home » media resource centre » responses to government » Response to Planning Gain Supplement Concultation

Response to Planning Gain Supplement Concultation

1 Introduction

1.1 Following recommendations made by Kate Barker, a consultation document ‘Planning Gain Supplement' was published in December 2005. The Government aims to build sustainable communities supported by new investment in transport, schools, health centres and local services. The consultation document gives weight to and builds on Kate Barker's recommendation that the Government should capture a proportion of the land value uplift arising from the planning process. The so-called Planning Gain Supplement (PGS) is to be a fair, efficient and transparent levy.

2 The Context for FIT's Response

2.1 FIT was founded in 1925 (as the National Playing Fields Association), and granted a Royal Charter in 1933, with the aim of ensuring that every man, woman and child throughout the United Kingdom had access to high quality, outdoor facilities for sport, play and general recreation. To this day, FIT remains the only national organisation which has specific responsibility for acquiring, protecting and improving playing fields, playgrounds and playspace where they are most needed, and for those who need them most. Today's mission focuses on improving the quality of life and health of everyone by working to ensure the availability, protection and development of high quality, well used local land and facilities for outdoor sport and play for all communities.

2.2 The key feature of FIT's work, unique in many ways, is the protection of facilities for outdoor sport, play and recreation. Measures are put in place to safeguard recreational use for generations of users to come. We secure public access, safeguard investment and require that, in the rare circumstances of disposal, proceeds are reapplied and reinvested in better recreational facilities serving the same community. FIT uses a range of legal measures for this purpose including registration of fields as charities, land law and contract law obtaining future guarantees in consideration for grants given. Today, FIT protects some 1150 sites covering over 8000 acres. These split almost 50:50 between urban and rural provision. We estimate that they serve about the needs of some 1.3 million people for active sport and play, not counting informal users, walkers and spectators. The sites are used 7 days a week by many adults and children's football, cricket and rugby teams, and some 800 or 60% of the sites are used for football.

2.3 In the context of the planning system, FIT has long made recommendations on the provision, improvement and protection of outdoor sport and play facilities. Known as the ‘Six Acre Standard' (last published 2001, currently under review), these provide minimum national recommendations on standards relating to quantity, quality and accessibility of such provision, suitable for adaptation at the local level. A postal survey of planning authorities in England in 2005, (responded to be 252 out of 350 authorities or 72% showed that 2/3 of them had adopted FIT's Six Acre Standard or its quantitative equivalent within local standards. The FIT's recommendations also play an important part in Supplementary Planning Guidance and Documents. Their clarity, practicality and efficacy have long been recognised by planning authorities, developers and community organisations alike, and they have been tested many times at appeal.

2.4 The FIT's comments are, therefore, provided in the context of planning gain supplement issues relating to outdoor sport and play provision in particular, and open space in general.

3 The Development Site Approach

3.1 It is proposed that planning obligations for negotiation by local planning authorities are reduced. They would be defined on a statutory basis, and largely delimited to the environment of the development site itself, with the objective of helping it to become sustainable, safe, of high quality and accessible. Affordable housing provision would remain negotiable by LPAs. The new system aims to improve consistency and fairness of approach by LPAs across England. Concomitantly, it is also proposed that the Planning Gain Supplement is levied on community facilities and improvements which fall outside of the development-site environment itself.

3.2 Table 5.2 of the consultation document identifies the scope of planning obligations which might be included in the development-site approach. These include many aspects of work with which the NPFA recommendations are concerned, such as on-site landscaping, on-site roads and traffic calming, access roads, open space and environmental improvements. From the perspective of the NPFA's specific interests and objectives (See paragraphs 2.1 to 2.3 above), this can be interpreted to include outdoor facilities for sport, outdoor facilities for play, open space uses generally and the general community environment within the development site area and how it impacts on the use of the environment generally by children and young people.

3.3 Leisure and cultural facilities are stated as being outside of the proposed new scope. However, they are not defined.

4 Issues Relating to Outdoor Land and Facilities for Sport and Play under the Proposals

4.1 While it is reasonable to conclude that the scope of the development site improvements would relate to all open space uses, this needs confirmation. If the proposals are to be taken forward in their present or similar form, this can be done by reference to the 10 different types of Open Space defined within the typology described in the Annex to PPG17 Planning Guidance on Open Space, Sport and Recreation' (2002). These relate to open spaces that may be of public value and are repeated below for ease of reference:

1. parks and gardens - including urban parks, country parks and formal gardens
2. natural and semi-natural urban greenspaces - including woodlands, urban forestry, scrub, grasslands (eg downlands, commons and meadows) wetlands, open and running water, wastelands and derelict open land and rock areas (eg cliffs, quarries and pits)
3. green corridors - including river and canal banks, cycleways, and rights of way
4. outdoor sports facilities (with natural or artificial surfaces and either publicly or privately owned) - including tennis courts, bowling greens, sports pitches, golf courses, athletics tracks, school and other institutional playing fields, and other outdoor sports areas
5. amenity greenspace (most commonly, but not exclusively in housing areas) - including informal recreation spaces, greenspaces in and around housing, domestic gardens and village greens
6. provision for children and teenagers - including play areas, skateboard parks, outdoor basketball hoops, and other more informal areas (eg 'hanging out' areas, teenage shelters)
7. allotments, community gardens, and city (urban) farms
8. cemeteries and churchyards
9. accessible countryside in urban fringe areas
10. civic spaces, including civic and market squares, and other hard surfaced areas designed for pedestrians

4.2 If the above approach is not adopted by Government then steps should be taken to ensure that local outdoor facilities for sport and play (provision for children and teenagers in the language of PPG17) are defined as within the scope of the development site environment. Items 4 and 6 above are referred to.

