Share We asked, you said, we did on Facebook
Share We asked, you said, we did on Linkedin
Email We asked, you said, we did link
We asked
We asked for your views on the draft Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) before finalising the document.
You said
12 responses were received, and the responses have been summarised, responded to, and changes made to the document where appropriate. The main issues, arising from the consultation and the Council’s response to them broadly centred around the following matters:
- further details of the evidence base, and methodology applied to justify employment and training obligations
- the requirement to secure and provide a large number or all of the financial obligations within the SPD (particularly the full set of employment and training obligations) may compromise the viability and deliverability of development
- with reference to Affordable Housing, clarification is sought within the SPD as to whether fast-track schemes which deliver 35% affordable housing are also subject to an early-stage viability review. The SPD should acknowledge the Portfolio approach towards affordable housing provision on public land for Purpose Build Student Accommodation and Build to Rent Schemes
- further details should be provided within the SPD on the Councils transport infrastructure projects envisaged to come forward via S106 planning obligations
- health contributions are covered under the CIL Regulations and to secure further financial obligations towards healthcare provision under S106 Agreements may result in “double counting” with the CIL provision
- clarification sought that financial contributions towards open space apply to major and large-scale developments only
- financial contribution towards maintenance for of offsite play space may be unnecessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms
- the SPD seeks to secure three separate financial obligations towards Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG); Urban Green Factor (UGF); on the grounds that it unduly onerous on developers to provide, and may compromise viability and deliverability of schemes
- a respondent recommends that additional obligations on water quality and management should be added to the final SPD.
- the SPD should consider whether it’s the Planning Obligations SPD could be used as a mechanism to implement Local Plan policy and proposals relating to the conservation of the historic environment.
We did
In accordance with Part 5 (the Regulation 18(4(b) of The Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012, a Statement (presented in table format) setting out a summary of all the representations received and the Council’s proposed response to them
The representations received have been summarised, responded to, and changes were identified in the Consultation Statement and made to the final Planning Obligations SPD. A number of points raised in the consultation submissions merit changes to the SPD in order to provide greater clarity on some of the planning obligations.
The adopted Planning Obligations SPD, and a detailed Consultation Statement are available to view on the council’s website: