PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT
Revised draft Island Plan
Purpose of the Report
The purpose of this report is for the Minister to:
(a) determine the form of the revised draft Island Plan to be lodged in the States;
(b) clearly set out and justify the differences between the initial draft Island Plan (September 2009) and the revised draft Island Plan.
Background
The Island Plan Review now enters its final stage involving debate and, hopefully, adoption of a new Island Plan.
This Island Plan has been through the most rigorous and intensive examination of any planning policy ever to be presented to the States of Jersey. Starting with the publication of the initial draft Island Plan in September 2009 and culminating with the publication of the independent Planning Inspectors’ Report in November 2010. This followed a three-week Examination in Public of the draft Island Plan itself; the Minister’s intended changes and the representations made against the Plan.
The requirement for this new process has been set out in law, in order to ensure and provide rigour, transparency and engagement in the plan-making process.
Legal and resource implications
The Minister is now required, on the basis of the evidence to date, to prepare and lodge a revised draft Island Plan for consideration and debate in the States. In so doing, the Minister is required to publish an indication of the differences between the initial draft Island Plan and the revised draft Island Plan, with a reasoned justification for each difference.
The Minister is also required to justify why he has chosen not to accept any recommendations in the Inspectors’ Report.
Under new provisions in the primary law[1], once lodged, the revised draft Island Plan cannot be debated for 12 weeks. If the Minister wishes to ensure that the Plan is debated in the current States session it must be lodged during March 2011[2].
Discussion
The schedule, at appendix 1, sets out the proposed changes to the initial draft Island Plan and the justification for them. It has been prepared having regard to the representations made relative to the initial draft Island Plan; the Minister’s expressed intentions to amend the initial draft Island Plan; and the Inspectors’ Report, as well as other material considerations that have arisen in the meantime. This provides the basis for the revised draft Island Plan to be lodged in the States.
There are a limited number of areas of discrepancy between the Minister’s intent to amend the Plan and the Inspectors’ Report. It is these areas, in particular, that are discussed in greater detail, below.
Housing
Inevitably, planning for the Island’s housing needs has been the most controversial area of plan-preparation to date, manifest in contention around specific sites. Before considering the merits of individual housing sites, however, it is considered valuable to review the strategic approach for meeting the Island’s development needs that is set out in the Plan.
(a) Spatial strategy
In reviewing the strategic policies of the Plan, the Inspectors’ state that none is more fundamental than that which seeks the concentration of development in the Built-up Area (BUA)[3]. On the evidence before them, the Inspectors support this policy on the basis that it strikes a reasonable balance between protecting the environment; housing the population; and growing the economy – it’s sustainable in its widest sense.
They point out, however, that acceptance of this approach has many implications, not least that St Helier and adjacent parishes will have to accept the bulk of development.
So whilst the parochial authorities and some residents of St Saviour and St Clement feel that their areas have taken more than their ‘fair share’ of development, the Inspectors’ view is that this is not a matter of fairness, but of geography.
This principle has already received the endorsement of the States as it is implicitly integral to the 2009-2014 Strategic Plan[4].
(b) Demand and supply
The Inspectors have reviewed the demand for homes set out in the draft Plan and concluded that the overall demand of 4,000 homes is robust.
They have also reviewed the sources of housing supply – identified at 4,625 homes in the Plan (i.e. a potential surplus of 625 homes over demand) - but consider two of them – the Waterfront and the Town of St Helier – to be optimistic.
On balance, however, they feel that the planned over-provision built into the Plan will be sufficient to cover the shortfall. It is relevant to note, therefore, that there is little or no ‘over-capacity’ in the planned supply of homes relative to need, and that any change to levels of supply will undermine the objectives of adequately housing the Island’s population.
(c) Affordable homes
Whilst the assessment of the requirement for affordable homes is imprecise, the Inspectors accept that it is clear that the need is very high and that the problem of affordability is serious and getting worse.
