Police stations and other police hereditaments
This publication is intended for Valuation Officers. It may contain links to internal resources that are not available through this version.
This instruction applies to hereditaments occupied by Territorial Police Forces in England and Wales and also those occupied by British Transport Police and Civil Nuclear Constabulary with the exception of police training colleges (see Rating Manual: Colleges of further education). In this respect the term police station should not be defined too narrowly but should be taken to include police headquarter buildings and training facilities (other than colleges).
List Description: Police Station and Premises
SCat Code: 215 Suffix G
This is a generalist class and responsibility for valuation will lie with the appropriate business unit. Queries of a complex nature arising from the valuation of individual properties should be referred to the National Valuation Unit (NVU) Class Lead via the Class Co-ordination Team (CCT).
NVU Civic Team has overall responsibility for the co-ordination of this class. The CCT are responsible for the approach to and accuracy and consistency of valuations. The CCT will deliver Practice Notes describing the valuation basis for revaluation and provide advice as necessary during the life of the rating lists. Caseworkers have a responsibility to:
- follow the advice given at all times
- not depart from the guidance given on appeals or maintenance work without approval from the co-ordination team
- seek advice from the co-ordination team should any issues arise that are not covered in this instruction
Police stations are a sui–generis class and consequently, as a general rule, only evidence relating to hereditaments in the same mode or category of use is pertinent. See:
- Scottish and Newcastle (Retail) Ltd v Williams (VO) (RA 2000 P 119) and the subsequent Court of Appeal decision –Williams (VO) v Scottish and Newcastle Retail and Allied Domecq [RA 2001 P 41)
- Re the appeal of Reeves (VO) RA 2007 P168
- Dawkins (VO) v Royal Leamington Spa BC and Warwickshire County Council (1961) RVR 291.
See Rating Manual Section 2 Part 7 Appendix 2 thereof for guidance on mode and category of use at the material day.
However, in some circumstances it may be appropriate to have regard to rental evidence derived from other modes or categories of use such as general office use, particularly where the hereditament might reasonably be described as “offices occupied by the police”. Many police stations are now used for administrative purposes due to the centralisation of specialist uses. See 8. below and Re the appeal of Reeves (VO) RA 2007.
6.1 Method of Measurement
Police stations may be valued by either the rental/comparative method or by reference to the contractor’s basis. The basis of valuation will determine the method of measurement required: Net Internal Area (NIA) in respect of the rental/comparative method and Gross Internal Area (GIA) in respect of the contractor’s basis. It will be necessary to ascertain the basis of valuation prior to inspection but in case of doubt sufficient measurement and survey information should be recorded to enable valuations to be carried out using either basis.
6.2 Description
Hereditaments occupied by the police forces are extremely varied in terms of construction, layout and size, characteristics which are largely dictated by their function.
The smallest police stations will cater for only limited public access, consisting of a reception area with enquiry desk and a small office with WC and mess facilities but with no cells/custody suite. At the other extreme regional HQs will contain a full range of facilities which may include extensive offices, staff facilities, custody suite, identification parade facilities, victim examination suites, scene of crime suites, major incident facilities, training facilities including rifle ranges, garages, workshops of various types, stables and dog training or kennel facilities. Some of the more specialised facilities will normally be found as separate stand-alone hereditaments, these including purpose-built custody suites.
The majority of police hereditaments are purpose-built. Exceptions are stations housed in shop units. There are also a small number of police stations, which are known to have been physically adapted from office premises acquired on the open market. The considerable range of administrative work undertaken by police forces may in some cases lead to occupation of ordinary office hereditaments.
6.3 Requirements
a) Unit of Assessment
The principles referred to in Rating Manual Section 2 Part 2 2. Identification of the hereditament should be adhered to. In cases of difficulty advice from the Technical Advisor/NVU specialist should be obtained. The normal approach should be applied to the identification of hereditaments and no attempt should be made to aggregate property which on normal rating principles constitutes more than one hereditament. Where co-located with other emergency services or other occupiers it is possible that unit of assessment issues may arise, particularly where some facilities are shared. In these circumstances it is essential the rateable occupier of each part is ascertained, and the correct unit(s) of assessment identified.
b) Survey Detail
The following information is required:
- A plan (CAD) or otherwise should be obtained where available and check dimensions made on site as necessary; otherwise, a plan should be drawn up.
- Site layout plan.
- Method of construction - e.g. temporary, traditional/permanent brick and tile or steel framed including roof type e.g. flat or pitched.
- Dimensions (where measured to NIA) and description of the accommodation offices, interview room, mess facilities etc. with details of internal finish, insulation, heating, lighting etc.
- Where the contractor’s basis is to be the method of valuation only the GIA of individual building(s) and any extensions is required unless there is a significant variation in the type of accommodation. For example, where a custody suite forms part of a building which otherwise consists of offices and staff accommodation a separate GIA will be required in respect of the custody suite. Likewise for such facilities as rifle ranges, garages, workshops, stables, dog training etc.
- Flat roof area.
- Age of all buildings/extensions.
- Description and detail of services to the hereditament e.g. heating, air conditioning, security systems (to include CCTV, barriers, gates and perimeter fencing), lifts, solar panels, wind turbines etc.
- Number of car parking spaces for police vehicles, staff and visitors- or/and parking area, the nature of the surface, a note of the extent of site landscaping and, where present, helicopter landing area areas, skid pans and the like.
- The site area.
- A description of the means of access to the highway and a note of the proximity to major trunk/arterial/ring roads.
Survey information including plans are to be stored on EDRM. Where the police station is to be valued using the Contractors basis the GIA of the building(s) is to be entered onto the valuation spreadsheet held on the non-bulk server (NBS). Where the police station is to be valued using the rental/comparative method then data, utilising appropriate Bulk Class Indicator (BCI) and sub location codes, should be captured within the Rating Support Application (RSA).
Police stations and premises will either be valued adopting the rental/comparative method or the contractor’s basis of valuation. The rental/comparative method should be applied when no functioning custody facility or other specialist facilities, such as stables, firing ranges etc., were present as at the Antecedent Valuation Date (AVD) and material day. The contractor’s basis will be appropriate for police stations with operational custody, freestanding custody centres and specialist training facilities.
It is therefore of vital importance to establish the facts on the ground for each property both at the AVD and the material day before deciding on the valuation method to adopt. Valuers should consult with the individual police force to confirm the designated (full-time use), non-designated (emergency/overspill use) and obsolete custody suites as at the AVD and material day. Cells used part time or for over-spill at busy periods are to be treated as operational. Another valuable source of custody use information can be sought from HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS) (formerly known as HM Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC). HMICFRS produce reports at 4-5 yearly intervals confirming which sites have operational custody within each force area.
If custody is closed between the AVD and material day, further investigation is required to ascertain the reason for closure and determine the hypothetical tenant’s requirements as at the material date. Custody facilities may cease operational use for either economic reasons (i.e. cost saving) or as a consequence of a material change of circumstances in the locality e.g. the provision of replacement facilities elsewhere. The particular circumstances will determine whether it will be appropriate to reflect the lack of demand within the hereditament for custody accommodation and hence adopt the rental/comparative method. If the cessation of custody use is driven by economic reasons only and that decision is not made until after AVD then the hereditament should continue to be valued on the contractor’s basis as before with the full appropriate value attributed to the custody accommodation. Where the change of use has arisen solely as a consequence of policy changes and/or a fall in arrest and detention rates post-AVD, then the cell/custody suite should continue to be valued on the basis that a demand exists for its original purpose. Some police forces, despite having introduced centralised custody suites, may have kept some cells operational in local police stations for weekend or emergency use only and such accommodation should be treated as fully operational facilities.
Where it is established as at both the AVD and material day that a police station is only used for administrative purposes, then the rental/comparative method is appropriate. Many police stations are purpose built and will have an element of cell accommodation. However, if the custody suite was not in use/obsolete as at the AVD and there are no other specialist uses, then the rental/comparative method should be adopted. Prevailing office values in the vicinity should be used (unless the property is a retail unit), with appropriate relativities applied to storage, garaging and other ancillary facilities. Former cell accommodation should be valued as storage unless it has been converted to office use.
No allowance should be made for sui-generis use. However, where a police station suffers from disabilities of layout not associated with offices from which the rental base has been derived, an end allowance may be appropriate if not already reflected in the unit rate.
When considering rents relating to police stations care should be taken to ensure that they can be suitably adjusted to accord with the rating hypothesis and are not otherwise of a nature which may prejudice their evidential weight – for example, lettings between connected parties, sale and leaseback, etc.
In adopting rental levels drawn from office premises it should be noted that some police stations are located in prime areas purely by historic accident. In such instances location in peak areas may not be operationally essential. Where it is not, it will be appropriate to adopt rental levels found in other areas within which the police station might alternatively be located without any operational detriment.
Retail units used as police stations will fall to be assessed on the rental/comparative method. As some examples of this type are known to be rented, it may be presumed that all examples may be valued by reference to retail tone unless evidence is available to demonstrate the rental value is at a different level for that particular use.
As this class of hereditament does not lend itself to valuation using the receipts and expenditure method then in the absence of sufficient rental evidence to carry out a valuation using the rental/comparative method the contractor’s basis of valuation should be applied by reference to Rating Manual: Section 4 Part 3 The Contractor’s Basis of Valuation and the practice note applicable to the relevant Rating List.
Valuations are to be carried out using the dedicated police stations spreadsheet held on the non-bulk server (NBS). Valuations on the rental/comparative method are to be carried out on the Rating Support Application.
1. Market appraisal
There are 39 regional police forces in England and 4 in Wales. There are also two nationwide non-defence related special police forces, the British Transport Police, which covers the rail network across the UK, and Civic Nuclear Constabulary, which covers non-military nuclear installations and material in transport.
The Policing and Crime Act 2017 introduced the concept of collaboration agreements between the three “blue light” services i.e. police, fire and rescue and emergency ambulance services. The Act obliges the emergency services in England to keep under consideration whether entering into a collaboration agreement with one or more other relevant emergency services in England could be in the interests of the efficiency or effectiveness of that service and those other services. This provision together with the ongoing drive for efficiency savings is likely to further encourage the development of multi service sites with certain facilities shared between the “blue light” occupiers on those sites.
There are a number of stations which have been built as a move to running an estate which is fit for purpose and replacing old and outdated buildings proceeds. The move toward centralisation of custody facilities has continued with new custody suites being provided in several areas as forces seek to comply with the guidelines “Safer Detention and Handling of Persons in Police Custody (2012)”. Some suites are now primarily managed by private sector security specialists and this may have implications as regard the identification of the rateable occupier and the unit of assessment.
There have been discussions concerning the merger of some forces in an endeavour to achieve efficiencies but these have not progressed to fruition, although innovative use of real estate such as the sharing of new facilities with other emergency services, magistrates’ courts and Local Authorities continues.
2. Changes from the 2023 practice note
This practice note follows the same principles as the 2023 Practice Note. Stage 1 costs, Stage 2 obsolescence and land values have been updated.
3. Ratepayer discussions
No discussions with the police forces or their representatives have taken place.
4. Valuation scheme
Purpose built police stations are a sui generis class for rating purposes, albeit due to the centralisation of specialist uses, many police stations are now only used for administrative purposes. It is therefore of vital importance to establish the facts on the ground for each property both at the Antecedent Valuation Date (AVD) and the material day before deciding on the valuation method to adopt.
Broadly speaking, police stations and premises will either be valued adopting the rental/comparative or contractor’s basis methods of valuation. The rental/comparative method will be adopted if there was no functioning custody facility as at the AVD and material day, or other specialist facilities present such as stables, firing ranges etc. The contractor’s basis will be appropriate for police stations with operational custody, freestanding custody centres and specialist training facilities.
4.1 Rental basis
Where it is established as at both the AVD and material day that a police station is only used for administrative purposes, then the rentals method is appropriate. Many police stations are purpose built and will have an element of cell accommodation. However, if the custody suite was not in use/obsolete as at the AVD and there are no other specialist uses, then the rentals method should be adopted. Prevailing office values in the vicinity should be used (unless the property is a retail unit), with appropriate relativities applied to storage, garaging and other ancillary facilities. Former cell accommodation should be valued as storage unless it has been converted to office use.
Valuers should consult with the individual police force to confirm the designated (full-time use), non-designated (emergency/overspill use) and obsolete custody suites as at the AVD and material day. Cells used part time or for over-spill at busy periods are to be treated as operational. Another valuable source of custody use information can be sought from HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS) (formerly known as HM Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC). HMICFRS produce reports at 4-5 yearly intervals confirming which sites have operational custody within each force area.
If custody is closed between the AVD and material day, further investigation is required to ascertain the reason for closure and determine the hypothetical tenant’s requirements as at the material day. Custody facilities may cease operational use for either economic reasons (i.e. cost saving) or as a consequence of a material change of circumstances in the locality e.g. the provision of replacement facilities elsewhere. The particular circumstances will determine whether it will be appropriate to reflect the lack of demand within the hereditament for custody accommodation and hence adopt the rentals method. If the cessation of custody use is driven by economic reasons only and that decision is not made until after AVD then the hereditament should continue to be valued on the contractor’s method as before with the full appropriate value attributed to the custody accommodation.
Where the rentals method is adopted, it has been accepted that no allowance will be made for sui-generis use. However, where a police station suffers from disabilities of layout not associated with offices from which the rental base has been derived, an end allowance may be appropriate if not already reflected in the unit rate.
In adopting rental levels drawn from office premises it should be noted that some police stations are located in prime areas purely by historic accident. In such instances location in peak areas may not be operationally essential. Where it is not, it will be appropriate to adopt rental levels found in other areas within which the police station might alternatively be located without any operational detriment.
4.2 The contractor’s basis
Police stations with functioning custody or other specialist facilities, stand-alone custody centres and specialist police training facilities should be valued adopting the contractor’s basis of valuation. For the purposes of this practice note, training facilities will include stand-alone facilities such as firing ranges and riot training buildings but not police training colleges, which should be valued as educational establishments (see Rating Manual: Colleges of further education).
In circumstances where the contractor’s basis of valuation is deemed appropriate, it is to be applied in accordance with Rating Manual: Section 4 Part 3 using the guidance below in relation to each stage of the valuation process.
The costs shown in this section are for ease of reference. In all cases where a cost guide code is shown it is this that must be input into the NBS template, not the costs shown here. Where the cost guide code shows options, the costs shown in this practice note should be used to aid selection. Should the cost guide show different costs to those shown in the current version of this practice note, please refer to the National Valuation Unit (NVU) Class Lead via the Class Co-ordination Team (CCT).
4.2.1 Stage 1 - estimated replacement cost (ERC)
Building costs
With the exception of areas that are not used at the antecedent valuation date (AVD) and have no prospect of being used, the actual GIA of the station should be used to calculate the Estimated Replacement Cost (Stage 1) of the hereditament. Guidance in relation to the treatment of superfluity is given in the Rating Manual: Police stations and other police hereditaments.
The costs shown in Appendix A are for ease of reference.
External works
The cost of external works is to be added in accordance with Appendix B.
Location factors
Where appropriate costs should be adjusted for location by reference to the Location Factors set down in the 2026 Rating Cost Guide and included at Appendix C.
Contract size adjustment
An adjustment for contract size is to be made to the building cost in accordance with the 2026 Rating Cost Guide and replicated in Appendix D .
Professional fees and charges
Fees should be added at the percentages shown in the 2026 Rating Cost Guide. For convenience these are shown below in Appendix E.
4.3 Stage 2 – age and obsolescence
The age and obsolescence allowances to be applied to the individual building blocks or structures are dependent upon the type of building or structure. The allowances are set out in Rating Manual: Section 4: Part 3: Practice note 1 - Revaluation 2026: The contractor’s basis: Age and obsolescence allowances and replicated in Appendix F:
- civic buildings obsolescence allowance (Table 1) is applicable to police stations and custody centres of permanent construction
- industrial buildings obsolescence allowance (Table 2) should be applied where exceptionally a building is of an industrial nature e.g. a separate and distinct store, workshop or a multi-storey/basement carpark
- temporary buildings obsolescence allowance (Table 3) is applicable for temporary buildings
For the avoidance of doubt the age of the building is to be taken as the date the building was completed.
The main civic buildings obsolesce scales take into account the following salient points:
a. The revised age and obsolescence scale has been agreed to represent the combined age-related physical depreciation along with functional obsolescence and technological redundancy exhibited by buildings of each age typical for their quality/specification and condition. It is anticipated that the stated allowances will be adopted in the majority of cases and only either moderated or increased in exceptional circumstances.
b. Extensions are to be given an allowance appropriate to their age unless of a lower specification than would be expected of a building of that age. Where a lower specification is used the allowance should be increased to a level appropriate to reflect the specification of the building as a whole.
c. In respect of physical depreciation, the above scales are intended to reflect normal wear and tear and/or deterioration due to the age of the building. The scales assume an average degree of cyclical refurbishment work will have been undertaken, to include whole or partial renewal of building sub-components, most particularly relating to mechanical and electrical services and internal fit-out, but also including periodic renewal of roof coverings and windows.
d. It follows from the above that no adjustment away from the scales is required in the majority of cases where older buildings have been subject to modernisation and refurbishment works, as these are explicitly assumed to have occurred. An exception to this would be for a building taken back to shell and reconstructed with significant renewal of structural elements, where an abatement of age-related physical obsolescence may be required.
e. An example of a building requiring an abatement of the allowances provided by the scales (due to the mitigation of physical depreciation) would be where a major renovation has occurred utilising the original building foundations, frame (including upper floors) but with comprehensive replacement of the external envelope (walls, windows), a complete internal refit and wholescale replacement of mechanical and electrical services.
f. Conversely, the above scales will be insufficient to reflect physical obsolescence in cases where buildings are substantially un-modernised and, in any case, the scales do not apply in instances where the hereditament is not repairable at reasonable cost and where it falls to be valued rebus sic stantibus.
g. To qualify as a substantially un-modernised building it is expected that the building will predominantly have the following:
- single glazed windows
- original internal layout
- original ceiling height, with no suspended ceilings
- original external walls
- pre 1980 internal finishes (flooring, ceiling and walls, internal doors and fixtures and fittings)
h. In respect of functional and technological obsolescence, for buildings that remain in operational use, the scales include adjustments to reflect functional and technological deficiencies observable in buildings typical of their original period of construction but taking account of the level of assumed cyclical refurbishment reflected in the physical depreciation element of the scales.
i. The type of functional and technological obsolescence factors already reflected in the scales include the following:
- poor energy efficiency and/or environmental sustainability
- inappropriate layout inhibiting flexible and efficient space utilization
- modern health & safety, fire or building regulations that preclude or limit the original purposes of the building
- dated design practices that restrict modern usage (such as lack of/or minimal floor and ceiling voids)
- the absence of modern space heating or air conditioning systems within a building
j. It follows that only where buildings display specific functional deficiencies or issues of technological redundancy, that are atypical for their age, consideration should be given to applying an additional allowance.
k. One indicator that additional functional obsolescence is present such that the allowance provided by the scales should be adjusted is the presence of new and/or replacement facilities making the existing building surplus. Such replacement or other material redundancy should be considered and may result in the total redundancy of the pre-existing building, i.e. 100% obsolescence.
Flat roof allowance
Permanent buildings built prior to and including 2004 receive an additional allowance of £80m2 ARC of the footprint of the flat roof. The allowance is not to be applied to temporary buildings, stores, workshops or garages.
