Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (As Amended)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (As Amended) S78 Appeal Proof of Evidence b y Andrew Tyrer Developer Contributions Officer Leicestershire County Council Appeal by William Davies Ltd and Jelson Ltd under s 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) in respect of the failure of the Local Planning Authority to give notice of its decision within the appropriate period for the residential development, village centre (including primary school, retail, business and other uses (class A1, A2 A3 A4 A5 B1 D1 (Healthcare) and D2 (community facilities), public open space, recreation areas, play areas, woodland planting and associated infrastructure including roads, sewers and water storage ponds. Andrew Tyrer BA (Hons) MSocSci MRTPI Developer Contributions Officer Leicestershire County Council 21 12 2011 Appeal Reference - APP/G2435/A/11/2158154/NWF Local Planning Authority Reference - 10/01208/OUTM CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Planning Policy Context 3.0 Justification 4.0 Education 5.0 Libraries 6.0 Civic Amenity 7.0 Section 106 Legal Agreement 8.0 Conclusion 2 1.0 Introduction 1.1 I am Andrew Henderson Tyrer. Since August 2007 I have been employed by Leicestershire County Council (LCC) as the Developer Contributions Officer in the Community Services Department. I hold a B.A. (Hons) in Town and Country Planning and I have over fifteen years professional planning experience and held various posts in local government such as Warwickshire County Council and in the public sector and I was previously planning officer with British Waterways with responsibility for responding to planning consultations and the negotiation of developer contributions. I have been a member of the Royal Town Planning Institute since 1998. 1.2 I appear at this inquiry in support of LCC’s view that this proposed development should not be permitted in the absence of suitable and appropriate contributions being made in respect of the education contribution, civic amenity contribution and the library facilities contribution. The majority of those aforementioned contribution response were submitted to North West Leicestershire County Council by email on the 7th February 2011 and set out LCC’s requirements for developer contributions. 1.3 In preparing paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of my proof of evidence I have relied heavily on advice and guidance from colleagues in the County Council’s Education Service, the Waste Management Team and the Libraries and Information Service. Colleagues from those services will be made available, subject to permission from the Inspector, to answer detailed questions regarding the contributions sought if required to do so. 1.4 The following paragraphs provide an overview of the development contributions policies and procedures of the County Council and separate detailed evidence will be provided by other expert witnesses where necessary. Relevant documents and plans in respect of this particular proof of evidence are attached. 3 1.3 It is widely recognised that some developments may impact on infrastructure and services and that planning obligations should be made to offset those impacts. Leicestershire County Council (LCC) currently seeks developer contributions on major residential developments for a range of infrastructure and services, for example, education, highways/transportation, civic amenity and library facilities. LCC seeks to address the relevant needs by seeking contributions based on the standards as encouraged in paragraph B33 of Circular 05/2005. In the case of the proposed development of up to 1420 dwellings at land at Stephenson Way Coalville, the County Council would if the planning appeal was upheld require financial contributions for education, civic amenity, library facilities. In the case of the highways and public transport requirements this may be dealt with by either a separate statement or through the statement of common ground. 1.2 It is considered that the requirements of LCC as indicated previously in correspondence with North West Leicestershire District Council, further to their consultation letter of 13th January do meet the necessity tests set out in the Government’s Circular 05/2005 are in accordance with the policy and the LCC SRDCL. LCC’s responses are attached at Appendix 1. 2.0 Planning Policy Context 2.1 The following policies are relevant in relation to the developer contributions:- Central Government Advice 2.2 Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) states ‘A planning obligation may only constitute a reason for granting planning permission or the development if the obligation is - • Necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms • Directly related to the development • Fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development 4 2.3 PPS1: Delivering Sustainable Development sets out the key objectives of the planning system. It seeks to ensure that development supports existing communities and contributes to the creation of safe, sustainable, liveable and mixed communities with good access to jobs and key services or all members of the community. It also advises that the provision of a transparent, flexible, predictable, efficient and effective planning system through the provision of a plan led approach is needed to deliver sustainable development. Paragraph 26(viii) states that the impact of proposed development may adversely affect people who do not benefit directly. Local Planning Authorities can use planning conditions or obligations to ameliorate such impacts. 2.4 PPS3: Housing covers the Government objectives on planning for housing. It indicates that development should be located in areas with good access to key services and infrastructure. 2.5 LCC consider the provision of necessary infrastructure and community services to be an essential part of the Government’s philosophy in relation to the creation of sustainable communities. Background to County Council Policy 2.6 The County Council has for several years sought contributions from developers. LCC adopted its original supplementary guidance in March 2001, together with many of the District Planning Authorities. This guidance required a review in light of changing circumstances, revised calculations and experience since its adoption. It is in light of those changes the County Council updated its Statement of Requirements for Developer Contributions in Leicestershire (SRDCL). The guidance was updated (including a period of consultation with a broad range of bodies and related organisations prior to its adoption by the County Council on 6th December 2006. 2.6 In December 20007 the County Council undertook an interim review to take account of revised standards/formulae. The document sets out the likely levels and types of contributions required towards County Council services and infrastructure in relation to new development (Appendix 1). 2.7 The production of the SRDCL reflects the advice at paragraphs B25-30 of Circular 05/2005 which amongst other things requires all tiers of government 5 with legitimate land-use planning interests to be involved at an appropriate level and in a focused way in providing an evidence base and setting planning obligations policies. 2.8 The SRDCL provides a consistent approach across the County in relation to relation to developer contributions for County Council services and infrastructure. It is intended that the SRDCL should be adopted by each Local Planning Authority in Leicestershire in support of its own supplementary guidance for its own services. 2.9 In appropriate cases the SRDCL will form a material consideration in the determination of planning applications and could form the basis or grounds for refusing a planning application if in some instances, it may be possible to make development proposals acceptable through the use of planning conditions (see Circular 11/95). Where this is not the case, it might be possible to make development acceptable through the use of planning obligations in accordance with Circular 2005/05. 2.10 The SRDCL gives an indication of the level of contributions, developers would be expected to make. However all contributions will be assessed on a site by site basis directly related to an individual proposal. The SRDCL should be used as a guide. Some of its content may not be relevant for all proposals and in certain circumstances additional or alternative elements may need to be addressed. Detailed discussion as to the precise nature of the appropriate contributions may need to be undertaken. 2.11 The level of contributions may change as a result of, for example, inflation and other factors such as legislation, government advice, adoption of new development plans, experience gained through negotiation and securing agreements. The criteria for individual services are reviewed annually normally with effect from 1st April. The SRDCL can be updated accordingly and more substantial reviews will be undertaken when necessary. It is proposed to undertake a revie w of the SRDCL in early to mid 2012. 6 3.0 Justification 3.1 It is widely recognised that developments may impact on services and infrastructure provided by public bodies and that planning obligations should be made to offset those impacts. The infrastructure and services affected by the appeal site proposal are considered in more detail below. Leicestershire County Council (LCC) is seeking developer contributions towards Education; Civic Amenity; Library Facilities and Highways and Transportation. The latter will be subject to determination in