Skip to content

Agenda item

Community Infrastructure Levy Presentation

Minutes:

Eric Manners (Team Leader – Planning Obligations) gave a presentation on the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), a copy of which would be interleaved with the agenda.

 

In the presentation and discussion the following points were made:

·         Islington Council adopted its CIL in September 2014. It replaced most infrastructure contributions through Section 106 but was more flexible as it had to address the impacts of growth.

·         Pre-CIL S106 agreements would remain in effect and Section 106 funds would continue to be received for some years.

·         CIL Regulations required a minimum of 15% to be allocated based on ‘agreed local priorities’.

·         Since the adoption of Islington’s CIL the total CIL liabilities issued was £27.6 million. (This would only be received once development commenced).

·         The estimated future CIL receipts between 2015 and 2018 was £15-21 million.

·         The CIL allocation process was an annual Executive decision made as part of the budget setting process. After monitoring and collection fees of 5%, it was proposed that CIL income be split into 50% - Strategic CIL, 35% Local Strategic and 15% Local CIL.

·         The 50% Strategic CIL would be allocated by the council as part of the annual budget setting process. Strategic CIL schemes included projects that contributed to revenue savings, projects that delivered statutory requirements, committed capital projects with a funding shortfall, projects that supported the delivery of new council homes e.g. Finsbury Leisure Centre and projects with other community benefits.

·         The 35% Local Strategic CIL would be allocated by ward councillors for ‘the provision, improvements, replacement, operation or maintenance of infrastructure’. It could be spent on anything that was included on the strategic ‘CIL Regulation 123’ infrastructure list within that ward or a neighbouring ward if appropriate. This list would be revised following consultation due to take place in the next month.

·         The 15% Local CIL was to be allocated by ward councillors for ‘the provision, improvement, replacement, operation or maintenance of infrastructure’ and/or ‘anything else that was concerned with addressing the demands that development placed on an area.’ It was likely to be used to fund many high priority Ward Improvement Plan (WIP) schemes although not all WIP schemes were eligible for CIL funds.

·         £127m of strategic infrastructure needs had been identified. £32m funding had been secured, leaving a shortfall of £95m. After a 50/50 split, only £7.5-£10.5 m of strategic CIL was likely within the first three years of CIL receipts.

·         The £24m shortfall for school place provision could be at most 1/3 funded by Strategic CIL over three years. Other council funds were scarce. There ere also no strategic CIL funds available for supporting social housing provision through major projects such as the redevelopment of Finsbury Leisure Centre, parks/housing estate open spaces, adventure playgrounds, ball courts, Multi-Use Games Areas (MUGAs) or community centres so Local CIL and S106 was required.

·         £37 m of Section 106 funds was held and $24 m of this had been allocated to projects. Future S106 funds likely to be received were £6m. S106 funds had to be allocated locally.

·         Several scenarios had been modelled. The July Executive report would propose a minimum £30,000 of local strategic CIL for each ward. Annual calculations would take place each December.

·         The July Executive paper would allocate Islington’s first £1.6m of carbon offsetting contributions secured through S106. All allocations of carbon offsetting funds were agreed by the Affordable Energy Board. Initial priorities included insulating high-rise estate buildings (£1.5m), ‘Housing and Health’ fund (£50,000) and ‘Energising Small Business’ fund (£50,000).

·         The CIL ‘Regulation 123’ infrastructure list set out how strategic CIL funds were likely to be spent. Islington’s list was quite broad. Minor revisions were proposed through public consultation and the Executive would make a decision on these in July. The list was mainly to ensure developers could not claim that carbon offsetting contributions used on housing estate high-rise insulation represented a duplication of their CIL liabilities.

·         It was proposed that to speed up the allocation process that one member per ward would act as the leader councillor for WIP review and allocations with the lead member consulting colleagues and reporting back. Where a ward had members from more than one party, both parties would have a lead member.

 

RESOLVED:

That the presentation be noted.