Infrastructure Delivery Plan (Feb 2013) - Runnymede Borough Council

LPAs should work collaboratively with private sector bodies, utility and
infrastructure providers.
CIL Guidance: Charge setting and charging schedule procedures (2010):
• Para. 14: states that in determining the size of its total or aggregate
infrastructure funding gap, the charging authority should consider known and
expected infrastructure costs and the other sources of funding available, or
likely to be available, to meet those costs. This process will identify a CIL
infrastructure funding target. This target may be informed by a selection of
infrastructure projects or types (drawn from infrastructure planning for the
area) which are indicative of the infrastructure likely to be funded by CIL in
that area. The Government recognises that there will be uncertainty in
pinpointing other infrastructure funding sources, particularly beyond the shortterm.
It is therefore stated that the focus should be on providing evidence of
an aggregate funding gap that demonstrates the need to levy CIL.
PPS 12 Local Spatial Planning (2008): (now revoked and replaced by the National
Planning Policy Framework in 2012)
Emerging Local Plan
• Para. 4.9: stated that the infrastructure planning process should identify, as
far as possible: infrastructure needs and costs; phasing of development;
funding sources; and responsibilities for delivery;
2.2 The Localism agenda pushes responsibility for infrastructure delivery towards the Local
Authority. The abolition of South East England Development Agency (SEEDA), and its
replacement with LEPs has led to a refocus on the delivery of strategic infrastructure to
unlock economic growth. Runnymede is now within the Enterprise M3 LEP which
covers 14 districts over Surrey and Hampshire (see Figure 4).
2.3 The delivery of the Local Plan must now be co-ordinated with other local, county and
sub-regional strategies, such as Enterprise M3 Local Enterprise Partnership: Business
Plan 2012 2 , the Surrey Local Transport Plan (2011-2026) 3 , the Local Investment Plan
(2011-2015) and the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment for Surrey.
2.4 The Localism agenda requires on-going collaborative discussions with partner
authorities and organisations to fulfil the Council’s ‘Duty to Cooperate’, and to enhance
delivery of instrastructure through the Surrey Joint Committee, the Surrey Planning
Officers Forum, and the LEP.
2.5 Within this context, the Council is in the process of producing its Local Plan which sets
out the principles and policy direction which will guide development in Runnymede up
to 2026. It is considered reasonable to assume that growth (in the number of residential
units and commercial floor space in particular) over the plan period will place increased
levels of demand upon the Borough’s infrastructure.
2.6 Currently the target for housing delivery is to provide a minimum of 161 units per
annum between 2011 and 2026. The Council intends to focus any windfall commercial
and/or residential growth within existing Urban Areas.
2.7 The Local Plan contains a cross section of 18 policies comprising of 8 ‘Location
Policies’ (LP01 – LP08) and 10 ‘Strategic Policies’ (SP01 – SP10), as detailed in Table
1 below. These policies are intended to meet the objectives of the plan taking account
of the context within which the plan sits. They are designed to reflect key broad
considerations that directly relate to development in Runnymede, and with the
2
Source: http://www.enterprisem3.org.uk/uploads/be578fa52d7672f654273a7c2588aa8f5ce9131c.pdf
3
Source: http://www.surreycc.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/surrey-transport-plan-ltp3
Page | 16
Runnymede IDP DRAFT – February 2013