HeathfieldGreen.Space is the new name for StopVinesCorner

HeathfieldGreen.Space

HeathfieldGreen.Space HeathfieldGreen.Space HeathfieldGreen.Space

HeathfieldGreen.Space

HeathfieldGreen.Space HeathfieldGreen.Space HeathfieldGreen.Space
  • Home
  • Local Elections 2021
  • Daily Info
  • SHELAA 2020
  • NEWS
    • News Flash
    • The Numbers
    • Planning Changes
    • Actions
    • Wealden
    • Your News Stories
    • Local Media News Stories
  • Your Area
    • Heathfield
    • Old Heathfield Cade St
    • Broad Oak
    • Cross in Hand
    • Horam
    • Mayfield
    • Five Ashes
    • Punnett's Town
    • Small Settlements
  • Photo's
  • Green Spaces
  • StopVinesCorner
    • Asset of Community Value
    • Stop Vines Corner History
  • Local Plans
    • WDC LOCAL PLAN
    • WDC Consultation
    • WDC Planning
    • Innovation in Building
    • Heathfield & Waldron PC
  • More
    • Home
    • Local Elections 2021
    • Daily Info
    • SHELAA 2020
    • NEWS
      • News Flash
      • The Numbers
      • Planning Changes
      • Actions
      • Wealden
      • Your News Stories
      • Local Media News Stories
    • Your Area
      • Heathfield
      • Old Heathfield Cade St
      • Broad Oak
      • Cross in Hand
      • Horam
      • Mayfield
      • Five Ashes
      • Punnett's Town
      • Small Settlements
    • Photo's
    • Green Spaces
    • StopVinesCorner
      • Asset of Community Value
      • Stop Vines Corner History
    • Local Plans
      • WDC LOCAL PLAN
      • WDC Consultation
      • WDC Planning
      • Innovation in Building
      • Heathfield & Waldron PC
  • Home
  • Local Elections 2021
  • Daily Info
  • SHELAA 2020
  • NEWS
  • Your Area
  • Photo's
  • Green Spaces
  • StopVinesCorner
  • Local Plans

Planning Changes 2020

To see the consultation document go here . The Government are seeking views on changes to planning policy and regulations.

This consultation closes at 11:45pm on 1 October 2020 if you want to take part click on the button below. For a view of the changes look here. Some changes have already been made see here.

Complete Consultation

The Main Changes

     Planning for the Future sets out plans to undertake a fundamental reform of the planning system and explains that this would be accompanied by shorter-term measures. This consultation sets out proposals for measures to improve the effectiveness of the current system. The four main proposals are: 

See Jargon Buster at the end of this Page

Change 1 - The Calculation

The Calculation

The Effect House Numbers

The Effect House Numbers

Pages 8-18 Changes to the standard method for assessing local housing need, which as well as being a proposal to change guidance in the short term has relevance to proposals for land supply reforms set out in Planning for the Future. For more information on The New Standard Method look here

The Effect House Numbers

The Effect House Numbers

The Effect House Numbers

  The housing projection shows that the new standard method for calculating housing required for England, would generate 337.3k dwellings 45.69% (154.8k) of these are destined for London and the Southeast. Can the current Infrastructure cope with the  disproportionate number of dwellings?

The Effect on Population

What could this mean for Wealden

What could this mean for Wealden

  The population data shows that out of 56.29m people that live in England 32.23% live in London and the Southeast. Can London and the Southeast take the disproportionate number of dwellings and the population that comes with them?

What could this mean for Wealden

What could this mean for Wealden

What could this mean for Wealden

 Comment 

As the residents of Wealden live in the most densely populated area of England the new calculation method can only make the situation worse.


As the numbers show London and the Southeast will have nearly 46% of all new dwellings planned for the foreseeable future.


At present under the new standard calculation method Wealden will have a target of nearly 25000 dwellings in the suggested 20-year Local Plan Period. A 20% increase in the land available for development will be needed if Wealden fails the Housing Delivery Test, at present on currently available numbers Wealden will fail the test.


