Purbeck Plan steps forward

Another milestone reached for the Purbeck Local Plan - the examiner's post-hearing note has been issued today announcing that subject to modifications she believes the Plan is likely to be capable of being found legally compliant and sound.  Key changes include the revised housing target (up to 180dpa using the new methodology, but with no additional uplift necessary), the deletion of the proposed Green Belt amendment at Wareham, and a modified approached to the small sites policy to ensure that developments are proportionate to the size and character of the settlement.  The full note can be seen here: https://www.dorsetcouncil.gov.uk/planning-buildings-land/planning-policy/purbeck/post-hearings-note-20-03-2020.pdf
Whilst there is still consultation to be done, and possibly a further hearing session if necessary, this is certainly welcome news to all those that have worked so hard to get this plan through. 

The 5 year supply - latest

The first set of planning application reports to be considered by the new Dorset Council are all now online.  One key thing to note is that, at least for the time being, decisions are still going to based on the separate housing land supplies on the previous local authority areas, rather than trying to take the temperature across the whole area.  Not that this particularly helps any of the areas.  West, Weymouth and North Dorset have all struggled to demonstrate a 5 year supply for some years, and East Dorset declared in December that they too have fallen below a 5 year housing land supply.  Only Purbeck are claiming that they have in excess of 5 years - though interestingly their January statement was based on the housing requirement of a 2012 Local Plan (which I am pretty sure is more than 5 years old), and their latest (May) statement is using a 10% buffer (which means they are relying on this being confirmed through the Local Plan examination) and they are also including some of the proposed Local Plan allocations in their supply - which arguably shouldn't be included at this stage.  So who knows where they are, right here, right now? 

Having said that, there is certainly still lots of movement in the planning arena that could help turn around the deficits.  One of the applications coming to the new Western and Southern Planning Committee is the outline application for up to 500 dwellings plus employment, retail and hotel uses at Littlemoor - nearly 4 years after the Local Plan's adoption.  As well as the 175 or so affordable dwellings this should also bring in over £4 million on developer S106 contributions - not an insignificant amount.

North Dorset Local Plan and housing numbers update

For those of us that are keeping an eye on when the Examiner's report on the North Dorset Local Plan will be published, there has been some interesting updates in the last month on the latest figures emerging on housing needs for the area, leading to an exchange between the Inspector and the District Council. 

The Inspector has been made aware that the Eastern Dorset 2015 SHMA which assessed the likely housing need for the housing market area is to be published soon. From the information available it seems that it concludes that the objectively assessed need for North Dorset is 330 dwellings a year – compared to the earlier SHMA estimate of 285.  So a 15% uplift in total.  Obviously no decision as yet where this might be allocated - particularly as the 330 dwellings is an indicative split across the housing market area, and depending on the capacity and constraints, this may need to go up or down under the combined Council's Duty to Cooperate. 

The District Council are keen to get their Plan regarded nonetheless, and press ahead with starting their review straight away (they say they will start by 31 March 2016).  It does signal that there is likely to be more housing land required, and that this would need to be identified and allocated in the review (if there isn't sufficient supply coming forward above that already identified by the District Council). 

Will we get to see Inspector David Hogger's final report before Christmas?  And see the details in the SHMA?  Watch this space...

UPDATE - the housing needs report is in fact already on the Purbeck section of the Dorset Council's website - click here to view - the graph on page 197 (shown below) illustrates the different requirements.  Both Purbeck and North Dorset have a significant chunk of their need to support the likely employment growth in the area (which would otherwise be stalled by lack of employees, or lead to higher levels of commuting).  The 330 suggested annual figure for housing in North Dorset does not include residential care homes which if included would add on a further 17 units a year to this figure. 

Progress on the North Dorset Local Plan

The North Dorset Local Plan Examination moved on a step with the publication of the District Council’s responses to some of the issues raised at the examination hearings.  Of particular note is the change in the plan period to 2031 and the proposed retention of the settlement boundaries and higher housing target for Stalbridge and the larger villages.  Care homes and neighbourhood plans also feature in the updated supply numbers.  The housing targets will now expressed as a minimum, the reference to prioritising 2 and 3 bed house sizes for open market houses is to be removed.

Only invited participants can comment at this stage, but there will be a chance to comment on all the major changes at a later stage.

If you want to find out more it is worth checking out the following links

MHD006: recommends extending the plan period to 2031, and increasing the housing target to 285dpa (dwellings per annum).  It also says that provision will be made for an early plan review to incorporate new emerging evidence on housing needs in conjunction with other Dorset authorities.

MHD007: recommends retaining settlement boundaries around Stalbridge and the more sustainable villages (Bourton, Charlton Marshall, Child Okeford, East Stour, Fontmell Magna, Hazelbury Bryan, Iwerne Minster, Marnhull, Milborne St Andrew, Milton Abbas, Motcombe, Okeford Fitzpaine, Pimperne, Shillingstone, Stourpaine, Winterborne Kingston, Winterborne Stickland and Winterborne Whitechurch), and that between them these provide 41dpa (dwellings per annum).  No change is made for rural employment provision. 

MHD008: proposes including care homes (C2 use class) in the housing supply.  It also revises some of the start dates and capacities of specific sites based on landowner updates, and refers to 42 housing sites ‘identified in Neighbourhood Plans’.

MHD018: sets out a range of proposed changes that arose during the hearing sessions.  This includes changes to the policy wording of (take a deep breath here) Policies 3 (Climate Change), 6 (Housing Distribution), 7 (Delivering Homes), 9 (Affordable Housing), 11 (The Economy), 13 (Grey Infrastructure), 15 (Green Infrastructure), 16 (Blandford), 17 (Gillingham), 18 (Shaftesbury), 19 (Sturminster Newton), 21 (Gillingham Strategic Site Allocation), 24 (Design), 27 (Retention of Community Facilities), 30 (Existing Employment Sites in the Countryside) and 32 (Equine-Related Developments in the Countryside). 

All the documents can be found here.

North Dorset's Housing Numbers

Lots of talk at the examination hearings this week about housing numbers for North Dorset and whether the 280 annual target of homes to be built is high enough.  A common concern raised by participants was about the housing needs evidence.  They felt the Council has not fully explored the economic or affordable housing implications, both of which could mean that the overall housing target should be higher.

The Council responded by saying that they do anticipate delivering around 350 homes every year in the next 5 years or so, which they argue should provide sufficient comfort to allow the plan to be adopted with an early review of the numbers when the new housing data is released and considered by all the Eastern Dorset planning authorities.

The Inspector suggested some further work for the Council – in particular whether there may be other ways to boost the affordable housing delivery  - what other options have been considered and why were these rejected?

At the very least it would appear that the 280 figure is to be adjusted slightly upwards to take into account the proportion of housing that is taken up by second homes, and made a ‘minimum’ target and subject to an early review.