Issue - meetings

To provide an update on the position in relation to S106 contributions.

The Scrutiny Commission was updated on S106 contributions received, spent, held and requested in 2018. The chairman informed members that he had received a letter from the Cabinet Member for education at Leicestershire County Council in response to a letter he had sent following consideration of the S106 report the previous year and he agreed to circulate a copy.

A member asked whether the authority tracked spending of the contributions by other agencies, and in response it was noted that some were paid directly to Leicestershire County Council and it was entirely their responsibility to monitor or return if not spent and whilst information on spend was requested from the CCG, information was not forthcoming.

In relation to contributions to health, a member asked whether it would be possible to allocate to a specific facility, for example Hinckley hospital. In response it was noted that if the impact of an application on a particular facility could be demonstrated, the contribution could be specific. It was further noted that if the CCG then said the money was not required, it could not be used for a different project and would have to be returned, and that no more than five contributions could be used on a single project (although they could be used on multiple projects at the same facility).

A member highlighted that on two recent applications that provided contributions to bus services, there were no bus services in the village to contribute to. Officers also reported that they had started to challenge requests for contributions to bus passes as this relied on applications from residents of new developments which may not be forthcoming yet it reduced the available money that could be used for other beneficial contributions. In relation to travel packs, it was suggested that developers could produce these themselves at lower cost than the value of the contribution or could provide links for residents to information held online.

Concern was expressed about bus services being added as part of S106 agreements and subsequently underused buses running. In response, members were reminded that as part of the DPD application, a contribution to existing bus services was requested to prevent this as officers strongly had argued that the contributions would be better used to provide a cycle link from Hinckley.

A member felt that there was a lot of misunderstanding about section 106 contributions and asked that a briefing be provided so it could be more effectively scrutinised.

Concern was expressed that the contribution for the new school as a result of the Hinckley west application had been agreed four years previously but had not been used so may be clawed back. In response, members were reminded that there were trigger points in the agreement meaning the time would not start until the trigger had been met.

RESOLVED – the report be noted.