OFFICERS REPORTS TO JOINT MEETING OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE (EAST & WEST) 18 JANUARY 2007 Each report for decision on this Agenda shows the Officer responsible, the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Building Control and in the case of private business the paragraph(s) of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 under which it is considered exempt. None of the reports have financial, legal or policy implications save where indicated. PUBLIC BUSINESS - ITEM FOR DECISION 1. Planning Policy Statement 3 - Housing PPS3 – Housing and supporting papers on affordable housing. Report providing an introduction to and outlining the key areas of advice in PPS3, and considering the implications for the preparation of the Local Development Framework and the determination of planning applications. 1. Introduction The Government issued a new Planning Policy Statement in respect of Housing (PPS3) on 29 November 2006. This new guidance proposes a significant change in Government policy, particularly in the area of housing delivery and is the Government’s response to Kate Barker’s Review of Housing Supply. The new PPS replaces PPG3 and ‘aims to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to live in a decent home, which they can afford in a community where they want to live.’ It also updates and replaces elements of PPG13 dealing with sustainable patterns of development, making efficient use of land, using previously developed land, and setting minimum car parking standards. To achieve its objectives Government is seeking: – To achieve a wide choice of high quality homes, both affordable and market housing, to address the requirements of the community. – To widen opportunities for home ownership and ensure high quality housing for those who cannot afford market housing, in particular those who are vulnerable or in need. – To improve affordability across the housing market, including by increasing the supply of housing. – To create sustainable, inclusive, mixed communities in all areas, both urban and rural. 2. Key Messages • Local authorities will need to identify more appropriate sites for housing and plan 15 years ahead in order to prevent much needed new homes being held up by unnecessary delays in the planning process. A five year supply of land should be identified which is not only identified but is also suitable for development, is available, and is deliverable. This 5 year supply should be maintained throughout the 15 year period. • There is stronger emphasis on improving the quality of design of housing and neighbourhoods. PPS3 makes it clear that local authorities should turn down poor quality applications. Joint Development Control Committees (East & West) 1 18 January 2007 • Stronger environmental standards. Developers and planning bodies will have to take account of the need to cut carbon emissions as well as wider environmental and sustainability considerations when siting and designing new homes. A forthcoming Planning Policy Statement on climate change and the new Code for Sustainable Homes will set out further details including plans to move towards zero carbon development. • Ensuring the effective and efficient use of land with a continuing focus on brownfield land, with local authorities setting their own local targets to reflect available sites and support the national target, with safeguards to ensure brownfield land is prioritised. They will also need to take stronger action to bring more brownfield land back into use, supported by the new National Brownfield Strategy led by English Partnerships. A national indicative minimum density of 30 dwellings per hectare is retained ‘until local density policies are in place’. Where LPAs wish to plan for, or agree to, densities below this minimum this will need to be justified having regard to a range of criteria including spatial visions, capacity, site accessibility, character of area and the need to achieve high quality well designed housing for all. • More flexibility for local authorities to determine how and where new homes should be built in their area, alongside greater responsibility to ensure the homes are built. • Stronger policies on affordable housing, especially in rural areas. The PPS includes a new definition of affordable housing namely: Affordable housing includes social rented and intermediate housing, provided to specified eligible households whose needs are not met by the market. Affordable housing should: - Meet the needs of eligible households including availability at a cost low enough for them to afford, determined with regard to local incomes and local house prices. - Include provision for the home to remain at an affordable price for future eligible households or, if these restrictions are lifted, for the subsidy to be recycled for alternative affordable housing provision’. Social rented housing is rented housing owned and managed by local authorities and registered social landlords, for which guideline target rents are determined through the national rent regime. Intermediate affordable housing is housing at prices and rents above those of social rent, but below market price or rents and which meet the criteria set out above. These can include shared equity products (e.g. HomeBuy), other low cost homes for sale and intermediate rent.’ Those homes that do not meet these definitions, for example, ‘low cost market’ housing, may not be considered, for planning purposes, as affordable housing.’ 3. Implications for LDF The policies in the PPS should be taken into account by Local Planning Authorities in the preparation of their Local Development Documents. Authorities should consider the extent to which emerging Local Development Documents can have regard to the policies in the PPS whilst maintaining plan-making programmes. Joint Development Control Committees (East & West) 2 18 January 2007 Much of the content of the PPS was included in the consultation drafts of the Core Strategy and Site Specific Proposals documents and is reflected in the work to-date on the Local Development Framework. The most significant changes relate to increased emphasis on delivery and a need for Planning Authorities to take a more proactive approach towards housing supply to meet all needs for market and affordable housing. The implications for North Norfolk’s LDF are highlighted in the Table below. It is intended that these issues will be discussed when the response to the consultation exercise on the housing sections of the Core Strategy and SSP documents are considered by the LDF Working Party. Table summarising content of PPS3 and implications for LDF preparation. PPS Summary Quantity of Housing Possible Actions/Considerations for LDF y The overall levels of housing in the District should remain broadly in conformity with the RSS (8000 dwellings). This figure should be built within the plan period and can be regarded as a minimum. y See comments below concerning delivery. y The emphasis should be on allocating sites which are both suitable for development and can realistically be developed. y Location of Housing y May need to reassess the extent to which windfall development contributes to the future housing trajectory. Authorities should not rely on windfall development in locations where allocations can be made. y Continued support for ensuring that building occurs in locations with good access to jobs, community facility and services and infrastructure helping to create mixed and sustainable communities. y May need to reconsider the extent to which brownfield industrial sites can contribute to housing supply in the context of other strategic objectives to retain and create job opportunities. y Use land effectively in particular re-using previously developed land where it can contribute towards sustainable development objectives. y Need to consider housing density and how national target should/should not be applied at local level. y Make efficient use of land ensuring that development takes place at appropriate densities with a national indicative minimum of 30 dwellings per hectare. Joint Development Control Committees (East & West) 3 18 January 2007 Quality and type of Housing y Renewed emphasis on achieving a high quality of design in all developments. y Set a District wide target for the amount of affordable housing to be provided to meet current and future needs reflecting likely economic viability. y Achieve a mix of housing to meet all needs in terms of tenure and price and house types suitable for families with children, single persons and older people. y Set separate targets for social rented and intermediate types of affordable housing y Set the range (site size threshold ) when affordable housing will be required and justify any threshold less than 15 dwellings. y Meet any identified need for Gypsies and Travellers. y Make provision for application of rural exceptions site policy. y Set out the likely profile of those needing housing and ensure (at least on large sites) that developments bring forward suitable housing to match this profile. y Identify suitable sites for gypsies and travellers to meet the identified need. Delivery of Housing y Deliver a flexible supply of housing land y There is far greater emphasis on housing deliver, monitoring performance and identifying in what circumstances the Authority will intervene. There will be a need to ensure identified sites are genuinely available, establish when they will be developed, possibly phase the release of land and spell out what measures will be taken if housing delivery does not match expectations. y Maintain a 5 year supply of housing land over a 15 year period y Ensure that the 5 year supply is deliverable by making sure that identified land is available, suitable and there is a reasonable prospect of delivery within the specified time period. y Monitor housing delivery and be prepared to intervene if development rates to not comply with targets Determining Planning Applications PPS3 also gives guidance to Councils in determining applications, as set out below: Local Planning Authorities should take into consideration the policies set out in Regional Spatial Strategies and Development Plan Documents, as the Development Plan, as well as other material considerations. When making planning decisions for housing developments after 1 April 2007, Local Planning Authorities should have regard to the policies in this statement as material considerations which may supersede the policies in existing Development Plans. In general, in deciding