Latest news with #S106
BBC News
6 days ago
- Business
- BBC News
Row over infrastructure pot spending at Waverley Borough Council
Conservative councillors say that money raised through funds for infrastructure and community projects has become a "hidden revenue stream" for Waverley Borough council allocates income generated by the interest from unspent Community Infrastructure Levies (CIL) and Section 106 (S106) agreements to its main revenue account, the general fund, which includes spending on providing Conservative leader, Jane Austin, said other local authorities had made the decision to ringfence it for infrastructure and that Waverley should do the Liberal Democrats, part of a coalition that run the council, said the interest earned was managed responsibly and in line with national guidance and is a standard practice. CIL are charges made by councils on any new developments and are typically used to pay for infrastructure, such as schools and S106 agreements are negotiated between developers and councils, with funds used to benefit communities, and try to limit and mitigate the impact of new houses. The council is setting up a cross party working group to look at CIL and is reviewing cases of charges, after some homeowners were asked to pay thousands of pounds in fees for making home improvements, without the ability to Conservatives said the council had £28.3m of unspent CIL and S106 money as of 31 March 2025, which they claim is a large amount in proportion to the size of the Austin said it had "quietly become a hidden revenue stream for the council" and that there would be a "black hole" in the finances without it."We've got to the stage where our council is basically relying on the interest from this CIL and from this S106 money," she told BBC Radio Surrey.A council spokesperson refuted this, stating that Waverley had been "independently recognised as the most financially stable local authority in Surrey"."It is also, to our knowledge, the only council in the UK to have published a balanced budget for both 2024/25 and 2025/26," they Liberal Democrat leader of the council, Paul Follows, said it was "standard practice" for "funds to be allocated to specific infrastructure projects and held by the council until they need to be paid for"."These projects typically require extensive planning and can take several months, or even years, to complete," he said."All funds held by the council are managed in accordance with our approved treasury management strategy. This ensures that they generate interest, in line with our statutory responsibility to secure best value for public money."Any interest earned is retained within the council's general fund and is reinvested into local services and the enhancement of public amenities."According to the council, more than £2.1m of the £27.5m collected in CIL receipts to date had already been spent, with more than £15.2m allocated to specific infrastructure projects."Each year, we are committed to setting a responsible and balanced budget that maximises the resources available to deliver high-quality public services for the people of Waverley. This commitment remains unchanged, regardless of the level of interest income received," a council spokesperson added.
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Park upgrade paid for with stashed cash
Thousands of pounds stashed in Dudley Council's coffers for years is to be spent on upgrades at a borough park. Work at King George V Park, Wordsley, will go ahead using £24,800 from property developers who agreed to pay for improvements in areas where they build homes. Dudley is to splash cash in the Lawnswood Road green space from agreements linked to applications approved as far back as May 2004. The deals, called planning obligations, are enforced under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act. Councillor Damian Corfield, Dudley cabinet member for neighbourhoods, said: 'Section 106 contributions are often multi-faceted with large sums allocated to many different projects. In this case we have held on to and combined several smaller elements of these S106 payments together to generate a significant total amount. 'That amount is now being used to fund this hugely beneficial project for the community in Wordsley, and an example of very smart use of section 106 money.' The park will get upgrades including resurfacing of the multi-use games area, the reinstatement of the bowling green and a revamp of the children's play area. The cash will come from four developments which were approved between 2004 and 2011. Latest figures published by Dudley Council show at the end of March 2024 a total of £2.8m of unspent S106 money was sitting in the authority's bank. In the financial year which ended on the same date the council's income from S106 payments was £61,580. In the same financial year the council spent £1.05m of S106 cash, mostly on education facilities while a further £956,810 had been allocated but not spent. Hoarding S106 funding is common practice for local authorities despite most agreements having a time limit which means the money has to be spent within a specific period or paid back to the developer. According to a report published by the Home Builders Federation (HBF) in autumn 2024, a total of around £6bn of unspent S106 cash was held by councils in England and Wales – with the average council holding £19m. The HBF is calling for greater transparency in local government about why spending is delayed and how long councils are holding on to cash for. Neil Jefferson, CEO at HBF, said: 'Each year developers contribute around £7 billion to local authorities for the provision of local infrastructure, affordable housing and education, recreational and health facilities but some councils are increasingly failing to invest this cash into the services that so desperately need it. 'Investment in new housing delivery brings unrivalled economic and social benefits to communities but too many of these advantages are going unseen by local people. With the government desperate to find money to invest in infrastructure to drive growth, it is nonsensical to have billions sat in council bank accounts. 'Furthermore, a lack of infrastructure provision is often cited as a reason to oppose development, yet this pipeline of billions of pounds of unspent infrastructure funding is too often underappreciated in debates about the impact of new development.'
