Agenda item

The Commission considered a report of the Chief Executive on the proposed changes to the Leicestershire County Council Planning Obligations Policy which was last refreshed in 2019.  A copy of the report marked ‘Agenda Item 9’ is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussion, the following points were made:

(i)               Some Members questioned the benefit of travel packs at a time of reducing public transport and suggested that if access to buses or trains were not available, these were of little benefit to residents moving into new developments.  Members noted that more flexibility on how these vouchers could be used was being considered.  However, it was questioned if there was no access to trains or buses, what could be regarded as ‘sustainable’ transport, for example, could the voucher be used towards purchasing a bicycle.  The Chief Executive undertook to liaise with colleagues in the Environment and Transport Department and to provide more clarity to Members after the meeting.

(ii)              It was suggested that officers should be permitted to revise the fees within the Policy without the need for further review the Policy itself to ensure these were kept up to date and reflective of the costs incurred by the Council.  Members noted that this would be the desired approach, but that new legislation was expected and therefore a further review of the Policy would be required, at which point this proposal could be addressed.

(iii)            A Member queried the change in approach regarding the provision of bus services for new developments.  It was noted that currently developers had a choice and often opted to pay a contribution up front to the Council who would then commission the service when needed.  This meant, however, that the Council did not benefit from the indexation that accrued between the time the payment was received and the point at which the service needed to be commissioned.  The approach in future would therefore be for developers to commission the service and details regarding what service was to be provided would be detailed with the section 106 developer agreement.  Members were reassured that developers could not amend the agreed service without approval by the County Council during the first five years and that the new approach would transfer the risk and cost to developers.

(iv)            A Member commented that the National Planning Policy Framework suggested that consideration should be given by Councils to the planting of trees along the highway.  This often improved the appeal of new developments but the Council had so far been reluctant to adopt such trees given the future maintenance costs it incurred.  It was noted that some authorities had an approved list of species that could be planted along a highway and the Chief Executive undertook to discuss this further with the Environment and Transport Department and provide an update to Members after the meeting.

(v)             Members noted that the Council would seek to take account of public health matters but that this would vary from site to site and development to development.  The Council’s planning team would liaise with the Public Health Department to consider what influence it could have in line with planning policy.

(vi)            Section 106 developer contributions could only be sought to mitigate the impacts of a development, not to regularise an existing issue.  However, a Member argued that a development could exacerbate and significantly worsen an existing issue and that the Council should therefore seek funding to address that element.  Members noted that a new approach was being trialled with Charnwood Borough Council to consider the cumulative effect of developments in the area and to identify in advance where improvements would be needed to support future funding requests.  If successful, this would be rolled out to other areas.  

(vii)          A Member commented that the consultation appeared to be very technical and that members of the public might not therefore engage and respond.  It was noted that an easy-to-read guide would be provided when the consultation was launched but that some of the more technical sections could not be changed.  These were, however, targeted to developers that would be specifically affected by the Policy.  The Chief Executive undertook to provide a copy of the consultation to Commission members in advance of this being launched, if time permitted.

(viii)         A Member questioned what checks were made to determine whether or not a library stock levels met the statutory minimum stock requirements and if not, how the ability to seek developer contributions to support the purchase of more stock was communicated to community managed libraries.  The Chief Executive undertook to liaise with the Communities and Wellbeing Service and to provide further clarification after the meeting.

(ix)            It was noted that the new Policy would be reference the Highway and Transport Design Guide.  This would be amended to provide more detail once the Design Guide had also been updated.

(x)             The Council’s Planning Obligations Team had gone through a period of improvement and new robust processes had now been put in place to monitor income received and timelines as agreed in section 106 agreement to ensure funding was collected in a timely manner throughout the lifecycle of a development.  Members were pleased to note that work was also taking place with the Council’s Business Intelligence Team to improve the data available to members within their division.

RESOLVED:

(a)  That the proposed changes to the Council’s Planning Obligations Policy be noted and that the comments now made by the Commission be taken into account as part of the consultation and reported to the Cabinet as appropriate.

(b)  That the Chief Executive be requested to:

(i)               to liaise with colleagues in the Environment and Transport Department regarding the use of Travel Packs and the Council’s current approach to adopting trees planted within the highway, and to provide an update to Members of the Commission on both issues after the meeting;

(ii)              to share with Commission Members a copy of the consultation documents before this was launched and made public if time permitted;

(iii)            to liaise with the Communities and Wellbeing Service regarding checks made on library stock levels and where this was below the statutory minimum, what information was shared with community managed library regarding the ability to seek section 106 developer funding to purchase more stock, the Chief Executive to update Commission Members after the meeting.