Phased Development & review of CIL

Planning Advisory Service (PAS)

Ouvert | En cours - juillet 2012 | Dernière modification - Hier

Former Member, modifié il y a 11 années.

Phased Development & review of CIL

Dear All My understanding is that the respective phases of large sites (that benefit from an Outline permission for the whole site) are defined as 'chargeable development'. Therefore for instance any instalments policy applies to the individual phase and CIL would be liable from the point at which all reserved matters are approved. I would therefore also assume that should the charging authority review its charging schedule and adopt new charges, subsequent phases of such large sites would be liable to pay the new charges, i.e. not the charge adopted at the time of the original outline planning permission and first reserved matters. I hope that is clear. Would others agree with that view? thanks

Simon Pickstone, modifié il y a 11 années.

Re: Phased Development & review of CIL

Advocate Publications: 104 Date d'inscription: 22/04/13 Publications Récentes

I would agree. This does, however, pose a challenge for CAs which have taken the route of seperating out large strategic sites to be dealt with primarily through a S106 (with perhaps a nominal CIL charge). If they set a trigger point for a major site (say 800 units) if said site then comes forwards in phases, each phase has to be treated as a seperate application and therefore my not trigger the 800 unit threshold, potentially making it laible to pay a higher CIL, i.e. a rate set for non-strategic sites and which seeks to collect developer contributions primarily through a CIL and not S106. Have I made myself clear?

Former Member, modifié il y a 9 années.

RE: Re: Phased Development & review of CIL

I've just picked up Simon's old post whilst I was searching the forum for something.

In the case of major (strategic) sites their geographical locations will be well known/defined. That area can then be used to differentially charge CIL for those areas, subject of course to the viability evidence supporting that approach.

In that way the problem of large sites coming forward in a number of small applications would not cause a problem in terms of the CIL charging schedule. However there may then be a problem with the s.106 pooling restriction!