Annual Monitoring Report. Thompson Cottages, Hudswell, affordable housing scheme completed 2017/18 (Credit: RDC)

Transcription

1 Annual Monitoring Report Thompson Cottages, Hudswell, affordable housing scheme completed 2017/18 (Credit: RDC) A report of planning policy implementation 1st April st March 2018

2 Contents 1 Introduction 1.1 Essential monitoring requirements p Additional monitoring activity p 1 2 Key policy areas 2.1 Policy C1 - housing target and delivery p Policy L2 re-use of traditional farm buildings p 11 Appendices Appendix 1 Essential monitoring requirements p 17 2

3 1 Introduction Local planning authorities must publish information annually that shows progress with developing new planning policies and the implementation of existing policy. The report only relates to the Yorkshire Dales Local Plan and is the second Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) since a new Local Plan was adopted for the National Park in December Separate planning policies apply in the area that became part of the National Park on 1 st August For the time being, monitoring in these areas will continue to be carried out by South Lakeland District Council, Eden District Council and Lancaster City Council respectively. 1.1 Essential monitoring requirements The statutory requirements for monitoring are set out in The Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations The required outputs are largely procedural matters relating to progress in preparing new policies rather than the actual impact of adopted policies. The Authority has reported against these requirements in Appendix 1. The headlines are that: The Local Plan was adopted in December 2016 and provides consolidated planning policy for the whole of the pre-august 2016 National Park; The Authority has yet to publish a new Local Development Scheme setting out the next stages in its review of planning policies. There are some important decisions that need to be made regarding future policy reviews. The Authority needs to ensure that the Local Plan for the old National Park remains up to date. This is particularly the case in relation to maintaining a supply of deliverable housing sites and the Authority has committed to a review of this area of policy before the end of At the same time, there is a need to ensure that the policies that apply to the areas of Cumbria and Lancashire designated as National Park in August 2016 remain fit for purpose. A decision on how to proceed will be made at a full Authority meeting during 2018; Neighbourhood planning by local communities continues to have limited take-up in the National Park. 1.2 Additional monitoring activity This year s report focusses in on two key areas of policy that are particularly important in the Yorkshire Dales context. The first of these is housing. The shortage of housing is a nationally important issue however, in the Yorkshire Dales, there are a particular set of circumstances that means new housing provision has a vital role to play in maintaining viable and sustainable communities. Policy C1 (housing in settlements) is the most relevant policy for housing 3

4 tenure and supply. Section 2.1 provides numerical returns to support monitoring of housing permissions and completions, together with further commentary and analysis regarding housing land supply. The second topic that the report focusses on is the conversion of traditional farm buildings. Policy L2 provides the framework for decisions regarding the conversion of traditional farm buildings to residential uses. This was one of the areas of policy that expanded most markedly with the advent of the Local Plan and so continues to prompt debate. Section 2.2 of the report sets out statistical information in relation to the location and tenure of these conversions and comments on some of the early lessons learnt from the policy. 4

5 2.1 Policy C1 Housing target and delivery The Local Plan established a housing target for the National Park, set at 55 net additional dwellings per annum. It is an ambitious target, well in excess of the minimum housing requirement, or objectively assessed need, for additional housing, which stands at between 32 and 38 units per annum. Annual completions Housing completions data is set out in Table 1 overleaf. During the 2017/18 monitoring year there were only 20 net housing completions. This represents an extremely disappointing return against the annual target while also falling short of the minimum housing requirement. It is the lowest level of completion in the last decade. The Authority anticipated that, during the early years of the Plan, housing delivery would be reliant upon the existing supply of extant planning permissions (i.e. those permitted prior to the Local Plan s adoption), rather than from newly permissioned or allocated housing sites. It is this stock of extant housing permissions that is failing to deliver sufficient completions at the present time. There are a number of factors that contribute to this issue. Housing sites in the National Park are small. The average size of a completed development is just under 2 units compared to much larger sites in the more accessible areas outside the National Park. Furthermore, a general lack of commercial developer interest in housing development in the Park results in a preponderance of smaller self build-type projects. This means that housing delivery is more unpredictable in the National Park than in areas with more market led development. There are also generally longer lead-in times for completion of developments in the National Park. Over the last five years the average lag period between permission and completion has been around four and a half years however, over the last two years, this has risen to six years. As a result a number of the completions that are currently coming through the system are partly the product of the economic downturn after 2008 when application numbers sharply reduced and developers had to navigate a more challenging financial climate. One of the most noteworthy schemes to have completed during the monitoring year was at Thompson s Field, Hudswell (pictured on the cover of this report), where a development brought forward by the local community has seen three new houses built for affordable rent to local people. 5

