Table 1: Proposed Residential CIL Charging Zones and Rates

Showing comments and forms 1 to 2 of 2

Object

Draft Charging Schedule and Draft Regulation 123 List

Representation ID: 21747

Received: 02/03/2015

Respondent: Oak Retirement Ltd

Representation:

Extra care properties have a positive impact on public spending by reducing social services costs and NHS spending. The CIL schedule should encourage such developments in line with the Councils stated strategy for providing for the housing needs of older people.
The viability assessment did not properly assess the added costs of developing extra care housing (especially the cost of providing communal facilities and staffing the development prior to full occupation) and the proposed CIL rates for these properties will discourage their development.

Full text:

Whilst the proposed rates for extra-care specialist housing for older people are a considerable improvement on the previously proposed schedule the two rates proposed £45psm on greenfield sites and £25psm for brownfield sites still represent a disincentive to the development of this type of property.

Extra-care developments must include several communal spaces if they are to follow the DOH model. These include at least a communal lounge, dining room (and a kitchen that is substantial enough to provide a hot meal each day for all residents), a laundry and a guest room. Addition facilities such as an activity room, fitness suite are highly desirable.

The purchase price or rent of the individual apartments cannot be increased to cover the full cost of providing these spaces.

Secondly, the on-site staff costs for these developments are substantial and can only be recovered when all apartments are sold or rented and all service charges being paid. The shortfall is a substantial cost to the development.

Thirdly, the building of this type of property cannot be phased in the way standard residential construction can be phased. The entire development must be completed before apartments can be sold.

These additional costs add significantly to the overall cost of extra care housing and the viability assessment did not properly take these costs into account. There is substantial evidence that older people in this type of accommodation reduce costs to both social services and the NHS and so the CIL schedule should be encouraging not discouraging such developments.

Object

Draft Charging Schedule and Draft Regulation 123 List

Representation ID: 21750

Received: 18/03/2015

Respondent: Battle Town Council

Representation:

Battle has been placed in zone 1 along with the rural north and west of the district. The PBA report recommends a figure of £240 for domestic dwellings as the levy for Battle and Battle Town Council recommends adoption of this figure instead of the proposed £200, and that Battle is placed in a separate zone at this rate.

Full text:

Battle has been placed in zone 1 along with the rural north and west of the district. The PBA report recommends a figure of £240 for domestic dwellings as the levy for Battle and Battle Town Council recommends adoption of this figure instead of the proposed £200, and that Battle is placed in a separate zone at this rate.