Community Assets No 13 - Assets of Community Value

Is it time for those in neighbourhoods to create their own list of community assets?. Yes and no; but we should only be interested in assets which have community value.

Although I cannot claim to be a local authority (see Localism Act 2011, s 106(1) and (3)) I have decided to create my generic list of assets of community value (s.  ). As far as I know no similar list exists - but firstly I need to check or try to interpret the Act so as to know what is wanted on my list.

The Act gives the following pointers:

1. building or other land;
2. the actual current use of;
3. in the recent past the actual current use 
4. not an ancilliary use;
5. furthers the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community;
6. reasonable to expect that in the next five years the actual current use (but not necessarily the same as before) could further...etc;

[Note I intend to expand the "pointers" by updating the post later.]

My list would include:

• village greens and town greens - already registered (listed) and protected uner the Commons Act 2006;
• prospective village or town greens (there is an expectation of a result of a government consultation on this topic) ;
• recreation grounds, parks, and other open spaces;
• footpaths, bridleways, cycleways and other such ways;
• land with protected trees, ancient monuments and the like;
• buildings and other assets of historic or architectural worth;
• village halls, community centres, youth clubs and similar premises;
• libraries;
• public houses;
• post offices and other neighbourhood shops; and,
• almshouses and similar establishments for seniors.

Of course, much depends on the community and the existing quality and extent of the environs for its social wellbeing and social interest. Can that be measured objectively?

Community Assets No 12 - 1 CPO-ing and 2 Funding the Acquisition No 1

Community groups may need to find the finance to acquire an asset of community value when exercising the right to bid provisions of the Localism Act 2011, section 98.

Circular 06/04 (as amended with the addition of Appendix AK, p57) advises that local authorities when seeking confirmation of a CPO to must provide details of funding. The expected sources cited elsewhere in the Circular include:

• full funding by the LA itself;
• full or partial funding by the requesting group; and,
• contribution from the private sector. 

Much of the detail is in paragraphs 20 to 23 of Part 1 of the memorandum to the Circular. The paragraphs also explains the need to give details of  possible "impediments" to the project. (See link below.)

http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/1918885.pdf

It is pretty obvious that the group will have their work cut out in meeting the deadlines of both:

• the compulsory purchase procedures;
• any moratorium and right to bid (Localism Act 2011, ss 95 to 99) resulting from the owner's intended disposal; and,
• grant application procedures if say, a grant from the National Lottery or other body might be sought.

An important point is that all the details should, it seems, be upfront at the time of preparing the draft CPO; the Minister needs to know!

Community Assets No 11 - Neighbourhood Planning

How does a resident get involved in the planning of his/her area? How does a business get involved the planning of their area? To me the involvement  has always seemed hit-and-miss - that is until quite recently. I remember Mrs Rosencrantz being utterly bewildered by a CPO scheme. All the houses around her were being vacated and the occupiers being sent to tower blocks,  new towns, etc. The vacanted houses were being "re-occupied" for very short periods, ie hours or minutes. To stop the occupations I arranged for the floor boards to be removed. Some weeks later Mrs R was still worrried - she said that the floor boards had been replace by mattresses and the occupations continued!

The site eventually became the cleared gound for a brand new school.  It was built and as far as I know it is still there but if it is as the original, it must be due for a refurbishment or rebuilding. Going back to the questions? Will the Localism Act 2011 make a difference to the planning of local areas?

Part 6 Chapter 3 of the Localism Act 2011 comprises six sections (ss 116 - 121) over two or so pages - a doddle. However the references to schedules abound and a quick looking at schedules 9, 10, 11, and 12 seems to indicate that the basics of plan-making and special development controls, etc in the big planning world will be applied to the little planning world (of neighbourhoods)! This is done by inserting sections and schedules into the former.

Of course, most of us will not need to go into the detail of the legislation but our professional advisors who have not had the opportunity to follow the passage of the Bill in detail will spend some evening burning the candles to get into, of instance, the sets of compensation provisions applying to local development orders. Of course, I have chosen a topic which is, conceivably light-years away. More pressing is the prospect of local residents realising the potential that the  2011 Act gives them to get involved and act accordingly so as to initiate their neighbourhood's plan.

Community Assets No 5 - CIL - Changes under the Localism Act 2011

Section 115 et al of the Localism Act 2011 (November 2011) make significant changes to the community infrastructure levy (CIL).  

CIL was originally conceived as providing (some) funds for new infrastructure to support new development. Now it could be argued that CIL has been adapted to provide (some) funds for supporting old development as well as new development. In past times, it might be argued, that a regime of largely uncontrolled section 106 Agreements provided an opaque, ad hoc way of funding  new infrastructure and support for existing  "fabric" in our communities. With CIL the Agreements were expected to fade away unless on-site or site-specific-but-off-site infrastructure was needed for a particular development project.

The changes seem to address the issue. They include the following:

1  Section 115 (5)(a)(ii) on the use of CIL provides amendments to the Planning Act 2008. Thus instead of just funding infrastructure CIL may be used to support development by funding: 

• provison of (new) infrastructure,
• improvement of (existing) infrastructure,
• replacement of (existing) infrastructure,
• operation of (existing and new) infrastructure, or
• maintenance of (existing and new) infrastructure.

[Note: The words in italics are added by me and four of the five "infrastructure" words are mine and superfluous - the Act's textual layout is more than appropriate.]

2 Section 115 (6) is a (seemingly) wide addition to the Planning Act 2008 (by the insertion of a new section 216A). There is now a duty imposed on the charging authority (by forthcoming regulations) to pass funds to a "person" who will hopefully use the money for things listed above but also:

• concerned with addressing demands that development places on an area

This is the provision widely acclaimed as enabling neighbourhoods to have CIL monies (if any). The terms person does not say "neighbourhood" and area could go much wider than for instance a parish council area.