Residential CIL - the garage question - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)

Dear Phil, All charging rates per sqm should be done on a Net Internal Area basis. This would exclude garages. This is the methodology adopted by developers in carrying out their appraisals and is RICS compliant. It also conforms with the methodology in the HCA's Economic Assessment Tool. As a viability consultant working for many local authorities, I would advise that it would cause too many anomalies to go for a gross area basis as your post suggests. I hope that helps. Andy Leahy - Bespoke Property Group.

Andy that would be va ery sensible approach but I dont think it is compliant with the regs. CIL is charged on the gross internal floorspace of the liable development. A garage is part of the liable development as a building into which people normally go, and (in my llimited understanding of DM processes) is essentially ancillary to the C3 use. Garages can be converted into residential space. I dont think the garage element of the floorspace of a residential development can be excluded easily. It would have to be demonstrated that it is separable and has no viability. Phil

Phil, Just so I didn't think I was going mad, I have consulted a number of other viability consultants, one of whom sits on the RICS panel dealing with such matters. His response is as follows: "The code of measuring practice (6th edition)defines NSA (Net Sales Area) for residential which is effectively the GIA of the dwelling. It applies to valuing and marketing residential units. NSA excludes garages. The normal GIA definition would pick up garages but that definition cross refers to the NSA definition for valuing and marketing residential units." Therefore I believe Garages should be excluded from the calculation of sqm rates for the purposes of CIL. Otherwise those implementing CIL charging are not following nationally agreed standards which could lead to appeals/judicial review. I hope that helps. Regards Andy Leahy Bespoke Property Group

Could this not open up the converse senario whereby developers provide overly large garages for conversion/ sub division under PD post completion?

Andy thanks. And you are right - I think it is expected that a lot of CIL related issues will end up in the courts. Your response goes to the heart of my concern. Garage space is not typically taken into account in viability assessment including those being used to formulate CIL rates. But garage space IS liable for CIL if it is part of a permission for a dwelling house or the development totals more than 100m2. Therefore charging authorities will have to specify what rate is to be applied. If a charging schedule doesnt specify otherwixse it can only be assumed that the residential rate applies. Simon it is quite possible that ways will be found to avoid CIL payments if they are too high and incur residential CIL charges. For example to avoid CIL a house could be sold without a garage but with a commitment to provide one under PD on occupation. Or the doors and end wall could be left off and it would be called a car port! If you have taken account of potential garage space in setting your residential rates by assuming an average size dwelling is say 105m2 rather than 90m2. Then you are missing potentially significant amounts of income. No easy answers!

I was asked about this a couple of days ago. The Planning Portal template for a CIL additional information form states that: "Residential floorspace includes new dwellings, extensions, conversions, garages or any other buildings ancillary to residential use." See http://portaldirector.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/cil-additional-information-form.pdf Whether that holds up through appeal cases remains to be seen, but that seems pretty conclusive in giving direction for the time being. In terms of having separate rates for garages, that seems pretty complicated - the general guidance seems to be to keep things as simple as possible. The 'wasted space' could be taken into account in viability assessments somehow, but again seems overly complicated (and would need some thought - are houses with garages more valuable overall than those without, for example?). There is definitely a loophole here though - e.g. build the house, then add the garage later through PD. Unless there is something in the legislation to prevent that that I've missed?