New leader of Manchester City Council

  • Thread starter Thread starter worsleyweb
  • Start date Start date
2019/20 total developer contributions for Affordable Housing £662k (commuted sums in lieu of on-site)
2019/20 total affordable housing delivered onsite via developer contributions 0.

It is derisory.

so stop building them and deny thousands jobs?
 
How about less of box ticking , i.e a woman posts and more of give her a chance and see what happens , she is there because she was the best option

How very innocent Kaz, Ive been informed by a someone in the know that she is actually the out going council leader’s pet favourite.
 
so stop building them and deny thousands jobs?
Other smaller LPAs get a lot more from developers even with a tiny fraction of what is being delivered in Manchester.

They have a 20% requirement for affordable housing on market sites in their Core Strategy and from then data it looks like mainly 0% is achieved.
 
Other smaller LPAs get a lot more from developers even with a tiny fraction of what is being delivered in Manchester.

They have a 20% requirement for affordable housing on market sites in their Core Strategy and from then data it looks like mainly 0% is achieved.

Not true - a new park, new school, new medical centre all been built as part of S106 contributions and threshold contributions set if developers make more than 15% on a project.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not true - a new park, new school, new medical centre all been built as part of S106 contributions and threshold contributions sets if developers make more than 15% on a project.

That should be in addition to affordable housing, and not always needed, and those contributions are set on a tariff basis normally rather than a % requirement that affordable housing uses.

The threshold for a major site is 10 or more in the NPPF, below that you are unlikely to be asked for affordable housing contributions unless Rural which Manchester isn't. The developer just needs to pay less for the land if they can't meet the Affordable Housing requirements and not hide behind creative viability assessments. It is clear some LPAs are performing far better than others in this area, and despite the Affordable Housing rhetoric MCC isn't good in this area.

Not having an up to date Local Plan doesn't help MCC, as viability is now tested at plan making stage, but the path of least resistance is not challenging developers.
 
That should ne in addition to affordable housing, and those contributions are set on a tariff basis normally rather than a % requirement that affordable.

The threshold for a major site is 10 or more in the NPPF. The developer just needs to pay less for the land if they can't meet the Affordable Housing requirements and not hide behind creative viability assessments. It is clear some LPAs are performing far better than others in this area, and despite the Affordable Housing rhetoric MCC isn't good in this area.

Not having an up to date Local Plan doesn't help MCC, as viability is now tested at plan making stage, but the path of least resistance is not challenging developers.

I love it when you talk dirty
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top