Meeting documents

1.1 The negotiation by the Council of s.106 agreements to secure developer contributions to mitigate the effects of development traditionally has taken place on a site-by-site ad hoc basis. Whilst this approach has resulted in many successful agreements over the years, officers have been concerned that we haven't been able to ensure sufficient contributions to fully mitigate the effect of development. To this end a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) has been developed that will introduce a more rigorous, evidence-based and methodical approach to securing developer contributions. In preparing the SPD a Companion Guide has been prepared setting out in greater depth the Council's current Affordable Housing requirements.

That Cabinet :

3. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

3.1 The adoption of the SPD together with implementation of administrative and other procedural changes will significantly assist in ensuring that developer contributions mitigate the effects of development rather than placing this burden on local council tax payers. As such, this approach is a key element underpinning the Council's Medium Term Financial Strategies (Revenue and Capital).

3.2 The priority given to the various sorts of contribution required needs to be considered in the context of the Council's long-term vision for the area, but also the other potential sources of funding that are available. Hence the SPD recognised that it is a primary funding vehicle in relation to enabling the provision of affordable housing, but in relation to Transport Infrastructure, the requirements are more likely to be for `gap' funding. The range of contributions required is not yet comprehensive, for example it does not yet include public realm, although this is a key element of the Council's vision, in recognition of the need for further development of the policy basis in this area.

3.3 The SPD also recognises the need for contributions in respect of the costs of administering this process, referred to in paragraph 5.7.

3.4 It needs to be recognised that to the extent that the SPD has an effect on the development value of those Council's own property holdings, this will reduce the council's ability to generate capital receipts. Capital Receipts currently provide a significant source of funding for individual council services, e.g. school reorganisations or the development of the CHCs, as well as potentially in relation to funding for the public realm or other regeneration initiatives. This emphasises the need to ensure that the SPD, in time covers the full range of council services and for a corporate approach to prioritisation in any given circumstance.

3.5 Implementation of the SPD will need to take into account development viability so as not to discourage necessary development in the District.

4. CORPORATE PRIORITIES

• Improving life chances of disadvantaged teenagers and young people
• Improving school buildings
• Sustainable growth
• Improving the availability of Affordable Housing
• Improving transport and the public realm

4.2 It should also be noted that subsequent versions of the SPD could contribute to all eight of the Council's priorities, as further policy documents are published. (see Para. 5.3 below)

5 THE REPORT

5.1 Agreements under s.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act are used to secure developer contributions to mitigate the negative effects of development. In Bath and North East Somerset, the Council traditionally has undertaken such negotiations on an ad hoc site-by-site basis. Whilst this approach has resulted in many successful agreements over the years, this approach is inefficient and opportunities for a better 'capture rate' are being missed. To this end a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) has been developed. The SPD will introduce a more rigorous, evidence-based and methodical approach to capturing developer contributions and it will carry considerable weight in planning terms. This SPD puts the Council in the forefront of the Government's new proposals (Community Infrastructure Levy) to ensure a more coordinated approach to addressing the issue of developer contributions.

5.2 SPD can only be made to an adopted development plan. The Contributions SPD therefore will derive its legitimacy from the adopted Bath and North East Somerset Local Plan, in particular Policy IMP.1. The Local Plan provides a framework for development proposals up to 2011. Therefore, this first version of the SPD can only relate to new developments coming forward in the period leading up to that date.

5.3 The SPD will be a 'living document'. It will be reviewed and updated regularly in order to keep pace with changing circumstances and demands. It is proposed that the first review of the SPD will take place in conjunction with the adoption of the Core Strategy in 2010. This will afford the opportunity to revise the SPD and take account of the growth in housing and other areas that the Core Strategy DPD will bring forward. This SPD therefore provides a foundation for addressing infrastructure needs arising out of the Core Strategy. It will clearly be very important to ensure that reviews of the SPD are carefully synchronised with the adoption of components of the LDF as they come forward to ensure that there are no gaps in B&NES' ability to capture contributions.

5.4 Cabinet will be aware that the Adopted SPD for the Bath and Western Riverside (BWR) contains specific developer contribution requirements associated with the development of that site. The (BWR) SPD will not be amended by the Planning Obligations SPD and the two policy documents will therefore sit alongside each other.

5.5 An SPD must also be based on sound evidence. This is particularly important with a document that will be the subject of tough negotiation. Members will note that the scope of the draft SPD is fairly narrow. It covers transportation, affordable housing, children's services, libraries, sport & leisure and green space provision. The scope is narrow because these are the only areas where a sufficiently rigorous evidence-base currently is available to justify the requirement for contributions. Other service requirements can be included in negotiations for contributions when sufficient evidence is provided. The result will be that the development industry will know precisely what Bath & North East Somerset will require from them in contributions and where it wants the contributions spent. There may still be opportunities to seek contributions on issues not in the SPD provided they are robustly justified as a material consideration and backed by sound evidence.

5.6 The SPD will be accompanied by a Companion Guide that explains, in greater detail, the Council's requirements for Affordable Housing. Whilst the document will not form part of the statutory SPD it will be a very useful aid in negotiations in this area and Cabinet approval will lend weight to it.

5.7 There is also a need to ensure that the control and administration process associated with the management and monitoring of the obligations are robust. This will ensure that the obligations are complied with. It will also enable the maintenance of a data base which will assist in transparency and aid reporting and monitoring.

5.8 As more and more items are added to the SPD members clearly will need to advise officers on where the priorities lie and where to place the emphasis in negotiations with developers.

5.9 If Cabinet approves the Draft SPD it will then be subject to six weeks' statutory public consultation. Responses will be analysed and changes to the draft SPD made as appropriate. It is intended to bring the SPD back to Cabinet for adoption at a subsequent meeting.

6. RISK MANAGEMENT

6.1 The report author and Lead Cabinet member have fully reviewed the risk assessment related to the issue and recommendations, in compliance with the Council's decision making risk management guidance.

6.2 The main risk associated with failure to produce an SPD is that significant levels of contributions will not be captured. This will result in more pressure on Council revenue and capital budgets as resources will need to be diverted to mitigate the effects of development.

7 EQUALITIES

7.1 A proportionate equalities impact assessment has been carried out using corporate guidelines. The overall impact is considered to be neutral.

8 RATIONALE

8.1 There is a need for a coherent and coordinated approach to securing the maximum amount of developer contributions without threatening the economic viability of the scheme to ensure that the effects of development are mitigated in a way that benefits the community.

9 OTHER OPTIONS CONSIDERED

9.1 The alternative to producing SPD is to continue with current ad hoc approach. This is considered to be inefficient and will be more so given the significant growth the district will face over the next 20 years.

10 CONSULTATION

10.1 Cabinet members; Other B&NES Services; Section 151 Finance Officer; Chief Executive; Monitoring Officer, Strategic Directors Group

10.2 Public Consultation on the SPD is a statutory requirement which will be undertaken in accordance with the Council's adopted Statement of Community Involvement.

11 ISSUES TO CONSIDER IN REACHING THE DECISION

11.1 Customer Focus; Corporate; Other Legal Considerations.

12 ADVICE SOUGHT

12.1 The Council's Monitoring Officer (Council Solicitor) and Section 151 Officer (Strategic Director - Support Services) have had the opportunity to input to this report and have cleared it for publication.