Senior Planning Policy Officer to report.

The Committee considered an update by the Planning Policy Team Leader regarding the Five Year Housing Land Supply.

The Planning Policy Team Leader presented the report to the Committee and confirmed that;

• The authorities were awaiting legal advice in respect of their five-year housing land supply (5YHLS) in context of the specific circumstances of the adopted Local Plan.

• Following on from the 12th of December, updates to the NPPF and to the standard method, changes had a consequence for the local planning authorities on the demonstration of a 5YHLS.
• The Change to Standard Method and wider NPPF meant a need to re-evaluate the 5YHLS.
  Members would be reminded that we were in a position where we had a 5.18 year supply. This was based on the requirement of 861 dwellings per annum.
• The local housing need for North Devon and Torridge was previously less than the housing requirement, it was now 1,330 per year.  There was quite a stark difference in the baseline of what need to be delivering over five years.
• Resulted in a move from previously demonstrating a 5.18 year supply to 4.86 years. This no longer demonstrated a five-year housing land supply.
• Not as dramatic an outcome as the change in housing need would suggest, due to a move from a 20% to 5% buffer and the fact that can disregard what was a significant backlog (due to this being incorporated into the local housing need figure); it was actually only 192 dwellings below a five-year supply.
• It was noted there were a number of large developments sites in progress across both districts. These would likely contribute to the 5YHLS when reappraised later this year.
• Have to apply the presumption in favour of sustainable development when considering applications that effect the supply of housing.
• Could potentially re-establish five-year supply relatively swiftly given the amount of housing development consented and being built across the area – although no certainty of doing so.

In response to questions from the committee, the Planning Policy Team Leader advised:

• There could be a need potentially to find more than 192 if sites hadn’t progressed as expected, although some of the other sites were likely to have moved on since previously assessed. There may be a greater level of supply because some of those sites that weren't previously delivering in, for example, years 1-3 could be considered in the future to be delivering in the years 2-5.
• Normally the assessment would be published annually but given the significant change in national policy, an update has had to be published as an interim position.
• An update would be issued again based on housing supply with a base date of 1^st April 2025, following the normal programme. Although this may be expedited if considered likely that a land supply could be re-established.

The Committee discussed:

• The possibility of hostile applications.
• The high level of dwellings required each year under the new calculation.
• The control of the housing market by large developers, along with the financial pressures those developers are experiencing.
• Paragraph 11(d)(ii): the tilted-balance and the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Noted that there has been clarification on the tilted balance and reinforcement of issues that should be considered. It was important because it sent an intent to developers, and Planning Inspectorate, that it was actually about quality development coming forward and not about housing “at all costs”, irrespective of what we hear.  It stated, it was around granting permission “unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when they get assessed against the policies in this framework, taken as a whole, having particular regards, to key policies for directing development to sustainable locations, making effective use of land, securing well designed places and providing affordable homes individually or in combination”.

The Planning Policy Officer (MA) advised that:

·       Although smaller sites could be quicker to deliver, many of the smaller local sites that had previously been granted consent had been much slower to deliver than hoped.

·       Recent non-allocated sites had often delivered 30% affordable housing.

RESOLVED that the Five Year Housing Land Supply update be noted.