Minutes:
With reference to Minute No. 10 (Matters Arising) and with particular reference to the award of £3.690 million to Telford and Wrekin Council to assist in bringing forward approximately 540 housing units across that area, Gareth Bradford reported that this matter had been considered and approved at the meeting of the Investment Board held on 30 October 2017 having received a positive recommendation from the Investment Advisory Group. He outlined the membership of the Investment Advisory Group which included Officers from respective local authorities and Local Enterprise Partnerships. He reminded the Board that the decision had been made prior to the formation of the WMCA housing and Regeneration Directorate. He explained that Telford and Wrekin Council role in meeting the housing shortfall in the Greater Birmingham Housing Market Area had not been referenced in the report to the Investment Board.
Going forward, he suggested that all reports considered by the Investment Board which included a housing provision element should first be considered by the Housing and Regeneration Directorate and that a discussion be commenced with Telford and Wrekin Council on its ability to draw down the allocated funding if it was not prepared to play an active and supporting role in the delivery of the housing shortfall in the Greater Birmingham Housing Market Area, the Housing Deal and the Housing Delivery Plan. He advised that all housing units provided should be included in both the Housing Deal, Strategic Economic Plan and the Industrial Strategy and that it was imperative that all partners receiving financial support should play their respective roles.
The Chair advised that in his view if Telford and Wrekin Council was not willing to co-operate in achieving the targets of this Board (and the WMCA) the decision of the Investment Board should be revisited. A further discussion on this matter could be required in the event that Telford and Wrekin Council was not willing to co-operate the decision would be revisited with the grant being reclaimed and rewarded elsewhere as deemed appropriate. Gareth Bradford advised that this could require the Commissioning Framework to be revisited. The Chair requested that a report be submitted to a future meeting on the drawdown of the funding allocated to Telford and Wrekin Council.
Councillor David Humphrey commented that the North Warwickshire Borough Council did not have a large number of brownfield sites but a number of small sites and enquired as to the possibility of a contribution towards funding of development of such sites. He had been advised previously that this issue had been raised with Homes England (formerly the Housing Communities Agency) but had not progressed. The Chair suggested that the details of any such sites be forwarded to Gareth Bradford for consideration. He commented that the recent revisions to the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) had done little to assist the development of such sites but that asking developers to offer commuted sums in lieu of the provision of affordable and/or social housing would have been preferable.
Gareth Bradford suggested that he bring forward a report on the development of a ‘Small Sites Fund’ targeted at assisting small builders to develop such sites. He stressed the need to maintain and increase the pace of housing supply and that the development of small sites could play a significant contribution in such an aim. He reminded the Board that the NPPF was a policy statement and not a statutory requirement with the WMCA being able to advocate an alternative approach to fulfilling the aims.
Councillor Ian Courts counselled caution inasmuch as small sites were often more difficult and expensive to develop. He suggested that there was also a need to consider existing or former retail sites in town centres. He supported the views expressed earlier in the meeting with regard to the award of funding to Telford and Wrekin Council and the role of this Board in determining future allocations. He stressed that outcomes and delivery were pre-requisites.
Councillor Peter Bilson commented that it was the role of this Board to deliver additional housing units across the region and that any decisions regarding provision of additional housing units should be considered by this Board. He advised that whilst he supported the concept of the development of a ‘Small Sites Fund’ that this should not be to the prejudice of existing commitments.
Councillor David Humphrey commented that a number of his constituents questioned the purpose and benefits of North Warwickshire being a Non-Constituent member of the WMCA on the basis of the benefits the Borough derived through such membership and financial contributions. On that basis he was of the opinion that if Telford and Wrekin Council was unwilling to support the aims of the WMCA it should be required to refund any grants received. The Chair emphasised the important role the Non-Constituent Authorities had in the work of the WMCA.
Gareth Bradford stressed the need for the maximum utilisation of the available resources provided by HM Government, the importance of an expeditious process and the need for a clear and understandable policy for the deployment of resources. He commented that if this could be achieved the WMCA would be in a good position to lever in additional resources from HM Government. He undertook to submit a report to the next meeting on this issue.
Councillor Bill Gavin asked as to the opportunity to package a number of small sites together for small developers to consider. The Chair commented that this was possible if the sites were in the same ownership but, if not, could be problematic to deliver. He outlined the use of the ‘New Homes Bonus’ at Walsall MBC to provide loans to small developers to acquire small sites. He requested that a report be submitted to the next meeting of this Board on the establishment of a ‘Small Sites Fund’ with the report being circulated in advance for comments. Councillor Ian Courts supported the concept of packaging small sites together especially if this be made of sites which were a mix of easy and difficult to develop sites. The Chair commented that a small developer could manage such a proposal with some assistance.
Gareth Bradford reported that the Housing and Land Team had focussed on the concept of packaging sites and assured the Board that this was a fundamental part of the work of the Team. He advised that to assist small developers there was a need to cut through the bureaucracy associated with seeking planning permission with one planning application being submitted for several sites. He emphasised the need to make optimum use of all sites including those which were contaminated and required remediation measures. He stressed the need for local authorities to identify sites and for the WMCA to respond quickly. Roy Stokes commented on the need to include and address difficult sites.
