A report from the Director of Regeneration and Environment is attached. This summarises work undertaken to date towards the introduction of a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) for Enfield. (Key decision – reference number 3844)
(8.30 – 8.35pm)
Councillor Alan Sitkin (Cabinet Member for Economic Development) introduced the report of the Director of Regeneration and Environment (No.51) summarising the work undertaken to date towards the introduction of a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) for Enfield.
1. The work undertaken towards the development and introduction of a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) for Enfield, as detailed in section 3 of the report.
2. The CIL introduced a tariff based approach towards the raising of funds for new infrastructure developments and once adopted would largely replace contributions from Section 106 Agreements for this purpose associated with specific planning consents.
3. The CIL tarriff rates recommended for inclusion within the Draft Charging Schedule, as detailed in section 4 of the report. The proposed rates had been subject to consultation as part of a Preliminary Draft Charging Schedule and also subject to a detailed viability assessment which had been used to inform the levy rates in the Draft Charging Schedule. Details of the consultation response had been set out in Appendix 2 of the report. The proposed rates would be in addition to the Mayoral CIL and had been set at different levels for development depending on location across the borough. The different rates had been designed to reflect the variation in land values and development viability across the borough.
4. The concern expressed by Councillor Orhan at the lack of provision within the legislation establishing the CIL to set a levy for commercial uses such as hot food takeways and betting shops in sensitive locations across the borough. The planning powers available to control such uses were noted, as detailed in sections 4.5 – 4.11 of the report, but it was felt that the Government needed to take urgent action to remove this restriction in relation to the CIL Regulations.
5. The following comments highlighted by Councillor Hurer, on behalf of the Opposition Group, who had requested to speak on this item at the meeting:
a. whilst supportive of the approach towards introducing a variable CIL tariff applying to different areas of the borough, concerns were raised at the level at which the base rate had been set and difference between the levels being recommended in each area;
b. the need identified for any further consultation undertaken to include details on the recommended charging rates;
c. the request for details to be provided on the viability assessment referred to within section 3.7 and Appendix 4 of the report along with a comparison of the CIL charging schedules in other boroughs accompanied, where possible, with details of the average house prices in each area. In response Paul Walker (Assistant Director Regeneration, Planning and Programme Management) advised that he would be able to provide an Executive Summary and comparison of the CIL charging schedules.
6. The lobbying activity already undertaken by the Council, as highlighted by Councillor Bond, in support of the recommendations arising from the Portas Review, relating to the creation of a separate retail use class for betting shops.
7. Subject to ... view the full minutes text for item 8