Change 2 - First Home - The Three Pillars

The Target

Pillar 1 - Planning for Development

Pillar 1 - Planning for Development

 The Government intends to set out in policy that a minimum of 25 per cent of all affordable housing units secured through developer contributions should be First Homes. This will be a national threshold, set out in planning policy. Initially these will be secured through section 106 planning obligations but, under proposed reforms, these would subsequently be secured through the Infrastructure Levy (see Pillar Three of Planning for the Future). 

Pillar 1 - Planning for Development

Pillar 1 - Planning for Development

Pillar 1 - Planning for Development

  •  Pages 19-24
  • Proposal 1: The role of land use plans should be simplified. We (Gov) propose that Local Plans should identify three types of land – Growth areas suitable for substantial development, Renewal areas suitable for development, and areas that are Protected.
  • Proposal 2: Development management policies established at national scale and an altered role for Local Plans.
  • Proposal 3: Local Plans should be subject to a single statutory “sustainable development” test, replacing the existing tests of soundness.
  • Proposal 4: A standard method for establishing housing requirement figures which ensures enough land is released in the areas where affordability is worst, to stop land supply being a barrier to enough homes being built. The housing requirement would factor in land constraints and opportunities to more effectively use land, including through densification where appropriate, to ensure that the land is identified in the most appropriate areas and housing targets are met.
  • Proposal 5: Areas identified as Growth areas (suitable for substantial development) would automatically be granted outline planning permission for the principle of development, while automatic approvals would also be available for pre-established development types in other areas suitable for building.
  • Proposal 6: Decision-making should be faster and more certain, with firm deadlines, and make greater use of digital technology.
  • Proposal 7: Local Plans should be visual and map-based, standardised, based on the latest digital technology, and supported by a new template.
  • Proposal 8: Local authorities and the Planning Inspectorate will be required through legislation to meet a statutory timetable for key stages of the process, and we (Gov) will consider what sanctions there would be for those who fail to do so.
  • Proposal 9: Neighbourhood Plans should be retained as an important means of community input, and we (Gov) will support communities to make better use of digital tools.
  • Proposal 10: A stronger emphasis on build out through planning.
  • Additional comment can be found here 

Pillar Two – Planning for beautiful and sustainable places.

Pillar Three – Planning for infrastructure and connected places.

Pillar Three – Planning for infrastructure and connected places.

    

  • Proposal 11: To make design expectations more visual and predictable, we (gov) will expect design guidance and codes to be prepared locally with community involvement, and ensure that codes are more binding on decisions about development.
  • Proposal 12: To support the transition to a planning system which is more visual and rooted in local preferences and character, we (Gov) will set up a body to support the delivery of provably locally-popular design codes, and propose that each authority should have a chief officer for design and place-making.
  • Proposal 13: To further embed national leadership on delivering better places, we (Gov) will consider how Homes England’s strategic objectives can give greater emphasis to delivering beautiful places.
  • Proposal 14: We (Gov) intend to introduce a fast-track for beauty through changes to national policy and legislation, to incentivise and accelerate high quality development which reflects local character and preferences.
  • Proposal 15: We (Gov) intend to amend the National Planning Policy Framework to ensure that it targets those areas where a reformed planning system can most effectively play a role in mitigating and adapting to climate change and maximising environmental benefits.
  • Proposal 16: We (Gov) intend to design a quicker, simpler framework for assessing environmental impacts and enhancement opportunities, that speeds up the process while protecting and enhancing the most valuable and important habitats and species in England.
  • Proposal 17: Conserving and enhancing our historic buildings and areas in the 21st century.
  • Proposal 18: To complement our planning reforms, we (Gov)will facilitate ambitious improvements in the energy efficiency standards for buildings to help deliver our world-leading commitment to net-zero by 2050.
  •  Additional comment can be found here  

Pillar Three – Planning for infrastructure and connected places.

