Implications for sport and recreation

Policies in Local Development Frameworks (LDFs) and the ‘necessity test’
There is a new emphasis on policies in development plans defining what is necessary in planning terms to make new development acceptable.  It is important that LDFs specifically refer to the situations in which sport and recreation should be provided in conjunction with new development [paras B8 and B25].

New typology for the use of obligations
Most obligations for sport and recreation will be justified under the headings of ‘compensation’ or ‘mitigation’.  Compensation will be for loss of or damage to a facility such as a playing field or open space.  Obligations for mitigation will be in situations where’…a proposed development would give rise to the need for additional or expanded community infrastructure’ [paras B3 and B15-16].

Past deficiencies
The Circular accepts that by seeking sport and recreation facilities that would not have been needed without the development, local authorities are conferring some wider benefit on the existing community.  Thus the rather artificial and rigid distinction between new demand and past deficiencies is removed.  The Circular says that ‘…planning authorities should not be used solely to resolve existing deficiencies in infrastructure provision’.  This should allow increased emphasis to be placed on the refurbishment of existing sport and recreation facilities through planning obligations [para B9].

Pooled contributions from a range of sites
The practice of pooling contributions from a number of schemes is acknowledged, reflecting current practice in the area of sport and recreation [para B21].

Pooled contributions across local authority areas
It is suggested that in future, pooling can take place across local authorities where there is a cross-authority impact.  Swimming pools, sports halls and other strategic facilities may have such impacts.  It would appear any such arrangements should be contained in policy in the Local Development Framework [B21].

Major facilities in growth areas
Where planning obligation issues arise, these should be addressed in the Regional Spatial Strategy, for later interpretation in Local Development Frameworks [para B29].

Formulae and standard charges
These are encouraged; authorities should publish their levels of standard charges and formulae in advance.  This reflects the current position for many local authorities in terms of sport and recreation.  Local authorities should state which matters they will treat in this way in their Local Development Frameworks [B33-35].

Recovering administrative costs
Where the rates/levels of contributions are specified by the local authority in advance (eg through standard charges) it may be acceptable to seek contributions towards the cost of preparing the obligation itself [B34].

Maintenance payments
Where contributions are secured for facilities that are’…predominantly for the benefit of the users of the associated development’ it may be appropriate for the developer to make provision for subsequent maintenance (ie physical upkeep) of such provision.  Such provision may be required in perpetuity.

Where contributions towards the initial support (’Pump priming’) of new facilities are necessary these should be time limited reflecting the time lag between the provision of the new facility and its inclusion in public sector funding streams.

[Note; what comprises a ‘facility primarily for the benefit of the users of the associated development’ is not further defined in the guidance].

In the interim (before Local development frameworks are approved)

The Circular encourages local authorities to write SPD for planning obligations using the provisions in the Circular in the time period before local development framework policies are approved [B27].

[Note: It appears therefore that no authority need be held up in preparing a scheme for sport and recreation obligations by the non-approval of their local development framework policies]

Click here to view Circular 05/05