A smarter test for when a place has done more than its fair share
🎯 Purpose:
To create a transparent, nationwide measure that shows when a local area has reached or exceeded its sustainable growth capacity — in terms of population density, infrastructure strain, housing growth, and environmental resilience.
📊 Indicator Structure:
Category
Measure
Trigger Thresholds
🧍♂️ Population Density
People per km² (excluding protected/non-developable land)
🟡 >500/km² 🔴 >750/km²
🏘️ Cumulative Housing Growth
% growth in dwellings since 2011 census
🟡 >20% growth 🔴 >35% growth
🏥 GP and School Strain
Patient list size per GP / Pupil places per school catchment
🟡 over 95% capacity 🔴 over 110%
🌱 Net Green Infrastructure Loss
Change in accessible green space per capita
🟡 loss of >10% since 2011 🔴 >20%
🏗️ % of Homes via Windfall Sites
% of homes approved outside the Local Plan in last 5 years
🟡 >25% windfall 🔴 >40%
🐝 Biodiversity Stress
Net biodiversity change on development sites (post-2023)
🔴 if net gain <10% overall
🚧 Infrastructure Response Time
Time taken to deliver physical infrastructure linked to housing expansion
🔴 if >50% of required infra is delayed by >3 years
🧠 How It Would Work:
Each local planning authority reports annually into the indicator (data is already mostly available via AMRs and monitoring).
Each settlement or district is scored across all indicators.
A combined score triggers a status:
⚪ Stable
🟡 Stretched (requires mitigation)
🔴 Overdeveloped (development freeze or EIA/mitigation mandatory)
Developers must justify new major proposals in areas marked as 🟡 or 🔴 with cumulative impact statements.
🏁 Why We Need It:
Current systems only look at supply vs demand, not cumulative harm.
Windfalls and tilted balance schemes are being approved in places that have already seen exponential growth.
We need to build with intention, not as a by-product of developer strategy.
This indicator gives councils the tools to say “enough” — and to prove it in appeals.
📌 Next Steps:
Pilot this framework in East Hampshire (starting with Medstead and Four Marks)
Lobby DLUHC and MPs to integrate this into future planning reform
Publish district status maps publicly, alongside housing stats
Under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) — specifically Annex 2 (Glossary) — a site is considered deliverableif it is available now, offers a suitable location for development now, and is achievable with a realistic prospect that housing will be delivered on the site within five years.
Deliverable sites must fall into one of these categories:
Sites with Detailed Planning Permission (full planning permission or reserved matters) — automatically considered deliverable unless there is clear evidence they won’t be built in time.
Sites with Outline Planning Permission, Allocation in a Development Plan, or Permission in Principle — only considered deliverable if there is clear evidence of:
Progress toward delivery (e.g. site viability, infrastructure in place),
A developer is on board,
Housing completions are expected within five years.
📌 So, not every site with permission counts — only those that meet these tests.
🔍 How Councils Prove Deliverability
To include a site in the 5-Year Housing Land Supply, the council must show evidence that supports its delivery within 5 years. This often includes:
Recent site activity (construction start or infrastructure work)
Signed S106 agreements (legal agreements securing planning obligations)
Developer commitments or delivery programmes
Viability appraisals showing the site is financially feasible
Infrastructure plans and funding in place (e.g. roads, drainage)
📊 Where This Appears
All this is documented in the Housing Land Supply Statement (or interim statement), where the council provides:
A list of individual sites (with status, capacity, delivery timeline)
A schedule of projected completions per year
Evidence that supports the inclusion of each site
📊 How It’s Measured
Each site included in the land supply must state:
The number of dwellings it is expected to deliver within the 5-year period.
A delivery timeline (how many homes will be completed each year).
Supporting evidence to justify that timeline (e.g. planning status, developer activity, infrastructure availability).
✅ So for example:
A site with full planning permission for 120 homes, with the builder confirming 60 units/year, would contribute 120 dwellings to the 5YHLS — assuming the delivery is within five years.
🔁 Why This Matters
Because the requirement is also set in housing units (e.g. 451 homes/year for EHDC), the council must match that with deliverable homes — not just land availability.
The term “interim housing land supply position statement” is not defined in national planning legislation, but is commonly used by local planning authorities like EHDC (East Hampshire District Council) to refer to:
A temporary or informal summary of the council’s current land supply status, prepared in the absence of an up-to-date Local Plan or formal Housing Land Supply Statement.
When is an Interim Statement Used?
An interim position statement may be published when:
The Local Plan is out of date.
A full Housing Land Supply Statement has not yet been completed or published for the current monitoring year.
The council is awaiting confirmation of housing delivery numbers (e.g. completions, permissions).
There is uncertainty due to appeals or legal challenges that affect the 5-Year Housing Land Supply.
It is a way for the council to indicate its estimated position, e.g. stating that it believes it has 3.2 years’ worth of deliverable housing land, pending final verification.
Status of Interim Statements
Not binding — unlike a formally published 5-Year Housing Land Supply Statement.
Subject to change — as new data or appeal decisions are incorporated.
May be used by officers to inform development management decisions, especially for tilted balance cases.
