Agenda item

To consider the attached report.

The Joint Assembly:

(a)        NOTED progress towards delivery.

(b)        REQUESTED that the Chairman of the Joint Assembly reports the concerns raised by Members of the Assembly at this meeting to the Executive Board in relation to the definition of rural exception sites for the purposes of monitoring the City Deal commitment.

The Joint Assembly considered a report which set out how a commitment in the City Deal to provide 1,000 additional dwellings on rural exception sites by 2031, in addition to the accelerated delivery of 33,480 homes, was progressing and the way it would be monitored.

Caroline Hunt, Planning Policy Manager at South Cambridgeshire District Council, presented the report and explained that the City Deal commitment was for homes on rural exception sites, which was in the context of another commitment to accelerate delivery of 33,480 planned homes at the time of the agreement.  As this was coincident with the 33,500 homes requirement for Greater Cambridge as part of Local Plans for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire, only once delivery exceeded the level to meet the Local Plan requirement could any eligible homes be counted towards the 1,000 additional home commitment.  It was therefore necessary to define the developments that comprised as eligible sites for the purposes of monitoring the Councils’ performance against the City Deal agreement.

Caroline Hunt referred to the report and advised that developments of traditional rural exception sites were currently not coming forward due to a lack of five year housing land supply.  She highlighted, however, that what was coming forward were developments in rural areas as exceptions to normal policy, which included an element of affordable housing as well as additional housing generally to meet the needs of the area.  Under the circumstances it was proposed that eligible sites be considered to be traditional rural exception sites and five year supply sites.

The Joint Assembly was referred Members to the appendices of the report which set out a list of eligible sites using this definition, as published in housing trajectory for 2015, together with predicted completions from eligible planning permissions permitted since the housing trajectory up to June 2016.  It was noted that on this basis 430 homes on top of planned housing growth could now be included towards the City Deal’s commitment of 1,000 additional dwellings, with a further 170 dwellings having recently received planning permission that would also be eligible. 

Councillor Roger Hickford, Chairman of the Joint Assembly, made the point that examination of the submitted Local Plans had been suspended with a significant number of speculative planning applications being submitted.  He was concerned that developments resulting from these applications in rural areas were being classed as being within rural exception sites for the purpose of meeting this City Deal objective.

Caroline Hunt explained that the adoption of the Local Plan would resolve the lack of five year housing land supply but that in the interim period the Council would remain open to speculative applications, but was taking all possible steps to deal with that situation as robustly as possible. 

Councillor Hickford said he understood that the City Deal’s commitment was for 1,000 additional homes on rural exception sites and that these should all therefore be affordable homes.  He did not think this was being delivered and felt that the original commitment was being interpreted in another way, which was not in the spirit of what was intended.

Councillor Bridget Smith agreed with Councillor Hickford and was of the opinion that the figures were being manipulated.  She reiterated that Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire was vulnerable to speculative planning applications and in South Cambridgeshire 50% of those refused by the Council’s Planning Committee had been approved on appeal by the Planning Inspectorate.  In terms of the City Deal commitment, the 1,000 additional homes were included on the basis of being in rural exception sites and consisting of 100% affordable housing expressly for the use of people living in the community and not for general housing need.  Councillor Smith said that what was being proposed in the report was to accept the smaller proportion of affordable housing from developments that were not wanted, with the majority of dwellings being market housing, and have these count towards the City Deal’s additional 1,000 homes commitment.  She strongly opposed this proposal and claimed that the report had redefined what rural exception sites represented, which were about meeting local needs.

Councillor Kevin Price supported Councillor Smith’s comments and was concerned that the definition of rural exception sites contained in the Council’s affordable housing supplementary planning document would be changed by the proposed approach. 

Caroline Hunt explained that the sites suggested in the report were market led but that they did include elements of affordable housing, many at levels of 40% of affordable housing.  She accepted that these developments had resulted from speculative planning applications, so were not planned, but reiterated that they would deliver affordable housing in rural areas.  Caroline Hunt said that it was expected that  applications for traditional rural exception sites would be submitted again once the Local Plan had been adopted.

Discussion ensued on whether, in the interim period, all of the dwellings in these developments should count towards the City Deal’s commitment, or whether this should be limited to solely the affordable homes associated with these developments.  Councillor Maurice Leeke highlighted a third option which was to include none of them, since none of the developments fell under the category of rural exception sites. 

Councillor Tim Wotherspoon made the point that circumstances since the City Deal document was originally signed had changed and saw the logic of extending the definition as proposed in the report.  In his view, all that mattered was that more houses were able to be built in order to accommodate more people in the interests of growing the economy.

Alex Colyer, Executive Director at South Cambridgeshire District Council, made the point that the Government’s challenge at the time of the City Deal negotiations was not in relation to affordable homes but delivery of 1,000 additional homes over and above those set out in the Local Plans.  He added that it had been the Council that had suggested rural exception sites as being the only option available at that time given the stage in the Local Plan process. 

Councillor Hickford, in response, referred to paragraph 11 of the report which stated that ‘the City Deal agreement was for 1,000 homes on rural exception sites’, so thought it would be useful to inspect the City Deal agreement document to confirm the City Deal’s commitment with regard to this issue.

Further discussion took place on the developments set out in the appendix to the report and whether they should be counted towards the City Deal’s commitment.  The Chairman asked Members to signify whether they would support the inclusion of only those affordable homes in the developments outlined in the appendix as being an appropriate definition of eligible homes for the 1,000 additional homes on rural exception sites as part of the City Deal’s commitment.  Five Members signified that they would be in favour, four Members signified that they would be against and four Members abstained.  It was subsequently agreed that the Chairman should present the concerns raised at this meeting to the Executive Board.

The Joint Assembly unanimously:

(a)        NOTED progress towards delivery.

(b)        REQUESTED that the Chairman of the Joint Assembly reports the concerns raised by Members of the Assembly at this meeting to the Executive Board in relation to the definition of rural exception sites for the purposes of monitoring the City Deal commitment.