Title Surname Organisation/Compan Response Policy no. Site and ward where DMBC Comments Outcome including proposed changes for the Publication y applicable version of the Document Mr Austin-Fell RPS Planning and Council has been hurried in developing evidence to support its CIL and Planning Obs The Council commenced preparation of a CIL Charging Schedule back in 2012, with a Preliminary No change made Development planning contributions. CIL cannot be adopted until Development Draft Charging Schedule published for consultation in January 2013. Draft Charging Schedules Strategy is adopted. were subsequently published in March and again in July 2014 prior to submission for examination in September 2014. The evidence base to support the CIL charging schedule has been developed over this period of time and was subject to independent examination by the Planning Inspectorate as part of the examination into the Council’s CIL Charging Schedule. This evidence base included the Black Country Core Strategy (2011), the Dudley Infrastructure Delivery Plan (June 2014) and the Dudley CIL Viability Assessment (June 2014). In March 2015 the Inspector concluded that, subject to a number of modifications, the Dudley CIL satisfies the requirements of the 2008 Act and meets the criteria for viability in the 2010 regulations, thus recommending it be approved. It is considered that the Council is able to adopt a CIL Charging Schedule prior to adoption of the Development Strategy, on the basis that robust, up to date evidence was used to form the basis of the CIL Charging Schedule. The CIL Regulations 2010 (as amended) do not require a local plan to be in place prior to adoption of a CIL charging schedule. Rather, Section 16 states that “Before submitting a draft charging schedule for examination in accordance with section 212 of PA 2008, the charging authority must...(b)publish on its website...(ii)the relevant evidence...”where “relevant evidence” means evidence which is readily available and which, in the opinion of the charging authority, as informed its preparation of the draft charging schedule. Austin-Fell No Mechanisms in place for accommodating need arising from Housing The Black Country Authorities are committed to a review of the Black Country Core Strategy No change made Birmingham commencing in 2016 which will be subject to a full Strategic Housing Market Assessment and green belt review. The outcome of the Strategic Housing Needs Study currently being done and any additional housing requirement including whether land in the green belt should be considered will be dealt with on a strategic basis across the Black Country and therefore reflected in the Core Strategy Review and not this document. Austin-Fell Need to SA alternative options for growth such as Green Belt sites at Sustainability The BDS is a "brownfield first" Strategy as it needs to be in conformity with the strategic No Change made Holbeache Lane Appraisal direction of the Black Country Core Strategy. Sufficient brownfield sites and land allocations have been identified to meet the housing targets set out in the BCCS and green belt sites will only be considered following a strategic review of the BCCS which is to be carried out commencing in 2016. The scope of the SA is to examine those sites proposed within the BDS and not those which lie outside of the remit of the Strategy. Austin-Fell Needs to take account of the full objectively assessed needs with Policy S1 The housing allocations and target figures are based on the adopted Black Country Core Strategy No changes made sufficient flexibility to adapt to rapid change (para 14 of the NPPF). figures but have also been compared to and tested against the latest OAN figures which have Also needs to include additional provisions to ensure that the OAN is emerged from the Black Country and GBSLEP Housing Study and the very latest Household assessed through the current BC and GBSLEP Housing Study so the Projections from Government. There is sufficient flexibility within this plan through being flexible Dudley Development Strategy can respond without the need for on certain allocations and in the Black Country Core Strategy in having policies which allow other significant alteration. brownfield sites to come forward for housing to adapt to any further changes in these figures in the short to medium term. Any longer term changes and requirements will be dealt with on a strategic basis within the review of the Black Country Core Strategy commencing in 2016. Austin-Fell Policy needs to be flexible to account for when SUDs is not feasible Policy S5 From 6th April 2015, changes to planning policy mean that SuDs will now be required for the That Policy S5 be amended at bullet point 5 - Unless it is adding the words "where technically feasible". management of surface water run-off from "major developments "Policy S5 in part reflects the proved