Skip to main content

The Cheshire East Local Plan. More twists and turns than a twisty turny thing.

There is an episode of Blackadder in which a very drunk Lord Melchett accuses Edmund of twisting and turning 'like a twisty turny thing.' 

What's this got to do with anything? Well I was trying to think of something with more twist and turns than the Cheshire East Local Plan and all I could think of was Lord Melchett.

The latest twist (or turn...) came on Friday, with the publication of the Elworth Hall Farm, Sandbach appeal decision, which is the first to consider the Housing Position Statement published by the Council in February. 

That statement claimed a 5.13 or 5.86 year supply depending upon whether or not a 5% or a 20% buffer is used. The Elworth Hall Farm inspector concludes only that the Council has not demonstrated a five year supply of deliverable housing sites, but the appellants in the case, Rowland Homes, claimed a 3.45 to 3.95 year supply.

To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, to have one land supply calculation (the 7.15 year supply included in the February 2012 SHLAA) dismissed by an inspector may be considered a misfortune, but to have a second calculation dismissed looks like carelessness.

Where now then for the Local Plan, the Submission version of which is currently subject to public consultation?

The NPPF states that Local Plans should be consistent with the principles and policies set out in the framework, which includes the need for to identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide five years worth of housing.

Notwithstanding though the cross in that box, more fundamentally, the NPPF also requires plans to be 'justified', which means that they include the most appropriate strategy when considered against reasonable alternatives and based on proportionate evidence. A key part of the evidence base is the SHLAA, which needs to establish realistic assumptions about the availability, suitability and the likely economic viability of land. Given the Elworth Hall Farm inspector's comments about lead in times, build rates and "a distinct lack of credible hard evidence to justify the projections for some (strategic) sites"  there must a significant doubt that the Local Plan is 'effective' or deliverable. 

It is understood that the leader of the Council has expressed a desire to 'battle on, check our figures and continue to fight', and given that previous opportunities to reappraise the Local Plan have not been taken it seems safe to assume that it will be submitted at the earliest opportunity. Can it be found sound though in it's present form? There are surely more twists and turns to come...

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Life on the Front Line

I like it when people get in touch with me to suggest topics for 50 Shades of Planning Podcast episodes because, firstly, it means that people are listening to it and also, and most importantly, it means I do not have to come up with ideas myself. I found this message from a team leader at a local authority striking and sobering though. In a subsequent conversation the person that sent this confided in me that their team is virtually in crisis mode. It is probably fair to say that the planning system is in crisis, but then it is also probably fair to say that the planning system is always in crisis… There is, of course, the issue of resources. Whilst according to a Planning magazine survey slightly more LPAs are predicting growth in planning department budgets (25%) rather than a contraction (22%), this has to be seen in the context of a 38% real-terms fall in net current expenditure on planning functions between 2010–11 and 2017–18. Beyond resources though the current crisis feels m...

The Green Belt. What it is and why; what it isn't; and what it should be

‘I began to see what a sacred cow the Green Belt has become’. Richard Crossman, Minister for Housing & Local Government, in 1964. The need for change The mere mention of the words Green Belt raise hackles. There are some who consider it’s present boundaries to be sacrosanct. According to recent Ipsos polling, six in ten people in England would retain it's current extent of Green Belt even if it restricts the country's ability to meet housing needs. There are some, including leader writers at The Economist , who would do away with it all together. Neither position is tenable, but there is a trend towards an entrenchment of these positions that makes sensible conversations about meeting housing needs almost impossible. The status quo is unsustainable, both literally and figuratively. The past In both planning and cultural terms, the notion of a ‘Green Belt’ goes back a long way. Long after Thomas More’s ‘ Utopia ’ and Elizabeth I’s ‘ Cordon Sanitaire ’ in 1580, the roots of ...

Labour's planning proposals

There is a sense among some that Labour is 'keeping it's powder dry' on housing and planning so as 'not to scare the horses', but actually, when you compile everything that has been put into the public domain, the future direction of policy is relatively easy to discern. This is that compilation, which takes in a couple of press releases (and, importantly, the 'notes to editors'), a policy paper, an extract from a Westminster Hall debate, and Sunday Times and FT articles. ‘How’, not ‘if’: Labour will jump start planning to build 1.5 million homes and save the dream of homeownership Oct 10, 2023 https://labour.org.uk/updates/press-releases/how-not-if-labour-will-jump-start-planning-to-build-1-5-million-homes-and-save-the-dream-of-homeownership/ Labour’s Housing Recovery Plan Upon entering office, the Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, Angela Rayner, will publish a Written Ministerial Statement and write to...