6 Table 1 - Housing completions 2007/8-2017/18 TOTAL OCCUPANCY TYPE PROPOSAL TYPE YEAR Units Net units (excluding holiday-only Unrestricted Affordable 2007/ / / / / / / / / / / Local Occupancy Agricultural/Rural worker Other Holiday use only Mixed holiday/local occupancy New Build Barn Conversion Sub division of existing dwellings Re-occupation of abandoned dwelling All other change of use 6

7 Annual permissions The more immediate impact of policy change can be felt through planning permissions granted for additional dwellings. Table 2 overleaf sets out relevant data on housing permissions over the last decade. The 10 year average for the number of units of permanent residential accommodation permitted was 40 units up to 2016/17. The 5 year average was lower at 38 units. In 2017/18, 67 units were permitted which is the highest level for a decade. On top of this, a further 26 units have been permitted subject to the completion of a Section 106 legal agreement. This represents a significant head start on the 2018/19 figure that will be reported next year and means that the increase in average levels of housing permissions should be maintained. The change in policy is undoubtedly a factor in this upturn, in particular as regards the conversion of traditional buildings, but there are signs of an over-reliance on these permissions, as opposed to new builds. In the 10 years prior to the current Local Plan s policies being used in decision making, the average proportion of new build residential permissions was 48%. During the last two monitoring years when the current Local Plan has been in force, this has dropped to just 31%. This is not because new build permissions have dropped, but rather because conversions have increased, and this issue is discussed later in the report in relation to the 5 year supply and the policy on converting traditional farm buildings. Some of the more notable schemes to have received permission this year are: a revised scheme for 13 dwellings on one of the allocated housing sites at Green Gates Lane, Long Preston which will deliver 6 affordable houses, and a further 2 local occupancy houses on an allocated housing site in Malham; a scheme for 5 local occupancy dwellings and 6 employment units on a former industrial site at King s Yard, Sedbergh; a scheme of 5 affordable dwellings on a rural exceptions site in Bainbridge. 7

8 Table 2 Housing permissions /8-2017/18 TOTAL OCCUPANCY TYPE PROPOSAL TYPE YEAR Units Net units (excluding holiday-only Unrestricted Affordable 2007/ / / / / / / / / / / Approved pending S Local Occupancy Agricultural/Rural worker Other Holiday use only Mixed holiday/local occupancy New Build Barn Conversion Sub division of existing dwellings Re-occupation of abandoned dwelling All other change of use 1 Variances from figures reported in previous years reflect permissions superseded by new schemes and expiries of unimplemented and temporary permissions. 2 The Authority has resolved to approve these applications but a formal decision cannot be issued until the completion of a legal agreement. All bar five of these units are derived from applications considered during 2017/18. 8