Pillar Three – Planning for infrastructure and connected places.

Pillar Three – Planning for infrastructure and connected places.

  

  • Proposal 19: The Community Infrastructure Levy should be reformed to be charged as a fixed proportion of the development value above a threshold, with a mandatory nationally-set rate or rates and the current system of planning obligations abolished.
  • Proposal 20: The scope of the Infrastructure Levy could be extended to capture changes of use through permitted development rights.
  • Proposal 21: The reformed Infrastructure Levy should deliver affordable housing provision.
  • Proposal 22: More freedom could be given to local authorities over how they spend the Infrastructure Levy.
  •   Additional comment can be found here.


Comment

Nowhere in the current proposals (except proposal 10 above) is there any concrete proposals to clear the backlog of one million plus  dwellings that currently have planning permission, this is the equivalent to 3 years of the Governments stated build target of 300,000 plus dwellings per year. In reality SHELTER reported recently that up to 40% of dwelling with planning permission are never built, once again showing it not permissions causing the problem. Some say it is the stringent conditions imposed by the Local Planning Authorities that cause protracted time periods for large development, but larger developers with knowledge and resources combined with modern technology the condition should be able to be predicted and designed in from the start and before permission applied for. 


Also, with the temporary measure to cut the affordable element (35% currently in Wealden) of planning applications below (40 or 50 dwellings),this would mean losing 25% 0f those that would have been First Time Homes in effect losing 3-4 dwelling per development.


Based on a 300,000-build target per year, of which 105,000 would be affordable if the WDC 35% is used (other LPA may be different). The loss in numbers of First Homes could be up to 26,000 per year over the period of the temporary measure. It just seems to be self-defeating when one of the prime objectives is to make houses more affordable.

Change 3 - Affordable Housing

The Effect on Affordable Housing

The Effect on Affordable Housing

The Effect on Affordable Housing

 Temporarily lifting the small sites threshold below which developers do not need to contribute to affordable housing, to up to 40 or 50 units to support SME builders as the economy recovers from the impact of Covid-19. 


 

 

Comment

The Government make great play on the fact they want to simplify the planning system but under the section of Affordable Housing the word simplify seems to have changed to complicate, with a vast array of different options. It talks about Community Infrastructure Levy exceptions, complicated methods of affordable housing allocations, and shared ownership variations.

Under the current rules on affordable housing a straight 35%(Wealden) is a must for developments over 5 dwellings in the AONB and over 10 outside the AONB, with all the complications introduces in The White Paper on calculating the numbers of Affordable Housing and First Homes and the associated discount developers will cry NOT VIABLE and seek a reduction in the affordable and first home numbers. 

The Governments Proposals

The Effect on Affordable Housing

The Effect on Affordable Housing

  • Pages 25-28
  •  Proposal 1 - We (Gov) are proposing to raise the small sites threshold to up to either 40 or 50 new homes through changes to national planning policy and are seeking views on the most appropriate level. These thresholds balance the aim of supporting SMEs with the need to deliver new affordable homes. This will be for an initial period of 18 months in which we (Gov) will monitor the impact of the raised threshold on the sector before reviewing the approach.
  • Proposal 2 - National policy currently sets out a site size threshold for residential development in addition to number of homes. It makes clear that affordable housing contributions should not be sought for developments that have a site area of less than 0.5 hectares. We (Gov) propose to scale up the site size threshold at the same proportion as the increase in number of homes threshold and we (Gov) are seeking views on whether this is the most appropriate approach.
  • Proposal 3 - There could be adverse threshold effects whereby developers attempt to bring forward larger sites in phasing's of up to 40 or 50 homes (depending on which threshold is taken forward in legislation) to avoid contributions. To minimise the impact of this potential threshold effect, we (Gov) propose to set out in planning guidance how local planning authorities can secure contributions for affordable housing where it is apparent that a larger site is being brought forward.
  • Proposal 4 -   In designated rural areas, local planning authorities can set a lower threshold of five units or fewer in their plans. We (Gov) are aware that rural local authorities secure greater proportions of their housing supply as affordable on average when compared to urban local authorities. In designated rural areas, we  (Gov) therefore propose to maintain the current threshold.


