CH Cymru Technical Services Forum Revised TAN 1 Presentation

1. CH CymruTechnical Services ForumRevised TAN 1 Presentation Friday, 26th September 2014

2. LOCAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN POSITION • Vale, Wrexham –LDPs put back for new Deposit Plan • Cardiff – LDP delayed but now submitted • Swansea, Gwynedd/Anglesey, Flintshire – Yet to publish Deposit Plan • NPT – Submitted • Powys recent Deposit stage • Newport and Carmarthenshire close to adoption • Others adopted • Caerphilly – Review process started

3. 5 YEAR LAND SUPPLY • All local authorities required to maintain a 5 year housing land supply • PPW and TAN 1 • TAN 1 also sets out requirements for JHLA Studies • Joint Housing Land Availability Studies. • LPAs, HBF, RSLs and Others • Previously Meetings where sites individually discussed • Since 2011 Statement of Common Ground • Inspector decides on areas of dispute.

4. HOUSING LAND SUPPLY IN LA AREAS (2013) • Cardiff – 3.2 • Denbighshire – 3.5 • RCT – 3.7 • Neath Port Talbot – 2.6 • Swansea - 3.3 • Caerphilly - 2.9 • Monmouthshire – 3.6 • Powys – 3.4 • Wrexham – 3.4

5. METHODOLOGY • Residual Requirement where there is an adopted LDP or a UDP not time expired • Residual Method based on LDP Target divided by number of years to give annual requirement • Otherwise Past Building Rates • Period applied – 10 years • Implications – last 7 years low level of growth • Therefore lower requirements • Inaccurate picture which favours LAs

6. RESIDUAL METHOD • Annual Requirement x 5 = 5 year requirement • Straightforward Example – RCT LDP • 15,000 dwellings in 15 years + 1,000 a year • Need 5,000 for 5 year supply • If only 4,500 units can come forward on sites available then only 4.5 years supply • If building rates don’t keep up with residual requirement it increases • Eg if only 3,000 built in RCT in first 5 years, remaining requirement will be 12,000 over 10 years – 1,200 a year

7. ISSUES • LDP progress slower than anticipated • Individual site merits do not influence inspectors as long as plan is sound • Densities applied unrealistic • Reluctance by LPAs to admit sites won’t come forward • Increasingly lengthy planning procedures – EIA etc • Most authorities struggle to maintain 5 year supply • Even those with recently adopted LDPs

8. NEW DRAFT TAN 1 • Recognition that new home building essential – also important driver for job creation • Up to date LDPs critical for delivery • Need to align JHLAs with LDP Monitoring • New TAN to be finalised to align with 2015 JHLA process.

9. WHY CHANGES NOW? • Last Reviewed in 2011 • Economic conditions had detrimental effect on viability • Positive Planning consultation published which reinforces LDPs as cornerstone of the planning system • 14 LPAs now have adopted LDPs

10. MAIN CHANGES • Supply to be based on adopted LDPs • No up to date Plan – no 5 year supply • LDPs should provide for 5 year supply on adoption • Residual method only • Time for studies reduced to 6 months • More precise information to categorise sites • Revised Categories • Where under-supply – informs Annual Monitoring Report – early Review? • More Study Group meetings to resolve disputes

11. RESPONSE • Overall Positive • Consultation involves 9 questions • Exclusion of past building rates method welcomed as it rewards under performance • Weight given to up to date plan and 5 year supply but how enforced? • Resource issues of shortening process • Site categorisations – need for tighter definitions • Eg Sites subject to S106 Agreements – should they be included?

12. RESPONSE (Contd) • Longstanding Council owned allocations – should be removed • Implications for Williams Commission – LA Mergers • Inspectors should be clearer in decisions on disputed sites • Alignment with English system – 20% addition required where persistent under delivery • Meetings should be chaired independently • Exercise Ends on 10th October • Draft Responses obo CH Cymru Circulated