CIL Statement of Consultation January 2015.Indd

Community Infrastructure Levy Statement of Consultation

• Summary of responses received to the Preliminary Draft Schedule consultation • Consultation Process

Draft Schedule consultation February 2015

City Mayor

Contents

1.0 Background 5

2.0 Consultation and engagement with development 5 industry representatives

3.0 Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule Consultation 5

4.0 Summary of Responses Received to Preliminary 8 Draft Schedule Consultation

Appendix 1: Consultation Workshops 5th July 2012 - 11th December 2012 16

Appendix 2: List of consultees at Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule 31

Appendix 3: Email and letter sent to Consultees 42

Appendix 4: CIL web page 45

Appendix 5: Press Statement 48

Appendix 6: Consultations Portal 52

Appendix 7: CIL Watch Extract 54

Cover photograph © Getmapping Plc

CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 5

Community Infrastructure Levy

Summary of Consultation Process

1.0 Background

1.1 The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is a locally set standard charge that can be applied to new development to fund infrastructure. In order to charge CIL, charging authorities must prepare a Charging Schedule. Leicester City Council as the charging has prepared a Draft Charging Schedule, which sets out proposed CIL charges for diff erent types of development within the District.

1.2 Leicester City council has been preparing its CIL Charging Schedule since 2012. This document summarises the consultation and engagement undertaken.

2.0 Consultation and engagement with development industry representatives

2.1 In order to ensure that a CIL charge would not put at risk the delivery of the Core Strategy, the Council commissioned a CIL Viability Assessment.

2.2 The Council Commissioned with the rest of Leicester & Rutland local authorities, URS to undertake the viability assessment. During the preparation of the viability assessment, 2 stakeholder workshop days were held, which were attended by over 50 interested bodies in July and December 2012. Information regarding who was invited, and who attended these workshops can be found within appendix 1. The CIL Viability Assessment was published alongside the Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule in May 2014. This provided those in the development industry the opportunity to check and challenge, if necessary, the assumptions and fi ndings at a relatively early stage.

3.0 Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule Consultation

3.1 Leicester City Council published a Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule consultation document for a 6 week consultation between Wednesday 28th May 2014 and Thursday 10th July 2014. 6 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION

3.2 The consultation document sought to provide an introduction to CIL and an overview of how the Council had come to the proposed charges set out, including a summary of the Viability Assessment.

3.3 In addition to the Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule the Council also published a number of documents that were used as evidence to inform the development of the Schedule. This included:

• Community Infrastructure Levy: Viability Study;

• CIL Infrastructure Projects List and Funding Gap;

• Draft Regulation 123 List and Instalments Policy.

3.4 The consultation was publicised by:

• A mail to all consultees on the Council’s Local Plan mailing list based on the adopted statement of community involvement, as well as specifi c bodies with an interest in CIL. This was done by email or post, depending on the preferred method of contact.

3.5 Appendices 2 - 7 set put the details of publicity. This included:

• Neighbouring Local Planning Authorities;

• Leicestershire County Council and other nearby County Councils;

• Village and Parish Councils;

• Key Infrastructure Providers;

• Developers and Planning Agents;

• Voluntary and charity sector organisations; and

• Interested members of the public.

• A page on the Council’s website;;

• A specifi c consultation page on the Council’s Citizen space pages;

• A press release; and

• A copy of the websites and press release can be found in Appendix 3.

3.6 The consultation documents were publicised at the following locations:

• The Council’s website;

• The Council’s customer service centres; and

• All libraries within Leicester via the public internet access. CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 7

