To receive a presentation from the Lead Member for Built Environment, Councillor Elaine MacTiernan. 

94.1           The Mayor invited the Lead Member for Built Environment, Councillor Elaine MacTiernan, to make her presentation to the Council.  

94.2           The presentation covered the following main points:

·         Built Environment Portfolio – What Services Does it Cover? – a group of services mostly, but not exclusively, in Development Services – it also included a housing function (affordable housing) in Community Services. Services included: Planning – Development Management, Enforcement, Land Charges; Planning Policy – Joint Core Strategy (JCS), Tewkesbury Borough Plan (TBP) and Neighbourhood Development Plans (NDPs); Building Control – shared with Cheltenham Borough Council; and Strategic Affordable Housing – mostly through the JCS.

·         Who’s Who in the Team – Head of Development Services – Annette Roberts; Development Services Manager – Paul Skelton; Planning Policy Manager – Matthew Barker; Building Control Manager – Ian Smith (shared with Cheltenham Borough Council); and  Economic and Community Development Manager (including Tourism) – Andy Sanders. Total number of 50 full-time equivalent staff.

·         Built Environment Quiz –

o   How many planning applications does the Council receive each year? 1,300.

o   How much income does the Development Management team bring into the Council on average per annum? £1,300,000.

o   What percentage of determined applications are approved? 90%.

o   How many registered Neighbourhood Development Plan areas are there in the Borough? 14.

o   How many houses were completed in the Borough last year? 728.

·         Development Management Process – case officers consider the issues associated with the application. They weigh the application merits, benefits and policy position against the comments in support of, and opposed to, the development – they then make a recommendation and decision. Planners did not just follow process or interpret a procedure they had to use skill and experience to negotiate complex interrelated issues to get the maximum benefit for the community.

·         Creating a Place from a Plan – the strategic allocations in the JCS were Twigworth/Innsworth, South Churchdown, Brockworth, North West Cheltenham, West Cheltenham and Ashchurch = 10,900 houses and 112 hectares of employment land.

·         Requires Significant Investment in Infrastructure – the team is involved in preparing bids for funding: £4.53 million towards A40 improvements to help deliver strategic growth; £8.1 million towards a bridge to unlock capacity for development at Ashchurch; and capacity funding for Ashchurch and the JCS.

·         Bringing these Sites Forward – Creating a Place – the portfolio is crucial to the delivery of growth; it is not just about making planning documents and processing planning applications but also about creating a place that everyone was proud to be part of making; it was about involving communities through consultation in developing the TBP and helping them with NDPs; and it was about the Community Development Team being the connection between the Council and Parishes helping to negotiate S106 Agreements and, in the future, Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).

·         Not Just about Ensuring Enough Homes for People but Land for Jobs Too – Innsworth and Twigworth = indicative housing up to 2031 - 2,295 / hectares of employment land up to 2031 – 9.1; South Churchdown = indicative housing up to 2031 – 1,100 / hectares of employment land up to 2031 – 17.4; North Brockworth = indicative housing up to 2031 – 1,500 / hectares of employment land up to 2031 – 3; North West Cheltenham = indicative housing up to 2031 – 4,285 / hectares of employment land up to 2031 – 23.4; Ashchurch = indicative housing up to 2031 – N/A / hectares of employment land up to 2031 – 14.3; Winneycroft = indicative housing up to 2031 - 620 / hectares of employment land up to 2031 – N/A; West Cheltenham = indicative housing up to 2031 – 1,100 / hectares of employment land up to 2031 – 45. Tewkesbury Borough will also identify around 40 hectares of employment land to meet needs.

