LENHAM NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN
INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY GROUP
Note of Meeting held on Tuesday 15thJanuary 2019 at the offices of DHA, Maidstone.
Present: David Knight
Guy Dixon, Savills for Knight
Mark Bewsey, Countryside
Matt Woodhead, DHA, for Countryside
Barry Chamberlain, Wealden
Richard Greenwood, Chair, LPC
Nick Osborne, Lenham Parish Council
Mark Presland, Sibley Pares, for LPC
Paul McCreery, PMC Planning for LPC
Tim Mitford Slade, Strutt & Parker/BNPP
Apologies: Darren Russell
Andrew Lawrence for Russell and Claire/Matthew Eastwood
Toby Hudson for Countryside
Tim Dean, Dean Lewis Estates for Barr
Not Represented: Jones Homes (David Stewart)
- The minutes of the previous meeting held on 20thNovember were circulated and agreed subject to the omission of Guy Dixon from Savills who was at the meeting representing David Knight.
- The principal landowning interests were defined:
- Barr – Dean Lewis Estates – Tim Dean;
- Towers/Eastwood –
Matthew Eastwood represented by Andrew Lawrence;
Claire Eastwood represented by Andrew Lawrence;
Lorraine Towers representing herself;
- Knight – Savills – Guy Dixon;
- Russell – Andrew Lawrence;
- Countryside – Matt Woodhead – DHA;
- Lenham PC – Sibley Pares – Mark Presland;
- Wealden – Barry Chamberlain;
- Jones Homes – David Stewart.
- The pressing business for the meeting was to discuss the Viability Study and so that item was taken first (Item 8.5 on the Agenda).
- Tim Mitford-Slade outlined his fee proposal to produce a viability study, for the 1000 homes proposed at Lenham.
- The generic approach is to produce a typology for greenfield residential sites at Lenham. This would cover a policy compliant planning situation including:
- CIL contributions
- S106 contributions
- Affordable housing at 40%
Tim Mitford-Slade indicated he would interrogate his database of sites and use a wealth of background knowledge to produce a robust estimate of infrastructure costs. He could also apply standard site revenue figures based on typical layouts and build mixes. He would apply robust figures for landowner returns (which would include any ransom payments) and developer profit margins justified by the risks involved. He would take on board any abnormals if the data presented these.
- This would produce the generic typology for viabilities as set out in government guidance. He would also indicate whether any evidence had emerged in this study to indicate whether any one of the seven LNP sites was significantly different in terms of viability to produce any different conclusion.
- The initial report would be produced by 1stFebruary 2019.
- Paul McCreery said he would take this initial report as a draft and would engage with MBC to ensure it contained the level of detail which was acceptable to the Council. Paul McCreery said the approach taken by Tim Mitford-Slade was, in his judgement, more than adequate to satisfy a Public Examination in the context of government planning guidance.
- Tim Mitford-Slade said his fixed fee of £16,900 plus VAT would cover the preparation of the above Stage 1 exercise.
- Paul McCreery indicated he had instructed Tim Mitford-Slade to prepare the study on behalf of LPC because of the urgency involved and because the above fee fell within the guidelines agreed by the IDG previously.
- LPC could reclaim the VAT and so the cost to developers would be net of this cost.
- LPC would seek to reclaim the cost of the study based pro-rata to the number of units allocated to each of the 7 sites in LNP Regulation 14 Consultation Draft, September 2018.
- Paul McCreery confirmed that any supporting retail/commercial/office uses within the Plan would be cost neutral to the residential.
- As regards each landowner the situation was as follows:
- Barr agreed to contribution;
- Towers/Eastwood unknown, not present. Paul McCreery to contact Andrew Lawrence to discuss/agreed. David Knight to similarly discuss with Lorraine Towers;
- Russell unknown at present. LPC (Paul McCreery) to contact Andrew Lawrence to arrange a meeting to agree/discuss;
- David Knight agreed to contribution;
- Lenham Parish Council agreed to contribution;
- Wealden Homes agreed to contribution.
Depending on whether Russell and Towers/Eastwood were included, the proportion expected would vary amongst the remaining members of the consortium.
- If any landowner wishes to receive an individual report on that land from Tim Mitford-Slade the cost would be £600 plus VAT per site. Any landowner could also commission an additional report on this own account, if perceived as necessary.
- PMC indicated that from his knowledge of the sites each one would fit within the broad-brush generic typology approach set out by Tim Mitford-Slade at Stage 1 above. He would seek to agree this approach with MBC.
- It was agreed the development mix should include for 15% flats at Lenham as this would have implications for the education contribution to be sought.
- Wealden has submitted a planning application for its site to MBC and it was included in the submission that occupations would not occur before 1stApril 2021, the date set out in MBLP. Paul McCreery indicated that, in his opinion, the approach taken by Wealden was acceptable and should not trigger prematurity objection.
- LPC had commissioned a Landscape Study which would be available by 1stFebruary 2019.
- The Transportation Study was being updated and extended by pba and Paul McCreery undertook to check progress with pba and advise the consortium.
- Paul McCreery said over 30 representations had been received on LNP Regulation 14 Consultation Draft, including a fairly lengthy set of comments from KCC, MBC and several landowners. All of these representations would need to be weighed by LPC and taken on board along with:
- the updated Transport Study;
- the Viability Study;
- and the Landscape Report;
in order to achieve a Regulation 16 Consultation Draft Plan. The programme for the submission was April/May 2019, with an Examination in September 2019 and the Plan being ‘made’ by the end of 2019.
- MBC had requested a two week window to make final comments on the Draft before it is submitted.
- The approach to Transportation is that the Plan should seek to secure a transportation network which is sufficient to serve the 1000 dwellings and be adopted by KCC and no more.
- The approach to education would be that with the dwellings being constructed at Harrietsham and Lenham, together with the expansion of both of these primary schools by an addition of a 1 form entry each on education land already owned by KCC, would meet the Primary Education requirements for 1000 dwellings without the need for a second primary school at Lenham. There was sufficient capacity at The Lenham School to meet all Secondary Education requirements and no contribution would therefore be needed towards Secondary Education.
Date of Next Meeting
- The next meeting was arranged for Tuesday 5thMarch at 10.00 a.m. at the offices of DHA in Maidstone.