3.8 A total of 21 respondents made comments on the consultation documents. A summary of comments and the Council’s response is set out in section 4 below. 8 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION the through c issues and needs can be addressed rmed the CIL rates Comments noted. noted. Comments be wary needs to Council support of using CIL funds to aid rules state to especially with regard enterprises commercial the Council’s it is ultimately with CIL guidance .In accordance support CIL funding will be used to prioritise how decision to essential infrastructure such as education provision. S106 obligations will be scaled back as a result for potential The of the CIL Regulations specifi Site liaison with the Council. The Council notes that the comments relate to policy to and relate that the comments notes Council The District viability to in Harborough Council. approach in adjoining LA should be taken of CIL rates Whilst regard on policy cannot comment the Council and practice in areas, Harborough. with the has been set in accordance CIL rate Leicester The the City. viability for evidence noted Comments Comments noted. noted. Comments within the set well has been carefully CIL rate Leicester The An development. of viability and will not compromise margins the Draft the viability to Schedule study for update Consultation has confi on RM capacity cant burden and Street, – Campbell ce as Road as well Loughborough ce, leasehold properties at Elland Road and Nelson Street Car Park. leasehold properties Car at Elland Road and Nelson Street signifi will place growth Strategy Core services deliver to S106 through a new site require a statutory RM may As provider need for CIL and the potential or infrastructure funding through essential infrastructure. funding for to development from should be protected Existing RM sites operations continue. ensure Leicester North DeliveryLeicester offi Comments relate to Harborough District Council policies, and District policies, Harborough Council to relate Comments within Harborough. viability of development matters on appropriate CAA should be consulted The on CIL No comments of the provider the sole designated Mail (RM) is currently Royal Service in a highly competitive Postal and operates Universal market. delivery offi the Leicester RM owns Impetus for CIL arose in a period of rapid expansion. Councils in a period of rapid expansion. Councils CIL arose Impetus for CIL should not of CIL imposed. be very on level to careful have impact to on entry especially relating developers, discourage homes. level PDCS 2 Twigg Andrew & Twigg Andrew Ltd Associates PDCS 3 Forrest E. Civil Aviation Authority & Airspace Safety Group Regulation PDCS 4 Biddle Claire DTZ On behalf of Royal Mail Respondent Respondent PDCS1 Pawson, Steve Wilkinson & Accent Summary of ResponseArchitects Response /Action City Council Leicester Preliminary Draft Schedule Consultation 28th May – 10th July 2014 28th May Preliminary Draft Schedule Consultation of Consultation Statement 4.0 Summary of Responses Received CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 9 The City Council is aware of the recent restructuring of health of the recent is aware CityThe Council in the City. provision care needs in health care recognises evidence Strategy Core The areas. growth to candidates CIL infrastructure list includes projects The that are the new commissioning recognises Council The CIL. be funded by the NHS and will discuss health infrastructure in structure for undertaking Plan. on the new Local work the City - within the city boundary and does not impact on the them as appropriate. BC will involve Charnwood Council. Parish and supportComments noted No Comments to make on the CIL consultation to No Comments & Rutland ceased in Leicestershire Trusts Primary Care former The by being taken over April 2013, with responsibilities exist from to Groups. Clinical Commissioning in City will impact on primaryHousing growth health care Noted is not included that healthcare and note infrastructure provision in the PDCS. be need to on health care implications of housing growth The in of healthcare the absence for with clear reasons considered, the PDCS Council Borough Charnwood CIL applies to How Support in the draft approach Regulation 123 List to Councils with CIL Regs and seeking planning obligations in accordance appropriate. where use of conditions CIL will apply to has explained that the Leicester City The Council CIL infrastructure funding gap for the potential Acknowledge CIL. introduce to intention City’s projects and welcome CIL rates methodology, on viabilityNo comments assumptions, or instalment policy zones . ,charging Respondent Respondent PDCS 5 Gemmill Angela Marine Summary of Response Management Organisation Response /Action City Council Leicester PDCS 6 Anderson Amanda NHS England & (Leicestershire ) Lincoln PDCS 7 Marianne Lane & Thurcaston Parish Cropston Council PDCS 8 Samantha Pinnock Agency Highways 10 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION ( eg the ect of development rate the slow eld House to cater for growth in the central area has been area in the central growth for cater eld House to which is not development Green rst phase of the Ashton Comments noted. noted. Comments heritage assets in protect of policies to suite has a strong Council with the NPPF. accordance It is viability. the limit of development CIL has not been set to The will not impact that the rate on heritage assets. considered in the draft noted R123 List planning obligations will be As with CIL Regulations. in accordance appropriate sought where circumstances schedule will set out the exceptional revised The . procedures in seek S106 contributions to will continue Council The with the Regulations accordance liaison with the Police collective highlighted CityThe Council and extent of Police , and the nature level at the sub regional the needs are of Police ‘blocks’ main two The requirements. Green. and Ashton area regeneration central Mansfi in the Core included in the R123 List based on evidence on needs is also working with the Police Council The Strategy. the fi subject the CIL. to will seek to the Council CIL funding, potential the limited Given CIL funding. for be eligible prioritise the infrastructure that could with the CIL guidance CIL InfrastructureThe List in accordance a funding show to Strategy the Core from is directly derived Some projects such as CIL funding. for gap and projects eligible been reviewed have area education needs in the regeneration refl to and updated requirement for two schools as been reduced to one ) to schools as been reduced two for requirement its viability has updated study and has set out in its Council The will apply. ‘s S106 R123 List how noted. Comments CIL. be funded by R123 lists the infrastructure that may The whether the Draft will consider Schedule Council can be The that all other uses will not be charged. state amended to eld House to in er CIL relief ect of heritage on protection rm that heritage assets should ect assets. ect serve the SRA. to infrastructure planning in relation date up to Question how in the City is? growth on what CIL infrastructure needs updating and agreement Police CIL needs will be met through Policing will be spent on and how CIL will make in CityDialogue needed on contribution and CIL would how account take into viability to updated analysis the S106 regime over contribute certain cases which aff that the Regulation 123 List includes transportNote corridor transport City Centre linkages Funding works, and Open Space. should be complementary environment heritage and historic to in these areas documents should confi Council S106 contributions. for be eligible the present, for Police discuss overall to with Council Meeting required infrastructure requirements. Mansfi deliver that CIL will not be able to Concerns assets. exemptions In consider to certain be appropriate context it may a heritage asset is under CIL where or discretionary from relief reserve off to the right to the Council Urge threat. Overall no objection the PDCS. Important to that CIL ensure to eff adverse does not have charge as part infrastructure should be listed Cultural of the R123 List Schedule should specify that all other developments Charging a nil rate will have PDCS 10 Michael Lambert Leicestershire Police Respondent Respondent PDCS 9 Mark White English Heritage Summary of Response Response /Action City Council Leicester PDCS 11 Rose Freeman Trust Theatres The CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 11 ect for es a funding gap and candidates Comments noted. Comments transportThe infrastructure in the CIL Infrastructure list refl costs support and the potential to growth the schemes required of these schemes. Agency closely with the Environment has worked Council The do so. to and will continue CIL Infrastructure List identifi Strategy. CIL funding based on the Core and changes in health provision of the recent is aware Council the opportunity Plan will provide Local to The commissioning. on health infrastructure. engage in an update ood risk should be View CIL as playing an important role in the strategic approach to to an important approach CIL as playing in the strategic View role infrastructure. and green bi diversity for providing infrastructure projects green the inclusion of strategic Welcome CIL. in the Council’s split in funding appears Draft percentage The R123 List contains of transport in favour . weighted heavily be too to in partnership good work The that has been undertaken between Agency on fl and the Environment the Council openly supported. more in CIL recognised should be appropriately Health care consultation out of are Strategy assumptions based on 2010 Core Healthcare date. opportunity welcome new evidence would present Horizons to CIL policy inform in the future to Plan should take account R123 List and Local CIL schedule, Final of health infrastructure Platts Respondent Respondent PDCS 12 Roslyn Deeming England Natural Summary of Response Response /Action City Council Leicester PDCS 13 Geoff Environment Agency PDCS 14 Chatten Andrew – Horizons on behalf of Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust, University Hospitals of Trust NHS Leicester City CCG Leicester 12 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION viable and are rates rms that the retail the delivery of the rmed that it will not threaten Plan . Other are local authorities with student accommodation area. their respective for rates the appropriate charging on the instalments policy, the comments welcomes Council The its instalments policyand has revised cycles. extend to payment list The the R123 List. to relating the comments notes Council The sustainable transportcontains linkages the City between Centre support to growth / employment areas and adjacent residential connectivity transport to as improved hubs as well on the CIL setting strategy. the comments welcomes Council The the retail - tested viability and has re The study has been updated confi evidence .The rates appropriate. The Council has set the rate in accordance with the viability in accordance has set the rate Council The has been checked in the viability rate update The evidence. which has confi ls ect scheme viability. ordable housing ordable on University nancial burden This rate should be re considered. should be re rate This Comments on behalf of London Metric – owners of St. Margaret’s of St. Margaret’s Metric – owners on behalf of London Comments Road. Devonshire Retail Park, and to with CIL setting strategy, Agree study out of date. Viability of viability. within margins set CIL well high and will levy of £150 is too Retail warehouse charge aff and will adversely investment discourage Proposal to charge student halls of residence has no empirical or student halls of residence charge to Proposal policy akin basis and are aff to fulfi Student accommodation is arbitrary. £100 sqm. CIL rate and will impact on not commercial an education purpose, student accommodation. ability provide to University’s lands owned University study does not justify charge. Viability imposes Student rate zones. charging from should be excluded fi Instalments policy a longer timescale should is welcomed: 12 months from required with earliest payment be permitted with phasing after. commencement, should be added to R123. Following welcomes broadly University list: Road to station London the railway from access a. Enhance Road; University pedestrian and cycling connections between Improve b. main site; Road and the University’s University Road and University Welford Rationalisation of the junctionc. of at least enable public transportRoad to turn right at this to junction pedestrian and cycling connections between Improve d. Road, Court, houses and Nixon Putney Common Freemen's Road Welford Road; and University pedestrian, cycling and public transport Improve e. connections Road. and University Park Victoria student village to Oadby from eld PDCS 16 Neil Goldsmith Lichfi Nathaniel & Partners Respondent Respondent PDCS 15 Piatt Andrew LLP Gateley Summary of ResponseOn behalf of Leicester University Response /Action City Council Leicester CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 13 S106 per for gures Housing tables have ordable housing methodology. ordable The Council has updated the Viability study to take into account account take into study to Viability the has updated Council The and changes in the CIL Regulations, and costs, changes in prices has also assessed the viability update test The and guidance. and return land value and competitive and assumptions around aff undertaken has already and Council the PDCS consultation The June 2015 so that CIL funds can begin adopt CIL by like to would the funding of infrastructure . A parallel towards contribute to delay. Plan will cause considerable path with the Local base – based on the Core that its evidence considers Council The a sound basis , and remains and relevant is appropriate Strategy with the CIL. proceeding for A Regulation 123 List was issued as part of the PDCS consultation. S106 to of the approach also included a statement This contributions. fi which presents S106 information Additional dwelling have been provided. The Aff The been provided. have dwelling been updated to show the schemes supported show HCA funding. to by been updated ‘ in line with the CIL in kind ‘payment will consider Council The Regulations. change by CIL when house prices review to intends Council The percent. ten will undertake of annual monitoring Council The the appropriate CIL ordable housing ordable housing methodology needs revising ordable Viability study out of date Viability unfortunate that publication is in place, Strategy Whilst the Core Plan of CIL does not run with publication Local adoption of new Local prior to CIL should be subject review to Plan In with policy some some locations the CIL rate will render costs schemes unviable- type especially site 6 and aff targets, used as the basis for the residential rate. the residential used as the basis for targets, Aff is not rate £25sq.m study methodology needs revising. Viability appropriate as partA R123 List has not been submitted of the consultation. on S106 needed and information detailed analysis More ‘ would in kind‘ payment details of how should provide Council infrastructure provision for operate mechanism – with six monthly a clear review should have LCC monitoring Respondent Respondent PDCS 17 Michael Davis Savills Summary of ResponseOn behalf of Homes. Barratt Response /Action City Council Leicester 14 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION ecting site site ecting for rmed the rate a £45 -50 cation for can only be set with rates erential CIL rates have been set on robust viability evidence, refl viability evidence, been set on robust have CIL rates area. the regeneration the type of for and evidenced is appropriate rate residential The has not set this Council The in the City. proposed development arbitrarily and does understand the justifi rate typologies and ability of sites to sustain a CIL charge. The Council Council The typologies sustain a CIL charge. and ability to of sites the viabilityhas updated study which has confi Council. Borough Charnwood by proposed rate per sq.m social infrastructure and has has not disregarded Council The CIL. justify a funding gap for the R123 List to considered carefully and supports welcomes by the statement Council The Hammersons. See response to PDCS 16. Diff to See response the viability has updated study , Council viability.The to regard the viability stores. of smaller discount which also takes account in accordance appropriate rates the retail considers Council The with the evidence. cant adverse adverse cant ed. The low rate does rate low The ed. cant disadvantage. cant viability for cant development Class with no within same Use rates erential object the rate. negotiation if developers to for er room There should be a charge of £10 sq.m in the SRA of £10 sq.m should be a charge There be signifi appears to There appears £25sq.m of the City. in the rest development residential of £45 -50 can be justifi A charge be low. to not off impact considerable for have could CIL charge A lower especially for a higher CIL rate, should it have Charnwood the boundary close to sites development instalments policyThe appears reasonable. social/community infrastructureR123 List does not contain such S106 obligations? by this be covered Will as health. Hammersons support the current approach to CIL with regard to to CIL with regard Hammersons support to approach the current and the £0 rate development retail comparison ensure to appropriate are CIL rates that the proposed Considers in the city centre development viabilitythe continued of retail for £150 sq.m The rate. retail object proposed Strongly to a signifi will have warehouses and retail convenience development, impact scale retail large on viability of future with other infrastructure account especially when taken into costs. with diff Disagree convenience Puts development. of retail other form for charge at signifi warehouses and retail Respondent Respondent PDCS 18 Richard Bennett Charnwood Summary of Response Council Borough Response /Action City Council Leicester PDCS 19 CgMS Consulting On behalf of Hammersons PLC PDCS 20 and Smith Peacock On behalf of Morrisons CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 15 justify a separate cient to ChargingCharging 105 Charging 100 Charging 100 Charging 85 Charging 60 40 Oxford Bristol Huntingdonshire Plymouth Exeter Charging AuthorityCharging Portsmouth Stage Rate (£/sq.m.) See also response to PDCS 15. to See also response be to rate the student accommodation considers Council The with the viability evidence. in accordance appropriate student housing : for Examples of other authorities charging The the charitable status of Universities. notes Council The on ‘blanket relief’ should not be a that there considers Council student for majorityThe of developments student housing. has , and the Council developers private from housing are student housing from only one application for received the Given in the last eight years. of Leicester the University schedule as straightforward keep the CIL charging to requirement that the number of to is no clear evidence there as possible, is suffi forward come schemes likely to the University by development for CIL charge of student housing assessment has taken account Viability The Regeneration Area. viability within the Strategic Student Accommodation does form part of the Core Strategy part Strategy does form of the Core Student Accommodation it to for appropriate and it is therefore housing requirement infrastructure needs. to contribute ed by by ed ats within the to DMU contributing cation for the countryats around is £70sq.m DMU for purpose built by rm that accommodation cation on applying the CIL levy student fl to SRA and outside. Student accommodation within SRA should not Student accommodation SRA and outside. use. as with residential be charged Proposed student accommodation rate is high compared is high compared rate student accommodation Proposed of residential and other forms space hotel commercial to and will restrict construction of new student accommodation accommodation student fl for charge Average assumptions on student housing should be verifi Viability such as De Montfort key providers University housing part Strategy Student Housing does not form of the Core in the R123 requirements and is not linked to land requirement, justifi limited List, and therefore infrastructure. . Council the charge from DMU is a charity and should be exempt should confi should be exempt. students of the University Clarifi Respondent Respondent PDCS 21 Rowley Fran Turley Summary of Response On behalf of De Montfort University. Response /Action City Council Leicester 16 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION Appendix 1: Consultation Workshops 5th July 2012 - 11th December 2012

