Policy and Prejudice: Delivering affordable housing through the planning system in Wales

2. Introduction Wales has been experiencing unprecedented increases in house prices WAG responded with new affordable housing target of 6,500 new homes by 2011 But only funding for 4,500 So trying to find a way to encourage greater use of S106 – developer contributions to affordable housing – to fill the gap

3. What is S106 achieving? Poor monitoring so difficult to estimate Valuing Planning Obligations in Wales found total contributions from developers for affordable housing in 2005/6 was between £14 and £20 million Equivalent to North East in 2003/04 Numbers of units only 869, of which 496 were social rented and 249 intermediate market housing (124 tenure unknown)

4. Why so little? Low land values? (until recently) But Valuing Planning Obligations found that ‘land value is not the only determinant of the value of S106 obligations. Policy and practice are equally, if not more, important. Wales could significantly increase S106 contributions by improving the negotiation process and the clarity of local policy’.

5. Why so little? Out of date policies – now that house and land prices have risen WAG introducing interim measures to enable new policies outwith LDF process Lack of political will – some local authorities still have no policy, some just introducing one and have no experience Lack of clarity in existing policies

6. Other problems Tension between Plaid Cymru and Labour in new coalition government Plaid Cymru promised ‘local homes for local people’ Past Labour view was equal treatment and focus on housing needs Rural areas – and much of Wales is rural – don’t want to house non-locals Most don’t want any new housing at all

7. Purpose of paper Explore concept of ‘local homes for local people’ and its relationship to ‘affordable housing’ as defined in legislation Examine Welsh language policy in planning at national and local levels Ask how a language policy can be interpreted as sustaining communities Based on current research for WAG so very much work in progress

8. What is a community? Government: mixed tenures How can this create a community? JRF study of 3 mixed communities built 20 years ago suggests people felt they were ‘ordinary’ with some interaction (school) Does it require social mix? Or income mix? In Welsh context, it appears to be about language – ethnic mix – and historic opposition to English?

9. Planning Policy Wales Explicit policy allows planners to introduce policies that relate to the Welsh language. Section 2.10.1 ‘The land use planning system should … take account of the needs and interests of the Welsh language and in so doing can contribute to its well being’.

10. Planning Policy Wales Section 2.10.2 ‘All local planning authorities in Wales should consider whether they have communities where the use of the Welsh language is part of the social fabric, and where this is so it is appropriate that this be taken into account in the formulation of land use policies’

11. Planning Policy Wales Section 2.10.3 ‘It should be the aim of local planning authorities to provide for the broad distribution and phasing of housing development taking into account the ability of different areas and communities to accommodate the development without eroding the position of the Welsh language’. Appropriate policies about the broad scale, location and phasing of new development could assist in achieving this aim.

12. Planning Policy Wales Section 2.10.3 goes on ‘Policies relating to affordable housing could also be of benefit. However, policies should not seek to introduce any element of discrimination between individuals on the basis of their linguistic ability, and should not seek to control housing occupancy on linguistic grounds’.

13. Planning Policy Wales What kinds of planning policies for housing could assist the Welsh language or help prevent its erosion? PPW refers to scale, location and phasing and explicitly rules out occupancy restrictions related to Welsh speaking – although local occupancy conditions are OK So local does not mean Welsh speaking – at least in legal terms

14. Some examples Gwynedd – Inspector’s report on draft UDP published last year Clause on linguistic impact assessment – developments that because of size, scale or location have an unacceptable impact on social, linguistic or cultural cohesion of communities will be refused Inspector deleted it only because national policy says Welsh language has to be a basic consideration in all Plan proposals

15. Holiday and second homes Gwynedd deliberately avoided allocating sites for housing in coastal and rural areas to reduce scope for purchase from outside Gwynedd for holiday and second homes Reason is that they are less likely to speak Welsh Objectors argued that incomers have preserved and enhanced Welsh culture

16. Inspector’s response ‘Both the LPA and objectors are faced with a dilemma. If there are allocations for market housing in a particular settlement they may attract people of non-Welsh culture and, thereby, weaken the social fabric. If, however, the LPA does not make such allocations then the children of indigenous people can’t remain in or return to the village. This too, would weaken the social fabric. In the absence of new allocations in the settlements that are popular the demand won’t simply go away. It will, instead, inflate the price of the existing housing stock, removing it even further from the reach of local people. Also the absence of new general market construction will result in an absence of new affordable housing which would have been associated with that.’

