Meeting documents

Members will receive a status update from the service area. They will also consider the next steps for the inquiry following Initial exploratory work carried out to identify and refine the key areas for further examination within the scope.

John Rippon, Policy and Planning Business Manager, Place

John Rippon, Policy and Planning Business Manager, Place was welcomed to the meeting.

Mr Rippon gave the following summary of the current position of the S106 process, the scope of future and ongoing lines of inquiry to identify and refine key areas for further examination.

The S106 inquiry is split into four key areas; governance, commissioning and delivery, local engagement and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).

Governance: Internal Policy and Process

This is about ensuring that robust systems are in place to effectively manage the creation and monitoring of S106 agreements, including payments and budget management.

Work that has taken place today includes;

·      Systems are currently being developed jointly with Finance, Legal Services, and Highways Development Management team

·      All of the funding is now held in the corporate reserve account

·      The creation of a central register of all the S106 agreements across the County Council. External Interim support has called in to help with this (2 days a week).

·      A stronger audit trail needs to be created within the process. The onus is currently on the developer to come forward with a payment once the trigger in the 106 agreement has been hit.  A more proactive stance approach is needed in terms of sending standard notifications to developers and presentation of invoices to they can be tracked through the system.

·      Better use of IT systems such as Uniform – the County Council’s planning database.  This system is used to record County Council planning applications and consultation responses.

·      The possibility of expanding the scope of the system to include highways responses

·      As part of the future shape programme, there will be a new s106 officer post created in the Transport, Economy and Environment structure.  Recruitment to the post will take place in the New Year.

Commissioning and delivery of s106 schemes

This is to ensure that schemes are effectively delivered and S106 funds are spent in a timely fashion.

·      This is an ongoing area of concern particularly where there are historic contributions and where there is the need to get the schemes delivered on the ground.

·      Work is taking place with TfB and Ringway Jacobs to produce a rolling annual programme of schemes.

·      TfB submitted a draft proposal which sets out how they would like to address this going forward. These programmes will be reported through the Business Investment Group to release the funds and allow the capital budget to be managed more effectively.

·      Close working is taking place with TfB and Ringway Jacobs to jointly develop project briefs, have clear time bound outcomes and objectives and have better communication and consultation with local residents and Members.

·      There could be potential economies of scale by tying elements together such as other work programmes for Local Area Forums and TfB

·      Bringing together historic S106 schemes as a priority. In some cases there could be the need to consider re-negotiation of the terms of the S106 agreements

Councillors and local influence in s106 agreements/contributions

To ensure that Local Members and Communities have a genuine influence in securing the best outcomes to mitigate the impact of development.

·      Is the County Council asking developers for the right schemes?  How can the County Council ensure that it is meeting the aspirations of the local community? This would partly involve the Highways Development Management team in terms of how can they make more informed decisions.  Processed and cultures within the teams are being looked at.

·      There is the potential to develop a large degree of community engagement through Local Area Forums. Many LAFs have a wish-list of schemes for which they look for funding through a delegated budget.  Very often there are insufficient funds available to deliver the needs.  Again it is a case of joining up the processes in terms of what happens on the ground and with the Highways team.

·      Ensuring that local Members are being briefed on the responses received about local planning applications.  This is about getting a true sense of local perspective from local members to enable informed decisions to be given about planning advice to planning authorities.

·      In the absence of local plans and the advent of the National Policy Planning Framework, the service needs to be bolder in terms of its asks especially with medium and larger planning applications and to tie this in with major infrastructure proposals where funds are being sought through other sources i.e. the LEP.

·      Work is taking place with other local planning authorities around the emerging local plans, helping to shape and influence the plans to meet the needs in housing and growth, informing CIL lists and how this can be supported.

Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and partnership working

This is an area for further discussion and development.

·      Bucks County Council is not a CIL collecting authority.  With this in mind, how can the County Council best influence the district councils to secure better transport through CIL and how can local needs to be captured in this process? There is still the option of s106 agreements but these are likely to be heavily scrutinised through planning appeals.

·      Other possible funding sources need to be looked at such as match funding by the use of local growth funds from the Department of Transport.

·      Wycombe is the only area which has not adopted the CIL charging schedule.  It is unlikely that a charging schedule will be seen in Aylesbury Vale for a few years.

During discussions, the following points were made and questions were asked.

It sounds as if positive steps are being made particularly in terms of governance and management.

Work with local members is paramount.

One area of concern is the lack of s106 monies being put into the cultural side such as museums.  S106s should be broadened to pick up the cultural side not just the infrastructure.

Is there a programme for the introduction for CIL across the country or is introduction at the discretion of the local district council.  The introduction of CIL is at the discretion of district councils.  CIL regulations become statute in April 2015.  Even with the ongoing S106 agreements, there will be the need to meet the tests of CIL regulations. Whether planning authorities develop and adopt CIL charging schedules on the back of local plans or not would depend largely on the levels of growth and development within those respective areas. Wycombe naturally lends itself to CIL because of the potential housing need over the next 20 years. Some of the other areas such as South Bucks are heavily affected by Green belt constraints and are therefore not necessarily going to experience that quantum of development, don’t lend themselves to the supporting the CIL schedule.

There is concern that many other groups will want to be involved and there will be too many involved in the process.  The Member is elected represent the process and the majority of the people in their area.  This should be contained.

Recommendations

·      The Committee is asked to agree all or some of the key areas as general terms of reference for inquiry refining scope, as agreed in June, into clear work streams.

·      The Committee is asked to agree that the inquiry evidence will be received through the ETL committee, inviting the Chairman of the FPR select committee and will be added to the committee work programme for February/March 2015.  All evidence will be heard in one committee meeting.

·      The Committee is asked to agreed that in December 2014/January 2015, the Policy Officer is to undertake desk research on behalf of the committee, collating background information, identifying key witnesses and other Local Authority processes and to develop inquiry timetable/plan and to arrange an evidence session for February/March 2015.

Members of the Committee agreed that the following should remain in scope;

·      Further work to look at CIL in more detail

·      How the local influence and councillors work needs further

     investigation

·      The commissioning of the delivery of S106 schemes – there is

     concern about the slowness of delivery in some divisions

·      Internal processes and policies

The following was also agreed;

·      A one day inquiry session is to be held in February/March 2015. Attendees are to be confirmed (Wycombe and Aylesbury Vale, a representative of the Royal Town and Planning Institute).

·      The Policy Officer is to continue with some desk research to provide better evidence to format questions and provide guidance.