8.72 Multiples of five times income have been the maximum generally available from mortgage lenders in Jersey with higher multiples generally regarded as too much of a risk and burden. In addition to this, mortgage lenders have typically required deposits of 15-20%. The MacDonald report provides evidence to suggest that no properties are affordable in Jersey at standard income: debt ratios (i.e. 1:5) for those on average incomes without substantial available capital. It also suggests that if 50% is taken as the maximum proportion of net income that should go on housing, then average income households cannot afford the price of a one-bed flat or any other housing type (see pp 40/41).
8.73 The Whitehead report also tackles the question of worsening affordability. It provides evidence of the position for households in different income ranges at the end of 2008 which suggests, inter alia, that only those in the two upper income quartiles (above £40,000 per annum) could hope to buy a house as a family home. (see pp 14/15). [5]
On the basis of the evidence, accepting it’s imprecision, the Inspectors are content that the order of 1,000 affordable homes to be provided during the Plan period, as identified, in the draft Plan, is about right[6].
They also accept that given the immediacy and severity of the issue, there is a need to seek to address it, rather than to await the outcome of further statistical evidence gathering and analysis of the evidence of need. There is an obligation, derived from the States Strategic Plan[7], for the Planning and Environment Minister to help to address this most serious of issues for Jersey.
The draft Island Plan proposed to address the issue of meeting the need for new affordable homes (over and above existing known sources of supply[8]) in two ways:
(i) Rezoned sites (200 homes)
Seven, predominantly brownfield, sites yielding 200 (between 197-298) homes were identified in the initial draft Island Plan for rezoning to provide affordable homes (Policy H1).
One site is already being developed – Field 633, St Peter – yielding 15 homes, which needs to be withdrawn from the revised draft Island Plan.
The Minister has indicated his intent to remove three of the remaining six sites (with a potential yield of 123 homes) from the revised draft Island Plan. These are:
- Cooke’s Rose Farm, F.114, Le Passage, St Lawrence (yield of 13 - 30 homes);
- Samares Nurseries, St Clement (yield 100 -150 homes); and
- Longueville Nurseries, St Saviour (yield of 10 - 15 homes).
Cooke’s Rose Farm (F.114, Le Passage, St Lawrence) is not supported by the Inspectors because of its relatively poor location (relative to access to services) and poor vehicular access.
The Minister is cognisant that there was some opposition to the rezoning of Samares Nursery, Grande Route de la Cote, St Clement for Category A housing and it is not generally supported by the local community on the basis of the likely future need for glasshouses; the amount of development which has already taken place in the area; transport issues; ground conditions and potential social problems and has indicated his intent to remove it from the revised draft Island Plan. Likewise, he is also cognisant that the rezoning of Longueville Nurseries, New York Lane, St Saviour for Category A housing is not generally supported by the local community on the basis of the amount of development already accommodated within the parish; local traffic problems and the extent of local opposition and has indicated his intent to remove it from the revised draft Island Plan.
It is clear that in pursuing the removal of these two sites, then alternative provision must be made.
Potential alternative provision
Potential alternative provision has already been explored to some extent as part of the Examination in Public (EiP) process[9]. It essentially involved two alternatives.
Potential alternative provision: optimising density
The first involved increasing the density of development on remaining rezoned sites in the Plan;
- at De la Mare Nurseries, Grouville – from 25 to 37 units;
- at Field 785, St Ouen, from 15-22 units; and
- at Field 1219, Mont a L’Abbe, where the site area has also been expanded, from 20-42 units.
This provides a yield of 100 affordable homes (towards the required provision from this source, of 200 homes) and is consistent with the strategic policy objective of seeking to use land efficiently and effectively. The Inspectors’ view of this proposal was inconclusive other than to suggest that it may make the provision of family homes more difficult. In view of the fact that the initial yields were conservative, this is not considered to be problematic.
