Agenda item

The report provides information around potential for not basing housing number in the East Devon local plan on the outcomes of application of the Government standard method for assessing housing need.

The Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management presented the report which addressed matters raised by Strategic Planning Members at the meeting on 9 June specifically addressing the housing need matters with constraints in East Devon to accommodate housing growth.

The report focused on two key aspects which related to the unconstrained housing need figure calculated on the Government’s standard method for calculating housing numbers and the housing requirement which takes into the constraints.  The current housing need figure under the Government’s standard method stands at 910 homes per year which Members noted was not unusual for Southern England.

The Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management highlighted the following planning constraints which the report addressed but concluded could not be taken into account as these were not classed as exceptional circumstances:

·       Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty

·       Green Belts

·       Duty to co-operate

·       Growth on protected habitats

He also addressed the wider concerns for not accommodating the standard method housing need numbers and emphasised that current evidence had demonstrated East Devon did not have any exceptional circumstances to justify using an alternative approach to the standard method for calculating the Local Housing Need.

The Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised it was important to note that the proposed levels of growth could be accommodated with suitable mitigation in place and that it would be kept under review should Government policy changes.

Members thanked the Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management for the excellent detailed report which gave a compelling argument to the recommendations proposed and raised the following comments and questions:

·       There is a need to challenge the housing numbers through political channels rather than through the local plan process.

·       Concern was raised about the duty to co-operate and neighbouring authorities not meeting their housing numbers.  It was advised there was a need to wait and see and then push for evidence to back up their case. Torbay was the only neighbouring authority at this stage that had indicated that they would not be able to meet their housing numbers and evidence had been requested to confirm this.

·       There was a need to find ways to mitigate existing challenges and focus on issues such as waste water and working with NHS.

·       There was a need to work closely with town and parish councils to ensure they get the right housing that they believe is needed.

·       Clarification was sought on the affordability ratio and the comments detailed in paragraph 5.30.  The Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management agreed questioning the evidence about whether this would bring house prices down.

·       Clarification was sought on the infrastructure issues detailed in paragraph 5.24 and whether this could be considered a constraint if Government was failing to carry out the engineering solutions.  In response the Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management advised it would not be a constraint to levels of growth in  planning terms as development could be phased to allow for the infrastructure to put in place, but it could be raised at a political level.

·       Concern was raised about the proposal for a new town when DCC were not happy with their infrastructure and roads in Exeter.

·       There is a need to separate the site allocations from worst to good and put the worst sites on a reserve which if needed can be appealed when the local plan goes for inspection.

·       The reason why East Devon suffers so badly with house prices and availability is due to inward migration.

In line with comments received from Members about the need to challenge the housing numbers through a political process Councillor Kevin Blakey proposed the following additional recommendation which was seconded by Councillor Ben Ingham.

‘That EDDC should write to our local MPs to press for a policy change as referred to in recommendation 2 to take into account the real local need excluding the influence of demand for housing created by inward voluntary migration.’

Further comments included:

·       Do not agree that we do not have exceptional circumstances.  There is a duty to our residents to push back and not accept figures from an algorithm.

·       Concern raised that the local plan was not moving forward since the consultation and the need to stop going around in circles.

·       It was suggested to a slight amendment of the wording in recommendation 2 as there was a need to keep other neighbouring authorities under constant review with their housing numbers.

·       Dissatisfaction was expressed about the delivery of housing sprawling out into the countryside onto our green fields.  Discussions have never taken place in committee about how this can be avoided.

·       In response to the additional recommendation proposed by Councillor Blakey it was suggested there was a need for a continuous commitment to look at political avenues to challenge the housing numbers.

·       There is a need to push to maximise the number of affordable homes.

·       A member expressed support for a letter to be sent to local MPs to try and get the housing numbers down but could not support a letter that could not support the voluntary inward migration as this would stop people coming into the district that were highly skilled.  In response Councillor Blakey advised the point he was trying to make was that local housing need should be made more affordable and that house prices were driven by people coming into the area.

·       The current housing target was completely unreasonable and that continued conversations were needed with our local MPs to keep the pressure on Government.

·       It was suggested to have a bullet pointed letter to the local MPs listing all the constraints.

·       It was suggested to use the previous letter sent to Michael Gove should be used as a base point. 

The following suggestions were made by Members to include in the letter to Michael Gove:

·       A member suggested circulating the letter to the Strategic Planning Committee Members as several Members who had commented earlier were not present.

·       It was suggested there was a need to send the letter out as a press release and to also put the letter on all the council’s social media platforms, so residents know that they are supported.

·       There was a need to include the following constraints:

Ø  the impacts on roads and infrastructure.

Ø  the effects on water and sewerage and its infrastructure

Ø  the increased pressures on doctors’ surgeries and the NHS in general.

Ø  the efficacy of the affordability uplift in the standard method.

Ø  the ability for councils to build homes and not just developers to maintain a mixed market.

  RESOLVED:

1.     That active local plan preparation reconvene and work on the basis, for the time being, of providing sufficient housing to meet the Government standard method.

2.     That should the Government policy change and provide sufficient flexibility for a differing housing level, an insurmountable infrastructure constraint, or a finding at a local plan examination elsewhere then matters should be reviewed for an alternative approach is applicable, appropriate and desirable and can be successfully achieved in the East Devon local plan.

3.     That EDDC should write an open letter to our local MPs to press for policy change as referred to in recommendation 2.  Delegated authority to be given to the Assistant Director – Planning Strategy and Development Management in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair to agree the content of the letter in line with the previous letter written and points raised.