Councillor David Humphreys referred to the delays associated with the redevelopment of certain redundant premises and gave the example of former public houses being listed as ‘Assets of Community Value’ which could lead to a delay of 12 months in development commencing. The Chair commented that it was for this Board to respond to such challenges and to expedite development whenever possible. Gareth Bradford suggested that it was part of his role to seek HM Government assistance in addressing problems associated with empty former public houses and redundant petrol stations in the Green Belt and/or countryside and that some form of dispensation from planning guidelines was required. Councillor Ian Courts commented that the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) contained several references to the use of derelict land and buildings and there was a need for the rules to be complied consistently across the region.
Gareth Bradford reported that the Housing Deal would not have been achieved without negotiation on various points and stressed the need to improve delivery in order to encourage HM Government to change the principles and rules to assist in further delivery. A definition of ‘social housing’ and ‘affordable housing’ was required. He challenged the Board to identify three or four matters which required the assistance from HM Government to aid delivery by the WMCA. He commented that changes to national guidelines was not necessary but that the interpretation of those guidelines could be flexibly applied. He undertook to submit a report on this matter to the next meeting of the Board.
Councillor Ian Courts reminded the Board that planning was an issue for which the local authorities were responsible. He advised that Solihull MBC was about to commence a refresh of its ‘Brownfield Register’ and the need to identify ownership details at an early stage. He suggested that a simple sifting process was required to identify developable land.
Councillor Peter Bilson commented that the delivery of the implementation phase of both the Housing Deal and the Housing Investment Fund (HIF) was crucial but that addressing issues on the corridors were equally important. He requested that details of the funding regime and timelines be reported to a future meeting of the Board.
Gareth Bradford advised that HM Government had identified ‘up to £100 million’ of funding but that payments against the Housing Deal were phased against delivery. He reported that he was negotiating for payment through a Section 31 grant which was non-refundable. He aimed for payment of 25% of the money in October 2018 for delivery of 25% of the housing units. Once these units were delivered a claim could be made for the second 25% and so on. Allocation of funding would be at the discretion of the WMCA. Previously, monies allocated in the Devolution Deal had not been spent and this was damaging to the reputation of the region. If allocated funds were used it was likely to realise the allocation of additional funds. He emphasised that it was not practical for the allocation of the £100 million to be agreed in advance of receipt. This view was supported by Councillor Ian Courts who commented that the funding could not be attached to specific sites at this point. Gareth Bradford advised that some sites would be identified especially those with the benefit of planning permission but once the funds were released it would be for this Board to determine on how it was allocated.
Roy Stokes encouraged the Board to consider building in a sustainable manner with due consideration being given to those sites where ‘Sustainable Drainage Systems’ could be used and/or which were carbon friendly. These developments could be used to demonstrate the work of the Board. Gareth Bradford reminded the Board that these issues were part of its founding principles.
Councillor David Humphreys commented that the developers controlled the release of developable land without recourse to the five year supply. Gareth Bradford responded that the five year supply position could be addressed through building out small sites quickly and that the powers of the WMCA and local authorities could be used to increase build out rates.
Councillor Peter Butlin suggested that the approach needed to be ‘process light’ and that there was no need to consider sites which were moderately difficult to develop at this point and with very difficult to develop sites being left until much later in the exercise. He advised that he supported the creation of a ‘Small Sites Fund’ and that monies currently held for remediation purposes could be used for its establishment. Additionally, HM Government should be approached for assistance in removing blockages to development.
Councillor Ian Courts acknowledged the difficulties with developers ‘land banking’ but commented that the creation of the ‘Help to Buy’ scheme had slowed down development in the Solihull area. Gareth Bradford commented on the need to commence a dialogue at Chief Executive level with those builders operating across the WMCA area and that the dialogue refer to issues such as build out rates, affordability and quality of design and construction.
Councillor Daren Pemberton reported on an exercise which was underway at Stratford on Avon District Council to attempt to understand the commonalities and differences between builders operating in the area. Once an understanding of their methods of operation had been established a working relationship and understanding was easier to build. Gareth Bradford commented that those who did not share the aims and ambitions of the WMCA would not benefit from funding. Councillor Daren Pemberton suggested that a regional view was required with regard to viability and housing mix. A corporate view was also required rather than a local view and information sharing between partners would be paramount.
Resolved:
1. That all reports to the Investment Board including reference to provision of housing units be considered by the Housing and Land Team in the first instance;
2. That the funds allocated to Telford and Wrekin Council towards the provision of housing units be subject to such units being included in the numbers required by the Housing Deal/Strategic Economic Plan/Industrial Strategy as appropriate and contributing to the shortfall in the Birmingham Housing Market Area;
3. That a report be submitted to the next meeting of this Board on the details of drawdown of funds to date by Telford and Wrekin Council as referred to above and on proposals for the use of remaining funds;
4. That a report be submitted to the next meeting of this Board on the establishment of a ‘Small Sites Fund’ targeted at small builders with the report being circulated in advance for comments;
5. That a report be submitted to the next meeting of this Board on a clear criteria for deployment of resources in order to lever in further investment from HM Government to assist in the delivery of additional units;
6. That a report be submitted to the next meeting of this Board on opportunities to interpret guidelines and rules in such a way as to assist in the delivery of additional units;
7. That a report be submitted to the next meeting of this Board detailing the funding regimes and timelines for the various workstreams.