Adran Adnoddau Naturiol Department for Natural Resources Rhian Kyte Team Leader Caerphilly County Borough Council Planning Division Tredomen House Tredomen Park Ystrad Mynach Hengoed CF82 7WF 22 April 2016 Dear Mrs Kyte, Caerphilly County Borough Council Local Development Plan (LDP) – Deposit LDP 1st Review – Regulation 17 Consultation: Welsh Government Representation Thank you for consulting the Welsh Government regarding the Caerphilly Local Development Plan (LDP) – 1st Review Deposit documents. We acknowledge that the preparation of a LDP and the supporting evidence is a significant undertaking and recognise the amount of work your authority has undertaken as the first to deposit your replacement LDP for public consultation in Wales. The Welsh Government is broadly supportive of the LDP strategy which seeks to locate development in sustainable locations, linked to the role and function of places and infrastructure provision. Planning Policy Wales (para 9.2.2) requires LPAs to consider the latest Welsh Government (WG) household projections and local factors when assessing the housing requirement in a plan. The LPA should set a level of housing provision that is appropriate for the area, linked to the key issues the plan is seeking to address and have regard to PPW. The latest Welsh Government 2011-based principal projection indicates that approximately 5650 dwellings are required over the plan period (2011-2031). The Council has concluded that the SE Wales 10 year migration trend (including a household size adjustment) is most appropriate to deliver the strategy and key issues. The LDP makes provision for 13,640 dwellings in order to deliver 12,400 units over the plan period 2011-2031. This is a deviation of approximately 6,750 dwellings above the WG principal projection. The development planning system in Wales is evidence led and demonstrating how a plan is shaped by the evidence is a key requirement of an LDP examination. The demonstration of delivery and viability of all sites in the LDP is key, in particular those sites that are integral to the delivery of the strategy and objectives. Parc Cathays ● Cathays Park Ffôn ● Tel 029 2082 3732 Caerdydd ● Cardiff [email protected] CF10 3NQ Gwefan ● website: www.wales.gov.uk After reviewing your Deposit LDP and its evidence, the Welsh Government has fundamental concerns in respect of the lack of evidence to demonstrate the delivery of the LDP strategy in relation to key sites in the plan. The issues raised in our Preferred Strategy consultation response (24th March 2015) and in the follow-up meeting of 25th September 2015, do not appear to have been adequately addressed. The Welsh Government remains concerned that key elements of your LDP are not supported by evidence in respect of viability, funding and timescales for delivery. Whilst it will be for the Planning Inspectorate to determine the soundness of the plan, we are of the view that there is a significant risk the LDP may be found unsound if these issues are not addressed. Without prejudice to the Minister’s discretion to intervene later in the process and to the independent examination, the Welsh Government is committed to helping local planning authorities throughout the LDP process. I have considered the Deposit LDP in accordance with the tests of soundness as set out in PPW/ LDP Manual. The Welsh Government’s representations are separated into four categories which are set out in some detail in the attached annex. Category A: Fundamental issues that are considered to present a significant degree of risk for the authority if not addressed prior to submission stage, and may have implications for the plan’s strategy: • Deliverability of the Strategy – Strategic Sites Category B: Matters where it appears that the deposit plan has not satisfactorily translated national policy down to the local level and there may be tensions within the plan, namely: • Clarity of housing provision; justification of components; flexibility; and affordable housing viability • Strategic sites & infrastructure delivery • Employment – safeguarding and delivery • Flood Risk • Minerals • Renewable Energy Category C: Whilst not considered to be fundamental to the soundness of the LDP, we consider there to be a lack of certainty or clarity on the following matters which we consider we can usefully draw to your attention to enable you to consider how they might be better demonstrated: • Affordable housing – tenure mix, exception sites • Employment – level of need • Waste • Welsh Language • BMV; biodiversity; and open space • Monitoring Framework Category D: Matters relating to clarity of the plan generally which we consider may be of assistance to your authority and to the Inspector in considering suitable changes: • Various - technical issues and clarity It is for your authority to ensure that the LDP is ‘sound’ when submitted for examination and it will be for the Inspector to determine how the examination proceeds once submitted. You should consider how you could maximise the potential of your LDP being considered ‘sound’ through the examination process. I would be happy to meet to discuss matters arising from this formal response to your Deposit LDP and I would encourage you to contact me to arrange a mutually 2 convenient time. Yours sincerely, Mark Newey Head of Plans Branch Planning Directorate 3 Annex to WG Letter (22nd April 2016) in response to the Caerphilly County Borough Council 1st Replacement Deposit LDP 2011-2031 Category A: Objections under soundness tests; fundamental issues that are considered to present a significant degree of risk for the authority if not addressed prior to submission, and may have implications for the plan’s strategy. Delivery of the Strategy - Strategic Sites The delivery of the LDP is reliant on the delivery of strategic sites. Strategic sites are by definition strategic in nature and integral to the delivery of the strategy and objectives of the LDP. There is no evidence to support the delivery of strategic sites. The Welsh Government considers this a fundamental gap in the evidence base. The authority alludes that work will be completed in respect of strategic sites viability; however this work should be available now in order to demonstrate delivery of the plan. Demonstrating the infrastructure to support delivery is fundamental to the strategy. All the points raised in this annex in relation to infrastructure delivery, viability, funding mechanisms, and phasing apply to each strategic site individually and should be addressed before the plan is submitted for examination. Category B: Objections under soundness tests; matters where it appears that the Deposit Plan has not satisfactorily translated national policy down to the local level and there may be tensions within the plan, namely: Clarity of Housing Provision The Welsh Government does not object to the level of housing provision in the plan. This if for the authority to justify. However, the Welsh Government considers there is a fundamental lack of clarity as to how the level of provision has been calculated in relation to the components of supply that underpin it. It is also unclear as to how the level of provision relates to the spatial distribution of housing and phasing tranches set out in the plan. Policy SP22 and its reasoned justification set out the level of provision, but the plan is silent as to the numerical assumptions that comprise the figure. The only figures specifically referred to in the plan are those set out Policy H1 and Appendix 20 - 9,238 dwellings. The detail in respect of housing components are decanted to the Housing Supply Paper (BR15) which sets out and explains all components of housing supply. However the various tables within it refer to different components at different base dates (2013 and 2015). Table I appears to summarise all components; however, the table is a mismatch of data from different base dates. Completion data is only included up to 2013, yet some supply components are included up to 2015. It is also difficult to understand how some components are labelled with different titles from that in BR15 and the plan. For example, the sites in Appendix 1-6 (BR15) all appear to feature in Policy SP22 and are labelled as allocations. Yet when totalled, these components do not correlate with that in the plan. The Welsh Government assessment arrives at a housing provision range of between 12,031 – 14,245 dwellings depending on which base date and what components from the Councils own evidence. On this basis the Welsh Government considers there is a fundamental lack of clarity between the housing supply components and the provision in the plan, and considers the following amendments are necessary to ensure soundness and provide clarity to plan users: • The plan needs to make clear how the components of housing supply relate to the spatial distribution of housing growth, strategy and settlement hierarchy. Policy SP22 should be supported by evidence, summarised by a table in the plan that clearly sets out from one base date, the completions to date, land bank (u/c, permissions and S106 sites, if appropriate) new allocations and windfall assumptions (small and large). In doing so, the Council should be clear that there is no overlap between components and base dates. In essence the Council need to ensure there is no double counting. 4 • Policy H1 should clearly differentiate between commitments and allocations. The rational of labelling all sites as allocations is unclear given the Council’s approach to settlement boundaries. Justification of components of housing supply Windfall Assumptions - The LPA assumes a windfall rate of 3,960 dwellings over the remaining 18 years over the plan period (1620 small, 2340 large). The rates are based on past trends, with a discounting adjustment for large sites that that have the potential to distort the figures when projected forward.