9 Revised 5 year housing requirement Local planning authorities are expected to maintain a rolling supply of land sufficient to satisfy at least 5 years worth of their housing requirements. The Authority set a housing provision target of 55 dwellings per annum. This is well in excess of the objectively assessed need requirement of between 32 and 38 dwellings per annum, which forms the minimum benchmark for measuring whether the National Park has a 5 year supply of housing sites. The basic 5 year requirement for the National Park, adopting the upper end of the objectively assessed need range, is 190 dwellings. Adjustments then need to be made to take account of past delivery (including under delivery of 18 units during the 2017/18 monitoring year), as well as national policy requirements to add a buffer to boost choice and competition in the market for land. A revised figure of 208 units (42 dwellings per annum) for the period 2018/ /23 represents the actual 5 year requirement. Land supply In line with national planning policy the Authority should identify and maintain a supply of housing land sufficient to meet the revised 5 year requirement figure of 208 units. As of the close of the monitoring year, gross housing land supply in the Local Plan area was made up of: 216 units where a planning application has been approved; 197 units on land allocated in the Local Plan; 145 units from other unplanned windfall sites that come forward (based on the 5 year average for windfall delivery). Total: 558 units Although this supply of land exceeds the 5 year requirement by some margin, it needs to be adjusted to take account of real world deliverability, acknowledging that some sites that are allocated for development or have planning consent may fail to be developed within the next 5 years, while there will always be a lag period before windfall sites (which do not yet have planning permission) are developed and completed. The Authority has adopted a conservative approach to assessing deliverable sites over the next 5 years. In view of this it has assessed the following as being deliverable: 138 units from extant permissions taking account of likely expiries and those that are moving too slowly to be considered deliverable within 5 years; 34 units from allocated sites based on those that are most advanced in preapplication discussions or where a planning application has already been lodged but not yet fully determined; 64 units from windfall based on the 5 year average figure being phased in to allow for the lag between permission and completion Total: 236 units 9

10 It is clear that, while a 5 year housing land supply does currently exist, the margins are fine, and that too much (58%) of the gross housing land supply cannot be deemed to be deliverable within 5 years. There are a range of factors that contribute to this, including: A preponderance of self build projects, which make up a significant proportion of all housing proposals in the National Park, suffering from a lack of finance or time, or being delayed pending family needs. This means that permissions either expire or are implemented and then become very slow moving or stall completely. There are still extant housing permissions in the National Park that date back to the early 1990s while one of the units completed during 2017/18 was originally given consent as far back as As the proportion of housing supply made up of traditional building conversions continues to rise, this could exacerbate the situation as conversion projects are typically less predictable when it comes to construction timescales; Developments where the main structural works are completed but internal fit out doesn t take place due to unpredictable timescales for occupation and a wish to avoid incurring Council Tax on completed vacant properties; Developments that fail to comply with conditions and so become delayed pending revised applications or enforcement investigations; Sites that landowners requested to be allocated for housing but that now lack a firm intent to develop, either because they are viewed as longer term projects, changes in personal and financial circumstances, or because they have been sold on and bought as investments; A lack of commercial developer or housing association interest in developing small remoter rural sites, due to higher development costs and therefore more marginal viability compared to larger more accessible and easier to develop sites outside the National Park; A lack of surplus publically owned land that might be brought forward for development. While much of that residual supply will contribute to housing delivery later in the Plan period, and will be supplemented by newly released supply from permissions and future reviews of policy, the Authority is working to try and increase the amount of permissions that are deliverable in the shorter term. This includes continued attempts to facilitate delivery of the allocated housing sites and a more proactive approach to identifying possible rural exceptions sites for Community Land Trusts and housing associations. 10

