SOME of the country’s biggest developers are preparing to take on Kent County Council over plans to force them to pay up front for schools, roads and other community facilities.

KCC wants to adopt a policy meaning developers would be refused planning permission unless they showed how new schools, health services, roads and other facilities were to be paid for.

The policy is set out in the Kent and Medway Structure Plan, the strategic planning blueprint for the development of the county over the next 20 years. A public inquiry into the plan will be held in September.

But developers have made it clear they intend to contest KCC’s bid to force them to meet the costs of additional community facilities.

Barratt Homes, Persimmon Homes, Ward Homes and Fairview Homes are among those who tabled submissions to KCC during a public consultation on its plan. All are active in building homes in Kent. Marks and Spencer also opposes the policy.

They all argue the policy goes beyond Government guidance and would force them to pay an unfair amount for additional community facilities. Developers claim there would be no way of assessing objectively what extra facilities are needed.

One of the most outspoken critics is Fairview New Homes, which has developed many sites in Kent.

The company accuses KCC of “shirking the statutory responsibilities to make provision for the needs of the population, particularly with regard to health, transport and education” and complains the policy is “completely contrary” to Government guidance.

The National Housebuilders Federation, which represents the industry, is equally critical. It says the policy makes no distinction between different types of development and single-person households will create less demand for more roads, schools and other facilities.

Spokesman Pierre Williams said: “Increasingly, local authorities who do not have enough cash are demanding house-builders pay for all these improvements, as well as providing affordable housing, in exchange for planning permission.

“But this option makes sites which are potentially suitable for regeneration unviable for development.”

KCC is likely to stick to its guns but has acknowledged that the issue will have to be resolved at September’s public inquiry.