The Government’s proposals to introduce the hugely unpopular planning gain supplement came under fire today from the Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA) and the BPF.
In a discussion paper published today by the TCPA it proposed a new development tariff or ‘roof tax’ which it said was a ‘workable alternative’ to the planning gain supplement.
The supplement is a tax on the uplift in land value derived from gaining planning permission and Knight Frank said it would ‘raise less cash than the current system and remove vital links between local authorities and developers’.
The TCPA said a tariff would work as follows:
o The local authority’s ‘shopping list’ of infrastructure is costed against planned future development for an area.
o The cost of the infrastructure is then allocated across the planned development charging a set amount per sq m of residential or commercial space
o The infrastructure required before development is forward funded by a ‘banker’ who is guaranteed the money from future development
o As development takes place the developer pays a set tariff for its development rather than negotiating a Section 106 agreement.
Liz Peace, chief executive at the British Property Federation, said it has consistently opposed the supplement as it weakened the link between developer and local authority by removing the physical provision of infrastructure from the developer: ‘We see a tariff as a far better option than PGS and one which the government seriously needs to consult on…PGS will create lengthy legal disputes, raising less revenue than well negotiated section 106 agreements. It will deter much-needed regenerative development.’