Permanent buildings built from 2005 onwards do not receive the allowance.
Where a building has varying roof types a reasonable apportionment should be made to arrive at the allowance.
What is flat as opposed to a pitched roof will generally be self-evident. In instances where an allowance is sought for pitched roofing caseworkers should seek advice from the National Valuation Unit before proceeding.
This allowance is not to be applied to buildings of temporary construction.
4.4 Stage 3 – Land value
The developed land value additions are shown in Appendix G below. Developed land is defined as land consisting of the footprint of all buildings, associated landscaped areas, artificial sports pitches, roadways, car parks, hard standings, paths etc.
Any additional land on the site will be viewed as undeveloped land and valued as amenity land for the appropriate region as detailed in the Practice note 2026: Land values for contractor’s basis. Undeveloped land will consist of playing fields, open grass land etc.
4.5 Stage 4 - Decapitalisation rate
The adjusted replacement cost (ARC) of the buildings is aggregated with the land value, and then de-capitalised to an annual equivalent at the prescribed (higher) rate applicable in respect of the 2026 Rating List. However, there are some training facilities which may fall within the definition of educational hereditament and where the lower de-capitalisation rate should be employed. These cases should be referred to the NVU Class Lead via the CCT.
4.6 Stage 5 - End adjustments
Any advantage or disadvantage, which might affect the value of the occupation of the hereditament as a whole, should be reflected at this stage. An adjustment under this head should not duplicate adjustments made elsewhere. The value has already been adjusted prior to Stage 5 for:
- physical and functional obsolescence including age related build quality
- location factor
- flat roof allowance
Most hereditaments will not warrant further allowances at this stage and where allowances are appropriate, it is expected that they should not normally exceed 15%.
Appendix A – Building costs
| Description | Cost guide code | Cost per square metre (m²) GIA | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|
| Police stations with custody | 63A00C | £2,733 | Including vehicle docks, plant rooms and all component |
| parts of the main building. | |||
| Stand-alone custody centres | 63A00D | £3,803 | Including vehicle docks, plant rooms and all component parts of the main building. |
| Separate garages/workshops | 63A00E | £1,143 | No data |
| Separate vehicle examination facilities/garages up to 500m² | 63A00J | £1,699 | No data |
| Separate vehicle examination facilities/garages 500m² to 1500m² | 63A00G | £1,353 | No data |
| Firing ranges | 63A00H | £2,674 | No data |
| Stables | 63A00L | £1,243 | No data |
| Kennels | 63A00M | - | To be dealt with on their own merits |
| Multi-storey car parks | 98H011 | £667/m² or £15,007 per space | No data |
| Basement car parks | 98H012 | £1,159/m² or £26,077 per space | No data |
| Single deck (steel) car parks | See note | £9,243 per space | No data |
The above costs for police stations with custody and stand-alone custody centre hereditaments have been analysed so as to derive a single cost for the entirety of the main building i.e. to include vehicle docks, plant rooms etc. all at the single rate. The only elements that should be costed individually are those separate and distinct facilities such as detached garages and vehicle workshops etc.
Stand-alone custody centres are a relatively new development in the police estate, as forces move towards centralised facilities. It will usually be evident which buildings should be valued as stand-alone custody centres, the majority of which were built from 2012 onwards. The majority use will be the custody suite itself, with ancillary offices dedicated to the running of the custody facility.
Where external sports facilities are present at a regional HQ they are to be costed in accordance with the guidance in the 2026 Rating Cost Guide.
Substantial multi-storey car parks should have a construction cost as per the above table. An additional cost code has been introduced to cover simple ‘meccano’ style car parks that consist of a single upper storey/deck. Consideration should be given to whether the cost should be applied to both the ground and upper deck. Where the single deck has been constructed over an existing concrete/tarmac car park with minimal alteration to the bottom storey then the cost should only be applied to the upper deck. In such circumstances the lower car park element will form part of the consideration to the external works addition.
Appendix B – Additions for external works
An addition for external works should always be made even for hereditaments with no tangible land outside of the building footprint. Typical external works comprise the following:
- paths, paving, vehicle parking areas, access roads, boundary fences, gates, security barriers, lighting, CCTV, landscaping
- foul and surface water manholes, pipes and connections
- incoming mains electric, gas, water, telephone and other services
| Description | Addition |
|---|---|
| A site with almost 100% site coverage, will typically apply to central area sites with minimal external works. | 5% |
| A site with adequate car parking spaces for police vehicles and some staff/public parking but limited amount of landscaping. | 10% |
| An extensive site with adequate car parking for police vehicles, staff and visitors and extensive landscaping. | 20% |
| Stand-alone custody centre - a single rate of 15% will be adopted for all stand-alone custody centres. | 15% |
Where multi-storey car parks are present, they are to be added for separately and an appropriate adjustment made to the external works addition if appropriate.
Appendix C – Location adjustments
The Regions referred to are administrative areas and are not significant boundaries.
North East region
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Durham County | 0.89 |
| Northumberland | 0.93 |
| Tees Valley | 0.92 |
| Tyne and Wear | 0.89 |
North West region
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Cheshire | 1.01 |
| Greater Manchester | 1.01 |
| Lancashire | 1.01 |
| Merseyside | 1.01 |
| Cumbria | 1.02 |
Yorkshire and Humberside region
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| East Riding and North Lincolnshire | 0.90 |
| North Yorkshire | 0.96 |
| South Yorkshire | 0.92 |
| West Yorkshire | 0.90 |
South West region
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Cornwall | 1.03 |
| Devon | 1.00 |
| Dorset | 1.03 |
| Gloucestershire | 1.02 |
| North Somerset | 1.01 |
| Somerset | 0.99 |
| Wiltshire | 1.01 |
East midlands region
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Derbyshire | 1.03 |
| Leicestershire and Rutland | 1.02 |
| Lincolnshire | 1.02 |
| Northamptonshire | 1.07 |
| Nottinghamshire | 1.01 |
West midlands region
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Herefordshire | 0.94 |
| Shropshire | 0.97 |
| Staffordshire | 0.95 |
| Warwickshire | 1.00 |
| West Midlands | 0.97 |
| Worcestershire | 1.00 |
East of England region
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Bedfordshire | 1.03 |
| Cambridgeshire | 0.99 |
| Essex | 1.02 |
| Hertfordshire | 1.06 |
| Norfolk | 0.95 |
| Suffolk | 0.96 |
South East region (excluding London)
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Berkshire | 1.09 |
| Buckinghamshire | 1.08 |
| East Sussex | 1.10 |
| Hampshire | 1.06 |
| Isle of Wight | 1.06 |
| Kent | 1.10 |
| Oxfordshire | 1.05 |
| Surrey | 1.15 |
| West Sussex | 1.09 |
North Wales
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Flintshire | 0.88 |
| Conwy | 0.93 |
| Denbighshire | 0.89 |
| Gwynedd | 0.96 |
| Isle of Anglesey | 0.94 |
| Wrexham | 0.91 |
Mid Wales
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Carmarthenshire | 0.97 |
| Ceredigion | 0.98 |
| Powys | 0.96 |
| Pembrokeshire | 0.91 |
South Wales
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Blaenau Gwent | 0.95 |
| Bridgend | 0.92 |
| Caerphilly | 0.93 |
| Cardiff | 0.93 |
| Monmouthshire | 0.98 |
| Neath Port Talbot | 0.88 |
| Newport | 0.95 |
| Rhondda, Cynon, Taff | 0.92 |
| Swansea | 0.93 |
| Torfaen | 0.90 |
| Vale of Glamorgan | 0.96 |
Central London North
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Camden | 1.30 |
| City of London | 1.22 |
| Hammersmith and Fulham | 1.30 |
| Islington | 1.27 |
| Kensington and Chelsea | 1.32 |
| Westminster | 1.29 |
Central London South
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Lambeth | 1.26 |
| Southwark | 1.27 |
| Wandsworth | 1.28 |
Greater London North East
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Hackney | 1.23 |
| Haringey | 1.31 |
| Newham | 1.17 |
| Tower Hamlets | 1.24 |
| Barking and Dagenham | 1.16 |
| Enfield | 1.17 |
| Havering | 1.08 |
| Redbridge | 1.14 |
| Waltham Forest | 1.16 |
Greater London North West
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Barnet | 1.22 |
| Brent | 1.20 |
| Ealing | 1.26 |
| Harrow | 1.17 |
| Hillingdon | 1.15 |
| Hounslow | 1.14 |
Greater London South East
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Bexley | 1.23 |
| Bromley | 1.19 |
| Croydon | 1.22 |
| Greenwich | 1.23 |
| Lewisham | 1.19 |
Greater London South West
| Area | Location factor |
|---|---|
| Kingston Upon Thames | 1.24 |
| Merton | 1.23 |
| Richmond Upon Thames | 1.20 |
| Sutton | 1.18 |
Appendix D – Contract size adjustment
The adjustment for contract size should be made having regard to the total ERC (after adjustment for location but before the addition for fees) in accordance with the following scales:
| ERC £ | % Adjustment |
|---|---|
| Up to 0.25 million | + 10% max |
| 0.5 million | 8% |
| 0.75 million | 6% |
| 1.0 million | 4% |
| 1.5 million | 3% |
| 2.0 million | 2% |
| 3.0 million | 1% |
| 4.0 million | 0% |
| 5.0 million | -0.5% |
| 6.0 million | -1% |
| 8.0 million | -1.5% |
| 10.0 million | -2% |
| 15.0 million | -3% |
| 18.0 million | -4% |
| 20.0 million | -5% |
| 25.0 million | -6% |
| 35.0 million | -9% |
| Over 40.0 million | - 10% MAX |
Intermediate figures may be interpolated.
Appendix E – Fees and professional charges
Fees should be added at the percentages shown in the 2026 Rating Cost Guide. For convenience these are shown below inclusive of the 2% complexity addition. Note that minimum fees may apply to counter inversion.
| Size of contract | % Adjustment |
|---|---|
| Sums up to £750,000 | 14% |
| £750,000 to £1,499,000 | 13.5% |
| £1,500,000 to £3,999,999 | 11.5% |
| £4,000,000 to £7,499,999 | 10.5% |
| £7,500,000 to £14,999,999 | 9.5% |
| Over £15,000,000 | 9% |
Appendix F – Age and obsolescence allowances
Table 1 – Civic buildings obsolescence allowance
| Age | % Obsolescence |
|---|---|
| 2026 | 0.00% |
| 2025 | 0.75% |
| 2024 | 1.50% |
| 2023 | 2.50% |
| 2022 | 3.50% |
| 2021 | 4.75% |
| 2020 | 6.00% |
| 2019 | 7.25% |
| 2018 | 8.50% |
| 2017 | 10.00% |
| 2016 | 11.25% |
| 2015 | 12.75% |
| 2014 | 14.25% |
| 2013 | 15.75% |
| 2012 | 17.25% |
| 2011 | 18.75% |
| 2010 | 20.25% |
| 2009 | 21.75% |
| 2008 | 23.25% |
| 2007 | 24.50% |
| 2006 | 26.00% |
| 2005 | 27.50% |
| 2004 | 28.75% |
| 2003 | 30.00% |
| 2002 | 31.25% |
| 2001 | 32.50% |
| 2000 | 33.75% |
| 1999 | 35.00% |
| 1998 | 36.00% |
| 1997 | 37.00% |
| 1996 | 38.00% |
| 1995 | 39.00% |
| 1994 | 40.00% |
| 1993 | 40.75% |
| 1992 | 41.50% |
| 1991 | 42.25% |
| 1990 | 43.00% |
| 1989 | 43.75% |
| 1988 | 44.50% |
| 1987 | 45.00% |
| 1986 | 45.50% |
| 1985 | 46.00% |
| 1984 | 46.50% |
| 1983 | 49.25% |
| 1982 | 52.25% |
| 1981 | 55.00% |
| 1980 | 58.00% |
| 1979 | 58.25% |
| 1978 | 58.50% |
| 1977 | 58.50% |
| 1976 | 58.75% |
| 1975 | 59.00% |
| 1974 | 59.00% |
| 1973 | 59.25% |
| 1972 | 59.25% |
| 1971 | 60.00% |
| 1970 | 60.00% |
| 1969 | 60.00% |
| 1968 | 60.00% |
| 1967 | 60.00% |
| 1966 | 60.00% |
| 1965 | 60.00% |
| 1964 | 60.00% |
| 1963 | 60.00% |
| 1962 | 60.00% |
| 1961 | 60.00% |
| 1960 | 60.00% |
| 1959 | 57.50% |
| 1958 | 55.00% |
| Pre 1958 | 55.00% Max Allowance |
Table 2 – Industrial buildings obsolescence allowance
| Age | % Obsolescence |
|---|---|
| 2026 | 0.00% |
| 2025 | 0.50% |
| 2024 | 1.00% |
| 2023 | 1.50% |
| 2022 | 2.00% |
| 2021 | 2.50% |
| 2020 | 3.00% |
| 2019 | 3.50% |
| 2018 | 4.00% |
| 2017 | 4.50% |
| 2016 | 5.00% |
| 2015 | 6.00% |
| 2014 | 7.00% |
| 2013 | 8.00% |
| 2012 | 9.00% |
| 2011 | 10.00% |
| 2010 | 11.00% |
| 2009 | 12.00% |
| 2008 | 13.00% |
| 2007 | 14.00% |
| 2006 | 15.00% |
| 2005 | 16.00% |
| 2004 | 17.00% |
| 2003 | 18.00% |
| 2002 | 19.00% |
| 2001 | 20.00% |
| 2000 | 21.00% |
| 1999 | 22.00% |
| 1998 | 23.00% |
| 1997 | 24.00% |
| 1996 | 25.00% |
| 1995 | 26.00% |
| 1994 | 27.00% |
| 1993 | 28.00% |
| 1992 | 29.00% |
| 1991 | 30.00% |
| 1990 | 31.00% |
| 1989 | 32.00% |
| 1988 | 33.00% |
| 1987 | 34.00% |
| 1986 | 35.00% |
| 1985 | 36.00% |
| 1984 | 37.00% |
| 1983 | 38.00% |
| 1982 | 39.00% |
| 1981 | 40.00% |
| 1980 | 41.00% |
| 1979 | 42.00% |
| 1978 | 43.00% |
| 1977 | 44.00% |
| 1976 | 45.00% |
| 1975 | 46.00% |
| 1974 | 47.00% |
| 1973 | 48.00% |
| 1972 | 49.00% |
| 1971 | 50.00% |
| Pre 1971 | 50.00% Max allowance |
Industrial buildings obsolescence allowance should be applied where exceptionally a building is of an industrial nature e.g. an external store or workshop.
The scale of allowances commonly referred to as “the Monsanto scale” (derived from the approach determined in Monsanto v Farris (VO) 1998 RA 217) continue to be applicable to Industrial buildings.
The scales refer to the actual age of the specific item. A notional age can be adopted where the item has undergone significant improvement or refurbishment.
The scales do not provide for physical obsolescence alone. They also reflect the expected degree of functional and technical obsolescence for an asset of that age.
Any extraordinary functional or technical obsolescence may result in an additional allowance being considered. Examples include superfluity for modern purposes or where new technology evidences that the actual asset is relatively inefficient. Where an additional allowance is made the reasons for it must be stated in the valuation notes.
An element of risk of failure and the requirement of the tenant to replace the item at the end of its useful life is incorporated in the allowances.
It should not be automatically assumed that because a property is old it merits an allowance. Age in itself is not a disability but rather what often flows from age.
The scales are intended to provide a degree of uniformity of allowance. They should be regarded as the maximum allowances to be given.
The scales should only be used as guidance in accordance with the principles outlined in the Rating Manual.
Allowances in excess of 50% for buildings or P&M should only be adopted in exceptional circumstances. It is unlikely that many very old buildings exist which have not undergone some form of modernisation or refurbishment. Where a building or piece of plant has obviously not undergone refurbishment or modernisation at some stage it is permissible to give allowances up to a maximum of 65% as indicated in the scales.
Allowances may be up to 50% higher from those shown in the scales for structures which are of a temporary nature and have continued in use well beyond their intended life span.
It should not be assumed automatically that because an item of plant or machinery is old it merits an allowance. If an asset is well maintained the amount of use may well not affect the item or its value. However, with age the risk of breakdown is likely to increase and functional and technological obsolescence factors are likely to become prevalent. These factors must be borne in mind when selecting an appropriate obsolescence allowance.
The scales of allowances therefore take into account the average use of items over a period of time, bearing in mind the physical, functional and technical obsolescence that may occur during the stated period.
Where judgement through actual knowledge of the item is inconsistent with the allowance scales the item should be valued accordingly recording the reasons for the divergence from the scale.
In any instance of variation from the scales in accordance with these instructions, the reasoning for this must be recorded in the valuation.
