Planning - the value, incidence and impact of developer contributions: research

10. Annex 3: Analysis of Survey Data

This section reports on findings from our survey of 34 planning authorities (PAs) in Scotland, comprising 32 local authorities and two national parks. The survey achieved a 100% response rate, although not all authorities answered all questions (the number of respondents is indicated above each table). The reasons for this are explored at the end of this section.

10.1 Planning authority policies, plans and guidance

Table 13: Whether PAs have formal policies on developer contributions, by area type

	Total
Yes	30 (93%)
No	3 (7%)

(Question seen by all planning authorities; n=33)

More than 90% of responding authorities said they had formal policies on developer contributions (Table 13). All rural authorities said this was the case, while two urban authorities said they had no formal policies. Of those authorities that did have policies, almost all of them (96%) said these were contained in their development plans.

(all PAs with policies on developer contributions in their development plan; n=26)

Most authorities (58%) said they had adopted their development plan in the last four years (i.e., in 2017 or more recently), but some plans were from as early as 2012 (Figure 9).

(all PAs with policies on developer contributions; n=27. Multiple answers permitted)

The development plan was not the only policy document related to developer contributions: most authorities also had supplementary guidance in statutory and/or non-statutory form (Figure 10). Most of these documents had been adopted in the past five years, although a number dated from before 2015 including one affordable-housing policy from 2006.

Table 14: Whether PAs use standard charges for developer contributions, by area type

	Large urban	Other urban	Rural	Total
Yes	5	7	6	18 (64%)
No	3	3	4	10 (36%)

(all PAs with policies or guidance on developer contributions; n=28)

Importantly, 64% of authorities use standard charges for developer contributions (Table 14). A majority of PAs in all area types use this approach.

Table 15: Requirements related to specific zones/projects

	Large urban	Other urban	Rural	Total
Requirements apply to entire planning authority area	4	3	1	8 (29%)
Requirements apply to specific zones	5	4	4	13 (46%)
Requirements apply to specific projects/sites	5	5	6	16 (57%)

(all PAs with policies on developer contributions; n= 28. Multiple answers permitted)

In all area types, requirements generally did not apply across the whole planning-authority area, but were applied to specific zones, projects or sites (Table 15).

10.2 Local infrastructure plans

Table 16: Existence of infrastructure plans or programmes in PAs

Local authority has…	Number	%
Infrastructure / LDP action programme	25	89%
Infrastructure plan or capital plan	14	50%
Other	5	18%
Total PAs responding	28

(All responding PAs; multiple answers permitted)

Planning authorities normally have formal plans to guide infrastructure investment (Table 16). Eighty-nine percent reported having an infrastructure or LDP action programme, while 50% had an infrastructure plan or capital plan. Authorities told us the plans were generally drawn up by planners in consultation with other council services; some also involved external stakeholders including developers or statutory consultees. A few used external transport consultants. Sixty-eight percent of responding authorities said these plans included costings for the required infrastructure.

(all PAs with infrastructure programmes/plans; n=24. Multiple answers permitted)

The plans and programmes cover a range of types of infrastructure (Figure 11). Schools and roads are the most common categories included, while energy, social care and utilities are less often found. Most commonly the plans and programmes cover the whole local-authority area, but plans for specific projects and sites were also regularly used.

(Question seen by all PAs but not all responded; n=17)

Around 40% of the authorities who responded to this question expected developer contributions to address 60-plus percent of their defined infrastructure needs over the next decade (Figure 12). On the other hand, about a quarter of responding authorities thought that developer contributions would meet a maximum of 20% of these needs in the longer term. The position with respect to next year, where authorities have much more direct knowledge of both requirements and potential delivery, was much less positive: 16 out of the 17 replying said that 40% or less would be covered next year.

Only about half of planning authorities responded to this question, perhaps suggesting that these forecasts are difficult to make. Asked how accurate these forecasts of developer contributions were, 70% of respondents said they were somewhat accurate, and only a single respondent thought they were very accurate.

Even though most authorities did have formal infrastructure plans of some sort, 38% said they had infrastructure needs that were not included in these plans or programmes, including schools, digital infrastructure and healthcare. Some authorities noted that infrastructure needs were constantly evolving and that this could be difficult to capture in formal plans.

Table 17: Details covered by infrastructure plans: timing and funding

		Documents specify funding
		Yes	No
Documents specify timing	Yes	11	1
	No	3	11

(PAs with infrastructure plans or programmes, n=26)

In terms of their level of detail, the infrastructure plans fall mainly into two groups: some specify both the funding and timing of the required infrastructure investment (cell highlighted green in Table 17), while some specify neither of these (cell highlighted pink).

10.3 Targets for affordable housing contributions

Eighty percent of respondents said their authorities had policies to support the delivery of affordable housing. This was as likely in rural authorities as in urban ones. The policies were normally found both in the local development plan and in supplementary guidance. The minority that did not have such policies gave several reasons including a lack of identified need, maintaining the viability of development, and that the council itself met any affordable-housing requirement.

Table 18: Form in which affordable housing contributions are sought

	Count	%
Completed homes	22	92%
Land	20	83%
Total PAs responding	24

(All PAs with policies to secure affordable homes; n=24. Multiple answers permitted)

Developers can provide affordable housing in various ways and clearly most authorities used more than one approach. Commuted sums, completed homes and land were all used by over two-thirds of responding authorities, with commuted sums chosen by the highest number (Table 18).

Table 19: How targets for affordable homes are expressed.

	Count	%
As a proportion of new homes	15	63%
As numbers of units	1	4%
Targets set out in a different way	4	17%
No targets	5	21%
Total PAs responding	24

(All PAs with policies to secure affordable homes; n=24. Multiple answers permitted)

Most authorities said they based their targets on the Housing Need and Demand Assessment or simply used the national policy target of 25%. Twenty-four authorities said they consulted local housing associations in drawing up their affordable-housing policies and targets; none said they did not do so. Most included the full range of affordable tenures and products in their target numbers; as discussed below, social rented homes and mid-market rental units dominate permissions and completions.

Table 20: Areas covered by affordable homes targets

	Count	%
Whole planning authority	17	89%
Particular neighbourhoods	4	21%
Particular sites	2	11%
Total PAs responding	19

(All PAs with targets for delivery of affordable homes; n=19. Multiple answers permitted)

Targets for affordable housing were most often set as a proportion of new homes (Table 16), with small numbers using other methods or having no targets at all. In most cases the targets covered the entire planning authority rather than particular neighbourhoods or sites (Table 20).

Some 19 authorities said residential developments were required to contribute to affordable housing, while only a single authority said commercial schemes were required to contribute. Ten authorities said they required affordable housing contributions from schemes with four or more units, and one authority requires a contribution from any scheme with two or more. Some authorities set a higher threshold for requiring on-site provision. At the other end of the scale, three authorities required affordable housing only from schemes of 20 or more units, including one where the cut-off was 50.

