'1'0: Chris Fridlingtoii 7 19 November 2009 From: Louckia Taylor Re: Green Farm,King 8terndale,8106 Unilateral Undertaking Chris, I attach a copy of the draft Unilateral Undertaking which I have amended and returned to the applicant. You raised several issues in your instruction form, which I will deal with below. 1. I don't think it matters that the resolution states that the approval is subject to entry into a s106 agreement, and they have offered a Unilateral Undertaking. The effect is the same and the UU would be acceptable instead of an I' _ agreement - we do not need to re-draft it as an agreement. - VI. i) f fd\f\.Jl..,{'"'l 2. You also highlighted in your instruction form the fact that the wording of the UU does not conform with part of the Committee resolution. The resolution approves the permission: "... subject to entry into a s1061egal agreement securing the refurbishment works to Barn 3..." The refurbishment works to Barn 3 are not currently included in the s106 obligations, as they are presumably required as part of the planning permission itself and would not normally be requirements in a s106. However, it appears that the reason it was included in the resolution is that the report envisages that the proposed works to Barn 3 be completed before first occupation. I could put in an obligation that the Development be completed before first occupation of Barn 3, although this would mean amending the deed so that the obligations also extend to the subsequent owner of Barn 3(which they don't at the moment - see clause 3.4). The other way of doing it would be to make this a requirement in the planning permission. - Perhaps we c01.!ld disyuss how lhis issue should be deall'l'ith. C I I "J ( I - I ~tk Cvf ev. c<-f(JlcJ (Jrl~ CN1 01' 'l ""-- V-Ju- r:! 3. You questioned whether the mechanism proposed in the draft s106 is d-<.J ~( sufficient to secure works to Barns 1and 2. I believe that the UU is sufficient J..J in this regard. It imposes obligations on the owner of Green Farm to submit an 1.-' approved scheme for Barns I and 2 for the Authority's approval before commencing development, and to fully implement the scheme within 2 years of the first sale of Barn 3. It requires the owner, in the event of a sale of Barn 3, to apply the net proceeds of sale of Barn 3to the cost of repair, refurbishment and improvement of Barns 1and 2 and the courtyard, in the order set out in Schedule 4, and up to a maximum value of the net proceeds of sale. Let me know if you think there is anything of concern with this. - I "'1 "'J ~c.,f'{1 Louckia ( To: Chris Fridlington 19 November 2009 From: Louckia Taylor Re: Green Farm, King 8terndale, 8106 Unilateral Undertaking Chris, I attach a copy of the draft Unilateral Undertaking which I have amended and returned to the appl icant. You raised several issues in your instruction form, which I will deal with below. I. I don't think it matters that the resolution states that the approval is subject to entry into a sl06 agreement, and they have offered a Unilateral Undertaking. The effect is the same and the UU would be acceptable instead of an agreement - we do not need to re-draft it as an agreement. 2. You also highlighted in your instruction form the fact that the wording of the UU does not conform with part of the Committee resolution. The resolution approves the permission: "... subject to entry into a slO61egal agreement securing the refurbishment works to Barn 3..." The refurbishment works to Barn 3are not currently included in the sl 06 obligations, as they are presumably required as part of the planning permission itself and would not normally be requirements in a sl 06. However, it appears that the reason it was included in the resolution is that the report envisages that the proposed works to Barn 3 be completed before first occupation. I could put in an obligation that the Development be completed before first occupation of Barn 3, although this would mean amending the deed so that the obligations also extend to the subsequent owner of Barn 3(which they don't at the moment - see clause 3.4). The other way of doing it would be to make this a requirement in the planning permission. Perhaps we could discuss how this issue should be dealt with. 3. You questioned whether the mechanism proposed in the draft sI06 is sufficient to secure works to Barns I and 2. I believe that the UU is sufficient in this regard. It imposes obligations on the owner of Green Farm to submit an approved scheme for Barns I and 2for the Authority's approval before commencing development, and to fully implement the scheme within 2 years of the first sale of Barn 3. It requires the owner, in the event ofa sale of Barn 3, to apply the net proceeds of sale of Barn 3to the cost of repair, refurbishment and improvement