An amendment to the Housing & Planning Bill would introduce a s106 dispute resolution service that POS suggests developers may not opt to follow.
Local authorities would have to bear in mind the costs which may be incurred if they go for dispute resolution, Graham Jones, the POS CIL and Infrastructure Specialist, told Planning magazine. "The service is supposed to be self-financing with the local authorities and applicants sharing the costs," he said.
Developers will be keen to use the mechanism if they think they can get a better decision out of it than from the local authority, said Jones. However, Jones added that they are likely to be deterred because it would introduce new uncertainties into the planning process, and it may place additional requirements on them to reveal more detail about the economics of the development.
Jones said that the resolution process would most frequently be used to overcome differences about the viability of providing affordable housing at the level required in the local plan. "The developer would be required to put on the table all his costs and profit forecasts to demonstrate the limitations on the funds available," said Jones.