wolverhampton Area Action Plans were adopted between 2014 and 2016. There has, therefore, been a significant period of time for the sites allocated for development in the Strategic Centre to come forward for development. The fact that these
sites have not delivered despite the benefit of a positive planning framework suggests that there may be problems with their delivery. That being the case, the 10% discount rate suggested for these sites is entirely unrealistic.

• Occupied Employment Land - Occupied employment land is expected to deliver 3,091dwellings towards the total housing requirement. This should not be included as a source of supply. There is no guarantee if or when such sites will come forward for development.
Landowner’s intentions may change during the course of the Plan Period. In addition, we have frequently found that industrial values outweigh residential values in large parts of the Black Country. As a consequence, it simply may not be economic to bring a site forward for
residential development.

Furthermore, there is a significant shortfall of employment land within the Black Country, and
the conurbation as a whole. Whilst new employment allocations are proposed by the Plan these will be new build estates where rents will be significantly greater than second hand stock. It is unlikely that businesses that are located on the poorer quality employment sites
will be able to afford to rent or buy a new premises. Secondary, and lower cost stock, plays a vital role in the West Midlands economy. Losing land of this type to residential use may result in businesses closing. We are, therefore, extremely concerned that this source of supply is by and large undeliverable but could also have a detrimental effect on the supply of employment
land through the plan area. We therefore recommend that this source of supply be deleted from the supply. If allocated employment sites come forward for development during the course of the Plan Period they should simply be treated as part of the proposed windfall
allowance.

• Other Allocations - The “Other” allocations within the plan have a 10% discount rate applied. It is not clear how this discount rate has been calculated. However, given the significant proportion of the allocations in the draft Plan that are brownfield sites they are likely to have
delivery constraints. A 10% discount rate is inadequate.

• Additional Site Capacity in Strategic Centres - The sites in this category are due to be identified and allocated through subsequent Local Plans produced later into the plan period. We are concerned that the housing figures identified for these areas are not robust, and ultimately
the plan making process will find that there is not the capacity to deliver this level of development within future Local Plans. A substantial discount rate should, therefore, be applied to sites in this category.

Furthermore, 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 their relationship to surrounding uses.
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.

In conclusion, we are concerned that the identified sources of supply will be incapable of meeting that
part of the housing requirement identified by the Plan to be developed in the Black Country. 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 providing much needed market and affordable
housing within the Black Country for those that need it.

Comment

Representation ID: 44936

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Lichfields

Policy HOU2 - Housing Density, Type and
Accessibility

12.1 Part (3) of policy HOU2 states that 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. Taylor Wimpey considers that the source of information should be confirmed in the policy (e.g. it should state that this will be the latest version of the SHMA if this is the case) so it is clear to developers what evidence they need to consider in order to address policy requirements.

12.2 Part (4) of the Policy sets out density requirements for new development based on different accessibility standards and Part 5 of the policy states that Chapter 13 provides details of the appropriate density and, where appropriate, house type mix, to be sought on each housing allocation site. However, it’s is not clear how the requirements of the policy and the density requirements for allocated sites align. For example, Policy WSA.2 suggests that densities of at least 35 dph will apply on the allocation but there is no equivalent density requirement in Policy HOU2. The policy should be amended to clarify this matter.

12.3 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: 44972

Received: 09/03/2022

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Lichfields

Policy HOU2 - Housing Density, Type and
Accessibility
Part (3) of policy HOU2 states that 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. Taylor Wimpey considers that
the source of information should be confirmed in the policy (e.g. it should state that this will be
the latest version Of the SHMA if this is the case) so it is clear to developers What evidence they
need to consider in order to address policy requirements.
part (4) Of the policy sets out density requirements for new development based on different
accessibility standards and Part 5 of the policy states that Chapter 13 provides details of the
appropriate density and, where appropriate, house type mix, to be sought on each housing
allocation site. However, it's is not clear how the requirements of the policy and the density
requirements for allocated sites align. For example, Policy WSA.2 suggests that densities of at
least 35 dph will apply on the allocation but there is no equivalent density æquirement in Policy
HOU2. policy should be amended to clarify this matter.
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: 46183

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Agent: Maddox Planning

Criterion 4 of policy HOU2 stipulates minimum expected net density for all developments of ten homes or more. 4(a) states that very high density of 100 dwellings per hectare or higher is subject to meeting accessibility standards and the site being located within a Strategic Centre or Town Centre. Given that the BCA are currently facing a housing shortfall of at least 25% against Government-assessment requirements, policy HOU2 and the supporting Table 5 should acknowledge that very high density development may also be appropriate within the defined Core Regeneration Areas, subject to accessibility standards and very high density not prejudicing historic character or local distinctiveness.