MAIN ISSUES REPORT STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOPS

MAIN ISSUES REPORT STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOPS
DELIVERING HOUSING

27 APRIL 2011 DG ONE, DUMFRIES

Name Organisation
Stephen McAloon Scottish Water
Ian Anderson SNH
Ken Asher Asher Associates
Jamie Carruthers Scottish Rural Property and Business
Association
Colin Connell Persimmon Homes
Jamie Dent Dumfries and Galloway Small Communities
Housing Trust
John Edgar Member of public
Alex Haddow Dumfries and Galloway Housing Partnership
Sue Hudson Sue Hudson Planning
Rachel Lightfoot Story Homes
Debbie Livingstone JMP
Blair Melville Homes for Scotland
Shirley Prahms Resident
James Shirazi Dumfries and Galloway Housing Partnership
Bob Taylor Taylor and Hardy planning consultants
Brian Walker Hartfell Homes
Laurence Wilson Laurence T. Wilson Planning and Development
John Lynch Dumfries and Galloway Council, Housing
Services
Jim O’Neill Dumfries and Galloway Council, Housing
Services
John Deady Dumfries and Galloway Council, Development
Planning
Andrew Maxwell Dumfries and Galloway Council, Development
Planning
Christine Whittle Dumfries and Galloway Council, Development
Planning

Acronyms used in the following text:
HNDA: Housing Need and Demand Assessment
LHS: Local Housing Strategy
HMA: Housing Market Area

Questions following presentation

Q. Are the LHS housing supply targets straight out of the HNDA or are they adjusted?
A. Adjusted. Scottish Government advises that shouldn’t just take figures as read. Looked

at management and intervention methods first (e.g. allocation policies/ adapting existing

stock) and amended figures accordingly.

Looked at whether the “need” outlined for each HMA was actually deliverable. For example,
in some areas such as Eskdale, much of the land is physically constrained and could not
accommodate the housing targets. Therefore targets were shifted to other areas where they
could be delivered and where they fitted better with strategic objectives (e.g. to support
Dumfries as regional capital).
This is open to discussion and welcome comments on whether this approach is right.

Comment: it would be better if this process was set out in a form that people could
understand.
A. Agree and this will be explained better in the final LHS?

Q. Can you give an update on the situation with Scottish Water?
A. Same as now: if land is allocated, Scottish Water will strive to accommodate accordingly
with upgrades etc. Introduced reasonable cost contribution: Scottish Water will pay for some
but also expect money from developer. Will attempt to deal with constrained areas and add
any work required to the Growth Programme but must meet 5 criteria to be eligible.

Q. Are you taking into consideration future planning for the elderly?
A. When providing affordable housing, all RSLs are being asked to provide 20% amenity
housing (primarily for older people). Fully aware of issue of ageing population and need to
further develop this in the LHS.

Q. Question on division between market and affordable housing: understand that more
housing is required in the lower quartiles while there is a surplus in the higher quartiles. How
is this going to be resolved in spatial terms?
A. This is most acute in Dumfries HMA where there is oversupply of the more expensive
homes. Place-making will help to address this e.g. higher densities will supply a larger
proportion of smaller units which should be more affordable to those on lower incomes.
Masterplanning of larger sites e.g. Ladyfield should also help where a range of housing types
and sizes will be planned.

Q. So as well as providing affordable housing, there is also a requirement for smaller houses
on sites?
A. Yes, will need to work with housing providers on this.

Comment: Difficulty with affordable housing is that housebuilders feel that they are providing
houses in the lower quartile that should be affordable but these might not be seen acceptable
to meet affordability standards. If have to have a requirement for lower quartile houses on
top of requirements for affordable housing, this would be difficult for developers.
A. Affordability can also be met through provision of smaller houses. We need a broader
definition of affordability and are open to suggestions. There shouldn’t be a different
approach by housing and planning.

