Introduction of an Infrastructure Charging Mechanism in Scotland: research project
This research focuses on the options for an infrastructure charging mechanism.
Footnotes
1 Note that this is scoped out of some options considered in Section 6.
2 Drawn from HM Treasury’s Green Book Appraisal Guide
3 i.e. Circular 3/2012
4 Consultation held with Scottish Futures Trust on 5 May, 2017.
5 It is unclear if this refers to ‘local authorities’, ‘localities’ or market areas.
6 It should be noted that there were mixed experiences regarding how onerous the process was.
7 The two formula options are independent of the “national agency” or local authority options
8 The responsibilities of the different parties / organisations are indicative. No commitment has been made at this stage.
9 Consultations raised concerns that disproportionate costs to funds raised risked undermining the process. As such, it was proposed at the time that an adapted Land and Buildings Transaction Tax ( LBTT) may be most straightforward insofar as the legislative and administrative functions were already in place.
10 That is, independent of the local authorities / partnerships
11 Cheshire, Paul. “How to capture land value rises”. Planning Magazine, 10 Feb 2017
12 This is a point of contention in the English CIL system leading to disproportionate challenges. The important point is that the valuation basis for pre-existing floor space should be established at the point of planning consent.
13 More exactly the formula will be based on a share in the uplift in land value associated with a planning consent for change in use or additional floorspace. This uplift is a function of, but not linearly proportional to, the market value created.
14 Of which cash payments in lieu of obligations fund about 0.5% of the Total.
15 There is an alternative formula which produces similar results but where IGC is a function of the square root of GDV.
16 The arguments as to whether or not Affordable Housing should contribute to other types of S75 planning obligations such as school places and highways improvements is beyond the scope of this report.
17 Many planning obligations use an index to BCIS to maintain real value. This is appropriate in that the school build costs, and so on, are most closely (but not exactly) linked to this. But in the context of keeping up with the leveraged inflation of land values and uplift, a BCIS index will rapidly fall behind. The implication is that it is the scope of planning obligations, rather than the cost of each individual element, that will widen over time.
18 http://www.boyerplanning.co.uk/news/the-future-of-cil-and-s106/
Contact
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback