Agenda item

The Committee will receive an update report on the housing land supply; and are asked to make the following recommendation;

That the Committee notes the housing land supply update and the approach to housing applications as set out in para. 6.5 of the report.

Mr Ayling and Miss Stevens presented the report to the Committee. Miss Stevens introduced the report, she explained that the previous land supply position concluded, that as of April 2020 the Council had a 4.3 year housing supply. In response the Council brought forward an Interim Position Statement that was approved by the Planning Committee in June 2020.

Mis Stevens explained that West Sussex County Council undertake the monitoring of housing development for Chichester District Council (and other West Sussex authorities). The data provided by WSCC has been used as the basis for the latest land supply position.

Miss Stevens informed the Committee that Lambert Smith Hamilton had been appointed to undertake a Critical Friend Review of the 5YHLS report, and to review the evidence in respect of the windfall allowance; as well as the lead-on and build-out rates of residential development sites. She drew their attention to Appendix 1 of the report which set out the full review.

Based on the most recent data, Miss Stevens informed the Committee that the Council, as of 1 April 2021, is able to demonstrate at least 5.3 years of housing land supply.

Mr Ayling took the Committee through section 6 of the report. He explained that the findings to be tested at appeal and Members will be kept informed of the outcome of the examinations and how they impact upon the five-year housing land supply.

Mr Ayling drew Member’s attention to paragraph 6.4 of the report, he highlighted that although there is a current five-year housing land supply (5YHLS) it is important that to maintain this position going forward with planning applications considered if the benefits indicate it should be permitted. The five-year housing land supply statement has immediate effect and will apply to current appeals, it means the tilted balance no longer applies.

Mr Ayling informed the Committee that there was a typo in the recommendation which should read as follows ‘…set out in para 6.4 of the report’.

The Committee received representations from;

Cllr Tony Colling – Loxwood Parish Council

In response to comments made in the public representation; Mr Ayling acknowledged that the Loxwood Neighbourhood Plan had being stalled by the water neutrality issue affecting the area. However, he reminded the Committee the same issue also applied to all planning applications and other Neighbourhood Plans within the area. He clarified that the Development Plan is the basis for all planning applications and referred to paragraph 6.3 of the report. In addition, Mr Whitty advised that whilst the Committee do not have to apply the tilted balance in their consideration, they should remain mindful to the future and maintaining a five-year housing land supply.

On behalf of the Committee Mrs Purnell thanked all officers for their work on the Five-Year Housing Land Supply Statement.

With regards to the A27 and the number of new homes that can be supported in the future; Mr Ayling explained that the 5YHLS is assessed through the Standard Method. A different figure to the 5YHLS will be put forward as part of the Local Plan, however, this figure would not be applicable until the Local Plan has been fully adopted.

On the issue of the windfall allowance included within the statement; Mr Ayling informed the Committee that part of the work LSH had undertaken in the Critical Friend Review, was to assess the methodology the Council had used in calculating the statement and how that information was presented. From this work they advised that there were a number of elements the Council should consider amending, including;

-       Windfall allowance; Mr Ayling explained that these are unplanned sites that come forward, the Council has always included an allowance for small windfall sites (10 dwellings or less), however, following the work undertaken by LSH they have concluded that there is sufficient evidence for allow a larger allowance to be included. As a result, the windfall element included within the statement is larger than in previous statements.

-       Rate of delivery and lead in times; Mr Ayling explained that there was no significant difference in the figures calculated, however the work undertaken by LSH meant that they were better evidenced.

In addition, Mr Ayling informed the Committee, that planning decisions taken over the previous year had also been considered, including the Tangmere development which had been approved by the Committee at a meeting on 21 March 2021.

On the matter of lead in times, Mr Ayling clarified that this means the time from when an application receives full permission (either a full application or an Outline and then Reserved Matters) and the permission is then issued along with the signed S106 agreement.

With regards to delivery rates on sites; Mr Ayling clarified that delivery rates are considered as a whole, therefore larger sites such as Whitehouse Farm where there a number of developers, will have a higher delivery rate, when compared to smaller sites.

On the matter of how much weight can be attached to Loxwood Neighbourhood Plan; Mr Whitty informed the Committee that it was currently at ‘Reg 14’ which means officers are unable to apply any significant weight to the policies currently contained within the Neighbourhood Plan. He reassured members that officers do not see the Interim Position Statement (IPS) as a ‘green light’ to development, it is a useful a tool for assessing the benefits which might be brought forward by development.

On the issue of whether the 5YHLS has any implications to the Duty to Cooperate; Mr Ayling informed the Committee that officers had sought legal opinion regarding this and received very clear advice that the Duty to Cooperate and the 5YHLS are very separate matters until the time when the figure for the Local Plan is agreed.

In a vote the Committee agreed to the report recommendation to note the housing land supply update and the approach to housing applications as set out in para. 6.4 of the report.

Recommendation; That the Committee notes the housing land supply update and the approach to housing applications as set out in para. 6.4 of the report.