11 2.3 Policy L2 re-use of traditional farm buildings A change in approach One of the most significant changes to policy in the 2015 Local Plan has been the introduction of greater flexibility for the conversion of traditional buildings to residential uses. Historically, opportunities for residential conversion had been largely confined to specified settlements as sustainable locations for housing. This approach resulted in 21% of pre residential permissions coming from farm building conversions. Nonetheless, with an estimated 6000 traditional farm buildings in the National Park, it was clear there was a large resource of buildings outside established settlements. In 2013 The Government decided to introduce new flexibilities for the conversion of agricultural buildings to residential uses. It did this, not through a change of national policy but, through the introduction of a permitted development right that meant a simplified prior approval process would replace the requirement for full planning permission. This would have seen limited planning control over matters like design and highway safety, but no discretion whatsoever to restrict which buildings could be converted or who could occupy them. As a result it would have risked harmful and unsustainable development in the sensitive landscape of the Yorkshire Dales. The Government proposal coincided with early consultation on the Local Plan and so the Authority heard a range of viewpoints regarding the wisdom of widening permitted development rights versus a policy-led approach, including the different options for framing such a policy. National Parks and other protected areas were subsequently excluded from the introduction of the permitted development rights following widespread lobbying. However, in making this concession, the Government made clear its expectation that National Park Authorities should take a more positive and proactive approach to residential conversions in future. Policy L2 is the product of this debate. Its objective is to match appropriate uses with buildings and locations that have capacity to absorb them. In particular, it allows the more intensive uses of traditional buildings, including residential, in settlements as before, but also now in other groups of buildings and in roadside locations. This approach received widespread support throughout the Local Plan process and is supported by additional guidance in the form of a Traditional Farm Buildings Toolkit which helps applicants to determine what level of use their buildings are capable of sustaining. Take up The policy started to be given weight in planning decisions from October 2015 and its impact has been immediately felt in the volume of planning applications received and approved. Since October 2015 planning permission 3 has been given for 73 barn 3 Including permissions that are subject to completion of a Section 106 agreement meaning a formal decision notice has yet to be issued 11

12 conversions to residential use. This represents nearly 40% of all residential permissions over that period, almost double the historic average an average that was destined to drop further as the limited stock of buildings within settlements was gradually consumed. On top of this, the conversion of other, almost exclusively traditional, buildings to residential use has accounted for a further 30% of all residential permissions. This brings the total proportion of residential planning permissions, granted under the Local Plan s policies, through conversion of existing buildings, to almost 70% of the total. The pre Local Plan historic average was just over 50%. Locations of approved traditional farm building conversions Policy L2 allows traditional buildings to be converted within settlements, building groups and suitable roadside locations. Table 3 below shows the breakdown of according to location types. Table 3 - Traditional farm building residential conversion 4 permissions 5 by location Situation Number of Percentage permissions 6 1. Local Service Centre Service village Small settlement Hamlet a. Residential building group b. Non residential building group a. Roadside (adjoins metalled public road) b. Roadside (adjoins green lane/private road connecting with a metalled public road) 7. Non-roadside (assessed according to landscape impact) TOTAL 73 Prior to the Local Plan, residential conversion opportunity was typically only offered in established settlements down to the level of small villages. One of the things that is most striking about the impact of the new policy is that just 12% of approvals have been within these settlements (highlighted green in Table 3), so clearly there is a majority taking advantage of the new locational flexibilities the policy offers. To varying degrees, policies preceding the Local Plan, and stretching back into the 1980s, provided some additional latitude for conversions outside of settlements, but 4 Includes all buildings that are of traditional construction and have the character of a traditional farm building, including those that have had an intervening use that has retained the original character (e.g. storage, workshop), but excluding those where an intervening use has changed the character (e.g. domestic annexe or employment use) 5 Applications approved since Policy L2 started to be given weight in decision making (October 2015) 6 Includes applications that have a resolution to approve subject to completion of a Section 106 legal agreement 12