We asked authorities how the availability of grant funding affected their obligations policies for affordable housing. Most said they set their DC requirements without regard to potential grant funding, although they recognised that grant would affect the tenure of homes provided. Some survey respondents indicated that grant was handled by housing departments, with planners not involved. On the other hand, a few authorities said Scottish government grant funding was generous enough that they could achieve their affordable-housing targets without turning to developer contributions. This was seen as preferable because it did not discourage private development.

10.4 Types of infrastructure agreed as developer contributions

Table 21: Number of authorities entering into agreements related to various infrastructure types, by year agreed

	17/18	18/19	19/20
Schools and other educational facilities	16	15	14
Roads and other transport facilities	17	13	14
Sporting and recreational facilities	12	11	12
Open/green spaces	9	8	10
Public realm improvements	6	7	4
Medical facilities/ emergency services	5	5	4
Environmental projects	1		2
Energy	1	1	1
Employment projects	2
Other	5	4	5

(PAs that had entered into agreements with developers in the preceding 3 years; n=20. Multiple answers permitted.)

As noted earlier, schools and roads were the types of infrastructure most commonly included in infrastructure development plans, and these were also the most common subjects of agreements for developer contributions in the last three years. Note that Table 21 indicates the numbers of authorities that entered into agreements related to each type of infrastructure, not the number of such agreements concluded, which is addressed later in this section.

10.5 Operational Effectiveness

Seventy-one percent of authorities said they had a dedicated team to negotiate developer agreements, while 50% said they had staff devoted to monitoring them. Only one authority said they outsourced this monitoring work.

Table 22: Methods of monitoring delivery of developer contributions

	Count	%
Site visits	15	56%
Digital alert system	5	19%
Other	23	85%
Number of responses	27

(All PAs that had entered into agreements in last 3 years or previously; n=27. Multiple answers permitted)

Over half of local authorities responding said they checked delivery of contribution through site visits, and 19% had a digital alert system (Table 22). Authorities reported several other monitoring methods including liaison with building standards departments, requiring developers to provide sales statements and cross-checking council tax payments.

Table 23: Whether developer contributions are delivered as agreed

	Count	%
Always delivered	7	26%
Mostly delivered	17	63%
Only a minority delivered	2	7%
Never delivered	1	4%
Total PAs responding	27

(All PAs that had entered into agreements in last 3 years or previously; n=27. Multiple answers permitted)

Planning authorities reported that contributions were mostly or always delivered; only a few reported low levels of compliance (Table 23).

Authorities reported that only a minority of agreements (median of 13.5%) had been subject to requests for variation over the last three years. Most of these requests (median 82%) were granted. The most frequently reported changes were reworking of the agreement in relation to further applications from developers that changed the overall plans for the site and resultant contribution requirements, and timing. Most respondents (63%) said requests for variation had not become more common in the last three years.

10.6 Overall Picture

Table 24: Biggest perceived challenges with regard to developer contributions

	Count	%
Viability issues for developers	21	78%
Getting enough contributions to deal with the impact of cumulative developments on infrastructure needed	18	67%
Delays to site starts and therefore payment of contributions	14	52%
Land/development market not strong enough to support what is needed	12	44%
Negotiation difficulties	11	41%
Constraints arising from the five tests	8	30%
Other	6	22%
Total PAs responding	27

(All PAs that had entered into agreements in last 3 years or previously; n=27. Multiple answers permitted)

The biggest challenges with regard to agreeing and securing developer contributions were seen to be viability issues for developers and getting enough contributions to deal with the impact of cumulative developments (Table 24).

Table 25: Perceived difficulty of getting agreement on developer contributions 'in this planning authority'

	Count	%
Easy	3	11%
Neither easy nor difficult	15	56%
Difficult	8	30%
Very difficult	1	4%
Total PAs responding	27	100%

(All PAs that had entered into agreements in last 3 years or previously; n=27. Multiple answers permitted)

Getting agreement on developer contributions was generally seen as neither easy nor difficult, although about one-third of respondents said it was difficult or very difficult (Table 22).

Table 26: How agreeing developer contributions affects planning delay

	Count	%
Not at all	2	7%
A little	3	11%
A moderate amount	13	46%
A great deal[10]	10	36%
Total PAs responding	28	100%

(All PAs; n=28)

The process of securing developer contributions was seen to add to planning delay, with over a third of respondents saying the effect was major (Table 26). Authorities said that the process of negotiating contributions on a site with 50 or more homes normally added to the time to grant consent, with estimates of the extra time required ranging from one month to two years. Most authorities said such agreements were usually concluded within nine months or less.

10.7 Numbers of planning permissions and agreements 2017/18 – 2019/20

In the three years from 2017/18 to 2019/20, survey responses indicated there were about 22,500 planning permissions issued in Scotland for residential and commercial uses^[11] (Table 27). There was a fall of about 9% in the annual numbers from 2017/18 to 2019/20.

Over the same three-year period there were 1,737 planning agreements concluded under S75 and S69^[12], meaning 7.7% of permissions were covered by agreements. Although the number of planning permissions fell over the period 2017/18 to 2019/20, the number of planning agreements rose by about 50%. Most of the agreements (68%) were via S75, although that proportion fell markedly from 2017/18 to 2019/20.

On average, each planning authority made about 15 agreements for developer contributions per annum over the period. This average obscures significant variation: six authorities had each concluded more than 100 agreements, while another six authorities reported none at all over these three years (although most said they had entered into agreements at some time in the past, and would use them again if the situation and the development market warranted).

Table 27: Planning permissions and agreements: Scotland 2017/18 – 2019/20

	17/18	18/19	19/20	Totals/ Overall
Total planning permissions (commercial & residential)	7,797	7,654	7,130	22,581
Total planning agreements under S75 & S69	506	480	751	1,737
% of permissions with agreements	6.5%	6.3%	10.5%	7.7%
Average number of agreements per PA	14.9	14.1	22.1	14.9
Average proportion of agreements via S75*	79.2%	62.8%	61.8%	67.9%

Source: LSE London calculations based on survey responses, grossed up for non-response based on Scottish Govt statistics

*Average for those authorities giving breakdown in survey (n=17)

10.8 Use of S75 vs. S69

We asked how planning authorities decided between the use of S69 and S75. They said they generally used S69 for smaller contributions and those where the developer preferred to pay upfront, while S75 was usually preferred for complex obligations and those that needed to run with the land. Many authorities did not regard this as a decision that was theirs alone to take; rather the choice of instrument was a matter for negotiation with developers. One authority explained, 'It is not simply a question of the PA "deciding" which contribution route is taken: it is not for an PA to unilaterally decide that an S69 as opposed to an S75 will be used. Even if that might be the preferred approach for an PA, it is still subject to agreement by the developer.' Another said simply, 'It is left for the developer to choose.'

