Affordable Housing

Following discussion by the council at the 13 July 2010 full parish council meeting, agenda item 5.1, it was agreed that a group on Affordable Housing in St Mary Bourne Parish would be formed and appointed by the parish council and would consist of six people: three councillors and three others.

The group will appoint a chairman and minute taker, either for the duration of the life-time of the group or for each meeting.

Minutes from every meeting to be copied to the full parish council, preferably in Word and sent by e-mail to the clerk. These minutes will be included in the following Full Council Meeting as a report to the parish council and will thus form part of the council’s minutes which are always visible to the public via the web-site or on request to the parish office.

The remit of the group is to:

Confirm the need for affordable housing.
Establish the number and type of housing required.
Liaise with the local housing association to establish supply and condition of their housing stock
To reopen the process by which the 10 sites were chosen and investigated.
To organize, with BDBC Cllr Mitchell and J Lancaster (the Rural Housing Enabler), public discussion and an open meeting at the appropriate time.
The group to step down when/if a planning application is put forward.

It was agreed by the council that the group should comprise: Cllrs Randall, Grunsell and Henderson, and Robin Mackenzie, Mark Maclay and Ann Hollstein.

At the parish council meeting held on 10 August it was reported that the first meeting of the sub committee was set for Monday 27 September - see agenda item 5.

At the full Parish Council meeting on 20 April 2010 Borough Cllr Horace Mitchell presented a ‘Briefing for Residents’ on Affordable Housing (Rural Exception Housing), and distributed hard-copies to those present.

Please find the full text of this briefing below. In view of public interest and Cllr Mitchell’s briefing and explanation of the ‘affordable housing process’, it was agreed by the council to place the whole topic on the agenda of the next parish council meeting on 11 May 2010 with a view to engaging the informed involvement of the parish council and parishioners in the continuing process to provide affordable housing in the parish.

Some viewpoints from the members of the public present were expressed at the parish council meeting on 11 May 2010 regarding concerns about the way the Rural Exception Housing process was being handled. The parish council collectively shared these concerns.

The process is still in the pre-planning phase between B&DBC Planning Department (and other bodies, eg Environment Agency) and the Rural Housing Enabler.

The parish council agreed to keep this item on the agenda for the next full (and what will be a new council) council meeting on the 8 June 2010 and thereafter on a regular basis.

Rural Exception Housing

A brief for residents by Councillor Horace Mitchell

Note: This is provided by Cllr Horace Mitchell for local residents in St Mary Bourne to answer questions he has been asked by residents in connection with the possibility of a rural exception site here. For clarity, planning and housing jargon has either been avoided or explained. This should please be treated as an explanatory note and not as a legally definitive statement! I welcome further questions, preferably by email to cllr.horace.mitchell@basingstoke.gov.uk, but my phone and postal details are also given below.

1. What is rural exception housing?

The ‘exception’ is that in appropriate circumstances so-called ‘affordable’ houses can be built where a normal commercial development of houses would not be permitted. Most usually this means in or at the edge of a village but outside the ‘settlement policy boundary’ (see below).

2. What is ‘affordable’ housing

In general ‘affordable’ housing means houses, flats etc that are to be rented or sold outside the normal commercial market. It can include:

social rented (formerly known as ‘council’ houses) – the houses are owned and rented out by a housing association, eg Kingfisher, Sentinel
shared equity – the buyer’s deposit and mortgage are based on 50% of the market value of the property, and rent is paid on the other 50%. The buyer then has opportunities to ‘staircase’, ie to buy more of the equity, with a view to securing full ownership or a sufficient value in their equity to go on to buy a home on the open market

There are other variations but these are the usual options for rural exception sites.

In the particular case of a rural exception site, there is usually an arrangement whereby only people with a strong ‘local connection’ may rent or buy into the houses. This continues, so that, for example, when the first tenant moves on the next tenant must also have a strong local connection. Equally if a shared equity buyer moves on the house can only be sold to a new buyer who has a strong local connection.

