Cil Levy

[nod]

I was just reading an online article relating to 400 homes that have been given The go ahead in our local area 

The builder is objecting to paying the 36 k levy on each home and the 30% of the project being affordable housing 

It’s a bit rich really when you think of all the hoops we all have had to jump through in order to build one family home 

[The Reverend]

CIL is, in my opinion, a bribe (in many cases) for Councils to grant inappropriate planning approvals to commercial developers. I understand that Councils need the money to invest in shops, schools and public amenities but they get this through Council tax anyway. The vast majority of new builds in my area are green field developments with hedgerow and woodland being destroyed and why, because it's cheap. Lots of profits to be had from lower construction costs and higher retail prices for out-of-town housing. Building on brownfield sites has demolishen costs, decontamination costs, recycled materials cost and disposing of waste costs. Plus increased costs for upgrading sewers and other infrastructure which means delays in profits for the developer. Better to bung the Council a large brown envelope full of cash and be able to build what where the rest of us would never get planning permission for even a modest home.

 

 

 

[SteamyTea]

9 hours ago, nod said:

builder is objecting to paying the 36 k levy on each home

The real issue is how that money is spent.

Does it genuinely improves local infrastructure or just goes to general expenditure.

 

1 hour ago, The Reverend said:

vast majority of new builds in my area are green field developments with hedgerow and woodland being destroyed

We have to accept that no matter where a development is done, even on polluted industrial land, there will be ecological damage.  Really depends where your personal ecological interest lay.

 

This was an interesting listen, how microbes can eat up pollution, and how quickly they can develop to a new environment.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001lyrn

 

[Temp]

I think there is a spreadsheet somewhere that each council uses to justify the CIL. It lists capital expenditure projects that it was meant to fund and the number if houses it expects to build.  Divide one by the other to get the CIL per house -  that sort of thing.

 

Many of these will gave been drawn up when the CIL is first introduced in an area. Now several years later someone should file an FOI request to see how much was raised and which projects it was speant on. Some areas might have raised all the money required and still be raising it. Others might not have spent it on the stated projects. 

 

 

[The Reverend]

7 hours ago, SteamyTea said:

The real issue is how that money is spent.

Does it genuinely improves local infrastructure or just goes to general expenditure.

 

We have to accept that no matter where a development is done, even on polluted industrial land, there will be ecological damage.  Really depends where your personal ecological interest lay.

 

This was an interesting listen, how microbes can eat up pollution, and how quickly they can develop to a new environment.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001lyrn

 

I believe any department can apply for Section 106 money provided it is linked to the area in which the development is occurring. There has to be an improvement and not to subsidise that which should be done as maintenance. For instance I could not pull down some rusty railings to replace them or paint them but I could pull them down and replace with a dry stone wall costing 10 times as much.

@SteamyTea I'm an advocate for building up not out. Cardiff has just approved building on farm land to the west of Cardiff and 3 farmers have not had their tenancy renewed so building has started.☹

[SteamyTea]

1 minute ago, The Reverend said:

I'm an advocate for building up not out.

I used to be, but the blocks of flats that have been built in the UK have not been very successful, even the posh ones.

Housing, as opposed to all urbanisation, only takes up about 3% of the UKs land. Unused farm land takes up several times more.

[The Reverend]

This is how I would like to see building up in the UK

[Redbeard]

Just plant some buddleia and I am sure you could get a 'similar' result!... It is even a job creation measure, in providing future work for builders and structural engineers.

[LSB]

Part of the CIL payment goes to the local parish, only a small bit, but some.

In the parish I live in, 144 residents, we have recently received some money from a New Build in the Countryside, agreed only because it is going to a 5 bed holiday let which increases tourism.

Initially they submitted a Class Q to convert a small barn, again as a holiday let, once they got that they submitted plans for it to be a house, next door to the original barn.  That was supposed to be knocked down on completion, still to be done.

I personally don't like it, some do, that's not the point.

Most agree that within a few years it will be residential home for the London solicitors that own the existing house and all the other barns.

 

The CIL here is £200 per sqm and this house is 300sqm so the CIL was 60k

The parish who have had their road and many verges destroyed by all the delivery lorries got just over £1,000.

 

This build has since built a new cart lodge with 'games' room over and paid more CIL.

 

CIL rules do not allow the parish to use the money  received to have the verges and edge of road holes repaired, that is down to county, who as it's a green lane will do nothing, even with their 59k CIL.

 

So, the CIL payment has been used to replace the church gates.

We are so limited in what we can do with it.

I've asked for an Owl Box, must be on a footpath, which is not an issue as one runs beside our fields and there is a huge tree.

I've yet to get a response.

 

But, I guess it would be interesting to know what the LPA do with the rest of the CIL for this and numerous other builds in the area.

 

[Dave Jones]

On 17/05/2023 at 08:13, SteamyTea said:

The real issue is how that money is spent.

 

 

 

3 guesses if the morons in the council decide.

 

It's a homes tax nothing more that the buyer has to pay. 

 

Like all taxes immoral.

[jfb]

3 hours ago, Dave Jones said:

Like all taxes immoral.

I tried to find the dislike button but sadly there wasn’t one