4.3 Either 4.1 or 4.2 above would retain the direct link between policies and standards to be set out in Local Development Frameworks and within Supplementary Planning Documents, ensuring sufficient open space provision is made for the benfit of health, the quality of life of the individual and community cohesion. If these facilities were otherwise defined as having to compete with other provision needs, including those with statutory force, such as education and health, the it is possible that investment levels would be insufficient for appropriate provision as required by standards, that quality would suffer and that confidence in the planning and development processes would reduce. It is not in the interest of Government, local planning authorities nor developers for this to occur.

4.3 It is possible that two catgories of open space may be differentiated under PGS arrangements. That to be provided on site would be subject to planning obligations as now, but any which is off site would fall under the Planning Gain Supplement. This would be particularly problematical when overall development comprised, in total or large part, small sites. It would also prove difficult to co-ordinate appropriate levels of investment relating to any hierarchical approach to provision, such as the local areas for play, local equipped areas for play and neighbourhod equipped areas for play adopted by many LPAs. The same difficulty might apply to sports pitches on local recreation grounds compared with larger scale playing field provision. A somewhat contradictory provision may well occur with certain relatively large scale outdoor facilities funded by planning obligations in large developments and the same forms of provision having to be funded under the PGS in areas where development was in a number of small sites. In worst circumstances, this may happen in the same authority at the same time to the benefit of no-one's reputation. The recommended approach in paragraphs 4.1 or 4.2 would avoid such problems.

4.3 Clearer definition needs to be given to ‘cultural' and ‘leisure' facilities which may be intended to refer only to indoor facilities. In this context, the Government should take particular note of the representations made by Sport England and the Central Council of Physical Recreation.

4.4 Much of the provision for outdoor sport and play in this country is enabled by the investment, effort and resources of the voluntary sector, particularly through registered recreational charities and voluntary sports clubs. There are occasions when such bodies may dispose of their site and facilities for development to generate funds for new and improved facilities. Any such sales and replacements should be considered within the development site environment approach.

4.5 If the recommendation under 4.4 is not to apply, then in the case of registered charities, with appropriate trust purposes, and registered community amateur sports clubs, where proceeds of sale are ringfenced towards the provision of new facilities and their future maintenance, there should be an exemption from any PGS that would otherwise apply. This parallels exemptions afforded by the Inland Revenue and through rate relief.

4.6 FIT has developed close working relationships with planning authorities and developers alike over many years, including recent discussions about planning obligations and the investment in and maintenance of outdoor sport, play and open space provision in new developments. This has included discussions with the Home Builders' Federation and the development of a new initiative, called Space Plan which will provide a future exemplar for policy, provision and practice. Much enhanced and sustainable facilities would result and it is our considered opinion that the application of the proposed Planning Gain Supplement to this type of provision and initiative would be detrimental.

4.7 FIT is enthusiastic about discussing its views and the Space Plan initiative with the Goverrnment. We will respond positively to any invitation to future discussions or involvement. We are willing to provide further information and advice.

5 Conclusion and Recommendations

5.1 FIT's response is confined to matters relating to the provision of outdoor land and facilities for sport and play, and to open space more generally. Other provision and services, including indoor sport (apart from facilities ancillary to the above outdoor uses), leisure and cultural activities are excluded, as are wider statutory and non-statutory services. We have also chosen not to enter debate about other key issues at this time, for example the scale of the lower rate for brown field sites or the amount of revenues that might be taken by Government for significant infrastructure.

5.2 FIT's recommendations are summarised below.

Development site planning obligations should include all provision and improvements to open space, with open space being defined as in the Annex to PPG17

If the above approach is not to be adopted, then development site planning obligations (and not the proposed PGS) should include all local outdoor facilities for sport and play (provision for children and teenagers in the language of PPG17). These are listed as categories 4 and 6 within paragraph 4.1 above.

Clearer definituion needs to be given to ‘cultural' and ‘leisure' facilities.

The Government should take particular note of the representations made by Sport England and the Central Council of Physical Recreation in respect of indoor sports, leisure and cultural facilities which might fall under the PGS regime.

Disposal and replacement of outdoor sport and play facilities and their replacement with new facilities by registered recreational charities, with appropriate trsut purposes, or registered community amateur sports clubs (CASCs) should not be subject to PGS but dealt with by planning obligations within the development site approach.

If, however, the above recommendation is not adopted and the PGS approach is to be applied, then the registered charities or registered CASCs concerned should be allowed to retain and apply all proceeds of sale, ringfenced towards the provision of new facilities and their future maintenance. In other words, there should be an exemption from any Planning Gain Supplement. This parallels exemptions afforded to such organisations by the Inland Revenue and through rate relief.

FIT is developing a new approach to securing and maintaining sustainable, enhanced, cost effectiove open space provision with LPAs and developers. The application of the proposed PGS to such initiatives may be counter-productive. The NPFA wishes to discuss such initiatives with Government in the context of PGS to identify the best ways forward.

6 For further information, please contact

Don Earley
Deputy Director
Fields In Trust
Fields Office
Mercia Business Village
Torwood Close
Coventry CV4 8AS

024 76 465800 (switchboard)
024 76 426622 (direct line)
07957 846552
don.earley@npfa.org
www.npfa.org

new projects

ways to donate

fields forum