of Barns I and 2 and the courtyard, in the order set out in Schedule 4, and up to a maximum value of the net proceeds of sale. Let me know if you think there is anything of concern with this. Louckia Tel: 01629 816200 Fax: 01629 816310 E-mail: customer,[email protected] Web: www.peakdistrict.gov.uk Minicom: 01629 816319 Aldem House. Baslow Road. Bakewell. Derbyshire. DE45 IAE ~--------NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY Your ref NJSITCIWI L871/3 Pricketts Solicitors Ourref: LT/Green Farm 30 Great Underbank Dale: 17 November 2009 Stockport SK1 1NB Dear Mr Seymour Proposed Planning Agreement- Green Farm. Earl Sterndale Application Number: NP/HPKl0609/0493 Thank you for your letters dated 15 and 21 October with enclosures. I apologise for the delay in reverting to you. I have now considered the draft Unilateral Undertaking, and enclose a copy of it with some proposed amendments for your consideration. As to the Authority's fee for dealing with this, I would estimate that this would not exceed 200. With regard to your comment about the risk of the application being disposed of, I confirm that any delays on the part of the Authority will of course not be attributed to your client when deciding whether the application should be disposed of on account of delays. Turning to your client's title, I confirm that I do not wish to see a copy of the 1950 conveyance, but should be grateful if you would deal with the following: 1. I am returning the 1986 conveyance and would be grateful if you would provide a certified copy. 2. I note that the joint tenancy was severed. In these circumstances please confirm whether there has been/will be an assent vesting the legal estate in the name of a trustee. 3. Please confirm that there are no mortgages on the land. I look forward to hearing from you. Yours sincerely Louckia Taylor Assistant Solicitor Legal Services :4i', Member of the Association of National Park Author/ties Holder o(Council of Europe Diploma '. Chief Executive: Jim Dixon Chair: Narendra Bajaria CBE Deputy Chair: Trevor Bagshaw Working together for the Peak District National Park: -A special environment -A welcoming place at the heart of the nation -Vibrant communities and a thriving economy. THIS UNILATERAL UNDERTAKING is given on 2009 BY: STELLA ANN WILLIAMS of Green Farm, King Stemdale, Buxton, Derbyshire, SK17 9SL ('the Owner') TO: PEAK DISTRICT NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY of Aldem House, Baslow Road, Bakewell, Derbyshire, DE45 IAE ('the Authority') RECITALS I. The Authority is the local planning authority for the purposes of th,e 1990 Act for the area in which the Site is situated. / 2, The Owner is the freehold owner of the Site as sct out in Schedule 1. c 3, The Owner has by the Planning Application applied to the Authority for permission to "'\-" ; carry out the Development. 'c. '" /' 4, The Authority has decided to grant Planning Permission for thc Development In accordancc with the Planning Application subject to conditions and subjcct to the making of this deed without which Planning Permission for the Deyelopment would not ~. bel!t'l granted. tl'..~, .' s, The Owner is .prepared to' enter into,1h~d~}d'in ordcr to'secure thc planning obligations "';- .10 ,f' '! ,.t it creatcs. <t",:, /' t' NOW THIS DEED WITNESSES as followsf" . 't' d /t t t' 1. De fi 1m Ions a~)11 erpre a Jon ~..th." .,' C'" / I" 1.1. DefinitionS. ' / ~~o~~:g~~ses of~thi,~ deed the following expressions shall have,the following A~ ~ ,./ -. ~ 1.1.1. 'the 1990 Act' means the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, \,~\ ~:~ '" '1.1.2. 'the Approved Scheme' means a scheme of measures to repair and restore v. / ~ /'W. ~v.rtl "".C'.Bal"ns I and 2,::,s serout in Schedule 4 below, 1.1.3: 'Authority' includes the successors to the Authority as Local Planning Authority, 1.104. 'Bam 3' means the area shown coloured yellow on the Plan and 'Barns I and 2' means the area shown coloured green on the Plan and 'Barns J 2 ".h. and 3' together shall be read and construed accordingly, o/. -> .\"'- ~"M.R.l>c.N\/.l vw. IN&. $'W-w'''' cJ1~ """~ r """'- 1.1.5. 'the Commencement of Development' means the commencement of any material operation (as defined in the 1990 Act section 56(4)) fonning part of the Development other than (for the purposes of this deed and for 1 no other purpose) operations consisting of site clearance, demolition work, archaeological investigations, investigations for the purpose of assessing ground conditions, remedial work in respect of any contamination or other adverse ground conditions, diversion and laying of services, erection of any temporary means of enclosure, the temporary display of site notices or advertisements and 'Commence the Development' shall be construed accordingly, I 1.