THAME received a very distinguished visitor on Friday, in the person of Nick Boles MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Planning, who came to hear how the Neighbourhood Plan is progressing.
Mr Boles told the meeting at The Spread Eagle Hotel that in formulating one of the first Neighbourhood Plans in the country, Thame had ?blazed a trail? and explained how, as a reward, if the plan is accepted by Referendum in May, Thame will be entitled to one quarter of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) from any development that takes places, to spend on community priorities.
Val Jonas of Cmag (the Thame Cattle Market Action Group), asked Mr Boles if there would be constraints on the levy as to whether it could be used for Capital or Revenue spend and whether there would be a time cap on when it must be spent, as it may take time to build up funds for, for instance, a community centre for Thame.
He replied that the levy could be spent on any infrastructure that a new development may make demands on in a community, which could include a community centre. As to any time limit on spending the levy money, Mr Boles replied that the planning authority (SODC) may put in a phasing system of payment. Also, he said that there would be nothing to prevent any group from raising a loan that could be paid from future levy payments.
Another resident, Cath Daly, told the Minister that she was concerned that if the forthcoming Examination of the Thame Neighbourhood Plan could not consider the plan?s ?soundness,? who could?
He replied that his view was that the plan would not be going forward to the Examination stage if it were not sound, and assured her that there is still the chance to ?challenge, change and campaign for change? in the lead up to the Examination meeting on February 19. He concluded: ?Then there will be the Referendum itself, for which you can lobby against if you are not happy with the plan. I would prefer the people of Thame to decide whether the plan is sound or not.?
Thame?s MP, John Howell, who was also at the meeting alongside the Mayor, Nigel Champken Woods, added that the plan may not be perfect but that in his view it is difficult to produce a plan that everyone agrees with.
Angela Wilson from the Lea Park Residents Association, in Thame, was concerned that the CIL money could work against Thame, with other funders turning us down because we have the levy money. The Minister told her that the CIL money would be for the specific purpose of ?supporting development? and that if funds were being raised for a Capital project it would be difficult for
a local authority to say you couldn?t have the money.
Another questioner feared that the CIL fund would fall short of need and take money away from communities not making Neighbourhood Plans. The Minister replied that in his view, if you encourage trust and provide incentives for development, ?people will do more of it resulting in more tax, more council tax, more business rates and everyone will be better off?
Val Jonas (Cmag) asked if it had been calculated whether communities will get more or less money than they did under the previous Section 106 scheme, ?as Thame got very little out of the last two major housing developments in the town.
?It may look like we?re getting something but we may not be getting much,? she added.
Mr Boles said that under the ‘opaque’ section 106 system people didn?t know where the money went, but that with CIL, the figures will be public so developers will know upfront, which will help them decide how much to pay for land etc. ?I genuinely believe,? he added, ?that it will make it easier for developers and for communities to know what monies are going to them.?
Representatives from other communities embarking on their Neighbourhood plans, including Henley and Sonning Common, were at the meeting and keen to hear how Thame had set about bringing different groups together to formulate its plan and there was some discussion about difficulties defining the boundaries for their plans.
Cllr Mike Dyer suggested that what feels like a local community should help define it for them. Mr Boles offered the help and advice of his ?team? in his department, to help in any way they could.
Roger Cooper of the Priest End Residents? Association in Thame, asked if any funds were going to be made available towards combining Lord Williams?s Lower school with the Upper school in Oxford Road, because if the Lower school could not be moved, the housing spread in the Neighbourhood Plan would be changed.
Planning Consultant, Jake Collinge, who has advised the town council throughout the planning of the Neighbourhood Plan, said that ‘deliverability’ of the site was uncertain and that there is a fall-back plan in the TNP for the land to be brought forward as a ?reserved? site for housing after a certain number of years, if the lower school did not move out.
At the end of the meeting, the Mayor, Nigel Champken Woods spoke of the hard work and time put in by so many people, including the town Clerk, Helen Stewart, concluding: ?I am happy that we will get there in the end.?
He ended by saying that there had been some ?misinformation? spread about the TNP, and that he was happy to confirm that there definitely is no aspiration to extend the Ring Road around Thame.