Draft Black Country Plan

Comment

Representation ID: 22342

Received: 24/01/2022

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Avison Young

Following the publication of the revised Standard Methodology for calculating housing need in December, which included an urban uplift of 35% applicable to the 20 largest cities and urban areas, the BCAs have calculated that their combined local housing need for the Plan period is 76,076 homes.
Policy CSP1 goes on to set out how the BCAs will go about meeting this need. It says that it expects the Plan’s housing allocations to deliver some 47,837 dwellings, based on the following components (see Table 1 below): [see attached PDF]
Evidently, even if the Council’s planned supply delivers in the way anticipated in the Draft Plan, the BCA will under-deliver against their local housing need within their administrative boundaries by 28,239 dwellings.
However, in reality, the shortfall is probably even greater. We say this because the Plan, as drafted, does not propose to accommodate any additional homes to help address the unmet need arising from Birmingham and elsewhere in the wider housing market area.
As outlined in Table 1, the Plan proposes to export over 28,000 dwellings to neighbouring authorities through the Duty to Co-operate. The Duty to Co-operate Statement, published by the BCA as part of the Draft Plan evidence base, concludes that neighbouring authorities can potentially accommodate up to 14,750 homes, as follows:
• Cannock Chase – Between 500 and 2,500 homes;
• Lichfield – Between 2,000 to meet Black Country needs out of a contribution of 2,665 to the
• Greater Birmingham and Black Country Housing Market Area (GBBCHMA) as a whole;
• South Staffordshire – Up to 4,000 homes;
• Shropshire – 1,500 homes.
• Stafford – Up to 2,000 homes
• Solihull – A proportion of the 2,105 dwelling contribution identified in the submitted Local
• Plan to the GBBCHMA
• Telford and Wrekin – 3,700 homes.
Whilst the above contributions are to be tested as the Local Plans for some neighbouring authorities are progressed (namely Cannock Chase, Lichfield, South Staffordshire, Shropshire and Solihull), there is certainly no guarantee that these additional dwellings will come forward to address the shortfall currently faced by the BCAs. This is evident in the case of Solihull who were expected to allocate a proportion of their 2,105 dwelling contribution identified in its submitted Local Plan to the Black Country. However, Solihull MBC’s view expressed at the Examination of its new Local Plan is that it will now no longer plan to take any unmet need from the Black Country up to and post 2031 and will, instead, look to exclusively assist in meeting the unmet needs of Birmingham.
Moreover, the Duty to Co-operate Statement suggests that the level of housing that Stafford Borough and Telford and Wrekin are able to accommodate should be viewed as ‘minimums’, however, there is no evidence to suggest that this is the case, as the Draft Plan is not supported by any Statements of Common Ground, or other similar document, which commits these authorities to taking a proportion of the Black Country’s unmet housing needs.
In any event, if the BCA’s assumptions around how their unmet housing need will be distributed amongst the neighbouring local authorities are correct, this would still leave a shortfall of some 13,489 dwellings that will need to be allocated. This being the case, the BCAs are failing to plan to meet their identified need, contrary to the provisions of the NPPF. In order to address this, the BCAs must, in our view, look at allocating additional sites in the Plan to help meets the Black Country’s housing requirements over the Plan period.

Support

Representation ID: 22346

Received: 24/01/2022

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Avison Young

In light of the above, [representation on Policy CSP1] it is inevitable that Green Belt land in the Black Country will need to be released to help the authorities meet their housing needs over the Plan period. It is evident that the BCAs have examined fully all other reasonable options for meeting their identified need for development and have concluded that they could not achieve this alone by adopting a strategy that accords with the criteria set out in paragraph 141 of the NPPF. In our view, this demonstrates that the exceptional circumstances do exist to justify the BCAs making changes to existing Green Belt boundaries.

We support the BCA’s acknowledgement that the site at Aldridge Road is considered appropriate for the release from the Green Belt, as evidenced by Policy HOU1. The site is well contained, with well-defined, defensible boundaries on all sides (i.e. Aldridge Road to the north, Calderfields Golf Club to the east, Walsall Arboretum to the south and residential land uses to the west). These features provide a visual separation from open land surrounding the site, meaning that its release would not result in the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas. The Golf Club to the east, in particular, is a key element of the separation between the site and Streetly to the east. As this would mean a strong gap is maintained between the site and the built-up areas of Aldridge and Streetly, the removal of the site from the Green Belt would not result in the merging of neighbouring towns.

