CED16

13 August 2015

Mark Southgate Director of Major Applications and Plans The Planning Inspectorate, 3/18 Eagle Wing, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Bristol, BS1 6PN Enquiries to: David Coleman Email: [email protected]

Dear Mr Southgate

Maldon District Community Infrastructure Levy and LDP costs

I am writing to request further clarification in relation to the progression of the Maldon District CIL Charging Schedule and also to request the reimbursement of costs that the Council incurred associated with the Local Development Plan Examination-in-Public earlier this year.

Maldon District Community Infrastructure Levy

As you will recall, Maldon District Council submitted the Maldon District Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule for Examination-in-Public (EiP) in September 2014. The CIL Charging Schedule was produced alongside the LDP for the District, and takes into account the latest CIL Regulations and viability considerations associated with all planned strategic development and infrastructure requirements in the District. Mr David Vickery was appointed to undertake the EiP for both the LDP and for the CIL Charging Schedule, and decided that the examination of the CIL Charging Schedule should not be progressed until he was convinced that the LDP could be found to be sound. In January of this year the Planning Minister (Brandon Lewis MP) wrote to Priti Patel MP and John Whittingdale MP to confirm that the Inspector would not wait until his report into the Local Plan examination was complete before starting the CIL examination and that he would work on the two simultaneously.

Since that time the Secretary of State has ‘called-in’ the LDP for his determination citing that there is a need ‘to test whether the planning inspector has taken a proportionate and balanced view on the local plan as a whole in the light of national planning policy.’ DCLG is currently reviewing and considering the Plan thoroughly and will issue its decision as soon as possible. The Council has sought clarification from DCLG in relation to the status of the CIL Charging Schedule and has been informed that the call-in of the LDP does not impact upon CIL in anyway. Therefore, the CIL Charging Schedule remains with PINS and the Council awaits further clarification in relation to the process and timetable for the progression of the Examination.

The Council is also aware that the Examination of the CIL Charging Schedule is not dependent upon having an adopted Local Development Plan, and there have been precedents elsewhere whereby CIL has been introduced prior to the adoption of an up to date Local Plan. For instance, in July of this year Inspector Philip Staddon concluded in his Examination of the Birmingham City Council CIL Charging Schedule that “there is nothing contained within either the Planning Act 2008 or the Localism Act 2011 that makes having an up-to-date and adopted plan in place a prerequisite for a CIL regime”. He concluded that the strength of the Council’s evidence meant that "complexities and delays" in its local plan preparation CED16 should not set back the introduction of the levy. He said: "The important point is the evidence base itself, rather than the procedural status of the development plan".

The Council and the local community remains concerned that delays in the introduction of the CIL Charging Schedule will result in contributions towards future infrastructure in the District being lost. This is exacerbated in the case of Maldon because the LDP requires planning contributions from developers in accordance with the CIL Regulations, meaning that the Council’s ability to pool Section 106 contributions from multiple developers is restricted. In effect, developers who should be paying significant contributions towards future infrastructure through CIL payments in accordance with the Council’s Infrastructure Delivery Plan are able to avoid making such payments at this time before the CIL Charging Schedule is implemented. In addition, the Council has already received planning applications for all but three sites out of eleven sites identified within the LDP as either Garden Suburbs or Strategic Allocations to meet future growth needs. It is therefore imperative that the CIL Examination can be progressed as swiftly as possible in order to avoid any further delays to the introduction of CIL in the District and any further lost CIL revenue.

Maldon District Local Development Plan Examination-in-Public costs

Following the submission of the LDP for Examination in April 2014, the Council incurred significant costs associated with the Examination process. These costs are highly significant for a relatively small local authority, particularly in the context of ongoing cuts being required to local government expenditure. In addition, it should be noted that the Council will also be required to meet costs associated with the ‘call-in’ of the LDP by the Secretary of State in the future.

As set out above, the ‘call-in’ of the Plan is to test the approach of the Planning Inspector, rather than any suggestion that the Council has failed in its ability to produce an up to date local plan. I would therefore like to request that the Planning Inspectorate reimburses the Council in relation to the following costs incurred directly as a result of the Examination process:

LDP Programme Officer: £22,018.46 Costs of consultants: £20,481.48 Venue hire: £8,417.71 Total costs: £50,917.65

For the reasons set out above I would also be grateful to receive your confirmation that the Council will not be invoiced for any of the work undertaken by the appointed Planning Inspector during the EiP.

I would be grateful if you could give consideration to the above and I look forward to receiving your response as soon as possible.

Yours Sincerely

David Coleman Group Manager Strategic Planning

CC: Mary Travers, Planning Inspectorate Fiona Marshall, Maldon District Council Chief Executive Priti Patel MP John Whittingdale MP