·         Affordable Housing 2017/18 – Head of Community Services – Pete Tonge; and Housing Services Manager – Paula Baker. The Council Plan target of delivering 150 affordable properties in Tewkesbury Borough was met in quarter three of 2017/18 with the total delivery due to approach 200 properties for the year – the target for 2018/19 had been increased to 180. 2017/18 had seen new affordable housing providers deliver and/or begin to manage properties in Tewkesbury Borough: Gloucester City Homes had sites in Highnam, Witcombe and some coming soon in Twyning; Two Rivers had properties in Churchdown and Wheatpieces, Tewkesbury; and Heylo Housing had acquired properties in Bishop’s Cleeve and Cooper’s Edge, Brockworth. Progress has been made for delivery of rural housing in Tewkesbury Borough with sites at Minsterworth and Norton on track to be delivered during 2018/19. Work through the Gloucestershire Rural Housing Partnership would continue to identify opportunities to develop affordable rural housing.

·         Affordable Housing Quiz:

o    What is the average house price in the Borough? £275,000.

o    What is the average income in the Borough? £26,243.

o    What is the ratio of house price to income in Tewkesbury? 10.5.

·         On That Basis – average income of £26,343 (gross), or approximately £19,700 (net), gives a monthly figure of £2,200 (gross) or approximately £1,700 (net) – average monthly rental in the Borough is £730 per month so 40% of income is spent on rent; added to the other bills people have to pay life becomes a struggle for many.

·         Vision Statement – “Tewkesbury Borough…a place where a good quality of life is open to all” - can the Council make sure there is enough land for homes and jobs that allow all sectors of the community to have the opportunity to live and work in the Borough; can the Council increase its target for building affordable homes and make them truly affordable; and can the Council protect the built and natural environment along with the assets that made the Borough special.

94.3           The Mayor thanked the Lead Member for her informative presentation and invited Member questions. A number of Members expressed concern about the affordability of homes in the Borough. One felt the cost of land needed to be considered carefully; particularly when the Council was selling its own land, as often it was the fact that land was expensive that made affordable homes unviable. In addition, there was concern that the Council needed to find a way to promote low cost housing. In response, the Lead Member indicated that, unfortunately, the amount of land sold by the Council was fairly insignificant compared to that sold by private landowners and the Council had no control over the cost of that land. Another Member suggested that self-build could be a way for people to be able to afford their own homes and he felt this should be encouraged. In response, the Head of Development Services confirmed that the JCS policy asked for 40% affordable housing on all developments – this was often challenged by developers but nonetheless was what was asked for. Going forward it was intended to look at affordability issues through the review of the JCS and the production of the Borough Plan to try and bring affordable homes forward quicker. In terms of self-build, the Member was advised that the Council had approved a site for four homes between Greet and Tewkesbury and, in addition, there was a self-build register. The Council had also been considering the use of modular housing and a number of Officers and Members had visited factories which produced steel and wooden framed modular homes; these types of homes were faster and cheaper to build and it was felt this was likely to be the future of housebuilding, particularly in terms of affordable homes. A Member indicated that he shared the concerns of the Lead Member about the social housing and affordable rent systems which saw young people struggling with higher rents but not being eligible for housing allowance. He felt a happy medium needed to be found, possibly with the capping of rents so as not to cause hardship. In offering some clarification about rents, a representative from Severn Vale Housing Society explained that they were set using a ‘rent formula’; to build affordable housing capital grant support was needed through Homes England and that organisation determined what the first rent would be and whether the rents went up or down and when. This meant the only way a Housing Association could decide its own rents was by building affordable housing that did not fit the Homes England criteria; however, that had a higher cost so there was also a need to find a way of bringing the costs of building down.

94.4           Referring to the decline in apprenticeships in the building industry, a Member explained that, in some places, S106 Agreements insisted that construction companies employed local people and apprentices – this meant more local people were employed and badly needed apprentices were able to learn a trade. She felt this approach should be considered within Tewkesbury Borough. In terms of modular housing, a Member questioned how buildings of that type would be viewed by Planning Officers. In response, the Head of Development Services explained that each application was considered on its own merits regardless of the materials used to build it - first and foremost it was about context and design.

94.5           Accordingly, it was

                  RESOLVED          That the Lead Member presentation be NOTED.