Urban Taskforce Australia has reviewed the documents and wishes to raise a number of matters.
Value capture and developer contributions
If a developer is required to pay $x in accordance with s.7.11 or s.7.12 contributions obligations, but the VPA specifies that $(x+y) must be paid (or, more accurately, that $y must be paid, but cannot be offset against $x), surely this is an attempt to capture perceived value from any uplift.
In fact, clause 2.5(h) appears to confirm this, by saying:
(h) Council will not agree to a planning agreement which provides for alleged surplus value or additional costs incurred by the developer being refunded to the developer; or being used to offset against section 7.11 contributions or section 7.12 levies required to be made by the developer, unless as a result of a change in scope and amendment of the planning agreement
Adding charges to a development that is already required to contribute funding towards infrastructure, based on Council’s perception of additional value, overlooks the costs already being placed on projects.
To read the full submission, CLICK HERE