Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) has been around now for nearly 10 years, having come into force in April 2010. However, it seems that the take up of CIL has only recently really started to spread across the country, with an increased number of Local Authorities adopting a CIL charging schedule within the last couple of years. As a result, it has become a major consideration in obtaining planning permission.

What is Community Infrastructure Levy?

The CIL is a planning charge available to Local Authorities to help deliver infrastructure to support the development of their area. In principle, CIL is a planning tax on development, with a fixed rate charge for each square metre of floor space.

The charging rate is set by each individual Local Authority, and if your development falls with a Local Authority without an adopted charging schedule you are in the clear. However, be mindful of any draft charging schedules, as you could be caught out if CIL is adopted during the application process.

CIL should be factored into the viability of a new development proposal and should be fully considered as part of any planning application submission, to save on delays and unexpected development costs.

How can we help?

We are fully aware of the challenges people face trying to navigate through the complex CIL system, having helped a number of clients with the process in the past. In providing guidance, we have helped clients achieve CIL reliefs and exemptions, avoiding unnecessarily high costs when building a new home.

CIL can be a bit of a minefield, and we have heard nightmare stories of people being stung for CIL as a result of not completing the relevant forms at the relevant times, both before, during and after the build process.

We can ensure that the right information is submitted to the Local Authority, making sure that you are not caught out by the CIL process.

Please give us a call if you’d like some advice.

The Main Modifications to the Cheltenham Borough Local Plan have recently been published and are now on consultation until 16^th December.

This marks the latest stage of progress by the Borough Council in producing a Local Plan, to provide the detailed planning policy guidance and non-strategic housing allocations, as required by the Joint Core Strategy.

The Main Modifications include the successful allocation of land south of Kidnappers Lane for the provision of a 6 Form Entry Secondary School with associated playing fields, all within land under the County Council’s control.

This is the welcome outcome of EiP papers submitted by McLoughlin Planning to support this allocation.

Whilst the Local Plan has yet to be formally adopted, the publication of the Main Modifications clearly show the ‘direction of travel’ with the Local Plan, making the policy case for the application more positive.

This demonstrates the importance of being involved in the development plan process and how we as planning consultants, with a track record in securing allocations can actively promote land interests and secure positive outcomes.

Government statistics for 2018/19 on the Green Belt show that out of a total of 1,621,150 hectares of Green Belt land in the Country, 2018/19 saw a decrease in the overall size of by 3,290 hectares (equivalent to 0.2%).

The reduction arises from Local Plans realising land for development, showing that at least the principal of Green Belt review as a means of assisting Local Planning Authorities to meet the Government’s housing target of 300,000 dwellings per annum is alive and well.

Green Belt review has to be justified by “very special circumstances” and further guidance is found in the NPPF and NPPG on this matter.

A counter view is Green Belt should not be released to allow homes and employment and community facilities to come forward. Such an approach, in our view, simply fails to accept the reality in terms of how Green Belts are drawn around urban areas in England.

The Government statistical release usefully contains a Plan which shows the extent of urban areas and Green Belt designated around them. This Plan clearly shows that the designated Green Belts are adjacent to the boundaries of urban areas.

In terms of delivering development, and more importantly sustainable patterns of development, it inevitably follows that there is a compelling need for Green Belt review and land to be released as part of development plan review.

The challenge faced by our industry is to ensure that where releases are proposed, they offer the greatest opportunity to generate sustainable patterns of traveland do the least harm to the well-established and well understood objectives of including land in the Green Belt in the first place.

Several McLoughlin Planning projects involve the promotion of housing development sites in the Green Belt, we have considerable experience with the issues involved.

Planning in the General Election

With the recent turmoil in Parliament, it is clear that there is a General Election inevitably on the horizon and irrespective of one’s Political views, the General Election will have some impact on the planning process.

Planning is inevitably a political process to some degree and as a practitioner I thought it useful to highlight what the main impacts might be.

In terms of guidance, helpfully both the Local Government Association and the Planning Inspectorate publish guidance on such matters making it clear that any planning decisions during the Election process, or any planning actions, is something that should be handled carefully. The starting point for their collective concerns is Section 2 of the 1986 Local Government Act (as amended in 1988). This states that one of the responsibilities of an Authority during an Election period is:

“not to publish any material which in whole or in part appears to be designed to affect the public support for a Political Party”.

