Housing - it's a numbers game

One of the biggest challenges that Bob & I face in the next few months is our response to the developing Horsham District Local Plan.  This has already been out to public consultation (the  'Regulation 18' stage, now closed) and much work is being done by the officers (HDC employees) to reflect the massive number of comments.  

Some aspects of the current local plan (Horsham District Planning Framework 2015- 2020), in particular the housebuilding target ('800 homes per year'), cease to be valid by the end of this November (basically those that contradict the current National Planning Policy Framework), although many of the policies remain.  This housing target was calculated from a local analysis of the housing need to 'allow for increases in population, support economic growth, and also to support the wider economy of the Gatwick Diamond and beyond'.

The new minimum for housebuilding (as calculated by the now mandatory central government 'standard method') will be 920pa, plus 5%, plus an estimated 200 to 400 from our 'duty to cooperate' with surrounding local authorities that are 'running out of room to build'.  To put this in context, there were just over 55,000 households in Horsham District at the time of the last (2011) census; roughly 60,000 now.  If we assume a figure of 1200 per annum, the next decade would see an additional 12,000 dwellings built - an increase of 20% - against an Office for National Statistics (ONS) prediction of 12.5% population growth!

Does that sound bad?  Well how does 1715 dwellings pa grab you?  That's the number that the so-called 'mutant algorithm' contained in the government's 'Changes to the current planning system' consultation (now closed) would require.  I've been told that these changes are subject to a ministerial decision, not a parliamentary debate, although many local MP's have spoken against the proposed changes.  A decision is expected in December.

All this leaves Horsham DC with a bit of a problem, to put it mildly!  The current majority approach appears to be to get the current draft plan, with its already excessive (in my view) numbers submitted to external examination by March 2021, which should 'protect' it from the proposed changes to the planning system numbers for 3 years (provided it passes examination and is subsequently adopted by HDC).  Having no plan at all does not sound a sensible way to go, if HDC is to retain any control over development, as it would lead to 'planning by appeal' with the council constantly on the back foot, with no overriding plan to draw on. 

Perhaps what we really need is for us all to check the back of our wardrobes for a 'Land in Nania' site, with infinite capacity...  Do let us know if you find one!  We'd also welcome more constructive suggestions!  

Garden Survey

We're happy to support Greening Steyning's garden survey, which is part of the 2030 Vision project.

So if you live in the Beeding, Bramber and Steyning area, please take part in the survey to enable the project to develop 'ways of turning all your gardens, all our streets into rich wildlife areas which are good not just for biodiversity but for everyone who lives there'.

Changes to the Planning System

Mike and I have had several emails from members of the Wildlife Trusts expressing concerns about the Government's White Paper on the Planning System.  Last week we attended a meeting at which councillors had a chance to comment on the Council's response to the Consultation before it closed.  Among the issues raised were the impact the proposals would have on wildlife and biodiversity, lack of mention of Green Spaces and biodiversity in the proposals for 'Growth' and 'Renewal' areas.  The proposals would also undermine local democratic input into the planning process.  Mike and I raised these points in our comments.

The White Paper is full of half-baked ideas, not just restricted to wildlife and biodiversity.  One of the underlying assumptions is that the failure to build enough houses is due to Local Authorities' management of the planning system.  In fact their are over one million houses which have approval, but have not been built yet.  HDC's response is full of hard-hitting, constructive criticism.  I hope the Governmant takes notice.  HDC has a good record of an efficient planning department and has over- delivered on its housing target.  Perhaps the Government will take this into account and give extra weight to their comments..

HDC's response has a number of references to 'Green' issues.  For instances in response to the question: 'What are the top three priorities for planning in your area? ' No.2 is Addressing Climate Change, No.3 is Protecting and Enhancing biodiversity.  Wildlife, biodiversity and green space come up in all the relevant responses.  

If you want to see the full response you can find it on HDC's website by following this link: HDC reponse to Planning White Paper

Black Lives Matter

As we hope all realise, the Green Party is a party for social justice: especially relevant with the prospect of climate change having its largest impact on the poorest in society.  As part of that search for justice, it stands with the Black Lives Matter movement.

In response to online racial harassment of a local Facebook group, Mike recent proposed a motion that 'Horsham District Council takes note of the Black Lives Matter protests within the district earlier this year.  In response, council resolves to tackle bias, racism or discrimination wherever we find it, and to continue to work with the community and Sussex police to ensure that policing in the county is proportionate and fair to all residents.'  

This was summarily amended by the relevant cabinet member to read: 'Horsham District Council notes the Black Lives Matter protests that have take place recently.  We have long condemned racism, along with all other forms of discrimination on grounds of gender, religious belief, sexual orientation and other protected characteristics that are in Section 4 of the 2010 equality act. This council requires that all members adhere to that non-discrimination policy in Section 3.2 of the members' code of conduct and we will continue to work with partner agencies, including Sussex police, to meet these requirements.' and this motion was passed, but not without some dissent regarding dilution of the original message.

As an administrative / technical error* resulted in Mike not be able to speak in support of his motion before the amendment was proposed, his text follows: 

Firstly, I must comment on the timing of this motion, which I had originally planned for the, subsequently cancelled, September council meeting.  Fortuitously, we are now in Black History Month, so the proposed motion possibly has more relevance, given the historical repression and exploitation of black lives – something touched on in the recent museum press release regarding Horsham's Black History.  In particular, the linked blog by Malcolm Linfield about the life of Jomo Kenyatta is particularly edifying.  I also note that this is Hate Crime Awareness week!

