Planning Obligations

Monitoring Statement

July2009

General enquiries should be made to Stephen Faulkner (Principal Planner) on 01603 222752 (email ) or Ellen Jones (Planning Analyst) on 01603 638160 (email ) or Anita Ragan (Planner) on 01603 222731 (email ).

- 1 -

Contents

(i) Executive Summary

  1. Introduction
  1. Responses to Planning Obligation Consultations
  1. Value of Contributions Sought
  1. Status and Number of S106 Agreements
  1. Value of S106 Agreements
  1. Building Progress and Monies Received

Appendix

Contributions Paid to Date

S:\PLANNING STRATEGY\Planning Obligations\Monitoring\Half yearly monitoring\July 2009\Planning Obligations Statement - July 2009.doc
(i) Executive Summary

(a) Market Slow Down and County Council Response

The slow-down in the economy has begun to have an effect on the County Council’s Planning Obligations in the following areas:

(a)A reduction in enquiries - During 2008, the County Council responded to 112 planning obligation enquiries, an average of 9 per month. This was the highest annual figure since records began (see graph 1). However, during the first half of 2009,the County Council has responded to just 32 enquiries averaging just 5 per month. If this trend were to continue for the rest of the year the County Council would only respondto 64 enquiries, a decline of 43% compared to 2008.

(b)A fall in the value of new S106 agreements being signed. The value of new S106 agreements has fallen steeply in the first six months of 2009 reflecting a decline in major sites coming forward at this time. New S106s signed in the first six months of 2009 totalled just over £400,000 compared to an annual average of just under £3 million per annum over the past seven years (2001 – 2008); and

(c)A fall in the amount of receipts from extant S106 agreements. Up to 2008 the level of receipts had steadily risen year on year reflecting a confident housing market as new developments came on stream and phased contributions paid to the County Council. In 2008 the level of receipt peaked at around £2.8 million (see graph 6). However, in the first 6 months of 2009 less than £650,000 had been received due to many housing sites seeing very low levels of completions and hence critical trigger points for contributions not being met.

The County Council has responded to the economic slow-down through updating its Planning Obligations Standardsas follows:

In terms of positive help for the housing industry the new Standards have:

  • Frozen the education and library cost multipliers at 2008 levels. This freeze in contributions is hoped will provide some positive reassurance to the local housing market;
  • Provided clarification on the phasing of payments over the lifetime of the development, rather than being front loaded. This is hoped will provide some practical help to house-builders in terms of managing their cash-flows;
  • Not introduced any monitoring charge on developers relating to the servicing of S106 agreements, although the County Council does charge for the legal input into the drafting of S106 agreements.
  • Not introduced any new charges planned for household waste re-cycling and climate change initiatives.

In respect of minimising risk to the authority the Standards include:

  • Clearer reference to the use of Bonds where appropriate – i.e. seeking a Bond from a developer as security for payment so as to minimise the risk to the County Council in the event that a developer goes into administration/receivership at a later date; and
  • Increasing the time the County Council has to spend any developer contribution.

(b) Headline Monitoring Figures

Since the introduction of the agreed Planning Obligations Protocol in 1999, which has provided the mechanism for the District Councils to formally consult Norfolk County Council on applications over an agreed threshold, the County Council has responded to enquiries relating to 446 sites.

Since 1999 the County Council has signed up to 163 S106 agreements covering education, library and fire hydrant provision. The 163 agreements are worth just over £25.3 million. There are a further 27 draft agreements worth just over £6.1 million and the County Council has been consulted on a further 256 sites which could potentially yield a further £181.1 million.

In terms of the value of contributions agreed since 1999, South Norfolk has the largest share (43%) with North Norfolk having the lowest proportion of contributions (<1%) agreed by value (see graph 5). The high levels of contributions agreed in South Norfolk reflect the number of major sites that have come forward (permitted) in this period at locations such as Costessey, Cringleford, Wymondham and Poringland.

The Local Authority with the highest number of S106 agreements is King’s Lynn and West Norfolk with some 43 agreements (see graph 4). This is followed by Breckland with 30 agreements and South Norfolk with 28. Great Yarmouth has the lowest number of S106 agreements with only 10 agreements being entered into between 1999 and the end of June 2009.

In terms of the type of contributions agreed most have been for education purposes (97%). To date only £9.7 million (38%) of the agreed contributions has been collected due to the fact that:

  • Only a third (34%) of sites are now complete.
  • Some 20% of the agreed S106 sites have yet to start;
  • Many of those sites which have started have yet to reach their critical threshold (trigger points) as set out in the S106 agreements.

The County Council undertakes twice yearly surveys to monitor building progress on those “live” S106 sites (i.e. sites not yet complete). In the past this has relied heavily on District Council monitoring, but given the scale of contributions agreed and the limited resources many Districts were able to allocate to this exercise, the County Council now undertakes its own site surveys.