Table 3 – Temporary buildings obsolescence allowance
| Age | % Obsolescence |
|---|---|
| 2026 | 0.00% |
| 2025 | 1.50% |
| 2024 | 3.00% |
| 2023 | 4.50% |
| 2022 | 6.00% |
| 2021 | 7.50% |
| 2020 | 9.00% |
| 2019 | 10.50% |
| 2018 | 12.00% |
| 2017 | 13.50% |
| 2016 | 15.00% |
| 2015 | 16.50% |
| 2014 | 18.00% |
| 2013 | 19.50% |
| 2012 | 21.00% |
| 2011 | 22.50% |
| 2010 | 24.00% |
| 2009 | 25.50% |
| 2008 | 27.00% |
| 2007 | 28.50% |
| 2006 | 30.00% |
| 2005 | 31.50% |
| 2004 | 33.00% |
| 2003 | 34.50% |
| 2002 | 36.00% |
| 2001 | 37.50% |
| 2000 | 39.00% |
| 1999 | 40.50% |
| 1998 | 42.00% |
| 1997 | 43.50% |
| 1996 | 45.00% |
| 1995 | 46.50% |
| 1994 | 48.00% |
| 1993 | 49.50% |
| 1992 | 51.00% |
| 1991 | 52.50% |
| 1990 | 54.00% |
| 1989 | 55.50% |
| 1988 | 57.00% |
| 1987 | 58.50% |
| 1986 | 60.00% |
| Pre 1986 | 60.00% Max allowance |
Appendix G – Land value additions
Developed Land
South East (SE)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha | | — | — | — | — | | SE | 3110 | Oxford | 2,000,000 | | SE | 435 | Milton Keynes | 1,600,000 | | SE | 405 | Aylesbury Vale | 1,400,000 | | SE | 3105 | Cherwell | 1,250,000 | | SE | 3125 | West Oxfordshire | 1,250,000 | | SE | 1705 | Basingstoke & Deane | 2,000,000 | | SE | 1765 | Winchester | 1,600,000 | | SE | 1780 | Southampton | 1,800,000 | | SE | 3805 | Adur | 1,500,000 | | SE | 2235 | Maidstone | 1,400,000 | | SE | 335 | Bracknell Forest | 2,250,000 | | SE | 340 | West Berkshire | 1,800,000 | | SE | 345 | Reading | 2,400,000 | | SE | 350 | Slough | 2,750,000 | | SE | 355 | Windsor & Maidenhead | 2,600,000 | | SE | 360 | Wokingham | 2,400,000 | | SE | 1410 | Eastbourne | 1,200,000 | | SE | 1415 | Hastings | 700,000 | | SE | 1425 | Lewes | 1,200,000 | | SE | 1430 | Rother | 1,000,000 | | SE | 1435 | Wealden | 1,350,000 | | SE | 1445 | Brighton & Hove | 1,900,000 | | SE | 2205 | Ashford | 1,300,000 | | SE | 2210 | Canterbury | 1,150,000 | | SE | 2215 | Dartford | 2,500,000 | | SE | 2220 | Dover | 550,000 | | SE | 2230 | Gravesham | 1,950,000 | | SE | 2245 | Sevenoaks | 2,000,000 | | SE | 2250 | Shepway | 892,500 | | SE | 2255 | Swale | 1,200,000 | | SE | 2260 | Thanet | 1,000,000 | | SE | 2265 | Tonbridge and Malling | 1,900,000 | | SE | 2270 | Tunbridge Wells | 1,650,000 | | SE | 2280 | Medway | 1,700,000 | | SE | 3605 | Elmbridge | 3,000,000 | | SE | 3610 | Epsom and Ewell | 2,500,000 | | SE | 3615 | Guildford | 2,600,000 | | SE | 3620 | Mole Valley | 2,450,000 | | SE | 3625 | Reigate & Banstead | 2,400,000 | | SE | 3630 | Runnymede | 2,800,000 | | SE | 3635 | Spelthorne | 2,800,000 | | SE | 3640 | Surrey Heath | 2,100,000 | | SE | 3645 | Tandridge | 2,000,000 | | SE | 3650 | Waverley | 2,000,000 | | SE | 3655 | Woking | 2,400,000 | | SE | 3810 | Arun | 1,600,000 | | SE | 3815 | Chichester | 1,650,000 | | SE | 3820 | Crawley | 2,450,000 | | SE | 3825 | Horsham | 1,550,000 | | SE | 3830 | Mid Sussex | 1,550,000 | | SE | 3835 | Worthing | 1,500,000 | | SE | 410 | South Buckinghamshire | 3,300,000 | | SE | 415 | Chiltern | 1,400,000 | | SE | 425 | Wycombe | 3,000,000 | | SE | 3115 | South Oxfordshire | 1,250,000 | | SE | 3120 | Vale of White Horse | 1,100,000 | | SE | 1710 | East Hampshire | 1,450,000 | | SE | 1715 | Eastleigh | 1,550,000 | | SE | 1720 | Fareham | 1,300,000 | | SE | 1725 | Gosport | 1,100,000 | | SE | 1730 | Hart | 1,500,000 | | SE | 1735 | Havant | 1,200,000 | | SE | 2100 | Isle of Wight | 750,000 | | SE | 1740 | New Forest | 1,200,000 | | SE | 1775 | Portsmouth | 1,650,000 | | SE | 1750 | Rushmoor | 1,850,000 | | SE | 1760 | Test Valley | 1,300,000 |
East Midlands (EM)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| EM | 2820 | Kettering | 800,000 |
| EM | 2830 | South Northamptonshire | 850,000 |
| EM | 2465 | Leicester | 625,000 |
| EM | 1055 | Derby | 545,000 |
| EM | 3060 | Nottingham | 525,000 |
| EM | 2515 | Lincoln | 475,000 |
| EM | 2530 | South Kestevan | 360,000 |
| EM | 2825 | Northampton | 850,000 |
| EM | 3010 | Bassetlaw | 500,000 |
| EM | 2410 | Charnwood | 550,000 |
| EM | 2805 | Corby | 600,000 |
| EM | 2810 | Daventry | 850,000 |
| EM | 2815 | East Northamptonshire | 800,000 |
| EM | 2835 | Wellingborough | 800,000 |
| EM | 1005 | Amber Valley | 330,000 |
| EM | 1010 | Bolsover | 400,000 |
| EM | 1015 | Chesterfield | 400,000 |
| EM | 1025 | Erewash | 285,000 |
| EM | 1030 | High Peak | 425,000 |
| EM | 1035 | North East Derbyshire | 360,000 |
| EM | 1040 | South Derbyshire | 510,000 |
| EM | 1045 | Derbyshire Dales | 375,000 |
| EM | 2405 | Blaby | 550,000 |
| EM | 2415 | Harborough | 580,000 |
| EM | 2420 | Hinckley and Bosworth | 500,000 |
| EM | 2430 | Melton | 475,000 |
| EM | 2435 | North West Leicestershire | 500,000 |
| EM | 2440 | Oadby and Wigston | 580,000 |
| EM | 2505 | Boston | 235,000 |
| EM | 2510 | East Lindsey | 310,000 |
| EM | 2520 | North Kesteven | 410,000 |
| EM | 2525 | South Holland | 330,000 |
| EM | 2535 | West Lindsey | 280,000 |
| EM | 3005 | Ashfield | 380,000 |
| EM | 3015 | Broxtowe | 380,000 |
| EM | 3020 | Gedling | 500,000 |
| EM | 3025 | Mansfield | 375,000 |
| EM | 3030 | Newark and Sherwood | 380,000 |
| EM | 3040 | Rushcliffe | 425,000 |
| EM | 2470 | Rutland | 400,000 |
East (E)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| E | 505 | Cambridge | 1,320,000 |
| E | 1915 | East Hertfordshire | 1,450,000 |
| E | 1505 | Basildon | 1,550,000 |
| E | 530 | South Cambridegshire | 1,250,000 |
| E | 540 | Peterborough | 1,000,000 |
| E | 1550 | Rochford | 540,750 |
| E | 2625 | Norwich | 750,000 |
| E | 3515 | Ipswich | 880,000 |
| E | 1920 | Hertsmere | 1,200,000 |
| E | 1530 | Colchester | 680,000 |
| E | 510 | East Cambridgeshire | 535,000 |
| E | 515 | Fenland | 370,000 |
| E | 520 | Huntingdonshire | 1,100,000 |
| E | 1510 | Braintree | 660,000 |
| E | 1515 | Brentwood | 900,000 |
| E | 1520 | Castle Point | 565,000 |
| E | 1525 | Chelmsford | 875,000 |
| E | 1535 | Epping Forest | 1,080,000 |
| E | 1540 | Harlow | 1,340,000 |
| E | 1545 | Maldon | 515,000 |
| E | 1560 | Tendring | 530,000 |
| E | 1570 | Uttlesford | 840,000 |
| E | 1590 | Southend-on-Sea | 1,400,000 |
| E | 1595 | Thurrock | 2,060,000 |
| E | 2605 | Breckland | 480,000 |
| E | 2610 | Broadland | 420,000 |
| E | 2615 | Great Yarmouth | 420,000 |
| E | 2620 | North Norfolk | 275,000 |
| E | 2630 | South Norfolk | 480,000 |
| E | 2635 | Kings Lynn and West Norfolk | 495,000 |
| E | 3505 | Babergh | 335,000 |
| E | 3520 | Mid Suffolk | 365,000 |
| E | 3540 | East Suffolk | 325,000 |
| E | 3545 | West Suffolk | 510,000 |
| E | 1905 | Broxbourne | 1,870,000 |
| E | 1910 | Dacorum | 2,200,000 |
| E | 1930 | St Albans | 1,650,000 |
| E | 1935 | Stevenage | 1,750,000 |
| E | 1940 | Three Rivers | 2,700,000 |
| E | 1945 | Watford | 2,250,000 |
| E | 1950 | Welwyn Hatfield | 1,950,000 |
| E | 235 | Bedford | 975,000 |
| E | 240 | Central Bedfordshire | 975,000 |
| E | 230 | Luton | 1,650,000 |
| E | 1925 | North Hertfordshire | 1,650,000 |
North East (NE)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| NE | 4510 | Newcastle-Upon-Tyne | 300,000 |
| NE | 2935 | Northumberland | 150,000 |
| NE | 4525 | Sunderland | 235,000 |
| NE | 734 | Middlesborough | 225,000 |
| NE | 1355 | Durham | 185,000 |
| NE | 1350 | Darlington | 180,000 |
| NE | 724 | Hartlepool | 185,000 |
| NE | 728 | Redcar and Cleveland | 155,000 |
| NE | 738 | Stockton-on-Tees | 190,000 |
| NE | 4520 | South Tyneside | 225,000 |
| NE | 4505 | Gateshead | 235,000 |
| NE | 4515 | North Tyneside | 210,000 |
North West (NW)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| NW | 4215 | Manchester | 1,000,000 |
| NW | 4235 | Stockport | 950,000 |
| NW | 2345 | Preston | 750,000 |
| NW | 665 | Cheshire W & Chester | 550,000 |
| NW | 4205 | Bolton | 900,000 |
| NW | 4250 | Wigan | 900,000 |
| NW | 915 | Carlisle | 450,000 |
| NW | 930 | South Lakeland | 500,000 |
| NW | 4310 | Liverpool | 675,000 |
| NW | 655 | Warrington | 1,000,000 |
| NW | 650 | Halton | 450,000 |
| NW | 660 | Cheshire East | 650,000 |
| NW | 905 | Allerdale | 300,000 |
| NW | 910 | Barrow-in-Furness | 400,000 |
| NW | 920 | Copeland | 275,000 |
| NW | 925 | Eden | 350,000 |
| NW | 2315 | Burnley | 475,000 |
| NW | 2320 | Chorley | 750,000 |
| NW | 2325 | Fylde | 425,000 |
| NW | 2330 | Hyndburn | 475,000 |
| NW | 2335 | Lancaster | 600,000 |
| NW | 2340 | Pendle | 425,000 |
| NW | 2350 | Ribble Valley | 550,000 |
| NW | 2355 | Rossendale | 500,000 |
| NW | 2360 | South Ribble | 750,000 |
| NW | 2365 | West Lancashire | 475,000 |
| NW | 2370 | Wyre | 400,000 |
| NW | 2372 | Blackburn with Darwen | 525,000 |
| NW | 2373 | Blackpool | 450,000 |
| NW | 4210 | Bury | 925,000 |
| NW | 4220 | Oldham | 925,000 |
| NW | 4225 | Rochdale | 925,000 |
| NW | 4230 | Salford | 925,000 |
| NW | 4240 | Tameside | 925,000 |
| NW | 4245 | Trafford | 1,200,000 |
| NW | 4305 | Knowsley | 500,000 |
| NW | 4315 | St Helens | 500,000 |
| NW | 4320 | Sefton | 500,000 |
| NW | 4325 | Wirral | 500,000 |
South West (SW)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| SW | 1250 | Bournemouth | 1,100,000 |
| SW | 1235 | Weymouth & Portland | 750,000 |
| SW | 1110 | Exeter | 1,000,000 |
| SW | 1115 | North Devon | 490,000 |
| SW | 1160 | Plymouth | 450,000 |
| SW | 840 | Cornwall | 400,000 |
| SW | 3315 | Taunton Deane | 1,000,000 |
| SW | 114 | Bath & NE Somerset | 1,200,000 |
| SW | 119 | South Gloucestershire | 1,075,000 |
| SW | 3935 | Swindon | 900,000 |
| SW | 116 | Bristol | 1,075,000 |
| SW | 121 | North Somerset | 725,000 |
| SW | 835 | Isles of Scilly | 370,000 |
| SW | 1105 | East Devon | 500,000 |
| SW | 1125 | South Hams | 400,000 |
| SW | 1130 | Teignbridge | 450,000 |
| SW | 1135 | Mid Devon | 450,000 |
| SW | 1145 | Torridge | 325,000 |
| SW | 1150 | West Devon | 400,000 |
| SW | 1165 | Torbay | 420,000 |
| SW | 1210 | Christchurch | 925,000 |
| SW | 1215 | North Dorset | 550,000 |
| SW | 1225 | Purbeck | 750,000 |
| SW | 1230 | West Dorset | 600,000 |
| SW | 1240 | East Dorset | 650,000 |
| SW | 1255 | Poole | 1,150,000 |
| SW | 1605 | Cheltenham | 1,000,000 |
| SW | 1610 | Cotswold | 850,000 |
| SW | 1615 | Forest of Dean | 300,000 |
| SW | 1620 | Gloucester | 1,000,000 |
| SW | 1625 | Stroud | 960,000 |
| SW | 1630 | Tewkesbury | 1,000,000 |
| SW | 3305 | Mendip | 500,000 |
| SW | 3310 | Sedgemoor | 750,000 |
| SW | 3320 | West Somerset | 500,000 |
| SW | 3325 | South Somerset | 880,000 |
| SW | 3940 | Wiltshire | 800,000 |
West Midlands
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| WM | 4605 | Birmingham | 1,150,000 |
| WM | 4610 | Coventry | 850,000 |
| WM | 4620 | Sandwell | 600,000 |
| WM | 4635 | Wolverhampton | 625,000 |
| WM | 3415 | Lichfield | 675,000 |
| WM | 3245 | Shropshire | 525,000 |
| WM | 3455 | Stoke-on-Trent | 525,000 |
| WM | 3725 | Warwick | 825,000 |
| WM | 1835 | Worcester | 720,000 |
| WM | 1845 | Wyre Forest | 750,000 |
| WM | 1805 | Bromsgrove | 750,000 |
| WM | 1825 | Redditch | 825,000 |
| WM | 1840 | Wychavon | 700,000 |
| WM | 1850 | Herefordshire | 575,000 |
| WM | 1860 | Malvern Hills | 670,000 |
| WM | 3240 | Telford & Wrekin | 525,000 |
| WM | 3405 | Cannock Chase | 650,000 |
| WM | 3410 | East Staffordshire | 625,000 |
| WM | 3420 | Newcastle-under-Lyme | 525,000 |
| WM | 3425 | Stafford | 550,000 |
| WM | 3430 | South Staffordshire | 550,000 |
| WM | 3435 | Staffordshire Moorlands | 440,000 |
| WM | 3445 | Tamworth | 580,000 |
| WM | 3705 | North Warwickshire | 775,000 |
| WM | 3710 | Nuneaton and Bedworth | 800,000 |
| WM | 3715 | Rugby | 800,000 |
| WM | 3720 | Stratford-on-Avon | 800,000 |
| WM | 4615 | Dudley | 600,000 |
| WM | 4625 | Solihull | 700,000 |
| WM | 4630 | Walsall | 600,000 |
Yorkshire and Humber (YH)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| YH | 2715 | Harrogate | 625,000 |
| YH | 2741 | City of York | 550,000 |
| YH | 4705 | Bradford | 600,000 |
| YH | 4710 | Calderdale | 490,000 |
| YH | 4720 | Leeds | 1,000,000 |
| YH | 4410 | Doncaster | 615,000 |
| YH | 2002 | North East Lincolnshire | 370,000 |
| YH | 2001 | East Riding of Yorkshire | 615,000 |
| YH | 4420 | Sheffield | 650,000 |
| YH | 4405 | Barnsley | 600,000 |
| YH | 2705 | Craven | 500,000 |
| YH | 2710 | Hambleton | 400,000 |
| YH | 2720 | Richmondshire | 410,000 |
| YH | 2725 | Ryedale | 325,000 |
| YH | 2730 | Scarborough | 370,000 |
| YH | 2735 | Selby | 475,000 |
| YH | 4415 | Rotherham | 600,000 |
| YH | 4715 | Kirklees | 575,000 |
| YH | 4725 | Wakefield | 575,000 |
| YH | 2003 | North Lincolnshire | 247,500 |
| YH | 2004 | Kingston upon Hull | 500,000 |
Central London, North (Lon)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lon | 5210 | Camden | 20,620,000 |
| Lon | 5030 | City of London | 20,620,000 |
| Lon | 5990 | City of Westminster | 20,620,000 |
| Lon | 5390 | Hammersmith & Fulham | 20,620,000 |
| Lon | 5570 | Islington | 20,620,000 |
| Lon | 5600 | Kensington & Chelsea | 20,620,000 |
Central London, South (Lon)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lon | 5660 | Lambeth | 12,000,000 |
| Lon | 5840 | Southwark | 12,000,000 |
| Lon | 5960 | Wandsworth | 12,000,000 |
Greater London, North West (Lon)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lon | 5090 | Barnet | 4,424,000 |
| Lon | 5150 | Brent | 4,424,000 |
| Lon | 5270 | Ealing | 4,424,000 |
| Lon | 5450 | Harrow | 4,424,000 |
| Lon | 5510 | Hillingdon | 4,424,000 |
| Lon | 5540 | Hounslow | 4,424,000 |
Greater London, South West (Lon)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lon | 5630 | Kingston upon Thames | 5,700,000 |
| Lon | 5720 | Merton | 5,700,000 |
| Lon | 5810 | Richmond upon Thames | 5,700,000 |
| Lon | 5870 | Sutton | 5,700,000 |
Greater London, North East (Lon)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lon | 5060 | Barking and Dagenham | 4,512,000 |
| Lon | 5300 | Enfield | 4,512,000 |
| Lon | 5360 | Hackney | 4,512,000 |
| Lon | 5420 | Haringey | 4,512,000 |
| Lon | 5480 | Havering | 4,512,000 |
| Lon | 5750 | Newham | 4,512,000 |
| Lon | 5780 | Redbridge | 4,512,000 |
| Lon | 5900 | Tower Hamlets | 4,512,000 |
| Lon | 5930 | Waltham Forest | 4,512,000 |
Greater London, South East (Lon)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lon | 5120 | Bexley | 4,320,000 |
| Lon | 5180 | Bromley | 4,320,000 |
| Lon | 5240 | Croydon | 4,320,000 |
| Lon | 5330 | Greenwich | 4,320,000 |
| Lon | 5690 | Lewisham | 4,320,000 |
South Wales (W)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| W | 6825 | Carmarthenshire (1) | 220,000 |
| W | 6828 | Carmarthenshire (2) | 150,000 |
| W | 6829 | Carmarthenshire (3) | 210,000 |
| W | 6840 | Monmouthshire | 375,000 |
| W | 6845 | Pembrokeshire | 190,000 |
| W | 6855 | Swansea | 325,000 |
| W | 6910 | Blaenau Gwent | 230,000 |
| W | 6915 | Bridgend | 310,000 |
| W | 6920 | Caerphilly | 350,000 |
| W | 6925 | Merthyr Tydfil | 230,000 |
| W | 6930 | Neath Port Talbot | 200,000 |
| W | 6935 | Newport | 500,000 |
| W | 6940 | Rhondda, Cynon, Taff | 300,000 |
| W | 6945 | Torfaen | 320,000 |
| W | 6950 | Vale of Glamorgan | 430,000 |
| W | 6815 | Cardiff | 700,000 |
Mid and North Wales (W)
| Economic Region | BA Code | BILLING AUTHORITY (BA) | £/ha |
|---|---|---|---|
| W | 6805 | Isle of Anglesey | 180,000 |
| W | 6810 | Gwynedd | 200,000 |
| W | 6820 | Ceredigion | 120,000 |
| W | 6830 | Denbighshire | 175,000 |
| W | 6835 | Flintshire | 225,000 |
| W | 6850 | Powys (1) | 180,000 |
| W | 6853 | Powys (2) | 150,000 |
| W | 6854 | Powys (3) | 175,000 |
| W | 6905 | Conwy | 200,000 |
| W | 6955 | Wrexham | 350,000 |
1. Market appraisal
1.1 The Policing and Crime Act 2017 introduced the concept of collaboration agreements between the 3 “blue light” services i.e. Police Authorities, Ambulance Trusts and Fire and Rescue Authorities. The Act obliges the emergency services in England to keep under consideration whether entering into a collaboration agreement with one or more other relevant emergency services in England could be in the interests of the efficiency or effectiveness of that service and those other services. This provision together with the ongoing drive for efficiency savings is likely to further encourage the development of multi service sites with certain facilities shared between the “blue light” occupiers on those sites.