13 only where they were located in a building group with a residential context. It is these locations (highlighted orange in Table 3) that have seen the most take up under the new policies, accounting for 63% of approvals. Clearly the availability of services will be a factor in this, with these locations offering the potential for significantly reduced infrastructure costs. In this sense, the policy is partly self-regulating since remoter locations will tend to be far more problematical to supply with infrastructure. Below this level are 25% of approvals that have been given for conversions away from residential building groups (highlighted pink in Table 3) and it is this element of the policy that really breaks new ground. In particular it is the roadside, or even beyond roadside, element that is the most sensitive. Although developed in the sense that these locations form corridors of human activity, roadside locations can still be quite isolated and sensitive to change. Such is the number and variety of traditional buildings in the Yorkshire Dales, it was always going to be impossible to prescribe in a policy exactly what was and what wasn t a suitable location for residential conversion to take place. Instead, the policy leaves judgements to the decision maker, while trying to provide a framework for these decisions with reference to a fixed feature (a road) that is readily understood by the public. Naturally, this is resulting in some fine judgement calls and differences in interpretation. Of the 14 cases outside of building groups that have been approved, 9 were judged by Officers to be acceptable and approved under delegated powers. One of these cases, at Low Oxnop in Swaledale, was noteworthy because the sensitivity of the roadside location led Officers to negotiate a holiday letting use, rather than permanent residential occupancy. This ensured that minimal external interventions, a particularly restricted curtilage and off site parking could be secured in a way that would not have been possible for a permanently occupied dwelling. Mill Bridge Barn, Low Oxnop, Swaledale Three cases were reported to Committee, not because there was any doubt regarding the acceptability of conversion as a matter of principle, but because they were determined at a time where Policy L2 was still emerging (i.e. prior to full adoption) or because of unresolved highway safety issues. 13

14 This leaves 2 cases that have proved more controversial and they are the 2 cases that have been approved despite being considered to fall outside of the definition of roadside. In these cases, Policy L2 allows buildings in close proximity to roadside locations to be considered, subject to the impact on the landscape arising from their conversion. One case, Tug Gill Lathe near Starbotton, was refused by the Authority, but its decision was overturned on appeal by an Inspector. The Authority considered that the building, which is set 30 metres back from the road and not connected to it by a sealed metalled track, failed to satisfy the definition of roadside. As a result it was deemed to be at the margins of the policy and assessed according to its landscape impact. The Authority considered that the building, being situated in the open countryside in a part of Upper Wharfedale with highly distinctive landscape character of isolated field barns set back from the highway, would result in significant landscape harm if converted to a residential use. Tug Gill Lathe, Starbotton, Wharfedale In contrast, the Inspector concluded that the proposal would result in the external appearance of the site being largely unaltered. Furthermore, he took a much more flexible approach to the interpretation of the definition of a roadside location, considering that the field within which the building stands constituted part of its immediate definable curtilage and therefore a roadside building. The Authority has written to the Planning Inspectorate to express its disappointment with the Inspector s interpretation of both the landscape harm that would result from the proposal and the approach to identifying the extent of the building s curtilage. The other case of a barn at Bouldershaw in Arkengarthdale was recommended for refusal by Officers on account of the landscape impact of physical alterations to the building, which is located in a remote area within a Barns and Walls Conservation Area. Members of the Planning Committee disagreed and considered that the building, being located in a 14

15 landscape of dispersed dwellings, could be satisfactorily converted without landscape harm. Barn at Bouldershaw Lane, Arkengarthdale Aside from the refusal of permission at Tug Gill Lathe, one further application, for conversion of a barn off Eshington Lane in Thoralby, was refused during the monitoring year. This building is located 40 metres from Eshington Lane, a rural green lane. As such it did not constitute a roadside location and was considered according to its landscape impact. It was deemed to be unsuitable for an intensive residential use and the application was duly refused. Barn off Eshington Lane, Thoralby, Bishopdale The issues surrounding the interpretation of Policy L2 as it relates to remotely located barn conversions will continue into the next monitoring year. There are currently 11 live 15

