Asked by: Mike Penning (Conservative - Hemel Hempstead)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, which local authorities do not have a housing plan in place.
Answered by Christopher Pincher
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that local plans should provide a framework for addressing housing needs, as well as other economic, social and environmental priorities.
As of 30 September 2021, 23 local planning authorities (7%) do not have an adopted local plan (under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004). Most are at an advanced stage of preparing plans:12 have submitted their plan for examination in public; and a further 2 have had their plans found sound following examination and expected to adopt shortly. The authorities that have no plan in place are:
Amber Valley
Ashfield
Basildon
Brentwood
Bury
Calderdale
Castle Point
Eastleigh
Epping Forest
Liverpool
Medway
North East Derbyshire
North Hertfordshire
Northumberland
Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation
Salford
St Albans
Tameside
Uttlesford
Welwyn Hatfield
Windsor and Maidenhead
Wirral
York
Asked by: Mike Penning (Conservative - Hemel Hempstead)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, if he will provide (a) details and (b) the number of local plans that have been halted by the Planning Inspectorate in each year since 2010.
Answered by Christopher Pincher
Since 2011, 55 local plan Development Plan Documents (DPDs) have been withdrawn by the local authority, or been found unsound or legally non-compliant by an Inspector, following:
A breakdown by year is provided below:
Year | Number of local plan DPDs |
2011 | 6 |
2012 | 4 |
2013 | 15 |
2014 | 12 |
2015 | 8 |
2016 | 0 |
2017 | 2 |
2018 | 1 |
2019 | 0 |
2020 | 6 |
2021 (up to 31 October) | 1 |
Total | 55 |
This constitutes 9% of all DPDs examined during this period, with 639 DPDs (91%) found sound subject to modifications.
Most of the plans withdrawn or found unsound or legally non-compliant, 45 out of the 55, were examined during the period 2011-2016. The reduction in the last 5 years has resulted from a letter from the then Secretary of State in 2015, asking that Inspectors work pragmatically with LPAs to find plans sound.
Asked by: Mike Penning (Conservative - Hemel Hempstead)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, what weight is given to Ministerial statements on housing growth by the Planning Inspectorate at local plan inquiries; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Christopher Pincher
Local Plans are assessed to determine whether they are sound. Plans are sound if they are: positively prepared, justified, effective and consistent with national policy - enabling the delivery of sustainable development in accordance with the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework and other statements of national planning policy (including those announced via Ministerial Statement), where relevant.
Asked by: Mike Penning (Conservative - Hemel Hempstead)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what guidance his Department is providing to local planning authorities on local plans that are constrained as a result of pressures on the Green Belt.
Answered by Christopher Pincher
We have published planning practice guidance which sets out how authorities should consider the constraints, such as Green Belt, when determining the suitability, availability and achievability of sites within their plan, and which can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/housing-and-economic-land-availability-assessment.
This Government is committed to protecting and enhancing the Green Belt, in line with our manifesto. The National Planning Policy Framework outlines strong protections for Green Belt land, and states that a Green Belt boundary may be altered only in exceptional circumstances, through the local plan process. A local authority should consider releasing land from Green Belt only if it can evidence that it has examined all other reasonable options for meeting its development needs. The local authority should demonstrate that it has used as much brownfield land as possible, optimised densities, and discussed with neighbouring authorities whether they could accommodate some of the development required.
The Framework strongly encourages the re-use of brownfield, especially for housing, to relieve some of the pressure to consider other land, including Green Belt. It says that local authorities should give substantial weight to the value of redeveloping suitable brownfield sites, including development above transport infrastructure. Communities are also expected to consider gentle densification within settlements to provide more developable land.