Policy ENV9 – Design Quality

Support

Representation ID: 11888

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Mr. Dennis R Whittaker

The Policy sums up my reasons.
With respect to paragraph 4 "All new residential development (including the conversion of buildings) and the creation of houses in multiple occupation will be required to meet the Nationally Described Space Standards" , as far as I'm aware, although Dudley MBC uses the NDSS as a guide, it has not adopted them. I assume that this Policy would require them to do - and I would welcome that.

Support

Representation ID: 12040

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Miss Emma Thompson

as per Wildlife Trust's response

Comment

Representation ID: 12583

Received: 29/09/2021

Respondent: Mr Thomas Finn

Walsall Arboretum is a precious local resource and the development of the land alongside the arboretum will spoil the landscape of open fields. My god children love to see the sheep and cows and horses. This is not just Green Belt land it is Green Belt land that is very important to the local population. Planting trees along this border to hide the new builds will be detrimental to the beauty of the arboretum and to the Users. It will also surely impact the wildlife.

Comment

Representation ID: 13001

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Narinder Badyal

Development would ruin views, cause overlooking and result in a concrete jungle. It would devalue property.

Comment

Representation ID: 14848

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Alison Wilkes

Policy ENV9
5
Comment: Design quality and the contribution of developments, where they have to take place, to the greening of the Black Country should be applied to developments of all scales. Features such as swift bricks and other features that can be included in the construction of buildings should be included automatically, with justification needed for their exclusion, in exceptional circumstances.

Comment

Representation ID: 15254

Received: 07/10/2021

Respondent: Mrs Sylvia Whitehouse

Any new developments - could we have decent room sizes, not one bedroom places where we are all pushed into, unable to fit furniture etc.

Comment

Representation ID: 16510

Received: 03/10/2021

Respondent: Ian Newman

Reference the Blackcountry Plan Proposal. Lets first take a look at Netherhall Park, a development on the old St Margarets site. The housing appears quite close to one another with next to no frontage to the properties and parking for vehicles being insufficient. The garages are too small to park a vehicle in and hence this adds to the vehicles being parked on the streets.
Regarding the area services, ie schooling, medical etc. Again, the local schools I believe are already at the maximum capacity, especially as certain schools have children attending that don’t live locally and the medical situation, there has been no real increase in number of GP Surgeries to accommodate the extra number of households.

Support

Representation ID: 17568

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Sport England

Policy ENV9 - Design Quality Sport England supports Part 1e) of the policy that makes specific reference to the 'agent of change' principle as set out in the NPPF. The footnote that relates needs to be updated to reflect the para numbering (now para 187) and text within the latest version of the NPPF (2021). The policy is a missed opportunity to reference Active Design and Active Environments Principles which would sit well with the other principles of good design that are referenced in this policy and would then cross relate to the reference in policy ENV8, and to the other parts of the plan that relate to Health and Well-Being. For instance, could the wording of this policy be strengthened to require major developments to demonstrate they have addressed Active Design issues by providing an Active Design Checklist? (see appendix A of the attached guidance) https://www.sportengland.org/how-we-can-help/facilities-and-planning/design-and-cost-guidance/active-design

Object

Representation ID: 20828

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: L&Q Estates

Agent: Pegasus Group

Paragraph 10.16 to 10.18 - A list of design considerations from ENV9 are challenged on the basis they are outside of planning legislation.

Support

Representation ID: 21251

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Newlands Developments

Draft Policy ENV9 (Design Quality) provides guidance on design standards and principles to be assessed and included within design and access statements. Part 1(d) of Draft Policy ENV9 is of particular relevance to employment developments as it encourages developments to consider crime prevention measures and Secured by Design Principles. We support Policy ENV9 in principle, as this policy seeks to ensure that developments are designed to the highest possible standards.

Comment

Representation ID: 21272

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Redrow Homes Ltd

Agent: Savills

Policy ENV9 – Design Quality
The Policy states that all new residential development should meet Nationally Described Space Standards. The Planning Practice Guidance states that Local Planning Authorities should provide justification for requiring internal space standards “where a need for internal space standards is identified” (Reference ID: 56-020-20150327). We do not consider that the BCP or the Council’s evidence base has justified the requirement for NDSS.