16 planning applications for barn conversions outside of established building groups. Of these 4 physically adjoin a public road, 2 adjoin a metalled private road connecting to a public road and 5 are not roadside so will be considered subject to their impact on the landscape. These cases will be reported in more detail in next year s monitoring report. Tenure of approved traditional farm building conversions Table 4 shows the breakdown of permissions for traditional farm building conversion according to tenure. Policy L2 allows conversion to three main tenure types; local occupancy (accounting for 40% of permissions granted), holiday letting (19%) or a flexible option of both (40%). Of the latter category, it will not be possible to assess the balance of use (holiday let or local occupancy) until the buildings are converted and occupied, which very few currently are. Table 4 Traditional farm building residential conversion permissions by tenure Tenure Permissions Percentage Local occupancy or rural worker Flexible local occupancy/holiday Holiday letting TOTAL 73 Geographical spread of traditional farm building conversions Take up of Policy L2 has been concentrated in the Craven part of the National Park and in particular in Wharfedale, as shown in Table 5 below. Table 5 - Traditional farm building residential conversion permissions by geographical spread Sub area Permissions District total Upper Wharfedale 8 Mid Wharfedale 5 Lower Wharfedale Malhamdale 6 Ribblesdale, Ingleton & Clapham 8 Upper Wensleydale & Swaledale 5 Lower Swaledale & Arkengarthdale 4 22 Mid & Lower Wensleydale 13 Dentdale 2 Garsdale 2 9 Sedbergh/Cautley 5 TOTAL; 73 16

17 Appendix 1 Essential monitoring requirements Requirement The title of the local plans or supplementary planning documents specified in the local planning authority s local development scheme Response A Local Development Scheme was last prepared in June The two policy documents highlighted in the Local Development Scheme are: Local Plan provides all policy in a single document, replacing the adopted/saved policies of the 2006 Local Plan, the 2012 Housing Development Plan and the 1998 Minerals & Waste Plan; Design Guide supplementary planning document providing guidance on the detailed execution of design in the National Park; Both documents have now been adopted and so a new Local Development Scheme is needed to outline the timetable for future policy reviews. Requirement In relation to each of those documents (i) the timetable specified in the local planning authority s local development scheme for the document s preparation; (ii) the stage the document has reached in its preparation; and (iii) if the document s preparation is behind the timetable mentioned in paragraph (i) the reasons for this. Response The Local Development Scheme provides full details. The Local Development Scheme timetable was last revised in July Local Plan the Local Development Scheme timetable shows adoption of this Plan in June Adoption actually happened in December This was the result of a longer than expected examination, both pre and post hearing stages. 17

18 Design Guide the Local Development Scheme timetable envisaged that the Design Guide would be adopted alongside the Local Plan in June Due to the delayed adoption of the Local Plan the Design Guide was also delayed, but was adopted as a Supplementary Planning Document during the monitoring year (September 2017). In August 2016 the National Park boundary was extended and, as a result, the Authority has inherited existing adopted or emerging policies that are being used to determine planning applications in the new area of the National Park. In the South Lakeland District and Lancaster City Council areas, policies deriving from a range of documents adopted at different times remain saved and applicable to the parts now within the National Park. In the Eden District area of the extended National Park, a new Local Plan was already at an advanced stage of preparation when the boundary National Park boundary extension was confirmed in August This has been the subject of a protracted public examination but it is expected that this will conclude during the summer of Subject to being found to be sound by the Secretary of State, the Authority will jointly adopt the Eden Local Plan so that it has an up to date policy framework for the area. These policies are already being used to determine planning applications in the Eden area of the National Park as they are sufficiently advanced in the process so as to be given weight in planning decisions even though the Local Plan has yet to be formally adopted. The Authority, working in partnership with a range of other bodies, will be finalising the National Park Management Plan during Although this does not form part of the development plan, it is the key strategic policy document for the National Park, and will provide an updated framework covering the whole of the extended National Park. It therefore provides important context to future reviews of planning policy and will inform the Local Development Scheme. A new Local Development Scheme will be required to set out a longer-term timetable for future policy preparation covering the adopted Local Plan and the areas that are subject to different policies in the boundary extension area. This document will be consulted on and adopted by the Authority during 2018/19. 18

19 Requirement Where any local plan or supplementary planning document specified in the local planning authority s local development scheme has been adopted or approved within the period in respect of which the report is made, a statement of that fact and of the date of adoption or approval. Response The Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document was adopted on 26 th September Requirement Where a local planning authority are not implementing a policy specified in a local plan, the local planning authority s monitoring report must (a)identify that policy; and (b)include a statement of (i)the reasons why the local planning authority are not implementing the policy; and (ii)the steps (if any) that the local planning authority intend to take to secure that the policy is implemented. Response The policies of the 2006 Local Plan and 1998 Minerals & Waste Plan, alongside all adopted policies of the 2012 Housing Development Plan, were superseded with effect from December 2016 and are no longer be used in decision making. A full schedule of these policies can be found in Appendices 1-3 of the Local Development Scheme. The new Local Plan policies now have full weight in decision making and all are currently in use. 19

