The Planning Policy Team Leader presented a report on the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) which was a new mechanism for securing contributions from developers towards the provision of infrastructure that was required to support development.  In order to begin charging the Council needed to prepare a Charging Schedule to set out what developers would need to pay in £ per sq m of new buildings and any variations by area or type of development.  The consultation document at Appendix B to the report would form the first formal stage in the Council’s preparation of CIL and it was proposed that this should be subject to a 6 week consultation between June/July and August 2012.

In response to questions the Planning Policy Team Leader advised that the report would also be considered by the Local Development Framework Advisory Group and Cabinet in June 2012, so the consultation should begin at the end of June before the holiday season.  The Planning Policy Team Leader agreed to check with theEnvironment Agency the figures given by them on the cost of a Flood Defence and Water Quality Infrastructure.  With reference to supplying evidence for the need for infrastructure to support new development she explained that this was prescribed by legislation and the wording came from the regulations.  It was a grey area, but it could potentially be used to assist with existing problems if a new development would add to the infrastructure problems.

A Member queried the demographics; was concerned that if district wards were stuck to certain areas that could cope with the higher charge would only face the lower charge and therefore an opportunity would be lost; and due to revenue costs wondered how many of the projects could actually be realised.  In response to these queries, the Planning Policy Team Leader agreed to double check the demographic forecasts; explained that ward boundaries were used as a lot of data was provided on that basis and that it may be something that came out in the consultation process; and that the CIL could be used for on-going funding of schemes, and she did not believe there was a time limit for this but would double check.  In response to further questions she advised that developers were largely supportive of CIL as it was more predictable than s.106 agreements and could be more easily factored into their costings.  If a Parish Council did not respond TO THE request for evidence of infrastructure needs, it would not be a lost opportunity and they would still receive a share of the money to spend on local infrastructure projects.  Areas of development exempt from the CIL were affordable housing, charitable purposes and exceptional circumstances to be used on rare occasions.  The Planning Policy Team Leader noted the concern expressed that Gypsy and Traveller sites were not mentioned.

Resolved: That it be recommended to Cabinet that, subject to the discussions above:

a)       the CIL Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule Consultation Document be agreed and published for consultation;

b)        the Portfolio Holder be authorised to agree minor presentational changes and detailed amendments, including any minor changes to the proposed charging levels as a result of the completion of the CIL Viability Study, prior to publication to assist the clarity of the document; and

c)         copies be made available for sale at a price to be agreed by the Portfolio Holder.