planning applications, Local Planning Authorities should have regard to: • Achieving high quality housing. • Ensuring developments achieve a good mix of housing reflecting the accommodation requirements of specific groups, in particular, families and older people. • The suitability of a site for housing, including its environmental sustainability. • Using land effectively and efficiently. • Ensuring the proposed development is in line with planning for housing objectives, reflecting the need and demand for housing in, and the spatial vision for, the area and does not undermine wider policy objectives e.g. addressing housing market renewal issues. Joint Development Control Committees (East & West) 4 18 January 2007 Where Local Planning Authorities have an up-to-date five year supply of deliverable sites and applications come forward for sites that are allocated in the overall land supply, but which are not yet in the up-to-date five year supply, Local Planning Authorities will need to consider whether granting planning permission would undermine achievement of their policy objectives. Where Local Planning Authorities cannot demonstrate an up-to-date five year supply of deliverable sites, for example, where Local Development Documents have not been reviewed to take into account policies in this PPS or there is less than five years supply of deliverable sites, they should consider favourably planning applications for housing, having regard to policies in this PPS including consideration of paragraph 69. Local Planning Authorities should not refuse applications solely on the grounds of prematurity. When considering applications relating to sites for which planning permission has been previously granted for a similar proposal, but where the development has not been implemented, Local Planning Authorities should consider, based upon robust evidence provided by applicants, whether the site is likely to be developed. There is no presumption the planning permission should be granted because of a previous approval, particularly if the original permission proposal did not deliver the policy objectives of this PPS. Conclusion Clearly, from 1 April 2007, Officers and Members will need to consider carefully the relationship between the advice in PPS3, the policies in the adopted Local Plan and possibly the emerging LDF, depending on its progress. Further advice will be given to Members in due course. RECOMMENDATION That Members note the content of this report For further information see http://www.communities.gov.uk or contact Mark Ashwell, Senior Planning Officer Ext 6325 Source: (Mark Ashwell, Extn 6325/Steve Oxenham, Extn 6135 - File Reference: PPS3 Latest) PUBLIC BUSINESS - ITEM FOR DECISION 2. Planning Policy Statement 25 – Development and Flood Risk Report outlining the key areas of advice in PPS25 and considering the implications for the preparation of the Local Development Framework and for determining planning applications. 1. Introduction The Government issued PPS25: Development and Flood Risk, in December 2006. The PPS recognises that flood risk is likely to increase over the next few decades as a result of climate change and it provides guidance on planning’s contribution to mitigating and adapting to these challenges. Joint Development Control Committees (East & West) 5 18 January 2007 2. Key Messages The PPS aims to ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding and to direct development away from areas at highest risk. Where new development is, exceptionally, necessary in such areas, the aim should be to make it safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere. The LDF should set out policies for the allocation of sites and the control of development which avoid flood risk to people and property where possible and manage it elsewhere. A Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) should be carried out to inform the LDF and provide the information necessary to apply the sequential approach. The SFRA should refine the flood zone maps (i.e. distinguish between flood zone 3a and 3b), take account of other sources of flooding and consider the impacts of climate change. Environment Agency flood zone maps define the flood risk areas as follows: Zone 1: Low probability. Land having less than 1 in 1,000 annual probability of river or sea flooding in any year (<0.1%) Zone 2: Medium probability. Land having between a 1 in 100 and 1 in 1,000 annual probability of river flooding (1% - 0.1%) or between a 1 in 200 and 1 in 1,000 annual probability of sea flooding (0.5% - 0.1%) in any year. Zone 3a: High probability. Land having a 1 in 100 or greater annual probability of river flooding (>1%) or a 1 in 200 or greater annual probability of flooding from the sea (>0.5%) in any year. Zone 3b: the functional floodplain. Land where water has to flow or be stored in times of flood. Land with an annual probability of flooding of 1 in 20 (5%) or greater in any year. In North Norfolk the majority of areas at risk of flooding are in zone 3, but the Environment Agency flood zone maps do not distinguish between zone 3a and 3b. The SFRA should provide this detail. Flood vulnerability of development The PPS gives various land uses a flood vulnerability classification, dividing uses into water-compatible, less