Secondly, I must thank the cabinet member for Community Matters and Wellbeing for her reply to my constituent in Upper Beeding who initially contacted me on this subject.  I look forward to receiving progress reports from the cabinet member regarding the various actions she outlined in her reply.

In proposing this motion, I am well aware of the duties of this council under the Equality Act 2010.  However, the public discourse around the recent BLM protests earlier this year made it abundantly clear that racism, both blatant and more subtle, still persist throughout UK society.  A recent local example, which led to me being contacted, was the posting of aggressive racist comments on the Steyning Stand Up To Racism group's Facebook page after they organised a very successful Black Lives Matter protest. The sheer volume of the hatred expressed resulted in the need for the group to remove any reference to what, I am informed, was a positive and well attended event.

Members may be wondering why I make specific mention of Sussex police.  This is in response to the recent police data indicating that people of Black ethnicity were significantly more likely to be subject to a 'stop and search' than those regarded as White.  Clearly it is important that Sussex police are challenged about these statistics, but I am encouraged by their awareness of, and engagement with, Hate Crime Awareness week.

So this motion is both a 'stake in the ground' and a reminder to all that Black Lives do Matter, and I earnestly hope that members will support it. 

* meetings are held via Zoom: HDC is currently trying hybrid meetings, which have exposed communications difficulties between those at the physical meeting similar to those experienced virtually when all microphones are unmuted...

Horsham DC and the Climate Emergency

One year after the council took note of the Climate Emergency, Mike asked the Leader "What changes have been made to the council's structure in response to the climate emergency recognised by this council 12 months ago?" (CO/15).  

Although welcome steps are being taken, the Green councillors consider that community engagement, as well as a more aggressive approach to its own Scope 3 emissions (effectively those contracted out) will be required, especially as the latter makes up around 90% of HDC's carbon footprint.  

They will be looking for ways to expand the excellent work of organisations such as the South East Climate Alliance, Sussex Green Living and Steyning, Bramber and Beeding's own Greening Steyning, with its 2030 project.  Needless to say, the financial restrictions resulting from the ongoing Co-19 pandemic will not make this community engagement any easier, although the increased use of online discussions may facilitate lower cost engagement models.

 

Passivhaus

I expect that many reading this blog will be aware of Passivhaus design buildings.  In a nutshell, a Passiv house will generally have excellent fabric insulation, be very well sealed with mechanical ventilation incorporating heat recovery (MVHR), and be optimised to capture winter solar energy, but shield in summer, to reduce overheating (likely to be an increasing problem in the years ahead). 

Current, and currently proposed, UK building standards are still way behind Passivhaus, but there are shining examples where councils have taken the initiative to show how it should be done eg Goldsmith Street in Norwich.  With this in mind, in July 2020 Mike proposed a motion requiring all dwellings developed by the council owned Horsham District Homes Ltd to be built to Passivhaus standards (Item CO/18).  It came as no surprise the Tory majority did not approve, mostly on the grounds of additional cost, despite the potential future cost savings from significantly lower heating bills, not to mention the future fabric improvements that will be needed to meet the 2050 UK zero carbon target.

(It should be noted that the UK's EPC rating methodology is a cost based assessment, which does not necessarily encourage best practice in building fabrics.  It can also be shown that achieving carbon neutrality by heating with renewable energy isn't going to work unless the fabric efficiency of all UK housing is dramatically improved, because of the number of poor quality dwellings that require improvement.  So why are sub-optimal dwellings still being approved?)

Year One

At our initial annual council meeting, Bob was confirmed as a member of:

• Planning South committee
• Leisure and Culture policy development advisory group (PDAG)

and Mike joined:

• Planning South committee
• Licensing committee
• Overview and Scrutiny committee
• Environment, Waste, Recycling and Cleansing PDAG

We were thrown in at the deep end with our first 'serious' council meeting which included a well publicised motion regarding the climate emergency (proposed by the LibDems, seconded by Mike - CO/20).  The presence of a large number of SECA members offered moral support but increased stomach butterflies!  As the minutes show, this motion was diluted by a Tory amendment, but nevertheless serves as a reminder to all at HDC.

Further actions during the first year included:

• pushing the council to go beyond current building regulations in regard to the fabric of new dwellings (CO/35) 
• objecting to the council's support of the 'magenta' route for the proposed Arundel by-pass, and seconding a LibDem motion around sustainable transport provision, should a by-pass be built (CO/46)
• welcoming the council's financial commitments to the Wilder Horsham project and carbon footprinting, including potential support for community groups and parishes (CO/53)

and then the Covid-19 pandemic hit home, with emergency measures to allow remote meetings implemented (by Zoom).

From our Green perspective, this has the distinct advantages of removing the need to travel to Horsham for meetings - a process that highlighted the limited public transport provision (shame on you, Dr Beeching) - but, more importantly, meant that remote public access was now feasible from anywhere, with meetings streamed live on YouTube and available for subsequent scrutiny, (audio recordings have been available for some time).

It is possible for members of the public to speak at meetings (para 4a.19 of the constitution), provided the topic is relevant to the published agenda, and the necessary 2 working days notice is given to democratic services.  

At this point, it's worth highlighting that the easiest way to find out what meetings are going on is to use the online calendar: clicking on a meeting will take you to the published information.