Minutes:
2. Planning and Section 106 Presentation/Q&A
Emma Talbot, Head of Planning
London Borough of Lewisham
2.1 Emma Talbot’s presentation addressed five key areas:
2.2 Housing need
Emma explained that a need for 25,000 new homes across the borough by 2031 had been identified. Planning policy requires up to 50% to be “affordable”. This is subject to viability and is an approach that is set at the national planning level. She then covered key areas of planning and local information of particular relevance to Evelyn residents.
2.3 Deptford Regeneration and Growth Area
Emma explained that all policies relating to the regeneration of the area are in line with national and local planning policies. As background, she explained that in 2009 London Borough of Lewisham’s Planning Department had met with the local community to identify what they considered to be good and bad places. Information from this consultation had informed the approach to regeneration planning in Deptford.
She confirmed that plans were in train for the following building and regeneration works:
Convoys Wharf 3,500 units
Deptford Wharf 1,132 units
Plough Way Site 566 units
Marine Wharf East 225 units
Cannon Wharf 679 units
Yeoman Street c. 100 units
Other key sites
New Bermondsey 2,400 units
Bermondsey 199 units
When assessing impacts, these are looked at cumulatively.
2.4 Section 106
Emma explained the purpose of S.106 agreements as being legal contracts between the Council and developers through which contribute towards provision and facilities that offset the impacts of their development, secure affordable housing and capture the benefit of schemes.
For example, in the Convoys Wharf S.106, the developer is required to support the construction of a new school worth £6.9m.
2.5 Community Infrastructure Levy
For developments agreed after 2015, S.106 agreements will be largely superseded by the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) - a setcharge to developers per square metre of development, aimed at supporting wider infrastructure, e.g. education or public health facilities. S.106 will still be used for affordable housing and for contributions which are not infrastructure. Most of the strategic sites approved within the Evelyn ward were done so before the introduction of the local CIL charge.
Emma explained that the Council was currently in the process of preparing an infrastructure delivery plan which will identify needs at a Borough wide level and will be subject to public consultation with local communities. Consultation on this front will start later in the year but communities will need to be aware that available funds are needed to support growth and there are many competing interests for what is a finite amount of money available .
Consideration was being given to the development of a community trust as a legacy fund for available community monies as well as a process for consulting with local communities on local priorities.
2.6 Questions following the presentation:
A number of questions were raised following Emma’s presentation. These included:
Concerns relating to perceived inaccuracies in relation to the information provided during the presentation on Section106 agreements. Concern was expressed that not all S.106 funding was spent in local communities. Specific questions included:
Q. How can you evidence where the money is going?
Q. Why is it that in Deptford, where so much development work is taking place, so little is for social housing?
There were a number of questions relating to specific developments and S.106 agreements, including a question about the number of affordable units at Convoys Wharf, the amount spent on consulting on a skate park, how much funding had been identified for the Trundle’s Road development and when the Neptune’s Wharf development would begin.
The cost of new properties is £430 a week, resulting in local people being pushed out. At this rate local people will be moved out of London.
A. Emma responded by stating that the Council uses transparent processes, backed by consultation and comprehensive records. She also highlighted that the Council does not have the power to force the 50% target for affordable homes and instead looks at the viability of each individual scheme to maximise the delivery of affordable homes in each case. Whilst the concerns with what is classed as affordable were understood, the definition is set at the national level. However, the Mayor does have a plan to build 500 affordable units within the Borough.
Q. With regard to employment, over 4000 jobs are said to be being made available through the S.106 scheme. How many residents from Evelyn Ward have been employed as a result? The jobs do not appear to be being advertised in the local community. For example, one resident stated that they had contacted Barrett’s, only to find that they are not giving jobs to local people.
A. With regard to employment, Emma stated that £250,000 had been invested in developing a business skills initiative.
Q. With regard to infrastructure, a question was raised about the apparently limited numbers of buses and trains and a lack of communication about infrastructure between developers.
2.7 It was pointed out that Southwark Council is currently consulting on making public viability appraisals submitted with applications and providing real transparency around the actions and plans of developers, enabling the public to make successful arguments about the number of homes they build. It was suggested that the London Borough of Lewisham should consider a similar approach.
2.8 Emma highlighted that the London Borough of Lewisham is currently looking at viability appraisals and providing greater transparency. These are a standard part of the submission but are confidential due to the financial information they contain. At present, viability reports undertaken on behalf of the Council are being made publically available to ensure that the public have access to financial information and considerations which are not sensitive. This is being kept under review.
2.9 Emma finished her presentation by saying that not all answers were available at this time. However, a further response would be prepared and circulated via the Assembly Officer.