3. Why have rural exception sites?

Because our villages are such great places to live, whatever small parcels of land become available for development are snapped up at full market price and the developments are such that relatively few local young people have much chance of affording their own home at or close to where they’ve been brought up. There is always a waiting list for the relatively small numbers of social rented houses and no availability at all of houses that people can start to buy. If there is a relatively large commercial development, policy can require that a proportion of ‘affordable’ homes are included, but such developments are few and far between outside the larger towns. The finances available to support ‘affordable’ housing do not allow the housing associations to acquire land at market price and develop affordable housing on that land. A rural exception site provides land at below market price that would usually be paid for development land (see below) on the basis that commercial development would not be permitted.

What is the process?

The Hampshire councils (county and borough councils) subscribe to the costs of employing a ‘rural housing enabler’, whose role is to find suitable sites, research their suitability, and start the process of exploring the possibilities for a rural exception development. In this case the ‘enabler’ is Mr John Lancaster, who has extensive experience of the process and has worked with parish councils and communities (in Basingstoke & Deane as well as other authority areas) to work through the process.

A key point is that the process does not necessarily result in a development taking place.

In outline the process includes the following stages:

(a) identifying villages where there is a ‘need’ for affordable homes, usually established by the number of qualified candidates on the local authority’s housing list and whether their needs are likely to be met in the foreseeable future

(b) undertaking a preliminary ‘trawl’ for possible sites, based on a set of established criteria

(c) identifying sites that may be capable of being developed, including whether a landowner is prepared to release the land at sufficiently below market price for affordable homes to become a reasonable proposition

(d) working with officers of the planning authority to understand whether an application for rural exception housing has a reasonable possibility of meeting all relevant planning criteria (see below)

(e) working with the parish council and borough and county councillors to consult with the local community

(f) if the site is still a realistic proposition at this stage, bringing forward a formal planning application

(g) the proposal is then subject to the normal planning process; all the usual policies apply, except that the site may be outwith the settlement policy boundary

4. What is the status of proposals for St Mary Bourne?

The rural housing enabler has worked through stages (a) through (d) above. Although there are still some unresolved questions being assessed by planning officers, the rural housing enabler has initiated stage (e), starting with a presentation to a meeting of the parish council (16^th March 2010), thereby making public the possibility that a rural exception proposal may be in the wind.

If the remaining issues being assessed by planning officers are resolved, there will be a more formal consultation process with the local community.

5. What is a ‘settlement policy boundary’?

For towns and some villages, this boundary (a line of the map) defines the area within which developments may be permitted (mark: may not will be permitted). Outwith the boundary development will not normally be permitted. In planning jargon, outwith the boundary there is a prejudice against development. Areas outside such boundaries are referred to (again in planning jargon) as ‘countryside’, even though in some cases it may be a small village or hamlet. For example Binley, Crux Easton, Ashmansworth do not have settlement policy boundaries.

6. Other questions

(a) What is the value of land at ‘below market value’?

My understanding is that up to in the region of £10,000 per house can be paid for a rural exception site. At commercial rates the equivalent ranges between £50,000 and several hundred thousands per dwelling. The market is uncertain at present but historically developers have talked of the land value being in the region of one third of the eventual house price for commercial developments.

(b) Does the assessment by planning officers mean the application has in effect been pre-approved?

No. It’s quite normal for any prospective applicant to discuss their proposals with planning officers, whether it’s for a large scale development or a hut in the garden of a listed building. If an application does come forward it will be subject to all the normal processes. In the case of rural exception sites, because there is a clear public interest at stake, officers may (and usually will) take the same kind of care with a proposal for (say) six or eight dwellings as we might expect them to take with a commercial proposal on a larger scale.

(c) Does the earlier (16^th March) presentation to the parish council count as community consultation?

No. This was just a preliminary briefing. There are no hard and fast rules for this but I would expect community consultation (should it get to that stage) to be widely promoted and to be timed such that as many people as possible have the opportunity to see, question and comment on the proposals – for example an afternoon / evening Friday session and a Saturday session.

If it reaches this stage I would expect to work with the rural housing enabler and the parish council to ensure the validity of the consultation.

(d) What is meant by ‘all relevant policies’?

