Agenda item

Purpose of the report:  Scrutiny of Services and Budgets/Policy Development and Review

The report updates Members on the current preparations for the introduction of the Community Infrastructure Levy across Surrey, the experience to date of those authorities who have already adopted the Levy and the governance arrangements that are currently in place and those that are proposed.

The second part of this report is to update the Select Committee with regard to the funding and the delivery of Horley Master Plan infrastructure and service improvements and to explain the changes to the way in which developer contributions can be secured for infrastructure provision as a consequence of the introduction of the Community Infrastructure Levy.

Witnesses:

Paul Druce, Infrastructure Agreements Manager

Peter Boarder, Horley Regeneration Project Manager, SCC / Reigate and Banstead BC

i) CIL Overview Report

Key Points Raised During the Discussion:

1.   The Chairman began by inquiring with officers as to the potential for a regular update with Members on the status of Surrey district and boroughs readiness for CIL in line with the issues raised in Paragraph 24 of the report. The Infrastructure Agreements Manager (IAM) raised the potential for the distribution of a quarterly one page bulletin by Boroughs on this going forward to members of the select committee and local committee chairman.

2.   Members raised concerns regarding authorities yet to fully implement CIL and how this may impact existing development. The IAM informed the Committee that the failure to adopt CIL could allow certain development to avoid paying developer contributions but the government's chief planner has said, where the issue has been raised, that LPA's have had 5 years to adopt CIL and any shortfall in contributions is therefore a matter for them.

3.   Members noted that local committees should be scrutinising in detail how CIL funds are distributed and spent as CIL is adopted across Surrey.

i) Recommendations:

The Select Committee endorsed the following recommendations:

a)   That there be continued collaboration with Borough and District colleagues in their preparation of Local Plans, Infrastructure Delivery Plans, CIL Charging Schedules and Regulation 123 Lists.

b)   Officers continued collaboration with Borough and District colleagues on draft CIL documentation to ensure the County Council is able to support development in each of the areas by securing and providing infrastructure at the required time.

c)   Officers continuing to seek agreement as to how the governance regime for CIL will operate in each of the areas by way of a memorandum of understanding or other suitable agreement, and

d)   The further work required to secure a suitable governance regime in each of the areas, in the light of the possible different models for governance, given that the Woking model is one that appears to offer the most open and transparent collaborative process for deciding which schemes CIL monies should support.

ii) CIL/Horley Master Plan Report

1.   The Committee inquired as to the impact of SANGS on CIL payments for Surrey Heath. It was clarified to Members that up to 80% of CIL contributions are diverted to SANGS currently. The Committee asked Officers if this was something that could be determined by Surrey’s Districts and Boroughs in future (due to SANGS impact on West Surrey authorities) however it was explained that control of SANGS framework is determined by the E.U. and as such can’t be avoided in this instance.

2.   The Horley Regeneration Project Manager (HRPM) informed the Committee that authorities can set different CIL rates for different areas of any one borough, in line with a geographical and viability assessment.

3.   It was recognised by Members that SCC and its District and Boroughs have a long relationship of working together on these types of items and despite the Committee’s recommendations not being fully enforceable it was agreed that this issue would remain a matter of trust between Surrey and it’s local authorities.

ii) Recommendations:

The Select Committee endorsed the following recommendations:

a)   The principle of the Borough Council’s proposal to charge a higher levy for residential development in the North West Sector

b)   Officers making formal representations on the Borough Councils Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule including its Regulation 123 list, as necessary

c)   The two authorities work together to reach agreement by way of a memorandum of understanding to ring fence monies to ensure that there is sufficient funding to deliver the identified infrastructure in and service improvements in the HMP

Actions/Further Information to be Provided:
None

Committee Next Steps:
None.