STRATEGY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE
24 JUNE 2008
ITEM 02
SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT: DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS
Report of the:
Head of Planning
Contact:
Mark Berry
Urgent Decision?(yes/no)
No
If yes, reason urgent decision required:
Annexes/Appendices (attached):
Annexe 1 - Developer Contributions
Supplementary Planning Document
Other available papers (not attached):
Minutes of the meeting of the Planning Policy SubCommittee held on 3 June 2008.
Consultation
Draft
Developer
Supplementary Planning Document
Contributions
Schedule of consultation comments received and
Council responses
REPORT SUMMARY
This report sets out the recommendation of the Planning Policy Sub-Committee
regarding the adoption of a Supplementary Planning Document in relation to developer
contributions as part of the Council’s Local Development Framework.
Notes
RECOMMENDATION (S)
That the Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning
Document be adopted by the Council
1
Implications for the Council’s Key Priorities and Community Strategy
1.1
This Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) will assist in the delivery of many of
the Council’s Key Priorities and objectives of the Community Strategy.
1.2
Developer contributions will be used for enhancing the visual appearance of the
Borough, enhancing services for young people, health service improvements,
recycling and tackling anti-social behaviour. Aspects of the tariff will also serve to
tackle issues of climate change.
1.3
The affordable housing element of the SPD will help to address a key issue
identified in the Community Strategy and the forthcoming Local Area Agreement is
also likely to note this as a high priority. The tariff will also be used to address other
issues such as environmental improvements to Epsom town centre, provision for
young people, transportation issues and tackling antisocial behaviour.
Page 1 of 5
STRATEGY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE
24 JUNE 2008
2
Implications for the Committee’s Key Service Priorities
2.1
3
The proposed SPD would raise contributions for the provision and improvement of
local services. It is relevant therefore, to the delivery of the key service priorities of
several committees, not least those of leisure, social and the environment.
Background
3.1
4
ITEM 02
Following the adoption of the Core Strategy, a Supplementary Planning Document
(SPD) on Developer Contributions has been prepared. The aim of the document is
to provide clear guidance to developers as to how a number of the Core Strategy
policies will be applied.
Proposals
4.1
The SPD is in three parts; part one provides the background, part two covers
affordable housing, providing further detail to Core Strategy Policy CS9 (affordable
housing), while part three relates to financial contributions to infrastructure,
setting out how the Council will apply Core Strategy Policies CS4 (open space and
green infrastructure) and CS12 (community infrastructure). The SPD is attached at
Annexe 1.
Affordable Housing
4.2
Further detail is provided on the operation of the Core Strategy affordable housing
policy, which sets out the following thresholds and percentage requirements for
private housing development sites:
 Developments of between 5 to 14 units (or on sites between 0.15ha and
0.49ha) – 20% to be affordable
 Developments of 15 units or more (or on sites of 0.5ha or above) – 40% to
be affordable
Infrastructure
4.3
The second part of the SPD sets out the Council’s approach towards developer
contributions for various types of infrastructure. Developer contributions are a
means by which the Council can seek to ensure that services, facilities and
infrastructure keep pace with development. This includes not only the physical
infrastructure such as roads and utilities that enable development to proceed, but
also the community facilities and other improvements which will ensure occupiers
have adequate access to services such as education, healthcare and leisure
activities. Developers are therefore expected to fund or contribute directly to the
necessary improvements or new provision to serve the needs generated by the new
development. The SPD provides clear guidance to developers as to the level of
financial contributions that are likely to be required.
What was the previous approach in Epsom & Ewell?
4.4
The Council uses ‘Section 106’ legal agreements to obtain planning contributions,
but only from large developments and then for a limited range of infrastructure.
These agreements can often be complicated, and can take a long time to negotiate.
Page 2 of 5
STRATEGY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE
24 JUNE 2008
ITEM 02
How will the new approach be different?
4.5
The introduction of the SPD will provide the mechanism for negotiating contributions
from all net increases in dwellings, and commercial development above a certain
threshold. Contributions will be required for a wider range of infrastructure. The
SPD will also form the basis for negotiation on larger development schemes.
4.6
To ensure a quicker resolution of negotiations, and provide greater certainty for
developers, the SPD makes use of formulae and standard charges. Using these, a
developer can easily assess the required levels of financial contribution. The Audit
Commission has identified the fixed tariff approach as being clear, simple and
transparent. Preliminary work on this approach was done in collaboration with other
Surrey Districts and the County Council. Work between the Surrey authorities has
focussed on developing a code of practice which sets out common practice and
procedures on infrastructure contributions.
4.7
The SPD builds upon the Surrey code of practice and it is proposed initially to
collect monies for the following infrastructure, based on a tariff approach:
Beneficiary
Education
Transport
Libraries
Health
Open Space
Environmental Improvements
Community Facilities
Recycling
(Surrey CC – tariff based on Surrey formula)
(Surrey CC – tariff based on Surrey formula)
(Surrey CC – tariff based on Surrey formula)
(PCT – tariff based on PCT formula)
(EEBC – tariff based on local formula)
(EEBC – tariff based on local formula)
(EEBC – tariff based on local formula)
(EEBC – tariff based on local formula)
4.8
It is the intention to apply the tariffs in a consistent way, but without adopting a
blanket approach. Other contributions may be required but these will be assessed
on a case by case basis and this approach is likely to apply principally to larger
developments.