1.2 There are a number of stations which have been built as a move to running an estate which is fit for purpose and replacing old and outdated buildings proceeds. The move toward centralisation of custody facilities has continued with new suites being provided in several areas as forces seek to comply with the guidelines “Safer Detention and Handling of Persons in Police Custody (2012)”. Some suites are now primarily managed by private sector security specialists and this may have implications as regard the identification of the rateable occupier and the unit of assessment.
1.3 There have been discussions concerning the merger of some forces in an endeavour to achieve efficiencies but these have not progressed to fruition as at 1st April 2021, although innovative use of real estate such as the sharing of new facilities with other emergency services, magistrates’ courts and local authorities continues.
1.4 Examples of new facilities provided since 1st April 2015 can be found by Internet enquiry.
2. Changes from the 2017 practice note
2.1 The market appraisal section has been re-written and there are changes to building costs and age and obsolescence scales.
3. Ratepayer discussions
3.1 For the 2023 Rating List, police stations and premises have been the subject of a Group Pre-Challenge Review (40220725 – Police Stations and Premises and Freestanding Custody Centres). The agents involved in these discussions include Avison Young, JLL, LSH, Montagu Evans and Newmark. This memorandum of agreement (MoA) documents the conclusions drawn from these discussions.
3.2 The costs agreed within this memorandum are based upon divisional headquarters and custody centres and not campus-style Police Headquarters where each case is to be dealt with on its own merits.
4. Valuation scheme
4.1 Purpose built police stations are a sui generis class for rating purposes, albeit due to the centralisation of specialist uses, many police stations are now only used for administrative purposes. It is therefore of vital importance to establish the facts on the ground for each property both at the Antecedent Valuation Date (AVD) and the material day before deciding on the valuation method to adopt.
4.2 Broadly speaking, police stations and premises will either be valued adopting the rentals or Contractor’s approach. The rentals basis will be adopted if there was no functioning custody facility as at the AVD and material day, or other specialist facilities present such as stables, firing ranges etc. The Contractor’s basis will be appropriate for police stations with operational custody, freestanding custody centres and specialist training facilities.
4.3 Rentals Basis
4.3.1 Where it is established as at both the AVD and material day that a police station is only used for administrative purposes, then the rentals method is appropriate. Many police stations are purpose built and will have an element of cell accommodation. However, if the custody suite was not in use/obsolete as at the AVD and there are no other specialist uses, then the rentals method should be adopted. Prevailing office values in the vicinity should be used (unless the property is a retail unit), with appropriate relativities applied to storage, garaging and other ancillary facilities. Where former cell accommodation is used for storage, it should be valued as such.
4.3.2 Valuers should consult with the individual police force to confirm the designated (full-time use), non-designated (emergency/overspill use) and obsolete custody suites as at the AVD and material day. Cells used part time or for over-spill at busy periods are to be treated as operational. Another valuable source of custody use information can be sought from HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS) (formerly known as HM Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC). HMICFRS produce reports at 4-5 yearly intervals confirming which sites have operational custody within each force area.
4.3.3 If custody is closed between the AVD and material day, further investigation is required to ascertain the reason for closure and determine the hypothetical tenant’s requirements as at the material date. Custody facilities may cease operational use for either economic reasons (i.e. cost saving) or as a consequence of a material change of circumstances in the locality e.g. the provision of replacement facilities elsewhere. The particular circumstances will determine whether it will be appropriate to reflect the lack of demand within the hereditament for custody accommodation and hence adopt the rentals method. If the cessation of custody use is driven by economic reasons only and that decision is not made until after AVD then the hereditament should continue to be valued on the contractor’s method as before with the full appropriate value attributed to the custody accommodation.
4.3.4 Where the rentals method is adopted, it has been accepted that no allowance will be made for sui-generis use. However, where a police station suffers from superfluity or disabilities of layout not associated with offices from which the rental base has been derived, an end allowance may be appropriate if not already reflected in the unit rate.
4.3.5 In adopting rental levels drawn from office premises it should be noted that some police stations are located in prime areas purely by historic accident. In such instances location in peak areas may not be operationally essential. Where it is not, it will be appropriate to adopt rental levels found in other areas within which the police station might alternatively be located without any operational detriment.
4.4 Contractor’s Basis
4.4.1 Police stations with functioning custody or other specialist facilities, stand-alone custody centres and specialist police training facilities should be valued adopting the Contractor’s basis of valuation. For the purposes of this MoA, training facilities will include stand-alone facilities such as firing ranges and riot training buildings but not police training colleges, which should be valued as educational establishments on the College of Education or University basis.
4.4.2 During GPCR discussions the building costs of a number of police stations with custody, stand- alone custody centres and training facilities, built from 2012 onwards. Examples of new facilities provided can be found by Internet enquiry.
4.4.3 In circumstances where the Contractor’s basis of valuation is deemed appropriate, it is to be applied in accordance with VOA Rating Manual - Part 3: The contractor’s basis of valuation using the guidance below in relation to each stage of the valuation process.
4.4.4 The costs shown in this section are for ease of reference. In all cases where a cost guide code is shown it is this that which must be input into the NBS template, not the costs shown here. Where the cost guide code shows options, the costs shown in this practice note should be used to aid selection. Should the cost guide show different costs to those shown in a current version of this practice note, please refer to the Class Co-ordination Team (CCT).
4.5 Stage 1 – Estimated Replacement Cost
4.5.1 Building Costs
4.5.2 With the exception of areas that are not used at the AVD and have no prospect of being used (principally redundant cells), the actual GIA of the station should be used to calculate the Estimated Replacement Cost (Stage 1) of the hereditament in accordance with Appendix A. Guidance in relation to the treatment of superfluity is given in the Rating Manual section relating to police stations at paragraph 8.7.
4.5.3 External Works
4.5.4 The cost of external works is to be added in accordance with Appendix B.
4.5.5 Location factors
4.5.6 Where appropriate costs should be adjusted for location by reference to the Location Factors set down in the 2023 Rating Cost Guide and included at Appendix C.
4.5.7 Contract Size Adjustment
4.5.8 Contract size adjustments should be made in accordance with the guidance given in the 2023 Rating Cost Guide and included at Appendix D.
4.5.9 Professional Fees and Charges
4.5.10 Professional fees and charges are to be added for in accordance with the guidance given in the 2023 Cost Guide and included at Appendix E.
4.6 Stage 2 – Age and Obsolescence
4.6.1 The Estimated Replacement Cost (ERC) established at Stage 1 above is converted to Adjusted Replacement Cost (ARC) by applying an age and obsolescence allowance.
4.6.2 The standard age and obsolescence allowances (non–industrial) to be applied to the ERC of the individual blocks of permanent buildings are set out in Rating Manual: section 4 part 3 - the Contractor’s basis of valuation. Adjustments for age and obsolescence should be made in accordance with Appendix F. Separate scales are provided within for 1) Police Stations, 2) Separate and distinct stores i.e. stand-alone garage/workshop(s) areas then the industrial age/obsolescence scale should be applied and 3) Temporary buildings.
4.6.3 The scales contained inAppendix F take into account the following salient points:
a. The age and obsolescence scales set out in the rating manual represent the combined age-related physical depreciation along with functional obsolescence and technological redundancy exhibited by buildings of each age typical for their quality/specification and condition. It is anticipated that the stated allowances will be adopted in the majority of cases and only either moderated or increased in exceptional circumstances.
b. Extensions are to be given an allowance appropriate to their age unless of a lower specification than would be expected of a building of that age in which case the allowance should be increased to a level appropriate to reflect the specification of the building as a whole.
c. In respect of physical depreciation, the above scales are intended to reflect normal wear and tear and/or deterioration due to the age of the building. The scales assume an average degree of cyclical refurbishment work will have been undertaken, to include whole or partial renewal of building sub-components, most particularly relating to mechanical and electrical services and internal fit-out, but also including periodic renewal of roof coverings and windows.
d. It follows from the above that no adjustment away from the scales is required in the majority of cases where older buildings have been subject to modernisation and refurbishment works, as these are explicitly assumed to have occurred. An exception to this would be for a building taken back to shell and reconstructed with significant renewal of structural elements, where an abatement of age-related physical obsolescence may be required.
e. An example of a building requiring an abatement of the allowances provided by the scales (due to the mitigation of physical depreciation) would be where a major renovation has occurred utilising the original building foundations, frame (including upper floors) but with comprehensive replacement of the external envelope (walls, windows), a complete internal refit and wholescale replacement of mechanical and electrical services.
f. Conversely, the above scales will be insufficient to reflect physical obsolescence in cases where buildings are substantially un-modernised and in any case, the scales do not apply in instances where the hereditament is not repairable at reasonable cost and where it falls to be valued rebus sic stantibus.
g. To qualify as a substantially un-modernised building it is expected that the building will predominantly have the following:
- single glazed windows
- original internal layout
- original ceiling height, with no suspended ceilings
- original external walls
- pre 1980 internal finishes (flooring, ceiling and walls, internal doors and fixtures and fittings)
This is not intended to be applicable to prestige buildings that add character and esteem to the hereditament.
h. In respect of functional and technological obsolescence, for buildings that remain in operational use, the scales include adjustments to reflect functional and technological deficiencies observable in buildings typical of their original period of construction but taking account of the level of assumed cyclical refurbishment reflected in the physical depreciation element of the scales.
i. The type of functional and technological obsolescence factors already reflected in the scales include the following:
- poor energy efficiency and/or environmental sustainability
- inappropriate layout inhibiting flexible and efficient space utilization
- modern health and safety, fire or building regulations that preclude or limit the original purposes of the building
- dated design practices that restrict modern usage (such as lack of/or minimal floor and ceiling voids)
- the absence of modern space heating or air conditioning systems within a building
j. It follows that only where buildings display specific functional deficiencies or issues of technological redundancy, that are atypical for their age, the age-related allowances provided by the scales should be increased.
k. One indicator that additional functional obsolescence is present such that the allowance provided by the scales should be adjusted is the presence of new and/or replacement facilities making the existing building surplus. Such replacement or other material redundancy should be considered and may result in the total redundancy of the pre-existing building, i.e. 100% obsolescence.
l. If at the Antecedent Valuation Date, where there are buildings, or parts of buildings, that through an established pattern of use have been unused for a number of years the area of these buildings, or parts of buildings, is to be excluded from the GIA.
m. This adjustment takes into account deficiencies in the actual building from an occupational point of view, which is not reflected in the ERC.
4.6.4 Flat roof allowance
Permanent buildings built prior to 2005 with a flat roof are to receive an additional allowance. The allowance is not to be applied to temporary buildings, stores, workshops or garages.
-
a) £80 per m2 ARC of the footprint of the flat roof for buildings constructed up to and including 2004.
b) No allowance for flat roofs constructed from 2005 and onwards
-
Where a building has varying roof types a reasonable apportionment should be made to arrive at the allowance.
-
What is flat as opposed to a pitched roof will generally be self-evident. Flat roofing allowances will automatically apply here to all types of flat roof. In instances where an allowance is sought for pitched roofing caseworkers should seek advice from the National Valuation Unit before proceeding.
The age and obsolescence allowance applied to the buildings should also be applied to the external works (averaged as necessary). The spreadsheet in the Non-Bulk server application will automatically do this.
4.7 Stage 3 – Land Value
4.7.1 Land value is to be arrived at by having regard to values prevailing in the locality, in accordance with Rating Manual Vol 4: Section 3 and the 2023 Land Value Practice Note
- It is anticipated that developed land values will be generally based on industrial values in the locality with the exception of London where residential land values less 20% should be applied. Developed land values for all Billing Authorities on this basis are included at Appendix G1.
- Undeveloped land is to be taken at the amenity value in the locality are included at Appendix G2.
4.7.2 In this context developed land shall be taken to be the land upon which any building is situated, hard standing, artificial sports pitches and landscaping surrounding the buildings. Undeveloped land will consist of playing fields, open grass land, tree shelter belts etc.
4.8 Stage 4 – De-capitalisation rate
4.8.1 Generally the higher statutory de-capitalisation rate should be applied to the Effective Capital Value (ECV) to arrive at an annual equivalent, however there are some training facilities which may fall within the definition of educational hereditament within the meaning of The Non-Domestic Rating (Miscellaneous Provisions) (No. 2) Regulations 1989 and where they do so the lower rate is to be applied. In cases of doubt advice should be sought from the appropriate technical advisor in NVU. For ease of reference the prescribed decapitalisation rates are included in Table 1 below:
Table 1:
| Country | Rating List Year | Standard or ‘Higher’ rate | Public Sector or ‘Lower’ rate | Public Sector Rate Application |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| England | 2023 | 4.4% | 2.6% | Healthcare, Education & MoD |
| Wales | 2023 | 3.4% | 1.9% | Healthcare, Education, MoD & Public Conveniences |
4.9 Stage 5 – End Adjustments
4.9.1 Any advantage or disadvantage which might affect the value of the occupation of the hereditament as a whole should be reflected at this last stage. An adjustment under this head should not duplicate adjustments made elsewhere. Most hereditaments will not warrant further allowances at this stage and where allowances are appropriate, it is expected that they should not normally exceed 15%.
Appendix A
Stage 1 building costs
| ITEM | COST GUIDE REF | COST £/m2 | REMARKS |
|---|---|---|---|
| Police Stations with Custody | 63A00C | £2,300 | Including vehicle docks, plant rooms and all component parts of the main building but excluding garages and workshops |
| Stand-alone Custody Centres | 63A00D | £3,100 | Including vehicle docks, plant rooms and all component parts of the main building |
| Garages/workshops | 63A00E | £897 | |
| Vehicle examination facilities | 63A00J | £1,429 | Up to 500m2 |
| 63A00G | £1,138 | 500m2 to 2000m2 | |
| Firing ranges | 63A00H | £2,250 | |
| Stables | 63A00L | £1,046 | |
| Kennels | 63A00M | - | To be dealt with on their own merits |
Note 1
The Stage 1 Costs for Divisional and regional HQ and Stand-alone Custody Centre hereditaments have been analysed so as to derive a single cost for the entirety of the main building i.e. to include vehicle docks, plant rooms etc all at the single rate. The only elements that should be costed individually are those separate and distinct facilities such as detached garages and vehicle workshops etc.
Stand-alone custody centres are a relatively new development in the police estate, as forces move towards centralised facilities. It will usually be evident which buildings should be valued as stand-alone custody centres, the majority of which were built from 2012 onwards. The majority use will be the custody suite itself, with ancillary offices dedicated to the running of the custody facility.
Note 2
Solar panels and wind turbines should be added for at the appropriate figure as given in the 2023 Rating Cost Guide.
Note 3
Where external sports facilities are present at Regional HQ’s they are to be costed in accordance with the guidance in the 2023 Rating Cost Guide.
Appendix B
Stage 1 – The Addition for External Works
External Works.
An addition for external works will be made within the range of 5-20%. The following percentages would typically apply but are not intended to be prescriptive;
Police stations with Custody & Stand-alone Custody Centres
| Description | Addition |
|---|---|
| A site with almost 100% site coverage, will typically apply to central area sites with minimal ext. wks. | 5% |
| A site with adequate car parking spaces for police vehicles and some staff/public parking but limited amount of landscaping. | 10% |
| An extensive site with adequate car parking for police vehicles, staff and visitors and extensive landscaping. | 20% |
| Stand-alone Custody Centre - a single rate of 12.5% will be adopted for all stand-alone custody centres. | 12.5% |
Notes:
1) External works are inclusive of external CCTV, fencing, security barriers, all hard standing and landscaped areas
2) Where multi-storey car parks are present, they are to be added for separately and an appropriate adjustment made to the external works addition if appropriate.
| Description | Cost Guide Ref | Addition |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-storey car parks | 98H011 | £561 m2 or £12,622 per space |
| Basement car parks | 98H012 | £975/m2 or £21,937/space |
| Single deck (steel) car parks | See note# | £7,778 per space |
Note: Substantial multi-storey car parks should have a construction cost as per the above table. An additional cost code has been introduced to cover simple ‘meccano’ style car parks that consist of a single upper storey/deck. Consideration should be given to whether the cost should be applied to both the ground and upper deck. Where the single deck has been constructed over an existing concrete/tarmac car park with minimal alteration to the bottom storey then the cost should only be applied to the upper deck. In such circumstances the lower car park element will form part of the consideration to the external works addition.
Appendix C
Location adjustment
N.B. The Regions referred to are administrative areas and are not significant boundaries.
| NORTH EAST REGION | NORTH WEST REGION | |||
| Durham County | 0.91 | Cheshire | 0.97 | |
| Northumberland | 0.95 | Greater Manchester | 0.97 | |
| Tees Valley | 0.94 | Lancashire | 0.97 | |
| Tyne & Wear | 0.91 | Merseyside | 0.97 | |
| Cumbria | 0.98 | |||
| YORKSHIRE & HUMBERSIDE REGION | SOUTH WESTERN REGION | |||
| East Riding and North Lincolnshire | 0.92 | Cornwall | 1.05 | |
| North Yorkshire | 0.98 | Devon | 1.01 | |
| South Yorkshire | 0.94 | Dorset | 1.04 | |
| West Yorkshire | 0.92 | Gloucestershire | 1.03 | |
| North Somerset | 1.02 | |||
| Somerset | 1.01 | |||
| Wiltshire | 1.03 | |||
| EAST MIDLANDS REGION | WEST MIDLANDS REGION | |||
| Derbyshire | 1.05 | Herefordshire | 0.92 | |
| Leicestershire and Rutland | 1.04 | Shropshire | 0.95 | |
| Lincolnshire | 1.03 | Staffordshire | 0.94 | |
| Northamptonshire | 1.09 | Warwickshire | 0.98 | |
| Nottinghamshire | 1.03 | West Midlands | 0.95 | |
| Worcestershire | 0.98 | |||
| EAST OF ENGLAND REGION | SOUTH EAST REGION (EXCL. LONDON) | |||
| Bedfordshire | 1.04 | Berkshire | 1.08 | |
| Cambridgeshire | 1.00 | Buckinghamshire | 1.07 | |
| Essex | 1.03 | East Sussex | 1.09 | |
| Hertfordshire | 1.07 | Hampshire | 1.05 | |
| Norfolk | 0.96 | Isle of Wight | 1.05 | |
| Suffolk | 0.97 | Kent | 1.09 | |
| Oxfordshire | 1.04 | |||
| Surrey | 1.13 | |||
| West Sussex | 1.08 |
| WALES | CENTRAL LONDON SOUTH | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| North Wales | Lambeth | 1.28 | ||
| Flintshire | 0.89 | Southwark | 1.28 | |
| Conwy | 0.93 | Wandsworth | 1.30 | |
| Denbighshire | 0.90 | |||
| Gwynedd | 0.97 | GREATER LONDON NORTH EAST | ||
| Isle of Anglesey | 0.95 | Hackney | 1.25 | |
| Wrexham | 0.91 | Haringey | 1.31 | |
| Newham | 1.18 | |||
| Mid Wales | Tower Hamlets | 1.26 | ||
| Carmarthenshire | 0.98 | Barking and Dagenham | 1.18 | |
| Ceredigion | 0.99 | Enfield | 1.18 | |
| Powys | 0.97 | Havering | 1.09 | |
| Pembrokeshire | 0.92 | Redbridge | 1.15 | |
| Waltham Forest | 1.18 | |||
| South Wales | GREATER LONDON NORTH WEST | |||
| Blaenau Gwent | 0.96 | Barnet | 1.23 | |
| Bridgend | 0.93 | Brent | 1.22 | |
| Caerphilly | 0.93 | Ealing | 1.27 | |
| Cardiff | 0.94 | Harrow | 1.18 | |
| Monmouthshire | 0.99 | Hillingdon | 1.16 | |
| Neath Port Talbot | 0.88 | Hounslow | 1.16 | |
| Newport | 0.95 | |||
| Rhondda, Cynon, Taff | 0.93 | GREATER LONDON SOUTH EAST | ||
| Swansea | 0.93 | Bexley | 1.25 | |
| Torfaen | 0.91 | Bromley | 1.21 | |
| Vale of Glamorgan | 0.97 | Croydon | 1.24 | |
| Greenwich | 1.24 | |||
| CENTRAL LONDON NORTH | Lewisham | 1.21 | ||
| Camden | 1.32 | |||
| City of London | 1.24 | GREATER LONDON SOUTH WEST | ||
| Hammersmith & Fulham | 1.32 | Kingston Upon Thames | 1.26 | |
| Islington | 1.29 | Merton | 1.24 | |
| Kensington & Chelsea | 1.34 | Richmond Upon Thames | 1.22 | |
| Westminster | 1.30 | Sutton | 1.2 |
Appendix D
Contract Size Adjustment
The adjustment for contract size should be made having regard to the total ERC (after adjustment for location but before the addition for fees) in accordance with the following scales:
| ERC £ | % Adjustment |
|---|---|
| Up to 0.25 million | + 10% max |
| 0.5 million | 8% |
| 0.75 million | 6% |
| 1.0 million | 4% |
| 1.5 million | 3% |
| 2.0 million | 2% |
| 3.0 million | 1% |
| 4.0 million | 0% |
| 5.0 million | -0.5% |
| 6.0 million | -1% |
| 8.0 million | -1.5% |
| 10.0 million | -2% |
| 15.0 million | -3% |
| 18.0 million | -4% |
| 20.0 million | -5% |
| 25.0 million | -6% |
| 35.0 million | -9% |
| Over 40.0 million | - 10% MAX |
| NB. Intermediate figures may be interpolated. |
Appendix E
The addition for fees
Fees should be added at the percentages shown in the VOA published Cost Guide at Section 7. For convenience these are shown below inclusive of the 2% complexity addition. Note that minimum fees may apply to counter inversion.