The attached monitoring statement also sets out where money has been spent in accordance with the signed S106 agreements. This covers education, libraries and fire hydrants and also includes a section on highway/transport contributions showing a further total of around £13.5 million secured through S106 agreements for transport schemes. In addition further contributions have been agreed for highway/transport contributions under S278 of the Highways Act (1980).

1. Introduction

Planning obligation contributions play an important role in the provision of county-wide services. The County Council is consulted by District Councils on all developments,above an agreed threshold, on the possible need for contributions for infrastructure and service provision.

Contributions sought from developers are based on the County Council’s Planning Obligations Standards, which were first introduced in 2000 and have subsequently been updated on an annual basis. The current Standards were last updated in April 2009.

This report quantifies the number and value of enquiries and signed106 agreements. The total figures are categorised according to geographic location of development (District Council) and type of contribution (i.e. education, library and fire hydrant provision). The report also sets out how the County Councilhas usedthe contributions paid to date.

The end date for statistics for this report is 30th June 2009.

Developers also contribute towards the construction and maintenance of highways and other related transport schemes. These contributions are dealt through both the Planning (S106 of the 1990 Town and Country Planning Act) and Highway legislation(S278 of the 1980 Highways Act). It should be noted that this aspect of planning obligations is dealt with by a separate team/section, however, this report does provide a broad summary of the transport contributions collected under the S106 process during a similar time period (see Appendix for detail).

2. Responses to Planning Obligations Consultations

Graph 1: Planning Obligations Responses by Calendar Year (2009 - only half year results)

The number of responses to District Councils and developers hasrisen(fairly) steadily between 1999 and 2008 as indicated in graph 1above. The average number of responses for complete years from 1999 – 2008 is 88 per annum or 7 per month. In 2008 the County Council responded to 112 enquiries, on average 9 per month, the highest annual figure to date. The County Council has responded to 32 enquiries in 2009 so far. If this trend were to continue, only 64 responses, an average of 5 per month would be made for the year, which is some 43% less than in 2008. This reduction in enquiries is most likely to be as a result of the current economic downturn.

Responses are made to a variety of enquiries from either the:

  • Local Planning Authority (LPA) – response to planning applications and Local Development Framework (LDF) consultations; or the
  • Developer – response to pre-application enquiries and enquiries on potential LDF site allocations.

Graph 2: All responses, by district, 1999 – June 2009

To datethe County Council has responded to enquiries on 446 sites, many of these have been multiple responses reflecting:

(a)Different stages in the planning process (pre-application, application, S106 negotiation);

(b)Different market conditions leading to new proposals being submitted on the same site.

King’s Lynn & West Norfolk and Breckland are the districts with the largest proportion of cases since 1999, with 22% and 19% respectively (see graph 2 above). Broadland and Great Yarmouth have the lowest proportion of enquiries responded to in this period. (The Broads Authority is exceptional in that it has a particularly low level of development which meets the criteria set out in the Protocol).

3. Value of ContributionsSought

Graph 3: Value of all contributions sought, by district, 1999 – June 2009 (including pre-application enquiries and those with draft orsigned S106 agreements)

In terms of the value of contributions sought since 1999, South Norfolk accounts for 62% of the total (£131 millionout of a total of £213 million). This reflects the fact that several strategic housing sites came forward in South Norfolk during this period at Poringland, Wymondham, Costessey and Cringleford. In addition there have been enquiries from the development industry relating to potential major housing sites in South Norfolk (i.e. within the Greater Norwich Development Partnership area).

4. Status and Number of S106 Agreements

District / Agreed S106 / Draft S106 / Pre-application / Total Cases/Sites
Breckland / 30 / 3 / 51 / 84
Broadland / 14 / 4 / 23 / 41
Great Yarmouth / 10 / 1 / 25 / 36
KLWN / 43 / 7 / 42 / 92
North Norfolk / 14 / 0 / 36 / 50
NorwichCity / 24 / 3 / 45 / 72
South Norfolk / 28 / 9 / 32 / 69
Broads Authority / 0 / 0 / 2 / 2
TOTAL / 163 / 27 / 256 / 446

Table 1: Status of S106 Agreements, by District, 1999 – June 2009

Graph 4: Status of S106 Agreements, by District, 1999 – June 2009

Not every enquiry will develop into a S106 agreement, since some requests received by the County Council are speculative. However, many of the enquiries received do progress from ‘outstanding’ to ‘draft’ status, and eventually through to a S106 agreement.

The Borough Council of King’s Lynn & West Norfolk have the highest number of signed S106 agreements of the seven districts, with 43 followed by Breckland (30)and South Norfolk (28).

