Problems With Section 106 Agreements

A review of the effectiveness of Section 106 of the planning agreements for the provision of affordable housing. Renegotiation can produce less affordable housing. An S106 reported 30 percent affordable housing scattered throughout development. However, it was a high-end housing block with access to a sports complex and swimming pool: no social owner would pay the high service costs. The developer negotiated a sum of commuters and affordable housing was lost (although the amount of commuters goes to another development). If one or more parties fail to achieve what they expected, this is usually due to the fact that the relevant elements of S106 were not fully specified. For example, some may be disappointed with the quality of the houses made available or their exact location on the site. With respect to developer contributions, the Community Infrastructure Tax (CIL) did not replace the Section 106 agreements, which strengthened the s 106 tests. S106 agreements on developer contributions should focus on correcting the specific weakening required for a new development.

CIL was designed to address the broader effects of development. There should be no circumstances in which a developer pays CIL and S106 for the same infrastructure for the same development. For example, new residential construction may put additional pressure on the social, physical and economic infrastructure that already exists in a given region. A planning obligation must reconcile the pressures resulting from this new development with improvements in the environment, so that development can make a positive contribution to the local space and the community as much as possible. A significant proportion of affordable housing is provided by the planning system under Section 106 (S106). However, little is known about the full implementation of these agreements. As government statements indicate the growing importance of S106, this research aims to address current knowledge gaps in the outcome of S106 planning agreements. An appeal may be brought if the authority does not change the planning obligation as requested or makes a finding within a specified time frame. Obligations that “are or must be made available to persons whose needs are not adequately served by the commercial housing market” fall within the scope of this new procedure. This was a Section 106 agreement on residential construction.

The agreement provided for the obligation to provide affordable housing on site or, if this was not possible, a sum of money paid.