Minutes:
Witnesses: Paul Sanderson, Minerals and Waste Team Manager (And CIL project manager)
Key points raised during the discussion:
1. The Committee was provided with an update regarding the progress of the introduction of a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). It was confirmed that Elmbridge Borough Council would be introducing its CIL charges from April 2013. It was anticipated that when fully in effect this would generate approximately £2.4 million CIL funding per annum. It was anticipated that there would be CIL charging schedules in place across all Surrey district and boroughs by 2014.
2. The Minerals and Waste Team Manager outlined the key focus was around agreeing infrastructure spending priorities with boroughs and districts to inform the allocation of CIL monies. Surrey Future had been identified as being a key partnership initiative in identifying where infrastructure funding should be spent. The Committee was informed that the County Council would work with each of the District & Boroughs to seek to agree a five year infrastructure delivery programme, that could then form the focus for potential funding including CIL.
3. The Chairman raised a question regarding the impact of Suitable Alternative Natural Green Spaces (SANGS) on CIL funding. It was confirmed that SANGS were legally recognised as having priority with regards to the funding, and that discussions were taking place with the Districts & Borough Councils where this was likely to be a concern.
4. Members queried who held the responsibility for the CIL funding. The Minerals and Waste Team Manager confirmed that the District & Borough Council would be the collecting authority and so would carry the responsibility of assigning the funding. However, it was also recognised that the County Council was a key partner, and officers expected that any decisions would be made with the County Council’s views taken into consideration. The Committee commented that making decisions regarding CIL through the Local Committees would help facilitate this partnership working.
5. Members questioned whether the CIL Task Group could explore how the local transport strategies, local committees and CIL funding interacted. It was suggested that the views of Local Committees would be very important when decisions were made regarding infrastructure spending priorities, particularly through the development of transport strategies. Progress on the preparation of local transport strategies could be collated and presented to the Select Committee.
6. Members asked for clarification on what constituted a neighbourhood development plan. It was confirmed that the definition of a neighbourhood development plan was identified in the national regulations (The Neighbourhood Planning (General) Regulations 2012). It had to be developed by a Town or Parish Council or legally constituted neighbourhood forum, and then accepted by the relevant District & Borough Council before being put forward for independent examination. A neighbourhood plan could only be adopted if it was supported by over 50% of those voting, determined through a neighbourhood referendum.
7. Members raised concerns that the CIL charging sheets would be different across District & Boroughs, and that there were not set processes about joint working. A question was raised as to how far CIL was driven by central mandate and how much was decided at an individual District & Borough level. Officers commented that there was a general consensus regarding the level of CIL charges, and any differences in charging had to be justified on the basis of economic viability.
8. One Member raised a question as to whether self-build residential dwellings would be considered exempt from CIL. It was confirmed by officers that the current legislation did not give any general exemption to self-build properties, and there would need to be a case made on the basis of economic viability if such exemptions were to be justified in future.
Recommendations:
None.
Actions/further information to be provided:
None.
Committee Next Steps:
The Committee will receive a more detailed officer update with regards to the CIL with proposals for the role of the Task Group in July 2013.