UPSVLP 2347
The Plan is unsound, without justification or effective in meeting the objectives of the plan, its preferred development option and spatial strategy through the action to remove allocation of housing at Burtonwood.
Metacre Limited seeks the reinstatement of housing allocation Site OS1 Phipps Lane
The Council has not effectively and constructively engaged on an active and on-going basis with St Helens Council or Highways England in a manner expected under Section 33A (1). It has not reasonably considered matters relevant to strategic matters of its duty to cooperate on a self-identified cross-boundary issue of significance to its plan and prepared its development plan documents with the appropriate supporting evidence and activities expected under Section 33A (3). It has not reasonably undertaken effective cross-boundary or joint working to determine need for new infrastructure or impact of development on infrastructure in a manner expected under NPPF paragraph 26. It has failed to demonstrate effective, on-going joint working on strategic policy and on matters of cross-boundary importance as part of its duty to cooperate as required by NPPF paragraph 27. There is no evidence to show every effort to secure strategic cross-boundary agreement on matters before submission of the PSVLP2 in the matter of the removal of the Burtonwood allocation. There is absence of any evidence or intent to even raise the matter, less reach an agreement or disagreement on the matter.
Metacre Limited seeks the reinstatement of housing allocation Site OS1 Phipps Lane
From the very limited evidence in the Duty to Cooperate Statement and draft Statement of Common Ground the following conclusions can be drawn relating to the removal of allocation OS1 Phipps Lane, Burtonwood: Identification of the cross-boundary issue between the proposed Burtonwood allocation and Bold Garden Suburb is a concern solely held by Warrington Council. There are no corroborating statements from St Helens Council or Highways England; The Council did not consider it necessary, despite identifying a cross-boundary issue of significance to its emerging plan, to raise the matter at any time with relevant statutory bodies, i.e. St Helens Council and Highways England; and though it has identified a level of uncertainty in this matter it considers so significant to warrant removal of the allocation, contrary to its spatial strategy for distribution of housing to outlying settlements, the Council did not consider it necessary to review, commission or produce any evidence to investigate its significant concerns.
i. Lack of meaningful working on a cross-boundary strategic matter with the relevant adjoining local authorities and statutory bodies; ii. Lack of preparation of relevant evidence base; and iii. Lack of compliance with the Duty to Cooperate.
Need to ensure that sufficient land is provided in alternative locations to account for the significant shortfall at Fiddlers Ferry. We submit that such a site must include as first consideration the reinstatement of allocation OS1 Phipps Lane, Burtonwood.
Meeting held with Halton in July in respect of Fiddlers Ferry identified the importance of a strategic, cross-boundary matters to mitigate potential transport and social infrastructure impacts, alongside physical need to maintain a green belt separation ? a strategic gap between urban areas of Widnes and Warrington. However none of these issues have been resolved and the Council has not prepared an appropriate evidence base on these matters prior to publication of the Plan and confirmation of the proposed allocation. This contrasts to Burtonwood where the much smaller allocation has been removed based on unevidenced highways impacts. Further, Metacre agree with the wider developer consortium that in a best-case scenario first completions from Fiddlers Ferry will not occur until Year 13 (2033/34), resulting in a probable shortfall on forecast completions of around 595 units. A significant shortfall that would unbalance the plan and its ability to meet even the Council?s preferred, lowered housing requirement.
The proposed minimum housing requirement derived from the Standard Method pays little regard to the need to boost the supply of housing, tackling the affordability issues, aligning the housing requirement with the Plan?s economic aspirations or seeking to boost the supply of affordable housing to meet existing needs.
A higher housing requirement necessitates and reinforces the point that the allocation OS1 Phipps Lane must be reinstated to secure a sound, effective and justified plan.
there has been no evidential justification for the removal of allocation OS1 Phipps Lane, or indeed any removal of provision of housing to Burtonwood as an outlying settlement. In a circumstance of needing to boost housing supply, tackling affordability and aligning housing delivery with economic aspirations there can be no reason to reject housing at Burtonwood. Burtonwood, and the wider North West Warrington sub-area that includes Winwick, has been effectively starved of any meaningful housing development for a decade. The community of Burtonwood needs investment to maintain a sustainable community ? a matter the Council expressly identified in its Preferred Development Option to which the PSVLP2 maintains is the right approach to provide for incremental growth to outlying settlements. Even if the Council is correct that there are uncertainties to the transport impact of allocating land for housing Burtonwood, which it is not, it would be no different to allocate housing at Burtonwood in such circumstance as the Council proposes to do at Fiddlers Ferry on a far less available evidence and greater uncertainty.
Pertinent to the plan period it is highlighted that the Council?s own housing evidence, the Local Housing Needs Assessment Update, GL Hearn (2021) the Local Plan (PSVLP2) itself have different timeframes. The Local Plan is working to an 18-year timeframe (2021/22 to 2038/39), and therefore should arguably be running from 2021 to 2039, not 2038. In contrast, GL Hearn?s housing need assessment is over a 17-year timeframe, running from 2021 to 2038.