Relevance to Tilted Balance
If the council publishes an interim statement indicating it cannot demonstrate a full 5-year supply, this can trigger Paragraph 11(d) of the NPPF, meaning the tilted balance applies:
Planning permission should be granted unless the adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.
In such cases, the council must still apply planning judgment and local policies — but with less control due to the shortfall.
Housing targets for councils like East Hampshire District Council (EHDC) are calculated using the government’s Standard Method, which must be applied annually.
✅ Who Sets the Rules?
The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) sets the rules through:
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
The associated Planning Practice Guidance (PPG)
📈 What Gets Updated?
Household growth projections
Provided by the Office for National Statistics (ONS)
Usually updated every few years (currently using 2018-based projections)
Affordability ratios
Published annually by DLUHC
Based on median house prices and earnings in each local authority
The council’s Local Plan status
If the Local Plan is out of date (over 5 years or inconsistent with the NPPF), then no cap is applied to the housing need figure
🔄 When Do Councils Update Their Figure?
The housing need number must be recalculated each year, usually as part of the council’s Annual Monitoring Report or Housing Land Supply Statement.
Even if a Local Plan is in place, this calculation ensures that councils are using up-to-date demand data.
Before examining specific material considerations, it’s important to understand that planning consultees participate at different stages of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and planning process. Their feedback plays a crucial role in identifying risks, shaping assessments, and informing final decisions — just as specialist doctors and technicians inform each stage of a health diagnosis and treatment plan. A good planning decision, like a safe medical procedure, depends on thorough checks, qualified input, and a clear understanding of the patient — in this case, the community and its environment.
Currently, it appears EHDC does not publish a formal methodology or checklist to determine which consultees should be engaged at which stage. Selection is made on a case-by-case basis by planning officers, guided by statutory requirements, experience, internal guidance, and discretionary judgment. While this allows for professional flexibility, it also introduces risk of inconsistency. (As of writing, it appears no formal EHDC framework has been published online for how ‘relevance to the development’ is determined — source: EHDC planning portal and policy pages, April 2025.)
🧭 Types of Consultees by Stage:
📊 Why EHDC Should Adopt a Transparent Consultee Relevance Policy
Currently, it appears EHDC relies on officer judgment and internal precedent to decide whether a consultee is “relevant to the development.” Without clear criteria, this creates inconsistencies, potential unfairness, and missed environmental or infrastructure risks. To strengthen this process, EHDC should adopt a formal Consultee Relevance Scoring Matrix, aligned with both legal obligations and site-specific impact.
This scoring model would:
✅ Standardise when non-statutory consultees are triggered
1 point = discretionary but should be documented if omitted
This would complement, not replace, the legal obligations already mapped in the following table:
To clarify how different consultees engage throughout the development process, the following matrix shows when each consultee typically participates — at EIA Screening, EIA Scoping, Full EIA (Environmental Statement), or the Planning Application stage.
A ✅ indicates statutory participation, ◻️ represents non-statutory but commonly expected practice, and ❌ shows no formal involvement at that stage. Notes clarify statutory duties, best practice roles, and site-sensitive involvement.
Consultee
EIA Screening
EIA Scoping
Full EIA (ES)
Planning Application
Notes
Environment Agency (EA)
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
Statutory where flood risk or water quality is involved
Natural England
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
Required where biodiversity or designated sites affected
Historic England
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
Statutory for heritage settings and archaeological impacts
Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA)
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
Statutory consultee for surface water/flooding
National Highways
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
✅ (statutory)
Statutory for proposals affecting strategic roads
Local Highways Authority
◻️ (non-statutory)
✅ (expected)
✅ (expected)
✅ (expected)
Non-statutory but standard practice at all stages
EHDC Environmental Health
◻️ (non-statutory)
✅ (expected)
✅ (expected)
✅ (expected)
Assesses air, noise, amenity impacts
EHDC Ecologist / Wildlife Trust
◻️ (non-statutory)
✅ (expected)
✅ (expected)
✅ (expected)
Local non-statutory consultees for biodiversity
Southern Water / Utility Providers
◻️ (non-statutory)
✅ (site-dependent)
✅ (site-dependent)
✅ (frequently engaged)
Non-statutory, often essential for capacity input
NHS / ICB
◻️ (non-statutory)
◻️ (best practice)
◻️ (best practice)
◻️ (routinely consulted)
Non-statutory at all stages; increasingly involved due to population growth and health service strain
HCC Education
❌ (discretionary)
◻️ (context-sensitive)
◻️ (expected)
◻️ (expected)
Non-statutory; engaged where school capacity is affected
EHDC Planning Policy / Urban Design
❌ (internal)
◻️ (required input)
◻️ (required input)
◻️ (required for compliance)
Internal consultee for policy/design compliance
Parish Councils
❌ (not statutory)
❌ (not statutory)
◻️ (public comment)
✅ (consulted by law)
Required to be consulted on applications; may comment on ES if published
General Public
❌ (not included)
❌ (not included)
✅ (consultation required)
✅ (consultation required)
Legal right to comment on ES and planning applications
These stages build upon one another. For example, concerns raised at screening may lead to scoping input, which influences the depth of the Environmental Statement. Later, feedback on the full planning application must reflect and incorporate the evidence and conditions shaped through earlier stages.