Just what it says. Every planning application is assessed against a wide range of policies, including those in the Local Plan, Supplementary Planning Documents, and national and regional guidance. The only ‘exception’ is that a rural exception site may be outwith the settlement policy boundary.

(e) What weight is attached to local community opinion?

Almost all planning applications encounter some local objections. In general, objections are regarded as ‘material’ to the extent that they invoke an appropriate stated policy. In general, your or my view that ‘this is a very good proposal, I like it’ or ‘this is a thoroughly bad proposal, I don’t want it to happen’, have little weight. In the case of a rural exception site however, the weight of public opinion can itself be a material consideration. It will be readily appreciated that if an overwhelming majority of the community like a proposal while a handful are opposed, the opponents’ case would need to be very clearly rooted in policy considerations. Equally if an overwhelming majority are strongly opposed and can cite relevant policy reasons it would be difficult for a minority’s view in favour to be supported.

Note that in many cases the interpretation of some important aspects of policy can be subjective. For example one expert may say a particular proposal is ‘harmful to the landscape’, another may say the proposal improves the landscape!

(f) What is the role of the parish council?

A parish council reviews and may comment on any and all applications in its area. As with any other ‘consultee’ the parish council may object to an application, giving its reasons in policy terms (including any perceived harm to the community), or may ‘not object’, expressing no opinion either way, or it may ‘support’ an application, again giving its reasons, which can of course include community benefit. St Mary Bourne parish council has an excellent track record in its handling of planning applications. However it should be noted that individual views expressed in a parish council meeting are just that – individual views. Only at a later stage, when a planning application has been made, will the parish council have an opportunity to properly consider (and if necessary vote) before submitting its formal views. The parish council would, at that stage, also have had an opportunity to hear local community views as expressed through and following the consultation process.

(g) What is / are the unresolved matters being assessed by the planning officers?

The Government has very recently updated some of its planning policy guidance, notably through a document Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk (29 March 2010). Although some aspects of this have been known for some time, when relevant policy was cited at a recent Development Control Committee meeting I and other councillors raised questions that officers were unable to answer to our satisfaction. Some of this is now being hammered out by officers with the Environment Agency and the outcome is awaited. Flood risk is of course highly relevant in our valley.

(h) Why were discussions between the rural housing enabler and officers held in confidence until the parish council meeting of 16^th March?

This again is quite normal for any development application; indeed in the normal way of things officers are not allowed to disclose the fact that such discussion is taking place, let alone any of the details. In the case of a rural exception site there is little point in any public discussion until the rural housing enabler is reasonably confident that at least stage 6 (d) as described above is likely to be passed. What we in the community need to be confident of is that we will have full and proper consultation as the next stage, if stage (d) is indeed passed, which is still uncertain.

(i) What other sites were considered and why is this site preferred?

That will be among the aspects to be reviewed if the proposal goes to the community consultation stage.

(j) What can I do now if I wish to support or object to the proposal?

As a personal opinion it is premature to raise any issues at this stage, although there is nothing to stop anyone who has a rooted objection from beginning to marshal their arguments.

(k) What is your opinion as my borough councillor?

I won’t express an opinion until after I’ve heard local views during and following the community consultation and, assuming it gets to that stage, heard arguments and objections in relation to whatever planning application may emerge following the consultation. My role through this stage of the process it to provide advice about the process and to listen. In general, I’m in favour of rural exception proposals that are of a high quality, can be seen to meet demonstrated local needs, and have local community support. This one is clearly too early to judge. Also, if I express an opinion now it would be classed as prejudicial and would prevent me from sitting on, and speaking and voting at the development control committee should any application get to that stage. It’s therefore in the interests of the community that at this stage I keep my powder dry.

Further questions or comments are welcome, preferably by email (cllr.horace.mitchell@basingstoke.gov.uk).

Cllr Horace Mitchell - Tile Barn House, Woolton Hill, near Newbury RG20 9UZ - 01635 254677

If you would like me to keep you informed from time to time about local authority work and issues that affect us locally, just send me an email saying ‘keep me posted’.

This page was last edited on 12 Aug 2010