Government U-turn on higher housing targets welcomed in Arun

The Government has scrapped a controversial change to the way housing targets are calculated

Arun District Council adopted its local plan in the summer of 2018. This sets out where housing development should take place and how much should be built each year.

However developers are nowhere near delivering enough new homes to meet the current housing target of 1,000 dwellings per annum.

And under government planning reforms consulted on earlier this year, Arun’s housing requirement could have skyrocketed to 2,063 new homes a year.

This would have forced the council to find and approve even more large-scale housing developments all across the district.

But ministers have had a rethink and decided to scrap the new way of calculating housing targets.

However Arun’s target would still be much higher than the average delivery over the past three years.

Arun District Council said it was pleased that the Government had listened to its objections and those of many other councils.

Martin Lury, Arun’s cabinet member for planning, added: “A note of caution is still required as the amended proposals will see a significant rise in housing provision figures for the country’s top 20 cities.

“This includes Brighton, which is sandwiched between the sea and the South Downs National Park. If Brighton is unable to accommodate all of its future housing requirements it could ask other councils including Arun to assist.”

The Government U-turn follows a high-profile campaign in Parliament which Arundel and South Downs MP, Andrew Griffith, helped orchestrate.

He and others objected to the way fresh housing targets had been calculated coining the phrase ‘mutant algorithm’, leading to hugely inflated housing targets which did not take into account local factors such as geography and special characteristics.

Speaking last week, Mr Griffith said: “I am pleased that we have seen off this threat and to have spoken out passionately in Parliament for the residents of West Sussex.

“We faced a disproportionate amount of housing development had these plans gone ahead.

“Residents understand that we need new homes but numbers should reflect local need and be located where the infrastructure already exists or on brownfield sites not our precious green spaces.”