New Go-op train service between Swindon, Taunton and Weston-super-Mare approved by ORR

[stuu]

What does CIL mean?

Community Infrastructure Levy. In Taunton it is £210 per SqM of development (IIRC)

 

[Bald Rick]

What does CIL mean?

Community Infrastructure Levy.

It is a charge that Local authorities can decide to levy on new development to help pay for new infrastructure. Typically at the rate of £x per sq metre of development space being constructed. In a slightly roundabout way it effectively enables the local authorities to take a slice of the ‘development value’ created when a piece of land is granted planning permission.

The M (Mayor’s) CIL in London helped pay for Crossrail, and the second round (MCIL2) was intended to help pay for Crossrail 2 but is actually paying for the Crossrail overspend.

 

[Egg Centric]

Community Infrastructure Levy. In Taunton it is £210 per SqM of development (IIRC)

Does that include gardens etc? That sounds absolutely massive.

 

[stuu]

Does that include gardens etc? That sounds absolutely massive.

No, only actual new property. I would assume it's a lot higher in cities and especially London

 

[Egg Centric]

No, only actual new property. I would assume it's a lot higher in cities and especially London

It seems an surprising amount to me. While admittedly my house wasn't in the best state when I bought it this would have increased its price by about 15%. I don't have an objection to it by the way - what surprises me though is that we haven't seen decent infrastructure created from that level of tax.

 

[mrcheek]

With only 106 supporters, it certainly gives the impression that local people in the area that would benefit from Go-Op operations certainly are not interested and there is likely to be low demand for these services. P

Or maybe people support it, and would happily use it, but they dont actually have any money to contribute due to the current financial situation

 

[Egg Centric]

Or maybe people support it, and would happily use it, but they dont actually have any money to contribute due to the current financial situation

Maybe. But if they don't have £25 then they probably don't have the money to pay for the train tickets either.

I've also just noticed that rather oddly they aren't "letting" people who won't use the services regularly donate small amounts. This might be a legal restriction to do with cooperatives or something but if not it's a very odd decision - that's definitely keeping the number of donations down. Like a lot of people I wouldn't mind chucking them £25 and forgetting about it but I'm not giving them £500 I'd never see again!

 

[stuu]

It seems an surprising amount to me. While admittedly my house wasn't in the best state when I bought it this would have increased its price by about 15%. I don't have an objection to it by the way - what surprises me though is that we haven't seen decent infrastructure created from that level of tax.

It's not actually all that much money. For every 1000 new homes it might provide £20m. 1000 new homes will almost certainly need a new primary school and that's a big chunk gone straight away. A few other bits and pieces, minor road widening etc and it's all gone

 

[brad465]

Community Infrastructure Levy.

It is a charge that Local authorities can decide to levy on new development to help pay for new infrastructure. Typically at the rate of £x per sq metre of development space being constructed. In a slightly roundabout way it effectively enables the local authorities to take a slice of the ‘development value’ created when a piece of land is granted planning permission.

The M (Mayor’s) CIL in London helped pay for Crossrail, and the second round (MCIL2) was intended to help pay for Crossrail 2 but is actually paying for the Crossrail overspend.

Thank you for confirming.

It's not actually all that much money. For every 1000 new homes it might provide £20m. 1000 new homes will almost certainly need a new primary school and that's a big chunk gone straight away. A few other bits and pieces, minor road widening etc and it's all gone

I do actually think more investment in infrastructure is needed to support new developments, than currently is the case anyway. It's one of the biggest sources of opposition to new development, and is probably the most legitimate argument against it opponents can use (as opposed to NIMBYism which is rather pathetic). The current setup seems to just be about doing the very minimum to stop things getting too out of hand, often in areas where infrastructure pressure is already high. We shouldn't just be striving for the minimum, but for better.

There are also a fair number of towns that need a better train service (or a service in the first place) based on the existing population, let alone any extra housing planned. Frome and Melksham are the biggest two examples within the range of this proposed service that come to mind, not just in terms of service frequency, but new direct links currently not well-deployed (like Frome-Taunton).

 

[trainmania100]

I'm not giving them £500 I'd never see again!

Doesn't some of the investments say they have a reward? I'm not sure what this means but the way I read it if you invest £1000 you get £1000 reward back in December 2026

Either way, their livery - which consists of names of investors- will be relatively small , maybe half a carriage so far

 

[RT4038]

Thank you for confirming.

