Planning Advisory Service (PAS) Logo
Planning Advisory Service (PAS)
Grŵp agored | Wedi dechrau - Gorffenaf 2012 | Gweithgaredd diwethaf - Heddiw

Affordable Housing Policy re S106

Former Member, Addaswyd 11 Years yn ôl.

Affordable Housing Policy re S106

At Huntingdonshire we are working on a new Local Plan. We are working with our housing colleagues in considering our new affordable housing policy. They have asked me to see if I can find out what approach other councils are taking in respect of new affordable housing in light of the market downturn and impact on viability, NPPF, changes to HCA grant, affordable rent, etc. It would be very helpful if you could let me know what your policy position is for new section 106 agreements, particularly with regard to: 1. The percentage of affordable housing that your authority strives to achieve in new section 106 negotiations and whether your policy position differs for different size sites 2. The tenure split (social rent / affordable rent / shared ownership / etc ) your Council aims to achieve 3. Where sites are deemed unviable to proceed, what evidence base you use and what steps you take in order to come up with a development that is viable (particularly whether you use HCA / external consultants / in-house expertise to renegotiate % and tenures) 4. Whether you have any innovative ways of delivering affordable housing in a grant free way I would also add to this that any references to support for your approach in evidence would be useful. Thanks
Former Member, Addaswyd 11 Years yn ôl.

Re: Affordable Housing Policy re S106

Perhaps its a product of our location (Cambridgeshire) and that we have a high proportion of the 'few cases' or maybe its that I'm not up to date with current cases but I don't recognise the picture you paint; we have CIL and we have sites that are getting affordable housing agreed on them. I think this is also backed up by comments on our recent Local Plan consultation, which included an affordable housing policy very similar to out current Core Strategy, seeking 40% with some fairly standard references to viability. We are still to analyse the comments in detail but most on this policy seemed to be along the lines of 'yeah, this isn't that bad. Make sure 40% is justified, good to see viability in the policy' I guess I'm thinking that evolutionary changes are needed rather than revolutionary ones. Maybe I'm just not seeing it?