There is no specific requirement to amend the policies of the Plan to give effect to this as the Plan already encourages optimal use of these sites and the development briefs, at appendix 2 of the draft Island Plan, indicate the range of potential yields. Table 6.2: Sources of Housing Supply, of the draft Plan should, however, be updated.
Potential alternative provision: States assets
The second alternative involves the potential use of States-owned land to meet this pressing community need (over and above the extent to which it may contribute towards this need through the application of Policy H3: Affordable housing upon adoption of the Plan and its subsequent development).
It is considered that using publicly owned sites for the provision of affordable housing is an important principle. This would concentrate development further within the built up area and further protect less developed sites and require less rezoning. This is considered to be in line with the spatial strategy discussed above and is also in line with the States Strategic Plan.
The use of six States-owned sites, proposed for disposal as part of the 2010 States Business Plan, for the provision of affordable homes, has previously been considered and rejected by the States[10]. As noted during the EiP by both participants and the Inspectors, in their final report[11], there is, however, an evident inconsistency where the Island’s government is adopting a different approach to the development of its own land compared to that owned by others that is allocated for Category A housing. It is, therefore, encouraging that Jersey Property Holdings, in the States Business Plan, acknowledge that there is potential for such disposal to be made, at less than market value, where there is a policy decision or specific political direction to do so. The creation of the States of Jersey Development Company and delivery of schemes using States assets via this company will refocus this issue and the delivery of additional affordable housing via that route is expected to increase. Indeed it is important to consider the social or community value, rather than monetary value when considering the future use/disposal of States land.
If adopted as a policy, through the Island Plan, the use of States-owned land to contribute to the need for affordable homes has the advantage of being within the control of the government to bring these sites forward for development in response to an immediate and pressing need, over the first five years of the Plan period.
It is also relevant to note that comments submitted by the Council of Ministers in relation to the use of States owned land for affordable homes stated that ‘determination of land use policy is a matter for the Minister for Planning and Environment through the Island Plan’[12]. On this basis, therefore, it is legitimate for the Minister to pursue this route of provision.
Clearly, any such land would need to be appropriate in planning terms and accord with the criteria used to assess housing sites. Those sites with potential to contribute to this need that are presently part of the States property portfolio, or with the potential for disposal, include:
- Le Coin, Ann Street;
- former Jersey College for Girls site, Rouge Bouillon;
- South Hill States Offices;
and those sites that may become surplus to requirements include;
- former D’Hautree School site, St Saviour’s Hill; and
- Ambulance HQ, Rouge Bouillon.
All of these sites sit within the defined BUA and, in planning terms, strongly accord with the spatial strategy of the Plan (se set out at Policy SP1) and their development for affordable homes (in whole or in part) would also serve to potentially catalyse the residential regeneration of St Helier (as set out at Objectives BE1 and BE2).
There may also be properties within the Health and Social Services portfolio, for example, at St Saviour’s Hospital / Clinique Pinel, which could be considered. .
The Inspectors have also identified other sites (from representations made in relation to the Plan) that may have the potential to meet the need for affordable homes. They do not recommend pursuing them further at this stage, however, on the basis that it would entail delay, whilst consultation and investigation was carried out; the sites are likely to attract similar opposition to those already proposed for zoning as they are predominantly in St Clement and St Saviour; and some of them are green fields (thus contrary to Strategic Plan objectives).
The Minister has requested the Island’s Connetables identify sites that they would be willing to support to help meet the need for affordable homes in the Island.
The only response received has been one from the Connétable of St Martin relating to a site already identified under the 2002 Island Plan Policy H3: it is the connétable’s intention to seek to pursue the development of this site thought amendment of the 2002 Island Plan rather than through the Island Plan Review.