10.9 Units of housing and affordable housing

Turning now to housing, 109,570 homes in all were permitted from 2017/18 to 2019/20 (Table 28). Of these, 32,684 (about 30%) were affordable. The numbers of homes and affordable homes permitted both went up over this three-year period.

Table 28: Total and affordable homes permitted: Scotland 2017/18 – 2019/20

	17/18	18/19	19/20	Totals
Total number of new homes permitted	33,824	37,461	38,285	109,570
Total numbers of affordable homes permitted	9,915	10,130	12,639	32,684
Affordable homes permitted as % of all homes permitted	29.3%	27.0%	33.0%	29.8%

We asked respondents to tell us what proportion of affordable homes permitted were to be provided by developer contributions. The survey results were incomplete for this question, so we grossed up the figures for the country as a whole to account for non-responders, using two different techniques. We calculated that the proportion of affordable homes permitted was in the range of 25-34% of all homes permitted; the two figures are the results of different estimation methods^[13] (Table 29). Affordable homes permitted through developer contributions accounted for 8-10% of all homes permitted, again depending on the estimation method used (Table 26).

Table 29: Affordable homes permitted, of which via developer contributions: Scotland 2017/18 - 2019/20

Total numbers of affordable homes permitted via DCs	17/18	18/19	19/20	Totals/ overall
Estimation method 1	2,811	3,393	4,918	11,122
(% of affordable homes permitted)	28.4%	33.5%	38.9%	34.0%
Estimation method 2	2,190	2,542	3,540	8,272
(% of affordable homes permitted)	22.1%	25.1%	28.0%	25.3%
Affordable homes via DCs as % of all homes permitted
Estimation method 1	8%	9%	13%	10%
Estimation method 2	6%	7%	9%	8%

Source: LSE London calculations based on survey responses. Totals grossed up for non-response by reciprocal of population-weighted sampling fraction
*Estimation method 1: Grossed up for non-response by reciprocal of population-weighted sampling fraction
*Estimation method 2: Grossed up by applying average % of homes via DCs to non-responding authorities

Table 30 below, shows the percentage of ALL homes consented that were to be delivered by developer contributions, by house-price quartile. These figures are calculated on partial data (see rows—in one quartile we had information for only two of seven authorities). Many authorities did not answer one or another of the two relevant questions, and there was not enough information to permit grossing up.

Even so, the information we do have suggests that in areas with the highest prices, developer contributions account for around a fifth to a quarter of consented homes, while the proportions are much lower in all the other quartiles. There is one outlier: the 2019/20 number in price quartile 2 reflects a single very high figure (presumably a major development) in one authority.

Table 30: % of ALL homes consented to be delivered by DCs, by house-price quartile 1= lowest prices

	2017/18	2018/19	2019/20
Price quartile 1 (data for 5 of 8 authorities)	4%	0%	0%
Price quartile 2 (data for 3 of 8 authorities)	4%	2%	32%
Price quartile 3 (data for 2 of 7 authorities)	5%	5%	2%
Price quartile 4 (data for 6 of 9 authorities)	18%	22%	24%

Source: Survey, Q39 (number of housing units permitted per year) and Q45 (number of affordable units permitted to be delivered by DCs)

Across Scotland, in the areas for which we have information (about half of planning authorities), more than two-thirds of affordable homes permitted in the last three years were social rented dwellings (Table 31). The next most common tenure was intermediate/mid-market rent: together these two tenures accounted for over 90% of affordable homes permitted over the period 2017/18 – 2019/20. Shared equity, discounted market sale and shared ownership made up the remainder. Shared ownership, an important component of affordable housing in England, accounted for only a handful of units in Scotland.

Table 31: Affordable homes permitted by tenure

Numbers	2017/18	2018/19	2019/20	Totals
Social rent	3,446	3,660	4,028	11,134
Intermediate/mid-market rent	1,304	815	1,464	3,583
Shared equity	546	273	372	1,191
Discounted market sale	40	90	128	258
Shared ownership	24	0	5	29
Percentages				3 yr. avg
Social rent	64%	76%	67%	69%
Intermediate/mid-market rent	24%	17%	24%	22%
Shared equity	10%	6%	6%	7%
Discounted market sale	1%	2%	2%	2%
Shared ownership	0%	0%	0%	0%

Over the last three years, social housing dominated affordable housing output with 73% of completions, versus 69% of permissions over the same period (Table 32). Again, these numbers are not for the whole of Scotland but only for those authorities for which we have information. More authorities were able to give information about the tenure of completions than of permissions (23 vs 16).

Table 32: Tenure of new affordable homes completed

Numbers	2017/18	2018/19	2019/20	Totals
Social rent	2,453	3,642	3,094	9,189
Intermediate/mid-market rent	777	623	648	2,048
Shared equity	273	393	353	1,019
Discounted market sale	62	127	47	236
Shared ownership	0	24	0	24
Percentages				3 yr. avg
Social rent	46%	75%	52%	73%
Intermediate/mid-market rent	14%	13%	11%	16%
Shared equity	5%	8%	6%	8%
Discounted market sale	1%	3%	1%	2%
Shared ownership	0%	0%	0%	0%

We noted above that developer contributions accounted for 25-34% of all affordable homes permitted in the last three years. Looking at the breakdown by tenure for those areas where we have information, about 22% of social rented homes and of mid-market rental homes permitted were to come via developer contributions (Table 33). Discounted market sale and shared ownership units were most likely to be provided via developer contributions (93% and 100% respectively were to come this way), but the total number of such units was small.

Table 33: Affordable homes permitted by tenure, via developer contributions

Numbers	2017/18	2018/19	2019/20	Totals
Social rent	904	761	758	2,423
Intermediate/mid-market rent	272	165	338	775
Shared equity	12	11	0	23
Discounted market sale	40	90	110	240
Shared ownership	24	0	5	29
Percentages				3 yr. avg
Social rent	26%	21%	19%	22%
Intermediate/mid-market rent	21%	20%	23%	22%
Shared equity	2%	4%	0%	2%
Discounted market sale	100%	100%	86%	93%
Shared ownership	100%	n/a	100%	100%

(only PAs giving breakdown in survey N=16)

We asked authorities how much time normally elapsed between conclusion of planning agreements and delivery of new affordable homes. 13 authorities replied. The average time reported was 27 months (minimum 12, reported by two authorities; maximum 48 months).