| Size of Contract | % Adjustment |
|---|---|
| Sums up to £750,000 | 14% |
| £750,000 to £1,499,000 | 13.5% |
| £1,500,000 to £3,999,999 | 11.5% |
| £4,000,000 to £7,499,999 | 10.5% |
| £7,500,000 to £14,999,999 | 9.5% |
| Over £15,000,000 | 9% |
Appendix F
Age and obsolescence scales
Table 1: Civic Buildings Obsolescence Allowances – Police Stations
| Age | % Obsolescence | Age | % Obsolescence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 0.00% | 1986 | 43.75% |
| 2022 | 0.75% | 1985 | 44.50% |
| 2021 | 1.50% | 1984 | 45.00% |
| 2020 | 2.50% | 1983 | 48.00% |
| 2019 | 3.50% | 1982 | 51.00% |
| 2018 | 4.75% | 1981 | 54.00% |
| 2017 | 6.00% | 1980 | 56.75% |
| 2016 | 7.25% | 1979 | 57.25% |
| 2015 | 8.50% | 1978 | 57.50% |
| 2014 | 10.00% | 1977 | 58.00% |
| 2013 | 11.25% | 1976 | 58.25% |
| 2012 | 12.75% | 1975 | 58.50% |
| 2011 | 14.25% | 1974 | 58.50% |
| 2010 | 15.75% | 1973 | 58.75% |
| 2009 | 17.25% | 1972 | 59.00% |
| 2008 | 18.75% | 1971 | 59.00% |
| 2007 | 20.25% | 1970 | 59.25% |
| 2006 | 21.75% | 1969 | 59.25% |
| 2005 | 23.25% | 1968 | 60.00% |
| 2004 | 24.50% | 1967 | 60.00% |
| 2003 | 26.00% | 1966 | 60.00% |
| 2002 | 27.50% | 1965 | 60.00% |
| 2001 | 28.75% | 1964 | 60.00% |
| 2000 | 30.00% | 1963 | 60.00% |
| 1999 | 31.25% | 1962 | 60.00% |
| 1998 | 32.50% | 1961 | 60.00% |
| 1997 | 33.75% | 1960 | 60.00% |
| 1996 | 35.00% | 1959 | 57.50% |
| 1995 | 36.00% | 1958 | 55.00% |
| 1994 | 37.00% | 1957 | 55.00% |
| 1993 | 38.00% | 1956 | 55.00% |
| 1992 | 39.00% | 1955 | 55% |
| 1991 | 40.00% | 1954 | 55% |
| 1990 | 40.75% | 1953 and earlier | 55% |
| 1989 | 41.50% | ||
| 1988 | 42.25% | ||
| 1987 | 43.00% |
Table 2: Industrial Buildings Obsolescence Table - Separate and distinct stores
| Age | % Obsolescence | Age | % Obsolescence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 0.00% | 1994 | 24.00% |
| 2022 | 0.50% | 1993 | 25.00% |
| 2021 | 1.00% | 1992 | 26.00% |
| 2020 | 1.50% | 1991 | 27.00% |
| 2019 | 2.00% | 1990 | 28.00% |
| 2018 | 2.50% | 1989 | 29.00% |
| 2017 | 3.00% | 1988 | 30.00% |
| 2016 | 3.50% | 1987 | 31.00% |
| 2015 | 4.00% | 1986 | 32.00% |
| 2014 | 4.50% | 1985 | 33.00% |
| 2013 | 5.00% | 1984 | 34.00% |
| 2012 | 6.00% | 1983 | 35.00% |
| 2011 | 7.00% | 1982 | 36.00% |
| 2010 | 8.00% | 1981 | 37.00% |
| 2009 | 9.00% | 1980 | 38.00% |
| 2008 | 10.00% | 1979 | 39.00% |
| 2007 | 11.00% | 1978 | 40.00% |
| 2006 | 12.00% | 1977 | 41.00% |
| 2005 | 13.00% | 1976 | 42.00% |
| 2004 | 14.00% | 1975 | 43.00% |
| 2003 | 15.00% | 1974 | 44.00% |
| 2002 | 16.00% | 1973 | 45.00% |
| 2001 | 17.00% | 1972 | 46.00% |
| 2000 | 18.00% | 1971 | 47.00% |
| 1999 | 19.00% | 1970 | 48.00% |
| 1998 | 20.00% | 1969 | 49.00% |
| 1997 | 21.00% | 1968 and earlier | 50.00% Max |
| 1996 | 22.00% | ||
| 1995 | 23.00% |
Notes Applicable to Table 2
-
As noted above, the scale of allowances commonly referred to as “the Monsanto scale” (derived from the approach determined in Monsanto v Farris (VO) 1998 RA 217) continue to be applicable to Industrial buildings.
-
The scales refer to the actual age of the specific item. A notional age can be adopted where the item has undergone significant improvement or refurbishment.
-
The scales do not provide for physical obsolescence alone. They also reflect the expected degree of functional and technical obsolescence for an asset of that age.
-
Any extraordinary functional or technical obsolescence may result in an additional allowance being considered. Examples include superfluity for modern purposes or where new technology evidences that the actual asset is relatively inefficient. Where an additional allowance is made the reasons for it must be stated in the valuation notes.
-
An element of risk of failure and the requirement of the tenant to replace the item at the end of its useful life is incorporated in the allowances.
-
It should not be automatically assumed that because a property is old it merits an allowance. Age in itself is not a disability but rather what often flows from age.
-
The scales are intended to provide a degree of uniformity of allowance. They should be regarded as the maximum allowances to be given.
-
The scales should only be used as guidance in accordance with the principles outlined in the Rating Manual.
-
Allowances in excess of 50% for buildings or P&M should only be adopted in exceptional circumstances. It is unlikely that many very old buildings exist which have not undergone some form of modernisation or refurbishment. Where a building or piece of plant has obviously not undergone refurbishment or modernisation at some stage it is permissible to give allowances up to a maximum of 65% as indicated in the scales (below).
-
Allowances may be up to 50% higher from those shown in the scales for structures which are of a temporary nature and have continued in use well beyond their intended life span.
-
It should not be assumed automatically that because an item of plant or machinery is old it merits an allowance. If an asset is well maintained the amount of use may well not affect the item or its value. However, with age the risk of breakdown is likely to increase and functional and technological obsolescence factors are likely to become prevalent. These factors must be borne in mind when selecting an appropriate obsolescence allowance.
-
The scales of allowances therefore take into account the average use of items over a period of time, bearing in mind the physical, functional and technical obsolescence that may occur during the stated period.
-
Where judgement through actual knowledge of the item is inconsistent with the allowance scales the item should be valued accordingly recording the reasons for the divergence from the scale.
-
In any instance of variation from the scales in accordance with these instructions, the reasoning for this must be recorded in the valuation.
Table 3: Temporary Buildings Obsolescence Table (Category 3 buildings)
| Age | % Obsolescence | Age | % Obsolescence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 0.00% | 2002 | 31.50% |
| 2022 | 1.50% | 2001 | 33.00% |
| 2021 | 3.00% | 2000 | 34.50% |
| 2020 | 4.50% | 1999 | 36.00% |
| 2019 | 6.00% | 1998 | 37.50% |
| 2018 | 7.50% | 1997 | 39.00% |
| 2017 | 9.00% | 1996 | 40.50% |
| 2016 | 10.50% | 1995 | 42.00% |
| 2015 | 12.00% | 1994 | 43.50% |
| 2014 | 13.50% | 1993 | 45.00% |
| 2013 | 15.00% | 1992 | 46.50% |
| 2012 | 16.50% | 1991 | 48.00% |
| 2011 | 18.00% | 1990 | 49.50% |
| 2010 | 19.50% | 1989 | 51.00% |
| 2009 | 21.00% | 1988 | 52.50% |
| 2008 | 22.50% | 1987 | 54.00% |
| 2007 | 24.00% | 1986 | 55.50% |
| 2006 | 25.50% | 1985 | 57.00% |
| 2005 | 27.00% | 1984 | 58.50% |
| 2004 | 28.50% | 1983 and earlier | 60.00% Max |
| 2003 | 30.00% |
Appendix G1
Developed Land Values
| BA Code | Geographic Regions & Billing Authorities | Developed Land Values |
|---|---|---|
| South East | ||
| 3110 | Oxford | £2,000,000 |
| 435 | Milton Keynes | £1,250,000 |
| 405 | Aylesbury Vale | £1,100,000 |
| 3105 | Cherwell | £1,250,000 |
| 3125 | West Oxfordshire | £1,000,000 |
| 1705 | Basingstoke & Deane | £1,700,000 |
| 1765 | Winchester | £1,500,000 |
| 1780 | Southampton | £1,500,000 |
| 3805 | Adur | £1,500,000 |
| 2235 | Maidstone | £1,400,000 |
| 335 | Bracknell Forest | £1,900,000 |
| 340 | West Berkshire | £1,500,000 |
| 345 | Reading | £2,000,000 |
| 350 | Slough | £2,500,000 |
| 355 | Windsor & Maidenhead | £2,400,000 |
| 360 | Wokingham | £2,000,000 |
| 1410 | Eastbourne | £1,200,000 |
| 1415 | Hastings | £700,000 |
| 1425 | Lewes | £1,200,000 |
| 1430 | Rother | £1,000,000 |
| 1435 | Wealden | £1,350,000 |
| 1445 | Brighton & Hove | £1,750,000 |
| 2205 | Ashford | £1,250,000 |
| 2210 | Canterbury | £1,150,000 |
| 2215 | Dartford | £2,500,000 |
| 2220 | Dover | £550,000 |
| 2230 | Gravesham | £1,950,000 |
| 2245 | Sevenoaks | £2,000,000 |
| 2250 | Shepway | £890,000 |
| 2255 | Swale | £1,200,000 |
| 2260 | Thanet | £900,000 |
| 2265 | Tonbridge and Malling | £1,800,000 |
| 2270 | Tunbridge Wells | £1,500,000 |
| 2280 | Medway | £1,600,000 |
| 3605 | Elmbridge | £2,700,000 |
| 3610 | Epsom and Ewell | £2,400,000 |
| 3615 | Guildford | £2,400,000 |
| 3620 | Mole Valley | £2,300,000 |
| 3625 | Reigate & Banstead | £2,200,000 |
| 3630 | Runnymede | £2,600,000 |
| 3635 | Spelthorne | £2,700,000 |
| 3640 | Surrey Heath | £1,900,000 |
| 3645 | Tandridge | £2,000,000 |
| 3650 | Waverley | £2,000,000 |
| 3655 | Woking | £2,200,000 |
| 3810 | Arun | £1,500,000 |
| 3815 | Chichester | £1,550,000 |
| 3820 | Crawley | £2,300,000 |
| 3825 | Horsham | £1,550,000 |
| 3830 | Mid Sussex | £1,550,000 |
| 3835 | Worthing | £1,500,000 |
| 410 | South Buckinghamshire | £2,700,000 |
| 415 | Chiltern | £1,100,000 |
| 425 | Wycombe | £2,500,000 |
| 3115 | South Oxfordshire | £1,100,000 |
| 3120 | Vale of White Horse | £850,000 |
| 1710 | East Hampshire | £1,450,000 |
| 1715 | Eastleigh | £1,400,000 |
| 1720 | Fareham | £1,200,000 |
| 1725 | Gosport | £1,000,000 |
| 1730 | Hart | £1,500,000 |
| 1735 | Havant | £1,200,000 |
| 2100 | Isle of Wight | £750,000 |
| 1740 | New Forest | £1,000,000 |
| 1775 | Portsmouth | £1,500,000 |
| 1750 | Rushmoor | £1,700,000 |
| 1760 | Test Valley | £1,100,000 |
| East Midlands | ||
| 2820 | Kettering | £775,000 |
| 2230 | South Northamptonshire | £850,000 |
| 2465 | Leicester | £650,000 |
| 1055 | Derby | £545,000 |
| 3060 | Nottingham | £500,000 |
| 2515 | Lincoln | £450,000 |
| 2530 | South Kestevan | £350,000 |
| 2825 | Northampton | £850,000 |
| 3010 | Bassetlaw | £500,000 |
| 2410 | Charnwood | £525,000 |
| 2805 | Corby | £600,000 |
| 2810 | Daventry | £850,000 |
| 2815 | East Northamptonshire | £800,000 |
| 2835 | Wellingborough | £800,000 |
| 1005 | Amber Valley | £330,000 |
| 1010 | Bolsover | £400,000 |
| 1015 | Chesterfield | £400,000 |
| 1025 | Erewash | £265,000 |
| 1030 | High Peak | £425,000 |
| 1035 | North East Derbyshire | £350,000 |
| 1040 | South Derbyshire | £510,000 |
| 1045 | Derbyshire Dales | £375,000 |
| 2405 | Blaby | £525,000 |
| 2415 | Harborough | £575,000 |
| 2420 | Hinckley and Bosworth | £475,000 |
| 2430 | Melton | £450,000 |
| 2435 | North West Leicestershire | £450,000 |
| 2440 | Oadby and Wigston | £575,000 |
| 2505 | Boston | £230,000 |
| 2510 | East Lindsey | £300,000 |
| 2520 | North Kesteven | £400,000 |
| 2525 | South Holland | £325,000 |
| 2535 | West Lindsey | £275,000 |
| 3005 | Ashfield | £380,000 |
| 3015 | Broxtowe | £360,000 |
| 3020 | Gedling | £500,000 |
| 3025 | Mansfield | £350,000 |
| 3030 | Newark and Sherwood | £380,000 |
| 3040 | Rushcliffe | £400,000 |
| 2470 | Rutland | £400,000 |
| East | ||
| 505 | Cambridge | £1,200,000 |
| 1915 | East Hertfordshire | £1,350,000 |
| 1505 | Basildon | £1,500,000 |
| 530 | South Cambridgshire | £1,200,000 |
| 540 | Peterborough | £900,000 |
| 1550 | Rochford | £525,000 |
| 2625 | Norwich | £630,000 |
| 3515 | Ipswich | £800,000 |
| 1920 | Hertsmere | £1,200,000 |
| 1530 | Colchester | £650,000 |
| 510 | East Cambridgeshire | £500,000 |
| 515 | Fenland | £350,000 |
| 520 | Huntingdonshire | £1,100,000 |
| 1510 | Braintree | £625,000 |
| 1515 | Brentwood | £850,000 |
| 1520 | Castle Point | £550,000 |
| 1525 | Chelmsford | £850,000 |
| 1535 | Epping Forest | £1,050,000 |
| 1540 | Harlow | £1,300,000 |
| 1545 | Maldon | £500,000 |
| 1560 | Tendring | £515,000 |
| 1570 | Uttlesford | £800,000 |
| 1590 | Southend-on-Sea | £1,350,000 |
| 1595 | Thurrock | £2,000,000 |
| 2605 | Breckland | £415,000 |
| 2610 | Broadland | £365,000 |
| 2615 | Great Yarmouth | £365,000 |
| 2620 | North Norfolk | £250,000 |
| 2630 | South Norfolk | £415,000 |
| 2635 | Kings Lynn and West Norfolk | £450,000 |
| 3505 | Babergh | £305,000 |
| 3520 | Mid Suffolk | £340,000 |
| 3540 | East Suffolk | £310,000 |
| 3545 | West Suffolk | £475,000 |
| 1905 | Broxbourne | £1,700,000 |
| 1910 | Dacorum | £2,000,000 |
| 1930 | St Albans | £1,500,000 |
| 1935 | Stevenage | £1,600,000 |
| 1940 | Three Rivers | £2,700,000 |
| 1945 | Watford | £2,250,000 |
| 1950 | Welwyn Hatfield | £1,800,000 |
| 235 | Bedford | £900,000 |
| 240 | Central Bedfordshire | £900,000 |
| 230 | Luton | £1,500,000 |
| 1925 | North Hertfordshire | £1,500,000 |
| North East | ||
| 4510 | Newcastle-Upon-Tyne | £260,000 |
| 2935 | Northumberland | £140,000 |
| 4525 | Sunderland | £230,000 |
| 734 | Middlesborough | £200,000 |
| 1355 | Durham | £180,000 |
| 1350 | Darlington | £175,000 |
| 724 | Hartlepool | £180,000 |
| 728 | Redcar and Cleveland | £150,000 |
| 738 | Stockton-on-Tees | £185,000 |
| 4520 | South Tyneside | £215,000 |
| 4505 | Gateshead | £230,000 |
| 4515 | North Tyneside | £200,000 |
| North West | ||
| 4215 | Manchester | £675,000 |
| 4235 | Stockport | £575,000 |
| 2345 | Preston | £600,000 |
| 665 | Cheshire W & Chester | £325,000 |
| 4205 | Bolton | £575,000 |
| 4250 | Wigan | £500,000 |
| 915 | Carlisle | £400,000 |
| 930 | South Lakeland | £500,000 |
| 4310 | Liverpool | £440,000 |
| 655 | Warrington | £800,000 |
| 650 | Halton | £290,000 |
| 660 | Cheshire East | £500,000 |
| 905 | Allerdale | £165,000 |
| 910 | Barrow-in-Furness | £300,000 |
| 920 | Copeland | £150,000 |
| 925 | Eden | £300,000 |
| 2315 | Burnley | £450,000 |
| 2320 | Chorley | £600,000 |
| 2325 | Fylde | £400,000 |
| 2330 | Hyndburn | £475,000 |
| 2335 | Lancaster | £525,000 |
| 2340 | Pendle | £425,000 |
| 2350 | Ribble Valley | £550,000 |
| 2355 | Rossendale | £500,000 |
| 2360 | South Ribble | £600,000 |
| 2365 | West Lancashire | £395,000 |
| 2370 | Wyre | £400,000 |
| 2372 | Blackburn with Darwen | £500,000 |
| 2373 | Blackpool | £400,000 |
| 4210 | Bury | £615,000 |
| 4220 | Oldham | £550,000 |
| 4225 | Rochdale | £525,000 |
| 4230 | Salford | £550,000 |
| 4240 | Tameside | £525,000 |
| 4245 | Trafford | £850,000 |
| 4305 | Knowsley | £440,000 |
| 4315 | St Helens | £310,000 |
| 4320 | Sefton | £370,000 |
| 4325 | Wirral | £325,000 |
| South West | ||
| 1250 | Bournemouth | £1,100,000 |
| 1235 | Weymouth & Portland | £750,000 |
| 1110 | Exeter | £1,000,000 |
| 1115 | North Devon | £440,000 |
| 1160 | Plymouth | £440,000 |
| 840 | Cornwall | £350,000 |
| 3315 | Taunton Deane | £975,000 |
| 114 | Bath & NE Somerset | £1,200,000 |
| 119 | South Gloucestershire | £1,075,000 |
| 3935 | Swindon | £850,000 |
| 116 | Bristol | £1,075,000 |
| 121 | North Somerset | £725,000 |
| 835 | Isles of Scilly | £370,000 |
| 1105 | East Devon | £450,000 |
| 1125 | South Hams | £400,000 |
| 1130 | Teignbridge | £430,000 |
| 1135 | Mid Devon | £450,000 |
| 1145 | Torridge | £300,000 |
| 1150 | West Devon | £400,000 |
| 1165 | Torbay | £400,000 |
| 1210 | Christchurch | £925,000 |
| 1215 | North Dorset | £550,000 |
| 1225 | Purbeck | £750,000 |
| 1230 | West Dorset | £600,000 |
| 1240 | East Dorset | £650,000 |
| 1255 | Poole | £1,050,000 |
| 1605 | Cheltenham | £1,000,000 |
| 1610 | Cotswold | £850,000 |
| 1615 | Forest of Dean | £300,000 |
| 1620 | Gloucester | £1,000,000 |
| 1625 | Stroud | £915,000 |
| 1630 | Tewkesbury | £1,000,000 |
| 3305 | Mendip | £500,000 |
| 3310 | Sedgemoor | £740,000 |
| 3320 | West Somerset | £440,000 |
| 3325 | South Somerset | £860,000 |
| 3940 | Wiltshire | £800,000 |
| West Midlands | ||
| 4605 | Birmingham | £1,150,000 |
| 4610 | Coventry | £850,000 |
| 4620 | Sandwell | £575,000 |
| 4635 | Wolverhampton | £600,000 |
| 3415 | Lichfield | £650,000 |
| 3245 | Shropshire | £500,000 |
| 3455 | Stoke-on-Trent | £500,000 |
| 3725 | Warwick | £800,000 |
| 1835 | Worcester | £705,000 |
| 1845 | Wyre Forest | £700,000 |
| 1805 | Bromsgrove | £720,000 |
| 1825 | Redditch | £800,000 |
| 1840 | Wychavon | £650,000 |
| 1850 | Herefordshire | £550,000 |
| 1860 | Malvern Hills | £625,000 |
| 3240 | Telford & Wrekin | £500,000 |
| 3405 | Cannock Chase | £650,000 |
| 3410 | East Staffordshire | £625,000 |
| 3420 | Newcastle-under-Lyme | £500,000 |
| 3425 | Stafford | £525,000 |
| 3430 | South Staffordshire | £520,000 |
| 3435 | Staffordshire Moorlands | £420,000 |
| 3445 | Tamworth | £550,000 |
| 3705 | North Warwickshire | £720,000 |
| 3710 | Nuneaton and Bedworth | £750,000 |
| 3715 | Rugby | £775,000 |
| 3720 | Stratford-on-Avon | £800,000 |
| 4615 | Dudley | £575,000 |
| 4625 | Solihull | £700,000 |
| 4630 | Walsall | £575,000 |
| Yorkshire and Humber | ||
| 2715 | Harrogate | £625,000 |
| 2741 | City of York | £550,000 |
| 4705 | Bradford | £500,000 |
| 4710 | Calderdale | £490,000 |
| 4720 | Leeds | £825,000 |
| 4410 | Doncaster | £570,000 |
| 2002 | North East Lincolnshire | £345,000 |
| 2001 | East Riding of Yorkshire | £615,000 |
| 4420 | Sheffield | £630,000 |
| 4405 | Barnsley | £500,000 |
| 2705 | Craven | £600,000 |
| 2710 | Hambleton | £400,000 |
| 2720 | Richmondshire | £410,000 |
| 2725 | Ryedale | £325,000 |
| 2730 | Scarborough | £370,000 |
| 2735 | Selby | £450,000 |
| 4415 | Rotherham | £550,000 |
| 4715 | Kirklees | £525,000 |
| 4725 | Wakefield | £550,000 |
| 2002 | North Lincolnshire | £225,000 |
| 2004 | Kingston upon Hull | £470,000 |
| Central London, North | ||
| 5210 | Camden | £23,980,000 |
| 5030 | City of London | £23,980,000 |
| 5990 | City of Westminster | £23,980,000 |
| 5390 | Hammersmith & Fulham | £23,980,000 |
