Fears affordable housing delivery in Worthing could drop under planning reforms

Sweeping changes to the planning system would leave West Sussex having to build an extra 2,234 homes each year.
Boris Johnson at a building site last week promoting the government's new planning reforms (Photo by Phil Noble - WPA Pool/Getty Images)Boris Johnson at a building site last week promoting the government's new planning reforms (Photo by Phil Noble - WPA Pool/Getty Images)
Boris Johnson at a building site last week promoting the government's new planning reforms (Photo by Phil Noble - WPA Pool/Getty Images)

Councils across the county are currently trawling through the details of the government’s ‘planning for the future’ White Paper as well as preparing their responses for a second consultation on changes to planning policy and regulations.

Those changes include altering the way housing figures are calculated – replacing the current local housing need with local housing requirements, essentially adding 300,000 homes per year to the nationwide figures.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Figures from planning and development consultancy Lichfields show how the changes would affect West Sussex councils.

Adur District Council’s housing requirement would rise from 248 per year to 326.

Only Worthing Borough Council’s figures would fall – from 885 per year to 871.

These are both far higher than the average delivery over the past three years in Worthing which stands at 374.

Adur’s three-year average figure is just 97.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The White Paper has been described as ‘vague, damaging and ineffectual’ by The Campaign to Protect Rural England – Sussex.

The charity warned the proposals ‘could hand thousands of acres of rural Sussex over to developers who will be able to build without going through the planning process’.

Meanwhile writing this week, the Rt Revd Dr Martin Warner, Bishop of Chichester, argued that the drive to build new houses is something to be welcomed, but not at any price.

He said: “We need good new neighbourhoods, not just lots of new houses.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

He felt these neighbourhoods not only had to contribute to a reduction in our carbon footprint, but also develop their own character of diversity and have architecture that makes a statement about dignity and human achievement.

The White Paper divides land into three categories – growth, renewal and protected.

In growth areas, outline permission would be automatically given for developments specified in a council’s local plan; renewal areas would be seen as suitable for some development; and protected areas would see development restricted.

Councils would also be able to set aside land in ‘growth’ areas for self-built and custom-built homes.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The proposed changes brought a mixed reaction from West Sussex councillors.

Affordable housing was a major point of concern for Worthing Borough Council’s Labour group.

In a group statement, Jim Deen said the White Paper would not ‘cut red tape’ as declared by housing secretary Robert Jenrick, but would instead ‘cut local councils out of decision making’.

Calling the paper ‘a charter for developers’, Mr Deen said the ‘temporary’ move not to require affordable housing to be included in developments of up to 50 homes, would have a huge impact on Worthing.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Councillors also took umbrage with the suggestion that the planning system was a barrier to housebuilding.

Adur District Council’s Labour group leader Lee Cowen said 90 per cent of local planning applications were granted and that delays could be put down to a lack of resources.

His figures were supported by James Jamieson, chairman of the Local Government Association, who said more than a million homes given permission in the last decade had yet to be built.

Mr Cowen said there was no doubt the planning system needed reforming but added: “It’s very disappointing that the government is using the pandemic as an excuse to take town planning decisions away from local democratic accountability in favour of a further centralisation of power.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The proposed changes will provoke plenty of debate in the corridors of Westminster over the next few months.

Tim Loughton, East Worthing and Shoreham MP, said: “This is a consultation exercise and it is important that local people and everyone interested in the local community should get involved. It is vital that we get a planning system that works for everyone and all too often at the moment people feel disenfranchised from the planning process, councils feel powerless on big decisions that can be appealed against them and developers are distant from the impact on local communities.

“Everyone needs greater certainty and areas that we need to keep special need tougher protection and where there are opportunities to build much needed affordable homes we need to get on with it and make sure that the infrastructure can bear it.”

Meanwhile Worthing West MP Sir Peter Bottomley, said that unless the government could change the geography of the borough between the national park and coast it was ‘squeezed’. He described how the borough council had approved development west of Durrington, at Teville Gate, at the former Splashpoint site, with plans to develop at Union Place, adding: “No one can accuse Worthing of not trying.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Sir Peter has asked the minister to visit the town and tell them whether any of the unsuccessful appeals against planning refusals would have been different under his new proposals.

He wanted to see more affordable homes for all, and as a long-standing campaigner for leasehold reform, he expressed disquiet at plans to allow freeholders to build above their properties without going through the normal planning process.

Sir Peter added: “There are some parts of the government’s proposals which are all right. In my view they should all be all right, but I think at the moment some are all wrong.”

Andrew Griffith, MP for Arundel and South Downs, said: “There are some welcome initiatives such as the focus on building upon brownfield land, a locally set design code for new dwellings, better energy efficient standards and requirement to enhance bio-diversity.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“Post Covid, I want to see us building ‘up not out’ – attractive homes in existing towns and cities and converting the vast amount of now unused offices to dwellings in those areas where the infrastructure already exists - not developments on the unspoilt green fields of West Sussex such as those proposed at Mayfields, Adversane and West Grinstead that would only be accessible by motor car.”

A message from the Editor, Gary Shipton:

In order for us to continue to provide high quality and trusted local news, I am asking you to please purchase a copy of our newspapers.

With the coronavirus lockdown having a major impact on many of our local valued advertisers - and consequently the advertising that we receive - we are more reliant than ever on you helping us to provide you with news and information by buying a copy of our newspapers.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Our journalists are highly trained and our content is independently regulated by IPSO to some of the most rigorous standards in the world. But being your eyes and ears comes at a price. So we need your support more than ever to buy our newspapers during this crisis.

Stay safe, and best wishes.