Bedford Borough Local Plan 2040 Plan for Submission

Comment

Representation ID: 9895

Received: 28/07/2022

Respondent: EF Wootton and Son

Agent: Phillips Planning Services

The following contains general representations regarding proposed Policy DM5 of the Local Plan 2040 that are relevant to our client base who are promoting their sites as available for Self-build and Custom Housebuilding. A separate representation has been submitted on behalf of each client, with specific commentary provided regarding the merits of their site.

We are writing on behalf of our client Mr. E F Wootton, and wish to make representations on proposed Policy DM5 (Self-build and Custom Housebuilding), as well as the methodology used by the Council to calculate its provision of Self-build plots.

Firstly, in respect of defining what can constitute a serviced plot, the Council’s Self-Build And Custom Housebuilding Topic Paper (April 2022) states that:

“The council has therefore taken a straightforward approach to what it considers suitable planning permissions and counts planning permissions for developments of a single dwelling in the borough towards its self-build and custom housebuilding requirement. Whilst these types of permissions are not explicitly submitted as self-build and custom housebuilding applications they provide potential opportunities for self-build due to the size of the development.”

We strongly contend that the Council’s methodology of calculating all planning permissions for single dwellings as Self-build plots is inherently flawed. Single dwellings cannot realistically be considered as contributing to the supply of Self-build housing unless they are specifically granted for that purpose, and controlled by measures such as a legal agreement. Otherwise, these dwellings are effectively available on the open market and will more than likely be secured by small and medium-sized housebuilders.

One of the driving forces behind Self-build housing is a desire to improve affordability in this part of the marketplace, but it is very difficult for genuine Self-builders to compete with small and medium-sized housebuilders. Furthermore, there is currently a shortage of single plots and small sites which means the market is very competitive. In our experience, there are very few if any plots currently coming forward within Bedford Borough for single dwellings, with very few coming forward in the rural north or in or adjacent to small settlements.

The Council’s Self-build And Custom Housebuilding Topic Paper (April 2022) further states “that there is no clear guidance on what type of dwelling should be considered in counting the supply of self-build and custom housebuilding plots” (Paragraph 6.1), and that “Further clarity has not been forthcoming in guidance or in case law on the definition of “suitable” ”(Paragraph 6.2).

However, this is not the case, and this matter has been addressed in several Appeal Decisions where the matter has been the subject of debate. One of the most defining Appeal Decisions is in respect of a site in West Leicestershire in June 2019 (APP/G2435/W/18/3214451 - Land off Hepworth Road, Woodville). The key parts of the Appeal Decision in relation to this point are paragraphs 22 and 23 which state:

22. “The Council confirms that as at April 2019, there are 54 individuals on the Council’s Self-Build and Custom Housebuilding Register and that as of April 2019, it has permitted 4 plots in the period since 31 October 2016. Since 31 October 2016 the Council has permitted an additional 133 single plot dwellings which have been distributed across the District. However, the Council has not provided any information to suggest that there are provisions in place to ensure that any of the 133 single dwelling permissions would be developed in a manner that accords with the legal definition of self-build and custom housebuilding in the Self-Build and Custom Housebuilding 2015 (as amended).

23. To my mind this raises considerable doubts as to whether any of the single dwelling permissions would count towards the number of planning permissions the Council has granted for serviced plots and thus whether these consents would actually contribute towards the delivery of self-build and custom housebuilding in the District. Importantly, the S.106 Agreement submitted with the appeal proposal contains provisions to ensure that the proposed dwellings on the appeal site would meet the definition of self-build and custom housebuilding. There is no evidence before me of a similar mechanism which would secure the delivery of self-build and custom housebuilding on the plots referred to in Appendix 3 of the Council’s Statement. I consider it would be unreasonable to include any of the single dwelling permissions within the calculation of self-build and custom housebuilding permissions granted in the District.”

The Inspector’s opinion is both clear and concise in identifying the need for control and how this comes to define provision in respect of the legal duty. The Council’s methodology is not accurately addressing the provision of Self-build housing in the Borough, and the true figure of genuine Self-build plots is likely to be much lower. As such, the Council should utilise a much more accurate method of calculating the number of Self-build plots available in order to meet its obligations under the Self-build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015 (as amended). The Council need to provide genuine Self-build plots in areas of identified need through the granting of a sufficient number of planning permissions/allocations which are adequately controlled to ensure they are genuine Self-build plots, and not available to the wider market. It is proposed that Self-build plots delivered under Policy DM5 will be controlled through S106 Agreements. The same should therefore be done for all plots considered to be for Self-build to ensure they are utilised for this purpose.

In respect of the policy, the scope of proposed Policy DM5 is far too narrow as it is only focused on delivering Self-build plots as part of wider development schemes in and around the urban area, and not on delivering them in the locations where they are needed.

