Pegasus East Breakfast Briefing

November 2017 Format for Morning

• Local Plans and Housing Supply Update & Review of Government’s Standard Methodology for OAN – Guy Longley • Pre- Application Advice – Is the Pain Worth the Gain – Steve-Lewis Roberts • Reserved Matters – Navigating the System – James Hicks • Key Messages – Gary Lees • Q & A Local Plan and Housing Supply Update

Guy Longley Local Plan Progress in 2017

• Part 2 Local Plans progressing; • Fewer lpas without a plan in place in the ; • Plans Adopted – City, Central Lincs (Lincoln, , ); • Soon to be adopted – North West Leics, and South Part 2 Plan; • At Examination – , Part 2, Ashfield LP, South East Lincs (Boston/South Holland), Melton. No 2004 Act Plan in Place

• Derbyshire ◦ – Pre-Submission Consultation till 14th December 17; ◦ Bolsover – New Local Plan Submission Draft early 2018; ◦ – Draft Consultation Feb 17 - Submission Feb 2018; ◦ Derbyshire Dales – Examination in May 17 - Consultation on Proposed Modifications Aug 17 – Inspector’s Report due. • ◦ - Preferred Options Consultation ended 10th November; ◦ Ashfield – At Examination. • ◦ Melton – Local Plan submitted to Sec of State, Oct 17; ◦ North West Leicestershire – Inspector Report Issued – soon to be adopted. • ◦ East Lindsey – Inspector’s report expected Dec 17; ◦ South East Lincs (Boston/South Holland) – at Examination. Pre – NPPF Plan Reviews

• Leicestershire ◦ Harborough – New Local Plan consultation till 17th Nov; ◦ – Initial stages of review; ◦ – New Local Plan consultation ended 31st Oct; ◦ – New Local Plan consultation till 18th Dec. • Nottinghamshire ◦ Newark and Sherwood – Amended Core Strategy submitted to S of S Sept 17. ◦ Bassetlaw – Initial consultation on New Local Plan Draft, Dec 16. • Lincolnshire ◦ – New Local Plan due for submission April 18. • – ◦ Local Plan Review consultation ended Sept 17. Post NPPF Plans

• Leicestershire: ◦ Blaby – Part 2 Delivery DPD about to be published; ◦ Charnwood – New Local Plan Options consultation in New Year. • Derbyshire: ◦ Chesterfield – Draft Plan consultation Feb 17; ◦ Erewash – Initial work on Part 2 plan underway; ◦ – Part 2 Plan soon to be adopted; ◦ Derby – Part 1 Plan adopted Jan 17. • Nottinghamshire: ◦ Broxtowe – Consultation on Part 2 plan ended 3rd Nov; ◦ Gedling – Part 2 Plan at Examination; ◦ – Consultation on Part 2 Plan just completed; ◦ - Part 2 Preferred Sites Consultation – till 27th Nov. Post NPPF Plans

• : ◦ Daventry – Part 2 Draft on Strategy Group Agenda 16th Nov with consultation to follow; ◦ – Part 2 Sites Consultation ended 13th Nov; ◦ South Northants – Part 2 Preferred Options consultation ended 10th Nov; ◦ Corby – Part 2 Emerging Draft Consultation due Dec 17; ◦ East Northants – Part 2 Draft plan consultation awaited; ◦ Kettering – Part 2 Draft Plan consultation due Nov/Dec 17; ◦ Wellingborough – New Local Plan Draft consultation took place Sept-Nov 17. • Lincolnshire ◦ Central Lincs (Lincoln, North Kesteven, West Lindsey) – adopted April 17. Chesterfield

West Lindsey

High Peak Bassetlaw

East Lindsey Lincoln

Derbyshire Dales Newark & Sherwood Nottingham North Kesteven Amber Valley Gedling Boston

Rushcliffe

South Kesteven South South Holland Derbys Melton N W Leics Charnwood

Rutland Hinckley & Derby Bosworth Corby Harborough Local Plan progress

East Northants Leicester Kettering Key

Daventry Adopted Post NPPF – Good Progress Adopted Post NPPF – Limited Northampton Progress Adopted Pre NPPF – Good Progress South Northants Adopted Pre NPPF – Limited Progress No 2004 Act Plan – Good Progress No 2004 Act Plan – Limited Progress Leicester and Leicestershire Strategic Growth Plan