5th July 2012 and 11th December 2012 Organisations and individuals invited to consultation events

Aldi (WYG) British Property Federation AMEC Cancer Research (land owner/promoter Andrew Granger NWLDC) Andrew Martin Associates Commercial Estates Barrratt Developments Corby Bloor Homes Country Landowners Association Capita Symonds Crest Nicholson Clifton Homes CSB Group David Morley East Northants David Thompson EE Lane Davidsons Erewash BC East Midlands Housing Association Fisher German Gazeley Fosse Park North HCA Framework HA Indigo Planning (Sainsbury's) Freeth Cartwright Jamie Lewis Residential (Student) Geoff Prince John Cawrey Gleeson Homes Lambert Smith Hampton Goodman LHA-ASRA (RP) Hazelton Homes Longhurst Group Henry Boot Lovells House Builders Federation Lucas Land and Planning How Planning Marrons Iceni Projects Mather Jamie Innes England Miller Homes Intali National Housing Federation James Richardson NCHA James Sellicks Newark & Sherwood DC Jelson Homes Norman Tomson Joe Breslin Sorth Northants JPU Landmark planning Nuneaton & Bedworth BC Leics CC Pegasus Planning Lichfield DC Penwise Property (Own Grove Park) Mike Lidl Barton Magna Park/Gazeley Persimmon homes Matt; RGP (Andy Ward) McCarthy and Stone St Modwen Melton BC Estates Taylor Wimpey Midland Heart (Housing Association) William Davis Morris Homes Wilson Bowden Morrisons Ainscough Strategic Land Nick Jackson Alan Finch North Northants JPU Ancer Spa North Warks DC Andrew and Ashwell NWLDC Estates Andrew Twigg Opal Group (Student) APB Oxalis Planning Asda Peter Willmot Barwood Land Peterborough CC Bellway Homes Phil Baildon Blueprint Phillip Heath CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 17

Leicestershire and Rutland CIL Viability Study January 2013

Raynsway Spire Homes Redrow SSR Planning Richard Jones Stephan Lucas Robert Weighton Tesco Robin Taylo Tim Ellison) Ross Thain Tony Ansell, Rutland Planning Rugby BC Waitrose Rushcliffe BC Waterloo Sainsbury’s West Northants JPU Savills Westleigh Signet Planning WYG (Colin Sheilds) South Derbys BC South Kesteven DC

5th July 2012 Organisations and individuals that accepted invitations to consultation event

Aldi (WYG) Lovells AMEC Lucas Land and Planning Andrew Granger Marrons Andrew Martin Associates Mather Jamie Barrratt Developments Miller Homes Bloor Homes National Housing Federation Capita Symonds NCHA Clifton Homes Newark & Sherwood DC David Morley Norman Tomson David Thompson Sorth Northants JPU Davidsons Nuneaton & Bedworth BC East Midlands Housing Association Pegasus Planning Gazeley Penwise Property, Mike Barton HCA Persimmon homes Indigo Planning (Sainsbury's) RGP Jamie Lewis Residential St Modwen John Cawrey Taylor Wimpey Lambert Smith Hampton William Davis LHA-ASRA Wilson Bowden Longhurst Group 18 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION

Leicestershire and Rutland CIL Viability Study January 2013

11th December 2012 Organisations and individuals that accepted invitations to consultation event

Stuart Ashton Harworth Estates Philip Baildon Building Consultant x Dorothy Barratt North Warks DC x Neil Bloomfield Clifton Homes x Elle Cass Jones Lang LaSalle Carrick Casson-Crook Barratts x James Bompass Iceni Projects x John Coleman William Davis x Jonathon Collins Henry Boot x Lauren Culbert Persimmon Homes x Edward Dade Northants DC x Brian Mullin Marrons x Nuneaton & Bedworth Kelly Ford DC Tom Harrison Brown & Co x David Hearsum Uppingham School x John Henderson Longhurst Group x Catherine Hewitt NCHA x Wendy Hurst Lidl x Guy Longley Pegasus Planning x Stephen Lucas Lucas Land and Planning Chris May Marrons x Rebecca Mitchell Barwood Jim Patman EMHG x Melys Pritchett Savills x Luke Simmons Persimmon Homes x Gareth Staff DWH Andrew Tildesley Taylor Wimpey x Richard Wain Hawksmoor x Tim Walton Loughborough University x David Wilkinson Architecture.com x John Cawrey Cawrey Ltd x David Walgate Cawrey Ltd x

(Note – Attendees marked ‘x’) CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 19

Leicestershire and Rutland CIL Viability Study January 2013 Consultation2. Slides Consultation events - presentation events slides