10.10 Use of developer contributions for affordable homes

Because developer contributions are taken ultimately out of the value of the land, we expected to find higher rates of provision via DCs in areas with high land values. We looked at the proportion of affordable homes permitted that were to come via developer contributions across the areas by house-price quartile (using house prices as a proxy for land values, for which there was no suitable data source). The analysis confirmed our hypothesis. Table 34 shows that in the three years from 2017/18 to 2019/20, 69% of affordable homes were to be provided via developer contributions in the areas with the highest house prices (Quartile 4), versus only 10% in areas with the lowest prices (Quartile 1).

Table 34: Affordable homes permitted by price quartile: % via developer contributions

	House price quartile
	1	2	3	4
2017/18	27%	24%	29%	73%
2018/19	2%	16%	23%	61%
2019/20	0%	20%	9%	75%
Overall average	10%	20%	21%	69%

(Only PAs giving information in survey N=18 Quartile 1 = lowest prices)

Source: LSE London calculations based on survey responses.

10.11 Do permissions for new homes reflect house prices levels and changes?

If the supply of new housing is responsive to demand, we would expect to see a higher level of permissions in areas with high house prices than in areas where prices are low, and/or in areas where prices are rising more rapidly.

To examine the first proposition, we divided the 32 Scottish local authorities into quartiles by house price and compared the numbers of permissions in the last three years. Because the populations differ enormously (Glasgow, the most populous authority, has 633,000 inhabitants while the Orkney Islands have only 22,000), we used figures for permissions per 1000 population. Within each quartile the totals were grossed up for non-response.

The analysis showed that over each of the last three years, there were on average 4.4 new homes permitted per thousand population in the areas with the lowest house prices (quartile 1), versus 7.1 per thousand population in areas with the highest house prices (quartile 4). This suggests there is a generally positive relationship between house price and number of homes permitted. There are variations from year to year—in 2017/18, for example, there were more homes per thousand permitted by authorities in quartile 2 than in quartile 3 (Figure 13).

(per 1000 population; Quartile 1 = lowest prices)

To look at the second proposition – that supply and permissions respond to changes in house price – we did a similar analysis, dividing the 32 authorities into quartiles by house-price change. The quartiles were not the same; some of the authorities that had high absolute prices were in the lowest quartile for house-price change. Again, we compared the numbers of permissions in the last three years per 1000 population, with numbers within each quartile grossed up for non-response.

The analysis showed that over each of the last three years, there were on average 6.9 new homes permitted per thousand population in areas where house prices were rising most slowly (change quartile 1), versus 9 per thousand in areas where prices were going up fastest (change quartile 4). However, the relationship to house-price change is not straightforward, as the number of permissions per thousand was lowest in quartiles 2 and 3 (Figure 14).

(per 1000 population; Quartile 1 = smallest increase)

10.12 Do permissions for affordable homes reflect house prices levels and changes?

Turning now to affordable homes, we calculated the numbers of affordable homes permitted per 1000 population over the last three years in each of the house-price quartiles. The figures were not grossed up for non-responders. Unsurprisingly, the areas where prices were highest (Quartile 4) were also those where most affordable homes were permitted (Figure 15), and those where market prices were already low (Quartile 1) saw far fewer. Here again though the picture was mixed, with Quartile 2 (lower prices) seeing more permissions for affordable housing on a population-weighted basis than Quartile 3 (higher prices).

In the highest price quartile, the numbers of affordable permissions went up strongly over the three-year period, but this was not the case in the other quartiles.

(per 1000 population; Quartile 1 = smallest increase)

10.13 Reasons for data gaps

Our survey had a 100% response rate from Scottish planning authorities, which in our experience is very unusual in a study of this type. Even so there were several questions that not all authorities answered.

Most of these gaps were in answers to questions about numbers (of planning permissions, homes, affordable homes) or values (of developer contributions). We recognise this was a demanding exercise for authorities: There were 11 such questions, all in the form of matrices, so the survey asked for more than 175 separate numbers or values.

The questions that proved most difficult for authorities to answer were about

• The numbers of planning permissions with agreements under S75/S69/S48 in the last three years
• The numbers of new affordable homes granted planning permission / completed in the last three years, of which through developer contributions
• The values of developer contributions

For example, we asked for the financial value of developer contributions in 2019-20, regardless of the year in which the agreement was made. Authorities were asked to say how much they received in direct financial contributions, and for the value of in-kind contributions. Even for direct financial contributions, only a minority of authorities were able to provide data; most responded 'cannot estimate'. No authority could give us the value of in-kind contributions (except for the five authorities who said '0'). Similarly, few authorities could tell us what percentage of contributions agreed in financial year 2017-18 had been delivered by 31 March 2020.

There were three main reasons for the unanswered questions, according to our conversations and correspondence with local authorities, and the free-text responses to the survey:

• The authorities did not collect the specific data requested in the survey
• The data were inaccessible because of pandemic restrictions or were held by a different part of the authority, and/or
• The data were contained in individual case files and would have been onerous to extract.

Several authorities told us they focused on compiling the information required by the Scottish Government for the Planning Performance Framework. This emphasises the time taken to determine planning applications but does not address performance in terms of outcomes. Typical was this response to a query from us:

"My apologies for being unable to answer all of the questions in your survey – the way in which our database records information doesn't allow us to extract the fields you require".

Similarly, another authority said,

"The statistical data sought has necessitated detailed interrogation of Council records and in many cases cross service input. This has been time consuming and often reliant on officers running bespoke reports or manually extracting information.

Data on affordable housing were especially problematic. We asked for affordable home permissions and completions, broken down by product type (e.g., social rented, mid-market rent, shared ownership, etc.). Several authorities were unable to provide this, saying they did not hold the information in this way. One explained,

'The Council is unable to provide a direct response to this question as our legal agreements do not generally require the affordable housing tenure/type to be specified at the time of signing and grant of planning permission. Rather, our standard legal agreements include a requirement for 25% of the total number of housing units on site to be provided as affordable housing, and a clause requiring the subsequent submission and approval of an affordable housing scheme to outline exactly how the affordable housing requirement will be satisfied".

Another replied,

"in terms of social housing breakdown, we only record it as social housing and local authority - to break it down in to mid-market rent etc would require going through every single application and even then, would be unlikely to offer a comprehensive breakdown. The questions seem biased towards an expectation of having an affordable housing policy - which we do not have, as we deliver by other means which has resulted in difficulty in answering many of the questions as a lot of our data does not match your requirements".

Another said,

"With regard to these two questions (Q47: Units of affordable housing granted planning permission by type and mechanism, Q48: Units of affordable homes completed last 3 years, of which through developer contributions), these fell under another department's expertise. It is my understanding that this information is not readily available and would require a lot of resources to pull together, resources which are currently strained as is. We are trying to improve our in-house software which in the future would hopefully allow us to pull this information relatively quickly".