| 5570 | Islington | £23,980,000 |
| 5600 | Kensington & Chelsea | £23,980,000 |
| Central London, South | ||
| 5660 | Lambeth | £14,920,000 |
| 5840 | Southwark | £14,920,000 |
| 5960 | Wandsworth | £14,920,000 |
| Greater London, North West | ||
| 5090 | Barnet | £5,048,000 |
| 5150 | Brent | £5,048,000 |
| 5270 | Ealing | £5,048,000 |
| 5450 | Harrow | £5,048,000 |
| 5510 | Hillingdon | £5,048,000 |
| 5540 | Hounslow | £5,048,000 |
| Greater London, South West | ||
| 5630 | Kingston upon Thames | £6,960,000 |
| 5720 | Merton | £6,960,000 |
| 5810 | Richmond upon Thames | £6,960,000 |
| 5870 | Sutton | £6,960,000 |
| Greater London, North East | ||
| 5060 | Barking and Dagenham | £5,200,000 |
| 5300 | Enfield | £5,200,000 |
| 5360 | Hackney | £5,200,000 |
| 5420 | Haringey | £5,200,000 |
| 5480 | Havering | £5,200,000 |
| 5750 | Newham | £5,200,000 |
| 5780 | Redbridge | £5,200,000 |
| 5900 | Tower Hamlets | £5,200,000 |
| 5930 | Waltham Forest | £5,200,000 |
| Greater London, South East | ||
| 5120 | Bexley | £4,340,000 |
| 5180 | Bromley | £4,340,000 |
| 5240 | Croydon | £4,340,000 |
| 5330 | Greenwich | £4,340,000 |
| 5690 | Lewisham | £4,340,000 |
| South Wales (exc Cardiff) | ||
| 6825 | Carmarthenshire (1) | £210,000 |
| 6828 | Carmarthenshire (2) | £100,000 |
| 6829 | Carmarthenshire (3) | £200,000 |
| 6840 | Monmouthshire | £345,000 |
| 6845 | Pembrokeshire | £150,000 |
| 6855 | Swansea | £300,000 |
| 6910 | Blaenau Gwent | £185,000 |
| 6915 | Bridgend | £310,000 |
| 6920 | Caerphilly | £275,000 |
| 6925 | Merthyr Tydfil | £185,000 |
| 6930 | Neath Port Talbot | £148,000 |
| 6935 | Newport | £450,000 |
| 6940 | Rhondda, Cynon, Taff | £250,000 |
| 6945 | Torfaen | £310,000 |
| 6950 | Vale of Glamorgan | £330,000 |
| 6815 | Cardiff | £610,000 |
| Mid & North Wales | ||
| 6805 | Isle of Anglesey | £180,000 |
| 6810 | Gwynedd | £180,000 |
| 6820 | Ceredigion | £90,000 |
| 6830 | Denbighshire | £175,000 |
| 6835 | Flintshire | £225,000 |
| 6850 | Powys (1) | £160,000 |
| 6853 | Powys (2) | £150,000 |
| 6854 | Powys (3) | £175,000 |
| 6905 | Conwy | £190,000 |
| 6955 | Wrexham | £350,000 |
Appendix G2
Undeveloped Land Value
Amenity land values to be use by region
| Geographic Region | £ per hectare (ha) |
|---|---|
| Central London N | £250,000 |
| Central London S | £250,000 |
| GLNW | £200,000 |
| GLSW | £200,000 |
| GLNE | £200,000 |
| GLSE | £200,000 |
| North East | £50,000 |
| North West | £75,000 |
| Yorkshire & Humberside | £75,000 |
| East Midlands | £75,000 |
| West Midlands | £75,000 |
| East of England | £75,000 |
| South East | £100,000 |
| South West | £75,000 |
| Mid & North Wales | £35,000 |
| South Wales (excl Cardiff) | £35,000 |
| Cardiff | £40,000 |
1. Market appraisal
1.1 In September 2011, the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill received Royal Assent. This Act redefined the accountability of policing to the public, bringing about the dissolution of Police Authorities in England and Wales and introduced a Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) to Police Forces. The role of the PCC is to hold the Chief Constable to account, set the annual precept and create a Police and Crime Plan for the area, whilst being answerable to the Police and Crime Panel for all aspects of local policing. Elections of PCCs took place 15 November 2012 and commenced business on 22 November 2012.
1.2 As with most publicly funded bodies, police forces throughout England and Wales have had to respond to cuts in budgets arising from the austerity measures designed to tackle the deficit. This has impacted on all areas of policing including estates; resulting in closure and rationalisation of police stations, together with several examples of centralisation of services. The move toward centralisation of custody facilities has continued with new custody centres being provided in several areas as forces seek to comply with the guidelines “Safer Detention and Handling of Persons in Police Custody (2012) and mitigate the costs of staffing multiple custody facilities throughout their estate.
2. Changes from the 2010 practice note
2.1 The Market Appraisal section has been re-written and there are changes to the overall valuation scheme, building costs, age and obsolescence scales, external works and undeveloped land.
3. Ratepayer discussions
3.1 For the 2017 Rating List, police stations and premises have been the subject of a Group Pre-Challenge Review (35146196 – Police Stations and Premises and Freestanding Custody Centres). Both the ratepayer’s agents and the VO alike, have sought to eradicate the inconsistencies in the valuation approach adopted for Police hereditaments, which has occurred in previous Lists. The agents involved in these discussions include Avison Young, LSH, Gerald Eve and JLL. This memorandum of agreement (MoA) documents the conclusions drawn from these discussions.
3.2 The costs agreed within this memorandum are based upon divisional headquarters and custody centres and not campus-style Police Headquarters where each case is to be dealt with on its own merits.
4. Valuation scheme
4.1 Purpose built police stations are a sui generis class for rating purposes, albeit due to the centralisation of specialist uses, many police stations are now only used for administrative purposes. It is therefore of vital importance to establish the facts on the ground for each property both at the Antecedent Valuation Date (AVD) and the material day before deciding on the valuation method to adopt.
4.2 Broadly speaking, police stations and premises will either be valued adopting the rentals or Contractor’s approach. The rentals basis will be adopted if there was no functioning custody facility as at the AVD and material day, or other specialist facilities present such as stables, firing ranges etc. The Contractor’s basis will be appropriate for police stations with operational custody, freestanding custody centres and specialist training facilities.
4.3 Rentals Basis
4.3.1 Where it is established as at both the AVD and material day that a police station is only used for administrative purposes, then the rentals method is appropriate. Many police stations are purpose built and will have an element of cell accommodation. However, if the custody suite was not in use/obsolete as at the AVD and there are no other specialist uses, then the rentals method should be adopted. Prevailing office values in the vicinity should be used (unless the property is a retail unit), with appropriate relativities applied to storage, garaging and other ancillary facilities. Where former cell accommodation is used for storage, it should be valued as such.
4.3.2 Valuers should consult with the individual police force to confirm the designated (full-time use), non-designated (emergency/overspill use) and obsolete custody suites as at the AVD and material day. Cells used part time or for over-spill at busy periods are to be treated as operational. Another valuable source of custody use information can be sought from HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS) (formerly known as HM Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC)). HMICFRS produce reports at 4-5 yearly intervals confirming which sites have operational custody within each force area.
4.3.3 If custody is closed between the AVD and material day, further investigation is required to ascertain the reason for closure and determine the hypothetical tenant’s requirements as at the material date. Custody facilities may cease operational use for either economic reasons (i.e. cost saving) or as a consequence of a material change of circumstances in the locality e.g. the provision of replacement facilities elsewhere. The particular circumstances will determine whether it will be appropriate to reflect the lack of demand within the hereditament for custody accommodation and hence adopt the rentals method. If the cessation of custody use is driven by economic reasons only and that decision is not made until after AVD then the hereditament should continue to be valued on the contractor’s method as before with the full appropriate value attributed to the custody accommodation.
4.3.4 Where the rentals method is adopted, it has been accepted that no allowance will be made for sui-generis use. However, where a police station suffers from superfluity or disabilities of layout not associated with offices from which the rental base has been derived, an end allowance may be appropriate if not already reflected in the unit rate.
4.3.5 In adopting rental levels drawn from office premises it should be noted that some police stations are located in prime areas purely by historic accident. In such instances location in peak areas may not be operationally essential. Where it is not, it will be appropriate to adopt rental levels found in other areas within which the police station might alternatively be located without any operational detriment.
4.4 Contractor’s Basis
4.4.1 Police stations with functioning custody or other specialist facilities, stand-alone custody centres and specialist police training facilities should be valued adopting the Contractor’s basis of valuation. For the purposes of this MoA, training facilities will include stand-alone facilities such as firing ranges and riot training buildings but not police training colleges, which should be valued as educational establishments on the College of Education or University basis.
4.4.2 During GPCR discussions the building costs of a number of police stations with custody, stand-alone custody centres and training facilities, built from 2012 onwards. Examples of new facilities provided can be found by Internet enquiry.
4.4.3 In circumstances where the Contractor’s basis of valuation is deemed appropriate, it is to be applied in accordance with VOA Rating Manual - Part 3: The contractor’s basis of valuation using the guidance below in relation to each stage of the valuation process.
4.4.4 The costs shown in this section are for ease of reference. In all cases where a cost guide code is shown it is this that which must be input into the NBS template, not the costs shown here. Where the cost guide code shows options, the costs shown in this practice note should be used to aid selection. Should the cost guide show different costs to those shown in a current version of this practice note, please refer to the Class Co-ordination Team (CCT).
4.5 Stage 1 – Estimated Replacement Cost
4.5.1 Building Costs
4.5.2 With the exception of areas that are not used at the AVD and have no prospect of being used (principally redundant cells), the actual GIA of the station should be used to calculate the Estimated Replacement Cost (Stage 1) of the hereditament in accordance with Appendix A. Guidance in relation to the treatment of superfluity is given in the Rating Manual section relating to police stations at paragraph 8.7.
4.5.3 External Works
4.5.4 The cost of external works is to be added in accordance with Appendix B.
4.5.5 Location factors
4.5.6 Where appropriate costs should be adjusted for location by reference to the Location Factors set down in the 2017 Rating Cost Guide and included at Appendix C.
4.5.7 Contract Size Adjustment
4.5.8 Contract size adjustments should be made in accordance with the guidance given in the 2017 Rating Cost Guide and included at Appendix D.
4.5.9 Professional Fees and Charges
4.5.10 Professional fees and charges are to be added for in accordance with the guidance given in the 2017 Cost Guide and included at Appendix E.
4.6 Stage 2 – Age and Obsolescence
4.6.1 The Estimated Replacement Cost (ERC) established at Stage 1 above is converted to Adjusted Replacement Cost (ARC) by applying an age and obsolescence allowance.
4.6.2 The standard age and obsolescence allowances (non–industrial) to be applied to the ERC of the individual blocks of permanent buildings are set out in Rating Manual: Section 4 Part 3 - the Contractor’s basis of valuation. Adjustments for age and obsolescence should be made in accordance with Appendix F. Separate scales are provided within for 1) Police Stations, 2) Separate and distinct stores i.e. stand-alone garage/workshop(s) areas then the industrial age/obsolescence scale should be applied and 3) Temporary buildings.
4.6.3 The scales contained in Appendix F take into account the following salient points:
a. The age and obsolescence scales set out in the rating manual represent the combined age-related physical depreciation along with functional obsolescence and technological redundancy exhibited by buildings of each age typical for their quality/specification and condition. It is anticipated that the stated allowances will be adopted in the majority of cases and only either moderated or increased in exceptional circumstances.
b. Extensions are to be given an allowance appropriate to their age unless of a lower specification than would be expected of a building of that age in which case the allowance should be increased to a level appropriate to reflect the specification of the building as a whole.
c. In respect of physical depreciation, the above scales are intended to reflect normal wear and tear and/or deterioration due to the age of the building. The scales assume an average degree of cyclical refurbishment work will have been undertaken, to include whole or partial renewal of building sub-components, most particularly relating to mechanical and electrical services and internal fit-out, but also including periodic renewal of roof coverings and windows.
d. It follows from the above that no adjustment away from the scales is required in the majority of cases where older buildings have been subject to modernisation and refurbishment works, as these are explicitly assumed to have occurred. An exception to this would be for a building taken back to shell and reconstructed with significant renewal of structural elements, where an abatement of age-related physical obsolescence may be required.
e. An example of a building requiring an abatement of the allowances provided by the scales (due to the mitigation of physical depreciation) would be where a major renovation has occurred utilising the original building foundations, frame (including upper floors) but with comprehensive replacement of the external envelope (walls, windows), a complete internal refit and wholescale replacement of mechanical and electrical services.
f. Conversely, the above scales will be insufficient to reflect physical obsolescence in cases where buildings are substantially un-modernised and in any case, the scales do not apply in instances where the hereditament is not repairable at reasonable cost and where it falls to be valued rebus sic stantibus.
g. To qualify as a substantially un-modernised building it is expected that the building will predominantly have the following:
- single glazed windows
- original internal layout
- original ceiling height, with no suspended ceilings
- original external walls
- pre 1980 internal finishes (flooring, ceiling and walls, internal doors and fixtures and fittings)
This is not intended to be applicable to prestige buildings that add character and esteem to the hereditament.
h. In respect of functional and technological obsolescence, for buildings that remain in operational use, the scales include adjustments to reflect functional and technological deficiencies observable in buildings typical of their original period of construction but taking account of the level of assumed cyclical refurbishment reflected in the physical depreciation element of the scales.
i. The type of functional and technological obsolescence factors already reflected in the scales include the following:
- poor energy efficiency and/or environmental sustainability
- inappropriate layout inhibiting flexible and efficient space utilization
- modern health and safety, fire or building regulations that preclude or limit the original purposes of the building
- dated design practices that restrict modern usage (such as lack of/or minimal floor and ceiling voids)
- the absence of modern space heating or air conditioning systems within a building
j. It follows that only where buildings display specific functional deficiencies or issues of technological redundancy, that are atypical for their age, the age-related allowances provided by the scales should be increased.
k. One indicator that additional functional obsolescence is present such that the allowance provided by the scales should be adjusted is the presence of new and/or replacement facilities making the existing building surplus. Such replacement or other material redundancy should be considered and may result in the total redundancy of the pre-existing building, i.e. 100% obsolescence.
l. If at the Antecedent Valuation Date, where there are buildings, or parts of buildings, that through an established pattern of use have been unused for a number of years the area of these buildings, or parts of buildings, is to be excluded from the GIA.
m. This adjustment takes into account deficiencies in the actual building from an occupational point of view, which is not reflected in the ERC.