It’s clear from this that the LGA guidance seeks to keep politics out of planning. There is an expectation that any Council will continue to make planning decisions during the purdah period (begins six weeks before the scheduled election), but expressly advises against launching consultations during a purdah period and advises Officers to think “carefully” on the matter.

Turning to the Planning Inspectorate, its statement is clear, politically sensitive decisions are going to be withheld until after an Election. This is inevitable because of the sensitivity of some Applications which end up at Appeal.

From a Developer prospective what does the prospect of a General Election mean?

From experience, where there has been a change of political administration at District Council level, the new administration can and does ask very serious questions about whether previous administration’s Local Plan should proceed to Examination.

A good example of how the turmoil of the change in political administration can wreak havoc on a Local Plan is provided by South Oxfordshire District Council which is now Liberal Democrat controlled. Its Local Plan process has been paralyzed for a couple of months as Members deliberate potentially withdrawing and restarting the Local Plan, much to the alarm of neighbouring Oxfordshire Authorities.

From a Development Control perspective, it’s clear that whilst Authorities are required to continue to make decisions on the Plan, these will be inevitably slowed down by election decisions.

Furthermore, we would also strongly recommend that attention is paid to each Party’s election manifestos in terms of whether any potential Liberal Democrat or Labour Administration would look to make significant amendments to the planning process at the moment which is currently framed by a Conservative Government.

For example, any Labour Government has made it clear that the rights currently enjoyed under the General Permitted Development Order for Change of Use from office to residential or from agricultural to residential are likely to be severely curtailed or indeed withdrawn.

On the 1^st June 2018, the Town and Country Planning (Permission in Principle) (Amendment) Order 2017 came into force, which provides a new route for obtaining planning permission via an application for small housing-led developments. It was described as one of the most significant changes to the planning system since outline permission was introduced 60 years ago. However, whilst being available for over a year now, it would appear that take-up of this route has been slow so far.

The Permission in Principle (PiP) route is an alternative way of obtaining planning permission for housing-led development, which separates the consideration of matters of principle for proposed development from the technical detail of the development. The first stage (the PiP stage) essentially establishes whether a site is suitable in-principle with the second stage assessing the detailed development (the ‘technical details consent’). In essence, it is similar to the outline and reserved matters regime.

The PiP route via a direct application is only available for housing-led minor developments (i.e. between 1 and 9 dwellings; less than 1,000sqm of floorspace; and on a site of less than 1ha). This route is not available for householder development, major development, Habitats development and EIA development.

So, what are the benefits of this route? Principally, it can be a cheaper route to establishing whether a site is suitable for development or not by reducing the amount of technical information required (and thus the financial investment required at an early stage). The second benefit is speed as the Council has 5 weeks from receiving a valid application to determine the application.

The scope of PiP is limited to location, land use and amount of development and a decision to grant PiP to a site must be made in accordance with the relevant development plan for the area unless there are material considerations which indicate otherwise. If PiP is granted, the default duration of that permission is 3 years. Subsequent applications for technical details consent must be determined within the duration of the permission granted. There is also a right of appeal.

If you feel that this route could benefit you, please get in touch with Joe Seymour on 01242 895008 to see how we can assist you.

Joe has joined us from Cheltenham Borough Council where he worked as a Senior Planning Officer in their Development Management team dealing with a variety of work including major planning applications.

Previously, Joe was employed at Cotswold District Council in a similar role. Before that he worked at Rural Solutions Ltd. and Forest of Dean District Council. The breadth of knowledge and experience that Joe brings will be a significant asset for McLoughlin Planning whilst helping to grow the business in the process.

On his appointment as a Senior Planner at McLoughlin Planning, Joe said:

“I am really excited to be joining McLoughlin Planning, a growing planning consultancy with an interesting client base which emphasises being approachable and values good working relationships with local planning authorities and other built environment professionals. I am really looking forward to the next chapter in my career and all the challenges it may bring where I will be able to utilise my knowledge and experience to support our clients’ proposals through the planning system.”