The Self-build community - the part of the market that the Government wishes to stimulate and support through the Self-build and Custom Housebuilding Act - have very particular requirements. Whether it is to be located somewhere specific, where they have a local connection such as family or work; whether it is affordability and to build their home to a specification that is cheaper than they can buy within the general market; or indeed whether it is to find a unique plot to express themselves and design and build a home that meets their needs in a manner that is not served by the mass market, the self-builder is not looking for homogeneity, or to be a plot in amongst a sea of other plots – they are looking for individual, low-density rural areas where there are no, or very few, general housing development sites.

Conversely, people wanting to purchase a standard house type on an estate may be put off buying next to a Self-build plot that is undefined at the point of sale, as they will not know what exactly their property will be adjoining, and this could ultimately cause issues for the volume housebuilder in how the two relate.

Furthermore, the policy does not provide any guidance on the spatial approach to identifying self-build pots within a larger housing estate. Will they be dispersed throughout the development, or located in an area of their own? Are the Self-builders supposed to follow the design and material selection of the volume housebuilders, or are they able to utilise the more innovative designs that Self-build is supposed to offer? There are likely to be conflicts in the design and character of the houses built on the Self-build plots and the standard house types on the rest of the estate. Will this not result in a constraint on innovation?

We are also concerned that the legal duty within The Self-build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015 is not being adequately addressed by this restrictive policy. The Act requires Local Authorities to keep a register of those seeking to acquire serviced plots in the area for their own Self-build and custom house building and to give enough suitable development permissions to meet this identified demand.

The Council’s Housing Strategy 2021-2026 confirmed that there was a total of 115 individuals on the Self-build Register as of 31st December 2019. Table 12 of this document sets out the locational preferences of individuals on the Self-build And Custom Housebuilding register at the point of publication. Only 25 people registered a locational interest in Bedford Town and only 9 in Kempston Town. The overwhelming majority of people expressed interest in the villages in the north of the Borough, but the Spatial Strategy (Policy DS2(S)) only directs development to the urban area, at specified strategic locations adjacent to the urban area, and at growth locations within the A421 / East West Rail corridor. It does not direct any new development to the villages in the north of the Borough, and there are no strategic allocations in these locations that will come forward under the new Local Plan 2040. Those sites identified and being delivered through Neighborhood Plans will come forward under the current development plan policies and as such will not deliver custom and self-build housing plots, as these are only encouraged and not required by the current policy, as is proposed in Policy DM5.

There is, therefore, a fundamental difference between the objectives of Policy DM5 and the locational requirements of the Self-builders who have confirmed their interest in building within Bedford Borough. As the Council’s strategic planning policy does not allocate any new sites in the north, we ask how is the Plan supposed to deliver Self-build opportunities in this area which has a significant identified need? Policy DM5 is blunt and unable to deliver Self-build in the rural north of Bedford and therefore does not meet the large part of the need identified in the Council’s own evidence base.

Some provision is needed within the policy for Self-build opportunities to be considered as exceptions to the normal rural restraint policies. We, therefore, advocate the use of exception site policies for Self-build as set out in the National Custom & Self-build Association’s manifesto which sets out ten areas where Government Support can help the custom and Self-build sector fix the broken housing market. Point 3 of the Manifesto states that there should be the introduction of “….a custom and self-build exception site policy for small sites akin to the rural exception site scheme to ensure local demand for serviced plots can be met.”

We, therefore, contend that Policy DM5 either needs refining further to offer opportunities for Self-build and custom housebuilding as an exception to normal restraint policies, or, alternatively, the Council could identify a range of small sites identified in and around the villages in the northern part of the Borough which could deliver Self-build opportunities and the Council could allocate those sites specifically for this purpose.

Without modification, we would conclude that the plan is UNSOUND. It has not been positively prepared as the strategy does not meet the need for self-build and custom housebuilding sites in the locations where they are required. It is not justified with locational needs excluded from the policy framework. It is not effective as there is no evidence that the self-build and custom housebuilding communities have been adequately consulted. It is also not consistent with national policy and does not address the requirements of paragraph 62 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Furthermore, we question whether the legal duty under Section 2(1) of the Self-build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015, which places a duty on relevant bodies to have regard to each self-build and custom housebuilding register, that relates to their area when carrying out their planning, housing, land disposal and regeneration functions. For planning this means that the registers that relate to the area of a local planning authority – and the duty to have regard to them – needs to be taken into account in preparing planning policies and are also likely to be a material consideration in decisions involving proposals for self and custom housebuilding. Based on the identified failures to pay due regard to the Self-build Register, we, therefore, contend that the plan is not legally compliant.