To comment on the report to be considered by Cabinet on the 24 September 2015.

Members considered the report that was being submitted to the 24 September 2015 Cabinet.

The S106 Special Projects Officer, Hilary Oliver, referred Members to the report which gave details of the S106 income of £6,664,806 and expenditure of £4,504,285 during 2014-2015 and projected spend in 2015/2016.  Members were informed that details of the income sources and specific projects could be found in Appendix 1.

It was noted that of the balances of unspent funds the highest amounts were held by Education (£6,129,354), Highways (£4,405,872), Affordable Housing (£2,380,161), Open Space (£1,977,884) and Libraries (£1,049,225).  Members were informed that plans existed for the utilisation of 34% of held funds.

The S106 Special Projects Officer explained that the Supplementary Planning Document was not included with the report this time.

In the ensuing discussion the following points / questions were noted:

•           That projects for capital spend were identified in the capital programme.

•           That Developer Contributions identified for particular services (e.g. affordable housing) would be used strategically across the Royal Borough.

•           That the £508,375.36 White Waltham Developer Contributions for Highways was considered a very large amount.

•           That the Council needed to be able to demonstrate that contributions from developers were needed either for strategic projects or directly related to a development (e.g. Chapel Arches required improvements to the Waitrose junction).

•           That the CIL 123 list (the list of infrastructure that the Council will partly or wholly fund from CIL receipts) could be changed subject to the Council going out to consultation.

•           That it would be a challenge to explain to residents why the Maidenhead Area Action Plan area had zero viability.

•           That parishes did pay revenue costs and had had the legal agreements explained to them with regard to devolution to parishes. 

•           That para 5.2.6 in Appendix 1 should read Eton rather than Windsor.

•           That there needed to be a clear policy on how projects were put forward that could be funded from S106 receipts, especially for education and highway.

•           That education papers referred to regular demographic trends, rather than emerging trends from the Local Plan.

•           How many dwellings were likely to be built with the approximate £1million affordable housing funds? 

•           That no elected Members sat on the S106 Project Board although it was expressed that conflicts of interest could arise.

•           That a methodology was needed to inform all Members what funds were available and a monitoring mechanism for officers reporting to Cabinet.

•           That Housing Solutions would look at affordable housing within the Royal Borough across the board.

•           The S106 Special Projects Officer hoped to do training sessions with Parish Council on the CIL.

•           That a presentation about the CIL be brought to a future meeting.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: The Planning & Housing Overview & Scrutiny Panel unanimously agreed to recommend the following:

a)         The financial report in Appendix 1 is noted.

b)         The relevant Strategic Directors are responsible for ensuring that S106 income received is utilised in a timely manner to ensure the infrastructure required to support new development is provided

c)         The relevant Strategic Directors will ensure that funds are utilised in compliance with the purpose of the legal agreement and in support of the council’s priority infrastructure projects where appropriate