On the same issue, another said,

"We do a housing land audit 1^st of April every year, and that's when we log completions. The data are published in October so there's a 5-month lag. The 2019 housing land audit was delayed, and so was last year's. For Q47 it's very hard to get these numbers—we could try to do it but it takes a long time".

Another challenge was in following the course of developer contributions through the system. One authority told us,

"We have too much data corporately; the question is how to interrogate and understand it as each service within the council uses the data its own way. Contributions are brought in by planning but then go to say education/housing/transport and we don't know what happens to them".

In response to our query about values of developer contributions, one authority said,

"I have been advised that this data is not readily available – to advise the value (£) would involve scrutinizing a number of planning consents and/or conditions and S75 agreements. … Ideally (in future) we would be in a position where we can keep our data in a much more malleable form so it can be scrutinized in many a manner of ways with relative ease. … We are eager to see what comes of the survey and learn lessons from other PA colleagues".

Again, on the value of developer contributions received in the most recent year, another authority said,

"I am not in a position to quantify the value of third-party infrastructure works for the financial year 2019/20. If the infrastructure requirement purely arises from a single development, then the developer will generally be required to carry out the works themselves. This is certainly not uncommon. However, the Council does not quantify the financial value of such development-specific infrastructure".

10.14 Specific concerns about the current system

Finally, several respondents used the survey to tell us about their concerns with aspects of the current system, or to make suggestions for improvement. Verbatim excerpts from selected responses appear below.

About the accuracy of forecast infrastructure costs:

"Infrastructure costs are increasing ahead of indexation metrics. Also, Scottish Futures Trust's education costs per sqm metric appears to be less than actual costs councils are receiving in competitive tender processes. Therefore, cost gaps are appearing between what is being secured in contributions and the actual costs of projects that they are due to deliver".

About retrospective contributions and the cumulative impact of development:

"Planning obligations and the assessment of impact from new development is arguably the single largest determining factor in assessing the viability or delivery of housing development in [local authority area]. Pressures on transport infrastructure and specifically, the school estate, can create an imbalance in planning for and delivering across [area]. This is heightened as all market areas within [area] have their own development market costs; for example, schools required in weaker housing market areas will have more of a cost impact on developers whose land values and revenues will be lower than the stronger market areas".

"The solution often arrived at to mitigate new development impacts is the provision of new infrastructure or assets; however, this creates additional ongoing revenue and planning costs for the authority over the lifetime of the development. Critically it is not possible to recoup such revenue funding from obligations which in turn places pressure on authority and partner capital plans".

"It would be more effective to align spatial planning and the transport or education estate strategy so that new development is directed to locations with capacity or to locations where spatial and community planning objectives are planned to be met. Housebuilding including associated developer spending on mitigation, and local authority financial planning (capital and revenue) will be mutually supportive, and community planning can play a stronger role than it does currently where housebuilding can be led by market preferences. The new Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 offers scope to move us in that direction. The solution often arrived at to mitigate new development impacts is the provision of new infrastructure or assets; however, this creates additional ongoing revenue and planning costs for the authority over the lifetime of the development. Critically it is not possible to recoup such revenue funding from obligations which in turn places pressure on authority and partner capital plans".

About the timing of agreements about developer contributions:

"I previously used to work in England and was involved in negotiating S106's. For English appeals, where an obligation is a consideration it is considered alongside all of the other issues and the inspector needs to have an actual completed obligation in front of them at the point of making a decision on an appeal i.e., even if everything else was deemed to be acceptable, if there was no obligation and one was deemed to be necessary, the application would be refused.

In Scottish appeals, (after) all of the other issues are considered, the need for an obligation is likely to be raised by the Council. The Reporter, having addressed layout and design etc, will--if satisfied with those--issue a Notice of Intention to the parties and note the need for an obligation to address contribution to X, Y and Z.

It will often only be at that point that the parties will get into serious discussions about contributions and the basis of those. (It) can potentially take weeks if not months before an agreement can be drafted. It is also possible that the parties will disagree requiring the appeal to reopen for the issues to be examined by the reporter. All of this can prolong the whole process but also the whole matter of the necessity for an obligation can be fundamental to the granting or not of permission. This therefore needs to be fully considered at the point of resolving to grant permission rather than that only being examined after the decision in principle to grant permission has been taken. In essence I think an approach more akin to the approach adopted in English appeal might reduce delay and uncertainty".

10.15 Sub-annex 3A: Questionnaire

Planning Obligations in Scotland

Start of Block: Introduction

Q1 Thank you for taking this survey on developer contributions in Scotland. The study is being carried out by the London School of Economics in collaboration with the University of Sheffield, Rettie and Co and Stefano Smith Planning. The work has been commissioned by the Scottish Government to inform future policy development on infrastructure planning and delivery in Scotland. There is a glossary of terms which is provided as a separate Word document.

The questionnaire also asks for information relating to section 48 of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984, so colleagues responsible for highways may need to be involved in compiling the data. Equally housing colleagues may have relevant information about affordable housing.

The survey will be open until November 20th. The survey does not need to be completed in one go. If more than one department of your authority is contributing to the questionnaire, they should all use the same link so they can see which questions have been answered already. Please do not click the final 'submit survey' arrow until all questions that are relevant to your authority have been answered. If you are able to complete the questionnaire more quickly, we would be very grateful.

The survey is designed so that you only see questions relevant to your authority, so you may not see all questions. Where you cannot respond to a question for some reason, please note the issue--there is space for additional information at the end of the survey.

No individuals or local authorities will be named in any research reports or outputs without specific permission. All data will be held securely on LSE servers and anonymised at the conclusion of the project.

If you have any questions about the survey or the information we are looking for, please contact our LSE helpline (telephone or email):

Fanny Blanc: f.blanc@lse.ac.uk
(+44) 7746 367 561

End of Block: Introduction

Start of Block: Information about the authority

Q2 Name of planning authority

Q3 Who is completing this questionnaire?

	Name (1)	Role at planning authority (2)	Years at planning authority (3)
Lead respondent (1)
Contributor 1 (if any) (2)
Contributor 2 (3)
Contributor 3 (4)
Contributor 4 (5)

End of Block: Information about the authority

Start of Block: Agreements on contributions in the previous 3 years

Q4 Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing contributions in the past 3 financial years (i.e. 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20)? This includes contributions secured via S75, S69 and S48.

◯ Yes (1)
◯ No (2)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Q5 Were these contributions secured via ... ? (tick all that apply)

☐ Section 75 (1)
☐ Section 69 (2)
☐ Section 48 (3)
☐ Planning conditions (4)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = No

Q6 You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. What are the reasons for this? (tick all that apply)

☐ No requirements for new infrastructure (1)
☐ Lack of development activity (2)
☐ No affordable housing policy (3)
☐ No developer contributions policy (6)
☐ Development values too low so contributions would make development unviable (4)
☐ Anything else (please specify--eg reliant on regeneration policies) (5)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = No

Q7 You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. Have they entered into any such agreements in earlier years?