(ii) Affordable housing (as a proportion of new development) (600 homes)
The proposed introduction of a new policy to secure affordable homes as a proportion of new residential development was a controversial part of the draft Plan and was challenged strongly. The Minister indicated his intent to amend the thresholds and proportions for the operation of this policy, which has been acknowledged by the Inspectors. They have, however, proposed further modification, as follows:
- the introduction of a policy to require a proportion of new housing development to be for affordable housing (starting at 12.5% as intended by the Minister);
- that it should be introduced more gradually (not starting until 2012);
- that it should be a permanent policy (to stop people sitting on sites); and
- that the thresholds within it should be increased over a relatively short time.
Whilst the theoretical net effect of these changes is to reduce the potential yield of affordable homes over the Plan period from 600 to 550 homes, this is not considered problematic on the basis that the viability and success of the policy will require careful monitoring as a matter of course anyway, with a view to appropriate policy responses as required.
(d) Affordable housing mix
Since 2007 the Jersey economy has been through a significant economic downturn as a result of the global great recession. In terms of factors that impact on housing demand in the Island these have manifested as higher unemployment, a reduction in finance employment, reduced job security, weak earnings growth, reduced availability of credit and lower inward migration. All these factors would normally combine to lead to a general weakening in the housing market and also in particular in the demand from local residents for owner occupation: the flipside being that demand for rented and social rented housing would rise.
This matter has been raised since the publication of the initial draft Island Plan (September 2009) by the Minister for Housing, albeit that evidence to support this cannot be provided by the Housing Department. The Minister has, however, indicated his intent to reflect this shift in housing need with regard to the type and proportions of housing sought in Policy H1.
The initial draft Plan Policy H1 seeks a split of 75% Homebuy and 25% first-time buyer homes on rezoned sites This matter is addressed by the Inspectors who recommend that the penultimate paragraph of the policy be revised to include a more flexible distribution as between Jersey Homebuy, Social Rented and first time buyer housing – the proportions to be determined by the Minister in accordance with SPG.
Light industrial/ warehouse provision
Another area of potential discrepancy between the Minister’s intent to amend the Plan and the Inspectors’ recommendations is that relating to the provision of additional land to meet the need for light industrial and warehouse space.
(a) Demand
The context for this is the clear and pressing need to provide good quality light industrial and warehouse accommodation to meet both a latent demand and new requirements. As part of the Island Plan Review process, the situation was independently assessed in May 2009, when a need for 125,000 sq ft of floorspace was identified, requiring a land area of approximately 5.7 acres.
It is recognised that there has been some consolidation in the local fulfilment sector. Despite this, however, a recent review of the local situation commissioned by EDD[13] suggests that there still remains a strong demand for new, good quality light industrial and warehouse accommodation in the range of between 50,000 – 75,000 sq.ft, requiring a land area of approximately 2.3 – 3.4 acres.
It is relevant to note that the second aim of the Strategic Plan is to maintain a strong, environmentally sustainable and diverse economy: the provision and availability of premises is fundamental to this, and a role for the planning system.
(b) Supply
The draft Island Plan sought to respond to the clear evidenced-based need for new light industrial warehouse land through the extension of the existing industrial site at Thistlegrove. This will provide an area of 5.4 acres of industrial land, albeit that this already contains some of the existing operations at the site, without affecting any ‘green field’ land.
In response to representations made relative to this proposal, the Inspectors have reviewed the proposal. Their view is that whilst the location of Thistlegrove does not sit squarely with the spatial strategy of the draft Island Plan, in all other planning respects it is an entirely suitable site and its redevelopment and extension provides an opportunity to provide a development that is more orderly in character and appearance, with rationalised access arrangements and limited impact on the character of the countryside.
They also consider that there are no overriding amenity considerations relative to the residential properties in the area. Those submitting representations live approximately 150 metres from the site and the implications of the nature of development envisaged for their residential amenity is not sufficient to outweigh the proposal on planning grounds.
