Parish Room, 3 Home Barn Court, the Street, Effingham KT24 5LG
Cllr Lightfoot – Effingham Parish Council (EPC)
Philip Davies – Local resident
C.Dick – Effingham Residents’ Association (EFFRA)
P.Stock – Local resident
David Gilchrist – Berkeley Homes (BH)
C.Ritchie – Parish Clerk (EPC)
Cllr Pindar – Chair, Effingham Parish Council (EPC)
Cllr Hogger – Effingham Parish Council, Guildford Borough Council (EPC/GBC)
J.Busher – Guildford Borough Council Planning Dept (GBC)
Katie Williams – Guildford Borough Council Planning Dept (GBC)
A.McPhillips – Berkeley Homes (BH)
R.Barnfield – Howard of Effingham School (HoE)
Anne Persson – Howard of Effingham (HoE)
Greg Devine – Surrey Highways (SCC)
P.Davies took the Chair due to apologies from Cllr Pindar (EPC). The aims are of the working group are to identify and highlight potential Section 106 funding priorities for Effingham for discussion with Guildford BC and developers.
As for the Liaison group all discussions are held Without Prejudice which means that all discussions taking place in the working group meetings are considered separate from any EPC assessment of future planning applications and have no impact on the decision of EPC regarding an application. This also applies to EFFRA.
Representation from GBC Planning department has been withdrawn from 17 Oct due to receipt of a formal planning application submission from Berkeley Homes.
Section 106 Proposal Update
D.Gilchrist (BH) advised that although a planning application had been submitted to Guildford BC, the S106 enabling and viability submission had not been finalised and was still not yet available.
The working group felt that this offered an opportunity to collate and review previous suggested S106 proposed projects for consideration. Copies of GBC and EPC without prejudice documents summarising potential projects were provided to D.Gilchrist (BH).
Discussion on the SPA/SANG requirement contributions confirmed that a normal SANG contribution (ie for Effingham Common as a SANG) would be 38% and this would then be allocated by GBC.
Clerk gave an overview of the recent discussions between GBC, EPC and residents regarding the proposal for a 12 space car park on Effingham Common as part of the requirement for a SANG. GBC intend to carry out a visitor survey and consider site options for a car park. EPC will be providing data on the last two such reviews and previously identified issues. It was confirmed that the provision of a car park does have an impact on development 5-7km from site.
D.Gilchrist (BH) advised that it was considered that the provision of a new secondary school and its community facilities could mitigate against education considerations and that they had been advised that Surrey CC (SCC) had confirmed that they required no contributions for the primary school. Cllr Lightfoot (EPC) asked that written confirmation from SCC be made available on this . DG
Affordable Housing Considerations
D.Gilchrist (BH) confirmed that discussions continue with GBC of the level of affordable housing required. GBC’s usual recommendation is a level of 35% but D.Gilchrist advised that BH would be requesting a lower level in the range 0-20% which would be a mix of both affordable housing and shared ownership. D.Gilchrist confirmed that if GBC insist on a 35% level of affordable housing the development would not be able to proceed.
S106 highways contributions will be based around the aspirational list of highways improvements compile for SCC by G.Devine and discussed at the Liaison meeting. D.Gilchrist advised that should EPC have any further highways suggestions these should be submitted to GBC and SCC.
Clerk gave an overview of the without prejudice S106 EPC community projects proposals sent to GBC. Key requests are centred around the KGV site which has been identified both by EPC and the village as key to the community, with an aspiration for the future to develop the KGV hall as a community hub, including hall rebuild to include eg development of a medical room facility, improved disabled access, improved changing and toilet facilities, improved sports pitches and facilities. The provision of a burial ground extension is a further key project.
Enabling & Viability Submission
D.Gilchrist advised that, although not finalised , it appeared likely that £2M of S106 monies could be available based on the standard contribution calculations used nationally. £0.5M of this would be SANG designated.
P.Davies, local resident, asked whether the use of a national contribution calculation was appropriate given the location and scale of the proposed development and suggested that £2M would be a minimum contribution expected. EPC and EFFRA would be considering assessment of its own enabling and viability calculation which it would be prepared to submit to GBC should it feel Berkeley Homes submission had understated required contributions.
D.Gilchrist advised that once the enabling and viability submission had been finalised with GBC, then EPC and the village should negotiate with GBC to ensure their priority projects are considered for funding.