Housing loophole ‘closed’ says MP (From Bicester Advertiser)
When It Happens Panel Get involved: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting 'OXFORD NEWS' to 80360 or email
Housing loophole ‘closed’ says MP
1:00pm Monday 13th August 2012 in News By Sam McGregor, covering Bicester. Call me on 01869 250197
Tony Baldry
DEVELOPERS will find it more difficult to build “unwanted” homes thanks to new Government guidance.
As part of the National Planning Policy Framework, all planning authorities must maintain a supply of deliverable houses to meet identified need for the next five years.
But some developers have won planning approval for new housing at public inquiries because of the way inspectors have interpreted local councils’ supply.
Until now, homes that had been granted planning approval but where work had not yet started were not included.
That could mean developers could build new homes even though authorities had enough up-and-coming homes in the pipeline to meet their targets.
Banbury MP Tony Baldry said he and councillors on Cherwell District Council had become so concerned over the number of “opportunistic” applications being proposed for the area he sought clarification from Planning Minister Greg Clark.
Mr Clark’s reply states: “The policy is clear that unimplemented planning permissions count towards the five-year supply.”
Planning policy now also states the only way it can be disregarded is if a council is shown to have deliberately approved applications that would in practice not be financially viable to build.
Mr Baldry says this means existing applications, such as plans for 700 homes at Heyford Park, are included in Cherwell District Council ’s five-year housing plan.
He has now written to the district council’s chief executive Sue Smith to make the position clear.
In his letter, the MP said: “Developers have been encouraged to make such opportunist planning applications by certain decisions of the Planning Inspectorate who have failed to take into account, when considering whether Cherwell has an adequate five-year housing supply, those sites on which Cherwell has already granted planning permission.
“It strikes me that the minister’s response could not be clearer. The policy is clear that unimplemented planning permissions count towards the five-year supply.
“I think it is going to be very difficult to see how, on the basis of the tests put forward, the Planning Inspectorate could conclude that Cherwell doesn’t have an adequate five-year housing supply.”
Comments(3)
Antonywatts
says...
7:55pm Wed 15 Aug 12
WilburTheDog
says...
10:39pm Wed 15 Aug 12
ara02sc, what you fail to realise is that building more houses does not make them more affordable. Taxing 2nd home owners will bring demand down and free up more property thus reducing rent and purchase prices.
You also give CDC a little too much credit in believing they can actually count how many houses have been built. The latest housing number they list is out of date.
CDC are also way behind on government targets for developing on Brown sites. They need to address this as a priority. The developers want to earn a quick buck, as it's significantly cheaper to build on green field sites than brown sites. Why let them get away with it.
Banbury is a small, countryside town and should not become a sprawling metropolis of poorly built houses with an infrastructure that can barely cope now never mind what happens when 1000's more houses do get built.
ara02sc says...
1:51pm Mon 13 Aug 12
What this story doesn't tackle is how many of the houses with planning permission are actually going to be built within the five year time frame, or whether developers are potentially 'land banking' in an effort to increase house prices artificially overall... What is the council's penalty if they don't meet their targets? My assumption is that there will be much less housing created and in five years time the council will be paying penalties for not meeting government targets..
Why not base the five year target on a rolling review of housing stock, this could easily be created by the housing team at Cherwell District Council... i'm sure it doesn't take a genius to review the number of completed houses (with data from building control).. and number of granted planning applications.
Overall this seems like the Nimby brigade has put pressure on Mr Baldry.. and won!!!. With all the problems that youth in society are facing (now and in the future), surely standing back and looking at the bigger picture is what the decision makers should be doing... How on earth are we supposed to make a future in this county?