Experiences of running negotiable and non-negotiable developer contributions side-by-side

[thumbnail of PPR paper (post rev) v5.pdf]
Preview
Text - Accepted Version
· Please see our End User Agreement before downloading.
| Preview

Please see our End User Agreement.

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

Add to AnyAdd to TwitterAdd to FacebookAdd to LinkedinAdd to PinterestAdd to Email

Wyatt, P. orcid id iconORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9091-2729 (2017) Experiences of running negotiable and non-negotiable developer contributions side-by-side. Planning Practice & Research, 32 (2). pp. 125-170. ISSN 1360-0583 doi: 10.1080/02697459.2016.1222148

Abstract/Summary

In England, Since the 1970s, a system of negotiated project-specific agreements between local planning authorities and developers/landowners has evolved into the sole mechanism by which part of land value uplift ‘released’ by the grant of planning permission is captured by government. In 2010, in an attempt to simplify and speed up the planning process – negotiated planning agreements were regarded as time-consuming and a brake on development – the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) was introduced. Originally intended as a simple flat rate charge to replace site-specific planning agreements, CIL now sits alongside that mechanism so that developers pay CIL to help fund infrastructure provision in the locality, whilst planning agreements help mitigate the impact of their development and provide affordable housing. The experience of running a system of negotiated planning agreements alongside a non-negotiable infrastructure levy offers an opportunity to evaluate these policy shifts in order to assess their strengths and weaknesses and whether there are any wider lessons for international discussions of best practice in land value capture. Drawing on survey findings the paper considers the implementation of CIL alongside planning agreements, the revenue and expenditure patterns, and the impact of these combined land value capture mechanisms on development activity and, in particular, on affordable housing supply.

Altmetric Badge

Item Type Article
URI https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/66858
Identification Number/DOI 10.1080/02697459.2016.1222148
Refereed Yes
Divisions Henley Business School > Real Estate and Planning
Publisher Taylor and Francis
Download/View statistics View download statistics for this item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Search Google Scholar