560 likes | 689 Views
Community Infrastructure Levy Update. Meeta Kaur, Associate - Planning & Environment. 1. Recent developments. Community Infrastructure Levy (Amendment Regulations) 2012 (into force 29 November 2012) Community Infrastructure Levy (Amendment) Regulations 2013 (into force 24 April 2013)
E N D
Community Infrastructure Levy Update Meeta Kaur, Associate - Planning & Environment
1. Recent developments • Community Infrastructure Levy (Amendment Regulations) 2012 (into force 29 November 2012) • Community Infrastructure Levy (Amendment) Regulations 2013 (into force 24 April 2013) • Community Infrastructure Levy Guidance (April 2013) (updates December 2012 guidance) • Consultation on Community Infrastructure Levy further reforms (April 2013)
2. November 2012 Amendment Regulations • Deals with previous problems with Section 73 permissions: • Pre-CIL original permission and post-CIL Section 73 permission: • CIL only payable on increase in floorspace due to Section 73 permission • Post-CIL original permission and post-CIL Section 73 permission: • Where Section 73 permission does not change the CIL liability no additional CIL payable • Where Section 73 permission changes the CIL liability, the CIL payable is that arising on most recently commenced/recommenced development
3. Other amendments • Credit against CIL already paid • Permissions to extend time limits • Allows consent granted under Neighbourhood Development Orders to be liable to CIL • Amendment has been made to the formulae for calculating chargeable amount and social housing relief
4. April 2013 Amendment Regulations • Two main issues: • Neighbourhood funding • Mayoral Development Corporations
5. Neighbourhood funding • Requirement for charging authorities to pass on proportion of CIL receipts for neighbourhood planning • In areas with parish councils: • Where all or part of the chargeable development • is not in an area with a neighbourhood plan; and • was not granted permission by a Neighbourhood Development Order 15% of CIL must be passed to the parish council (subject to annual cap)
6. Neighbourhood funding • Where all or part of the chargeable development is: • In an area with a neighbourhood development plan; or • Not in an area that has a neighbourhood development plan in place and was granted by a neighbourhood development order 25% of CIL must be passed to the parish council (not subject to an annual cap) • In areas with no parish councils charging authority retains neighbourhood funding element but must spend it on neighbourhood planning • Wider application permitted
7. Mayoral Development Corporations • Provides for MDCs to be charging authorities for their area • Allows Mayor to carry out preparatory work on MDC charging schedule
8. Community Infrastructure Levy Guidance (April 2013) • Originally issued in December 2012 but updated April 2013 • Intended to provide further clarity on a range of issues including: • Setting CIL rates • Infrastructure planning • Factors to consider • Setting differential rates
9. Consultation on Community Infrastructure Levy Further Reforms (April 2013) • “Radical overhaul” – wide range of questions and proposals • Proposed changes include: • Differential rates by reference to use and scale • Regulation 123 list part of relevant evidence including at examination • Section 278 agreements • Payment in kind through provision of infrastructure • Full permissions capable of treatment as phased development • Removal of the vacancy test • Social housing relief to include discount market units • Relaxation of exceptional circumstances relief conditions
Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 and Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 - Key points Stephen Webb, Partner – Planning & Environment
Introduction • Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 and Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 amend TCPA 1990, Planning Act 2008 and Planning (LB and CA) Act 1990 • Not stand-alone Acts • Come into force in stages: • on the date of Royal Assent: 25 April 2013 IF25 April; • 25 June 2013 IF25 June; or • on such day as the Secretary of State shall appoint NIF • Trailed as being a counter to the Localism agenda • May not reflect all Government rhetoric but some measures should speed up the consenting process
Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 • Option to make planning applications directly to Secretary of State (section 1) • Planning proceedings & CPO costs (sections 2 and 3) • Permitted development changes (section 4) • Information requirements (section 6) • Section 106 and Affordable Housing (section 7) • Stopping up and diversion of highways and public paths (sections 11 and 12) • Registration of TVGs (sections 14, 15 and 16) • Bringing businesses and commercial projects within 2008 Act regime (section 26)
Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 Section 1: Option to make planning application directly to Secretary of StateNIF (except for designation power – IF25 April) • Applies to planning applications, “reserved matters” and “connected applications” (e.g. CAC and LBC) • LPA must be “designated” for underperformance • Duty to notify Parish Councils Schedule 1: • Allows the Mayor of London to continue to “call in” strategic planning applications where submitted to SoS • No s.78 right of appeal where submitted to SoS
Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 Sections 2 and 3: Planning and CPO CostsNIF • Broadens powers of SoS to recover costs in part as well as in full • Enables SoS to recover costs where an inquiry/hearing has been arranged but does not take place • Provides a power under which regulations may be made which set out the criteria for awarding or recovering costs
Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 Section 4: Permitted development IF25 April • Where order permits development within the curtilage of a dwelling house, the LPA can prevent the development proceeding if: • there are objections from neighbours who share a boundary; and • the LPA considers that there will be an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the adjoining properties • Where development is permitted by way of a development order and involves a change of use – then certain matters may still need to be approved by LPA/SoS e.g. traffic/transport issues
Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 Section 6: Information requirementsNIF • Limits the information which an LPA can request with planning applications • Information must be: • reasonable having regard to the nature and scale of the proposed development; and • the subject matter of the information will be a material consideration in the determination of the application
Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 Section 7: Modification or discharge of affordable housing requirementsIF25 April • Section 106BA: enables variation of affordable housing requirements if, on a first application, it would make the development unviable • On second and subsequent application in relation to the planning obligation, LPA has more flexibility not to vary • Section 106BB: duty for London Boroughs to notify the Mayor of applications under Section 106BA • Section 106BC: power to appeal to Secretary of State – if successful, if development not completed in 3 years then revert to original provisions • Also see DCLG best practice guide
Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 Sections 11 and 12: Stopping up and diversion of highways and public pathsIF25 June • Enables a draft order for the stopping up of a highway to be made at the application stage • Enables an order stopping up or diverting a public path to be made in anticipation of planning permission
Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 Sections 14NIF, 15NIF and 16IF25 April: Registration of TVGs • Reduces period (post 20 years “as of right”) from 2 years to 1 year for registration (section 14) • Enables landowner to deposit a statement and map to bring to an end the “as of right” period (section 15) • Restricts registration of TVG application where any trigger event has taken place (section 16): Schedule 1A: • Planning application • Draft or full development plan document or proposal for neighbourhood plan (which identifies land for development) • Application for an order granting development consent
Growth and Infrastructure Act 2013 Section 26: Brings business and commercial projects within Planning Act 2008 regimeIF25 April Introduces a new Section 35 into the PA 2008: • Enables SoS to direct that certain commercial and business development requires consent under NSIP regime • Projects will be prescribe in regulations but will not include projects which include dwellings • SoS Direction requires a “qualifying request” to be made – justifying why in national interest • In London SoS may only make Directions if the Mayor has consented
Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 Changes to heritage planning • Conservation Area Consent (Schedule 17, para6NIF) • CAC for demolition of an unlisted building in a CA no longer required • Instead, demolition will require planning permission • Listed Building Consent (Schedule 17, paraIF25 June) • Allows certain structures or objects to be specifically excluded from listing rather than everything within the curtilage of a building • Will allow works to be carried out which may have previously required LBC
Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 Changes to heritage planning • Certificates of Immunity from Listing (Schedule 17 para9NIF) • Can be applied for by anyone at any time • No need for a concurrent planning application • Heritage Partnership Agreements (section 60NIF) • Provides for owners of listed buildings to enter into Heritage Partnership Agreements with the LPA as an alternative means of obtaining consent for alteration/extension
A sound plan? Simon Ricketts, Partner– Planning & Environment
A sound plan? • Procedural requirements • Duty to co-operate • Soundness, e.g. does it seek to meet objectively assessed needs of area? • Inspector’s reasoning • Strategic environmental assessment
A sound plan? Duty to cooperate • Section 33A, 2004 Act: to “engage constructively, actively and on an ongoing basis. . .” with other local authorities and prescribed bodies • Paragraphs 178 to 181, NPPF: LPAs “will be expected to demonstrate evidence of having cooperated to plan for issues with cross-boundary impacts when their plans are submitted for examination”. Coventry
A sound plan? Soundness under NPPF, e.g. does it seek to meet objectively assessed needs of area? Dacorum East Hants West Northamptonshire North Warwickshire
A sound plan? Inspector’s reasoning Blyth Valley BC v Persimmon Homes (North East) Limited [2009] JPL 335, CA – no presumption of soundness University of Bristol v North Somerset Council [2013] EWHC 231 (Admin) – inadequate reasoning from inspector, needs to be proportionate to the level of detail in the evidence