Comment

Representation ID: 22349

Received: 24/01/2022

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Avison Young

This policy requires that all new developments should be supported by the necessary on and off-site infrastructure to serve its needs, mitigate its impact on the environment and the local community and ensure that it is sustainable and contributes to the proper planning of the wider area, unless material circumstances or considerations indicate otherwise.

With respect to our Client’s site, we note that Policy WSA7 of the Draft Plan suggests that the development of the site could deliver “appropriate local facilities to support new residents and to enhance the sustainability of the existing area, including a new primary school and local health centre”. In terms of any necessary infrastructure required in Aldridge or the wider Black Country, we note that paragraph 4.5 of the Draft Plan states that the Plan will be supported by an Infrastructure Delivery Plan, however we cannot locate this within the evidence base the BCA have published on the Black Country Plan website. We would be grateful to have sight of this document if it is publicly available, in order that we can review and comment on it.

Notwithstanding this position, the provision of developer contributions should only be sought where these are proportionate to the level and impact arising from new development. As outlined in paragraph 57 of the NPPF:
“Planning obligations must only be sought where they meet all of the following tests:
a) Necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;
b) Directly related to the development; and
c) Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.”

With that in mind, the BCAs will note that Taylor Wimpey’s proposals for land at Aldridge Road (detailed in the Development Statement at Appendix II) envisage that approximately 360 units can now be accommodated on the site, compared to the indicative capacity of 592 dwellings identified in the Local Plan, when taking into account technical constraints and design considerations. The reduced number of units will, in turn, mean that the development will have less of an impact on nearby amenities and services, which brings into question the requirement for a new on-site primary school and local health care centre, as identified in Policy WSA7. To that end, Taylor Wimpey is of the view that scale of the proposals at Aldridge Road do not warrant the provision of on-site facilities, in accordance with paragraph 57 of the NPPF. We would be grateful if Planning Officers could confirm that this approach is acceptable.

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: 22353

Received: 24/01/2022

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Avison Young

We note that this policy requires all developments of ten homes or more to provide a proportion of affordable housing, ranging from 10% to 30% depending on (i) if the site is located in a lower or higher value zone and (ii) if the site is greenfield or brownfield. The policy goes on to say that the tenure and type of affordable homes sought will be determined on a site-by-site basis, based on national planning policy and best available information regarding local housing needs, site surroundings and viability considerations.
Our Client supports the Draft Plan’s desire to see appropriate levels of affordable housing delivered in the Black Country, as well as it’s recognition that the tenure and type of affordable dwelling will vary according to market conditions. This is a critical factor which ensures sites are able to be delivered. However, it considers that it will be important to maintain the same type of flexibility when it comes to the proportion of affordable housing a development will be required to deliver, to allow for changing local market circumstances. It is recommended that this is reflected in the policy wording.

Comment

Representation ID: 22357

Received: 24/01/2022

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Avison Young

This policy seeks to ensure that new developments include adequate provision for charging infrastructure e.g. electric vehicle charging points in car parks, measures to encourage LEV use through travel plans and other initiatives.
Our Client supports the provision of electric vehicle charging points in principle, but has significant concerns about the practicalities of delivery, in light of wider infrastructure constraints. The additional loading created by car charging infrastructure is significant and it is essential that the Black Country Authorities liaise with electricity providers as part of the Black Country Plan process so that the implications in terms of network capacity can be understood and planned for. It cannot be left to individual developers to pick up the cost of what could be multi-million-pound upgrades to the Black Country’s electricity infrastructure.
It will also be important for the policy wording to maintain some flexibility so that in cases where the provision of such infrastructure would make a scheme unviable, an exception can be made.

