Agenda and minutes
Planning Advisory Group
Tuesday, 5th July, 2011 7.30 pm
Venue: MR3 - Civic Offices. View directions
Contact: Angela Guest, Committee Manager Tel. 020 8770 5122 Email email@example.com
Apologies for Absence & Notification of Substitutes
Apologies were received from Councillor Graham Whitham, for whom Councillor Peter Geiringer substituted, and Councillor Colin Hall.
Minutes of the Meeting held on 7 June 2011.
The minutes of the meeting held on 7 June 2011 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.
Further to minute 30(ii)/11 of the last meeting the Chair explained that she had requested Councillor Graham Whitham to draft a letter to the GLA regarding back garden land proposals.
Members considered a report which discussed the introduction of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) in Sutton, the background to CIL and the key issues to be considered in implementing the charge in the Borough. The report looked at examples of how a number of other boroughs had approached introducing the charge and outlined the proposed approach for Sutton as well as setting out a timetable for the work.
It was reported that before a levy could be set the council needed to produce an Infrastructure Plan which set out the infrastructure needs over the course of the Core Strategy document and conduct a Viability Study to ensure that any levy would not render development uneconomic. The differences between CIL and S106 were discussed.
Members requested that accountability measures be factored into the final scheme for payments made to other bodies e.g. Primary Care Trust or Environment Agency, to ensure value for money.
There was discussion regarding the approach to setting the levy in that health and education facilities could have a reduced rate as could Sutton Town Centre and other districts. It was explained that whatever levy was set it would need to be justified and that it was proposed to set a standard levy to ensure simplicity and understanding.
It was suggested that council officers could undertake the viability study rather than employing consultants but it was reported that there was a capacity issue and maybe a lack of in-house expertise.
Resolved: (i) To note the key issues involved in implementing the Charge for the Borough.
(ii) To agree the approach to introducing the Charge, as set out in paragraphs 2.20 and 2.24 of the report, subject to the findings of the viability study.
(iii) That the timetable for producing the CIL document, as set out in the report was agreed.
Members considered the draft Planning Brief for the Carshalton College and council sites (offices and car park) in Denmark Road.
A list describing five amendments put forward by Carshalton College was tabled. There was one amendment which was not considered appropriate by officers which read: ‘would prefer less detail and more flexibility in paragraphs 5.29 to 5.32’. Officers disagreed with this as the level of detail/flexibility contained therein was consistent with what the council had set out on its own sites.
Following an arboricultural report which stated that the trees lining Denmark Road had a lot of life in them, were considered substantial trees, and contributed to the landscape, the Planning Brief had sought to ensure as many of the trees as possible along Denmark Road were retained.
There was much discussion about the need for family houses, rather than flatted developments, in this area and how this could affect the layout of the site. A few members were of the opinion that it would be better to lose a few trees and build houses rather than retain the trees and have flats built. It was reported that if members were minded to insist on houses and removal of trees that this would need to be put forward as an option. The Chair stated that the document should remain as it was in setting out council policy and that it would be the responsibility of the developer to state the case for any tree removal.
In response to a member question it was reported that any housing development would normally seek to have a 50/50 split between private ownership and affordable housing. Officers would aim to ensure that at least 70% of any affordable housing was for rent with the remainder for intermediate housing (shared ownership).
Members discussed giving the consultation a high profile and wished ward councillors to be involved. Carshalton Central ward councillors were to be included in this process as the site was on the border of two wards. The Chair requested that this consultation be kept separate to the other consultation taking place regarding other Carshalton sites.
Resolved: (i) That the draft Planning Brief was approved for public consultation.
(ii) To delegate authority to the Executive Head of Planning and Transportation, in consultation with the Chair of the Planning Advisory Group, to agree any changes to the document prior to consultation.
(iii) That ward councillors for The Wrythe and Carshalton Central be consulted on ideas to raise the profile of the consultation for the draft Planning Brief.
(iv) That ward councillors for The Wrythe and Carshalton Central be invited to attend the Planning Advisory Group meeting which will discuss the consultation results.
Date of Next Meeting
The next meeting is arranged for 6 September 2011.
Resolved: To note that the next meeting would be held on Tuesday 6 September 2011.