WNPSC are using as a frame of reference by The revised wording, in what is now which borough council review the settlement paragraph 11.46, is more policy boundary in the future, or whether this categorical than was the case is an amendment to the SPB which is being within the Regulation 14 version, made by the WNP. which largely addresses the LPA’s previous concerns. However, the maps should be amended to remove reference to ‘proposed’ SPB, and instead state something along the lines of new or amended SPB once the WNP is ‘made’. 12.1.1 The text set out in paragraph would benefit CIL Amendment Regulations 2013: Met from some additional clarification. The of CIL by local councils “Application position in relation to CIL is that the 59C.A local council must use CIL This paragraph has been amended Regulation 123 list sets out the infrastructure receipts passed to it in accordance with in accordance with advice the borough council intends to spend its CIL regulation 59Aor 59B to support the previously provided by the LPA. on. 25% of the relevant CIL receipts will be development of the local area, council’s passed to the town council, but these do not or any part of that area, by funding - have to be spent on items on the regulation (a) the provision, improvement, 123 list. They can be spent on anything that replacement, operation or maintenance supports the development of the area. of infrastructure; or (b) anything else that is concerned with addressing the demands that development places on an area.” Policy In some circumstances, developer NPPF paragraph 203-205 (especially the Met CP1 contributions can be in kind, rather than tests in paragraph 204) through financial contributions. For example, obligations should only be This paragraph has been amended “Planning a developer can sometimes deliver highways sought where they meet all of the in accordance with advice upgrades themselves, rather than just paying previously provided by the LPA. following tests: for them. The policy should be amended to necessary to make the development take this into account as it is very focused on acceptable in planning terms; obtaining the financial contributions, rather directly related to the development; and than the desired infrastructure outcome. fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.”
WNPSC are using as a frame of reference by which borough council review the settlement policy boundary in the future, or whether this is an amendment to the SPB which is being made by the WNP. The revised wording, in what is now paragraph 11.46, is more categorical than was the case within the Regulation 14 version, which largely addresses the LPA’s previous concerns. However, the maps should be amended to remove reference to ‘proposed’ SPB, and instead state something along the lines of new or amended SPB once the WNP is ‘made’. 12.1.1 The text set out in paragraph would benefit from some additional clarification. The position in relation to CIL is that the Regulation 123 list sets out the infrastructure the borough council intends to spend its CIL on. 25% of the relevant CIL receipts will be passed to the town council, but these do not have to be spent on items on the regulation 123 list. They can be spent on anything that supports the development of the area. CIL Amendment Regulations 2013: “Application of CIL by local councils 59C.A local council must use CIL receipts passed to it in accordance with regulation 59Aor 59B to support the development of the local council’s area, or any part of that area, by funding - (a) the provision, improvement, replacement, operation or maintenance of infrastructure; or (b) anything else that is concerned with addressing the demands that development places on an area.” Met This paragraph has been amended in accordance with advice previously provided by the LPA. Policy CP1 In some circumstances, developer contributions can be in kind, rather than through financial contributions. For example, a developer can sometimes deliver highways upgrades themselves, rather than just paying for them. The policy should be amended to take this into account as it is very focused on obtaining the financial contributions, rather than the desired infrastructure outcome. NPPF paragraph 203-205 (especially the tests in paragraph 204) “Planning obligations should only be sought where they meet all of the following tests: necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; directly related to the development; and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.” Met This paragraph has been amended in accordance with advice previously provided by the LPA.