Following on from the discussion over the S106 or CIL
Futures Forum: 'Planning gain' - the replacement for S106 cash from developers - the Community Infrastructure Levy - but is it still 'bribery' by a different name?
it does seem that developers are not only able to 'shift the gain off-site' by paying the local authority to have 'affordable housing' built elsewhere, but...
If a developer can show that a council’s affordable housing target makes a development uneconomic, the requirement can be reduced or waived.
Thousands of affordable homes axed | The Bureau of Investigative Journalism
A rather provocative piece of irony... possibly:
How to Avoid Providing Affordable Housing - a Guide for Developers
A reminder and note of caution:
Before we hold our noses in disgust at housebuilder profits, we should remember that nearly all new social housing is paid for by them. Section 106 agreements – the financial contributions made by developers to planning authorities – have been used to pay for social housing since 1989.
Affordable housing: 20% of something is better than 50% of nothing | Housing Network | Guardian Professional
And from Radio 4 this week:
BBC Radio 4 - Face the Facts, The affordable housing that's unaffordable
Thanks to: The myth of affordable housing | Sidmouth Independent News