In light of the falling demand for space and the potential for further contraction in the fulfilment industry due to the uncertainty over the long term prospects of low value consignment relief; together with the Inspectors’ concern about the locational and access disadvantages of the Thistlegrove site (relative to the Plan’s spatial strategy) the Minister is minded to remove the proposed extension of Thistlegrove industrial estate (at Policy EIW1) from the revised draft Plan.
Alternative provision
Whilst there is limited alternative provision to meet the need for light industrial/ warehouse land over the Plan period, the Minister considers that Jersey Airport offers some opportunity, as already identified in the Plan[14]. This would remain to be the subject of assessment relative to other implications, such as traffic generation and would need to be considered, by the Minister, through the Jersey Airport Regeneration Zone masterplan.
In planning terms, Jersey Airport is better related to the existing BUA and has better connectivity to local transport infrastructure and public transport, and may provide a catalyst for the commercial development of the airport.
The Minister also considers that his proposed changes to permitted development rights for light industrial / warehouse premises – allowing a five per cent increase in floorspace without the need for express consent – may also enable the enhancement and improvement of the supply of warehouse / light industrial premises[15], further lessening the potential scale of new provision required. The current stock of light industrial warehousing is circa 1.5 million square feet (140,000 sq.m). This change could therefore see the creation of an addition 75,000 square feet (7,000 sq.m).
Summary and conclusion
On the basis of the above, the Minister for Planning and Environment has resolved to:
- endorse all those changes to be made to the initial draft Plan, and the reasoned justification for them, as set out in the schedule at appendix 1 of the associated report for use as a basis for the revised draft Island Plan;
The Minister has resolved, in particular to;
- remove the Cooke’s Rose Farm, F.114, Le Passage, St Lawrence rezoned site for Category A housing from the revised draft Island Plan (Policy H1(2));
- remove the Samares Nursery, Grande Route de la Cote, St Clement rezoned site for Category A housing from the revised draft Island Plan (Policy H1(3));
- remove the Longueville Nurseries, New York Lane, St Saviour rezoned site for Category A housing from the revised draft Island Plan (Policy H1(4));
- amend the draft Island Plan (at Policy H1) to require the use of States-owned land for the provision of at least 100 affordable homes (over and above any requirement derived from the application of Policy H3) in the first five years of the Plan;
- revise the penultimate paragraph of Policy H1 to include a more flexible distribution between social rented, Jersey Homebuy and/or first time buyer housing – with the proportionate split being developed in association the Statistics Unit on the basis of the latest evidence;
- remove the extension to Thistlegrove to provide light industrial warehouse land (at Policy EIW1) from the draft Plan.
- deal with the potential for Jersey Airport to make some provision for light industrial/ warehouse use through the Jersey Airport Regeneration Zone masterplan
The final version of the revised draft Island Plan will be brought back to the Minister for consideration and endorsement prior to lodging in the States.
Reason(s) for Decision
The Minister is required, on the basis of the evidence to date, to prepare and lodge a revised draft Island Plan for consideration and debate in the States. In so doing, the Minister is required to publish an indication of the differences between the initial draft Island Plan and the revised draft Island Plan, with a reasoned justification for each difference.
Resource implications
There are no resource implications for the Minister for Planning and Environment and the Department of the Environment arising from this decision.
There are wider resource implications for landowners (including the States) and developers resulting from the planning framework that the Island Plan will impose once adopted.
Action Required
- publish an indication of the differences between the initial draft Island Plan and the revised draft Island Plan, with a reasoned justification for each difference;
- publish a justification as to why the Minister has chosen not to accept any recommendations in the Inspectors’ Report;
- prepare a revised draft Island Plan, on the basis of the schedule approved by the Minister,
- bring back to the Minister, a revised draft Island Plan, for consideration and approval, prior to lodging in the States
Written by: Andrew Scate: Chief Executive Officer
Attachments:
- Revised Draft Island Plan: Amendments Schedule (March 2011)
File ref: 8/52
Date: 08 March 2011
gov.je