Comment

Representation ID: 21354

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: William Davis Homes

Agent: Define Planning and Design Ltd

POLICY ENV9 – DESIGN QUALITY
As an advocate of the importance of good design, WDH support the intention of Policy ENV9, with the policy requirements set out in the policy reflective of what WDH considers to be the principles of good urban design. WDH’s response to HOU1 sets out the manner in which the development of Bromwich Lane, Pedmore would adhere to those principles, and indeed would be in accordance with the plan as a whole.

With that said, it is noted that Policy ENV9 merely repeats the requirements of the Building Regulations in places. As such, it is not considered suitable to make reference to those requirements.

Furthermore, whilst WDH support the provision of high-quality, well-designed housing as an integral part of meeting the area’s identified housing needs, the inclusion of a requirement for all dwellings to demonstrate accordance with the Nationally Described Space Standards (NDSS) must be robustly justified; which currently is not the case. Moreover, the BCAs must consider the inevitable impact of that required on development capacity and viability to ensure that the plan is deliverable.

Object

Representation ID: 21770

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: St Philips

Agent: Lichfields

3.24 Draft Policy ENV9 states that all new residential development “will be required to meet the Nationally Described Space Standards (NDSS), except where it can be clearly evidenced that the implementation of the NDSS would cause harm to the significance of a heritage asset. The space standards will apply to all tenures.”

3.25 If the Council wishes to apply the optional NDSS to all dwellings, then this should only be done in accordance with NPPF paragraph 130(f) and footnote 49. Footnote 49 states that “policies may also make use of the NDSS where the need for an internal space standard can be justified”.

3.26 As set out in the NPPF, all policies should be underpinned by relevant and up to date evidence, which should be adequate, proportionate and focussed tightly on supporting and justifying the policies concerned (paragraph 31). The PPG29 sets out that “where a need for internal space standards is identified, the authority should provide justification for requiring internal space policies. Authorities should take account of the following areas need, viability and timing”. The BCA should provide a local assessment evidencing its case; however, no evidence has been presented to justify the policy requirement.

3.27 Draft Policy ENV9 is unsound because it fails the four tests of soundness as per NPPF
paragraph 35 as it is not positively prepared, justified, effective and consistent with national policy.

Comment

Representation ID: 22196

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Druids Heath Golf Club

Agent: Harris Lamb

We have a number of concerns with this policy, particularly where it introduces dual regulatory control. For example, Part 1e) of the Policy refers to needing to achieve Secured by Design principles as set out in Part Q of the Building Regulations. Similarly, part 3) of the policy refers to water efficiency standards that are set out in Part G2 of the Building Regulations. As both matters are addressed in other legislation there is no need for them to be included in this policy.

The policy also states that all new forms of residential development will be required to meet Nationally Described Space Standards (“NDSS”) except where it can be clearly demonstrated that the implementation of NDSS would cause harm to the significance of a heritage asset. The PPG is quite clear that the Councils need to gather evidence first to determine whether there is a need for additional standards in their area and justify setting appropriate policies in their Local Plan. There is not sufficient evidence to require all new properties to meet NDDS.

The BCHMA suggest that there is a requirement of 17,866 accessible and adaptable homes in the Black Country and a requirement for 1,674 wheelchair user dwellings. Combined this equates to approximately 25.7% of the total housing requirement (76,076), and 40% of the requirement that is expected to be met within the Black Country administrative area (47,837). That being the case, unless typically less that 40% of the houses on new development sites are built to NDSS standards there is no basis for this policy.

Notwithstanding this, if NDSS were to be applied this would have a number of significant implications for the Councils. The use of NDSS means larger houses have to be built in order to comply with the standards. This will mean the density of development and the capacity of sites will decrease. This will decrease the number of houses that can be delivered in the suggested allocations in the Plan.

Part 5 of the policy refers to ‘greening’ of the Black Country. This term is not precise. Whilst it generally refers to undertaking or incorporating sustainability measures in order to try and reduce the environmental impact of development it is not clear how can this be measured or assessed.

