Community Infrastructure Levy - we need transitional provisions

Although we will be submitting representations on the consultation, it is already clear that there is a real need for the Government to bring forward some transitional provisions. Because of the way the draft regulations are worded, liability for CIL could fall upon owners of buildings which have been developed well before CIL becomes effective in an area - if they were built under a permission under which further development may still take place (which may be after CIL comes in). For example, in a large development scheme permitted under a single outline permission, buildings A - F  may be built and even occupied well before buildings G-L come forward in a reserved matters application. If CIL comes in meanwhile, then, when the final reserved matters approval happens (which the regulations regard as the day on which the entire development is "first permitted") then CIL will be calculated for the whole development and will be due on the day when a material operation next takes place. Because the planning permission relates to the whole of the site, then liability will default (ie if the developer of buildings G-L does not pay it all) to all owners of the land (ie the land within the application site which was the subject of the outline planning permission) and will be apportioned among the owners according to value. This cannot be what is intended - investors and other owners beware. Now is the time to lobby for appropriate transitional provisions!

Comments

[David Brock]

I agree. This one of a number of very good arguments for transitional provisions. Another is the position where a planning application has been appealed, a section 106 agreement signed but the applicant is waiting the grant of permission. The planning package will be based on current viability and circular 5/05. But once permission is granted the permission will be subject to CIL if it has reserved matters and a chargng schedule is brought into effect before development commences.

That also applies where a planning authority grants permission, but at least there you know what the timeframe is - you have your permission. In the appeal scenario, there will have been a huge investment with no guarantee of when the permission wil emerge.