Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Decision details
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Open Spaces and City Services
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Is Key decision?: Yes
Is subject to call in?: No
To agree the next steps for identifying future S106-funded projects for the play area, open space, public realm and public art contribution types. This will include the process and decision-making arrangements for the next (generic) S106 funding round later in 2019.
Matter for
Decision
Off-site S106 contributions
paid by developers help to mitigate the impacts of their developments on local
amenities. They are based on legal agreements and have to be used in line with
official regulations. S106 funding availability is more limited than it once
was and is unevenly spread across the city. Official regulations highlight the
need to make a distinction between generic S106 contributions and specific
ones. The Council uses ‘target lists’ as a starting point for negotiating play
area and open space specific contributions.
The Officer’s report set
out the process for future generic S106 funding rounds for play area and open
space improvement projects.
Generic S106 funding rounds
can only seek project proposals from wards where S106 funding is available
locally.
The report also highlighted
plans to commission a public art project close to Trumpington’s
boundary with Petersfield and Coleridge, in order to make timely use of a
nearby, time-limited public art contribution.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Streets and Open Spaces
Agreed:
i.
The arrangements for annual, generic S106 funding
round for play areas and open spaces as long as there is sufficient, generic S106
funding available (paragraphs 4.1-4.5 of the Officer’s report).
ii.
That, where there is less than £10,000 of
unallocated, generic play area and/or informal open space S106 funding
available in a ward, this can be used to supplement spend on appropriate local
projects identified for specific S106 contributions or via the Environmental
Improvement Programme (for projects approved by the Executive Councillor for
Streets and Open Spaces) (see paragraph 3.10 of the Officer’s report);
iii.
To return decision-making over the use of generic
play area and informal open space S106 funding to the Executive Councillor,
while maintaining opportunities for all ward councillors to comment on
proposals from their part of the city (see paragraphs 4.6-4.7 of the Officer’s
report);
iv.
To instruct officers to develop proposals for a
public art commission (with a budget of between £50,000 -
£75,000) in Trumpington ward or close to its boundary with Petersfield
and Coleridge wards and report back to this Committee later in 2019 (see paragraph
4.8 of the Officer’s report).
v.
To instruct officers to make all city councillors
aware of the evidence-based target lists for play areas and open spaces that
are used as a starting point for negotiating specific S106 contributions (see
paragraph 5.7 of the Officer’s report).
Reason for the Decision
As set out in the Officer’s report.
Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny
Considerations
The Committee received a report from the Urban Growth Project Manager.
The Urban Growth Project Manager said the following in response to
Members’ questions:
i.
S106 funding contributions had to be used for its
intended purpose. Monies could not be moved from one contribution type to
another.
ii.
As resources ran down, it was recommended to return
decision-making over the use of generic play area and informal open space S106
funding to the Executive Councillor; alongside input from ward councillors, to
make the best use of resources available to deliver projects.
iii.
Funding would be allocated through steps set out on
page 62 of the Officer’s report. Ward councillors were encouraged to comment on
the proposals received (see page 64).
iv.
Proposed to put information about s106 funding on
the council website.
v.
A clear relation would be maintained between S106
funding where it was from and where it would be spent.
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.
The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor
(and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Publication date: 15/05/2019
Date of decision: 21/03/2019