4.9
Technical and cost information contained in he SPD will be updated on an annual
basis. For example, the tariffs will be anchored the Retail Price Index (RPI). It is
proposed that a full review of the SPD will commence after two years of its
operation.
What might it mean for Epsom and Ewell & what are the priorities?
4.10
It is difficult to be precise over the likely impact of the proposed infrastructure
charges. However, under the proposals in the draft SPD, around 30% of the value
of all the financial contributions for infrastructure would be made to the Borough
Council, and around 70% to Surrey County Council.
4.11
Where a developer considers that the development viability of a scheme may be
threatened because of particular infrastructure requirements, they will be expected
to adopt an “open book” approach and provide a detailed development appraisal of
the scheme. This will be assessed independently by the Council.
Page 3 of 5
STRATEGY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE
24 JUNE 2008
4.12
ITEM 02
In cases where the Council agrees that the potential viability of a development is an
issue, the priority order for contributions is proposed to be:
1)
2)
3)
Site-specific issues (e.g. traffic junction improvements)
Affordable housing provision
Other infrastructure contributions as set out in the SPD
Development of the SPD & Planning Policy Sub-Committee recommendation
5
6
4.13
The SPD has been developed in accordance with the Town and Country Planning
(Local Development) (England) regulations 2004. The Planning Policy SubCommittee approved a draft version of the SPD which was consulted upon for five
weeks from 20 February to 26 March 2008. The document was sent to those
individuals / organisations on the Planning Division’s consultation database and was
made available on the Council’s website.
4.14
In total 34 representations were received, each making detailed comments on a
variety of aspects on the document. Comments were made by a broad spectrum of
respondents, including local groups, developers, agents and national bodies.
Officers have given careful consideration to all of these comments and have made
appropriate changes to produce the final version of the SPD. Notably, the
Government Office for the South East (GOSE) and the South East of England
Regional Assembly (SEERA) have given their support to this document.
4.15
The Planning Policy Sub-Committee has now considered the final version of the
SPD and has recommended its approval for adoption.
Financial and Manpower Implications
5.1
The proposed SPD would enable the Council to secure contributions towards the
provision of local services. There is, therefore, a significant financial benefit to the
Council which must be regarded as additional to the existing provision. These
contributions can only be raised in accordance with criteria set out in Government
Circular 05/2005. For instance, the circular requires that contributions must be
directly related to the proposed development. The SPD, therefore, sets out the
basis on which contributions will be sought, the level of such and the means by
which their use will be determined.
5.2
It is important to ensure that the contributions are then properly monitored and used
for the designated purpose. The SPD includes provision for a 5% administration fee
which is to be used to resource the effective monitoring of developer contributions.
This would involve the employment of an officer whose job will be to ensure that
monies are received and used appropriately. The number of contributions will
increase significantly as a result of the introduction of the SPD and in consequence
it is anticipated that this role will be full-time. There are no financial implications as
this post would be funded entirely by the developer contributions
Equalities and Other Legal Implications
6.1
There are no specific equality issues arising. Consultees have had an equal
opportunity to comment on the draft document in accordance with the Council’s
Statement of Community Involvement.
Page 4 of 5
STRATEGY AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE
24 JUNE 2008
6.2
7
9
The SPD has been drafted so as to be compliant with Circular 05/2005 and
proposed changes have been made to the draft document where objections have
been raised following consultation. GOSE and SEERA have confirmed that our
approach is in accordance with Government advice.
Sustainability Policy and Community Safety Implications
7.1
8
ITEM 02
The SPD has been subject to a sustainability appraisal which is available on the
Council’s website. A proportion of the funds which are generated for environmental
improvements may be spent on community safety initiatives such as CCTV.
Partnerships
8.1
The SPD is based upon the Surrey Code which was prepared jointly by authorities
in Surrey as part of the Surrey Collaboration project. The essence of the proposed
SPD is therefore largely consistent with the approach being taken by other
authorities in Surrey. This is a good example of partnership working and gives
strength to and a measure of consistency with the approach being taken by
neighbouring authorities.
8.2
Developer Contributions will be raised by the Local Planning Authority on behalf of
Surrey County Council and the Primary Care Trust.
8.3
Funds will be used to support many of the objectives of the LSP as identified above.
Risk Assessment
9.1
With support from GOSE and SEERA and consistency with other authorities in
Surrey there is recognition of the strength of the tariff approach that is proposed in
the SPD. Nevertheless, detailed objections to the approach have been made by
consultees. There is a slight risk of legal challenge if a consultee feels that their
objections have not been adequately addressed.
9.2
There is also some risk that developers will seek to undermine the SPD once it has
been adopted by challenging aspects of it. However, the document has been
drafted with this in mind. Experience elsewhere shows that developers appreciate
the predictability and consistency of the tariff approach and that they are generally
willing to comply. In the minority of cases where there is a difference of opinion
between the Council and Developers, appropriate resolution may be found by
recourse to the appeal system.
9.3
The Council is required to exercise flexibility where this is reasonable. Furthermore,
is proposed that the operation of the SPD is subject to a full review after the first two
years of operation. On this basis I consider that the Council’s approach, though not
risk free, is both reasonable and justified.
10 Conclusion and Recommendations
10.1
This SPD will be an essential element of the emerging Local Development
Framework. Its adoption will support all of the Council’s key objectives. Adoption at
the earliest opportunity is therefore desirable and has been recommended by
Planning Policy Sub-Committee.
WARD(S) AFFECTED: All
Page 5 of 5