Developer Contributions SPD

Object

Representation ID: 71724

Received: 20/02/2020

Respondent: Barton Willmore (now Stantec)

Legislative Context
SPD should be expanded to make reference to the Community Infrastructure Regulations and relevant sections of the NPPF and PPG ,particularly the standard approach to viability assessments.

Object

Representation ID: 71725

Received: 20/02/2020

Respondent: Barton Willmore (now Stantec)

Legislative Context
SPD needs to make specific reference to the relationship between CIL, and S106 with regard to Infrastructure funding (including the requirement for Local Authorities to set out an Annual Infrastructure Statement).

Support

Representation ID: 71726

Received: 20/02/2020

Respondent: Barton Willmore (now Stantec)

Procedures / Process (Viability)
Support is given to the SPD statement that recognises that some development proposals may be unable to meet all of the relevant policy and planning obligations while remaining economically viable / deliverable.

Object

Representation ID: 71727

Received: 20/02/2020

Respondent: Barton Willmore (now Stantec)

SPD should stipulate that Neighbourhood Plan policies are not expected to seek in excess of the Local Plan policy requirement, and that any that do must be the subject of a neighbourhood plan viability assessment.

Object

Representation ID: 71728

Received: 20/02/2020

Respondent: Barton Willmore (now Stantec)

.The text of the SPD should replicate the assumptions made / indicated on the CIL and Section 106 elements of the Council’s website that that set out the financial assumption for infrastructure contributions per dwelling on sites of various thresholds

Support

Representation ID: 71729

Received: 20/02/2020

Respondent: Barton Willmore (now Stantec)

Support for the site viability section. The SPD includes reference to the Council’s acceptance that in cases where a scheme is unable to meet the required S106 contributions the cumulative benefit of the scheme will be a material consideration

Object

Representation ID: 71730

Received: 20/02/2020

Respondent: Barton Willmore (now Stantec)

Monitoring and Enforcement
It is accepted that a ‘monitoring fee’ is appropriate , however consideration of a ‘cap’ to ensure that these fees are not an excessive burden on development should be considered.

Object

Representation ID: 71731

Received: 20/02/2020

Respondent: Barton Willmore (now Stantec)

Part 1 Appendix 3 – S106 Template
Appendix 3 provides a standard template, however consideration of the standard terms and trigger points should be added related to the site and size of the development.

Object

Representation ID: 71732

Received: 20/02/2020

Respondent: Barton Willmore (now Stantec)

Standardised metrics and worked examples should be used in the SPD to give an indication of contributions required for developments of various capacities.

Object

Representation ID: 71733

Received: 20/02/2020

Respondent: Barton Willmore (now Stantec)

It is considered unnecessary for the standards of construction to be included in the legal agreement as they will be a part of designs and plans of the approved application.