Courtesy of Jo Russell, this appeal decision (please click here to view) should be of interest for those interested in approaches to calculating a five year land supply (see Jo’s summary below).
It would also appear from this decision and a number of others recently that the absence of a five year land supply is being given a lot more weight than the situation we facing us two years ago. Design considerations are still important, however.
I think the decision is also of interest for the discussion about the s106, the application of Circular 5/05 and the relationship to the CIL (see paragraphs 54 to 58). You can’t demand a sum from a developer if you don’t know what it’s going to be spent on and obligations should not be levied to resolve exiting deficiencies in council services.
HBF Strategic Planner
Summary: Joanne Russell, Barton Wilmore
Key items to note:
Inspector agreed a 10% discount for non-implementation of existing commitments was reasonable;
Windfall sites should not be included;
Regeneration sites which are known only to the Council in a private and confidential business plan should not be included;
Draft emerging Local Plan sites should not be included;
Bringing forward a site which is not identified in the first phase of the draft local plan period, but is proposed for a later phase, is not detrimental to the overall proposed phasing policy.
Home Builders Federation
London, SE1 9PL
To unsubscribe, simply click the following link: Unsubscribe
Please do not reply to this email. It has been sent from an email address that does not accept incoming emails. To contact us please email email@example.com