Rectification would be to align the evidence and in so doing reinstating the clear evidential basis for housing allocation at Burtonwood and at OS1 Phipps Lane.
Indirectly this is linked to decision to deallocate site OS1 Phipps Lane. Its deallocation was a result of wrong decision making that was politically motivated without an evidential basis. That decision has led to the Council delete and removing some references to the allocation and Burtonwood in its evidence base as to the need for housing, and so forth. But as we set out in detail in Section 3 it has done so poorly and incompletely with evidence extant that actively supports the allocation and housing need. It is not surprising that we can add the plan period inconsistency on housing evidence into this mix, a further reason to why the plan evidence base is fundamentally flawed, unjustified and unsound.
The Lichfields Issues Report and Technical Paper concludes that the Council?s approach to use of a staggered housing requirement is unjustified and arbitrary as means simply to reduce their housing requirement in the first 5 years. Lichfields concludes that there is no rational reason for reducing the requirement in the first 5 years aside from arbitrarily seeking to manipulate the figures to be able to demonstrate a 5-year supply upon adoption.
Metacre Limited seeks the reinstatement of housing allocation Site OS1 Phipps Lane
The staggered housing approach is significant to a settlement like Burtonwood and the nature of the former allocation OS1 Phipps Lane. To the previous Regulation 19 consultation we supported the OS1 allocation and concurred with the Council view that the site could be delivered early in the plan period. We also cautioned even in 2019 against the use of a staggered approach to the housing requirement. Such actions can lead to stacking-up delivery problems in the later plan period if this were to coincide with a downturn in the economy that slows housing completions at the very point the plan proposes an increase. Moreover, the combining of the staggered housing requirement and reliance of larger scale development areas, such as Fiddlers Ferry, to plug the housing requirement in the later period, places significant risk on meeting the requirement. A matter that is de-risked by allocation additional, small / medium scale sites that are viable, available and deliverable now ? i.e. greenfield housing sites such as OS1 Phipps Lane. Combine this with the paucity of any new development in a decade, it reinforces the importance of planning delivery to the forefront of the plan period to meet unmet needs. We concur with Lichfields analysis that the staggered housing requirement is a cynical manipulation to fit the requirement to the supply due to the limitations of sites to delivery early in the plan period. The antithesis of positive plan-making.
The Lichfields Issues Report and Technical Paper concludes on Consortium members significant concerns on the Council?s housing trajectory.
Metacre Limited seeks the reinstatement of housing allocation Site OS1 Phipps Lane
Lichfields Technical Paper on Housing Land Supply concerns sets out that the Council?s evidence to justify their housing trajectory is flawed and insufficient. It is the Consortium?s opinion that at least 2,448 dwellings need to be removed and replaced by alternative sources of supply having undertaken a detailed review of a sizeable proportion of the supply. In addition it is found that the Council?s proposed supply pays no regard to its own evidence on housing need which advocated that 65% of the supply needs to deliver 3 & 4 bedroomed properties. Site OS1 Phipps Lane, Burtonwood offers opportunity for at least 160 dwellings to be delivered in the short-term. It offers opportunity to provide a mix of dwellings that meets the profiles of the Council?s housing needs. It offers opportunity to deliver a full, policy compliant affordable housing complement as part of the housing offer. It is one such site that is known to the Council, which is already supported within its evidence base to the PSVLP2 2021 (settlement appraisal, green belt assessment, site assessment and SA Report) and also to the PSVLP1 2019 (options report, HRA, IDP and heritage impact report).
It is our firm view that the Council has erred in its decision to remove the allocation from the PSVLP2 2021 for politically motivated reasons. The totality of its reason to remove the allocation is because the Council is concerned over permitting an allocation of 160 homes in the context of potential significant implications on the local highways network arising from a strategic allocation across the boundary in St Helens, known as Bold Garden Suburb. The Council has not reviewed, commissioned or produced any evidence relating to its stated significant concerns. We have reviewed the extensive available evidence on transport and highway matters available to the Council in this plan and to the St Helens Replacement Local Plan and find no sustainable justification for the concerns of the Council. Moreover, this is evidence that the Council has available to it and has chosen not to review. Neither St Helens Council nor Highways England expressed any objection to allocation OS1 Phipps Lane, Burtonwood in the Regulation 19 consultation in 2019 to PSVLP1. It is the Council?s own evidence through its Preferred Development Option to spatially distribute housing to outlying settlements, including Burtonwood in this Plan. The removal of the allocation is contrary to this evidence that remains extant to the Plan. Allocation OS1 Phipps Lane, Burtonwood continues to benefit from positive evidence in matters of settlement, site and green belt assessment to the Plan. There is no negative evidence on matters of highway / transport matters to which the Council can substantiate its action to remove the allocation. There is now the positive evidence prepared on highway / transport matters produced on behalf of Metacre.