17. Inspector’s Decision LPA cannot seek to control occupancy of dwellings on basis of language But Planning Policy Wales advises that can allocate land that will accommodate development without eroding the position of the Welsh language So Inspector agreed that failing to allocate land in desirable holiday areas met that goal as far as planning policy will allow

18. Affordable housing? This seems to be about holiday and second homes being owned by non-Welsh speakers Yet Gwynedd could have allocated land specifically for affordable housing in the coastal and rural areas – with local occupancy conditions Failure to do this could make existing homes even more expensive, so that only incomers – who are less likely to speak Welsh – can afford them

19. Local Needs Housing Gwynedd distinguishes between ‘local need affordable housing’- housing that is affordable to local people in light of local incomes and prices and ‘social affordable housing’ – rented from a registered social landlord Inspector thinks ‘local need AH’ is very similar to intermediate affordable housing, introduced in Government policy and wants LPA to use that terminology instead

20. Local Needs Housing But to local people the two are very different ‘local need affordable housing’ can refer to ordinary market housing with an occupancy restriction – which is not the same as an affordability restriction or criterion as in planning policy ‘Local needs housing? In rural areas, you see it in the estate agents. It does meet a need but it is not an affordable need’

21. Occupancy restrictions Gwynedd have ‘general local need’ criteria restricting affordable housing (social rented) to those living in locality for 10 years or more Inspector said that cascades, using tiers of outlying villages if no need was forthcoming in the village near the site, met all objections No mention of how to enforce them however

22. Occupancy restrictions Pembrokeshire Coast National Park have occupancy restrictions But local housing officers saw policing this as extremely difficult ‘There is a lot of administration involved in implementing a local needs policy – will it grind to a halt?’ The Parks also restrict all new development to affordable housing only

23. Links with affordability ‘Local needs policy in the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park is controversial. There is no explicit link with affordability, but the occupancy restriction should dampen prices. National policy says there must be a link with affordability- but it is implicit’ (planning authority).

24. Attitudes to affordable housing ‘Members have a phobia about social renting’ (LA) ‘For council lets, nominations go to anyone in need – this colours their minds’ (LA) ‘Local connection is a massive issue. The European Human Rights Act says there should be no preferential treatment for anyone’ (RHE)

25. Other comments ‘Local connections policies still involve issues over the interpretation of “local” – the housing register covers the whole county. But in private housing, people can come in from anywhere and no-one knows them’. (NPA) ‘Local needs housing- but it may be that in some rural areas there is no way to provide for that need locally. In some there is no land. So do you say to (those wanting local housing) there is no affordable housing for you because other rural communities won’t let you in?’ (RHE)

26. A way forward? WAG accepts language argument – has put huge investment into Welsh language which has paid off But equity argument militates against this Clear prejudice in rural Wales against any social rented housing because seen as only providing for outsiders Similarly, new market housing won’t be affordable locally so will encourage outsiders – second homes, holiday lets etc.

27. Will community be preserved? Local connection restrictions – on affordable housing But this excludes local people who could afford market housing Local needs housing not the same as intermediate – but intermediate could serve similar purpose Enforcement always a problem in national parks Will restrictions really preserve community?

28. Issues Incomers preserve and enhance community – evidence? Welsh speaking excludes non speakers anyway even if local Does local occupancy dampen prices? Restrictions on size of new dwellings – and enlargement prohibited – also argued to dampen prices – evidence?

29. Conclusions Refusing to allocate sufficient land for housing on grounds of language will make housing less affordable for locals, whether Welsh speaking or not Will push up house prices so when current owners come to sell, only affordable to wealthier incomers Can planning policy really change market forces?