Object

Representation ID: 68038

Received: 10/04/2015

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Previously submitted evidence by Carter Jonas to support response. This was not recorded in summarisations, so has been re-submitted as part of this consultation as although some dates and figures may have changed it is still relevant and important to the Charging Schedule development.
Introduction:
CIL is intended to have a positive effect on development. The Council is required to strike an appropriate balance between the desirability of funding from CIL and the potential effects (taken as a whole) of the imposition of CIL on the economic viability of development across the local authority area. Must consider the impact of CIL together with the policies contained in the Local Plan on developments within the borough when deciding an appropriate CIL rate.
Funding gap/evidence base:
CIL should not be used by Council's as a mechanism for creating an unrealistic 'wish list' of infrastructure projects in their area. When establishing a funding gap that CIL receipts are intended to contribute towards filling, it is vital that the Council take account of every possible income stream, including accurate assessments of New Homes Bonus and council tax/business rate receipts and government funding. Also included should be an assessment of statutory undertakers' asset management plans.
The Council need to have an up to date, robust evidence base that fully justifies the infrastructure needs based on the amount of development required. These should be drawn from infrastructure planning that underpins the LP, identifying the quantum and type of infrastructure required. An incomplete evidence base will make the charging schedule unsound.
When calculating the level of infrastructure needed as a result, the Council must distinguish between new and existing demands. New houses do not always create new pressure.
CIL is expected to have positive economic effects across an area in the med - long term. CIL rates will also need to be appropriate over time, bearing in mind land values, market conditions and the wider economic climate change rapidly. The viability impact of incremental policy obligations must be assessed and reflected in the charging schedule. believe that it is inappropriate to set the levy based on a partial understanding of these infrastructure costs and in particular if the total money needed for infrastructure is unknown.
Differential charging rates:
Regulation 55 of the CIL Regulations allows local authorities to grant relief for exceptional circumstances from liability to pay CIL. Such provision should be factored into the Council's CIL and will avoid rendering sites with specific and exceptional cost burdens unviable should exceptional circumstances arise.
Payments in kind:
An allowance for infrastructure payments should be made available by the Council, recognising that there may be time, cost and efficiency benefits in accepting land or infrastructure from parties liable for payment of the levy.
Requirement to consult:
Consider the need to engage meaningfully with local developers and others in the property industry early and throughout the process crucial to the production of a robust CIL.
Examination:
The examiner must be independent and have the appropriate qualifications and experience e.g. a planning inspector
Conformity with Framework:
Fundamental that the Council ensures that the proposed levy rates are realistic and not set too high. Arbitrarily high rates may jeopardise the delivery of housing schemes within the area. This would be contrary to the Government's aim to boost the supply of housing as schemes may not come forward due to viability issues.
When testing the impact of CIL it is vital that the assumptions that underlie the standard residual valuation approach used to test the impact on viability of CIL are realistic and accurate. This should include abnormal costs, contingency costs, preliminary costs, and developer profit, which should reflect the current level of risk perceived in the market.
Urge the Council to adopt an instalments policy for CIL payments as this will give developers the flexibility to pay contributions in line with development phasing schemes and will facilitate cash flow. Council should also accept the phasing of planning permissions, with each phase treated as a separate chargeable development.
Need to review CIL tariffs as the economic climate will inevitably change over the course of the plan period.
The Local Plan will need to be in place prior to the CIL being adopted. The Council needs to have a clear understanding of the level of residential development to be brought forward in the plan period when preparing the charging schedule as this will directly influence the scale of CIL. Without this the charging schedule will not reflect the relevant and true infrastructure needs. This is particularly problematic as the Local Plan remains subject to objections related to the full objectively assessed housing needs and where further concerns are being raised about the requirement of Warwick to meet some of the unmet need of Coventry. The Council must consider that changes to the CIL may be required in order to consider issues which arise from the examination in public.