Comment

Representation ID: 22224

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Steve Crutchley

Policy ENV9 – Design Quality

We have a number of concerns with this policy, particularly where it introduces dual regulatory control. For example, Part 1e) of the Policy refers to needing to achieve Secured by Design principles as set out in Part Q of the Building Regulations. Similarly, part 3) of the policy refers to water efficiency standards that are set out in Part G2 of the Building Regulations. As both matters are addressed in other legislation there is no need for them to be included in this policy.

The policy also states that all new forms of residential development will be required to meet Nationally Described Space Standards (“NDSS”) except where it can be clearly demonstrated that the implementation of NDSS would cause harm to the significance of a heritage asset. The PPG is quite clear that the Councils need to gather evidence first to determine whether there is a need for additional standards in their area and justify setting appropriate policies in their Local Plan. There is not sufficient evidence to require all new properties to meet NDDS.

The BCHMA suggest that there is a requirement of 17,866 accessible and adaptable homes in the Black Country and a requirement for 1,674 wheelchair user dwellings. Combined this equates to approximately 25.7% of the total housing requirement (76,076), and 40% of the requirement that is expected to be met within the Black Country administrative area (47,837). That being the case, unless typically less that 40% of the houses on new development sites are built to NDSS standards there is no basis for this policy.

Notwithstanding this, if NDSS were to be applied this would have a number of significant implications for the Councils. The use of NDSS means larger houses have to be built in order to comply with the standards. This will mean the density of development and the capacity of sites will decrease. This will decrease the number of houses that can be delivered in the suggested allocations in the Plan.

Part 5 of the policy refers to ‘greening’ of the Black Country. This term is not precise. Whilst it generally refers to undertaking or incorporating sustainability measures in order to try and reduce the environmental impact of development it is not clear how can this be measured or assessed.

Support

Representation ID: 22248

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: The Wildlife Trust for Birmingham and the Black Country

WTBBC support the inclusion of Policy ENV9, the recognition of the link between high-quality design and climate change, and the need to ensure development has no harmful impacts on key environmental assets (Policies ENV1 and ENV3).

Comment

Representation ID: 22249

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: The Wildlife Trust for Birmingham and the Black Country

5
Comment: WTBBC support the recognition of the opportunities that major developments provide in contributing to the greening of the Black Country, and the specific references in points 5a, 5b and 5c to green infrastructure opportunities. WTBBC are of the view, however, that these opportunities can be realised in most developments at any scale, and therefore request that this should not apply only to major developments.

Support

Representation ID: 22287

Received: 21/01/2022

Respondent: Miss Jodi Stokes

Design Quality

9.6 Draft Policy ENV9 (Design Quality) sets out the design requirements for development proposals and that Design and Access Statements should be provided to demonstrate that they requirements have been addressed. We agree that the design of new proposals should reflect the principles of the National Guide, Manual for Streets (to be updated in 2022) and Building for a Healthy Life criteria. We also agree that the design should reflect the most up-to-date Building Regulations.

Object

Representation ID: 22293

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Investin PLC

Agent: Lichfields

3.24 Draft Policy ENV9 states that all new residential development “will be required to meet the Nationally Described Space Standards (NDSS), except where it can be clearly evidenced that the implementation of the NDSS would cause harm to the significance of a heritage asset. The space standards will apply to all tenures.”
3.25 If the Council wishes to apply the optional NDSS to all dwellings, then this should only be done in accordance with NPPF paragraph 130(f) and footnote 49. Footnote 49 states that “policies may also make use of the NDSS where the need for an internal space standard can be justified”.
3.26 As set out in the NPPF, all policies should be underpinned by relevant and up to date evidence, which should be adequate, proportionate and focussed tightly on supporting and justifying the policies concerned (paragraph 31). The PPG28 sets out that “where a need for internal space standards is identified, the authority should provide justification for requiring internal space policies. Authorities should take account of the following areas need, viability and timing”. The BCA should provide a local assessment evidencing its case; however, no evidence has been presented to justify the policy requirement.
3.27 Draft Policy ENV9 is unsound because it fails the four tests of soundness as per NPPF paragraph 35 as it is not positively prepared, justified, effective and consistent with national policy.

