Decision details

Cabinet received a report which sought its approval for the proposed changes to the way developer contributions (S106 Agreements) would be negotiated in the future.

The proposed changes responded to statutory and regulatory changes by Government and are also set in the context of the anticipated adoption of the Peterborough Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).

Cabinet considered the report and RESOLVED:

To approved the Peterborough Draft Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for the purposes of public consultation to take place in August and September 2014.

Government has introduced changes to the way developer contributions can be collected and spent. From April 2015, the use of our existing methodology for collecting and pooling developer contributions (POIS) will become unlawful and so unless a CIL is adopted, the collection and use of developer contributions will be severely limited from that date.

To support CIL and to secure the provision of on-site infrastructure there is a need for a Developer Contributions SPD to clearly set out the difference between CIL and S106 agreements.

Cabinet were recommended to approve the Developer Contribution SPD for public consultation in August and September 2014.

From April 2015 the Council will not be able to secure developer contributions through the POIS system and therefore the Council is proposing to introduce CIL. However, CIL does not cover affordable housing and will not be used to secure site specific infrastructure, particularly on strategic sites. Therefore there is the need for an additional document which supplements the CIL process and sets out how affordable housing contributions and other on-site infrastructure will be secured.

Without a Developer Contributions SPD in place to set out clearly how this process will work there could be inconsistences in the approach used and the Council could miss out on securing developer contributions that are critical to accommodate our growth targets. It could also mean that a developer would not be aware upfront of the potential costs associated with onsite infrastructure, which could affect the viability of a scheme and either result in lower contributions to fund important infrastructure, such as affordable housing, or stop development coming forward.

Therefore the option of not preparing a Developer Contributions SPD was rejected.

None.

None.