Phased Outline Permission

Planning Advisory Service (PAS)

Open group | Started - July 2012 | Last activity - Today

REBECCA STADDON, modified 9 Years ago.

Phased Outline Permission

Advocate Posts: 103 Join Date: 05/09/13 Recent Posts

Hi All,

Please can I ask for some help. We introduced CIL in April this year so are still very much finding our feet.

I have a situation that I cannot get my head around. I think that Regulations 8 and 128A refer.

Scenario: Outline permission granted pre-cil for phased development. Phase 1 Reserved Matters all submitted and complete pre-cil. Phase 2 Reserved Matters ongoing. The last Reserved Matter has not been approved. A Variation of Condition application has now been received post-cil to amend the approved plans on one of the Reserved Matters applications for Phase 2. This amendment increases the internal floor area of the Phase 2 development.

There is also a S106 Agreement in place to link the payments to the total number of dwellings provided.

It is my understanding that CIL should be charged on the increase in the floor area but the fact that the development is phased, that the outline was pre-cil and that the last Reserved Matter for the Phase in question has not been approved is confusing me.

Please can you wonderful people give me a hand to understand.

Many Thanks

Rebecca

Rebecca Randall, modified 9 Years ago.

RE: Phased Outline Permission

Enthusiast Posts: 60 Join Date: 06/05/14 Recent Posts

Hi Bex

I think that the S73 will trigger full CIL liability because it must be calculated in accordance with Reg 9(8) and Reg 40. The date that first permits development for the original outline approval has not occured on phase 2 because the last reserved matter has not been approved and the last pre-commencement condition for that phase has not been approved. Therefore, if the CIL liability is calculated in accordance with Reg 40 and the date that first permits development, this has to be the full CIL amount. If they had submitted a S73 on Phase 1 the situation might have been different and gone under Reg 128 I suppose.

The S106 would need to be re-visited, and any contributions or obligations related to infrastructure contained on your Reg 123 list would need to be omitted. If this causes problems, you may need to revise your Reg 123 list. I can't find any provisions in the CIL Regs in terms of the level of consultation this requires, so in the absence of this it should not be an overly onerous process.