I do actually think more investment in infrastructure is needed to support new developments, than currently is the case anyway. It's one of the biggest sources of opposition to new development, and is probably the most legitimate argument against it opponents can use (as opposed to NIMBYism which is rather pathetic). The current setup seems to just be about doing the very minimum to stop things getting too out of hand, often in areas where infrastructure pressure is already high. We shouldn't just be striving for the minimum, but for better.

The problem being that the more infrastructure money you ask for, the more the houses are going to be retailed at, to the extent that the developers will say that the development is no longer viable. The local Council, faced with house building targets, then have to compromise and get the maximum they can, rather than what they might like.
Of course the Council can stick out, refuse the planning permission on the grounds of insufficient CIL. The developer can then appeal, heard by a central govt. appointed Planning Inspector, who will weigh up the amounts and (bearing in mind they are also minded of housing targets) probably allow the appeal with a few tweaks.

As mentioned already, there are many claims on CIL for new building, a new 1,000 house development will need a new Primary School and likely a significant contribution towards new or expanded high school (£40m+, £40,000 per house, straight onto the price) , new road infrastructure (both to connect with the existing road layout and relieve pinch points on the road network downstream from the development), utilities network expansion etc. Public transport will probably get about £2.5m (£2,500 per house, straight onto the price) over 5 years, about enough for two or three extra buses in the existing network if you're lucky. No wonder new houses cost so much. Anything to do with railways is much too expensive, hence why it takes a new town to build a station, and a very large one to re-open or build a new line.

 

[baz962]

Maybe. But if they don't have £25 then they probably don't have the money to pay for the train tickets either.

I've also just noticed that rather oddly they aren't "letting" people who won't use the services regularly donate small amounts. This might be a legal restriction to do with cooperatives or something but if not it's a very odd decision - that's definitely keeping the number of donations down. Like a lot of people I wouldn't mind chucking them £25 and forgetting about it but I'm not giving them £500 I'd never see again!

Glad someone posted this. I was going to give them some money , quite a small amount really and with no expectation of anything back whatsoever. Living in Bedfordshire I would probably never use it either but thought it would be something nice to help. Shame really.

 

[6Gman]

It's not actually all that much money. For every 1000 new homes it might provide £20m. 1000 new homes will almost certainly need a new primary school and that's a big chunk gone straight away. A few other bits and pieces, minor road widening etc and it's all gone

As a former councillor and clerk to parish councils, yes it disappears very quickly. And by the time highways, education, amenities (parks, playgrounds, public open spaces, landscaping) etc have taken their shares there'd be little left over to hand over to outside organisations such as railway co-ops or Network Rail!

The problem being that the more infrastructure money you ask for, the more the houses are going to be retailed at, to the extent that the developers will say that the development is no longer viable. The local Council, faced with house building targets, then have to compromise and get the maximum they can, rather than what they might like.
Of course the Council can stick out, refuse the planning permission on the grounds of insufficient CIL. The developer can then appeal, heard by a central govt. appointed Planning Inspector, who will weigh up the amounts and (bearing in mind they are also minded of housing targets) probably allow the appeal with a few tweaks.

As mentioned already, there are many claims on CIL for new building, a new 1,000 house development will need a new Primary School and likely a significant contribution towards new or expanded high school (£40m+, £40,000 per house, straight onto the price) , new road infrastructure (both to connect with the existing road layout and relieve pinch points on the road network downstream from the development), utilities network expansion etc. Public transport will probably get about £2.5m (£2,500 per house, straight onto the price) over 5 years, about enough for two or three extra buses in the existing network if you're lucky. No wonder new houses cost so much. Anything to do with railways is much too expensive, hence why it takes a new town to build a station, and a very large one to re-open or build a new line.

And this puts it better than I did!

 

[Wandering Pom]

I've also just noticed that rather oddly they aren't "letting" people who won't use the services regularly donate small amounts. This might be a legal restriction to do with cooperatives or something but if not it's a very odd decision - that's definitely keeping the number of donations down. Like a lot of people I wouldn't mind chucking them £25 and forgetting about it but I'm not giving them £500 I'd never see again!

