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