• On NW Leics Cabinet for tonight; • Endorsed by Member Adivsory Group on the 6th November; • Strategy to 2050 with distribution of housing 2011-2031 and 2011-2036; • 12 week consultation commencing 8th January 2018; • A non-statutory growth plan to provide an agreed framework for local plans. The Time Periods

• For 2011-31 - much new housing provided in adopted and emerging plans; • Leicester City unmet needs – met through local plan allocations in other areas; • For 2011-36 – likely to be shortfall. Needs will be met in part by strategy in the draft plan; • The agreed distribution will be set out in a MOU early 2018; • Longer term 2031-2050 – the focus for the Growth Plan. Scale of growth projected forward using HEDNA figures; • Unmet needs for Leicester and Oadby and Wigston. The Building Blocks

• Infrastructure investment with a degree of support – focusing growth to areas with new infrastructure; • Midlands Connect Strategy – endorses rail and road schemes: ◦ Midland Mainline upgrade; ◦ Improved rail services to Leicester, Coventry and Birmingham; ◦ Improvements to A5 M42/A42 and A46; ◦ New road south-east of Leicester to M69. • Shifting the development focus: ◦ More development in major strategic locations; ◦ Reduced amount in towns, villages and rural areas. The Strategy

• A46 Growth corridor – 40,000 new homes; • Northern Gateway – northern parts M42/M1 – 10,000 homes; • Southern Gateway – focused on A5, M69/M1 – further potential; • Key Centres – Melton and Lutterworth – scope for further growth; Notional Housing Need and Supply 2031-2050

Local Authority Notional Needs Delivery Total Delivery Difference - 2031-50 on per annum Notional Need (per annum) Strategic to Total Delivery Sites

Blaby 361 15,500 924 563 Charnwood 994 10,000 994 0 Harborough 514 15,000 944 430 Hinckley and Bosworth 454 7,500 531 77 Leicester City 1,668 0 550 -1,118 Melton 170 3,000 238 68 NW Leicestershire 448 4,000 448 0 Oadby and Wigston 155 1,500 139 -16 4,764 56,500 4,768 5 Year Land Supply – The East Mids

• By their calculations some 28 local authorities now say they can demonstrate 5 years supply (24 last year);

• Reliance on large site delivery starting to bite – ◦ Blaby looking to allocate additional 750 dwells to address shortfalls; ◦ Rushcliffe looking to make up shortfall of 900 from SUEs in Part 2 Plan; ◦ Charnwood accept 5 year supply shortfall – revised assumptions on SUE delivery.

• Lpas getting better at 5 year supply assessments – fewer issues on methodology – more about assumptions on site delivery;

• Still opportunities – in Charnwood again! Harborough, Leicester, Amber Valley, Bassetlaw, Broxtowe, Rushcliffe, Northampton RDA; Deliverable Housing Sites

• Court of Appeal Judgement - St Modwen v SSCLG & ERYC [2017] EWCA Civ 1643, 20th October 2017 • http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2017/1643.ht ml • Sites may be included in five year supply if likelihood of housing being delivered is no greater than “a realistic prospect.”; • It does not have to be certain or probable that housing will actually be delivered; • St Modwen (Chris Young) taking the case to the Supreme Court. Lord Justice Lindblom Chesterfield

West Lindsey

High Peak Bassetlaw

East Lindsey Lincoln

Derbyshire Dales Newark & Sherwood Nottingham North Kesteven Amber Valley Gedling Boston

Rushcliffe

South Kesteven South South Holland Derbys Melton N W Leics Derby Charnwood

Rutland Hinckley & Bosworth Corby Harborough

East Northants Leicester Kettering 5 year supply

Key Daventry

Northampton > 6 years 5 – 6 years 3 – 5 years < 3 years Nov- 16 Nov- 17

West Lindsey West Lindsey High Peak High Peak Bassetlaw Bassetlaw

East Lindsey East Lindsey

Derbyshire Derbyshire Newark & Sherwood Dales Newark & Sherwood Dales North Kesteven North Kesteven Amber Gedli Amber Gedli Valley ng Valley ng Boston Boston

Rushcliffe Rushcliffe

South Kesteven South Kesteven South South South Holland Melton South Holland Derbys Melton Derbys N W N W Leics Leics Charnwood Charnwood

