Cheshire East Council (CEC) currently holds £14,322,950 in their S106 account and at the end of the 2014-15 financial year the balance was £13,202,847 which earnt £19,971 interest.
As the result of a Freedom of Information Request, alderleyedge.com can reveal that the Council has £216,283 in the bank from agreements relating to Alderley Edge which represents a substantial increase since we last obtained figures. In October 2013 the amount set aside for Alderley Edge was £146,783.
Section 106 agreements, also known as Planning Obligations, are legal agreements with the Council under Section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990. These are legally binding agreements between the Council, the developer and any other parties with an interest in the site to be developed and often include a financial contribution.
The purpose of Section 106 agreements is to regulate the future development of the land, compensate the local community for any impact caused by a development and help shape the new development - for example, to make sure a certain number of houses are affordable homes.
Money set aside for Alderley Edge includes a payment of £59,283 from the development at 17-23 London Road, where Tesco Express is located, which is to used for transport services and infrastructure, and £88,678 from the Eden Park development on Macclesfield Road to be used towards the provision of affordable housing in a rural area to be determined by CEC.
Additionally there is £40,083 from the Oak Park development on Heyes Lane for the enhancement of Alderley Park, Heyes Lane Allotments and Chorley Hall Lane playing fields and £28,239 from the Greenlands development on Chorley Hall Lane to be used for the enhancement of facilities at Alderley Park and Chorley Hall Lane along with the provision of outdoor sport facilities.
Of the £14,322,950 currently held in the S106 account, £11,289,291 is identified as non-time limited funds and £3,033,659 is identified as funds time limited for expenditure.
Of the £216,283 allocated to Alderley Edge, £147,962 has a time limit on the funds.
Income from S106 funds has increased from £4,677,437 in the financial year 2011/12 to £13,202,847 in 2014/15, whilst expenditure also increased during that period from £560,905 in 2011/12 to £2,511,620 in 2014/15.
In the past four years the interest received on the S106 fund is £46,565, we are currently waiting for confirmation from Cheshire East Council as to what happens to the interest and whether it is kept by CEC or added on to the individual 106 payment.
Comments
Here's what readers have had to say so far. Why not add your thoughts below.
I have asked Craig Browne to look into this and he's on the case...
congrats on 'finding' this 'hidden' money.
I thought I was doing well when I 'found' about £24,000 a few years ago and got it spent on the Park, but I bow to your superior forensic skills; £68,000 for Park and Chorley Hall Lane Playing Field (and Heyes Lane allotments; which is another matter; possibly dependent on the forthcoming Parking Review's decisions).
Can you tell us when the £147,962 time limit runs out and what might happen to that money if the time limit runs out?
Am I correct in thinking that in the past, Alderley Edge S106 money, for affordable housing, has not been spent in Alderley Edge?
Can you tell us who will have control of the spending of Alderley Edge's money?
Again, well done.
If I remember correctly, it was discussed at a parish council meeting(s), going back a few years, that S106 money from the St Hilary’s Park development was spent in Macclesfield.
My understanding is Cheshire East has control of spending the money, though parish and town council’s can make requests for specific projects - like you did with the park. I know Wilmslow Town Council has been trying for some time to get £30,000 of S106 money which Cheshire East Council is holding to help fund the building of public toilets in The Carrs, next to the children's playground.
I’m afraid I don’t know when all the time limits run out, only the £40,000 from the Oak Park development on Heyes Lane which needs to be spent within 15 years of receipt.
I will ask about the other time limits and what happens to the money if it isn’t spent.
Hopefully we can extract money to be spent in the village; e.g. why doesn't C.E. believe that A.E. need somes low cost housing, as much as other areas?
Alderley Edge will never have "low cost housing."
Would you like me to enlighten you as to why that is, or can you try really (really) hard and work it out for yourself?
There is the site of the falling-down pub/hotel, just outside the village. It is quite large enough for a block of low-cost apartments. You may recall that the 'Merlin' building was originally a row of 'Council Houses' ? What is needed is political willingness and some old-fashioned get-up-and-go.
Given that the old P.C. set to for a new Medical Centre, which work the new P.C. are continuing with; why should they not agitate to get hold of the site and get 'stuck in' ?
Don't give me excuses as to why not, give me ways to get it done !
Developers WILL build "affordable housing" in Alderley Edge - but it will be affordable to soccer stars, celebs and other wealthy professionals that increasingly make up the demographic of the village
The reality (as you well know) is that land is eye-wateringly expensive and Developers will do everything possible to extract maximum return from their investment.
Alderley Edge is an "aspirational" place to live and incomers will pay top dollar for the postcode, so Developers will "develop" accordingly.
The site of the old Harden Park hotel is already the subject of a planning application for luxury abodes as Lisa has reported recently.
Personally, I would favour a moratorium on any further development until we know for sure that there is the right infrastructure and local services to support the growing need
The Merlin was (if I recall correctly) formerly the "College Flats" which were, I think, privately owned. I believe that the building was originally a boarding school.
Or how about the ex-St. Hilary's playing field? Or is that earmarked as a car park?
If the people demand, the people will get; a little backside kicking may be needed, but so what?
When the last Parish Council decided to build a new Medical Centre, there were those who said it was impossible. It got built !
Just do it ?
As for College Flats, was there not, at the time, a promise/expectation to replce the lost accommodation?
As per the former Cottage Hospital ?
We have a Conservative Government committed to increasing house building and our M.P. is the Chancellor and we have an active Conservative leader of C.E. Is there just a wee hint there that low-cost housing can be built in A.E.? If the village citizens want it ?
If Bob Geldof can do it, why not 'us'?
As said, we live in an affluent area. There is little or no "real" homelessness or poverty and property prices locally are amongst the highest in the country (outside London and the Home Counties)
The Conservative-led CE Council, have thus far resisted any temptation to demonstrate any benevolence by providing cheap housing, with or without any gentle pushing from Central Office or our "local" hero George Osborne.
As we all know, what Alderley Edge actually needs is car parking, not new housing - so, hijacking your idea, why don't we get the placards out and campaign for CE to give up some of their land (Alderley Road for example) to provide a car park?
Surely you'll agree that that would be more equitable than trying to steal land from a group of allotment holders?
Does A.E. need affordable housing and do the majority of A.E. citizens want affordable housing? As said, if there is a political will for it, then it can happen.
As to the possibility of a car park on the Heyes Lane allotment site? Firstly to be pedantic; the land cannot be stolen from the allotment holders (I'm assuming that by 'holders' you actually mean the people who 'work' the allotments). The land is owned by Cheshire East and has been leased to the Parish Council.
In any case, only 11 people who actually live in A.E. have allotments at the site (if that number has changed in the last few months, then I am out of date and accordingly apologise). So it has been argued that the 'greater good' i.e. the possible need for a car park, outwheighs the allotment usage (especially as there is a larger tract of land available for new allotments).
Whether there may be a car park there may well depend on the soon-to-be-announced result of the Parish Council's Parking Survey (and I assume a list of actual actions to relieve the parking problems of the village).
If the council can be lobbied to give up, or compulsorily purchase land for the "Public Good," why split hairs over which "Public Good?"
As you rightly say, CE has a number of interesting plots of land available to it and they could solve Alderley Edges parking or housing problem (if there is one) at a stroke, but choose not to do so.
You seem to have come up with the conclusion that AE need affordable housing. That may, or may not be true. I look at it that CEC have a limited budget to spend on affordable housing and that they may have concluded that there are geographical areas that they can achieve their targets in a cost-effective way. I would have thought that is the responsible thing to do.
So could you please explain your reasons for the assumption that AE need affordable housing?
please read carefully what I wrote above. I did not say that A.E. needs affordable housing, I ASKED whether it was needed and whether the citizens of AE want it; that's not a conclusion !
I despair of you
Early on in this thread you said "Hopefully we can extract money to be spent in the village; e.g. why doesn't C.E. believe that A.E. need somes (sic) low cost housing, as much as other areas"
If you are now saying that you are just hanging out hypothetical questions for our entertainment and enjoyment, then I would say......DONT!
Yes, it was argued; that was a central plank of the all-Conservative previous Parish Council's manifesto.
AEPC is now all-independent.
Clearly you are still having difficulty in accepting the will of the electorate.
there is a difference between what I might like to happen and what the the general public might want to happen. I am simply an individual and would not presume to think that my view counts for any more than anyone else's view.
You wrote above that 'we all know that what A.E. needs is car parking not new housing'; so you have decided what 'we all know' and so I repeat your own advice from above .. DON'T ?
I haven't despaied of you yet !
Good Morning Pete,
why accuse me of ignoring the will of the electorate?
The new Parish Council is about to release the results of its parking survey and hopefully its raft of actions to solve the parking problem. Once that has happened, the electorate can
make its feelings felt.
If the electorate decides that it doesn't want a car park then that is that. If the electorate decide that a car park is needed, will you accept that? If the electorate decides where it wants a car park to be located, will you accept that?
By the way, is AEPC indeed all-independent? Surely it is a single political group? The electorate chose to exchange one 'group' for another 'group'. That's democracy.
A spokesperson for Cheshire East Council said "The section 106 agreements have a clause requiring us to hold the funds we received from developers in an interest bearing account. Where interest is earned it is required to be spent in line with the conditions of the s106 agreement or, in the case of time limited fund has expired, returned to developer along with any of original contribution which remains."
it is nice to see you digging on our behalf.
The info. on when the time limit runs out on funds 'earmarked' for A.E. seems to have been left out by the CE spokesperson !
I do wonder whether any 106 monies have ever been returned to the developer ?
Might the spokesperson be approached by you (us?) to list exactly the monies are held 'on behalf of' A.E. ? Has it a time limit that might be reached in the near future ? Who has already applied to 'get at' those monies.
Yes, I am a cynic !
we tried hard to get 106 monies from Cheshire East. I got lucky and 'found' circa £20,000 which was used to build the two new large play pieces of equipment in the park.
If C.E. refuse to 'cough up' then there isn't a lot a P.C. can do. I will be happy to congratulate the new P.C. if they manage to extract significant 106 monies for the village.
As Lisa is a very capable journalist, I am more than happy to get her to pose questions on behalf of the village.
I ask questions so that I can find things out; why might you have a problem with questions?
I do have an understanding of how the system worked; A.E. has developments for which the developers pay 106 dosh to C.E. Then C.E. either don't spend that money OR spends it elsewhere. The village has never, for example, seen the 106 monies from the St. Hilary's development.
So stop picking on me (at least I got some £thousands out of C.E. !) and instead encourage the new Parish Council so they can try to get monies (blood? stone?). If they are able to do so, please keep us posted.
By the way, its no longer called Section 106 money. The new system is supposed to make it easier for a village/town to get its hands on the money.
I have listed all the monies held on behalf of Alderley Edge in the article. Of these there is a time limit on the £28,239 from the Greenlands development on Chorley Hall Lane - to be spent by March 2021.
Also the £40,083 from the Oak Park development on Heyes Lane - to be spent by October 2029.
No time limit on the £59,283 from the development at 17-23 London Road, where Tesco Express is located, or the £88,678 from the Eden Park development on Macclesfield Road.
If the time to utilise a section 106 were to expire Cheshire East Council would be required to return any of the uncommitted balance to the developer. However, this has never happened.