More than 5,000 new homes at Peterborough’s Great Haddon development finally get the green light

More than 5,000 new homes at the Great Haddon development have finally been given planning permission after years of delays.The two largest developers on the site close to the A1M and A15 have finally signed their Section 106 agreements with Peterborough City Council which require them to deliver specific community and highways infrastructure at set times throughout the development programme. O & H Properties and Marlborough Oasis can now start building the first of 5,350 homes which are due to be delivered on the site, 16 per cent of which will be affordable homes. However, despite planning permission being granted for the entire site, the third set of developers Barratt Homes cannot begin work on the 647 homes they are due to build as they are yet to sign their Section 106 with the council.The first homes were originally due to be built at Great Haddon in 2011.The development is also due to deliver four schools three shopping centres and sports facilities. The shortfall of developer contributions would be around £10 million if the S106 with Barratt Homes is never signed, but this would be made up by not needing a third primary school and by reducing the size of the secondary school.The finishing of the Section 106 agreements comes nearly two months after the council’s planning committee had given its consent for planning permission to be granted once the agreements had been signed off. Barratt Homes co-owns 10 per cent of the land with two families, all of whom, according to the council, did not want to sign a S106 without entering a ‘collaboration agreement’ with the other developers.This would have allowed them to access the “roads, services and electricity” on each other’s land. However, the council said the collaboration agreement was not a planning condition it could impose. At last June’s meeting Peter Frampton, representing the families, said the land owners were “being asked to contribute 17 per cent of infrastructure costs with no arrangement for how the development of infrastructure is to be undertaken.”