I don't think it's a legal restriction with co-operatives generally - it's rather that they've set themselves up as "one member, one vote", regardless of the amount each member/investor has put in, and presumably they don't want their voting membership biased in favour of large numbers of small investors from outside the area. If there were some means of making a small donation without becoming a voting member they'd probably have more money now, albeit still nowhere near enough.

 

[Bald Rick]

It's not actually all that much money. For every 1000 new homes it might provide £20m. 1000 new homes will almost certainly need a new primary school and that's a big chunk gone straight away. A few other bits and pieces, minor road widening etc and it's all gone

Whilst this is true (and drifting slightly OT), the deomgraphics in most parts of the country is such that there is significant overcapacity in many primary schools, and this will follow into secondary schools in around 4-6 years. This might just shuft CIL soending towards other things, although with an ageing population I would expect this to lean towards healthcare over transport.

 

[brad465]

Whilst this is true (and drifting slightly OT), the deomgraphics in most parts of the country is such that there is significant overcapacity in many primary schools, and this will follow into secondary schools in around 4-6 years. This might just shuft CIL soending towards other things, although with an ageing population I would expect this to lean towards healthcare over transport.

In theory public transport would need to improve in an ageing population as well (granted not as much as healthcare), as a higher older population leads to higher numbers unable to drive, or drive as often. I would expect buses though would be first in line in this instance.

 

[The exile]

Maybe. But if they don't have £25 then they probably don't have the money to pay for the train tickets either.

I've also just noticed that rather oddly they aren't "letting" people who won't use the services regularly donate small amounts. This might be a legal restriction to do with cooperatives or something but if not it's a very odd decision - that's definitely keeping the number of donations down. Like a lot of people I wouldn't mind chucking them £25 and forgetting about it but I'm not giving them £500 I'd never see again!

Being realistic, if £2.6 million is needed just to get the ball rolling, most people are capable of realising that if all they're chucking in is £25, they might as well not bother. From the Go-Op side, no doubt one of the reasons for restricting the opportunity to invest as little as £25 is that having investors with that small a stake is more trouble than it's worth (possibly even loss-making over time - if someone rejected paperless communication, the income from £25 would unlikely be enough to pay for the printing and distribution of the annual report)

 

[Egg Centric]

Being realistic, if £2.6 million is needed just to get the ball rolling, most people are capable of realising that if all they're chucking in is £25, they might as well not bother. From the Go-Op side, no doubt one of the reasons for restricting the opportunity to invest as little as £25 is that having investors with that small a stake is more trouble than it's worth (possibly even loss-making over time - if someone rejected paperless communication, the income from £25 would unlikely be enough to pay for the printing and distribution of the annual report)

I don't agree with this because:

a) No one sensible is going to invest in this "for financial reasons" - i.e. to prudently allocate ones assets towards generating a return aligned with ones financial goals. For such enormous and blatant risk there needs to be a huge upside which there simply isn't. So don't think of it that way. These "investments" are best thought of as donations that may work out some day and return a few %. So enthusiasts are an outsize source of capital here and more importantly the numbers that would generate momentum and publicity - it looks an absolute joke having 106 backers atm. They won't even fill two 153s.

and

b) If I'm wrong about that, why wouldn't this apply to locals too?

This isn't to be taken as if I'm thinking that they would have succeeded if they did things differently*, but my goodness it would look better.

*I can think of one way that might have worked - mainline proper driving courses (not experience days trundling along at 25mph on a preserved line). I would pay £10k in a heartbeat to do a full DMU driving course on the mainline as a real driver would. Now I've no doubt that it would cost Go-Op wayyyyy more than £10k to put that on and they can't possibly be sold for that. But while I'm doing well, I'm not rich. Lots of people are rich. Extrapolating from myself to people with 10 times as much cash as me there are many others who would pay £100k. I think they'd make a profit there. Let's say said profit is £26k. Bingo - find 100 of these rich enthusiasts who want to drive on the mainline and bob's yer uncle. And I think that'd be quite easy actually.

 

[The exile]

I don't agree with this because:

a) No one sensible is going to invest in this "for financial reasons" - i.e. to prudently allocate ones assets towards generating a return aligned with ones financial goals. For such enormous and blatant risk there needs to be a huge upside which there simply isn't. So don't think of it that way. These "investments" are best thought of as donations that may work out some day and return a few %. So enthusiasts are an outsize source of capital here and more importantly the numbers that would generate momentum and publicity - it looks an absolute joke having 106 backers atm. They won't even fill two 153s.

and

b) If I'm wrong about that, why wouldn't this apply to locals too?

