Financial viability appraisals for site-specific planning decisions in England
Financial viability appraisals for site-specific planning decisions in England
复制标题
英格兰特定地点规划决策的财务可行性评估
DOI：
10.1177/0263774x16636118
复制
发表时间：
2016
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
P. Wyatt
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
N. Crosby;P. Wyatt
在英格兰，对发展计划的财务可行性的评估已成为规划决策的一个组成部分，最初是确定通过法律的协议（称为第106条协议）可能获得的规划义务的金额，后来作为建立社区基础设施税收费表的基础。地方规划当局在整个地区的基础上制定这些政策，但最终发展建议需要逐个地点的同意。正是在这一特定地点的层面上，生存能力问题引起了激烈的争论。本文探讨了案例文件，证据和决策的样本规划纠纷，以解决两个研究问题，发展的可行性;的准确性和程度的知识基础支撑的发展评估模型和开发商，土地所有者和社区之间的发展收益的分配。本文发现，发展可行性评估是在一个不明确的和误解的建模框架，损害了公平分配的发展土地价值。它还发现，使用市场价值或支付的价格作为基础，以确定分配给土地所有者的发展收益的建模框架内，允许他们最大限度地提高回报，在社区的代价，引入循环的可行性评估的元素。
In England, appraisals of the financial viability of development schemes have become an integral part of planning policy-making, initially in determining the amount of planning obligations that might be obtained via legal agreements (known as Section 106 agreements) and latterly as a basis for establishing charging schedules for the Community Infrastructure Levy. Local planning authorities set these policies on an area-wide basis but ultimately development proposals require consent on a site-by-site basis. It is at this site-specific level that issues of viability are hotly contested. This paper examines case documents, proofs of evidence and decisions from a sample of planning disputes in order to address two research issues within development viability; the veracity and extent of the knowledge base underpinning development appraisal modelling and the distribution of the development gain between the developer, landowner and community. The paper finds that development viability appraisal is being practiced within a poorly specified and misunderstood modelling framework that compromises the equitable distribution of development land value. It also finds that the use of either market value or price paid as a basis for determining the allocation of development gain to landowners within the modelling framework allows them to maximise their return at the expense of the community by introducing an element of circularity into viability appraisal.
实践中的发展评估：来自规划体系的一些证据
影响因子：
1.9
作者：
Coleman C
通讯作者：
Coleman C
DOI：
10.1068/b37181
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
Planning and Design
影响因子：
--
作者：
Crosby N
通讯作者：
Crosby N
完全错误还是大致正确？
DOI：
10.1108/13664381111179224
发表时间：
2011
影响因子：
1.9
作者：
Byrne P
通讯作者：
Byrne P