Some time ago I posted a link to Shropshire Council’s website that took you to the council’s Core Strategy and the section for housing development in the county, one of the proposals being to make developments pay for improvement to the local infrastructure. It’s not clear whether this is replacing any existing schemes, which were paraded as a balancing-out of the impact of housing development on the local infrastructure rather than the indirect tax it was. The details have now emerged.

Taken from the article in the Bridgnorth Journal: “Around £4 million annually could be raised to spend on improving services, infrastructure and facilities in [the county] under a new charge on developers.”

The Council’s Cabinet has agreed on a levy rate of £40 per sq.m “for residential development in towns and key centres” which is “equivalent to about £4,000 for a new 3-bed home”, and £80 per sq.m “for residential developments in rural areas, equivalent to about £8,000” [per 3-bed home].

“The majority of levy income would be ringfenced to the area where new developments are taking place.”

If it is a replacement for any existing schemes, the best that can be said of it is that at least you can work out what they’ll be demanding off you now, although you’ll still be held to ransom by the “up to 48%” of the building cost for barn conversions in Shropshire.

Hush! Some areas have not cottoned on to this way of charging people in Rural Areas more than those in Urban. Why the differentiation?

Funny that; don't see many services down my track. Never had a road sweeper, no road lights, library 6 miles away, Police are good though - one stopped the other day to check the place over as the gate was open and there were no vehicles around!

It's still in the (laughing hysterically) consultation stage, but due to roll out in a few weeks.

And Nigel, can you point me to a reference to the "exemptions for low cost affordable dwellings and for local needs", please. I need something to refer to. Thanks.

Thanks Nigel. Saw that but didn't see it as a specific "blanket" exemption, but rather just a re-wording of existing policy. The hoops and obstacles you need to get over and around appear pretty much the same as they've always been, in that there remains the need to "prove" both need and low-or-negligible impact on the immediate area, which means it's still a highly subjective area of planning decision-making. Any approval is still conditional for those "exempt" categories.

What the document says is: "Subject to the further controls over development that apply to the Green Belt,
development proposals on appropriate sites which maintain and enhance countryside vitality and character will be permitted where they improve the sustainability of rural communities by bringing local economic and community
benefits," In other words, whilst such development will be given a sympathetic hearing (as it's supposed to get at present!) it doesn't appear to exempt such developments from the levy.

The proposed levy is clear-cut and, given the claimed reasons for and professed target for the monies raised, would still, surely, apply to ANY development?