Change 4 - Extension of the Permission in Principle

Permission in Principle

Permission in Principle

Permission in Principle

  

Extending the current Permission in Principle to major development so landowners and developers now have a fast route to secure the principle of development for housing on sites without having to work up detailed plans first.

 

  • Growth areas – land that is suitable for 'substantial development' (as defined in policy). This may include the construction of new settlements, urban extension and redevelopment projects. Sites in this zone would receive automatic, outline approval for development. The focus is on certain types of infrastructure developments (including but not limited to new homes, hospitals and schools).

  • Renewal areas – land that is suitable for 'development' (with emphasis on smaller scale development in contrast to larger scale 'growth' areas). There would be a statutory presumption in favour of development in this zone if suitable for the given area (such as gentle densification, town centre development, small village expansion) with a focus largely toward urban and brownfield development.

  • Protected areas – Development on 'protected areas' (those designated as a result of their particular environmental and/or cultural characteristics) will continue to be restricted, as is the case with current policy, either nationally or locally defined. Areas such as the Green Belt, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Conservation Areas, Local Wildlife Sites, areas of significant flood risk and important areas of green space would continue to be subject to more stringent development controls.
  • Source 

Land Needed

Permission in Principle

Permission in Principle

  

Securing the principle of development for housing on more sites.

  • Pages 29-35
  • As part of our plans to support economic recovery, the Government wants to make it easier for landowners and developers to have certainty that the principle of development for housing only needs to be established once in the process before developers need to get into more costly, technical matters. This is particularly important for smaller sites which have not been allocated in local plans and where there is now, due to the rapidly changing economic circumstances, a desire by landowners to release the land for housing. 
  • Planning for the Future proposes that land allocated for substantive development in local plans should be automatically granted a form of permission of principle so that the principle of development is established, and subsequent consents only focus on detailed technical matters. As this new framework will take time to implement, the Government is keen to expand the current Permission in Principle framework for housing-led development as an early opportunity to move towards this new approach.

Comment

  

Under the Changes to the Current Planning System the government want to make it easier for land to come forward in the Growth Area Zone. In this growth area zone outline planning will be assumed unless an exceptionally good reasons for not approving can be given. It would then automatically move on to the reserved matters stage where the design and other details are finalised.


The next category is Renewal Area Zone the change in rules will make it easier to proceed with change of use from commercial to residential.


The Protected Area Zone as  the Government has stated means just that unless exceptional circumstances apply - we can only hope they keep to what they are stating in the proposals. Wealden recently passed a large development in a protected area in Crowborough and currently an application has gone in for LAND SOUTH-WEST OF GHYLL ROAD, HEATHFIELD. And because of the failed WDC Local Olan in January 2020 it remains in protected AONB.

Sadly such developments will be forced through with WDC saying the cost of a Judicial Review is a mitigating factor and the hard pressed councillors will be swayed by this argument and pass the application.


The White Paper - Planning for the Future

To see the consultation document go here.  

Consultation on proposals for reform of the planning system in England

This consultation closes at 11:45pm on 29 October 2020 

For an view of the changes look here 

Complete Consultation

If its all a bit of a Mystery

Plain English Planning Guide

Plain English Planning Guide

Plain English Planning Guide

See it Here

Find the Jargon to Much

Plain English Planning Guide

Plain English Planning Guide

Unearth the Mystery Here to see what all the abbreviations and terms mean. 

Copyright © 2021 HeathfieldGreen.Space - All Rights Reserved.

Powered by GoDaddy

Announcement

Welcome! Check out my new announcement.

Learn more