4.6.4 Flat roof allowance
Permanent Category 1 and 2 buildings with a flat roof are to receive an additional line entry allowance. The allowance is not to be applied to temporary buildings, stores, workshops or garages.
a) £80 per m2 ARC of the footprint of the flat roof for buildings constructed up to and including 2004. b) £60 per m2 ARC of the footprint of the flat roof for buildings constructed after 2004.
-
Where a building has varying roof types a reasonable apportionment should be made to arrive at the allowance.
-
What is flat as opposed to a pitched roof will generally be self-evident. Flat roofing allowances will automatically apply here to all types of flat roof. In instances where an allowance is sought for pitched roofing caseworkers should seek advice from the National Valuation Unit before proceeding.
4.7 Stage 3 – Land Value
4.7.1 Land value is to be arrived at by having regard to values prevailing in the locality, in accordance with Rating Manual Vol 4: Section 3 and the 2017 Land Value Practice Note.
- It is anticipated that developed land values will be generally based on industrial values in the locality with the exception of London where residential land values less 20% should be applied. Developed land values for all Billing Authorities on this basis are included at Appendix G1
- Undeveloped land is to be taken at the amenity value in the locality are included at Appendix G2
4.7.2 In this context developed land shall be taken to be the land upon which any building is situated, hard standing, artificial sports pitches and landscaping surrounding the buildings. Undeveloped land will consist of playing fields, open grass land, tree shelter belts etc.
4.8 Stage 4 – De-capitalisation rate
4.8.1 Generally the higher statutory de-capitalisation rate should be applied to the Effective Capital Value (ECV) to arrive at an annual equivalent, however there are some training facilities which may fall within the definition of educational hereditament within the meaning of The Non-Domestic Rating (Miscellaneous Provisions) (No. 2) Regulations 1989 and where they do so the lower rate is to be applied. In cases of doubt advice should be sought from the appropriate technical advisor in NVU. For ease of reference the prescribed decapitalisation rates are included in Table 1 below:
Table 1:
| Country | Rating List Year | Standard or ‘Higher’ rate | Public Sector or ‘Lower’ rate | Public Sector Rate Application |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| England | 2017 | 4.4% | 2.6% | Healthcare, Education and MoD |
| Wales | 2017 | 3.8% | 2.1% | Healthcare, Education, MoD and Public Conveniences |
4.9 Stage 5 – End Adjustments
4.9.1 Any advantage or disadvantage which might affect the value of the occupation of the hereditament as a whole should be reflected at this last stage. An adjustment under this head should not duplicate adjustments made elsewhere. Most hereditaments will not warrant further allowances at this stage and where allowances are appropriate, it is expected that they should not normally exceed 15%.
Appendix A
Stage 1 Building Costs
| ITEM | COST GUIDE REF | COST £/m2 | REMARKS |
|---|---|---|---|
| Police Stations with Custody | 63A00C | £1,850 | Including vehicle docks but excluding garages and workshops |
| Stand-alone Custody Centres | 63A00D | £2,540 | Including vehicle docks, plant rooms and all component parts of the main building |
| Garages/workshops | 63A00E | £760 | |
| Vehicle examination facilities | 63A00J | £1,130 | Up to 500m2 |
| 63A00G | £900 | 500m2 to 2000m2 | |
| Rifle ranges | 63A00H | £1,800 | |
| Temporary Buildings | 98H006 | £684 | |
| Stables | 63A00L | £890 | |
| Kennels | - | - | To be dealt with on their own merits |
Note 1
The Stage 1 Costs for Divisional and regional HQ and Stand-alone Custody Centre hereditaments have been analysed so as to derive a single cost for the entirety of the main building i.e. to include vehicle docks, plant rooms etc all at the single rate. The only elements that should be costed individually are those separate and distinct facilities such as detached garages and vehicle workshops etc.
Stand-alone custody centres are a relatively new development in the police estate, as forces move towards centralised facilities. It will usually be evident which buildings should be valued as stand-alone custody centres, the majority of which were built from 2012 onwards. The majority use will be the custody suite itself, with ancillary offices dedicated to the running of the custody facility.
Note 2
Solar panels and wind turbines should be added for at the appropriate figure as given in the 2017 Rating Cost Guide.
Note 3
Where external sports facilities are present at Regional HQ’s they are to be costed in accordance with the guidance in the 2017 Rating Cost Guide.
Appendix B
Stage 1 – The Addition for External Works
External Works
An addition for external works will be made within the range of 5-20%. The following percentages would typically apply but are not intended to be prescriptive.
Police stations with Custody and Stand-alone Custody Centres
| Description | Addition |
|---|---|
| A site with almost 100% site coverage, will typically apply to central area sites with minimal ext. wks. | 5.0% |
| A site with adequate car parking spaces for police vehicles and some staff/public parking but limited amount of landscaping. | 10% |
| An extensive site with adequate car parking for police vehicles, staff and visitors and extensive landscaping. | 20% |
| Stand-alone Custody Centre - a single rate of 15% will be adopted for all stand-alone custody centres. | 15% |
Notes:
1) External works are inclusive of external CCTV, fencing, security barriers, all hard standing and landscaped areas
2) Where multi-storey car parks are present, they are to be added for separately and an appropriate adjustment made to the external works addition if appropriate.
| Description | Cost Guide Ref | Addition |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-storey car parks | 98H011 | £458 m2 or £10,300 per space |
| Basement car parks | 98H012 | £786/m2 or £17669/space |
| Single deck (steel) car parks | See note# | £6,350 per space |
Note: Substantial multi-storey car parks should have a construction cost as per the above table. An additional cost code has been introduced to cover simple ‘meccano’ style car parks that consist of a single upper storey/deck. Consideration should be given to whether the cost should be applied to both the ground and upper deck. Where the single deck has been constructed over an existing concrete/tarmac car park with minimal alteration to the bottom storey then the cost should only be applied to the upper deck. In such circumstances the lower car park element will form part of the consideration to the external works addition.
Appendix C
Location adjustment
N.B. The Regions referred to are administrative areas and are not significant boundaries.
| NORTH EAST REGION | NORTH WEST REGION | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Durham County | 0.98 | Cheshire | 0.91 | |
| Northumberland | 1.02 | Greater Manchester | 0.91 | |
| Tees Valley | 1.01 | Lancashire | 0.91 | |
| Tyne and Wear | 0.98 | Merseyside | 0.91 | |
| Cumbria | 0.91 | |||
| YORKSHIRE and HUMBERSIDE REGION | SOUTH WESTERN REGION | |||
| East Riding and North Lincolnshire | 0.91 | Cornwall | 1.03 | |
| North Yorkshire | 0.97 | Devon | 1.01 | |
| South Yorkshire | 0.93 | Dorset | 1.03 | |
| West Yorkshire | 0.91 | Gloucestershire | 1.02 | |
| North Somerset | 1.01 | |||
| Somerset | 1.00 | |||
| Wiltshire | 1.02 | |||
| EAST MIDLANDS REGION | WEST MIDLANDS REGION | |||
| Derbyshire | 1.06 | Herefordshire | 0.91 | |
| Leicestershire and Rutland | 1.04 | Shropshire | 0.93 | |
| Lincolnshire | 1.05 | Staffordshire | 0.92 | |
| Northamptonshire | 1.10 | Warwickshire | 0.96 | |
| Nottinghamshire | 1.04 | West Midlands | 0.94 | |
| Worcestershire | 0.96 | |||
| EAST OF ENGLAND REGION | SOUTH EAST REGION (EXCL. LONDON) | |||
| Bedfordshire | 1.03 | Berkshire | 1.12 | |
| Cambridgeshire | 0.99 | Buckinghamshire | 1.11 | |
| Essex | 1.04 | East Sussex | 1.14 | |
| Hertfordshire | 1.07 | Hampshire | 1.09 | |
| Norfolk | 0.96 | Isle of Wight | 1.08 | |
| Suffolk | 0.98 | Kent | 1.13 | |
| Oxfordshire | 1.08 | |||
| Surrey | 1.17 | |||
| West Sussex | 1.12 | |||
| WALES | CENTRAL LONDON SOUTH | |||
| North Wales | Lambeth | 1.17 | ||
| Flintshire | 0.90 | Southwark | 1.17 | |
| Conwy | 0.94 | Wandsworth | 1.19 | |
| Denbighshire | 0.91 | |||
| Gwynedd | 0.98 | GREATER LONDON NORTH EAST | ||
| Isle of Anglesey | 0.96 | Hackney | 1.15 | |
| Wrexham | 0.93 | Haringey | 1.18 | |
| Newham | 1.08 | |||
| Mid Wales | Tower Hamlets | 1.15 | ||
| Carmarthenshire | 0.98 | Barking and Dagenham | 1.06 | |
| Ceredigion | 1.01 | Enfield | 1.08 | |
| Powys | 0.99 | Havering | 0.98 | |
| Pembrokeshire | 0.93 | Redbridge | 1.05 | |
| Waltham Forest | 1.07 | |||
| South Wales | GREATER LONDON NORTH WEST | |||
| Blaenau Gwent | 0.97 | Barnet | 1.09 | |
| Bridgend | 0.95 | Brent | 1.11 | |
| Caerphilly | 0.95 | Ealing | 1.16 | |
| Cardiff | 0.96 | Harrow | 1.06 | |
| Monmouthshire | 1.01 | Hillingdon | 1.07 | |
| Neath Port Talbot | 0.90 | Hounslow | 1.06 | |
| Newport | 0.96 | |||
| Rhondda, Cynon, Taff | 0.94 | GREATER LONDON SOUTH EAST | ||
| Swansea | 0.94 | Bexley | 1.12 | |
| Torfaen | 0.94 | Bromley | 1.09 | |
| Vale of Glamorgan | 0.98 | Croydon | 1.12 | |
| Greenwich | 1.13 | |||
| CENTRAL LONDON NORTH | Lewisham | 1.10 | ||
| Camden | 1.19 | |||
| City of London | 1.11 | GREATER LONDON SOUTH WEST | ||
| Hammersmith and Fulham | 1.18 | Kingston Upon Thames | 1.14 | |
| Islington | 1.16 | Merton | 1.13 | |
| Kensington and Chelsea | 1.23 | Richmond Upon Thames | 1.12 | |
| Westminster | 1.19 | Sutton | 1.10 |
Appendix D
Contract Size Adjustment
The adjustment for contract size should be made having regard to the total ERC (after adjustment for location but before the addition for fees) in accordance with the following scales:
| ERC £ | % Adjustment |
|---|---|
| Up to 0.25 million | + 10% max |
| 0.5 million | + 8% |
| 0.75 million | +6% |
| 1.0 million | +4% |
| 1.5 million | +2% |
| 2.0 million | +1% |
| 3.0 million | ZERO |
| 4.0 million | -1% |
| 5.0 million | -2% |
| 7.0 million | -3% |
| 10.0 million | -4% |
| 15.0 million | -5% |
| 18.0 million | -6% |
| 20.0 million | -7% |
| 25.0 million | -8% |
| 35.0 million | -9% |
| Over 40.0 million | - 10.0% MAX |
NB. Intermediate figures may be interpolated.
Appendix E
The addition for fees
Fees should be added at the percentages shown in the VOA published Cost Guide at Section 7. For convenience these are shown below inclusive of the 2% complexity addition. Note that minimum fees may apply to counter inversion.
| Size of Contract | % Adjustment | Minimum fee |
|---|---|---|
| Sums up to £750,000 | 14% | |
| £750,000 to £1,499,000 | 13% | £105,000 |
| £1,500,000 to £3,999,999 | 11.5% | £195,000 |
| £4,000,000 to £7,499,999 | 10.5% | £460,000 |
| £7,500,000 to £14,999,999 | 9.5% | £787,500 |
| Over £15,000,000 | 9% | £1,425,000 |
Appendix F
Age and obsolescence scales
Table 1: Civic Buildings Obsolescence Allowances - Police Stations
| Year of Building Completion | % Age and Obsolescence Allowance | Year of Building Completion | % Age and Obsolescence Allowance |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 0.00% | 1985 | 40.00% |
| 2016 | 0.75% | 1984 | 40.75% |
| 2015 | 1.50% | 1983 | 44.00% |
| 2014 | 2.50% | 1982 | 47.25% |
| 2013 | 3.50% | 1981 | 50.50% |
| 2012 | 4.75% | 1980 | 53.75% |
| 2011 | 6.00% | 1979 | 54.50% |
| 2010 | 7.25% | 1978 | 55.00% |
| 2009 | 8.50% | 1977 | 55.50% |
| 2008 | 10.00% | 1976 | 56.00% |
| 2007 | 11.25% | 1975 | 56.50% |
| 2006 | 12.75% | 1974 | 56.75% |
| 2005 | 14.25% | 1973 | 57.25% |
| 2004 | 15.75% | 1972 | 57.50% |
| 2003 | 17.25% | 1971 | 58.00% |
| 2002 | 18.75% | 1970 | 58.25% |
| 2001 | 20.25% | 1969 | 58.50% |
| 2000 | 21.75% | 1968 | 58.50% |
| 1999 | 23.25% | 1967 | 58.75% |
| 1998 | 24.50% | 1966 | 59.00% |
| 1997 | 26.00% | 1965 | 59.00% |
| 1996 | 27.50% | 1964 | 59.25% |
| 1995 | 28.75% | 1963 | 59.25% |
| 1994 | 30.00% | 1962 | 60.00% |
| 1993 | 31.25% | 1961 | 60.00% |
| 1992 | 32.50% | 1960 | 60.00% |
| 1991 | 33.75% | 1959 | 57.50% |
| 1990 | 35.00% | 1958 | 55.00% |
| 1989 | 36.00% | 1957 | 55.00% |
| 1988 | 37.00% | 1956 | 55.00% |
| 1987 | 38.00% | 1955 and earlier | 55.00% |
| 1986 | 39.00% |
Table 2 – Industrial Buildings Obsolescence Table - Separate and distinct stores
| Year of Building Completion | % Age and Obsolescence Allowance | Year of Building Completion | % Age and Obsolescence Allowance |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 0.00% | 1985 | 27% |
| 2016 | 0.50% | 1984 | 28% |
| 2015 | 1.00% | 1983 | 29% |
| 2014 | 1.50% | 1982 | 30% |
| 2013 | 2.00% | 1981 | 31% |
| 2012 | 2.50% | 1980 | 32% |
| 2011 | 3.00% | 1979 | 33% |
| 2010 | 3.50% | 1978 | 34% |
| 2009 | 4.00% | 1977 | 35% |
| 2008 | 4.50% | 1976 | 36% |
| 2007 | 5% | 1975 | 37% |
| 2006 | 6% | 1974 | 38% |
| 2005 | 7% | 1973 | 39% |
| 2004 | 8% | 1972 | 40% |
| 2003 | 9% | 1971 | 41% |
| 2002 | 10% | 1970 | 42% |
| 2001 | 11% | 1969 | 43% |
| 2000 | 12% | 1968 | 44% |
| 1999 | 13% | 1967 | 45% |
| 1998 | 14% | 1966 | 46% |
| 1997 | 15% | 1965 | 47% |
| 1996 | 16% | 1964 | 48% |
| 1995 | 17% | 1963 | 49% |
| 1994 | 18% | 1962 | 50% |
| 1993 | 19% | 1961 | 50% |
| 1992 | 20% | 1960 | 50% |
| 1991 | 21% | 1959 | 50% |
| 1990 | 22% | 1958 | 50% |
| 1989 | 23% | 1957 | 50% |
| 1988 | 24% | 1956 | 50% |
| 1987 | 25% | 1955 and earlier | 50% |
| 1986 | 26% |
Notes Applicable to Table 2
-
As noted above, the scale of allowances commonly referred to as “the Monsanto scale” (derived from the approach determined in Monsanto v Farris (VO) 1998 RA 217) continue to be applicable to Industrial buildings.
-
The scales refer to the actual age of the specific item. A notional age can be adopted where the item has undergone significant improvement or refurbishment.
-
The scales do not provide for physical obsolescence alone. They also reflect the expected degree of functional and technical obsolescence for an asset of that age.
-
Any extraordinary functional or technical obsolescence may result in an additional allowance being considered. Examples include superfluity for modern purposes or where new technology evidences that the actual asset is relatively inefficient. Where an additional allowance is made the reasons for it must be stated in the valuation notes.
-
An element of risk of failure and the requirement of the tenant to replace the item at the end of its useful life is incorporated in the allowances.
-
It should not be automatically assumed that because a property is old it merits an allowance. Age in itself is not a disability but rather what often flows from age.
-
The scales are intended to provide a degree of uniformity of allowance. They should be regarded as the maximum allowances to be given.
-
The scales should only be used as guidance in accordance with the principles outlined in the Rating Manual.
-
Allowances in excess of 50% for buildings or P and M should only be adopted in exceptional circumstances. It is unlikely that many very old buildings exist which have not undergone some form of modernisation or refurbishment. Where a building or piece of plant has obviously not undergone refurbishment or modernisation at some stage it is permissible to give allowances up to a maximum of 65% as indicated in the scales (below).
-
Allowances may be up to 50% higher from those shown in the scales for structures which are of a temporary nature and have continued in use well beyond their intended life span.
-
It should not be assumed automatically that because an item of plant or machinery is old it merits an allowance. If an asset is well maintained the amount of use may well not affect the item or its value. However, with age the risk of breakdown is likely to increase and functional and technological obsolescence factors are likely to become prevalent. These factors must be borne in mind when selecting an appropriate obsolescence allowance.
-
The scales of allowances therefore take into account the average use of items over a period of time, bearing in mind the physical, functional and technical obsolescence that may occur during the stated period.
-
Where judgement through actual knowledge of the item is inconsistent with the allowance scales the item should be valued accordingly recording the reasons for the divergence from the scale.
-
In any instance of variation from the scales in accordance with these instructions, the reasoning for this must be recorded in the valuation.
