Our Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Managed Growth, Councillor Ian Courts, continues his commentary on the challenges we face with planning currently.
"In September, I wrote about the challenges Solihull faces in meeting the housing targets established by government. I tried to explain the nuts and bolts of what is a really complicated legal and policy situation.
"Last week, I read a press release from the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) about the West Midlands Mayor’s Spatial Development Strategy (SDS): that the opportunity was being given to share your views on future planning. I felt this needed clarification and an explanation of the relationship with what Solihull is doing.
"I think everyone understands the pressure of need for housing and Solihull has always been willing to play its part. However, the issue is the where, the how, the when, as well as the numbers; fundamental to this are the policy changes made by the new government regarding development in the Green Belt, which constitutes two thirds of our borough.
"In 1955 the system of Green Belt protection was set up and has endured. The rules were clear. To develop in the Green Belt, you needed to prove what is known as 'exceptional circumstances'. There was even an argument that housing need did not justify removing that status. Solihull won countless appeals against planning applications refused by the Council where it was seeking to protect the Green Belt.
"Last year’s updated National Planning Policy Framework changed all that. It says in paragraph 155 that housing need effectively trumps Green Belt protection. This is through the new concept of ‘Grey Belt’, so we are now seeing the argument crop up to whether, in effect, Green Belt protection for a particular site is justified or even applicable. For this purpose, it has also lowered the protection given against encroachment of Green Belt in the countryside and puts the emphasis on preventing merging between towns (but not villages!). We now understand that the role of the local planning committee is also to be reduced by government, but the details of this are not clear yet.
"Another change made was to introduce new powers for regional mayors and require the setting up of spatial development strategies. Some of you may recall that regional planning (the Regional Spatial Strategy (or RSS) as it was then) provided targets for local plans to meet, but these were removed in 2010 and were replaced by a ‘duty-to-cooperate’.
"The West Midlands Combined Authority, at its board meeting in July, resolved to start work on this, based on a number of principles. Initially there were set to be seven of these: co-development with councils; timelines; infrastructure first; brownfield first; additionality to local authority plans; evidence led; integration with other national / local plans; and I was pleased to get support to add an eighth ‘enhancing the functions of green spaces’.
"I was also able to secure an amendment introducing an additional ‘member oversight’ process, enabling councillors to engage with and comment on the work as it progresses. Solihull will be one of the three members represented on this group.
"What is accepted is that in total the seven councils of the WMCA will not be able to meet our housing needs, but other adjacent rural areas such as Staffordshire, Warwickshire and Worcestershire have increased targets too. The map below illustrates the Green Belt in the West Midlands, and you can see how little is left in the metropolitan area (the area covered by the Combined Authority and the SDS – outlined in orange). It’s clear that the majority is located within Solihull so you can see why we are so vulnerable to attack. But the Green Belt has to be about more than just somewhere to build houses, and this is why I have been championing the added principle for the SDS and will continue to focus on the importance of our green spaces and local character. We will continue to take active steps to fight our corner in the region to protect our borough.
"We all know our motto is ‘Urbs in Rure’ – town in country. Locally, I continue to stress that planning needs to be done on the best principles of good design, not just developers’ boxes. We must look at development that makes best use of existing infrastructure, minimising pressure on existing congested communities. It must also provide proper green infrastructure to help address the massive decline in wildlife species that we are seeing. The houses to be built should be for local people and allow the young to buy their first home in the communities they grew up in.
"So let me resort to a few more Q & As, with the regional context in mind.
What is the Spatial Development Strategy (SDS) about?
"The SDS will contain a statement of policies, of “strategic” importance about land use and development; it needs to ensure collective need is met, redistributing where need cannot be met; infrastructure needs; and mitigation of climate change. Importantly it will work across administrative boundaries covering the seven metropolitan councils (Birmingham, Coventry, Dudley, Sandwell, Solihull, Walsall and Wolverhampton).
"Allocation of actual housing sites is down to local councils, as are detailed policies that will help shape the development that is to take place. These will be contained within a Local Plan.
Will the West Midlands SDS dictate numbers of housing in Solihull? Will it say where the housing goes?
"The SDS is expected to indicate a housing requirement for the whole area, as well as each of the seven constituent authorities. This will need to have regard to the evidence base that sits behind it – including land supply, constraints and infrastructure.
"It’s important to note that we already have a housing requirement set out by government that I highlighted in my previous message. This forms the basis for the work in the SDS.
"Whilst the SDS may include some broad directions for growth it is not expected to allocate specific sites.
Will development be infrastructure led?
"The statements have been clear in government announcements about the importance of infrastructure and facilities. The question is whether funding will be there to match the need, and how, in planning terms at least, that ‘need’ is defined. The SDS includes a specific principle around ‘infrastructure first’ and does offer a revised platform from which infrastructure needs can be considered on a cross-boundary basis.
What will be the timing of the SDS in relation to our own Local Plan?
"Plan making requires a great deal of work in assembling evidence and consultation. It is not, and should not be, something that is rushed through without the opportunity for community and stakeholder input. A possible three-year period has been mentioned for the SDS, which is not dissimilar to our own Local Plan timetable.
"Government expects Local Plans to be in general conformity with an SDS though, and as a result this will be an important test when our Local Plan is examined. We will therefore need to review our own timescale to ensure there is necessary alignment of principles.
Can any of our requirement be transferred elsewhere?
"We are not the only area to be faced with significantly increased numbers, and there are limited places in cities now to build, so we must be realistic.
"We are working closely with neighbouring authorities and the WMCA, though, and wherever we can identify appropriate opportunities we will. This may include some of the West Midlands need being accommodated in Staffordshire, Warwickshire or Worcestershire.
What progress is being made with the Solihull Plan?
"Work is ongoing, with a report expected for Cabinet in December. However, this will need to acknowledge the timelines being established for the SDS as well as its strategic context and direction of travel."
Councillor Ian Courts