What it is:
A method for choosing future allocated sites based not just on availability and suitability, but also delivery performance.

How EHDC should use it:
In future SHLAAs and Plan-making, screen out landowners with a poor delivery record.
Give preference to developers with proven track records of building within planned timelines.

Impact:
Shifts the incentives: rewards delivery, discourages speculative land hoarding.

🏡 What Are “Strategic Site Screens”?

---

When the Council is deciding which sites to include in the next Local Plan, it often asks:

• Is the land suitable?
• Is it available?
• Is it sustainable?

But it should also ask:

“Is the landowner someone who actually builds?”

Strategic screening means weeding out the speculators — and prioritising those with a proven record of delivering homes on time and as promised.

🧭 What Could EHDC Do?

---

• Add a test to its site selection process: “Has this landowner delivered on previous allocations?”
• Prefer landowners or developers who:
  • Submit applications quickly,
  • Stick to agreed delivery schedules,
  • Deliver community benefits early.

🎯 Why Does It Matter?

---

If you reward slow or speculative behaviour with more land, you encourage more of it.

If you reward delivery, you get homes and infrastructure sooner and more reliably.

✅ Final Thought

---

Think of this as the Council saying:

“We’re not just choosing land — we’re choosing who to trust.”

It’s not about punishing people. It’s about giving opportunities to those who’ve proven they’ll follow through.

What it is:
A formal policy that allows EHDC to consider removing sites from the Local Plan if they remain undelivered beyond a reasonable period.

How EHDC should use it:
Include in the Local Plan a review trigger (e.g. “If no application is made within 3 years of adoption, the site may be reconsidered.”)

Impact:
Puts landowners on notice: allocation is not indefinite.

🏡 What Is a “Site Deallocation Review”?

---

When the Council allocates land in the Local Plan, it’s basically saying:

“We’re trusting you to build here — not just sometime, but within a reasonable window.”

But what if that land just sits there for years, unused?

A site deallocation policy gives EHDC the power to say:

“You’ve had enough time. You didn’t deliver. We’re giving someone else a chance.”

🧭 How Does It Work?

---

• EHDC writes into the Local Plan: “If no application is made within 3 years of adoption, this site may be deallocated.”
• They check each year in the AMR.
• If no progress — they issue a warning.
• If still no progress — the site can be replaced in the next plan review.

🎯 Why Does It Matter?

---

Without this power:

• Developers can treat allocations like long-term investments, not promises,
• Sites sit undeveloped while others fight to get land,
• Local trust in planning collapses.

✅ Final Thought

---

This is about consequences.

“If you’re not serious about delivery, you lose the privilege of allocation.”

That helps reward proactive builders and deter speculative land holders.

What it is:
Legally binding obligations tied to a planning permission that specify what the developer must do — often tied to infrastructure, phasing, or affordable housing.

How EHDC should use it:
Include clauses that:

• Restrict occupation until delivery milestones are met.
• Require early infrastructure delivery before homes are sold.
• Include a detailed Delivery Strategy as a condition of permission.

Impact:
Makes it economically risky for developers to delay — without needing direct penalties.

🏡 What Are “Section 106 Agreements”?

---

Section 106 agreements are legal contracts between the Council and a developer. They’re used to make sure new developments pay their fair share for things like:

• Roads and junction upgrades
• New school places
• Playgrounds and green spaces
• Affordable housing

They can also set rules about when and how a developer builds — such as:

“You can’t sell or occupy any homes until you’ve built the new roundabout.”
“You must deliver 40% affordable homes by the time you finish the first 50% of the site.”

🧭 What Would EHDC Use These For?

---

• To make delivery milestones legally enforceable,
• To stop developers from building slowly just to wait for prices to rise,
• To make sure critical infrastructure comes first, not last.

🎯 Why Does It Matter?

---

Without strong Section 106 agreements, developers can:

• Build homes and sell them before anything else is ready,
• Delay infrastructure or community benefits until the end — or indefinitely,
• Ask for things to be removed later, claiming “viability issues”.

✅ Final Thought

---

Section 106 isn’t about punishing developers — it’s about making sure they deliver what they promise, when they promise it.

If used well, it protects local communities from broken commitments and poorly phased development.

What it is:
A non-statutory but public-facing statement of EHDC’s stance on speculative development, delivery expectations, or decision-making priorities.

How EHDC should use it:
Issue a PPS that clearly says: windfall applications from developers who haven’t progressed allocated sites will be treated as undermining the Local Plan.
Use the PPS to shape officer recommendations and Planning Committee debates.

Impact:
Publicly signals intent, improves consistency, and shapes appeal defence.

🏡 What Is a “Planning Position Statement”?

---

A Planning Position Statement (PPS) is like a public noticeboard that says:

“Here’s what we believe. Here’s how we’ll judge planning decisions.”

It doesn’t change the law — but it tells developers, residents, and planning inspectors where EHDC stands on a specific issue — like speculative development.