vulnerable, more vulnerable and highly vulnerable. This is summarised below and the full table is attached as Appendix 1. Highly vulnerable: Police, fire and ambulance stations, caravans for permanent residential use. More vulnerable: Residential dwellings, hospitals, hotels, sites used for short-let or holiday caravans. Less vulnerable: Shops, offices, general industry, restaurants, agriculture and forestry. Water-compatible: Water based recreation, amenity open space, ship building. The Sequential Approach The sequential approach should be applied at all stages in the planning process and the aim is to steer new development to areas at the lowest risk of flooding (flood zone 1). If there is no reasonably available land in zone 1 then the flood vulnerability of the development (see Appendix 1) can be taken into account in locating development in zone 2 and then zone 3. The following table illustrates this. √ = development is appropriate X = development should not be permitted. Joint Development Control Committees (East & West) 6 18 January 2007 Flood zone Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3a Zone 3b Essential infrastructure Water compatible √ √ √ √ Exception test required Exception test required √ √ Highly vulnerable √ More vulnerable Less vulnerable √ √ √ √ x Exception test required √ x x x Exception test required The Exception Test This allows for development in higher risk areas, but only if it is not possible for development to be located in areas of lower risk. The Exception Test should only be used when there are large areas of land in flood risk zone 2 and 3, where the sequential test cannot deliver acceptable sites, but where some continuing development is necessary. As large areas of North Norfolk that are suitable for development are in flood zone 1 the LDF Working Party will be recommended to apply the sequential approach rigorously and steer development to these locations and restrict it in flood risk areas. It is not considered appropriate to use the Exceptions Test in North Norfolk for the same reason. PPS25 states that minor developments and changes of use should not be subject to the Sequential or Exception Tests and would therefore be allowed in flood risk zones. This would allow commercial and leisure extensions with a footprint of less than 250sq.m., alterations that do not increase the size of the building and ‘householder’ development such as garages and extensions to existing dwellings to be permitted in flood risk zones, therefore allowing continuing development in these areas. Strategic Flood Risk Assessments (SFRAs) The PPS confirms that local authorities should prepare SFRAs, to refine the flood zone maps, take account of other sources of flooding and consider the impacts of climate change. The Council is working with Broadland, South Norfolk, Norwich and the Broads Authority in commissioning a SFRA. A stage 1 report has been prepared by consultants that sets out the extent of work required and gives an estimate of costs. Bids for the stage 2 work of preparing the SFRA are currently being considered. It is hoped that this work will be competed by March 2007. Climate Change Projections of future climate change indicate more frequent short duration, high density rainfall, more frequent periods of long-duration rainfall and continuing sea level rises. These changes will increase the possibility of flooding. The PPS recommends contingency allowances for net sea level rises, extreme wave heights, offshore wind speeds, peak river flows and peak rainfall intensity that should be used when preparing Flood Risk Assessments. These provide a precautionary response as it is anticipated that the rise in sea levels will change the frequency of occurrence of high water levels relative to today’s sea levels and there may also be secondary effects such as changes in wave heights due to increased depth of water as well as an increase in the frequency and duration of storms. Extensive, low-lying coastal areas are particularly susceptible to flooding and changes to factors associated with coastal erosion will increase the chances of flooding. Joint Development Control Committees (East & West) 7 18 January 2007 In the East of England the following contingency allowances are recommended. Parameter Net sea level rise (mm/yr) Peak rainfall intensity Peak river flow Offshore wind speed Extreme wave height 1990 to 2025 4 2025 to 2055 8.5 +5% +10% +10% 2055 to 2085 12 2085 to 2115 15 +20% +30% +20% +5% +10% +5% +10% Testing the Environment Agency flood zone maps using the 20% increase in peak river flows suggests that changes in the extent of flooding are negligible in welldefined floodplains, but can be dramatic in very flat areas. However, changes in the depth of flooding will mean that a site currently lying within a lower risk zone, such as zone 2, could in future be re-classified to a high risk zone. This will have implication for the type of development that is appropriate, according to its vulnerability to flooding (See Appendix 1). It is therefore important that the SFRA, as well the current flood zone maps, is taken into account when considering development. However, as discussed previously it is proposed to limit development in flood risk zones to minor development only. Determining Planning Applications In determining planning applications the Council should have regard to policies in the PPS as material considerations which may supersede the policies in the Local Plan. In particular: • • • • • Planning applications should be supported by a Flood Risk Assessment as appropriate The sequential approach should be applied at a site level to minimise risk by directing the most vulnerable development to areas of lowest flood risk (see Appendix 1 – flood risk vulnerability classification). Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) should be encouraged, to manage flood ‘pathways’ and reduce the likelihood of flooding. Any new development in flood risk areas must be appropriately flood resilient, including safe access and escape routes. The Environment Agency must be consulted on all applications for development in flood risk areas (except minor development) and for any development on land exceeding 1ha outside flood risk areas. In cases where the Environment Agency object to a planning application on flood risk grounds but the Local Planning Authority considers that it should be approved, the PPS requires that the Local Planning Authority first contacts the Environment Agency to allow discussions and further representations to be made. In the case of major applications, where after further discussions the Environment Agency still objects and the Local Planning Authority is still minded to grant permission, the Town and country Planning (Flooding) (England) Direction 2007 requires the Local Planning Authority to notify the Secretary of State of the proposal. This could result in the Secretary of State ‘calling in’ the application for determination. Joint Development Control Committees (East & West) 8 18 January 2007 RECOMMENDATION That Members note the content of this report For further information see http://www.communities.gov.uk or contact Polly Wake, Senior Planning Officer Ext 6325 Source: (Polly Wake, Extn 6325/John Williams, Extn 6163 - File Reference: PPS25) PUBLIC BUSINESS - ITEM FOR DECISION 3. Local Plan – Saving Local Plan Policies pending the preparation of the Local Development Framework To consider the need to save current Local Plan policies pending their replacement with new policies in the Local Development Framework Background. The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires Local Planning Authorities to prepare Local Development Frameworks to replace their current Local Plans. To allow time for the preparation of Local Development Frameworks the Act makes provision for Local Plans to remain in force for a three year period commencing in September 2004 after which time policies will no longer comprise part of the approved Development Plan. The policies of the North Norfolk Local Plan are currently saved until September 2007. Whilst work is progressing on the Local Development Framework it will not be adopted prior to next September. The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) can make a direction to save specific policies for a longer period and has published a protocol setting out the relevant procedures. This requires that if the Authority wishes to extend the saved period beyond September 2007 it will need to make a submission to DCLG by 1st April 2007. If the Authority does not save relevant policies the Local Plan will lapse and its provisions will cease to be material to the determination of planning applications. Principles for saving policies. In principle all of the policies in the current Local Plan could be saved. However the Protocol makes it clear that this is not the intention. In its submissions to the Secretary of State the Authority will need to demonstrate that the policies it wishes to save reflect the emerging Local Development Framework, are consistent with government advise, and that it is not feasible to replace them prior to next September. Furthermore, policies which are out of date, do not comply with Community Strategies, Regional Spatial Guidance or other approved development plan documents, or are no longer needed because they merely repeat national or regional policy, should not be saved. Which Policies need saving? The Local Plan incorporates 153 formal policies, the North Norfolk Design Guide, a number of detailed annexes dealing with issues such as car parking and open space standards, and the Proposals Map defining development boundaries and policy areas. Each of the policies have been considered against the principles outlined in the Protocol. The results are presented in Appendix 2 which makes Joint Development Control Committees (East & West) 9 18 January 2007 recommendations in respect of each policy of the plan together with a justification for seeking to either save or not save. The general approach taken has been to seek to save those policies which are used on a regular basis by the Development Control Committees in reaching decisions on planning applications. The final decision will be made by the DCLG. RECOMMENDED That Members endorse the Officer recommendations presented in Appendix 2 and refer the matter to Cabinet to seek Authority to make a submission to the Government Office. (Source: Mark Ashwell, Senior Planning Officer, Ext. 6325) Joint Development Control Committees (East & West) 10 18 January 2007