20 Requirement Where a policy specified in a local plan specifies an annual number, or a number relating to any other period of net additional dwellings or net additional affordable dwellings in any part of the local planning authority s area, the local planning authority s monitoring report must specify the relevant number for the part of the local planning authority s area concerned (a)in the period in respect of which the report is made, and (b)since the policy was first published, adopted or approved. Response The Local Plan establishes a target of 55 net additional dwellings per annum. In accordance with the recommendations of the Inspector appointed to examine the Local Plan s soundness, the target had effect from the 2015/16 monitoring year onwards. During 2015/16 there were 31 net additional housing units completed. During 2016/17 there were 39 net additional housing units completed. During 2017/18 there were 20 net additional housing units completed. Requirement Where a local planning authority have made a neighbourhood development order or a neighbourhood development plan, the local planning authority s monitoring report must contain details of these documents. Response A draft Neighbourhood Development Plan for Gargrave has been prepared and is being taken forward in conjunction with the Craven Local Plan, which has now been submitted to the Secretary of State so that its soundness can be examined. The bulk of the parish is outside the National Park and much of the Plan s content is only relevant to the part of the parish within Craven District Council s planning remit. A Neighbourhood Development Order in relation to the reoccupation and extension of Carr House, Mallerstang was made during the monitoring year. 20

21 Requirement Where a local planning authority have prepared a report pursuant to regulation 62 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010(2), the local planning authority s monitoring report must contain the information specified in regulation 62(4) of those Regulations. Response Not applicable. The Authority does not currently charge Community Infrastructure Levy in respect of the pre- August 1st 2016 National Park. Requirement Where a local planning authority have co-operated with another local planning authority, county council, or a body or person prescribed under section 33A of the Act, the local planning authority s monitoring report must give details of what action they have taken during the period covered by the report. Response The Authority agreed a memorandum of understanding with Craven District Council on the apportionment of housing numbers inside and outside the National Park. It has also discussed the broader policies in the emerging Craven Local Plan. This has now been submitted for examination to the Planning Inspectorate and the Authority will work with the District Council to support its adoption. The Authority has cooperated with Richmondshire District Council on the delivery of housing policy inside the National Park, including schemes on allocated and exceptions sites. In South Lakeland the Authority has worked with the District Council and other partners on the Sedbergh Economic study and implementation group. The Authority has worked with Eden District Council to implement its emerging Local Plan inside the newly extended area of the National Park. It has also worked jointly on the publication and referendum for the Carr House Neighbourhood Development Order which has now been made. The Authority has also adopted the Cumbria Minerals and Waste Local Plan for new National Park areas in Cumbria. The Authority has worked with most of the County and District Councils on an attracting families initiative which 21

22 has looked at a variety of issues designed to support younger working age families to move into the area. This has looked at policy for housing, employment and infrastructure and supported community led housing and custom build initiatives. The Authority has also continued to support joint working on spatial planning strategy across North Yorkshire, York and the East Riding. A new National Park Management Plan is being prepared. This will be the first Management Plan for the whole of the extended National Park. Once adopted during 2018 it will become a material planning consideration for decision making and will influence future reviews of planning policy. It contains objectives on housing, the economy, tourism and community services. Requirement A local planning authority must make any up-to-date information, which they have collected for monitoring purposes, available in accordance with regulation 35 as soon as possible after the information becomes available. Response This report has been published on our website and made available for inspection at our offices in accordance with Regulation 35. The report has been produced as soon as possible following the conclusion of housing completions monitoring, which is essential in order to allow the information in Appendix 2 to be presented. 22