Issue - items at meetings - Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

Report of the  Strategic  Director, Place (copy attached)

That the committee notes the findings of the CIL Viability Assessment and agrees to undertake consultation on the indicative rates of CIL attached to this report and to receive a report on this consultation at a later stage with a draft CIL charging schedule for the City.

76.1         The Committee considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place in relation to the Government’s decision that a new tariff-based approach known as the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) would provide an appropriate to fund infrastructure to unlock land for development and support growth. CIL was intended to assist in providing infrastructure to support the broad development of an area rather than to make individual planning applications acceptable in planning terms, which would remain the role of planning obligations (Section 106 agreements). Planning obligations would remain for detailed site impacts and mitigation where not covered by CIL.

76.2    It was noted that the report also described the outcome of a CIL Viability assessment and proposed further steps towards developing a CIL charging schedule for the City.

76.3    Councillor Brown stated that whilst generally supporting the approach being taken she considered that the indicative values set out were too high. The Head of Planning and Public Protection explained that these figures had emerged as a result of the viability assessment carried out, the Council was not however, wedded to them. Councillor Bowden, the Chair sought confirmation that this would be monitored in the light of operating experience.

76.4    Councillor Morgan sought clarification regarding when it was anticipated the CIL would be introduced and how long it would need to be in operation before it could be amended if necessary.

76.5    Councillor C Theobald stated that her only concern was that if the CIL rates were set too high it could lead to attempts at overdevelopment or could discourage development altogether.

76.6    The Head of Planning and Public Protection stated that there was flexibility in setting up the CIL, however once in place it would need to be rigidly applied. It had been set up at around 10 other authorities around the country and was intended to provide developers with a degree of certainty in the current economic climate.

76.7    Councillor Janio stated that he was uncertain as to how the CIL would work in practice. Whilst recognising the need to keep the zones as simple as possible the demography and geography of the city was complex and needed to be taken account of.

76.8    Councillor Mac Cafferty stated that the approach proposed for the city was more cautious than that being adopted by some of its neighbours for example in Burgess Hill where there was more space to “grow”, different zones were proposed to reflect the different requirements of different parts of the city.

76.9    RESOLVED - That the committee notes the findings of the CIL Viability Assessment and agrees to undertake consultation on the indicative rates of CIL attached to this report and to receive a report on this consultation at a later stage with a draft CIL charging schedule for the City.