Agenda item

17.1

The Executive Director, Place submitted a report containing proposals relating to the introduction of a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) as a new way of securing contributions from developers towards infrastructure provision through the planning system. The first stage in introducing such a levy was to establish a Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule setting out the proposed rates that will be charged on new development, and this will be subject to a period of public consultation. 

17.2

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:-

(a)

agrees to publish a Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule for public consultation;

(b)

agrees that the Council proposes a multiple rate CIL, to include a ‘buffer’, to deal with uncertainties in assessing future viability equating to 50% of the calculated ‘margin’ that could make a CIL contribution, in line with the proposed rates set out in the Table in paragraph 7.2 of the report;

(c)

includes an option in the Charging Schedule to allow for relief to be offered in exceptional circumstances; and

(d)

offers payment of CIL in instalments as a matter of course, as assumed in the viability study.

17.3

Reasons for Decision

17.3.1

The CIL will help to deliver the City’s strategic priorities for infrastructure provision, will be generated by economic growth and reinvested into economic growth and infrastructure.  Successful implementation and investment of CIL funds will make the city more competitive.

17.3.2

The first stage in adopting a CIL is to produce a Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule setting out the proposed rates that will be charged on new development, and this will be subject to a period of public consultation. 

17.3.3

The recommended CIL rates are based on the ability of development to pay.  A Viability Study has provided evidence that some development in the city can afford to pay a CIL charge to help meet identified needs for infrastructure. The CIL rates proposed represent a cautious approach to viability through the assumptions used and the inclusion of a 50% margin below the potential maximum affordable charge.

17.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

17.4.1

One option is not to implement a CIL, as it is not compulsory.  Wolverhampton and Doncaster have decided not to implement a CIL at present.  But most councils are working on a CIL because funding for essential infrastructure is not otherwise available (60 authorities have already published a Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule.

17.4.2

If implemented, the Council has the option to set either a single or multiple rate CIL.  A single rate would be where all development in all areas pays the same amount per square metre.  This would have the advantage of simplicity.  However, as the rate has to be based on viability, multiple rates may be appropriate to reflect variations in the viability of different types of development and different locations.  The Viability Study has recommended multiple rates due to significant variations in viability across different uses and areas.  A multiple rate is likely to raise more total CIL revenue and better reflects the actual viability of individual developments

17.5

Any Interest Declared or Dispensation Granted

None

17.6

Reason for Exemption if Public/Press Excluded During Consideration

None

17.7

Respective Director Responsible for Implementation

Simon Green, Executive Director, Place.

17.8

Relevant Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee If Decision Called In

Economic and Environmental Well-being.

17.1

The Executive Director, Place submitted a report containing proposals relating to the introduction of a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) as a new way of securing contributions from developers towards infrastructure provision through the planning system. The first stage in introducing such a levy was to establish a Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule setting out the proposed rates that will be charged on new development, and this will be subject to a period of public consultation. 

17.2

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:-

(a)

agrees to publish a Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule for public consultation;

(b)

agrees that the Council proposes a multiple rate CIL, to include a ‘buffer’, to deal with uncertainties in assessing future viability equating to 50% of the calculated ‘margin’ that could make a CIL contribution, in line with the proposed rates set out in the Table in paragraph 7.2 of the report;

(c)

includes an option in the Charging Schedule to allow for relief to be offered in exceptional circumstances; and

(d)

offers payment of CIL in instalments as a matter of course, as assumed in the viability study.

17.3

Reasons for Decision

17.3.1

The CIL will help to deliver the City’s strategic priorities for infrastructure provision, will be generated by economic growth and reinvested into economic growth and infrastructure.  Successful implementation and investment of CIL funds will make the city more competitive.

17.3.2

The first stage in adopting a CIL is to produce a Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule setting out the proposed rates that will be charged on new development, and this will be subject to a period of public consultation. 

17.3.3

The recommended CIL rates are based on the ability of development to pay.  A Viability Study has provided evidence that some development in the city can afford to pay a CIL charge to help meet identified needs for infrastructure. The CIL rates proposed represent a cautious approach to viability through the assumptions used and the inclusion of a 50% margin below the potential maximum affordable charge.

17.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

17.4.1

One option is not to implement a CIL, as it is not compulsory.  Wolverhampton and Doncaster have decided not to implement a CIL at present.  But most councils are working on a CIL because funding for essential infrastructure is not otherwise available (60 authorities have already published a Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule.

17.4.2

If implemented, the Council has the option to set either a single or multiple rate CIL.  A single rate would be where all development in all areas pays the same amount per square metre.  This would have the advantage of simplicity.  However, as the rate has to be based on viability, multiple rates may be appropriate to reflect variations in the viability of different types of development and different locations.  The Viability Study has recommended multiple rates due to significant variations in viability across different uses and areas.  A multiple rate is likely to raise more total CIL revenue and better reflects the actual viability of individual developments

17.5

Any Interest Declared or Dispensation Granted

None

17.6

Reason for Exemption if Public/Press Excluded During Consideration

None

17.7

Respective Director Responsible for Implementation

Simon Green, Executive Director, Place.

17.8

Relevant Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee If Decision Called In

Economic and Environmental Well-being.