Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

PAS 106 Workshops Leeds

780 views

Published on

Advisory Team for Large Applications

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

PAS 106 Workshops Leeds

  1. 1. PAS 106 Workshops ADVISORY TEAM FOR LARGE APPLICATIONS
  2. 2.  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
  3. 3. 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
  4. 4. 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
  5. 5.  Infrastructure not just mitigation  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 Scale Creating Quality Places
  6. 6.  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 Vision Does the potential solution fit the agreed vision and objectives / anticipated outcomes? If not, is it acceptable? Impact on Viability Will the potential solution close the viability gap and enable the development to proceed. Prospect of Delivery Will the potential solution be deliverable, i.e. are the appropriate partners on board, is the solution eligible for potential funding? Level of “Acceptable” Risk What are the risks associated with the solution. Is this considered acceptable? Some Key Themes
  7. 7. 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
  8. 8. Your Experiences…….  Political risk taking – setting priorities; being flexible etc.  Issues of openness and collaboration (not to mention skills) on viability?  Pooling issues – is this starting to cause a problem?  Use of s106 Frameworks - any experiences?  Use of review mechanisms?  Views on Starter Homes impact?
  9. 9.  Significant infrastructure needs: transport, utilities, social & community  Often multiple land owners  Over a long time – many phases  Engaging with organisations (HE, EA, Health) Key Challenges of Large Scale Delivery Issues
  10. 10. Typical large scale approach  6000 homes extension to Scunthorpe  Significant infrastructure – flooding  Multiple ownerships  Define as much as possible at policy stage
  11. 11. Understanding the detail….
  12. 12. Breaking the site down
  13. 13. Outline application stage – design parameters
  14. 14. 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?
  15. 15. Constructing a 106
  16. 16. Define required infrastructure (Masterplan/IDP/Policy) Test Viability Fix site specific priorities Agree review mechanism (for viability and masterplan/IDP) Agree S.106 HOTs – Clarity of committee resolution Discuss legal drafting Sign S.106
  17. 17. NNDA Persimmon Taylor Wimpey Church Commissioners
  18. 18. Upper Callerton Lower Callerton Middle Callerton Green Belt Line of O.O.R
  19. 19. Collaborative and Integrated Approach
  20. 20.  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 Challenges Scale & land, phasing & cashflow
  21. 21. 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!
  22. 22. 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
  23. 23. 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
  24. 24. 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
  25. 25. Framework Agreements • Establishes a mechanism for collection and management of contributions • Agreed infrastructure package • Specifies what infrastructure needs to be provided and when
  26. 26. Framework Agreements Some Considerations  Overall Planning Strategy agreed  Consistent approach to the Planning Applications  The components of proposed Framework S106 Agreement itself  Infrastructure Delivery Plans  Relationship to CIL  Development Framework Plans  Relationship to Masterplanning
  27. 27.  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 Vision Does the potential solution fit the agreed vision and objectives / anticipated outcomes? If not, is it acceptable? Impact on Viability Will the potential solution close the viability gap and enable the development to proceed. Prospect of Delivery Will the potential solution be deliverable, i.e. are the appropriate partners on board, is the solution eligible for potential funding? Level of “Acceptable” Risk What are the risks associated with the solution. Is this considered acceptable? In conclusion Hints & tips
  28. 28. 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?
  29. 29. Further Information The 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

×