Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule and Regulation 123 List

Rye Town Council is making a Neighbourhood Plan (NP) to allow the
community to influence growth. As a result the community looks forward to
the right to receive and spend a proportion of Community Infrastructure
Levy funds on local projects.

Rye Town Council agrees with the principle of CIL, but underscores the
need to fix it at a rate which does not have adverse impacts on
developments.

Rye Town Council considers that the Schedule should give greater
prominence to the distribution of CIL receipts to parish/town councils -
setting out the two qualifying percentage rates [amended 2013 CIL
Regulations]. Further, it recommends that there is specific reference to
Neighbourhood Planning in the schedule, as the ability to secure local
income from CIL is one of the clearly stated advantages of making a plan.

On the figures provided by the Rother DC analysis - particularly in terms of education capacity, flood defences and transport schemes - Rye Town Council agrees that there is an infrastructure funding gap. However, it is not clear what account Rother DC is taking of the infrastructure plans in the emerging Rye Neighbourhood Plan in its calculations. Please see Q8.

Most Charging Authorities introducing CIL are developing charging zones to cater for differing land and property values. Rye Town Council agrees with the principle of zones, but would like to understand how they have been designed in Rother District.

Rye Town Council notes that the draft rate of charge is in the upper part of the band being considered by other Charging Authorities. The level of CIL must be 'appropriate' because of the risk that it might either cause developers to seek to recoup the cost from buyers (thereby inflating house prices) - or deter development by making it non-viable.

Rye Town Council recommends that the rate level is reconsidered at a lower level.

Rye Town Council notes again that the proposed charges are in the upper part of the band being set by other Charging Authorities. It is particularly concerned that high rates of CIL do not discourage development (reducing employment opportunities and local tax revenues) by increasing the cost (freehold or leasehold) of commercial property.

Rye Town Council considers that the charge applicable to developments for which it is know that the supply does not meet demand and there is a proven social need (for example, residential care homes) should be reduced.

Rye Town Council recommends that the rate level is reconsidered at a lower level.

Rye Town Council agrees with the proposal as an aid to cash flow of any development.

Rye Town Council agrees in principle but would wish to know more about the discretions and exceptions (to be published later), beyond those which are listed in the schedule.

While it is important to exempt those developments, which would be rendered
uneconomic by the levy, does Rother DC have in mind to exempt some 'strategic'
developments as other Charging Authorities are doing? By doing so, Rye Town Council, if not fully consulted, might be denied the levy from key developments in its Neighbourhood Plan.

Rye Town Council notes the draft Infrastructure R123 list, but asks to be consulted
further on its detail to ensure that emerging findings of the Rye Neighbourhood Plan (community wishes) are fully considered, particularly in the areas of education and transport.

S106 and CIL
National guidance indicates that the CIL will run in tandem with Section 106 obligations. Rye Town Council notes the remarks in the draft schedule about the intention not to 'double dip' (applying both CIL and S106). However, what is not clear is the precise relationship between these two charges.

Some Charging Authorities have attempted to clarify this with a guidance table (typical example below). Rye Town Council recommends that Rother District Council does similar.

Comparing CIL and s.106

Infrastructure funded by CIL -
Provision, improvement, replacement, operation or maintenance of:
Education facilities
Health care facilities
Clearly identified infrastructure projects (eg transport)
Public open space
Public sports & leisure
Community facilities (as identified in the Neighbourhood Plan)

Infrastructure funded by s106:
s106 for affordable housing
s106 for standard site/design mitigation
Development-specific mitigation
Public realm projects or types that are pre-defined
Employment & skills training

Guidance on Enforcement and Appeals
Rye Town Council notes that there is no local guidance yet on enforcement and
appeals. The draft schedule makes it clear that 'CIL is non-negotiable' and that there are significant powers and penalties to deal with failure to pay: Stop Notices, surcharges, late payment interest and prison terms.

Rye Town Council seeks advice on the situations where appeals by developers might be possible, which it understands might be in circumstances where the Council:
*incorrectly calculates the amount of CIL. (Before making the appeal the developer must first request an internal review by the Council).
*incorrectly apportions liability between landowners.
*incorrectly determines Charitable Relief.
*incorrectly applies surcharges.
*deems the development to have commenced when it did not.
*incorrectly issues a Stop Notice for non-payment