Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
Matter for
Decision
Developer contributions are payments received by the council from
property owners or developers to help address the impact of greater demand for
facilities arising from development in the city. Alongside the council’s
approach to devolved decision-making for the local use of developer
contributions, half the payments from major developments are assigned to a
city-wide fund. This is for strategic projects to create or improve facilities
that would benefit residents from more than one area of the city.
Following the first priority-setting round in late 2012/early 2013, the
next round is now underway. This is planning ahead for the next set of projects
to be taken forward once first round and on-going projects are completed.
The Officer’s report asked the Executive Councillor to identify second
round strategic priorities for the contribution types in the Public Places
portfolio (informal open space, play provision for children & teenagers,
public art and public realm).
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Public Places
i.
Allocated a further £27,000 of
public art developer contributions from the city-wide fund to the ‘Cambridge
Rules’ project on Parker’s Piece.
ii.
Allocated £39,000 of public realm
developer contributions from the citywide fund towards lighting for Parker’s
Piece.
iii.
Noted the consultation feedback
and officer comments on other strategic project ideas for Public Places (Table
3 and Appendix C of the Officer’s report).
iv.
Identified follow-up action needed
to build on the progress so far in the second priority-setting round over the
use of developer contributions, namely to return to North Area (for devolved decision-making)
those informal open space contributions from North Area that had been assigned
to the city-wide fund (in the region of £15,000-£25,000).
Reason for the Decision
As set out in the Officer’s report.
Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny
Considerations
The Committee received a report from the Urban Growth Project Manager.
He said the report contained a typographical error on page 21 where PP7
listed ‘Jesus Green’ instead of ‘Parker’s Piece’.
In response to the report, the Committee felt there should be the option
to return contributions that had been assigned to the city-wide fund for
strategic priorities back to area committees on case-by-case basis, if area
projects were in a position to go ahead and strategic projects were not. The
Committee noted this would deplete the city-wide fund and so the option should
be used with caution as returning funds to areas could stop strategic citywide
projects going ahead.
In response to Members’ questions the Director of Environment and Urban
Growth Project Manager said the following:
i.
The use of developer contributions needed to be
consistent with the tests set out in official regulations (such as the CIL
Regulations).
ii.
Second round area committee short-listing reports
have generated discussions about how to make best use of the devolved funding
available. It has become clear that there is not enough funding to take forward
all the suggestions and so priorities will have to be identified.
iii.
Area Committee Chairs and others have asked whether
further funding would be available from appropriate categories in the city-wide
fund to support local priority projects. If the relevant Executive Councillors
wished to take up this option, the most appropriate way of doing so would be to
return to an area committee those contributions from that same area which
previously accrued to the city-wide fund (as part of the 50:50 split of
developer contributions from major developments permitted by the Planning
Committee).
Councillors requested a change to recommendations in the Officer’s report. Councillor Kightley formally
proposed to amend the following recommendation:
iv.
Identified follow-up action needed to build on the progress so far in the
second priority-setting round over the use of developer contributions, namely
to return to North Area (for devolved decision-making)
those informal open space contributions from North Area that had been assigned
to the city-wide fund (in the region of £15,000-£25,000).
The Committee unanimously approved this amended
recommendation.
The Chair decided that the recommendations highlighted in the Officer’s
report and amended by (iv) above should be voted on
and recorded separately:
The Committee endorsed recommendation (i) by 4 votes to 3 with 1 abstention.
The Committee endorsed recommendation (ii)
unanimously.
The Committee endorsed recommendation (iii)
unanimously.
The Committee unanimously endorsed
recommendation (iv)as amended.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendations as amended.
Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor
(and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.