Upload
pasteam
View
1.088
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
PAS 106 Workshops
ADVISORY TEAM FORLARGE APPLICATIONS
Advisory Team for Large Applications Impartial advice Provided at the request of Local
Authorities …. but available to the benefit of all partners
Large Scale (200+, 500+ housing units) Projects at all stages in planning process Working on “large sites”: urban
extensions, new settlements, LIF projects, public sector land, garden cities
Introducing ATLAS
ATLAS Project Activity - Jan 2016
ESE SSW MID NTH Total Projects
Total Units
Total 16 17 17 26 75 239,816
LSIP/ HDF
- Sites >1,500 15 15 16 16 62 227,825
- Sites <1,500 1 1 1 10 13 11,991
- Housing Zones 1 3 3 5 12 23,067
- Priority Sites 3 4 0 2 9 44,870
Garden Cities
- DCLG Supported 3 1 1 0 5 42,700
- DCLG Awareness 4 0 0 0 4 31,500
Public Sector Land
- HCA Land 0 0 1 0 1 1,880
- OGDs Land 0 2 0 0 2 5,745
Large Site ( >1500)Large Site ( <1500)
Public Sector Land
Garden City (supported)
Housing Zone
Garden City (aware)
Priority Sites
What we’ll cover
Look at challenges that large sites present for 106’s
How to deal with these issues in a timely manner
Tools and techniques from our experience
Creating quality places
Requires balance and mix of uses - sustainability
Significant infrastructure needs: transport, utilities, social & community
Often multiple land owners
Over a long time – many phases
Key Challenges of Large ScaleScale & Components
Number of organisations involved
Local Authorities
Private Sector Public Bodies
Typical large scale approach 6000 homes
extension to Scunthorpe
Significant infrastructure – flooding
Multiple ownerships
Define as much as possible at policy stage
Understanding the detail….
Breaking the site down
Outline application stage – design parameters
Site Specific Infrastructure Delivery Plan
What infrastructure is needed?
When will it be needed?
How will it be paid for?
Who will deliver it?
CIL may well impact upon this?
Constructing a 106
40% affordable homes £5.7m primary school £5m secondary school £2.1m community centre £2.3m access road £2.1m community centre £1.4m guided bus £0.8m local transport initiatives £0.6m play area maintenance £0.6m community payments
Example scope of obligations
Trumpington Meadows, Cambridge1,200 units & associated mixed uses, approved Oct 2009. Scope of obligations:
Ecological mitigation Allotments maintenance Household waste / recycling Sports facilities maintenance Sports Development officer Bus allowance Library, health & police Community Development Youth facility, youth worker …. etc
Collaborative and Integrated Approach
Initial land release: “patient” money
Multiple developer / land interests
Phasing of infrastructure & enabling works
Long term returns on investment
-10,000
-8,000
-6,000
-4,000
-2,000
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Balance
Additional ChallengesScale & land, phasing & cashflow
Review Mechanisms NPPF promotes the approach – ‘to take account of
changes in market conditions over time and be sufficiently flexible to prevent planned development from being stalled ‘(para 205)
Accept due to project viability, based on current costs and values not all S106 obligations will be fully funded
Re-appraisals will need to be carried out
Involves risk – if viability does not improve then some obligations will not be fully met!
Some Key Principles Baseline on viability approved up front
Be clear on S106 priorities and accept all cannot be provided now!
Don’t review too often
Keep any mechanisms simple
Often based on 2 key variables – costs and sales values
Cap overall obligations
Has to work for the developer as well
Deferred obligations(one variable: value uplift)
Actual Sale Price
Implementation
Baseline appraisal
Deferred Obligations, contingent on uplift in values
Initial “Residual Regardless” contributions
Capped Total
Appraisal Tools
• Development Appraisal Tool• Works for up to 20 years• Populate income with: unit numbers, sizes, values and rents amongst
others and allows up to 5 phases
• Costs can be specified and include developer overheads and return for risk, and planning obligations
• Garden Cities Model• Bespoke for very large
schemes – at high level • Allows public funding to be
included• Allows for value capture
Framework Agreements
• Establishes a mechanism for collection and management of contributions
• Agreed infrastructure package
• Specifies what infrastructure needs to be provided and when
Start early!! Get clarity on vision &
critical outcomes Collaborate & share
information Ensure evidence is robust Test alternative ways of
doing things Work positively to find
solutions Be flexible where possible Don’t compromise too far
VisionDoes the potential solution fit the agreed vision and objectives / anticipated outcomes? If not, is it acceptable?
Impact on ViabilityWill the potential solution close the viability gap and enable the development to proceed.
Prospect of DeliveryWill the potential solution be deliverable, i.e. are the appropriate partners on board, is the solution eligible for potential funding?
Level of “Acceptable” RiskWhat are the risks associated with the solution. Is this considered acceptable?
In conclusionHints & tips
Pitfalls - of course it’s not that simple…….
CIL can get in the way
Reg 122 – contributions have to be necessary; directly related; and fair & reasonable
Reg 123 – no longer pool more than 5 contributions for single piece of infrastructure
Evidence of Inspectors beginning to apply strictly
Starter Homes – unclear impact on viability and AH provision going forward
Points for discussion Use of review mechanisms?
Issues of openness and collaboration (not to mention skills) on viability?
Political risk taking – setting priorities; being flexible etc.
Pooling issue – is this starting to cause a problem?
Use of 106 Frameworks - any experience?
View on Starter Home impact?
Further InformationThe ATLAS Guide:Planning for Large Scale Development:
www.atlasplanning.com
The HCA’s guide to a development appraisal tool:http://www.homesandcommunities.co.uk/ourwork/development-appraisal-tool