BBC News
27-04-2025
- Business
- BBC News
Another 70 homes added to new Melton Mowbray development
A developer has been given the green light to build a further 70 homes as part of a wider housing project in a Leicestershire approved the scheme off Lake Terrace in Melton Mowbray despite developer G S Property Holdings telling the committee it cannot afford to contribute to health, education and other services through a Section 106 County Council and the NHS have said they need roughly £2m to pay for the infrastructure and services the residents in the homes will new homes will include 10 affordable bungalows, with the rest of the properties to be sold on the open market. A viability report showed the developer could not afford to make financial contributions to infrastructure and services due to the "significant abnormal costs" of developing the site, the Local Democracy Reporting Service a previous meeting, a planning agent speaking on behalf the developer said the company would give the borough and county council £580,000 as part of a financial agreement known as an overage payment should planning permission be granted. 'Catch-22' The committee on Melton Borough Council voted in December to defer its decision to allow planning officers time to investigate alternative sources of funding which might enable the developer to make a S106 contribution. In a report, planning officers said there were two grants the scheme would be eligible for – but the grants can only be applied for once planning permission is already in place, and even then, the applications might be Siggy Atherton described the situation as a "catch-22", and said the developer would win "hands down" at appeal should it be she added: "Travelling through Melton this last couple of mornings, it's mayhem. With more households having at least two cars – that's just [the impact] on the roads without thinking schools, doctors."
BBC News
17-04-2025
- Business
- BBC News
Medway Council has nearly £20m in unused funds from developers
A local authority is sitting on almost £19.5m of unused funds meant for health, education and leisure Council has received the contributions from developers which were granted planning permission, as reported by the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS).Their payments, called Section 106 agreements (S106), are sums given to support projects to benefit the community and limit the impact of new houses.A spokesperson for Medway Council said: "The S106 team keep all potential and received contributions under review and work with the relevant services within the council, the NHS and other third parties to identify suitable projects that can utilise S106 funds." After an agreement, developers can then begin work and pay the contributions when they reach a certain point in the construction Freedom of Information (FOI) requests submitted by the LDRS show issues with money getting to where it was initially report revealed as of December, the council held £4m of S106 cash for schools and education, £3.1m for community centres and museums, and £5.3m for open the £4m agreed with developers since 2013, just £1.2m has been collected with only £17,846 total, funding from 40 different agreements has been received by Medway Council, but only two projects have actually seen money spent. A £9,446.36 sum from a 2014 agreement for development on Richmond Road, Gillingham, was used for "healthcare services".The report also revealed another £8,400 was spent from a £9,197.96 agreement from 2020 for a development in Twydall, which was used for a health pod in the Woodlands Family Practice, LDRS reported the largest S106 contribution collected for a single development was £180,869.99 for a 300-home scheme on land at Otterham Quay Lane, was agreed for improvements to GP services at the Rainham Healthy Living Centre, the Thames Avenue Surgery or the Maidstone Road LDRS reported none of the money has been spent yet. Out of the five towns and Hoo Peninsula, Chatham is the place with the most health-based S106 funding currently held by the council, which is £406, LDRS added if the fund was not spent by a certain deadline, the developer could request the money be range between five and 10 years but Medway Council said it had never had to return any another FOI submitted by the LDRS revealed £175,000 of S106 funding agreements for health projects was allowed to expire before the money was collected by the council. Medway Council chief planning officer Dave Harris told the LDRS the issue of getting the NHS Kent and Medway Integrated Care Board (ICB) to request the funds collected "had been a long-term frustration".He said the council was having regular meetings with the ICB to discuss how to use the available funds as the local authority was unable to spend the money on services ICB spokesperson said: "We request S106 funding when there is an identified and approved project to allocate the funding to."Where we have an opportunity to pool S106 funding contributions, we will sometimes do so where appropriate."The spokesperson added there can be a "significant lag" between the S106 contribution being secured, the development and getting to a point when the contribution is due."Due to the time lag, the ICB may consider a different project from that proposed originally is required and we will discuss this with Medway Council," they added.