This isn't to be taken as if I'm thinking that they would have succeeded if they did things differently*, but my goodness it would look better.

*I can think of one way that might have worked - mainline proper driving courses (not experience days trundling along at 25mph on a preserved line). I would pay £10k in a heartbeat to do a full DMU driving course on the mainline as a real driver would. Now I've no doubt that it would cost Go-Op wayyyyy more than £10k to put that on and they can't possibly be sold for that. But while I'm doing well, I'm not rich. Lots of people are rich. Extrapolating from myself to people with 10 times as much cash as me there are many others who would pay £100k. I think they'd make a profit there. Let's say said profit is £26k. Bingo - find 100 of these rich enthusiasts who want to drive on the mainline and bob's yer uncle. And I think that'd be quite easy actually.

The “really rich” wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole for financial reasons, and it t doesn’t “press the right buttons” emotionally or sentimentally. It’s not a well-loved community pub or even the Titfield Thunderbolt (which - to be cynical - got its money by exploiting the weakness of a rich alcoholic!!!). A rich local benefactor might be motivated to make a last-minute big contribution to get a “so near but so far” project over the line- but is more likely to be motivated to use that money to save something that is already there.

 

[cjw714]

As mentioned already, there are many claims on CIL for new building, a new 1,000 house development will need a new Primary School and likely a significant contribution towards new or expanded high school (£40m+, £40,000 per house, straight onto the price) , new road infrastructure (both to connect with the existing road layout and relieve pinch points on the road network downstream from the development), utilities network expansion etc. Public transport will probably get about £2.5m (£2,500 per house, straight onto the price) over 5 years, about enough for two or three extra buses in the existing network if you're lucky. No wonder new houses cost so much. Anything to do with railways is much too expensive, hence why it takes a new town to build a station, and a very large one to re-open or build a new line.

A very good example of this is Cranbrook in Devon where there was enough cash available to build a new station but not enough to re-double the line and give it the half-hourly service it really needs to be useful.

 

[ainsworth74]

Like a lot of people I wouldn't mind chucking them £25 and forgetting about it but I'm not giving them £500 I'd never see again!

Yeah that's me too. I was willing to go £100 even but no-way was going to be giving them £500 that there's a good chance I'd never see again. Feel like they might have left money on the table as a result I'm sure others are in my position.

 

[YouLostAStar]

the Donations are now down to a trickle of 1 every 3 days. Would be curious to know the feeling in the Go-op camp.
Are they still optimistic or is the reality of the maths setting in

 

[John R]

Seems the rail regulator was quite right to be sceptical about its chances of raising the necessary funds (as I suspect were rather a lot of people).

 

[Meerkat]

I just can’t get my head around the idea that they really thought they could raise this money!
Is anyone in Go-op getting full time pay?

 

[Killingworth]

I just can’t get my head around the idea that they really thought they could raise this money!
Is anyone in Go-op getting full time pay?

I'd like to think they've got some serious financial management in place and that behind the scenes there's a large sum already pledged.

However, and I say this kindly, the appearance of the GoFindMe fund raising page doesn't inspire confidence. Confidence to raise the funds is just the start. There's apparent naivety in plans for level crossing improvements, crew recruitment and training, unit selection, preparation and maintenance and revenue collection.

Frankly, it just doesn't stack up on any front.

I hope Go-op can prove me wrong.

 

[Iron_Duke]

Good to see that "Bring Back British Rail" has invested in an open access competitor to the nationalised railway!

Great spot, how amusing!

 

[Snow1964]

It appears the deadline has been moved back about 2.5 months, can now pledge money upto 23rd May

Currently at £86,665 from 110 investors

https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/p/go-op-som-wilts-rail/updates#start

 

[The exile]

It appears the deadline has been moved back about 2.5 months, can now pledge money upto 23rd May

Currently at £86,665 from 110 investors

https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/p/go-op-som-wilts-rail/updates#start

Not a good sign…

 

[PG]

Not a good sign…

No indeed not. Perhaps they hope come the new fiscal year people will discover some spare cash...

 

[The exile]

Certainly suggests the “large scale backers” are either non-existent or (trying to be positive) have set a hurdle that the crowdfunding has to reach before they’ll pitch in themselves. Somehow, I think the former is more likely.