Support

Representation ID: 22358

Received: 24/01/2022

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Avison Young

Our Client supports the principal of net gain and the 10% target which will shortly be mandated nationally. It also supports the principal of calculating net gain using the national Biodiversity Metric, assuming the Draft Plan is referring to the Biodiversity 3.0 metric provided by DEFRA, to ensure a consistency of approach between Local Authorities. The policy should be updated to make specific reference to this metric.

Comment

Representation ID: 22359

Received: 24/01/2022

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Avison Young

Whilst our Client recognises and supports the BCA’s aspirations to increase tree canopy cover across the Black Country, it expresses reservations around the obligations of Policy ENV4 in this regard, specifically parts 2 and 13 of this policy which require:
• a buffer around individual veteran or ancient trees likely to be impacted by development of a minimum of 15 times the diameter of the tree, approximately 5m from the edge of the tree’s canopy if that area is larger than 15 times its diameter; and
• new developments to make a minimum contribution of 20% canopy cover across the development site and a recommended contribution of 30% canopy cover across the development site.
We understand that these requirements stem from recommendations contained within the Emergency Tree Plan for the UK (2020), prepared by The Woodland Trust. We would note that, whilst useful, this piece of guidance is not statutory in nature, nor has it been produced for or by the Government. In such instances, it would be unrealistic to expect developments to adhere to such guidance. Moreover, by necessitating a ‘one size fits all approach’ for the contribution developments make to canopy cover, this part of the policy fails to take into account on-site conditions which could mean this cannot be achieved. Such conditions should not jeopardise future development across the Black Country, particularly in the context of such an acute need for housing and employment land. We therefore recommend that the policy wording be revised so that canopy cover is determined on a site-by-site basis.

Comment

Representation ID: 22363

Received: 24/01/2022

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Avison Young

Parts 1 to 3 of this policy require new developments of 10 homes or more to include opportunities for decentralised energy provision within the site, unless it can be demonstrated that the development is not suitable, feasible or viable for district heat or decentralised power networks. Where there is existing decentralised energy provision available close to the site, the development will be expected to link into it or should be designed to accommodate a subsequent connection. Whilst Taylor Wimpey supports the principal of planning for development in ways which help, as much as possible, eliminate and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, it has a number of concerns around the provisions of Policy CC2. Firstly, the assumption that developments can easily to off-site sources is problematic, as this may require connection through land outside of the ownership of the application and over which they have no control. As a result, it would be difficult to guarantee that such connections would be available to serve the site when required or that they would be available at all. In addition, the information provided in the BCP Viability Study suggests that the provision of or connection to decentralised energy networks has not been factored into the viability assessment work. The viability implications of such provision have not, therefore, been adequately assessed. The costs of provision or of connection to decentralised energy networks will need to be properly considered in the Council’s viability evidence if this is to be pursued.
Part 4 of the policy goes on to deal with proposals for on-site energy provision and the means by which this can be achieved. These provisions (parts a to j of the policy wording) are detailed, but not clearly justified and so seem somewhat over prescriptive. We would recommend that the policy wording be revised to encourage developers and energy companies / bodies to engage in the early stage of the development process to establish the likely future energy and infrastructure requirements, and to engage with the relevant BCP authorities to determine the most appropriate solution.

Comment

Representation ID: 22365

Received: 24/01/2022

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Avison Young

In order for the Draft Plan to be sound it must provide a clear strategy for bringing sufficient land forward, and at a sufficient rate, to address objectively assessed needs over the Plan period. Because the BCAs must also identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide a minimum of five years’ worth of housing against its housing requirement, the Draft Plan is also required to identify specific, deliverable sites for years one to five of the plan period and then sufficient developable sites, or broad areas of growth, for the remainder of the plan period.
The Glossary to the NPPF defines ‘deliverable’ sites as being available now, offering a suitable location for development. In order for a site to be considered ‘developable’ it should be in a suitable location for housing development with a reasonable prospect that it will be available and could be viably developed at the point envisaged.
Our Client welcomes the Draft Plan’s recognition that the site can, and should, deliver a development that is capable of materially contributing to Walsall, and the Black Country’s housing requirements. The site is available, offers a suitable location for development and is achievable with a realistic prospect of delivering housing within the first five years of the plan period.
Chapter 13 provides details of the number of dwellings that could be delivered on each housing allocation site. According to the BCAs calculations, the Draft BCP assumes that land south of Aldridge Road is capable of delivering 592 dwellings at a net density of 35 dph. However, as alluded to previously in these representations, having assessed the various technical constraints and other factors that might influence development, Taylor Wimpey concludes that the site could accommodate approximately 360 market and affordable dwellings. This would still make a meaningful contribution to the delivery of both market and affordable housing in the Black Country.
Moreover, the Plan identifies the site, amongst other, as a strategic allocation, taking into account its size and the number of dwellings it has the potential to deliver. Each strategic allocation has a separate policy (in this case Policy WSA7) that provides details of the specific constraints and requirements affecting development. Decisions on planning applications for these sites will, therefore, be made in accordance with their specific policy requirements. Table 2 (below) lists the policy requirements in full insofar as they relate to Taylor Wimpey’s site at Aldridge Road. To provide Officers with the comfort that Taylor Wimpey’s proposals for the site can still satisfy the requirements of Policy WSA7, Table 2 also describes how the development will accord with each of the design principles.
Table 2 – Policy WSA7 Design Principles
Design Principle [DP] Taylor Wimpey’s Proposals at Aldridge Road [TWPAR]
[1]Local Facilities
[DP] Deliver appropriate local facilities to support new residents and to enhance the sustainability of the existing area, including a new primary school and local health centre.
[TWPAR] In light of the reduced number of dwellings capable of being delivered on site, Taylor Wimpey will, instead, make the appropriate financial contributions to ensure that any impacts arising from the development on local services and amenities is satisfactorily mitigated, in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 57 of the NPPF .
[2] Contaminated Land
[DP] Investigation and detailed proposals for the remediation of contaminated land.
[TWPAR]A Phase 1 Ground Investigation Study will be prepared prior to the submission of a planning application.
[3] Transport Strategy
[DP] A transport strategy that ensures that the transport impacts of the development are appropriately managed and mitigated.
[TWPAR] There is potential to provide a minimum of two safe and visible highway access points into the site from Aldridge Road to the north and Buchanan Road to the west, which will make for a permeable scheme. Bus stops located directly opposite the site along Aldridge Road provide residents with suitable and appropriate non-car travel options.
[4] Pedestrians and Cyclists
[DP] Enhanced provision for pedestrians and cyclists, including enhanced connectivity with the town centre.
[TWPAR] The existing PRoW along the site’s western boundary will be retained and enhanced as part of a network of publicly accessible pedestrian and cycles routes through the site into new recreational greenspaces to the south, as well as to adjacent residential streets to the west to improve linkages to Walsall Town Centre.
[5] Sustainable Drainage
[DP] A site-wide Sustainable Drainage Strategy, to ensure that drainage requirements can be met on site and are designed to deliver landscape, biodiversity and amenity benefits.
[TWPAR] Development on the site would include the appropriate use of SuDs, including suitable attenuation measures, to ensure that a betterment in surface water management would be achieved.
[6] Landscape and Ecology
[DP] A strategy for landscape and habitat creation, in particular along the southern boundary to the Arboretum, providing new tree planting to ensure there is no significant adverse impact on the visual amenity and character of the Arboretum, nor on protected animal species.
[TWPAR] The proposals will provide an attractive semi-rural ‘transitional’ open space to the south of the development, so as to extend the character of the Arboretum. This will ensure that there is no significant adverse impact on the visual amenity and character of the Arboretum.

Conclusion
These representations have been prepared by Avison Young, on behalf of Taylor Wimpey, in response to the Draft Black Country Plan Regulation 18 consultation document.
These representations are intended to form a robust evidence base upon which an allocation in the Black Country Plan can be found sound at Examination stage. The inclusion of land south of Aldridge Road and its acknowledgement by the BCAs as a viable site is supported. The site remains available and could be delivered as a sustainable development opportunity in the short term (0-5 years) to help ensure that the Black Country Authorities are able to meet their objectively assessed housing needs in accordance with the requirements of the NPPF.
Accordingly, it is requested that the Council continue to support the allocation of land south of Aldridge Road, Walsall through the remainder of the plan making process.