5th July 2012 20 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 1 07/11/2012 Agenda What is CIL? What is • House Prices • Affordable Housing • Non-residential prices • Development costs • Developers profit • NPPF –of evidence use The – Assumptions Main – Test The Viability CIL -CIL is CIL What Evidence Viability Infrastructure Evidence Emerging Findings Other Matters Localchoosecan authorities to charge on new to developments by support developmentfunding infrastructure. Must be fixed against a schedule of the infrastructure that is development.new required to support The local authority must strike the balance between deterring regard viability through havingto CIL and raising development plan. the developmentand delivering an Examiner. be approvedmustby The levy not be In the future able will s106 contributionsto be ‘pooled’. July 2012 July th 5 Key issues –so development deter CIL will CIL Viability Study Viability CIL should it be payable? should First Consultation Event First Consultation much as to prejudice the Development Plan Development the to prejudice much as the prejudice of CIL or will the absence Development Plan ? When How much Assumptions, Appraisals and Findings • • Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Leicester, CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 21 2 07/11/2012 6 8 Evidence with, the evidence on economicauthority's area; viability and across the charging would not put at serious risk overall development of the area. ……. the chargingsupported authority’s by background draft documentsavailable charging containing evidence appropriate schedule is the proposed rate or rates are informed by and consistent evidence has been provided that shows the proposed rate Guidance (1) - Consultation Section 206 of the Planning Act 2008to (The Act) charge confers CIL the power on certainThe bodies charging known authority’s as responsibilities, chargingCIL, authorities. if will be they to: ……… decide to This will levy involve consultation and ……… The independent examiner should check that: x x x Guidance (9) –with Consistent 5 7 between securing balance it is for charging authorities to decide on the Regulations Guidance (7) - Balance . The amount will vary….. estimated total cost ofinfrastructure required support to the development its area, of taking into account other actual and expected funding;sources ofand. the economic on the potential CIL effects the imposition of whole)of (taken as a viability of development across its area.. development across its of viability ……a key consideration for authorities is the additional investment for infrastructure topotential support economic effect development of and imposing the CIL uponarea. development across The their CIL regulationscentre place of the this charge-setting balance process. In of viewcharging of circumstances, considerations the wide at variation the in local appropriate balance fordevelopment they their are willing area toof put CIL and at risk ‘how through the much’ imposition potential must aimmust to strike what appears to the charging authority be to an appropriate balance between— (a) part) the actual and expected in (in whole or desirability the funding ofCIL from (b) and expected administrative expenses in connection the extent to that those with CIL accordancein with regulation expenses fundedcan be fromCIL 61. take must council London borough a paragraph (1)(b)), accordance with development (in the Mayor. by into account rates set the London borough council beforethe Mayor the charging schedule approved recent by begins consultation on its preliminary draft charging schedule in accordance with regulation 15. The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 -Regulation 14 rates Setting (1) setting rates (including In charging differential rates) a in schedule, charging a authority (2) In setting rates charging in a schedule, charging a authority may also have regard to actual (3) In having regard to the potential on the economicofthe imposition effects viability ofCIL of (4) For the purposes ofparagraph (3), the rates set by the Mayor are the rates in the most 22 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 3 07/11/2012 10 12 Broad Brush Viability Tests Viability Assess impact of viability Assess impact of viability on delivery etc s106 negotiations Plan deliverability (was PPS3 Paragraph 29 Affordable Housing Affordable 29 Paragraph PPS3 (was deliverability Plan to be broadly deliverable) Target Deliverability The legislation (section 212 (4)(b))to requires a use charging authority 'appropriatecharging available schedule. evidence' It is tounlikely recognised inform to that their be theauthorities draft available fully need to data comprehensive demonstrate is thatrates or their are proposed exhaustive. CIL informed Charging rateconsistent or with by that evidence across ‘appropriate their area as available’ a whole. evidence and CIL Regulation 14 Regulation CIL NPPF SHLAA Site Specific RICS and Guidance LGA/HBF Guidance Guidance (23) – High Level and 9 11 inform not determine CIL The legislation (section 212 (4) (b))use only requires appropriate a charging authority availableschedule'. to A evidence charging authority’s toappear proposed 'inform CIL reasonable rate the given (orrequirement draft the rates) for should available a charging proposedexample, evidence, if rate the but evidence to pointed there to exactlyof setting viability. a There is mirror is charge room the right no for at some evidence, the pragmatism. margins for Guidance (27) –will Evidence The examinercharging should authority’s choice not inthe terms use evidence of available 'the the to appropriate(or the balance', examination CIL rates) unless shows will that examinationThe put the proposed to examiner the rate should overall questionschedule development be if a of it ready puts the toconsidering at area serious whether modify risk at the or the overall seriousat overall reject development risk. development serious the of of risk, the the draftthe the area. area priorities charging In examiner has that the will been authorityexample put want has planned identified to targets in consider for itsin housing Development the the Plan supply implications (for and case for affordable ofconsidering housing), the or whether Mayor’s CIL, the theput Development at implications Plan serious for risk, and the thethe its London examiner proposed Plan. should targets In only CIL have bethe rate been concerned level will with of whether that make risk.would a It be may material at be serious or that risk the significant in Development the difference Plan absence and to of its CIL. targets Guidance (10) –Balance Authority’s CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 23 4 07/11/2012 14 CIL, enviro Land + uplift Housing, Affordable Affordable standards, Existing / Existing design, etc Alternative Land Value Profit Builders Landowner Developers = LESS Etc. Fees Sales Design Engineer RESIDUAL VALUE RESIDUAL All income from a Scheme Gross Development Gross Development Value Gross Development Value (Construction + fees + finance charges) fees + (Construction + Standard Viability Test Standard Viability Etc. S106 (The combined value of the complete development) combined value of the complete (The Abnormals Residual Value v Existing / Alternative Alternative Use Value v Existing / Residual Value Construction Cost of creating the asset, including PROFIT Cost of creating the asset, including Site Remediation 13 15 to = provide competitive returns LESS developers profit) NPPF 173 Additional Profit Cost of creating the asset Gross Development Value Including X% affordable housing) X% affordable Including CIL –CIL Profit Additional (land* + construction + fees + finance charges + + finance + fees (land* + construction (The combined value of the complete development combined value of the complete (The * Where ‘land’ is the Alternative Use Value and uplift Alternative Use Value is the * Where ‘land’ Ensuring viability and deliverability 173. Pursuingattention to sustainable viabilitytaking. and development Plans costs should in requiresthe be scale deliverable. plan-making of careful Therefore, and developmentsubject the decision- identified to sites such in and a thetheir scale plan ability of should obligations to notviability, and be be the policy developed costs burdens that viably ofdevelopment, any is such requirements threatened. as likelystandards, To to requirements ensure infrastructure be for contributions appliedshould, or affordable to other housing, when requirements development and mitigation, takinga willing accountdevelopment land to of be owner deliverable. and the willing normal developer to cost enable the of 24 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 5 07/11/2012 18 20 overall development Development as a proportion of 19 17 Hotel Office Student Retail Modelling Average House Prices Average ResidentialCommercial 16 Sites Industrial CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 25 6 07/11/2012 22 24 wider the and appraisals base FlatsHousesHouses 1,356 1,929 1,838 HousesHousesHousesHouses 2,803 2,476 2,355 2,019 developer evidence from prices Residential CouncilLeicesterNW LeicsNarborough TypeBlaby FlatsWhetstoneLittle Thorpe HousesCrosby RuralBlaby Gen ResMeltonCharnwood £/m2 Gen Res 1,722 Gen Res Gen Res 1,917 HarboroughRes Gen 2,045 Gen ResWigston and Oadby Houses Houses 1,830 2,045 1,884 Houses Houses 2,153 1,938 1,539 1,900 2,368 2,100 21 23 Average House Prices Average 26 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 7 07/11/2012 26 28 Affordable Assumptions Affordable 2 bed3 bed 67m2 72m2 £60,000 £67,000 (£895/m2) (£930/m2) Rents, 3 Bedrooms, £/month Social rent Intermediate 70% of market value –Grant Historic £35,000/social rent Typically Grant, recycled grant, Right-to-buy receipts, Social rent conversions to affordable 16 25 27 House Village 15 Site Small Village Scheme 14 Site Infill Town Village Ex 13 Site site garage 12 Site flats Town centre 11 Site edge Urban d 10 Site Medium greenfiel 9Site ld (£/m2) Medium Brownfie 8Site M Authority redev. ld Brownfie 7Site Charging Flats Urban by L 6Site redev. Variables ld Brownfie 5Site 3 ld Greenfie Appraisal LHA Cap 2 4Site ld Greenfie 1 3Site Affordable Rent Affordable ld Appraisal Prices 2Site 2Greenfie 1Site 1SUE Site 1,900 1,800 2,000 2,200 1,850 1,800 1,650 1,750 2,100 2,100 1,700 1,800 2,000 2,100 2,500 SUE DC Bosworth DC 2,200 2,300 2,200 2,200 2,300 1,800 2,250 2,300 2,300 1,800 2,100 2,200 2,400 2,600 BC 2,200 2,300 2,200 2,200 2,300 2,300 1,500 2,250 2,300 2,300 1,800 2,100 2,200 2,400 2,600 Wigston CC 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200 1,950 1,800 1,750 1,900 1,800 2,100 1,850 1,950 2,000 2,000 and DC 2,300 2,200 2,250 2,300 2,300 2,250 2,300 2,300 1,800 2,100 2,200 2,400 2,600 BC 2,300 2,300 2,300 1,500 2,250 2,300 2,300 1,800 2,100 2,200 2,400 2,600 RentManagement 10% 80% of median rent VoidsRepairs 4% Yield 6% 5.25% (19 YP) and West DC 2,000 2,100 1,800 1,650 1,800 2,100 2,100 1,700 1,950 2,000 2,250 2,500 Blaby Charnwood Harborough Hinckley BCLeicester 1,900 1,800 2,000 2,200 1,800 1,700 1,650 1,800 2,100 2,100 1,700 1,950 2,000 2,250 2,500 Melton North Leicestershire Oadby DCRutland 1,900 1,800 2,000 2,200 1,850 1,800 1,650 1,750 2,100 2,100 1,700 1,800 2,000 2,100 2,500 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 27 8 07/11/2012 30 32 Rent £/m2 2 Capitalised £/m rents 6.50% 2,150 typical 3,750 BCIS 10% - 20% 15% Brownfield 10% 5% 2.5% & £1,000/unit (ALL) 7% 20% Rent£/m2 Yield Capitalised Ͳ Residential room) Shops 236 7.00% 3,371 Non (per Development Costs Shops 150 11.00% 1,364 Retail 105 7.00% 1,500 office 100 7.00% 1,429 industrial 48 7.50% 640 office 93 6.50% 1,431 retail 122 5.00% 2,440 industrial 41 6.50% 631 Hotels Leisure 75 8.00% 938 Small Large Small Leicester Other Small Large Large 1. Construction 2. Infrastructure 3. Abnormals 4. Fees 5. Contingencies 6. Additional s106 7. Interest 8. Profit

