Agenda item

The Committee will receive and update on Section 106 Agreements and information about the Community Infrastructure Levy.

The Planning Policy and Partnerships Service Manager gave a presentation on Section 106 Agreements and Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). She explained that S.106 Agreements were a legally binding agreement between the Council and any landowners with an interest in a site. There were three legal tests that needed satisfying before an Agreement was entered into.

The Committee was advised that S.106 Agreements were designed to mitigate the impact of development (both to infrastructure and amenity) in its immediate locality. Sometimes contributions could be sought for more strategic purposes. Ms Sinclair informed the Committee there were approximately 150 live S.106 Agreements and summarised the purposes for which contributions were requested.

Developments would need to reach specified trigger points before payments were due. The level of contributions received from developers since 2009 and their breakdown was provided; this included money paid by developers for affordable housing when a contribution was paid instead of the houses being built .

The Community Infrastructure Levy was a new mechanism for collecting developer contributions. It was not mandatory, however, significant changes were expected to S.106 Agreements meaning local authorities were likely to choose to introduce it. CIL could be spent over a wider area than S.106 monies. Consultation on two additional CIL elements (affordable housing and apportioning a percentage of the CIL to neighbourhoods for them to determine how it should be spent) closed in December 2011. No update had been received since the consultation deadline.

Authorities might choose to introduce CILs because of restrictions on pooling that were being applied to S.106 monies. It applied to all developments, not just residential, with the exception of buildings that people entered intermittently.

The levy was based on a charge per metre-squared of additional floor space over 100m². This was normally paid in cash but could be paid through the transfer of land and buildings. Payment of CIL becomes due when a development commences, however the Council could agree to receive payment in instalments. CIL would cover revenue and capital costs for the infrastructure required to serve a new development.It could not be used to pay for remedial action combating pre-existing service deficiencies.

District councils would be required to produce a list of infrastructure projects it proposed should be funded by CIL and an annual report on CIL collection and spending. Calculating what the CIL rate would be needed basing on the cost of infrastructure development across the area and project viability. CILs could vary based on the type of the type of development and/or area. There was a requirement that proposed rates were consulted on and independently examined before they were introduced.

Discussion ensued on CILs and S.106 Agreements. Councillors asked whether existing S.106 Agreements would be honoured after CILs were introduced; they would.

Concern was expressed over the proposal to include affordable housing provision within the CIL. Councillors felt it was more appropriate that developers deliver affordable housing as part of integrated developments rather than making a financial contribution for the Council to commission a Registered Social Landlord. While there was no update from the national consultation, it was hoped that if affordable housing was incorporated into CILs, provision would remain within S.106 arrangements for the Council to argue for site specific mitigation and request that the developer include affordable housing within their development proposal.

11:19-11:35               Meeting adjourned