◯ Yes (1)
◯ No (2)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = No

Q8 Under what circumstances might the planning authority seek developer contributions in the future?

End of Block: Agreements on contributions in the previous 3 years

Start of Block: Policies and practices

Q9 Does your planning authority have formal policies on developer contributions?

◯ Yes (1)
◯ No (2)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have formal policies on developer contributions? = Yes

Q10 Are these policies set out in the local development plan?

◯ Yes (1)
◯ No (2)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have formal policies on developer contributions? = Yes

And Are these policies set out in the local development plan? = Yes

Q11 In what year was the local developer plan adopted?

Q12 Does your planning authority have any supplementary guidance covering development contributions/planning obligations? (tick all that apply)

☐ Yes, statutory guidance (3)
☐ Yes, non-statutory guidance (4)
☐ Other (please specify) (6)
☐ No (5)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have any supplementary guidance covering development contributions/p... = Yes, statutory guidance

Or Does your planning authority have any supplementary guidance covering development contributions/p... = Yes, non-statutory guidance

Q13 Which document(s) contain this guidance, and when were they adopted?

	Name of document (1)	Year adopted (3)
Document 1 (1)
Document 2 (2)
Document 3 (3)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have formal policies on developer contributions? = Yes

Or Does your planning authority have any supplementary guidance covering development contributions/p... = Yes, statutory guidance

Or Does your planning authority have any supplementary guidance covering development contributions/p... = Yes, non-statutory guidance

Q14 Does your planning authority use standard charges for developer contributions?

◯ Yes (1)
◯ No (2)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have formal policies on developer contributions? = Yes

Or Does your planning authority have any supplementary guidance covering development contributions/p... = Yes, statutory guidance

Or Does your planning authority have any supplementary guidance covering development contributions/p... = Yes, non-statutory guidance

Q15 Does your planning authority have requirements that are specific to particular zones or projects? (tick all that apply)

☐ No- requirements apply to entire planning authority area (1)
☐ Yes-Zones (please specify) (2)
☐ Yes-Specific projects/sites (please specify) (3)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Or You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. ... = Yes

Q16 What factors does your planning authority take into account when deciding between using S75 and other statutory powers for agreeing contributions?

End of Block: Policies and practices

Start of Block: Local Infrastructure Plan

Q17 Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new development or the Local Development Plan? (tick all that apply)

☐ Infrastructure plan or capital plan (6)
☐ Infrastructure / LDP action programme (7)
☐ Infrastructure action plan (10)
☐ None of the above (11)
☐ Other (please specify) (13)

Q18 Does your authority have infrastructure needs related to new development that are not in any infrastructure / Local Development / Capital plans? If so what are they?

◯ No (1)
◯ Yes (please specify) (2)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure plan or capital plan

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure / LDP action programme

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure action plan

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Other (please specify)

Q19 Does your planning authority have costings for the proposed investments?

◯ Yes (1)
◯ No (2)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure plan or capital plan

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure / LDP action programme

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure action plan

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Other (please specify)

Q20 Who was involved in drawing this (these) document(s) up?

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure plan or capital plan

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure / LDP action programme

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure action plan

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Other (please specify)

Q21 Do(es) these (this) document(s) specify when the infrastructure will be built (timing), and how it will be funded?

	Yes (1)	No (2)
Documents specify timing (1)
Documents specify funding (2)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure plan or capital plan

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure / LDP action programme

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure action plan

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Other (please specify)

Q22 What do(es) this (these) document(s) cover? (tick all that apply)

☐ Roads and other transport facilities (1)
☐ Flood defences (2)
☐ Schools and other educational facilities (3)
☐ Medical facilities/ Emergency Services (4)
☐ Social care facilities (5)
☐ Sporting and recreational facilities (6)
☐ Open/Green spaces (7)
☐ Proportion given to town/parish councils and neighbourhood forums (8)
☐ Public realm improvements (9)
☐ Utilities (10)
☐ Employment projects (11)
☐ Environmental projects (12)
☐ Energy (13)
☐ Other (please specify) (14)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure plan or capital plan

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure / LDP action programme

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Infrastructure action plan

Or Does your planning authority have any of the following for infrastructure that is related to new... = Other (please specify)

Q23 What spatial area(s) do(es) this (these) document(s) cover?

	Whole area (1)	Specific projects (2)	Specific sites (3)	N/A (4)
Infrastructure plan or capital plan (1)
Infrastructure / LDP action programme (2)
Infrastructure action plan (3)
Other relevant document(s) (please specify) (4)

Q24 What proportion of the identified infrastructure needs does your planning authority expect developer contributions to help deliver over the next year?

Q25 What proportion of the identified infrastructure needs does your planning authority expect developer contributions to help deliver over the next decade?

Q26 How accurate do you think these forecasts of developer contributions are?

◯ Very accurate (1)
◯ Somewhat accurate (2)
◯ Not very accurate (3)
◯ Not accurate (4)

End of Block: Local Infrastructure Plan

Start of Block: Affordable Housing Contributions

Q27 Does your planning authority have policies/practices to support the delivery of affordable homes through developer contributions?

◯ Yes (1)
◯ No (2)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have policies/practices to support the delivery of affordable homes... = No

Q28 You said your authority does not look for developer contributions for affordable housing. What are the reasons for this? (Tick all that apply)

☐ No identified need (1)
☐ No capacity within the planning authority (2)
☐ Maintaining viability of development (4)
☐ Other (please specify--eg reliant on regeneration policies) (3)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have policies/practices to support the delivery of affordable homes... = Yes

Q29 Are these policies/practices in your planning authority's local development plan and/or in supplementary guidance?

☐ Local Development Plan (1)
☐ Supplementary guidance (2)
☐ Both (3)
☐ Neither (4)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have policies/practices to support the delivery of affordable homes... = Yes

Q30 Does your planning authority seek contributions through land, completed homes, commuted sums or a combination ? (please tick all that apply)

☐ Land (1)
☐ Completed homes (2)
☐ Commuted sums (3)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have policies/practices to support the delivery of affordable homes... = Yes

Q31 Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer contributions? (tick all that apply)

☐ Yes, in terms of proportion of new homes (6)
☐ Yes, in terms of numbers of units (10)
☐ Yes, set out in a different way (please specify) (11)
☐ No (7)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, in terms of proportion of new homes

Or Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, in terms of numbers of units

Or Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, set out in a different way (please specify)

Q32 How are these targets determined?

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, in terms of proportion of new homes

Or Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, in terms of numbers of units

Or Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, set out in a different way (please specify)

Q33 What tenures do you include in your affordable housing definition?

