Issue - meetings

Outline planning application for up to 79 No. dwellings with all matters reserved except access.

Mr Sunil Vidhani, a local resident, spoke in objection to the application.

The Service Manager – Development Services introduced the report and gave the following updated information to the committee:

The applicant had confirmed that they were content to enter into policy compliant obligations as detailed in the report. Concern had however been expressed in relation to the proposed Local Labour Agreement. The applicant had advised that as a small local company they operate using local sub-contractors, most of who had worked with them for many years. The applicant had also advised that they only directly employ supervisory and management staff. It was however considered that it was possible to enter into a flexible Local Labour Agreement which met the business model of the developer, but also provided a formal commitment to use local labour and to provide the Borough Council with appropriate monitoring targets.    

The Service Manager – Development Services informed Members that further to the publication of the report, Calverton Parish Council had raised concern that the proposed planning obligation did not seek a planning obligation for village centre improvements as required in the Calverton NP (Policy G2 – Developer Contributions). He accepted that the report did not specifically address the issue, which was an oversight and provided the following update:

This policy consideration has now been fully considered and I do not consider that the request made by CPC meets the tests set out in Section 122 of The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, namely that an obligation must be:

(a)       necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;

(b)       directly related to the development; and

(c)        fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

In particular, unlike with the requirements for education and healthcare, there is no quantifiable basis or policy that could be used to set out how a sum of money or a scheme of improvements would be both necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms or be fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to either of the developments being proposed. This being the case, if village centre improvements were to be included in the list of S106 requirements, the Borough Council would subsequently have no basis on which to negotiate what form or amount that this would take, notwithstanding the fact that to do so would not meet with the tests I have just outlined. The Parish Council has however suggested that the contribution should be £1,000 per dwelling. 

It should also be note that a planning application to improve the village centre (St Wilfred’s Square) has recently been approved and that much of the centre is in private ownership, meaning that it cannot benefit from S106 monies. Likewise, S106 monies should not be used to maintain existing areas under public ownership, as this too would not meet the tests.

Furthermore, I note that paragraph 52 of the Neighbourhood  ...  view the full minutes text for item 126