Q. Affordable housing requirements may work on larger sites but what about in villages
where maybe only 3 or 4 houses are being developed at a time? Not all sites lend
themselves to affordable housing – would off-site provision be a better idea? Could this be
part of the tailored approach to different areas?
A. We are open to this and have to be flexible. Hoping to adopt an approach that finds
different solutions for different developments. Acknowledge that 40% requirement in
Stewartry is very high (this was a direction interpretation of the HNDA figures). We know that
at national level there is an understanding that we shouldn’t make unrealistic demands of
developers (letter from Scottish Government Chief Planner to Planning Authorities).

Comment: having fixed percentages does make solutions difficult at a small scale.
Requirement needs to be practical and achievable. Issue with commuted sums is that the

money could end up going to a settlement or area some distance away from the original
development.
Advisable to explore idea of Rural Exceptions policy such as that used in England.

Feedback from break-out sessions

Group 1
Facilitators: Christine Whittle / Jim O’Neill
Ken Asher
Jamie Carruthers
Colin Connell
Rachel Lightfoot
James Shirazi
Bob Taylor
Brian Walker
Laurence Wilson

How much housing is needed and where
Importance of providing housing audit information before finalising LDP. Consultees need
to know what the current situation is before they can make informed comments.
Housing Audits need to be subject to public consultation.
Need to consider capacity of existing sites before allocating new ones.
Sites can be very large e.g. Marchfield but developers will only build what they can sell.
Market dictates the build rate.
Some places have a good demand for housing but there aren’t enough sites allocated.
Dumfries is largest HMA – will Dumfries town just take all the allocation for the whole
HMA? How are the proportions split between regional capital / district and local centres in
this HMA? (DGC response: Dumfries HMA has much higher target that anywhere else in
the first place so although the regional capital is getting a large allocation, there will still be
ample allocation for the smaller settlements).
Windfall sites: MIR states that it is assumed that 15% of housing target will be met from
windfall sites – at what point will this will added to the overall calculation when allocating
land for the different categories of settlements?
To cope with ageing population, will you encourage smaller properties? (DGC reponse:
Yes but wouldn’t want to encourage “retirement villages” as such and not building one-
bedroom properties (minimum is two bedroom). Better to build houses that are flexible
and can be adapted in the future for different needs. Working with NHS to help meet
needs that don’t require specific housing types e.g. telecare. This is more difficult in more
remote rural areas, this is why spatial strategy concentrates new development in places
that have existing services and facilities.
General consensus that proposed spatial strategy is a good approach – good to link
housing with employment opportunities.
Success of policies for sites outwith the 49 settlements completely dependent on the
criteria. Need to consult on this before the wording is drawn up for the Proposed Plan –
will there will an interim stage before the published document where wording is released
for discussion?
Mixed use sites: larger housebuilders are struggling to achieve genuine mixed use sites.
Often the business / commercial units are left empty. The onus should not be on the
housebuilder to provide anything but houses. Need to consider market reality not apply
standards based on aspirations. (DGC response: there won’t be a rigid requirement to
provide a certain percentage of business units but mixed use development should be
considered early on in the process. Need to strike a balance between creating large
peripheral housing sites with no services and the market viability of providing non-
residential facilities).

Southern by-pass: this should be included in the discussion on different options for
Dumfries. Although acknowledged that no funding secured, it is unreasonable not to take
account of the possibility of this happening in a strategic planning document.

Affordable housing
LHS needs to set out clearly how supply targets were developed and what justification
was used.
Acknowledged that 40% requirement in the Stewartry is a heavy burden on developers.
However, this came about as HNDA showed that Stewartry had highest house prices in
D&G, holiday homes, affluent inward migration etc. has reduced affordability for locals.
Want to see flexible approach that takes economic viability into account. Sometimes
affordability can be provided through design rather than subsidy e.g. by just building
smaller houses which are naturally cheaper rather than specific “affordable” houses.
However, some discussion that affordable housing shouldn’t always be small – there is a
need for larger, family homes.
Will affordable housing targets be broken down into specific sectors e.g. percentage of
shared equity, mid-rent houses, social rented and so on.
It is proposed that some sites will be specifically allocated for affordable housing.
Need to consider self-build plots as part of affordable housing mix.