Object

Representation ID: 22416

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: St Philips

Agent: Lichfields

3.24 Draft Policy ENV9 states that all new residential development “will be required to meet the Nationally Described Space Standards (NDSS), except where it can be clearly evidenced that the implementation of the NDSS would cause harm to the significance of a heritage asset. The space standards will apply to all tenures.”
3.25 If the Council wishes to apply the optional NDSS to all dwellings, then this should only be done in accordance with NPPF paragraph 130(f) and footnote 49. Footnote 49 states that “policies may also make use of the NDSS where the need for an internal space standard can be justified”.
3.26 As set out in the NPPF, all policies should be underpinned by relevant and up to date evidence, which should be adequate, proportionate and focussed tightly on supporting and justifying the policies concerned (paragraph 31). The PPG28 sets out that “where a need for internal space standards is identified, the authority should provide justification for requiring internal space policies. Authorities should take account of the following areas need, viability and timing”. The BCA should provide a local assessment evidencing its case; however, no evidence has been presented to justify the policy requirement.
3.27 Draft Policy ENV9 is unsound because it fails the four tests of soundness as per NPPF paragraph 35 as it is not positively prepared, justified, effective and consistent with national policy.

Comment

Representation ID: 22618

Received: 29/09/2021

Respondent: Chief Constable of West Midlands Police (CCWMP)

Agent: Tyler-Parkes

The Tyler Parkes Partneship Ltd act for the Chief Constable of West Midlands Police (CCWMP).

This Comments Form TOGETHER WITH the accompanying letter dated 29th September 2021 comprise the CCWMP's representations on Policy ENV9.

The CCWMP welcomes the proposed policy requirement that Design and Access Statements should demonstrate that a number of aspects of design have been addressed, including, ‘…d) consideration of crime prevention measures and Secured by Design principles, in addition to the requirements of Part Q of the Building Regulations 2010 or any successor legislation;…’ However, he considers the policy does not go far enough as it does not have a requirement for Secured by Design principles and Park Mark to be incorporated into development proposals.

The CCWMP recommends that the policy wording is amended as follows, modifications shown below:

‘2) Development will be designed to the highest possible standards, creating a strong sense of place. Development proposals must address as appropriate:…
f) the need to ensure crime prevention measures and Secured by Design and Park Mark principles are incorporated to reduce crime, the fear of crime and anti-social behaviour.’

The CCWMP welcomes the inclusion in paragraph 7 of the policy requirement that development must not cause a detrimental impact on the living environment of occupiers of existing residential properties, or unacceptable living conditions for future occupiers of new residential properties, including in terms of ‘h) crime and safety’.

He also welcomes the wording of justification paragraph 10.134 which explains that ‘A key objective for new developments should be that they create safe and accessible environments where crime, or the fear of crime, and anti-social behaviour do not undermine the quality of life, health or community cohesion. Good design, layout and spatial relationships (including the use of sensitively designed and located landscaping that reduces opportunities for anti-social behaviours) can make a positive contribution towards improving community safety in an area. It is the intention of the BCA and the police to work together towards the reduction of crime and the fear of crime, and anti-social behaviour across the Black Country. This will be a material consideration in all planning proposals.’

The CCWMP requests that reference is made within Justification paragraph 10.134, to the need for developers, as well as the local authorities, to engage with the West Midlands Police Design Out Crime Officers (DOCO) at the pre-application as well as the planning application stage.
 
The Tyler Parkes Partneship Ltd act for the Chief Constable of West Midlands Police (CCWMP).

This Comments Form TOGETHER WITH the accompanying letter dated 29th September 2021 comprise the CCWMP's representations on Policy HOU4.

The Government’s good practice guide on ‘Designing Gypsy and Traveller Sites’ published in 2008, recommends that consultation should take place with the Police on site security issues and the Police Architectural Liaison Officer’s advice should be sought on the design of specific schemes with the aim of ‘designing out’ crime and social exclusion and ‘designing in’ community safety and social inclusion.

The CCWMP therefore formally requests that the wording within Policy HOU4 be amended to state that there is a requirement to consult with West Midlands Police and to consider issues of security and the need to promote community safety, social inclusion create environments where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion.

