Presumption in favour of Sustainable Development

  • Para 11d – the absence of a 5YLS or record of substantial under delivery will now render “the policies for the supply of land” out-of-date rather than “the most important policies”. Footnote 8 provides a definition of what these policies are namely those “which set an overall requirement and/or make allocations and allowances for windfall sites”. As a result, the policies which do not relate to the principle of development would remain up to date.
  • Para 11d(ii) has been amended such that the adverse impacts should have particular regard to promoting sustainable transport and achieving well designed places. This would suggest that comparatively less weight should be afforded to other adverse impacts.
  • Footnote 9 has reverted such that para 11d will once be engaged in the absence of a 5YLS or record of substantial under delivery. Happily, this dispenses with the 4YLS arguments and the disapplication of housing land supply considerations for 5 years post-adoption.

Housing

  • Para 61 There is a clear emphasis on meeting identified housing needs, and any reference to “as much as possible” has been deleted.
  • Para 62 Standard Method – a consultation on reforms to the standard method based on housing stock, affordability and local need is part of the consultation.
  • Uplift in areas where house prices are the most out of step with local incomes
  • Housing Targets are to become mandatory – all Local Authorities will need to demonstrate that they have taken all possible steps including optimising density, sharing need with neighbouring authorities and reviewing g/b boundaries before a lower housing requirement figure can be considered.
  • 1.5 million homes in the next 5 yrs (figure not included in the NPPF but in the Press release, i.e. 370,000 dwellings per annum)
  • Para 76 reintroduces the buffers of the old NPPF. The consultation proposes reversing the changes introduced in December 2023 with the reintroduction of the buffers to five year supply, removal of the 4 year supply provisions and the removal of the requirement to identify and update a five year supply of deliverable sites for plans that are less than five years old and could demonstrate a five year supply at the conclusion of the examination.
  • A 5% buffer on five year supply is proposed and a 20% buffer for where there has been significant under delivery of housing over the previous three years.
  • As expected, the standard method is proposed to be revised to identify a need for 0.8% of the existing dwelling stock + a revised and increased affordability adjustment. Looking through the figures, this is very helpful in the majority of cases.
    • The authorities in which the need reduces are largely urban areas where there is probably less opportunity comprising Ashford, Bedford, Birmingham, Bradford, Bristol, Central Beds, Charnwood, Coventry, Dartford, Derby, Eastbourne, Leicester, Liverpool, Luton, Medway, Newcastle, Nottingham, Sandwell, Sheffield, Slough, Southampton, Thanet, Thurrock, Watford, Welwyn Hatfield, and the majority of London Boroughs.
    • This means that the need increases everywhere else, and particularly in rural areas and some urban areas in the north. For example, the greatest increases in % terms include Redcar and Cleveland (1338% of current result), Burnley (625%), Hyndburn (528%), Blackpool (328%), Blackburn (320%), Cheshire West and Chester (279%), NE Lincolnshire (272%), West Lancs (264%), Tamworth (261%), Redditch (242%), Darlington (229%), South Ribble (223%), Northumberland (222%), Staffordshire Moorlands (213%), Pendle (209%), South Staffs (204%), Wyre Forest (192%), Ribble Valley (191%), NE Derbyshire (178%), Knowsley (177%), Worthing (168%) etc.
  • Paragraph 69 talks about delivering older persons’ housing as part of mixed tenure sites. Given the UK’s ageing population, it is good to see government recognising the importance of the delivering accommodation that is tailored towards meeting the needs of older people. Identifying the type of accommodation (sheltered, extra-care etc.) will be key.
  • Affordable Housing -planning policies to specify the type of affordable housing to include minimum proportion of Social Rent homes required.
  • Para 66 proposes to delete the reference to at least 10%of homes for affordable home ownership.
  • Much more emphasis on meeting affordable housing needs e.g. that the mix the mix of affordable housing required meets identified local needs, across both affordable housing for rent and affordable home ownership tenures.
  • The glossary clarifies that First Homes come forward through the First Homes exception sites and through developer contributions.

For more information contact Sarah Hamilton-Foyn.