Agenda item

(i)              Joint Report of the Assistant Chief Executive and the Corporate Director of Regeneration and Economic Development.

(ii)             Presentation by the Principal Policy Officer, Regeneration and Economic Development.

The Chairman introduced the Principal Policy Officer, Graeme Smith who was in attendance to give an update as regards the Housing Strategy for County Durham (for copy see file of minutes).

The Principal Policy Officer reminded the Committee of the previous update in relation to the Housing Strategy and the questions that Members had raised at that meeting.  It was noted that the County Durham Housing Strategy comprised of 3 elements: the Strategy Document, 2015-2020; the related Action Plan to deliver the Strategy; and the partnerships in place to be able to deliver the Strategy, working with a range of partners across the county.  Members were referred to a structure diagram, showing the aims, objectives and issues associated with the strategy, with the overarching aims of “Altogether Better Delivery and Standards”, representing place, and “Altogether Better Housing Support”, representing people.  Members noted that the issues fell across several areas, some involving planning policy, Durham Key Options (DKO), the Anti-Poverty Strategy and the Housing Solutions section.

Members were reminded of the interim report on the County Durham Plan (CDP), now quashed, and that this had implications for the Housing Strategy, with the evidence base requiring a refresh to update in respect of recent policy changes: “Fixing the Foundations: Creating a more prosperous nation” and the proposed Housing and Planning Bill.  Councillors noted that accordingly, the Housing Strategy would be updated, incorporating those legacy actions from the previous strategy while adding new actions as they are developed.  It was added that a new partnership structure would be developed with existing partners, aligning with the emerging Strategy and Action Plan.

In terms of the questions raised previously by the Scrutiny Committee, the Principal Policy Officer noted the main issues had been: type and mix of housing; affordable housing; and the private rented sector. 

Members noted that the Housing Strategy would seek to support the delivery on an appropriate type and mix of housing, based on the current type and mix and informed via discussion as part of the determination of planning applications.  Councillors noted information on property type and property size by delivery area, with East Durham having the largest proportion of single bedroom properties in the county.

In terms of affordable housing, the Principal Policy Officer explained that data from the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) had identified a net shortfall of 674 affordable dwellings across County Durham each year with demand exceeding supply.  It was noted that the reasons for the need for affordable housing varied across the county with: the greatest need being within the central delivery area; there being a demand for 1 and 2 bedroom properties in the north and east of the county; and the western and southern delivery areas older persons make up the need for affordable housing.  Members learned that the Housing Strategy would provide the context for the Council’s approaches to deliver affordable housing and that delivery would be via Section 106 Agreements as part of planning permissions and via public subsidy.

Members noted that the private rented sector averaged at around 20% of the housing stock across the county and that there were variations in quality with the private rented sector.  It was added that the Housing Strategy would seek to improve standards of accommodation and management practices, and to implement initiatives to support improvements to homes.  Councillors noted that the landlord accreditation scheme would hopefully lead to improvements in property management and standards.  Members were referred to a map detailing the change over time in terms of private rented accommodation, noting the largest increases in towns and urban areas, with decreases in the south and west of the county.

The Chairman thanked the Principal Policy Officer and asked Members for their questions, noting that the Government were holding a late night session at the Houses of Parliament in respect of the Housing and Planning Bill.  He continued by expressing concerns about the delivery of affordable homes in the future as a result of Government’s proposals in the Bill and that it was important going forward to understand the impact of changes in policy for our local communities and that once further information was known, it would be useful for Members to have a seminar.

Councillor J Armstrong noted the Prime Minister’s recent response to a question on the definition of affordable housing where he had stated it was “whatever a person can pay” and noted the great disparity between house prices in the north and south of the country, also in the context of welfare changes.

Councillor E Adam noted the a recent Local Government Association (LGA) report had highlighted an issue with land that had planning permission granted, however, was not being built upon and asked whether there was any such land in County Durham.  The Principal Policy Officer noted that models were used in terms of how to deliver housing to the market and that the Council would assess the likelihood of a scheme to be delivered at the planning stage, though it was added that this did not seem to be an issue in County Durham.  Councillor E Adam added that as land was being released in more rural areas for economic development, such as the Hitachi site, was there being more land released in order to match the housing demand these site would generate.  The Principal Policy Officer noted that this would be a planning policy issue, however, it was noted that land would be released accordingly in order to create sustainable locations. 

Councillor J Clare noted that it was important that if Planning Officers are using such strategies and policies in their negotiations with Developers, then it was important that Planning Committee Members were made aware and received the necessary training. 