The proposed modification to the policy is shown below:

‘5) The location, design and facilities provided on new sites will be determined in consultation with local gypsies and travellers and travelling show people and will also consider / reflect any available national guidance. Proposals for development will be expected to be well designed and laid out respecting Secured by Design principles. It is recommended that pre-application advice is sought from the West Midlands Police Design Out Crime Officers.’

Comment

Representation ID: 23088

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Canal & River Trust

Part 7 of policy ENV9 focuses on avoiding adverse impacts from new development on the living environments of existing residential properties, including sunlight and daylight, artificial lighting, vibration and wind. New development that is not appropriately located and/or well designed can adversely impact nearby areas of public realm, green and blue infrastructure and open space in many of these ways. We suggest that either a point 8 should be added to policy ENV9 to address adverse impacts on such areas or point 7 should be amended to indicate that development will need to avoid adversely impacting areas of public realm, green & blue infrastructure or open space in these ways (where appropriate).

Object

Representation ID: 23130

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: St Modwen SL&R

Agent: RPS

Paragraph 5.24 - 5.27 - "RPS contends that the evidence presented in the dBCP is insufficient to justify the need for internal space standards as proposed in criteria 4 of Policy ENV9"

Comment

Representation ID: 23164

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Environment Agency

Section 3) of this policy proposes a limit on water usage to 110l/p/d, and this is welcomed. 10.132 mentions that this is justified by evidence provided in the WCS. In addition to this, when the WCS was written, the water companies were classed as being in areas of ‘moderate‘ water stress. In July 2021, following a consultation exercise, the Secretary of State has determined that both Severn Trent Water (except their Chester zone) and South Staffs Water are now considered to be in areas of ‘serious water
stress’ for the purposes of water resources planning. This change in water stress classification adds further weight to this tighter limit and it may be worth reflecting this new classification within the plan as it is a key driver to tighten water usage in this area.

It should be highlighted however, that this requirement is a minimum only and developments that choose to go beyond this should be supported by the plan. Further limiting water consumption and encouraging re-use would provide additional benefits in relation to managing the pressures of climate change. This links to comments in relation to Policy CC1 - Increasing efficiency and resilience. In light of this we ask that you consider amending the policy to read as follows:

3) New residential development (including conversions from non-residential properties) and houses in multiple occupation will be required to meet water efficiency standards59 of 110 litres per person per day, as set out in Part G2 of current Building Regulations 2010 or any successor legislation. Any scheme that voluntarily proposes to go beyond this requirement would be viewed favourably.

Comment

Representation ID: 23271

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Historic England

We are supportive of this policy and have a few queries. What is meant by clause 1a? Are there views linked with clause 1b and how have these been defined? We suggest that a link to Policy ENV5 is also necessary in clause 1e. We support clause 4.

Comment

Representation ID: 23317

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Redrow Homes Ltd

Agent: Harris Lamb

We have a number of concerns with this policy, particularly where it introduces dual regulatory control. For example, Part 1e) of the Policy refers to needing to achieve Secured by Design principles as set out in Part Q of the Building Regulations. Similarly, part 3) of the policy refers to water efficiency standards that are set out in Part G2 of the Building Regulations. As both matters are addressed in other legislation there is no need for them to be included in this policy.

The policy also states that all new forms of residential development will be required to meet Nationally Described Space Standards (“NDSS”) except where it can be clearly demonstrated that the implementation of NDSS would cause harm to the significance of a heritage asset. The PPG is quite clear that the Councils need to gather evidence first to determine whether there is a need for additional standards in their area and justify setting appropriate policies in their Local Plan. There is not sufficient evidence to require all new properties to meet NDDS.

The BCHMA suggest that there is a requirement of 17,866 accessible and adaptable homes in the Black Country and a requirement for 1,674 wheelchair user dwellings. Combined this equates to approximately 25.7% of the total housing requirement (76,076), and 40% of the requirement that is expected to be met within the Black Country administrative area (47,837). That being the case, unless typically less than 40% of the houses on new development sites are built to NDSS standards there is no basis for this policy.