5. Value of S106 Agreements

Table 2: Value of S106 Agreements, by District, 1999 – June 2009

District / Agreed S106 / Draft S106 / Pre-application / Total
Breckland / £3,242,888 / £1,116,594 / £10,615,305 / £14,974,787
Broadland / £1,802,910 / £286,287 / £14,356,559 / £16,445,756
Great Yarmouth / £1,300,705 / £365,910 / £8,715,023 / £10,381,638
KLWN / £6,224,080 / £584,040 / £23,607,484 / £30,415,604
North Norfolk / £61,727 / £0 / £2,274,954 / £2,336,681
Norwich / £1,678,226 / £385,041 / £4,457,805 / £6,521,072
South Norfolk / £11,030,511 / £3,381,320 / £117,081,004 / £131,492,835
Broads Authority / £0 / £0 / £7,703 / £7,703
TOTAL / £25,341,047 / £6,119,192 / £181,115,837 / £212,576,076

Norfolk County Council has entered into 163 S106 agreements since 1999 worth just over £25.3 million (see Tables 1 and 2). A further 27 agreements are currently (June 2009) in draft form and are worth an additional £6.1 million.

In addition pre-application enquiries, and those sites potentially coming forward through the Local Development Framework (LDF) process, could provide a further £181.1 million towards County Council services. However, this figure could change over time and has to be seen in the context of planned housing growth in the emerging LDFs up to, and beyond 2021.

Of the signed agreements, 43% (in value)relates to developments in South Norfolk, which has seen several large scale developments at Poringland, Cringleford, Wymondhamand Costessey. Table 2 and Graph 5 show the value of S106 agreements by District.

Graph 5: Value of S106 Agreements, by District, 1999 – June 2009

Table 3: Yearly Total for Agreed S106, 1999 –June 2009

Year / Education / Libraries / Hydrants / Total
2000 / £465,394 / £15,240 / £1,800 / £482,434
2001 / £1,097,308 / £32,410 / £11,250 / £1,140,968
2002 / £1,107,408 / £56,864 / £11,550 / £1,175,822
2003 / £1,032,928 / £21,690 / £3,150 / £1,057,768
2004 / £8,222,788 / £147,300 / £29,250 / £8,399,338
2005 / £1,119,646 / £34,800 / £4,650 / £1,159,096
2006 / £5,186,126 / £124,700 / £23,700 / £5,334,526
2007 / £2,694,767 / £73,268 / £17,260 / £2,785,295
2008 / £3,262,008 / £96,420 / £11,541 / £3,369,969
2009 / £392,088 / £37,800 / £5,943 / £435,831
£24,580,461 / £640,492 / £120,094 / £25,341,047

While contributions are requested for education, library and fire services, by far the highest value of S106 agreements signed to date relates to education contributions, accounting for almost £24.6 million (97%) of the £25.3 million agreed to date.Table 3 shows the value of S106s agreed year on year and shows significant peaks in 2004 and 2006 as major sites came forward (i.e. being permitted) in these years, which included, for example:Greenland Avenue, Wymondham (2004); North of River Tud, Costessey (Queens Hills) (2004); Cringleford (Round House Park) (2004); Former RAF base Watton (2006) and Lodge Farm, Costessey (2006). Agreements being signed so far in 2009 show a significant decline probably as a result of the current economic uncertainties.

6. Building Progress and Monies Received

Table 4: Total Contributions Sought/Agreed, by Service Department, 1999 – June 2009

Status / Education / Library / Fire / Total
Agreed S106 / £24,580,461 / £640,492 / £120,094 / £25,341,047
Draft S106 / £5,971,079 / £116,820 / £31,293 / £6,119,192
Pre-application / £174,891,988 / £5,662,374 / £561,475 / £181,115,837
Total / £205,443,528 / £6,419,686 / £712,862 / £212,576,076
Paid / £9,241,210 / £342,739 / £66,950 / £9,650,899

Table 5: Building Progress on Sites with Agreed Section 106, 1999 – June 2009(based at March 2009)

District / Permitted (but not started) / Started / Complete / Not known / Total
Breckland / 9 / 7 / 11 / 3 / 30
Broadland / 2 / 5 / 4 / 3 / 14
Great Yarmouth / 1 / 3 / 4 / 2 / 10
King’s Lynn &West Norfolk / 10 / 18 / 13 / 2 / 43
North Norfolk / 3 / 6 / 5 / 0 / 14
NorwichCity / 3 / 6 / 12 / 3 / 24
South Norfolk / 4 / 15 / 7 / 2 / 28
Total / 32 / 60 / 56 / 15 / 163

Tables 4 and 5 show the value of contributions agreed and what has been paid to date as well as building progress on the 163 agreed S106 sites. They show that while just over £25.3 million has been agreed only £9.2 million has actually been received. The reasons for this are:

(1)Only a third (34%) of sites have been completed;

(2)A further 32 sites (20%) have not yet started; and

(3)Many of the remaining sites, which are under construction, have yet to reach their critical threshold (i.e. when contributions are triggered). The County Council monitors these sites twice a year in order to ensure that when appropriate trigger points are reached the developer transfers contributions to the County Council.