A sound plan? Strategic environmental assessment Save Historic Newmarket Ltd v Forest Heath DC [2011] JPL 1233 – DPDs require SEA Heard v Broadland DC [2012] Env LR 23 – reasonable alternatives need to be identified (with justification) and examined on the same basis and reasons given for selecting preferred option St Albans DC v S/S for C+LG [2009] EWHC 1280 – iterative process and some alternatives can be ruled out at earlier stage Cogent Land v Rochford DC [2013] P+CR 2 – defects can be remedied prior to adoption West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy
A sound plan? Conclusions
Neighbourhood Planning Meeta Kaur, Associate - Planning & Environment
1. Neighbourhood planning: the basics • Localism Act 2011amendments to Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 • Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012 and Neighbourhood Planning (Referendums) Regulations 2012
2. “Building Blocks” • Key spatial/geographical concept: neighbourhood areas • Key bodies: parish councils and possible or actual neighbourhood forums • Key neighbourhood planning tools: neighbourhood development orders, community right to build orders, neighbourhood development plans
3. Neighbourhood areas • Areas designated by LPAs where a relevant body has made a successful application for designation • Relevant body: parish council or body which is/is capable of being designated as a neighbourhood forum • Application must include a map of the proposed area, statement setting out why it should be designated and a statement that the applying body is a relevant body
4. Neighbourhood areas • Publicity and six week consultation • LPA must have regard to “the desirability of designating the whole area as a neighbourhood area whilst considering the preservation of existing neighbourhood area boundaries” • Refusal with reasons (no outright refusal) and approval with publicity
5. Neighbourhood forums • Groups designated by LPAs where they meet certain conditions: • Established for express purpose of promoting or improving social, economic and environmental wellbeing of an area • Membership open to individuals who live or work in the neighbourhood area or are elected members • Minimum of 21 members • Written constitution • Any other prescribed conditions
6. Neighbourhood forums • Publicity and six week consultation • Refusal with reasons or approval with publicity • Designation ceases to have effect after five years • Interactions
7. Neighbourhood planning tools • Neighbourhood development orders, community right to build orders and neighbourhood development plans • Qualifying bodies: parish council or designated neighbourhood forum, authorised for the purposes of a neighbourhood development order to act in relation to a neighbourhood area
8. Neighbourhood development orders (NDOs) • Grant planning permission in relation to a particular neighbourhood area for development or classes of development • Qualifying body entitled to initiate process requiring LPA to make an NDO • LPA advice or assistance (not financial assistance)
9. Neighbourhood development orders (NDOs) • Qualifying body must consult and publicise proposed NDO • Proposal must include draft NDO, statement with a summary of the proposals and reasons why NDO should be made, and consultation statement • Publicity • Examination and referendum requirements
10. Community right to build orders (CRBOs) • Particular type of NDO providing for community led site specific development • NDO = CRBO if: • made pursuant to a proposal by a community organisation • grants planning permission for specified development in relation to a specified site in a specified neighbourhood area • the specified development does not exceed certain limits
11. Community right to build orders (CRBOs) • Community organisation: corporate body established for the express purpose of furthering the social, economic and environmental wellbeing of individuals living or wanting to live in a particular area and which meet other prescribed conditions in relation to its constitution • Community organisations are authorised for the purposes of a CRBO to act in relation to a neighbourhood area • Examination and referendum requirements
12. Neighbourhood development plans (NDPs) • Plans which set out policies in relation to development and use of land in a neighbourhood area • Qualifying bodies entitled to initiate a process requiring LPA to make an NDP • NDP must be appropriate with regard to national policy and in general conformity with strategic development plan policies
13. Neighbourhood development plans (NDPs) • Part of the development plan for Section 38 PCPA 2004 but take precedence over non-strategic policies • Can only relate to one neighbourhood area and a neighbourhood area can only have one NDP • Examination and referendum requirements
14. Issues arising • First come, first served • LPA discretion – R (oao Daws Hill Neighbourhood Forum) v Wycombe DC (2013) • Genuinely neighbourhood planning?
Reforming Judicial Review Simon Ricketts, Partner– Planning & Environment
It’s a problem: • 3 months to find out whether JR claim lodged • Over 80 days on average for a judge to decide on the papers whether to grant permission • Another 110 days on average if an oral renewal • And then the Court of Appeal (twice)
Figure 2: Applications to apply for Judicial Review, by nature of review Judicial Review Statistics 2007-2011 - Ministry of Justice Ad-hoc publication - Published 18 April 2013
MoJ reforms, 7 May 2013 • Time limit in planning JRs to be 6 weeks, not 3 months (and no pre-action protocol) • If claim “totally without merit”, no right to an oral renewal • Fee for substantive hearing brought forward to oral renewal stage