Rutland Rutland Hinckley & Hinckley & Bosworth Bosworth Harborough Harborough

East East Kettering Northants Kettering Northants 5 year supply Daventry Daventry Key

South Northamptonshire South Northamptonshire > 6 years 5 – 6 years 3 – 5 years < 3 years November 2016 The Standard OAN Methodology

• Housing White Paper Feb 2017 – proposed consultation on a new standard methodology; • Planning for the Right Homes in the Right Places – sets out proposed methodology. Consultation period closed on 9th Nov; • Key Principles: ◦ Simple (easy and transparent); ◦ Based on publicly available data; ◦ Realistic (reflect actual need in each area, taking into account affordability) • Approach must allow an understanding of the minimum number of homes needed across as a whole (225,000 to 275,000) while reflecting the effect of the Industrial Strategy. The Proposed Method

• Step 1 – Baseline ◦ Most up to date ONS household projections (2014 based); ◦ Demographic baseline should be annual average household growth over 10 yr period 2016- 2026. • Step 2 – Market Signals Adjustment ◦ ONS affordability ratio with adjustment factor • Step 3 – Capping the level of increase ◦ If lpa has plan in last 5 yrs – local housing need will not be above 40% of the plan target; ◦ If plan older than 5 yrs – local housing need capped at 40% above annual local housing need figure or plan requirement – whichever is the higher. Transitional Provisions

• No plan or plan adopted more than 5 yrs ago and not reached publication stage – ◦ Methodology applies immediately unless a plan submitted for examination before 31st March 18 or publication of revised Framework; • Plan published but not submitted- ◦ Continue and submit before 31st March 18 or publication of revised Framework; • Plan at Examination – ◦ Carry on; • Plans adopted in last 5 years – ◦ Use new method on review of plan. East Mids Implications

• No plan: ◦ Amber Valley; ◦ Bolsover; ◦ Mansfield. • Plan more than 5 yrs old: ◦ Adopted 2009 – Hinckley and Bosworth; ◦ Adopted 2010 – Oadby and Wigston, South Kesteven; ◦ Adopted 2011 – Harborough, Newark and Sherwood, Rutland, Bassetlaw. The Pegasus Response

• A top down approach to meeting national housing requirements – evidence for the 266,000 homes per annum? – Sajid Javid has referred to 275,000 to 300,000 per annum; • Consideration of social and economic projections/LEP aspirations as a second stage; • Support household projections as baseline – need regular update; • Why cap uplift for affordability at 40% - can result in issues for unmet need where cap is applied to local plan increases. Remove cap and identify figures to deliver houses nationally – not supress growth; • Start date of 2016 can mean unmet need lost – start date should be date household projections published to take account of backlog; • Transitional approach allows lpas to choose their preferred approach • A number of anomalies with figures – especially in complex locations with unmet need; National Overview

• The standard methodology has resulted in Percentage increase/decrease between Indicative distinct north/ south differences. Dwelling Assessment and Current Local Assessment requirements in the north have decreased and 70

conversely in the south have increased against 60

the local OAN. 50 • Reasons: 40 30 ◦ a greater imbalance between supply and demand in 20 southern regions - greatest affordability uplift; 10

◦ the methodology does not include any consideration of 0 economic ambitions, which could suggest a significant -10 uplift over and above that suggested for affordability. -20

-30 Yorkshire North West North East East of South West South East London and England Humber North South The East Midlands Picture

• Compared with the current local needs assessment:

◦ For 8 authorities the OAN standard figure goes down by more than 10%;

◦ For 10, the OAN figure would go down by up to 10%;

◦ 10 authorities would see an OAN increase by up to 10%;

◦ 4 would see increases of more than 10%. % Change local assessment to Proposed Formula: Leicestershire 30%

20%

10%

0%

-10%

-20%

-30% Blaby Charnwood Harborough Hinckley & Leicester Melton North West Oadby & Rutland Bosworth Leicestershire Wigston Leicestershire % Change local assessment to Proposed Formula - Nottinghamshire 15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

-15%

-20%

-25%

-30%

-35% Ashfield Bassetlaw Broxtowe Gedling Mansfield Newark & Sherwood Nottingham Rushcliffe Nottinghamshire % Change local assessment to Proposed Formula 10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10%