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, in terms of proportion of new homes

Or Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, in terms of numbers of units

Or Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, set out in a different way (please specify)

Q34 What area is/are covered by these targets? (tick all that apply)

☐ Whole planning authority (1)
☐ Particular sites (2)
☐ Particular neighbourhoods (3)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, in terms of proportion of new homes

Or Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, in terms of numbers of units

Or Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, set out in a different way (please specify)

Q35 What type(s) of development are required to contribute to affordable housing provision? Please tick all that apply

☐ Residential above a certain number of units (please specify threshold) (1)
☐ Commercial (4)

Display This Question:

If Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, in terms of proportion of new homes

Or Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, in terms of numbers of units

Or Does your planning authority have targets for delivery of affordable homes through developer cont... = Yes, set out in a different way (please specify)

Or Does your planning authority have policies/practices to support the delivery of affordable homes... = Yes

Q36 Does your planning authority consult local housing associations/ affordable home providers when drawing up policies and targets?

◯ Yes (1)
◯ No (2)

Q37 How does the availability of grants for affordable housing influence your authority's obligations policies?

End of Block: Affordable Housing Contributions

Start of Block: Number of agreements and obligations within these agreements

Q38 For each of the last three financial years, how many planning permissions did your authority grant (excluding reserved matters)? Please exclude householder applications.

	Commercial (1)	Residential -- major developments (50 units or more) (2)	Residential -- Local developments (3)
2017/18 (1)
2018/19 (2)
2019/20 (3)

Q39 How many new homes in total were consented?

◯ 2017/18 (1)
◯ 2018/19 (2)
◯ 2019/20 (3)

Q40 How much new commercial floor space in total was consented, in m2?

	Sq metres of commercial space (1)
consented 2017/18 (1)
consented 2018/19 (2)
consented 2019/20 (3)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Q41 For each of these 3 years, how many of these permissions had agreements entered into under

	2017/18 residential with agreements (1)	2017/18 commercial with agreements (2)	2018/19 residential with agreements (3)	2018/19 commercial with agreements (4)	2019/20 residential with agreements (5)	2019/20 commercial with agreements (6)
S75 (1)
S69 Local Government Act (2)
S48 Roads Act (3)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Q42 What types of infrastructure were agreed as developer contributions in each year?

	2017/18 (17)	2018/19 (18)	2019/20 (19)
Roads and other transport facilities (5)
Flood defences (6)
Schools and other educational facilities (7)
Medical facilities/ Emergency Services (8)
Social care facilities (9)
Sporting and recreational facilities (10)
Open/Green spaces (11)
Proportion given to town/parish councils and neighbourhood forums (12)
Public realm improvements (13)
Utilities (14)
Employment projects (15)
Environmental projects (16)
Energy (17)
Other (please specify) (18)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Q43 In the most recent year for which you have data, for obligations other than affordable housing: (i) how were these contributions made (in kind/land/as financial contributions) and(ii) what was their total value?

	Number (1)	Value of contributions (2)
As land (1)
As other in-kind contributions (4)
As financial contributions (3)

Display This Question:

If If In the most recent year for which you have data, for obligations other than affordable housing: (i) how were these contributions made (in kind/land/as financial contributions) and(ii) wha... As land - Number Is Greater Than 0

Or Or In the most recent year for which you have data, for obligations other than affordable housing: (i) how were these contributions made (in kind/land/as financial contributions) and(ii) wha... As land - Value of contributions Is Greater Than 0

Or Or In the most recent year for which you have data, for obligations other than affordable housing: (i) how were these contributions made (in kind/land/as financial contributions) and(ii) wha... As financial contributions - Number Is Greater Than 0

Or Or In the most recent year for which you have data, for obligations other than affordable housing: (i) how were these contributions made (in kind/land/as financial contributions) and(ii) wha... As financial contributions - Value of contributions Is Greater Than 0

Or Or In the most recent year for which you have data, for obligations other than affordable housing: (i) how were these contributions made (in kind/land/as financial contributions) and(ii) wha... As other in-kind contributions - Number Is Greater Than 0

Or Or In the most recent year for which you have data, for obligations other than affordable housing: (i) how were these contributions made (in kind/land/as financial contributions) and(ii) wha... As other in-kind contributions - Value of contributions Is Greater Than 0

Q44 How reliable do you consider the values in the previous question to be?

◯ very reliable (1)
◯ somewhat reliable (2)
◯ not very reliable (3)
◯ not at all reliable (4)

End of Block: Number of agreements and obligations within these agreements

Start of Block: Affordable housing numbers approved

Q45 How many new affordable homes in total have been granted planning permission in each of the past 3 years, and of these how many have been secured via developer contributions?

	2017/18 affordable homes approved (1)	of which to be developer contributions (2)	2018/19 affordable homes approved (3)	of which to be developer contributions (4)	2019/20 affordable homes approved (5)	of which to be developer contributions (6)
Social rent (1)
Intermediate rent / mid-market rent (5)
Shared ownership (2)
Discounted market sale (3)
Shared equity (4)
Other (please specify) (6)

Q46 How reliable do you consider the numbers in the previous question to be?

◯ very reliable (1)
◯ somewhat reliable (2)
◯ not very reliable (3)
◯ not at all reliable (4)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Q47 Looking at planning permissions granted in the most recent year, how many units of each type of affordable housing were secured via developer contributions through

	Social rented housing (1)	Intermediate rent / mid-market rent (3)	Shared ownership (2)	Discounted market sale (4)	Shared equity (5)	Other (6)
Discounted land for affordable housing units provided on market site (1)
Sale of completed units at discounted prices on market site (2)
Off-site provision of discounted land for affordable housing (3)
Off-site provision of discounted units (4)
Commuted cash payment to local authority to provide new affordable homes elsewhere (please specify amount agreed) (5)

End of Block: Affordable housing numbers approved

Start of Block: Affordable housing numbers completed

Q48 How many new affordable homes have been completed in each of the last three years, and how many were funded or otherwise provided by developer contributions?

	Completed 2019/20 (1)	of which, through developer contributions (2)	Completed 2018/19 (3)	of which, developer contributions (4)	completed 2017/18 (5)	of which, developer contributions (6)
Social rented housing (1)
Intermediate / mid-market rent (6)
Shared ownership (2)
Discounted market sale (3)
Shared equity (4)
Other (please specify) (5)

Q49 How reliable do you consider the numbers in the previous question to be?

◯ very reliable (1)
◯ somewhat reliable (2)
◯ not very reliable (3)
◯ not at all reliable (4)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Q50 In the most recent year, how many of each tenure were funded/provided by

	Social rent (1)	Intermediate / mid-market rent (2)	Shared ownership (3)	Discounted market sale (4)	Shared equity (5)	Other (6)
Discounted land for affordable housing provided on market site (1)
Sale of completed units at discounted prices on market site (2)
Off- site provision of discounted land for affordable housing (3)
Offsite provision of discounted units (4)
Commuted cash payment to local authority to provide new affordable homes elsewhere (and specify amount agreed) (5)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Or You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. ... = Yes

Q51 On average how much time elapses between agreement and delivery of new affordable homes, in months?