Housing in the Countryside
Need to consider “exceptions policy” approach.
Typology of rural areas is based on national circumstances that aren’t appropriate – need
to have D&G specific typology.
Need to encourage houses that are better quality in design and sustainability terms and
be more flexible in allowing these.
Development Planning should be working closely with Development Management to
prepare appropriate criteria.

Housing in Villages
Support for not having inset maps for all settlements, only those classified as “district” and
“local” centres (and Dumfries).
Getting the policy criteria right is crucial.
Need to consider landward sites when making allocations and dividing up housing targets.
Monitoring and review needs to be built into the policy development process.

Group 2
Facilitators: Andrew Maxwell, John Deady
Stephen McAloon
Ian Anderson
Jamie Dent
John Edgar
Alex Haddow
Sue Hudson
Debbie Livingstone
Blair Melville
Shirley Prahms
John Lynch

How much housing is needed and where
Spatial strategy – this is how we propose to deliver development across the region.
How do we know if land will actually be developed?
o Effective
o Generous range of sites

o Criteria based policy
Villages to get 10% of allocation.
LHS (achieved via criteria based policy).
Flexibility needed rather than rigid approach to allocations i.e. 70% (to District Centres) /
20% (to Local Centres) / 10% (to villages).
What assessment has been made from an environmental perspective of the adjustments
made from HNDA to reaching housing supply targets? Will this be addressed in the SEA
for the LHS?
LHS does acknowledge key constraints e.g. flood risk in Langholm vs Dumfries HMA
which has a broader range of settlements.
Will be a strategic approach
LHS methodology will be outlined.
Can planning system stimulate village growth.
Develop services – climate change can influence this.
Need to have a balanced community in terms of housing range.
Planning authority should not micro-manage communities. Therefore support criteria
based policy approach.
Housing Land Audit – get smaller scale builders and local planning agents involved to
improve quality of response?

Affordable housing
Current 25% requirement for affordable housing is realistic limit – 40% is not deliverable.
Experience in East Dunbartonshire showed that when this was applied it delivered no
affordable housing and the approach had to be modified.
Need to define what may constitute a contribution / percentage of site and commuted
sums.
Scottish Government funding for housing has gone from £650 million down to £450 million
Scottish Government funding in last two years.
Rural affordable housing – concerns over percentage allocation that works on the ground /
in practice. If requirement is 10%, it does not work for a site of 4 units.
Source of funding usually came from landowner / land value. That is how affordable
housing is funded. It is not the developer who pays.

Housing in the Countryside
Need innovative approach – sensitive to different needs.
Criteria interesting and other good ideas welcome.
Energy efficiency – low carbon homes, this needs a lot of policy / guidelines to be set in
place.
Climate change: what can local authority actually deliver / achieve – must then work with
limitations. How will solar panels on listed building be dealt with? Some of the wider
issues for small scale renewable will be addressed through permitted development.
Smallholdings – new concept is needed to support genuine groups wishing to start
smallholdings.

Place making
There is a need for a culture change to ensure all aspects of Council policy and advice are
consistent with Designing Streets.
Designing Streets policy conflicts with Roads policy.
Policy does work – developers keen to meet requirements.
Signs of change in terms of design. Some examples of Designing Streets approach are
emerging e.g. Canonbie.
Masterplanning – which is usually done by landowners who consult with the planning
authority. Local Authority have provided development briefs to shape schemes.

Placemaking must reflect natural heritage e.g. landscape impact, wildlife corridors etc.
Passive solar gain should be taken into account.
Designing Streets – is there a more relaxed approach when it comes to affordable
housing? Needs more work e.g. on maintenance.

Post Feedback discussion
Need to seriously consider “rural exceptions” type policy.
Housing targets – note comment made in House of Commons debate that the figures are
a “target to be achieved, not a ceiling”.