impractical to do so, providing Sustainable provisions of CS Policy ENV5 - Policy ENV5 requires all development to incorporate SuDS unless it Drainage Systems within major development, with would be impractical to do so. priority given... Austin-Fell Approach welcomed but Parks and Green Space Strategy is suggested Policy S19 The Parks and Green Space Strategy provides robust evidence to inform and apply the provisions No change made to be out of date and suggests it is updated to include Green Belt sites of the CS. The DBS carries forward the provisions of the CS and gives them a Dudley focus. In as part of a green belt review. Should also refer to need to provide an addition, the four Black Country Authorities will be carrying out a review of the Black Country equivalent facility in line with Para 74 of the NPPF Core Strategy between 2016 and 2019 which will include a strategic review of the Green Belt surrounding the whole of the Black Country as part of that process. If additional housing requirements identified cannot be met in the urban area, then sustainable locations within the green belt may be identified and allocated to accommodate this additional growth in line with the findings of the Green Belt Review. There consequently seems little justification in undertaking a review of the Parks and Green Space Strategy until at such time as the CS Review. Austin-Fell Suggests the Council has not delivered sufficient housing in recent Policy S23 The land in question lies entirely in the green belt. At present, Dudley Council has identified No change made years and so should carry out a green belt review in accordance with sufficient land within the urban area to meet the current objectively assessed need within the Para 83 of the NPPF Borough up to 2026. However with increasing pressure to provide more housing land in the future, the four Black Country Authorities will be carrying out a review of the Black Country Core Strategy between 2016 and 2019 which will include a strategic review of the Green Belt surrounding the whole of the Black Country as part of that process. If additional housing requirements identified cannot be met in the urban area, then sustainable locations within the green belt may be identified and allocated to accommodate this additional growth in line with the findings of the Green Belt Review. Austin-Fell Policy is not sufficiently flexible to enable sufficient housing growth. Policy L1 This is a general policy, not only aimed at potentially new large housing developments but also No change made Wording is limited to pdl and environmentally sustainable sites but householder extensions. The emphasis on pdl reflects the CS priority, as well as the NPPF (para does not reflect social and economic issues in accordance with NPPF. 17 et seq). Suggests wording to say support "in sustainable locations, close to public transport facilities and links." Austin-Fell Objects to use of phrase "exceptional circumstances" for payment of Policy L3 Agree - amend Policy L3 to reflect the wording in para 50 of the NPPF Amend Policy L3 thus - ....Commuted Sums for Affordable commuted sums or off-site development. Suggest replace wording Housing will only be acceptable in exceptional with "reasoned justification". circumstances where on-site affordable housing can be robustly justified is not to be viable or feasible. Austin-Fell Need to recognise impact of CIL on viability. Suggests additional Policy D14 and The Council’s CIL Charging Schedule has been prepared in accordance with evidence across the No change made clause to Policy D15 to reflect viability on larger developments “Larger D15 Borough on site viability, including the consideration of a range of site sizes from small to large. schemes that require phased delivery over the medium and longer The CIL regulations state that, in setting rates, the Council must aim to strike a balance between term, may incur changes in the value of development and changes in a) the desirability of funding from CIL the cost of infrastructure required to support the costs of delivery, which may also need to be considered in the development of its area; and b) the potential effects of the imposition of CIL on the economic determination of site viability”. viability across its area. The Council’s CIL Charging Schedule has been subject to independent examination by the Planning Inspectorate and, subject to a number of modifications, the Inspector concluded that the Dudley CIL satisfies the requirements of the 2008 Act and meets the criteria for viability in the 2010 regulations, thus recommending it be approved. The Council intends to adopt an Exceptional Circumstances Policy in relation to CIL which allows for viability to be considered in exceptional circumstances where a number of criteria have been met. This will be set out within the Council’s CIL Charging Schedule and not the Development Strategy.