Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
Matter for
Decision
Under national
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) regulations, new restrictions from 6 April
2015 would limit substantially the extent to which councils can enter into new
S106 agreements with developers (and, therefore, significantly reduce the
number and value of new S106 contributions from new developments). This was in
addition to further constraints covered by a ministerial announcement in
November 2014. Cambridge was particularly affected by the latest restrictions
as the city council cannot introduce (or receive payments via) the Community
Infrastructure Levy until after the examination of its draft Local Plan and CIL
proposals has been concluded.
Whilst working
within the CIL Regulations, the city council (working
closely with County
Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council) was actively seeking an
interim solution prior to the implementation of CIL, in order to minimise the
impact of these changes.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for City Centre and Public Places
The Executive Councillor resolved to:
i.
delegate authority to the
Head of Planning Services to finalise the city council’s interim approach to
seeking S106 contributions from 6 April 2015 until the local implementation of
a Community Infrastructure Levy for Cambridge. The final details of this
interim approach will be agreed in consultation with the Executive Councillors
for City Centre & Public Places and Planning Policy & Transport, their
Opposition Spokes and the Chairs of the Community Services and Environment
Scrutiny Committees;
ii.
confirm that the scheduled fourth S106
priority-setting round (based on S106 developer contributions already received
and available) will go ahead in 2015.
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.
The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:
i.
Queried whether some developers might seek to rush
through applications in the knowledge that in the interim period they might
avoid both CIL and S106 contributions.
ii.
Queried what steps had been taken to inform MPS
about the situation.
In response to Members’ questions the Urban Growth Project Manager and
the Head of Planning stated the following:
iii.
Alternative approaches to mitigation measures were
under investigation, albeit that the options were quite limited in the interim
period prior to the implementation of the Community Infrastructure Levy.
iv.
Counsel’s advice was being sought on what was
possible.
The Head of Planning stated it had been
expected that the Local Plan would be in place by now and had that been
achieved, this situation would not have arisen. Her team had responded to
government consultation and had been in contact with local MP’s. More details
would be circulated outside the meeting.
The Committee resolved unanimously to endorse the recommendation.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendation.
Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any
Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.