Content area
Full Text
Community infrastructure Levy Lindy Howard expLains the changes brought in by the Community Infrastructure Levy (Amendmentj ReguLátiOns~2O14
When the community infrastructure levy (CIL) came into force in April 2010, it was intended to be a simple-to-adopt, simple-to-understand, and transparent means of collecting contributions, derived from the uplift in land values created by planning permission. It was to be levied on all development as a contribution towards infrastructure provision.
Since its introduction in 2010, there have been annual amendments to the CIL Regulations and the new year has brought further modifications: the Community Infrastructure Levy (Amendment) Regulations 2014.
These changes primarily relate to the way in which CIL is set, calculated and paid, as well as changes relating to reliefs and the relationship between CIL and planning and highways agreements.
Welcome changes
The key proposals are:
* more transparency7 and rigour in the process of setting CIL;
* greater flexibility to set differential rates by reference to the scale of development;
* extension of the end date for the use of "pooled" planning obligations to April 2015;
* agreements under section 278 (highway agreements) cannot be used to fund infrastructure for which the levy is earmarked;
* charging authorities may accept payments in kind through the provision of infrastructure;
* the date of calculation of CIL in relation to full permissions has been brought forward to the date on which permission is granted;
* authorities may now use their discretion to apply relief to "discounted market sale" housing in their area;
* greater flexibility to apply exceptional circumstances relief, at the charging authority's discretion;
* extending the definition of an "in-use" building to that which has been in use for six months of the previous three years; and
* relief for self-build housing and residential annexes and extensions.
What is happening at examinations?
Since the April 2013 statutory guidance for CIL was published (and possibly a few months before), there has been a marked change in the approach examiners have been taking, requiring charging authorities to be more robust in the collation of their evidence base.
'The government so far has been reluctant to offer guidance on how a charging authority might prepare its evidence base. This has inevitably led to a wide range...