You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles
Wolverhampton’s work with neighbouring councils on housing delivery is at risk
Ian Brookfield explains how the government’s planning policy proposals look set to reverse Wolverhampton’s successes in co-operating with neighbouring local authorities and reduce the delivery of affordable homes
The government has pledged to create a more democratic, effective and sustainable planning system that delivers a far greater supply of new homes. But in attempting to modernise and simplify planning, has it oversimplified the task at hand?
The proposals set out in short-term planning changes and the government’s white paper, Planning for the Future, will undermine local accountability and strategic decision-making. Added to that, they will make it even harder to build much-needed affordable housing.
The impact they will have on my own city of Wolverhampton serves to highlight the flawed thinking and contradictory nature of the plans.
“The proposals weaken our ability to deliver on our obligations, by abolishing the duty to co-operate”
The proposals deliver a double whammy. On the one hand, they impose a higher housing target on the city that outstrips our current supply by 34%, while on the other, they weaken our ability to deliver on our obligations, by abolishing the duty to co-operate.
The Localism Act introduced duty to co-operate in order to encourage co-operation between local authorities. I believe we are one of the best examples of that policy in action.
For many years, we have worked hard to exploit every possible development opportunity in the urban area. Wolverhampton is a post-industrial city with often-difficult brownfield sites requiring costly remediation, but we have worked proactively with partners to purchase sites, make them investment-ready and bring forward development that fits in with both the city’s regeneration and the Black Country’s wider vision to revitalise the area.
We have been tremendously successful in sparking a renaissance in the city, with major developments either completed or well under way that are providing new, high quality homes – including city-centre living – attracting new employers, generating jobs and transforming the city’s fortunes.
READ MORE
Wolverhampton works closely with its Black Country neighbours, Dudley, Sandwell and Walsall, to deliver a joined-up approach to housing delivery and economic development through a joint local plan, the Black Country Plan.
But we are reaching the limits of how much more development we can accommodate. Given the physical constraints Wolverhampton faces, exporting some of our housing needs to neighbouring areas is our only option if we are to preserve the city’s already scarce areas of green belt.
Duty to co-operate has been an essential lever in working with other councils to ensure that happens and several agreements have come as a result. Removing the duty could put those negotiations at risk, particularly if those same areas also see their own housing targets increase.
“It all adds up to a planning system that would undermine the effective delivery of housing and result in unsustainable developments in many areas”
When you put the various proposals together, it all adds up to a planning system that would undermine the effective delivery of housing and result in unsustainable developments in many areas.
In a bid to boost housebuilding to more than 300,000 homes a year, the proposals talk of binding housing targets for every local authority area using a nationally set method to make adjustments for environmental constraints. But this is a blunt tool that won’t reflect the local environmental issues, sustainability and deliverability that have to be considered for each site. That’s what the local plan process was set up to do and the changes would completely undermine this.
Dig a little deeper and there are further causes for concern.
The government proposes to abandon affordable housing requirements for medium-sized developments. This affects schemes of under 40 to 50 homes, which are common in cities such as Wolverhampton, where developments often involve smaller pockets of land.
Wolverhampton set up a housing company, WV Living, to take on sites that the market deems unviable, build a mix of tenures and ensure more affordable housing is available, in a city where incomes are well below the national average.
It’s difficult to see how this change in policy will do anything other than result in fewer affordable homes being built.
“Rather than attempting to remodel the planning system, the government ought to focus on the basics”
Few would claim the planning system doesn’t need reform. But simplifying processes by paring back the checks and balances that local plans – and local planning authorities – provide is counterproductive.
The Black Country Plan is nearing completion, and is the result of local authorities working together strategically to build a robust evidence base and make decisions that are informed by community engagement. It is critical that the Black Country has an up-to-date plan as soon as possible, to provide certainty for investment decisions and our communities, as well as a sound basis for planning decisions.
The circumstances in Wolverhampton and the Black Country aren’t unique – these proposals will be of concern in many other areas.
Rather than attempting to remodel the planning system, the government ought to focus on the basics. Help us to unblock delivery on constrained brownfield sites. Make sure planning teams are properly resourced in terms of staff and IT infrastructure. Help to build the capacity of planning committees.
In short, capitalise on the strengths of the existing system.
Ian Brookfield, leader, City of Wolverhampton Council
