West Leigh Residents Association
January 2007
Planning Obligation and Vehicle Parking Standards
General Comments
Para 1.6 As the
immediate local community will be the area most impacted by development
schemes, then it should be the priority beneficiary from developer
contributions.
2. Section One
Para 2.12
Southend has high infrastructure needs and therefore realistic developer
contributions should be sought. Southend should be in the upper quartile when
calculating financial benefit.
Para 2.22
Developer contributions must not be used to mitigate a breach in planning
guidelines – they must not be used as a trade-off.
Para 2.35
Provision of infrastructure etc should NOT “wherever possible, be provided on
site”. As a priority, contributions must benefit the local community.
Para 2.42
Unilateral undertakings may occur due to lack of Council resources. Unilateral
undertakings should be excluded from the process.
Para 2.49 Funds
must never revert to the payee.
Para 2.55 If the
developer cannot afford to pay the necessary contributions, the development
cannot proceed.
Para 2.60
Monitoring reports must be readily accessible by the general public (preferably
on the Council’s website)
|
Recipient of
developer contributions |
WLRA preferred option |
WLRA Comment |
|
Transport,
highways and accessibility |
1 |
Agree in
principle but the threshold for negotiation should be higher at 30 dwellings Contributions
should also go towards improved street lighting |
|
Education,
training and skills |
2 |
Contributions
should only go towards services provided by LEA |
|
Community
facilities |
2 |
Schemes for care
homes and sheltered housing should be exempt. Contributions
should also go towards crime prevention initiatives |
|
Public art and
public realm |
2 |
|
|
Natural
environment and conservation |
2 |
|
|
Affordable
housing |
1 |
Scaled formula
– affordable units should form part of a non-profit making housing trust |
|
Flood risk,
waste and resources |
1 |
Contributions
to flood defences should only be made for schemes in flood risk areas and
commensurate with the level of risk. Several factors should be planning
prerequisite. |
|
Administration
and monitoring |
2 |
|
|
Option |
Summary |
WLRA view |
|
1 (Council’s
preferred option) |
Contributions
from schemes over 9 dwellings should be determined by a mix of negotiation
and formula (charge per unit). Contributions from schemes under 10 units should
be determined by formula |
With some
exceptions, thought this too cumbersome, expensive to administer and
unnecessarily complicated |
|
2 |
Contributions
from all schemes should be determined by formula |
Thought this
straightforward, uncomplicated and less expensive |
|
3 |
Contributions
from all schemes should be determined by negotiation |
Unnecessary
waste of Council resources. |
|
Option |
Provision
for dwellings |
WLRA |
|
1 (Council’s
preferred option) |
1.5 spaces per
dwelling in main urban areas with good access to public transport 2 spaces per
dwelling in urban location with poor off-peak public transport |
WLRA’s
preferred option but additionally lower provision is not negotiable |
|
2 |
Provision as
above but as a maximum only |
|
|
3 |
Existing
arrangements |
|