It’s not legally binding, but it can influence decisions, appeals, and public expectations.

🧭 What Would EHDC’s PPS Say?

---

EHDC could issue a PPS that says:

• If a developer controls Local Plan land and hasn’t applied to build on it — they should not expect us to approve other applications elsewhere.
• Windfall applications (outside the plan) from those same developers will be treated as undermining the public’s plan.

🎯 Why Does It Matter?

---

A PPS gives the Council a stronger voice when dealing with:

• Developers trying to skip the plan,
• Planning Inspectors during appeals,
• The public, who want to know what’s going on.

✅ Final Thought

---

Think of it as EHDC saying:

“This is our line in the sand. If you’re not delivering what you promised, don’t expect us to reward you.”

It’s public, clear, and helps protect planning decisions from being overturned.

Let’s say a developer owns land that the Local Plan already says should be used for housing — but they haven’t applied to build on it or have just left it sitting undeveloped. Now that same developer applies for permission to build somewhere else, outside of the Local Plan.

Refusal weighting means the Council can say:

“You already had your chance to build where we planned for it — but you didn’t. So we’re not going to let you jump the queue and build somewhere else.”

This kind of policy gives EHDC the ability to tell developers:

• Use what you’ve been given first,
• Stop bypassing community-led planning,
• Don’t take more land when you’re not building on what you already have.

🧭 What Would the Policy Do?

---

• It gives planning officers a clear reason to recommend refusal of speculative applications.
• It lets councillors argue, “This developer hasn’t earned more land. They’ve ignored the plan.”
• It protects the credibility of the Local Plan, which is built with public consultation.

🎯 Why Does It Matter?

---

Without this tool, developers can:

• Sit on Local Plan sites,
• Apply for easier or more profitable ones elsewhere,
• Claim EHDC is failing to meet targets,
• And get even more land approved — despite not delivering.

This turns Local Plans into wishlists instead of enforceable blueprints.

✅ Final Thought

---

Refusal weighting helps EHDC say:

“If you haven’t delivered what the community planned for, don’t expect special treatment.”

It’s fair, transparent, and reinforces public trust in planning.

🏡 What Is “Delivery Phasing” in the Local Plan?

---

Imagine the Council has a map showing which pieces of land are meant to be used for new housing over the next 15 years. If they opened all of those areas at once, developers could just pick the easiest or cheapest ones, ignore the rest, and leave the local infrastructure (roads, schools, health services) struggling to catch up.

Delivery phasing is a rule the Council can adopt that says:

“You can’t build wherever you like, whenever you like. You can only build on this land now, and you have to wait to build on that land later — and only after certain conditions are met.”

This ensures:

• The first sites get delivered first,
• Infrastructure like roads and schools is built in sync with housing,
• Developers don’t get to hoard land or skip the queue, and
• The Local Plan stays in control, not overridden by developers.

🧭 What Would the Policy Do?

---

The policy I’ve proposed does three key things:

1. It breaks housing into phases

The Council divides the next 15 years into 3 time periods:

• Phase 1 (Years 1–5): sites expected to be built early,
• Phase 2 (Years 6–10): sites only allowed after the first ones are mostly finished,
• Phase 3 (Years 11–15): sites reserved for the long term.

2. It ties later phases to progress and infrastructure

Later sites can’t go ahead until:

• Enough homes have already been built in earlier phases (e.g. 75% complete), and
• Big infrastructure like roads or a school is actually built or fully paid for.

This prevents leapfrogging, where developers skip tough sites and leave others half-done.

3. It sets deadlines

Every site has a time by which developers must apply for planning permission, and a time by which they must start building. If they don’t — the Council may reallocate the land to someone else in future plan reviews.

🎯 Why Does It Matter?

---

Without this kind of rule, developers can:

• Get planning permission but wait years to build (called land banking),
• Avoid sites with more responsibilities (like building schools or affordable housing),
• Push for new sites outside the Local Plan (“speculative development”), claiming there’s a shortage — even though they’re sitting on land they haven’t built on.

That kind of behaviour distorts the housing system, leads to:

• Poorly timed infrastructure,
• Weaker communities, and
• More pressure on the countryside.

Phasing fixes this by saying:

“We’ve got a plan. Stick to it. Build in order. And if you don’t — you don’t get to jump ahead or ask for more land.”

🧾 Example

---

Let’s say there’s an area in South Medstead where the Council wants 120 homes built in the next 5 years. The developer:

• Has until Year 2 to submit their application,
• Must start building within 18 months,
• Has to deliver the road upgrades and local park before they reach 50% of the homes.

Only after that happens, can other nearby land (e.g. the Beechlands site) be opened up — and only if there’s a new school site secured too.

✅ Final Thought

---

This policy gives EHDC control over when, where, and how development happens. It ensures developers:

• Don’t delay what they promised,
• Don’t abandon difficult sites,
• Don’t overload roads, schools, or health services, and
• Don’t use housing targets as an excuse to take more land than they’re willing to build on.