Hull and East Riding JSP Panel Report

19 April, 2004

The Inspector's Panel Report is now available, and can be downloaded from the <a href="http://www.hullcc.gov.uk/jsp/" target="_blank">JSP website </a>

The key points to note are:

- The Panel supported the sub-area approach

- The graduated approach to housing distribution is

acceptable

- The industry's view that the build level for Hull was too

high was accepted by the Panel, however, in the event of a

shortfall in Hull, the roll over numbers would be kept

within the Central sub-area.

- The importance of Kingswood was recognised by the panel

who considered any deletion from this major development

could not be made up from the urban renewal process. The

Panel recommend the JSP be modified to recognise

Kingswood as an urban extension with an annual output of

200 dwellings (para 2.49)

- Within Chapter 6 - Housing, the Panel consider the

relationship between the JSP and RPG12 and in particular

the shortfall in completions in the early part of the

plan period. From this the Panel concluded (para 6.6)that

the RPG figures cannot be set aside in the manner

proposed in the JSP without generating a shortage of

housing. The Panel concluded therefore that the JSP

should be modified to accommodate the full RPG12

requirement. In para 6.10 the Panel looked forward to a

more transparent distribution allocation through the RSS.

- Paragraphs 6.31, 6.57 address the shortfall of 720

dwellings between 1998 and 2003. The Joint Authorities

request to 'ignore' the shortfall was not accepted by the

Panel who recommend the 730 units be incorporated into a

modified policy H1.

Para 6.84 sets out the key recommendations

1. The JSP should be modified to accommodate the full

RPG12 requirement - this will increase the housing

provision

2. Policy H1 should be modified as suggested above

2a. Over the period 2003 - 2016 provision will be made for

annual average additions to the housing stock as set

out in table 6.1 (this is significant as previous

wording under Table 6.1 referred to completions and not

net additions).

2b. The housing numbers would be reviewed in 2006 to

consider the JSP shortfall.

2c. Recognises the 1998 - 2006 shortfall.

2d. The shortfall will be added to the Central sub area

2006 onwards.

Within Chapter 7, Urban Renaissance, the Panel supported the aims and objectives of the JSP but also recognised the need to clear substantial areas for redevelopment.

Within Chapter 8, Greenfield Urban Extensions, the Panel (in para 8.7) acknowledged it would be prudent to plan for the possibility that greenfield extensions may be required, particularly within the Central sub-areas.

Conclusion: Whilst the industry scored well in this debate and housing numbers should be increased generally, we are unlikely to see any significant increase in the East Riding housing provision.

Should you have any queries regarding this please contact Mark Johnson at 01904 557624.