Issue - meetings

Minute 487 refers

RESOLVED – that (A) the information contained in the report on the Community Infrastructure Levy be noted; and

(B)      further analysis of CIL issues be undertaken, using additional resources if required.

(see also Minute 529)

Minute 15 refers

The Executive considered and supported the recommendations of the District Planning Executive Panel meeting held on 17 December 2015, on the Community Infrastructure Levy.

RECOMMENDED – that (A) the information contained in the report on the Community Infrastructure Levy be noted; and

(B)      further analysis of CIL issues be undertaken, using additional resources if required.

(see also Minute 494)

Members are asked to note that this item will include a presentation by the Planning Advisory Service.

Further to a request made at the previous meeting, the Panel received a report detailing information regarding the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and how it would relate to the existing Section 106 charging regime. 

The Panel noted that the CIL had been introduced by the Government in 2010 and was essentially a ‘development tax’ that allowed local planning authorities to seek non-negotiable payments for infrastructure based on a charge per square metre of floorspace.

CIL payments did not need to be spent on site specific infrastructure, and instead, could contribute towards the cost of providing larger, strategic infrastructure projects.  CIL was not mandatory, and was the responsibility of individual local planning authorities to decide whether or not to implement it in their area.  At present, many authorities in England and Wales have not yet adopted CIL.

Graham Jones, Planning Advisory Service (PAS), gave a presentation and answered Members’ questions on:

·         the impact on section 106 obligations;

·         exemptions from CIL such as “starter homes”; and

·         the need for the CIL charging regime to strike the right balance to ensure viability.

The Panel Chairman advised that a training session for Members would be arranged to better understand the issues before any decision on whether to adopt CIL was taken.  It was also suggested that further analysis of CIL issues be undertaken, using additional resources if required.  This was supported by the Panel.

The Panel Chairman thanked Graham Jones for his presentation.

The Panel supported the recommendations now detailed.

RECOMMENDED – that (A) the information contained in the report on the Community Infrastructure Levy be noted; and

(B)      further analysis of CIL issues be undertaken, using additional resources if required.