Graph 6: Pro-rata monies received annually (2004 to 2009)

Graph 6 shows the value of monies received(pro-rata calculated) annually by the County Council since 2004 plus a projection to the end of 2009. It shows a steady increase in monies received until the end of 2008 with a sharp drop in the first six months of 2009. Since the beginning of 2009 only £646,867 (pro-rata figure) has been received from developers probably reflecting current economic uncertainties and subsequent reduction in house build.

The difference between the total monies received in Graph 6 and that displayed in Table 4 can be explained by the difference in start date of the two (Graph 6 starts in 2004 rather than 2000).

- 1 -

Appendix - Contributions Paid

The following tables (6–9) show in broad terms how monies received to date have been spent by the respective service departments.

Table 6: How Education Contributions Have Been Spent

Any questions on the table below please contact Jane Blackwell on 01603 222287

Figures highlighted in red show new additions since February 2009.

SITE / SETTLEMENT / MONEY PAID SO FAR / SCHOOLS IN CATCHMENT
Breckland
Besthorpe Rd / Attleborough / £81,529.50 / Attleborough infant/junior/high. Spent on growth project at AttleboroughHigh School.
Fengate Drove / Brandon / £0 / Weeting Primary and Methwold High.
London Road / Dereham / £116,200 / Grove House, St Nicholas Junior, Northgate High. Spent 50/50 on Northgate and NeatherdHigh Schools.
Moorgate Business Centre / Dereham / £0 / Grove House, St Nicholas Junior, Northgate High. Spent on a mobile replacement project at St Nicholas Junior School.
Norwich Road, former Little Chef / Dereham / £52,085 / DerehamChurch Infants, St Nicholas Junior, Dereham High Schools. Spent at Dereham 6th form centre to expand art and technology facilities.
Garboldisham Road / Kenninghall / £0 / Kenninghall Primary, Old Buckenham High. Money will be allocated to OldBuckenhamHigh School.
Lynn Road / Swaffham / £0 / Swaffham First, South Greenhoe Middle, Hamonds High. Will be allocated to Hamond’s High School as contribution to the Norfolk Schools Project there.
Castleacre Road / Swaffham / £0 / Will be allocated to one or more of - Swaffham Infants, Swaffham Junior and Hamonds High.
Croxton Rd Industrial Estate / Thetford / £77,995.26 / Thetford schools. Spent on a mobile replacement project at RosemaryMuskerHigh School.
Kilverstone Park/Charlock Rd / Thetford / £209,340 / Admirals Primary, Rosemary Musker High. Spent on projects at Rosemary Musker and AdmiralsJuniorSchools.
Thetford Road / Watton / £52,175 / Westfield Infant, Watton Junior, Wayland High. Allocated to WestfieldsInfantsSchool.
RAF Watton Technical Site / Watton / £0 / St Peter and St Pauls, Carbrooke, Watton Infant, Junior and High. Allocated to project at Carbrooke and any remainder to one or more of the Watton schools.
RAF Watton Technical Site / Watton / £281,206 / St Peter and St Paul, Carbrooke and Wayland High. Allocated to CarbrookePrimary School.
Norwich Road / Watton / £0 / To be allocated to one or more of - Westfield Infant, Watton Junior, Wayland High.
RAF Watton Radar Site / Watton / £0 / To be allocated to one or more of - Westfield Infant, Watton Junior, Wayland High.
£870,530.76
Broadland
St Michaels Hospital / Aylsham / £0 / To be allocated to one or more of - St Michaels, BureValley, Aylsham High.
East of Chapel Street / Cawston / £0 / To be allocated to one or more of - Cawston Primary, Reepham High.
Land off Horsbeck Way / Horsford / £66,698 / Horsford First or Middle or Taverham High. Mobile replacement project at HorsfordFirstSchool.
Land off Dog Lane / Horsford / £44,293 / Horsford Middle and Hellesdon High. Put towards Hellesdon High remodelling – arts/technology and sports hall.
Former Mill, Mill Road / Horstead / £35,340 / To be allocated to one or more of - Coltishall Primary, Broadland High.
Post Office Road/St Edmunds Road / Lingwood / £0 / To be allocated to one or more of - Lingwood Infant and Junior, AcleHigh School.
Little Plumstead hospital site / Little Plumstead / £302,825 / Little Plumstead Primary, Thorpe St Andrew High. Money has been allocated to the new Primary school at Little Plumstead.