Table 3 - Temporary Buildings Obsolescence Table (Category 3 buildings)
| Year of Building Completion | % Age and Obsolescence Allowance | Year of Building Completion | % Age and Obsolescence Allowance | Year of Building Completion | % Age and Obsolescence Allowance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 1.5 | 2002 | 22.5 | 1988 | 43.5 |
| 2015 | 3.0 | 2001 | 24.0 | 1987 | 45.0 |
| 2014 | 4.5 | 2000 | 25.5 | 1986 | 46.5 |
| 2013 | 6.0 | 1999 | 27.0 | 1985 | 48.0 |
| 2012 | 7.5 | 1998 | 28.5 | 1984 | 49.5 |
| 2011 | 9.0 | 1997 | 30.0 | 1983 | 51.0 |
| 2010 | 10.5 | 1996 | 31.5 | 1982 | 52.5 |
| 2009 | 12.0 | 1995 | 33.0 | 1981 | 54.0 |
| 2008 | 13.5 | 1994 | 34.5 | 1980 | 55.5 |
| 2007 | 15.0 | 1993 | 36.0 | 1979 | 57.0 |
| 2006 | 16.5 | 1992 | 37.5 | 1978 | 58.5 |
| 2005 | 18.0 | 1991 | 39.0 | 1977 | 60.0 |
| 2004 | 19.5 | 1990 | 40.5 | Pre 1977 | By agreement |
| 2003 | 21.0 | 1989 | 42.0 |
Appendix G1
Developed Land Values
| BA Code | Geographic Regions and Billing Authorities | Developed Land Values |
|---|---|---|
| South East | ||
| 3110 | Oxford | £1,730,000 |
| 435 | Milton Keynes | £1,000,000 |
| 405 | Aylesbury Vale | £865,000 |
| 3105 | Cherwell | £1,235,500 |
| 3125 | West Oxfordshire | £990,000 |
| 1705 | Basingstoke and Deane | £1,500,000 |
| 1765 | Winchester | £1,250,000 |
| 1780 | Southampton | £1,250,000 |
| 3805 | Adur | £1,450,000 |
| 2235 | Maidstone | £1,350,000 |
| 335 | Bracknell Forest | £1,600,000 |
| 340 | West Berkshire | £1,200,000 |
| 345 | Reading | £2,000,000 |
| 350 | Slough | £1,750,000 |
| 355 | Windsor and Maidenhead | £1,700,000 |
| 360 | Wokingham | £1,500,000 |
| 1410 | Eastbourne | £1,000,000 |
| 1415 | Hastings | £750,000 |
| 1425 | Lewes | £1,000,000 |
| 1430 | Rother | £1,000,000 |
| 1435 | Wealden | £1,200,000 |
| 1445 | Brighton and Hove | £1,500,000 |
| 2205 | Ashford | £1,000,000 |
| 2210 | Canterbury | £1,000,000 |
| 2215 | Dartford | £1,500,000 |
| 2220 | Dover | £500,000 |
| 2230 | Gravesham | £1,350,000 |
| 2245 | Sevenoaks | £1,400,000 |
| 2250 | Shepway | £850,000 |
| 2255 | Swale | £1,100,000 |
| 2260 | Thanet | £650,000 |
| 2265 | Tonbridge and Malling | £1,350,000 |
| 2270 | Tunbridge Wells | £1,200,000 |
| 2280 | Medway | £1,250,000 |
| 3605 | Elmbridge | £2,000,000 |
| 3610 | Epsom and Ewell | £1,750,000 |
| 3615 | Guildford | £1,700,000 |
| 3620 | Mole Valley | £1,650,000 |
| 3625 | Reigate and Banstead | £1,600,000 |
| 3630 | Runnymede | £1,900,000 |
| 3635 | Spelthorne | £2,000,000 |
| 3640 | Surrey Heath | £1,600,000 |
| 3645 | Tandridge | £1,500,000 |
| 3650 | Waverley | £1,400,000 |
| 3655 | Woking | £1,600,000 |
| 3810 | Arun | £1,450,000 |
| 3815 | Chichester | £1,300,000 |
| 3820 | Crawley | £2,000,000 |
| 3825 | Horsham | £1,450,000 |
| 3830 | Mid Sussex | £1,450,000 |
| 3835 | Worthing | £1,450,000 |
| 410 | South Buckinghamshire | £2,000,000 |
| 415 | Chiltern | £925,000 |
| 425 | Wycombe | £1,235,500 |
| 3115 | South Oxfordshire | £990,000 |
| 3120 | Vale of White Horse | £445,000 |
| 1710 | East Hampshire | £1,250,000 |
| 1715 | Eastleigh | £1,100,000 |
| 1720 | Fareham | £950,000 |
| 1725 | Gosport | £800,000 |
| 1730 | Hart | £1,200,000 |
| 1735 | Havant | £1,000,000 |
| 2100 | Isle of Wight | £500,000 |
| 1740 | New Forest | £750,000 |
| 1775 | Portsmouth | £1,250,000 |
| 1750 | Rushmoor | £1,500,000 |
| 1760 | Test Valley | £800,000 |
| East Midlands | ||
| 2820 | Kettering | £725,000 |
| 2230 | South Northamptonshire | £800,000 |
| 2465 | Leicester | £595,000 |
| 1055 | Derby | £545,000 |
| 3060 | Nottingham | £480,000 |
| 2515 | Lincoln | £320,000 |
| 2530 | South Kestevan | £320,000 |
| 2825 | Northampton | £800,000 |
| 3010 | Bassetlaw | £480,000 |
| 2410 | Charnwood | £500,000 |
| 2805 | Corby | £550,000 |
| 2810 | Daventry | £800,000 |
| 2815 | East Northamptonshire | £750,000 |
| 2835 | Wellingborough | £750,000 |
| 1005 | Amber Valley | £300,000 |
| 1010 | Bolsover | £350,000 |
| 1015 | Chesterfield | £350,000 |
| 1025 | Erewash | £250,000 |
| 1030 | High Peak | £425,000 |
| 1035 | North East Derbyshire | £300,000 |
| 1040 | South Derbyshire | £500,000 |
| 1045 | Derbyshire Dales | £375,000 |
| 2405 | Blaby | £500,000 |
| 2415 | Harborough | £550,000 |
| 2420 | Hinckley and Bosworth | £450,000 |
| 2430 | Melton | £450,000 |
| 2435 | North West Leicestershire | £400,000 |
| 2440 | Oadby and Wigston | £550,000 |
| 2505 | Boston | £225,000 |
| 2510 | East Lindsey | £300,000 |
| 2520 | North Kesteven | £320,000 |
| 2525 | South Holland | £325,000 |
| 2535 | West Lindsey | £275,000 |
| 3005 | Ashfield | £360,000 |
| 3015 | Broxtowe | £340,000 |
| 3020 | Gedling | £480,000 |
| 3025 | Mansfield | £325,000 |
| 3030 | Newark and Sherwood | £360,000 |
| 3040 | Rushcliffe | £370,000 |
| 2470 | Rutland | £400,000 |
| East | ||
| 505 | Cambridge | £875,000 |
| 1915 | East Hertfordshire | £1,200,000 |
| 1505 | Basildon | £1,250,000 |
| 530 | South Cambridgshire | £875,000 |
| 540 | Peterborough | £750,000 |
| 1550 | Rochford | £500,000 |
| 2625 | Norwich | £525,000 |
| 3515 | Ipswich | £605,000 |
| 1920 | Hertsmere | £1,200,000 |
| 1530 | Colchester | £650,000 |
| 510 | East Cambridgeshire | £450,000 |
| 515 | Fenland | £300,000 |
| 520 | Huntingdonshire | £750,000 |
| 1510 | Braintree | £550,000 |
| 1515 | Brentwood | £800,000 |
| 1520 | Castle Point | £500,000 |
| 1525 | Chelmsford | £750,000 |
| 1535 | Epping Forest | £800,000 |
| 1540 | Harlow | £900,000 |
| 1545 | Maldon | £500,000 |
| 1560 | Tendring | £500,000 |
| 1570 | Uttlesford | £750,000 |
| 1590 | Southend-on-Sea | £1,250,000 |
| 1595 | Thurrock | £1,750,000 |
| 2605 | Breckland | £325,000 |
| 2610 | Broadland | £300,000 |
| 2615 | Great Yarmouth | £300,000 |
| 2620 | North Norfolk | £225,000 |
| 2630 | South Norfolk | £325,000 |
| 2635 | Kings Lynn and West Norfolk | £450,000 |
| 3505 | Babergh | £265,000 |
| 3510 | Forest Heath | £495,000 |
| 3520 | Mid Suffolk | £295,000 |
| 3525 | St Edmundsbury | £295,000 |
| 3530 | Suffolk Coastal | £245,000 |
| 3535 | Waveney | £295,000 |
| 1905 | Broxbourne | £1,700,000 |
| 1910 | Dacorum | £1,800,000 |
| 1930 | St Albans | £1,300,000 |
| 1935 | Stevenage | £1,300,000 |
| 1940 | Three Rivers | £1,800,000 |
| 1945 | Watford | £1,500,000 |
| 1950 | Welwyn Hatfield | £1,500,000 |
| 235 | Bedford | £800,000 |
| 240 | Central Bedfordshire | £800,000 |
| 230 | Luton | £1,300,000 |
| 1925 | North Hertfordshire | £1,300,000 |
| North East | ||
| 4510 | Newcastle-Upon-Tyne | £235,000 |
| 2935 | Northumberland | £135,000 |
| 4525 | Sunderland | £200,000 |
| 734 | Middlesborough | £195,000 |
| 1355 | Durham | £180,000 |
| 1350 | Darlington | £175,000 |
| 724 | Hartlepool | £180,000 |
| 728 | Redcar and Cleveland | £150,000 |
| 738 | Stockton-on-Tees | £150,000 |
| 4520 | South Tyneside | £200,000 |
| 4505 | Gateshead | £205,000 |
| 4515 | North Tyneside | £195,000 |
| North West | ||
| 4215 | Manchester | £650,000 |
| 4235 | Stockport | £525,000 |
| 2345 | Preston | £600,000 |
| 665 | Cheshire W and Chester | £225,000 |
| 4205 | Bolton | £550,000 |
| 4250 | Wigan | £450,000 |
| 915 | Carlisle | £370,000 |
| 930 | South Lakeland | £500,000 |
| 4310 | Liverpool | £440,000 |
| 655 | Warrington | £740,000 |
| 650 | Halton | £290,000 |
| 660 | Cheshire East | £220,000 |
| 905 | Allerdale | £150,000 |
| 910 | Barrow-in-Furness | £225,000 |
| 920 | Copeland | £150,000 |
| 925 | Eden | £250,000 |
| 2315 | Burnley | £450,000 |
| 2320 | Chorley | £600,000 |
| 2325 | Fylde | £400,000 |
| 2330 | Hyndburn | £475,000 |
| 2335 | Lancaster | £525,000 |
| 2340 | Pendle | £400,000 |
| 2350 | Ribble Valley | £550,000 |
| 2355 | Rossendale | £475,000 |
| 2360 | South Ribble | £600,000 |
| 2365 | West Lancashire | £310,000 |
| 2370 | Wyre | £400,000 |
| 2372 | Blackburn with Darwen | £500,000 |
| 2373 | Blackpool | £400,000 |
| 4210 | Bury | £575,000 |
| 4220 | Oldham | £500,000 |
| 4225 | Rochdale | £500,000 |
| 4230 | Salford | £500,000 |
| 4240 | Tameside | £475,000 |
| 4245 | Trafford | £800,000 |
| 4305 | Knowsley | £440,000 |
| 4315 | St Helens | £310,000 |
| 4320 | Sefton | £370,000 |
| 4325 | Wirral | £200,000 |
| South West | ||
| 1250 | Bournemouth | £950,000 |
| 1235 | Weymouth and Portland | £750,000 |
| 1110 | Exeter | £800,000 |
| 1115 | North Devon | £275,000 |
| 1160 | Plymouth | £375,000 |
| 840 | Cornwall | £350,000 |
| 3315 | Taunton Deane | £925,000 |
| 114 | Bath and NE Somerset | £1,100,000 |
| 119 | South Gloucestershire | £1,000,000 |
| 3935 | Swindon | £850,000 |
| 116 | Bristol | £1,000,000 |
| 121 | North Somerset | £680,000 |
| 835 | Isles of Scilly | £350,000 |
| 1105 | East Devon | £400,000 |
| 1125 | South Hams | £300,000 |
| 1130 | Teignbridge | £350,000 |
| 1135 | Mid Devon | £300,000 |
| 1145 | Torridge | £375,000 |
| 1150 | West Devon | £300,000 |
| 1165 | Torbay | £400,000 |
| 1210 | Christchurch | £800,000 |
| 1215 | North Dorset | £600,000 |
| 1225 | Purbeck | £700,000 |
| 1230 | West Dorset | £600,000 |
| 1240 | East Dorset | £600,000 |
| 1255 | Poole | £950,000 |
| 1605 | Cheltenham | £1,000,000 |
| 1610 | Cotswold | £850,000 |
| 1615 | Forest of Dean | £250,000 |
| 1620 | Gloucester | £900,000 |
| 1625 | Stroud | £850,000 |
| 1630 | Tewkesbury | £900,000 |
| 3305 | Mendip | £430,000 |
| 3310 | Sedgemoor | £740,000 |
| 3320 | West Somerset | £310,000 |
| 3325 | South Somerset | £860,000 |
| 3940 | Wiltshire | £740,000 |
| West Midlands | ||
| 4605 | Birmingham | £950,000 |
| 4610 | Coventry | £800,000 |
| 4620 | Sandwell | £495,000 |
| 4635 | Wolverhampton | £495,000 |
| 3415 | Lichfield | £600,000 |
| 3245 | Shropshire | £500,000 |
| 3455 | Stoke-on-Trent | £475,000 |
| 3725 | Warwick | £750,000 |
| 1835 | Worcester | £650,000 |
| 1845 | Wyre Forest | £650,000 |
| 1805 | Bromsgrove | £700,000 |
| 1825 | Redditch | £700,000 |
| 1840 | Wychavon | £620,000 |
| 1850 | Herefordshire | £475,000 |
| 1860 | Malvern Hills | £580,000 |
| 3240 | Telford and Wrekin | £500,000 |
| 3405 | Cannock Chase | £600,000 |
| 3410 | East Staffordshire | £600,000 |
| 3420 | Newcastle-under-Lyme | £475,000 |
| 3425 | Stafford | £475,000 |
| 3430 | South Staffordshire | £500,000 |
| 3435 | Staffordshire Moorlands | £400,000 |
| 3445 | Tamworth | £500,000 |
| 3705 | North Warwickshire | £700,000 |
| 3710 | Nuneaton and Bedworth | £700,000 |
| 3715 | Rugby | £750,000 |
| 3720 | Stratford-on-Avon | £700,000 |
| 4615 | Dudley | £515,000 |
| 4625 | Solihull | £550,000 |
| 4630 | Walsall | £515,000 |
| Yorkshire and Humber | ||
| 2715 | Harrogate | £375,000 |
| 2741 | City of York | £375,000 |
| 4705 | Bradford | £500,000 |
| 4710 | Calderdale | £475,000 |
| 4720 | Leeds | £650,000 |
| 4410 | Doncaster | £550,000 |
| 2002 | North East Lincolnshire | £320,000 |
| 2001 | East Riding of Yorkshire | £615,000 |
| 4420 | Sheffield | £600,000 |
| 4405 | Barnsley | £500,000 |
| 2705 | Craven | £300,000 |
| 2710 | Hambleton | £350,000 |
| 2720 | Richmondshire | £300,000 |
| 2725 | Ryedale | £300,000 |
| 2730 | Scarborough | £325,000 |
| 2735 | Selby | £425,000 |
| 4415 | Rotherham | £550,000 |
| 4715 | Kirklees | £475,000 |
| 4725 | Wakefield | £550,000 |
| 2002 | North Lincolnshire | £225,000 |
| 2004 | Kingston upon Hull | £440,000 |
| Central London, North | ||
| 5210 | Camden | £36,000,000 |
| 5030 | City of London | £36,000,000 |
| 5990 | City of Westminster | £36,000,000 |
| 5390 | Hammersmith and Fulham | £36,000,000 |
| 5570 | Islington | £36,000,000 |
| 5600 | Kensington and Chelsea | £36,000,000 |
| Central London, South | ||
| 5660 | Lambeth | £13,600,000 |
| 5840 | Southwark | £13,600,000 |
| 5960 | Wandsworth | £13,600,000 |
| Greater London, North West | ||
| 5090 | Barnet | £2,960,000 |
| 5150 | Brent | £2,960,000 |
| 5270 | Ealing | £2,960,000 |
| 5450 | Harrow | £2,960,000 |
| 5510 | Hillingdon | £2,960,000 |
| 5540 | Hounslow | £2,960,000 |
| Greater London, South West | ||
| 5630 | Kingston upon Thames | £10,400,000 |
| 5720 | Merton | £10,400,000 |
| 5810 | Richmond upon Thames | £10,400,000 |
| 5870 | Sutton | £10,400,000 |
| Greater London, North East | ||
| 5060 | Barking and Dagenham | £4,400,000 |
| 5300 | Enfield | £4,400,000 |
| 5360 | Hackney | £4,400,000 |
| 5420 | Haringey | £4,400,000 |
| 5480 | Havering | £4,400,000 |
| 5750 | Newham | £4,400,000 |
| 5780 | Redbridge | £4,400,000 |
| 5900 | Tower Hamlets | £4,400,000 |
| 5930 | Waltham Forest | £4,400,000 |
| Greater London, South East | ||
| 5120 | Bexley | £5,600,000 |
| 5180 | Bromley | £5,600,000 |
| 5240 | Croydon | £5,600,000 |
| 5330 | Greenwich | £5,600,000 |
| 5690 | Lewisham | £5,600,000 |
| South Wales (exc Cardiff) | ||
| 6825 | Carmarthenshire (1) | £209,950 |
| 6828 | Carmarthenshire (2) | £98,800 |
| 6829 | Carmarthenshire (3) | £185,250 |
| 6840 | Monmouthshire | £345,800 |
| 6845 | Pembrokeshire | £148,200 |
| 6855 | Swansea | £308,750 |
| 6910 | Blaenau Gwent | £185,000 |
| 6915 | Bridgend | £308,750 |
| 6920 | Caerphilly | £250,000 |
| 6925 | Merthyr Tydfil | £185,000 |
| 6930 | Neath Port Talbot | £148,200 |
| 6935 | Newport | £370,500 |
| 6940 | Rhondda, Cynon, Taff | £250,000 |
| 6945 | Torfaen | £308,750 |
| 6950 | Vale of Glamorgan | £370,500 |
| 6815 | Cardiff | £494,000 |
| Mid and North Wales | ||
| 6805 | Isle of Anglesey | £160,000 |
| 6810 | Gwynedd | £160,000 |
| 6820 | Ceredigion | £90,000 |
| 6830 | Denbighshire | £135,000 |
| 6835 | Flintshire | £180,000 |
| 6850 | Powys (1) | £160,000 |
| 6853 | Powys (2) | £150,000 |
| 6854 | Powys (3) | £175,000 |
| 6905 | Conwy | £150,000 |
| 6955 | Wrexham | £370,000 |
Appendix G2
Undeveloped Land Value
Amenity land values to be use by region
| Geographic Region | £ per hectare (ha) |
|---|---|
| Central London N | £250,000 |
| Central London S | £250,000 |
| GLNW | £250,000 |
| GLSW | £250,000 |
| GLNE | £250,000 |
| GLSE | £250,000 |
| North East | £50,000 |
| North West | £75,000 |
| Yorkshire and Humberside | £75,000 |
| East Midlands | £75,000 |
| West Midlands | £75,000 |
| East of England | £75,000 |
| South East | £100,000 |
| South West | £75,000 |
| Mid and North Wales | £30,000 |
| South Wales (excl Cardiff) | £35,000 |
| Cardiff | £40,000 |
The definitions of the areas referred to above can be found in the 2017 Land Value Practice Note.