Support
Draft South Pennine Moors SPA/SAC Planning Framework Supplementary Planning Document
Representation ID: 3249
Received: 22/03/2021
Respondent: Mr Bernard Poulter
I completely agree with the use of S106 legal agreements to raise the funding.
4.28: Acknowledges that CIL was innefective method of funding specific projects
4.29: Agree absolutrely that "payment of the required funds on the commencement of the development" using the section 56 definition of the Town & country Planning Act 1990 .
4.31: Agree with the insistence on using a Council Prepared "standardised unilateral Form" pursuant to section 106 of the act. Developers throw all sorts of reasons why this is unfair, unworkable, impossible to finance etc, but on this ONE THING, BDMC must remain firm.
4.36: NO!! an instalments policy negates all the good done by the the above paragraph. Disturbance to the SPA/SAC starts as soon as the first bulldozer arrives on site. To allow developers to delay paying for this upfront puts the burden back on the Council Tax Payers . This is markedly unjust.
I completely agree with the use of S106 legal agreements to raise the funding.
4.28: Acknowledges that CIL was innefective method of funding specific projects
4.29: Agree absolutrely that "payment of the required funds on the commencement of the development" using the section 56 definition of the Town & country Planning Act 1990 .
4.31: Agree with the insistence on using a Council Prepared "standardised unilateral Form" pursuant to section 106 of the act. Developers throw all sorts of reasons why this is unfair, unworkable, impossible to finance etc, but on this ONE THING, BDMC must remain firm.
4.36: NO!! an instalments policy negates all the good done by the the above paragraph. Disturbance to the SPA/SAC starts as soon as the first bulldozer arrives on site. To allow developers to delay paying for this upfront puts the burden back on the Council Tax Payers . This is markedly unjust.