Notwithstanding this, if NDSS were to be applied this would have a number of significant implications for the Councils. The use of NDSS means larger houses have to be built in order to comply with the standards. This will mean the density of development and the capacity of sites will decrease. This will decrease the number of houses that can be delivered in the suggested allocations in the Plan.

Part 5 of the policy refers to ‘greening’ of the Black Country. This term is not precise. Whilst it generally refers to undertaking or incorporating sustainability measures in order to try and reduce the environmental impact of development it is not clear how can this be measured or assessed.

Comment

Representation ID: 23335

Received: 11/10/2021

Respondent: Bloor Homes

Proposed Policy ENV9 states that Local Housing Design Supplementary Planning Documents (‘SPDs’) and the Building for a Healthy Life criteria will be used to demonstrate a commitment to achieve the highest possible design standards, good place-making and sustainable development.

BHL is committed to providing high quality and well-designed housing developments which is demonstrated by our 5-star rating; our award-winning developments; and our consistently high customer satisfaction rating and therefore supports BCA’s ambition to achieve the highest possible standards in terms of design and sustainable development. However, it is BHL’s interpretation that Building for a Healthy Life was never intended to become a mandatory policy requirement in Local Plans and was rather, best practice guidance to assist local authorities, communities and developers to assess new housing schemes. BHL considers that the use of Building for a Healthy Life should remain
voluntary rather than becoming a policy requirement.

In relation to SPD’s being used to demonstrate high design standards, BHL considers that it is clear in the legislation (The Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012) that Development Management Polices, which are intended to guide the determination for planning permission should be set out in policy and in accordance with paragraph 16d of the NPPF 2021, should be clearly written and unambiguous. BHL requests that requirements on design quality should be set out in sufficient detail in the BCP without relying on other criteria or guidelines set out in an SPD, which has not been subject to examination. Indeed, national policy clearly states that an SPD cannot introduce new planning policies nor add unnecessarily to the financial
burdens of a development. BHL are aware of recent High Court judgements that have ascertained that
policies which have a cost implication on development proposals cannot be deferred to a Supplementary Planning Document or similar document.

Policy ENV9 also requires all new residential development to meet the Nationally Described Space
Standards (NDSS) to all tenures, except where it can be clearly evidenced that the implementation of NDSS would cause harm to the significance of a heritage asset.

As aforementioned, BHL are committed to provide well-designed and high quality developments. BHL considers that by BCA pursuing a blanket and inflexible approach to NDSS, this could impact affordability and customer choice. BHL believe that there can still be well-designed dwellings that provide a good functional home that are below NDSS. When reviewing the NPPF 2021 and the NPPG, it is clear that polices should only make use of the NDSS where the need for internal space is
justified (footnote 49) and local authorities should take account of the areas need, viability and timing.

Additionally, to be in accordance with paragraph 31 of the NPPF 2021, all policies should be underpinned by relevant and updated evidence. BHL has not seen any evidence produced by the BCA that provides a local assessment justifying this blanket policy approach to NDSS and so cannot support the inclusion of this policy. BHL consider that the BCA should focus on good design and usable space to ensure dwellings are fit for purpose rather than focussing on NDSS specifically. BHL is of the understanding that if it was the Government’s intention to make NDSS mandatory, NDSS would have been incorporated into Building Regulations, which is currently not the case.

Support

Representation ID: 23432

Received: 15/02/2022

Respondent: L&Q Estates

Agent: Barton Willmore

9.18 Draft Policy ENV9 (Design Quality) provides guidance on design standards and principles to be assessed and included within design and access statements. We support Policy ENV9 in principle, as this policy seeks to ensure that developments are designed to the highest possible standards. However, we are concerned with reference to Secure by Design included at Part 1) d) of Policy ENV9, as Secure by Design guidance encourages cul-de-sacs and discourages permeability which is at odds with all other design guidance