New York Times
15-04-2025
- Business
- New York Times
Selhurst Park redevelopment latest: A new option on the table but costs could edge beyond £200m
Crystal Palace remain committed to the redevelopment of Selhurst Park despite the cost of work having risen significantly. The project, first announced in 2017 and originally due to be completed by 2021, has been beset by delays and rising costs. It was originally expected to set Palace back between £75million ($98.8m) and £100m but, by 2022, that had increased to £150m. It is now anticipated to exceed £200m. Advertisement Palace, though, are confident it will not impact work being completed on the stadium. Here's the latest on what's happening with the redevelopment… The original plan was to build behind, up and over the Main Stand, which was originally built in 1924, before then demolishing it. However, one new option under consideration is to vacate the existing structure for the entirety of the build process, allowing for a full demolition and subsequent new build. While this would likely speed up the project's completion, it would significantly limit capacity at Selhurst Park over the course of the build with no income received from the 6,000 spectators currently accommodated in the stand. A smaller set of temporary seating would be provided at the front of the stand if this approach was followed, but there are logistical problems which would stem from it — not least finding a suitable alternative location for matchday hospitality, which accounts for much of the club's revenue outside broadcasting rights. The club would need to make provision for this, as well as for those season-ticket holders displaced by the build. This option is least desirable and, while it remains under consideration, it is less likely to be pursued than the original plan which allows for the stand to retain its full capacity with an up-and-over build. Once completed, the stadium's capacity will rise to 34,259 from its existing 25,486. Funding was originally due to be secured via Palace's shareholders, with chairman Steve Parish reluctant to pursue a full-debt approach by borrowing the money in full and, instead, preferring to raise it via a mix of debt and equity. Options are being discussed by shareholders but, despite continued uncertainty over the future of John Textor's stake in the club and the fact all four General Partners would be required to contribute in any capital raise, Palace are confident they will source the funding. Advertisement Yet questions remain over the project's cost benefit. The redeveloped stadium will provide Palace with approximately an extra £20m ($25.5m) per year in revenue, meaning it could take a decade for the project to break even. This coming Saturday will mark seven years since Palace were initially granted planning permission in principle by Croydon Council, subject to agreeing a Section 106 agreement which would be used to fund community improvements. But while that S106 was agreed, Palace did not sign it and, after changes to the London Plan (which determines how the UK's capital as a whole will develop over the next 20 to 25 years), the club were required to submit an amended planning application. That amended application was subsequently approved by Croydon Council's planning committee in August last year, and the S106 has since been signed by both parties. Last year, The Athletic revealed that, as recently as 202,0 Palace considered exploring a return to Crystal Palace Park, something for which plans were unveiled in 2011 but never pursued. That prospect of returning to their original home on Sydenham Hill in south-east London, a few miles north of Selhurst, did not make it beyond initial discussions or to a serious proposal. Palace instead recommitted to the redevelopment of Selhurst Park. When the Covid-19 pandemic struck in March 2020, Palace also opted to prioritise the redevelopment of the club's academy — a smaller and less expensive project at around £30m. Then, ahead of starting the Main Stand work, it took time for the club to agree a deal with Sainsbury's, which The Athletic reported was worth several million pounds, for a piece of land which formed part of the supermarket giant's car park. All of these factors contributed to delays, during which inflation has caused construction costs to rise across the board, impacting Palace heavily. In June last year, Palace began preliminary work on the stadium and offices based in temporary buildings between the Holmesdale Road and Main Stands, which have stood for almost 30 years, were moved to a redeveloped area behind the Whitehorse Lane executive boxes which once hosted Crystals nightclub. Advertisement Work to drain water away from the flooded basement in the Holmesdale Road stand, with water retention tanks costing £1m, has also been undertaken. But there are now several issues which require decisions to be made before major construction work can commence. As a result the project has fallen further behind, but is still expected to take two years to complete once piling — driving the foundations into the ground — begins. Significant work is expected to commence this summer, but it is unclear what that will mean in practice. There are also issues with the purchase of the one remaining privately-owned house in Wooderson Close, which Palace are considering options to acquire, and finding land within the borough on which the club can build the replacement homes obligated by the planning agreement. Residents who had occupied the five social housing properties in Wooderson Close which are to be demolished were moved to new accommodation in October 2023 and those properties are vacant. Palace are required to pay the council the market value of the homes plus 2.5 per cent. It has been an arduous project with many amendments, and some questions still remain, but Palace remain confident the redevelopment of Selhurst Park will be completed.
