The Committee is asked to note the contents of the Urban Housing Capacity Study as a technical study and part of the Council’s evidence base, which informs the preparation of the new Local Plan.
It was resolved:
(1) That the Committee noted the contents of the Urban Housing Capacity Study as a technical study and part of the Council’s evidence base, which informs the preparation of the new Local Plan.
The Committee received a report presenting an Urban Housing Capacity Study (UHCS) which had been prepared to assess the potential optimal capacity of the Borough’s land supply within the urban area, and how this could contribute towards meeting the Borough’s challenging Objectively Assessed Housing Need (OAHN).
The following matters were considered:
a) Conclusions of Urban Housing Capacity Study. The Committee noted that the identified need for the Borough was unlikely to delivered in its entirety within its urban area during the new Local Plan period. The UHCS suggested that at optimum performance, 49% of the housing need could be accommodated within the urban area.
b) Clarification requested on Table 4. Members of the Committee identified that Table 4 of the UHCS indicated that the identified need calculated by the ‘standard method’ calculation is being used from 2015 onwards, despite not emerging from Government policy until 2017. Members of the Committee expressed concern at the imposition of this housing need requirement on historical housing completion levels, and considered that a more reasonable target would have related to future, not past levels. Officers informed the Committee that the introduction of the Housing Delivery Test (HDT) would measure the Council’s housing delivery for the previous three years and was likely to use the ‘standard method’ figure. However, the Housing Delivery Test (HDT) had not been published yet.
c) Potential urban sites not carried forward from Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) 2007 to SHLAA 2017. Following a question from a Member of the Committee, the Committee was informed that potential development sites identified in the SHLAA 2007 but subsequently considered not to be deliverable had been omitted from the SHLAA 2017.
d) Outstanding permissions for residential development. The Committee was informed that the information presented in Table 6 of the UHCS (Outstanding permissions for residential development) related only to extant permissions. Officers informed the Committee that no expired permissions had been included in the figures, and that the data had been processed in a manner to avoid double-counting of sites with more than one valid development permission.
e) Appendix A – Land to rear of 35 The Avenue, Worcester Park. The Committee identified that this development was incorrectly listed as being within Court Ward, and that it should instead be listed as within Cuddington Ward. Officers undertook to make this correction.
f) Appendix A – NESCOT development. The Committee identified that current development work on the NESCOT Agricultural land site was not listed within Appendix A, and requested Officers to consider whether it should be. Officers would look into the matter and provide an update following the meeting.
g) Appendix B –57 Longdown Lane North. The Committee identified that works on this site had begun, and requested Officers to consider whether it should be listed in Appendix A to the report, rather than Appendix B. Officers would look into the matter and correct the Appendices if appropriate.
Following consideration, it was resolved:
(1) That the Committee noted the contents of the Urban Housing Capacity Study as a technical study and part of the Council’s evidence base, which informed the preparation of the new Local Plan.