Object

Representation ID: 43881

Received: 05/10/2021

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Pegasus

11.18 Policy ENV9 deals, amongst other things, with design quality and it states that development proposals should address the following:
· Implementation of the principles of the National Design Guide;
· Implementation of the principles of Manual for Streets to ensure urban streets and spaces are designed to provide a high quality public realm and safe and permeable movement network;
· Use of Building for a Healthy Life criteria;
· Consider the requirements of part Q of the Building Regulations 2010;
· Meet water efficiency standards as set out in Part II of the Building Regulations 2010;
· Meet the Nationally Described Space Standards; and
· Reflect National Design Guide Design Principle H1.
11.19 Much of the above relates to other legislation outside of planning. As a result it is not appropriate for a Development Plan Policy to reiterate requirements in other legislation.
11.20 Regarding the Nationally Described Space Standards (NDSS), these were published by the Department of Communities and Local Government on 27 March 2015. Their publication was accompanied by a Planning Update issued as a Written Ministerial Statement to Parliament by the Rt. Hon. Sir Eric Pickles MP on 25th March 2015.
11.21 In introducing the standards, the Written Ministerial Statement outlines:
“New homes need to be high quality, accessible and sustainable. To achieve this, the government has created a new approach for the setting of technical standards for new housing. This rationalises the many differing existing standards into a simpler, streamlined system which will reduce burdens and help bring forward much needed new homes.”
11.22 However, the Written Ministerial Statement is also clear that the standards are optional, and that compliance cannot be required outside of a relevant current Local Plan policy:
“From 1 October 2015: Existing Local Plan, neighbourhood plan, and supplementary planning document policies relating to water efficiency, access and internal space should be interpreted by reference to the nearest equivalent new national technical standard. Decision takers should only require compliance with the new national technical standards where there is a relevant current Local Plan policy.”
11.23 This is to ensure that the need for the application of the standards through planning policy is fully evidenced and that the impact on viability is considered alongside all of the other policies contained in the Plan:
“The optional new national technical standards should only be required through any new Local Plan policies if they address a clearly evidenced need, and where their impact on viability has been considered, in accordance with the National Planning Policy

Framework and Planning Guidance.”
11.24 The reference to the National Planning Policy Framework relates to paragraph 130 (f) which states planning policies should:
“create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users.”
11.25 Footnote 49 makes it clear that use of the Government’s optional technical standards should be used "...where this would address an identified need for such properties and the need for an internal space standard can be justified" [emphasis added].
11.26 Planning Practice Guidance states2:
“Where a need for internal space standards is identified, local planning authorities should provide justification for requiring internal space policies. Local planning authorities should take account of the following areas:
· need – evidence should be provided on the size and type of dwellings currently being built in the area, to ensure the impacts of adopting space standards can be properly assessed, for example, to consider any potential impact on meeting demand for starter homes.
· viability – the impact of adopting the space standard should be considered as part of a plan’s viability assessment with account taken of the impact of potentially larger dwellings on land supply. Local planning authorities will also need to consider impacts on affordability where a space standard is to be
2 Paragraph: 020 Reference ID: 56-020-20150327
Revision date: 27 03 2015
adopted.
· timing – there may need to be a reasonable transitional period following adoption of a new policy on space standards to enable developers to factor the cost of space standards into future land acquisitions.”
11.27 The Guidance is therefore clear that the application of the NDSS requires a Local Plan policy which has been fully evidenced, including identification of need and the consideration of any impact on viability.
11.28 The Black Country Housing Market Assessment provides limited commentary in respect of NDSS. The focus of this commentary, contained within the Accessible and Adaptable Housing section on page 97, relates to M4(2) and M4(3) standards and provides no justification for the requirement of NDSS on all new dwellings. It also highlights that any requirements should be assessed to determine whether they are viable and should not impose any further requirements beyond building regulations.
11.29 Therefore, it is clear evidence does not support the imposition of NDSS within the Black Country. To the contrary, the evidence highlights a number of potential risks if such a policy were to be introduced.
11.30 In view of the above much of the requirements set out in policy ENV9 are not justified and contrary to national policy and should be deleted.

Object

Representation ID: 43924

Received: 10/10/2021

Respondent: Barratt West Midlands

Agent: Turley Associates

3.68 Policy ENV9 appears to be a duplication of the criteria contained in draft policy CSP4 and can be most appropriately dealt with by way of the production of a Local Design Guide for the Black Country aligning with the Governments’ recent amendments to the NPPF. As such it is not necessary.