-15%

-20%

-25% Amber Valley Bolsover Chesterfield Derby Derbyshire Erewash High Peak North East South Dales Derbyshire Derbyshire Derbyshire % Change local assessment to Proposed Formula - Northamptonshire 25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

-5%

-10% Corby Daventry Kettering Northampton South Northamptonshire Wellingborough Northamptonshire Conclusions • A number of key issues with proposed methodology – the north/south divide; • In principle simplification is good; but.. • Current proposals – too simplistic; • Key issue of top down approach and need for economic factors to be built in; • Data issues. ‘PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE’ IS THE PAIN WORTH THE GAIN? Steve Lewis-Roberts BENEFITS OF PRE-APP

• Early identification of potential issues • Speeds up the planning process and secure officer/member “buy-in” • Advice can help to shape the scheme • Indication of S106 contributions which will inform viability • Early dialogue to front-load submission and avoid pre-commencement conditions WHAT CAN HAPPEN IN PRACTICE

• Decision does not reflect the advice provided • Time taken to secure advice/arrange meetings • Planning officers change between advice and application • Advice can be meaningless!

How much?! CHARGES ACROSS THE EAST MIDLANDS-DERBYSHIRE

Fee £ (including VAT)

Authority 10 to 49 dwellings 50 to 199 dwellings 200+ dwellings

Amber Valley £1,800 £3,000 £4,200

Bolsover Free Free Free

Chesterfield Free Free Free

Derby City £2,000 (10-199) £2,000 (10-199) £2,500

Derbyshire Dales £500 (10-199) £500 (10-199) £750

Erewash Free Free Free

High Peak £845 (10-50) £1,130 (50+) £1,130 (50+)

North East Derbyshire Free Free Free

South Derbyshire Free Free Free CHARGES ACROSS THE EAST MIDLANDS-NOTTINGHAMSHIRE

Fee £ (including VAT)

Authority 10 to 49 dwellings 50 to 199 dwellings 200+ dwellings

Ashfield £720 (10-199) £720 (10-199) £1,200

Bassetlaw £550 £800 £1,200

Broxtowe £276 (6-14) £2,070 (15+) £2,070 (15+)

Gedling £480 £480 £480

Mansfield £636 £955 (50-100) 1273.5 (101-200) £1910 (minimum)

Newark & Sherwood £720 (10-199) £720 (10-199) £1,200

Nottingham City £1,200 (10-199) £1,200 (10-199) Price on Application (100+)

Rushcliffe £650 (10-50) £975 (51-100) £1,300 (101-200) £1,940 (minimum) CHARGES ACROSS THE EAST MIDLANDS-LEICESTERSHIRE

Fee £ (including VAT)

Authority 10 to 49 dwellings 50 to 199 dwellings 200+ dwellings

Charnwood £1,440 £2,880 £4,320

Blaby £300 (10-50) £360 (50+) £360 (50+)

Harborough £550 £1,100 (50+) £1,100 (50+)

Hinckley & Bosworth £984 £1,470 (50-99) £3,690 (100+)

Leicester City Free Free Free

North West Leicestershire £1,800 £3,400 (50+) £3,400 (50+)

Melton £634 (10-20) £950 (21-59) £1521 (50+) £1521 (50+)

Oadby & Wigston £650 £1,300 £1,300

Rutland £381 £509 £509 CHARGES ACROSS THE EAST MIDLANDS-NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

Fee £ (including VAT) Authority 10 to 49 dwellings 50 to 199 dwellings 200+ dwellings pre-application fee is calculated as 10% of the Corby Free relevant planning application fee Bespoke Fee

East Northamptonshire 10 % of application fee + VAT 10 % of application fee + VAT 10 % of application fee + VAT £970 for 10 dwellings, £60 for each Kettering subsequent dwelling £ 3,750 (50-100) £4,500 (101-150) Bespoke Fee (151+) Wellingborough 10% of fee (9+) 10% of fee (9+) 10% of fee (9+)

£100+VAT per hour for all £65+VAT per dwelling (min charge of work/meetings undertaken (rounded £975+VAT) (max charge of £65+VAT per dwelling (min charge of £975+VAT) up to 15 minute intervals) (minimum South Northamptonshire £2500+VAT) (10-199) (max charge of £2500+VAT) (10-199) charge of £3000+VAT) (100+)

Daventry £1,080 (11-50) £2,250 (51-200) £2,250 (51-200)