29 31

Rutland

Wigston

Oadby & & Oadby

Leics

North West West North

Melton

Leicester

Bosworth Hinckley & & Hinckley

£25,000 /ha £50,000 /ha £500,000 /ha Harborough

Worth of Affordable Rent Affordable of Worth

Charnwood Blaby Affordable -Affordable Values Alternative Use Value Leicester and Oadby & Wigston £400,000/ha Remainder £300,000/ha 2. Paddock 3. Residential 4. Industrial 1. Agricultural Private RentAffordable Rent (80%) 675Net Rent Pa 625Worth 540 5,184£/m2 750 4,800 500 575 5,280 94,255 550 4,416 87,273 650 96,000 4,992 80,291 460 90,764 4,608 992 83,782 600 76,800 4,224 520 83,782 919 87,273 550 4,608 1,011 480 4,800 600 845 440 625 955 480 882 500 808 882 919 28 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 9 07/11/2012 34 36 £/ha % £/ha £/ha Commuted sumon <5 units Commuted ( Unallocated sites -Unallocated to be negotiated Ibstock Uplift and Use Uplift Additional 20%10% Wigston South Wigston 30% All other settlements 25% SitesSUE over15 outside 30% Other areas 20% Other Areas 30%20%G Ashton East South and Elsewhere 35% Housing Use Land gy Alternative Land Alternative Affordable Alternative Core Strate Core Strategy 30% Oadby Local Plan 30%Core Strategy Sites over 5 40%Core Strategy areas High Value 40%Core Strategy Rural areas 15% Regeneration area PlanLocal Local PlanSPD be negotiated sitesite by To be negotiated To 20%Area and Greater Coalville EmergingCS 30% Sites over15 in SUE 12 SUE 13 SUE 24 Greenfield 15 Greenfield 26 Housing Student 7 L Brownfield redev. 8 Urban Flats Agricultural9 Agricultural M Brownfield redev. Agricultural Industrial Agricultural Industrial Medium Brownfield Industrial 25,000 25,000 15.00% Industrial 25,000 Industrial 15.00% 25,000 300,000 300,000 15.00% 250,000 15.00% 15.00% 250,000 15.00% 278,750 250,000 278,750 250,000 300,000 278,750 278,750 15.00% 300,000 300,000 15.00% 15.00% 345,000 345,000 345,000 345,000 345,000 11 Urban edge Paddock 300,000 15.00% 250,000 595,000 10 Medium greenfield1213 centre flats Town 14 Agricultural Ex garage site15Infill Village Town 16 Scheme Small Village Industrial House Village 25,000 Paddock Industrial 15.00% Residential 250,000 300,000 278,750 15.00% Paddock 500,000 300,000 15.00% 50,000 15.00% 15.00% 250,000 307,500 345,000 50,000 15.00% 575,000 345,000 250,000 307,500 Rutland Oadby and Wigston and Oadby Charnwood Harborough Bosworth and Hinckley Leicester City Melton NW Leicestershire CouncilBlaby Status Target(s) Number Site 33 35 Density Unit Unit Size ha Units/ha m2 m2 m2/ha assumptions Units Area Density Average development Site Build Rates TOTAL 314 8.50 37 81.9 25,723 3,026 12 SUE 13 SUE 24 Greenfield 15 Greenfield 26 Housing Student 7 L Brownfield redev. 8 Urban Flats9 M Brownfield redev. 314 150 Medium Brownfield 100 250 110 70 8.50 3.75 0.60 8.00 2.50 1.40 30 37 40 24 167 60 31 0.42 44 50 81.9 91.1 0.40 27.0 0.60 25,723 82.9 13,661 89.1 78.1 71 2,700 20,730 3,026 3,643 9,798 100 60 5,466 4,500 2,591 70.6 3,919 3,904 76.4 69.3 2,119 4,586 1,663 5,045 7,643 4,158 11 Urban edge 12 0.30 40 86.8 1,041 3,470 10 Medium greenfield1213 centre flats Town 14 Ex garage site15Infill Village Town 2416 Scheme Small Village 0.57 House Village 10 42 0.20 3 5 4 90.5 0.10 0.12 0.10 50 2,171 1 80.4 30 3,809 42 40 0.10 92.0 804 84.6 83.5 4,020 10 276 423 334 111.0 2,760 3,525 3,340 111 1,110 Number Site 1. Base 2. Large greenfield3. SUEs (phases) 9 / quarter 4. Small sites 20 / quarter 8 or 9 / quarter / month 1 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 29 10 07/11/2012 38 40 16 House Village 15 Site Small Village Scheme Shops Leisure Shops Leisure 14 Site 272 155 168 272 155 168 Infill Town Village Other Other 91 272 267 168 13 Site 91 272 267 168 20 20 Ͳ Ͳ site garage Shops Shops Ex 5 5 5 5 Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ 12 Site flats Town centre Greenfield Brownfield Ͳ Ͳ 11 Site Retail Leicester Retail Leicester edge Urban Value Value d 10 Site Medium Residual greenfiel Councils Councils Residual Retail Smaller Retail Smaller 9Site ld 394 592 429 69 202 419 374 243 394 592 429 69 202 419 374 243 4,172,394 24,407 4,172,394 24,407 2,811,685 2,826 2,539,045 297,322 1,667 Rutland Rutland Medium Brownfie 8Site M 96 13 81 452 293 83 152 245 293 105 91 272 81 130 96 Ͳ Ͳ and and Approximate Approximate redev. Office Large Office Large ld Brownfie and and 7Site 242 315 Ͳ Ͳ Flats Urban Profit Profit Leicestershire Leicestershire L 6Site Office Small Office Small NW NW redev. ld Brownfie Additional Additional Large Large 5Site 3 d Melton, Melton, Greenfiel Small Small showing showing 4Site 2 d Industrial Industrial Bosworth, Bosworth, Results Greenfiel Results 1 3Site and and d 510 468 505 390 466 394 592 429 69 202 419 374 243 Councils Large Large Greenfiel Industial Industial Appraisal 2 2Site Appraisal Hinckley Hinckley Wigston Councils Wigston and 1Site 1SUE Zero Affordable Zero Affordable Target 3142501338881706030242412105431 217 278 52 13 81 452 293 347 411 444 468 390 116 347 411 444 468 390 119 394 592 429 69 202 419 374 127 152 79 314 468 52 347412 344 444 468 179 152 390 116 152 79 314 468 230 52 13 49 452 293 152 79 314 468 230 52 13 49 452 293 Additional Profit (£/m2) 8.50 8.00 3.75 2.50 1.80 1.40 0.60 0.42 0.40 0.57 0.30 0.20 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.10 Site SUE Harborough, Harborough, Oadby and Oadby and and Worth Worth Worth Worth Profit 2,844,894 11,297 Profit 2,844,894 11,297 Profit 1,364,185 Profit 131,545 279,622 City, City, Land Land Land Land Wigston (ha) and Charnwood, Charnwood, and West Area Blaby, (APPROX) Leicester Residual Additional Additional Blaby, (APPROX) Additional Residual (APPROX) Residual (APPROX) Additional Residual Leicester Units Blaby Charnwood Harborough Hinckley Leicester Melton Bosworth Site Oadby North Leicestershire Rutland 37 39 16 305 154 127 Ͳ Ͳ House Village 15 Site 58 Ͳ 190 267 168 Ͳ Small Village Scheme 14 Site 15 272 155 168 118 44 112 119 Infill Ͳ Town Village 13 Site 20 57 90 Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ site 208 202 419 374 243 115 202 419 374 243 202 419 374 243 Ͳ Ͳ garage Ex 5 Ͳ 12 Site 290 245 181 181 152 430 193 flats Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Town centre 11 Site 100 Ͳ edge Urban Medium Brownfield Industrial Medium greenfield Medium greenfield edgeUrban Agricultural flats centre Town site garage Ex Infill Industrial Village Town Paddock Village Small Scheme Paddock Industrial Residential House Village Paddock d 10 Site 262 31 349 128 356 293 350 160 293 105 91 272 81 130 Medium greenfiel 9Site d 15 80 65 67 Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ 221 167 437 201 195 465 123 156 426 190 9 Ͳ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Medium Brownfiel 8Site M 71 37 Ͳ Ͳ 142 123 320 130 332 137 Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ redev. d Brownfiel 7Site 552 268 458 Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Flats Urban Source: HDH 2012 L 6Site 93 99 Ͳ Ͳ 116 Ͳ redev. Brownfiel d 5Site 3 d AppraisalCurrent Sites – Uses Land Greenfiel 4Site 2 d Greenfiel 1 3Site d 210 363 121 298 256 285 97 201 112 396 141 204 172 114 351 23 52 Greenfiel 2Site 2 59 65 Ͳ Ͳ 148 SUE 1SUE 2SUE 1Greenfield 2Greenfield Housing Student redev.Brownfield L Agricultural Agricultural FlatsUrban Industrial Agricultural Industrial Agricultural redev.Brownfield M Industrial Industrial Ͳ Additional Profit (£/m2) 1SUE 1Site 66 29 82 63 115 223 246 182 18 87 Ͳ Ͳ 314 250 133 88 81 70 60 30 24 24 12 10 5 4 3 1 139 194 276 299 155 231 224 352 376 88 61 193 147 8.50 8.00 3.75 2.50 1.80 1.40 0.60 0.42 0.40 0.57 0.30 0.20 0.12 0.10 0.10 0.10 Current Affordable Current Affordable Target Site SUE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Number Site Alternative Land Use Number Site Alternative Land Use UseNumber Site Land Number Site Land Alternative Alternative Wigston (ha) and and West Area Rutland Oadby Site Units Blaby Charnwood Harborough Hinckley Bosworth Leicester Melton North Leicestershire 30 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 11 07/11/2012 42 44 = LESS Funding Gap development Setting CIL Committed Funding Committed Infrastructure Requirements • Evidence Viability • Funding Gap • Consultations • Striking the Balance Costs of Infrastructure required to support newsupport to Infrastructure required Costs of 41 43 Leisure Other Shops Shops £.m2 Leicester Retail payment Smaller CIL 22 1,864 474474227 75 75 Large Retail maximum Small Office potential Large Office showing Results Small Industrial Appraisal Large Industial and and Melton, Melton, and and Infrastructure Requirements Hinckley Hinckley Wigston Wigston •TBC Some funding •funding gap could be larger Actual City, City, Councils Councils • Hotels• Accommodation Student £192/m2 £478/m2 and and Charnwood, Charnwood, Leicestershire Leicestershire Bosworth, Bosworth, Use existing infrastructure evidence Nationally infrastructure base Use existing Infrastructure Projects (NSIP’s) Significant Conservative approach All have a funding gap Oadby Councils Oadby Councils Greenfield Brownfield Harborough, and Harborough, and Blaby, NW Leicester Blaby, NW Leicester Rutland Rutland CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 31 Appendix 2: List of consultees at Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule

Who was consulted Email Letter Blaby District Counci X Harborough District Council X Charnwood BC X X North West Leicestershire DC X Oadby & Wigston BC X Melton BC X Hinckley & Bosworth BC X Leicestershire CC X Wanlip Parish Meeting X Birstall Parish Council X Thurmaston Parish Council X Barkby & Barkby Thorpe CP X Scraptoft Parish Council X Thurnby and Bushby Parish Council X Glen Parva Parish Council X Stoughton Parish Council X Blaby Parish Council X Enderby Parish Council X Braunstone Town Council X Leicester Forest East PC X Kirby Muxloe Parish Council X Glenfi elds CP X Anstey CP X Thurcaston & Cropston PC X Civil Aviation Authority X Homes and Communities Agency X NHS National Commissioning Board X Offi ce of Rail Regulation X The Highways Agency X The Environment Agency X English Heritage X 32 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION

Who was consulted Email Letter Natural England X Marine Management Organisation X Leicester City Clinical Commissioning Group X Leicestershire County Council Highways X The Coal Authority X Mobile Operators Association X Three X O2 X X Orange X T-Mobile X Vodafone X EE X Severn Trent Water X National Grid (Hinckley) X Centrica X LLEP X LABA X Leicester Civic Society X 20th Century Society X Leicestershire Campaign for better transport X Age UK X LACBA X X Leicester College X Leicester University X DeMontfort University X Leicester Centre for intergrated Living X Leicestershire Chamber of Commerce X X Home Builders Federation X Barratt Developments Plc X Bellway Plc X Bovis Homes Group Plc X CALA Group Ltd X County Life Homes Ltd X CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 33

Who was consulted Email Letter Crest Nicholson PLC X Davidsons Developments Limited X Galliford Try plc X Gilbert & Hall Ltd X H B Lewis & Sons Ltd X Lovell Partnerships Ltd X McCarthy & Stone Retirement Lifestyles Limited X Morris Homes Ltd X Persimmon Plc X Redrow PLC X St. Modwen Properties PLC X Taylor Wimpey plc X The Crown Estate X The Miller Group Ltd X Jelson Limited X Westleigh Homes X RSPB - Leicester X CfDS X Leicestershire and Rutland Wildlife Trust X Leicester Council Of Faiths X Leicester City Football Club X Leicester Tigers Rugby Club X Leicestershire County Cricket Club X Leicester Riders X X Birstall Golf Course X The Leicestershire Golf Course X The Ramblers Association X The Conservation Volunteers X Federation of Muslim Organisations (Leicestershire) X BT Group Ltd X Canal and Rivers Trust X The Georgian Group X Foxton Inclined Plane Trust X 34 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION

Who was consulted Email Letter NFU X Fields in Trust X The Theatres Trust X Leicester Theatre Trust X Sikh Federation (UK) X Mencap X NJUG X Sport England X Institue of Directors (leicestershire Branch) X Leicester United Caribbean Association X National Housing Federation X PDE Consulting X GVA X Bouldins X GMS X Gladman X Fairhurst X English Heritage (specifi c contact) X Peacock and smith X Natural England (specifi c contact) X Environment Agency (specifi c contact) X G L Hearn. X Silkstone Environmental X Walton X Deloitte X White Young Green X Nathaniel Litchfi eld & Partners X Woodlands Trust X Barton Willmore X Dtz X Turley Associates X Jwpc X Cgms X CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 35

Who was consulted Email Letter planware.co.uk X Bloorhomes X Lidl X Leicester and Leicestershire X Liz Kendall MP X Keith Vaz MP X Jon Ashworth MP X ratilal X National Planning Unit X Anne Hayto X Nigel Porter X Victorian Society X Fox Group X Leicester Access Forum X Lamp Direct X Andrew Granger X Andy Brookes X Vista X Michael Lambert – Leicestershire Police X Voluntary Action Leicestershire X Peacock and Smith X Fusion Online Ltd X Mather Jamie X ldpag X Mosaic 1898 X Savills X llgbc X East Midlands Skyscraper City Forum X Leicester Spokes X Insight Planning X hsduk101 X Depol X Graham Sleath X 36 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION

Who was consulted Email Letter Forum for the future X kirkwells X Bnpparibas X Greenbelt group X cpre.org.uk; X hbj-gw.com; X Jarroms X NCP X Severntrent X Shonki Brothers X West Bridge Living X Sowden Group X amamidlands X Sgp.co.uk; X raglan.org; X Lance Wiggins - Landmark Planning X Foundation Housing X advanceuk.org; X NRSPROPERTY.CO.UK; X jenko1945 X Leicester University X Kpw Architects X Renewable UK X Goodmans X Action Deafness X Pete Wilkinson – Landmark planning X Shakespeare Marrons X Innes England X Lambert Smith Hampton X jamessellicks.com X Mather Jamie X Henry Boot X Pegasus Planning X CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 37

Who was consulted Email Letter Freeth Cartwright X Andrew Martin X Andrew Ashwell X David Morley X Fisher German.co.uk X Oxalis Planning X iceniprojects.com X capita.co.uk X signetplanning.com X howplanning.com X ssrplanning.co.uk X lucasland.co.uk X rgparchitects.com X ancerspa.co.uk X twigg.biz X intali.com X rutlandplanning X [email protected] X bartonwillmore.co.uk X Andy Hiorns X Debbie taylor X boyerplanning.co.uk X cerda-planning.co.uk X Dlpconsultants.co.uk X gr-1.co.uk X stuart.dawson X howkinsandharrison.co.uk X eu.jll.com X michaelwellock X mslaw.co.uk X montagu-evans.co.uk X rpsgroup.com X sedgwickassociates.co.uk X 38 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION

Who was consulted Email Letter sra-architecture.co.uk X John hall X davidlock.com X butteryandwatson.co.uk X harrismccormack.co.uk X Baily Planning X planningprospects.co.uk X aimsltd.co.uk X D Green - turleyassociates.co.uk X Harborough London X ACERT X Network Rail X Arriva Bus X (form) British Geological Survey X CAMRA X Centre for Ecology and Hydrology X Church Commissioners for England (normally just DoL) X Equality and Human Rights Commission X Forestry Commission X First Bus X (form) Freight Transport Association X (form) Leicester shire promotions X Leicester Connexions (Part of LCC) X Leicestershire and Rutland Sport Board (Share Sport Eng) X Leicestershire Fire and Rescue X Hammilton Residents Association X Midland Mainline X National Off ender Management Services X Road Haulage Association. X Home Offi ce X Department for Communities and Local Government X Department for Education; X Department for Environment, Food and Rural Aff airs X CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 39

Who was consulted Email Letter Department for Transport X Department for Business Innovation and Skills X Department of Health X Ministry of Defence X Department of Work and Pensions X Ministry of Justice; and X Department for Culture, Media and Sport. X Royal Mail [email protected] X National Retail Federation X Capita X NCHA X Midland Heart X North Warwickshire BC X Applegate Leicester X Rugby BC X Blueprint UK X British Property Federation X X Fisher German X How Planning X Opal Group X X Lambert Smith Hampton X East Midlands Housing Association X X Unite Group X Rushcliff e BC X South Derbyshire X Marrons X X Lichfi eld DC X Lovells X MatherJamie X Crest Nicholson PLC X Famework HA X ADSA X Sainsbury's X X 40 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION

Who was consulted Email Letter Morrisions X X Tescos X X Co-op X X Aldi X X Lidl X X Waitrose X Lucasland X Longhurst Group X jamesrdesign X Cancer UK X breslin Architects X ainscoughstrategicland X Gazeleys X County land and Business Association X Stepford Homes X Andrew Twigg & Associates Ltd X Peter Wilmot Achitects X Stanforth Architects X Waterloo Housing Group X Peagus UK X Anglian Water X WDA Planning X Loughborough University X Harris McCormac X Harrow Estates X Barton Willmore X ass-ltd.com X thearchitect X hssparchitects.co.uk X gotadsl.co.uk X i-lid.co.uk X jed X krassociates.co.uk X CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 41

Who was consulted Email Letter mark.winklewski X mja-architects.co.uk X mccombiesmith.co.uk X msplan.co.uk X monolitharchitecture.co.uk X nbwarchitects.co.uk X n.tomson X pca-architects.com X Pd Architecture X P J wilmot X Philip Brownassociates X kenyeates X longhurst-group.org.uk X taylorrobin X strangeway.co.uk X thomaswilsonarchitects.co.uk X tomreeve.co.uk X A Harding X uppingham.co.uk X Nick Marshall w b d X Philip Heath 1 X M Pritchett X Multiagency Travellers Unit X British Retail Consortium X X

Total Consultees = 351 42 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION Appendix 3: Email and letter sent to Consultees

Paul Statham

From: planning-policy Sent: 29 May 2014 11:44 To: planning-policy Subject: Leicester City Council - Community Infrastructure Levy – Consultation on Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule

TheCouncilintendstointroducetheCommunityInfrastructureLevy(CIL),andisintheprocessofpreparinga CommunityInfrastructureLevyChargingSchedule. CILisanewchargethatlocalauthoritiescanplaceonnewdevelopment.Thelevywillbeusedtofund infrastructuretosupportgrowth. BeforeaChargingSchedulecanbeadoptedbytheCouncilitmustbesubjecttotworoundsofconsultationandan examinationinpublic.Thisisthefirststageoftheconsultationprocess. TheCouncilhaspreparedaPreliminaryDraftChargingSchedule(PDCS)alongwiththesupportingevidencebase documents.ThePDCSsetsouttheproposedchargingratesforLeicester. TheCouncilinvitescommentsonthePreliminaryDraftChargingScheduleandsupportingdocuments. TheconsultationperiodrunsfromWednesday28thMay2014andendsonThursday10thJuly2014at5.00pm. ThesummaryPDCS,aPDCSsupplementarydocument(whichincludesadraftinstalmentspolicy),CILInfrastructure ProjectsList,DraftRegulation123ListandsupportingdocumentscanbeviewedontheCouncil’swebsite: http://www.leicester.gov.uk/yourͲcouncilͲservices/ep/planning/plansandguidance/cil/ CopiesofthePDCSdocumentsareavailableatallCityCouncilcustomerservicecentresandcanbeaccessedatall publiclibrariesviathefreeinternetaccessprovidedthere. Youcancommentby: •UsingtheCouncil’sonlineconsultationsystemhttp://consultations.leicester.gov.uk/cityͲdevelopmentͲandͲ neighbourhoods/communityͲinfrastructureͲlevyͲviabilityͲassessment/ •Bywritingto:ThePlanningPolicyTeam,PDCSConsultation,LeicesterCityCouncil,A11NewWalk Centre,WelfordPlace,LeicesterLE16ZG •Byemail:[email protected] ThePDCScontainsanumberofquestionsonwhichtheCouncilwouldlikeyourviews.Pleasebeawarethatyour commentswillbepublishedontheCouncil’swebsitetogetherwithyourname. Regards JeevanDhesi PlanningPolicy LeicesterCityCouncil Tel:01164542983 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 43

Email:[email protected] Our ref:PP/CIL Date:29 May 2014 Please ask for : Jeevan Dhesi Tel: 0116 4542983

Planning Policy

A11, New Walk Centre Welford Place Leicester LE1 6ZG www.leicester.gov.uk/planning

Dear Sir /Madam

Community Infrastructure Levy – Consultation on Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule

Wednesday 28th May 2014 to 5.00 pm Thursday 10th July 2014

Copies of the PDCS documents are available at all City Council customer service centres and can be accessed at all public libraries via the free internet access provided there. 44 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION

You can comment by:

x Using the Council’s on line consultation system which can be accessed from the CIL webpage

x By writing to: The Planning Policy Team, PDCS Consultation, Leicester City Council, A 11 New Walk Centre, Welford Place, Leicester LE1 6ZG

x By email: [email protected]

The PDCS contains a number of questions on which the Council would like your views . Please be aware that your comments will be published on the Council’s website together with your name. For enquiries, please contact the telephone number given at the top of this letter

Yours faithfully

Jeevan Dhesi Planning Policy Leicester City Council CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 45

Appendix 4: CIL web page

Community Infrastructure Levy - Leicester City Council

search A-Z

Advice & Business Community Council & Education Environment Health & Housing Jobs & Leisure & Transport Benefits & Living Democracy & Learning & Planning Social Care Careers Culture & Streets

Environment & Planning

Plans, policy and Home > Your Council & Services > Environment & Planning > Planning > Plans, policy guidance and guidance > Community Infrastructure Levy 2006 Local Plan Area and Site Planning Community Infrastructure Levy Guidance City-Wide Planning Leicester City Council is proposing to introduce a Community Infrastructure Levy Guidance (CIL). Community CIL is a new charge that local authorities can place on new development in their Infrastructure Levy area. Its purpose is to help fund infrastructure that is needed to support new Design and Access for Disabled People development. Local Development Before the CIL charge is adopted by the Council it must be subject to two rounds of Framework consultation. This is the first stage of the consultation process – The Preliminary Draft Major Schemes and Awards Charging Schedule stage. New Local Plan Planning Policy Team The Council has prepared a Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule (PDCS) along with Regional Plan the supporting evidence base documents for consultation. The PDCS sets out the Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) proposed charging rates for Leicester. Waste Development The Council invites comments on the Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule and Framework supporting documents. Waste Local Plan

Viewing the Documents.

Search The summary Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule (PDCS) , a PDCS A-Z supplementary document ( which includes a draft instalments policy) , CIL Infrastructure Projects List , Draft Regulation 123 List, can be downloaded by Help following the above links or from the bottom of this page. About Us The CIL Viability Assessment demonstrates the level of CIL that could be Contact Us supported by development, and assists the Council in deciding the rate of the levy that could be reasonably charged without putting the viability of development in Follow us… Leicester at serious risk.

Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland CIL Viability Study

Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland CIL Viability Study - Leicester City Annex

Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland CIL Viability Study - Appendices

Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland CIL Viability Study – Results Annex

http://www.leicester.gov.uk/your-council-services/ep/planning/plansandguidance/cil/[24/09/2014 16:05:13] 46 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION

Community Infrastructure Levy - Leicester City Council

Other supporting documents that are referenced in this consultation are: -

Leicester Core Strategy (adopted 2010),

Leicestershire & Leicester Growth infrastructure assessment

Leicester City Growth infrastructure assessment extract

Leicester City Council Affordable Housing Provision and Developer Contributions

Printed copies of the Preliminary Draft Schedule documents are available at all City Council customer service centres, and the documents can be accessed at all public libraries via the free internet access provided there.

The consultation period runs from Wednesday 28th May 2014 and ends on Thursday 10th July 2014 at 5.00pm.

You can comment by

Using the Council’s on line consultation system which can be accessed from the council's Citizen Space pages http://consultations.leicester.gov.uk/city- development-and-neighbourhoods/community-infrastructure-levy- viability-assessment/

By writing to: The Planning Policy Team, CIL PDCS Consultation, Leicester City Council, A 11 New Walk Centre, Welford Place, Leicester LE1 6ZG

By email: [email protected]

Comments received at this stage will be taken into consideration in preparing a draft charging schedule, which will be subject to further consultation.

Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule (Summary) [pdf / 680KB]

Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule (Supplementary Paper) [pdf / 718KB]

Preliminary Draft Regulation 123 List [pdf / 69KB]

CIL Infrastructure Projects List and Funding Gap [pdf / 112KB]

http://www.leicester.gov.uk/your-council-services/ep/planning/plansandguidance/cil/[24/09/2014 16:05:13] CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 47

Community Infrastructure Levy - Leicester City Council

Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland CIL Viability Study [pdf / 1.88MB]

Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland CIL Viability Study - Appendices [pdf / 10.32MB]

Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland CIL Viability Study – Results Annex [pdf / 7.08MB]

Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland CIL Viability Study - Leicester City Annex [pdf / 840KB]

http://www.leicester.gov.uk/your-council-services/ep/planning/plansandguidance/cil/[24/09/2014 16:05:13] 48 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION Appendix 5: Press Statement

Leicester City Council - News Archive For May 2014: New developer charges planned

search A-Z

Advice & Business Community Council & Education Environment Health & Housing Jobs & Leisure & Transport Benefits & Living Democracy & Learning & Planning Social Care Careers Culture & Streets

Council News Contact Us

Home > News Council Press Office: New developer charges planned 0116 454 4150 28/05/2014 Email us at: LEICESTER City Council is consulting on proposals to change the way contributions are made to the cost of infrastructure projects linked to new [email protected] developments.

Currently, councils can require developers to make financial contributions towards infrastructure improvements such as parks, roads, and schools News Archive under Section 106 Agreements.

From next year, the government wants councils to introduce a new, locally- 2014 2013 2012 agreed system of securing infrastructure funds from development through a 2011 Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).

This requires local authorities to charge developers a fixed tariff based on the type and size of new building projects. RSS Feeds

Before the new levy is introduced in Leicester, the city council needs to Latest News agree its proposed levy rates in consultation with residents and developers. What's On This is based on a list of proposed infrastructure schemes that could potentially be needed as a result of development over the next ten to 12 BBC Leicester News years. This will be used to guide the investment of funds received from new developments. Leicester Mercury

Leicestershire Constabulary The list is linked to the city council’s planning strategy and includes improvements to transport, the provision of more school places, and improvements to parks and green spaces.

Money raised through the Community Infrastructure Levy could raise up to Council Info £500k per year from 2016/2017. Councillors

City Mayor Peter Soulsby said: “All development will impact on a city’s Meetings & Minutes infrastructure in one way or another. It is absolutely vital that we continue Leicester Facts to encourage growth and regeneration, but we cannot ignore the demands Planning Applications that new development makes on local amenities and services.

“Where investment needs to be made to meet those increased demands, it is fair that developers contribute.

“We are proposing a charging tariff that we think is appropriate, and which will still encourage developers to invest in the city.”

http://news.leicester.gov.uk/newsArchiveDetail.aspx?Id=2779[24/09/2014 10:14:10] CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 49

Leicester City Council - News Archive For May 2014: New developer charges planned

The proposed Community Infrastructure Levy charges for residential development in Leicester would be £25 per sqm per house, up to a maximum of £2,000. There would be no charge for new houses built in regeneration areas.

Proposed charges for non-residential development would be higher. For example large retail developments, including supermarkets and warehouses, could be charged a proposed levy of £150 per sqm.

A consultation on the proposed Community Infrastructure Levy has been launched today (May 28) and will run for six weeks.

People can complete the consultation questionnaire online at www.leicester.gov.uk/haveyoursay

http://news.leicester.gov.uk/newsArchiveDetail.aspx?Id=2779[24/09/2014 10:14:10] 50 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION

News Release no: 2779 date: 28 May 2014 release: For Immediate Release

New developer charges planned

LEICESTER City Council is consulting on proposals to change the way contributions are made to the cost of infrastructure projects linked to new developments.

Currently, councils can require developers to make ﬁ nancial contributions towards infrastructure improvements such as parks, roads, and schools under Section 106 Agree- ments.

From next year, the government wants councils to introduce a new, locally-agreed system of securing infrastructure funds from development through a Community Infrastruc- ture Levy (CIL).

This requires local authorities to charge developers a ﬁ xed tariff based on the type and size of new building projects.

Before the new levy is introduced in Leicester, the city council needs to agree its proposed levy rates in consultation with residents and developers. This is based on a list of proposed infrastructure schemes that could potentially be needed as a result of development over the next ten to 12 years. This will be used to guide the investment of funds received from new developments.

The list is linked to the city council’s planning strategy and includes improvements to transport, the provision of more school places, and improvements to parks and green spaces.

Money raised through the Community Infrastructure Levy could raise up to £500k per year from 2016/2017.

City Mayor Peter Soulsby said: “All development will impact on a city’s infrastructure in one way or another. It is absolutely vital that we continue to encourage growth and regeneration, but we cannot ignore the demands that new development makes on local amenities and services.

“Where investment needs to be made to meet those increased demands, it is fair that developers contribute.

“We are proposing a charging tariff that we think is appropriate, and which will still encourage developers to invest in the city.” CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 51

Proposed charges for non-residential development would be higher. For example large retail developments, including supermarkets and warehouses, could be charged a proposed levy of £150 per sqm.

A consultation on the proposed Community Infrastructure Levy has been launched today (May 28) and will run for six weeks.

People can complete the consultation questionnaire online at www.leicester.gov.uk/ haveyoursay

Ends

For further information please contact Jon Evans, Press Ofﬁ cer, on 0116 252 7926.

For more news visit www.leicester.gov.uk/news or follow us at www.twitter.com/leicester_ news 52 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION Appendix 6: Consultations Portal

Citizen Space - Community Infrastructure Levy - Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule

Consultation Hub Find Consultations We Asked, You Said, We Did

Community Infrastructure Levy - Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule

Overview Contact Leicester City Council is consulting on proposals to change the way contributions 0116 4542983 are made to the cost of infrastructure projects linked to new developments. This [email protected] new charge is known as the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). Dates Consultation is Closed Ran from 28 May 2014 to 14 Jul 2014

Other Information Areas: All Areas

Audience: All Residents, Voluntary organisations, Community organisations, All Public and Private Organisations

Interests: Planning

Currently, some developments make financial contributions towards infrastructure improvements including parks, roads, and schools as a planning requirement.

From next year, the government wants councils to introduce a new locally agreed system of securing infrastructure funds from development through the Community Infrastructure Levy.

This requires local authorities to charge developers a fixed tariff based on the type and size of new building projects.

Before the new levy is introduced in Leicester, the city council is required to agree its proposed levy rates in consultation with residents and developers.

The Council has prepared a Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule which includes the proposed charging rates for types of uses and buildings , and a number of documents which are required as evidence to support the setting of the new levy. These are all available on the Council’s CIL Webpage

http://consultations.leicester.gov.uk/city-development-and-neighbourhoods/community-infrastructure-levy-viability-assessment[24/09/2014 10:15:51] CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION 53

Citizen Space - Community Infrastructure Levy - Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule

http://www.leicester.gov.uk/your-council-services/ep/planning/plansandguidance/cil/

There are a number of questions which the Council would like your views on. These will assist the Council in deciding the rate of the levy that could be reasonably charged.

Please be aware that your comments will be published on the Council’s website together with your name.

Share This Consultation

Citizen Space from Delib Accessibility Terms of Use Cookies Privacy Help / Feedback

http://consultations.leicester.gov.uk/city-development-and-neighbourhoods/community-infrastructure-levy-viability-assessment[24/09/2014 10:15:51] 54 CIL STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION Appendix 7: CIL Watch Extract