Councillor J Cordon also asked as regards any progress being made in respect of the CDP.  The Overview and Scrutiny Officer explained that an update was planned for the meeting of the Committee to be held 28 June 2016.

Councillor J Armstrong asked whether funding to secure affordable housing would be via Community infrastructure Levy (CIL) if Section 106 Agreements were being replaced.  The Principal Policy Officer noted that CIL and Section 106 Agreements were different funding pots, with CIL being to support infrastructure and Section 106 Agreements to support other issues, such as affordable housing.  It was added that Government had stated that only a fixed number of Section 106 Agreements would be allowed.  Councillor J Armstrong added that there were other models in terms of providing types of affordable housing, such as those being put forward by Derwentside Homes.  The Principal Policy Officer noted models such as the Prince Bishop’s Model, and though not technically affordable homes as per definition, it represented a method by which to give the type and mix of housing to help meet housing need, recognising that there were also other models available.  The Chairman noted that there was a need to be clear in terms of affordable housing for Members at Planning Committee and Councillor J Clare added that it was important as issues could be contentious, with strong local feeling and representation at Committee, and therefore the issues around affordable housing should be highlighted and made transparent.

Councillor J Maitland noted the Landlord Accreditation Scheme and commented that  “good” landlords would already be signed up to the scheme and asked whether there was any way to encourage those landlords with issues to improve their provision and sign up to the scheme.  The Principal Policy Officer noted it was a voluntary scheme however he would speak to colleagues in the relevant section as regards this.

Councillor H Nicholson noted that he and other Members had asked on several occasions as regards the position in terms of empty homes, given that the CDP was not yet in place and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was generally in favour of new development, and with saved Local Plans being out of date.  The Principal Policy Officer noted that he could look into the figures but believed that the average vacancy rates across the county were around 4.1% and that while there was some churn, the Strategy would look to tackle the longer term empty properties.  Councillor H Nicholson requested detail of the number of empty properties within the County if possible on an area basis.

Councillor J Clare noted that Members at Planning Committees were aware of the age of the saved Local Plans and that the refresh of the CDP had yet to be completed and therefore there was a reliance on the NPPF.  The Chairman added that Members would have look at each application and weigh each against current planning policy.

Councillor M Davinson noted that in respect of empty homes, while the average across the county was 4.1%, the average in South Moor, Stanley was 8.6% with a number of properties having been unable to be sold in the past and then bought up cheaply by landlords.  Councillor M Davinson asked if a map similar to that for private rented sector could be produced to show terraced housing within the county to see if there was any correlation. 

Councillor M Davinson felt that a way to encourage more participating landlords in the accreditation scheme would be not to charge, noting that the pilot scheme had been free and had worked very well.

Councillor A Patterson asked as regards Paragraph 8 to the report, what the 13 actions carried over from the previous Action Plan were.  The Principal Policy Officer noted that they were reported to the Housing Forum, comprising of Officers and Members, and they were longer-term actions that had carried over.  Councillor A Patterson requested that a copy of the 13 actions be provided.

Mr T Batson asked as regards Town and Parish Council involvement in the consultation for the CDP and what flexibility would be built in the application of the CDP once in place.  Mr T Batson also asked as regards transport and mobility issues and how these were considered when looking at potential housing schemes.  The Chairman noted that each planning application would be judged on its own planning merits, with the strategies and policies being the framework by which to reach a decision.  The Principal Policy Officer explained that local needs were factored into decision making and that there was always the opportunity for objectors to speak at Committee in respect of larger developments and schemes.  In respect of transport, the Principal Policy Officer noted that this was part of the sustainable development assessment made on each application, again any evidence forming part of any presentation to Members should the application be considered at Committee.  Several Members noted that it was for Local Councillors to be aware of applications in their areas and to judge when it may be appropriate to look to have an application brought forward to a Planning Committee for consideration. 

Councillor J Clare noted that, in terms of sustainability of developments, it was important to consider the necessary facilities to support development, however, it was also important for existing communities to have sufficient people living in those communities to support the existing businesses and facilities.

Councillor E Tomlinson, Portfolio Holder for Housing thanked Members of the Committee for highlighting several matters, highlighting the complexity of the issues faced in County Durham and reiterated that, with Government making changes to policies and bringing forward new legislation, issues would need to be looked at in the context of those changes.

Resolved:

(i)          That the content of the report and presentation be noted.

(ii)    That the Economy and Enterprise Overview and Scrutiny Committee receive a further progress update on the Housing Strategy as part of the future work programme.

(iii)       That a Members’ Seminar be arranged providing an overview of the key elements of the Housing and Planning Bill.