15% of application fee 15% of application fee Northampton 15% of application fee PRE-APP LEAGUE TABLE- DERBYSHIRE

Ranking Authority 1 South Derbyshire 2 Chesterfield 3 Amber Valley 4 Derby City 5 Erewash 6 Derbyshire Dales 7 Bolsover 8 North East Derbyshire 9 High Peak PRE-APP LEAGUE TABLE- DERBYSHIRE

Ranking Authority 1 South Derbyshire 2 Chesterfield 3 Amber Valley 4 Derby City 5 Erewash 6 Derbyshire Dales 7 Bolsover 8 North East Derbyshire 9 High Peak PRE-APP LEAGUE TABLE- NOTTINGHAMSHIRE

Ranking Authority 1 Newark & Sherwood 2 Gedling 3 Bassetlaw

4 Broxtowe 5 Rushcliffe 6 Nottingham City

7 Mansfield 8 Ashfield PRE-APP LEAGUE TABLE- LEICESTERSHIRE

Ranking Authority 1 North West Leicestershire 2 Harborough 3 Leicester City

4 Blaby 5 Melton 6 Rutland

7 Hinckley & Bosworth

8 Oadby & Wigston 9 Charnwood DECIDING WHETHER TO USE PRE-APP • Consider the LPA – what will be gained from the pre-app advice? • Type of Application – input into a detailed scheme may be more helpful than securing a steer on the principle of development • Cost and Timing – factor into the project plan for the submission • Planning Application Fees to increase by 20% - early 2018? • New PD Rights – October 2017 allows COU of Class B1c to residential – subject to prior approval DECIDING WHETHER TO USE PRE-APP • Consider the LPA – what will be gained from the pre-app advice? • Type of Application – input into a detailed scheme may be more helpful than securing a steer on the principle of development • Cost and Timing – factor into the project plan for the submission • Planning Application Fees to increase by 20% - early 2018? • New PD Rights – October 2017 allows COU of Class B1c to residential – subject to prior approval SUMMARY • Good pre-application advice helps to deliver high quality development quickly • Early dialogue builds a relationship and is more likely to result in a positive outcome • Costs vary and high charges does not guarantee a gold star service • Quality of advice is patchy across the region – depends on the experience of the planning officer and the culture of the organisation • Benefits can outweigh the disadvantages but consider the authority and the scheme. Reserved Matters Navigating the System James Hicks The Outline Planning Permission is..

Outline Planning Permission

The Reserved Matters ….just the tip of the Iceberg

Because: • More so than ever before, applicants find themselves caught up in drawn out reserved matters applications that go way over the statuary determination deadlines.

Why? • Outline schemes don’t consider technical issues in enough detail; • A failure to consider what is required by the conditions attached to the outline when developing the reserved matter application; • Consultee requirements conflict; • Put this all together with the fact that there is a distinct lack of resources and experience at the LPA, and your scheme has stalled. The Ideal Approach

• Review the outline – carefully. (app, report, decision, S.106) • Consider the technical detail • Apply resources – assemble the right team • Take pre-app advice - time permitting • Manage the pre-submission and submission process • Develop the detail to discharge the pre-commencement conditions of the outline. • Empower the officer and hold their hand! Useful to Consider…

• That the time condition on outline cannot be amended, but the standard wording can be negotiated at outline. • Phasing. Phasing conditions don’t always read as phasing conditions. • You can make multiple RMA’s and inadvertently phase development, or only deliver it in part. • The fee. The full fee is never paid at outline! Remember that if you drop plots through the process you aren’t eligible for a refund. • Submitting the details to discharge the conditions of the outline won’t result in them being discharged, even though some LPA’s will still do this. You won’t get a discharge notice. • Housing Mix – isn’t a reserved matter….or is it? Reserved Matters = Delivery

In most cases reserved matters are being sought because there is a commitment in place to deliver the development.

Where… Delivery is always time sensitive

But Planning officers and committee’s aren’t! Conclusions

• Plan ahead at outline stage – think technically • Review conditions and S.106 obligations carefully • Challenge your technical team • Hold the hand of the officer! Summary Thoughts

Q & A

Gary Lees Gary Lees Pegasus East Midlands E: [email protected] u Guy Longley Pegasus East Midlands E: [email protected] Steve Lewis-Roberts Pegasus East Midlands E: [email protected] James Hicks Pegasus East Midlands E: [email protected]