When deciding whether to approve a development or request a full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) must consider whether the proposal will cause significant impacts. These impacts must be understood through the lens of material planning considerations — legally recognised issues that affect the use and development of land in the public interest.
This table maps material considerations to the planning consultees who inform them, using a health check analogy to help clarify each role. Statutory and non-statutory consultee designations are also indicated, as well as their relevance to the screening and assessment process.
Material Consideration
Relevant Consultee(s)
Mandatory Status
Health Analogy
🚗 Traffic and Access
National Highways, Local Highways Authority
✅ / ❌ (depending on road type)
🦴 Orthopaedic / 💪 Musculoskeletal – ensure the body’s transport systems can move safely
🌧️ Flood Risk
Environment Agency, Lead Local Flood Authority
✅ Statutory
💧 Vascular / 🩺 Kidney – prevent flooding and ensure water balance
🌬️ Air and Water Quality
EA, Environmental Health, Natural England
✅ / ❌ (depending on scope)
🫁 Pulmonologist / Nephrologist – clean air and filtered water support systemic health
🌿 Environmental Impact
Natural England, EHDC Ecologist, Wildlife Trust
✅ / ❌ (varies by case and designation)
🌬️ Respiratory / 🧬 Immune – detect environmental stress and defend against long-term harm
🏥 Infrastructure and Services
NHS / ICB, HCC Education, Utility Providers
❌ Non-statutory (best practice)
🏥 Capacity planner / 🧒 Paediatrician – checks system load and growth readiness
🧱 Heritage and Conservation
Historic England
✅ Statutory
🧠 Memory care specialist – protects long-term cultural identity
🧍 Residential Amenity
EHDC Case Officer, Environmental Health
❌ Non-statutory
🛏️ Quality of life check – light, noise, smell, overbearing effects
💼 Economic Impact
Economic Development Officer, Applicant
❌ Non-statutory
📈 Health economics – benefit vs risk analysis
🏘️ Land Use (Site Suitability)
EHDC Planning Policy
✅ (Development Plan must be used)
🧾 Eligibility check – confirms if the land is suitable for this form of treatment
⚖️ Local & National Planning Policy
EHDC Planning Officer
✅ Required by law
📋 Treatment protocol – ensures the surgery follows national health guidelines
🎨 Design and Appearance
EHDC Urban Design / Planning Officer
❌ Non-statutory
👁️ Cosmetic specialist – ensures the development integrates aesthetically and functionally
🔄 Sustainability
Planning Policy, Environment, Transport Teams
❌ Emerging standard
🧬 Preventative medicine – ensures long-term recovery, not just survival
📣 Public Opinion
Public / Parish Councils
✅ Publicity and participation required by law; material comments must be considered
👪 Carers / family – provide lived experience and flag risks otherwise missed
📣 Clarifying Public Involvement: Notification vs Consultation on EIA
For the General Public, it’s important to distinguish between two types of legal engagement:
✅ Must be notified (Planning Application Stage): This is a legal requirement under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The local authority must publish or issue notices to inform residents of planning applications. The public then has a right to comment, and any material concerns must be considered.
✅ Must be consulted on the Environmental Statement (Full EIA): Under the EIA Regulations 2017, when a full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is required, the developer submits an Environmental Statement (ES). The public must be given at least 30 days to read and respond to the ES. These comments must be formally reviewed before a planning decision is made.
🔍 In short: Notification gives the public the right to speak; consultation on the ES gives them the right to respond to technical findings — both are legally required, but serve different purposes.
📘 Clarifying Terms: “Statutory” vs “Required by Law”
In planning and EIA contexts, both terms imply legal obligations, but they differ in scope:
✅ Statutory means the consultee is specifically named in legislation or regulations and must be consulted when relevant (e.g. Environment Agency, Historic England).
✅ Required by law refers more broadly to legally mandated processes (like public consultation or publication), not tied to any specific named consultee. It covers duties such as notifying the public of planning applications or consulting them on Environmental Statements.
In short: Statutory = a named organisation must be consulted. Required by law = a process or outcome must happen under legal duty.
📚 Glossary of Acronyms
EA – Environment Agency
LLFA – Lead Local Flood Authority
ICB – Integrated Care Board (NHS)
SSSI – Site of Special Scientific Interest
SAC – Special Area of Conservation
HCC – Hampshire County Council
EHDC – East Hampshire District Council
LPA – Local Planning Authority
EIA – Environmental Impact Assessment
ES – Environmental Statement
⚠️ Notes on Materiality and Legal Weight
Public comments are only relevant if they relate to material considerations
LPAs must publish reasoning when rejecting or accepting input that raises these issues
Many consultees provide input under multiple headings, and the final judgment rests with the LPA
While not all consultees are statutory, they often raise issues that have legal weight if ignored
This framework helps EHDC and other LPAs ensure that decisions are:
✅ Legally defensible
✅ Environmentally and socially responsible
✅ Aligned with both planning policy and real-world service capacity