End of Block: Affordable housing numbers completed

Start of Block: Operational effectiveness

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Or You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. ... = Yes

Q52 Does your authority have a dedicated team/staff to negotiate developer contribution agreements?

◯ Yes (1)
◯ No (2)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Or You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. ... = Yes

Q53 Does your authority have a dedicated team/staff to monitor developer contribution agreements?

◯ Yes (1)
◯ No (2)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Or You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. ... = Yes

Q54 How is delivery monitored? (tick all that apply)

☐ Digital alert system (1)
☐ Site visits (2)
☐ Other (please specify) (3)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Or You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. ... = Yes

Q55 Is any of this monitoring work outsourced?

◯ Yes (1)
◯ No (2)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Or You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. ... = Yes

Q56 In general, are developer contributions usually delivered as agreed?

◯ Always delivered (1)
◯ Mostly delivered (2)
◯ Only a minority delivered (3)
◯ Never delivered (4)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Or You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. ... = Yes

Q57 How much was delivered in 2019-20, regardless of the year in which the agreement was made? Please enter "cannot estimate" if values are not available

	Affordable homes (1)	All other infrastructure types (2)
As direct financial contributions (£) (1)
As in-kind contributions (valued in £) (2)

Display This Question:

If If For each of these 3 years, how many of these permissions had agreements entered into under S75 - 2017/18 residential with agreements Is Greater Than 0

Or Or For each of these 3 years, how many of these permissions had agreements entered into under S75 - 2017/18 commercial with agreements Is Greater Than 0

Or Or For each of these 3 years, how many of these permissions had agreements entered into under S69 Local Government Act - 2017/18 residential with agreements Is Greater Than 0

Or Or For each of these 3 years, how many of these permissions had agreements entered into under S69 Local Government Act - 2017/18 commercial with agreements Is Greater Than 0

Or Or For each of these 3 years, how many of these permissions had agreements entered into under S48 Roads Act - 2017/18 residential with agreements Is Greater Than 0

Or Or For each of these 3 years, how many of these permissions had agreements entered into under S48 Roads Act - 2017/18 commercial with agreements Is Greater Than 0

Q58 Looking at the agreements made in financial year 2017-18, what percentage was delivered by 31 March 2020?

◯ % of agreed financial contributions (1)
◯ % of new affordable homes agreed (2)

Display This Question:

If If Looking at the agreements made in financial year 2017-18, what percentage was delivered by 31 Mar... % of agreed financial contributions Is Greater Than 0

Or Or Looking at the agreements made in financial year 2017-18, what percentage was delivered by 31 Mar... % of new affordable homes agreed Is Greater Than 0

Q59 How reliable do you consider the numbers in the previous question to be?

◯ very reliable (1)
◯ somewhat reliable (2)
◯ not very reliable (3)
◯ not at all reliable (4)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Or You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. ... = Yes

Q60 Have variations become more common over the last three years?

◯ Yes (1)
◯ No (2)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Or You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. ... = Yes

Q61 What proportion of agreements have been subject to requests for variation over the last 3 years?

Display This Question:

If What proportion of agreements have been subject to requests for variation over the last 3 years? [ % ] > 0

Q62 And what proportion of requests for variation were agreed to over the last 3 years?

Display This Question:

If What proportion of agreements have been subject to requests for variation over the last 3 years? [ % ] > 0

Q63 What sorts of changes get agreed? (tick all that apply)

☐ Timing (1)
☐ Reduced numbers of affordable housing (2)
☐ Reworking of the agreement due to further applications from developers that change the overall plans for the site and resultant contribution requirements (4)
☐ Other (please specify) (3)

Display This Question:

If What proportion of agreements have been subject to requests for variation over the last 3 years? [ % ] > 0

Q64 What types of changes requested are refused?

End of Block: Operational effectiveness

Start of Block: The overall picture

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Or You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. ... = Yes

Q65 What are the biggest challenges your planning authority faces in getting contributions agreed and delivered? (tick all that apply)

☐ Land/development market not strong enough to support what is needed (1)
☐ Constraints arising from the five tests (2)
☐ Viability issues for developers (3)
☐ Negotiation difficulties (4)
☐ Getting enough contributions to deal with the impact of cumulative developments on infrastructure needed (5)
☐ Delays to site starts and therefore payment of contributions (7)
☐ Other (please specify) (6)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Or You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. ... = Yes

Q66 In your experience, is getting agreement on developer contributions in this local planning authority generally…?

◯ Very difficult (1)
◯ Difficult (2)
◯ Neither easy nor difficult (3)
◯ Easy (4)
◯ Very easy (5)

Q67 In your view, how much does the process of reaching agreements contribute to delays in agreeing planning permissions?

◯ A great deal (1)
◯ A lot (2)
◯ A moderate amount (3)
◯ A little (4)
◯ None at all (5)

Display This Question:

If Has the planning authority entered into any agreements with developers / landowners securing cont... = Yes

Or You said your authority had entered into no agreements on contributions in the last three years. ... = Yes

Q68 For large residential applications of 50 dwellings or more, about how many months does the process add to the time taken to grant consent?

◯ Months (1)
◯ N/A--no schemes this large (2)

End of Block: The overall picture

Start of Block: Data availability

Q69 Does your planning authority have any planning-authority specific data on the following that could be made available to the research team? (tick all that apply)

☐ Infrastructure costings (1)
☐ Tenure of new affordable housing (2)
☐ Size distribution of market and affordable homes (3)
☐ Agricultural land values (4)
☐ Serviced land values in particular uses (5)
☐ The proportion of planning permissions granted that are delivered (6)
☐ Other (please specify) (7)

End of Block: Data availability

Start of Block: Survey end

Q70 If you have had any difficulties with the survey itself, please tell us about them here.

Q71 Is there anything else you would like to say about the process and effectiveness of securing developer contributions in Scotland? You may use this space to expand on any of your previous answers.

Display This Question:

If If Is there anything else you would like to say about the process and effectiveness of securing developer contributions in Scotland?  You may use this space to expand on any of your previous answ... Text Response Is Not Empty

Q72 If so, would you like to upload document(s)?

Q73 Please provide an email address for the person to contact in your authority, if the research team has questions.

Q74 This is the end of the survey. Before clicking the right arrow to register your authority's response, please ensure that ALL sections that apply to your authority have been completed. This is especially important if several people have contributed to the survey.

Thank you very much for your help with the research.