Mayor needs to stand up for boroughs on CIL

Mayor Johnson must lobby the Government for additional guidance on the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). He also needs to provide better London-specific guidance to local authorities within the capital. The Assembly Planning Committee, which I chair, made these points in its response to the Mayor’s draft guidance.

The draft Supplemental Planning Guidance (SPG) is intended to help boroughs with establishing their charging schedule. However, based on our extensive investigation, the Planning Committee identified important ways in which the SPG fails to provide the guidance boroughs need.

CIL – a charge local authorities levy on developers to pay for things like parks, schools, and health centres – is currently being drafted by councils throughout England. Our boroughs are unique in that London is the only place in the country where developers will face two CIL charges: one from the local authority, and on top of that a Mayoral CIL.

Bramcote Grove Playground, Rotherhithe

The Committee called on the Mayor to lobby the Government for further guidance that local authorities are calling for.

And while further instruction is needed from Government, the Mayor must do his part to provide better London-specific guidance to help boroughs navigate the unique circumstances of setting CIL in London. As drafted the SPG fails in particular to offer sufficient help in three essential areas: viability; cross-boundary projects; and the impact of CIL on affordable housing.

Viability
Setting CIL is a balancing act. Local authorites need to raise as much as possible pay for social and other infrastructure in the area. However, they can’t set the levy so high that development becomes too expensive and comes to a halt. Local authorities have told us they need more guidance on this so-called ‘viability’ issue. The SPG briefly addresses it, but only to note that London boroughs need to also factor in the Mayoral CIL. The SPG should go further in offering a tool to help local authorities calculate viability.

Cross-boundary projects
The draft guidance also fails to address cross-boundary projects. It must be as concerned with the way boroughs interact with one another as with how they work with the GLA. The physical closeness of London boroughs to one another means that local authorities must work closely to develop infrastructure between them. For example, a local tram which goes from one borough to another would ideally be part-funded by CIL; however, there are no clear systems in place to encourage such a project. The Mayor could and should facilitate cross-boundary infrastructure of this sort.

Affordable housing
Finally, the SPG must do more on the affordable housing issue. The impact of CIL on affordable housing funding has been one of the most contentious issues surrounding the new levy, but the SPG fails to provide the full range of guidance boroughs need. For example, the SPG should expand its affordable housing material to highlight the need for boroughs to consider the implications of their proposed amount of CIL levels in relation to the additional amount they expect to raise for affordable housing. Boroughs must closely monitor affordable housing contributions and delivery following the introduction of CIL, as a noticeable reduction in affordable housing contributions could indicate for a review of their CIL.

The committee’s full response is available here. See also official Assembly press release.

The committee will release a fuller report documenting the findings of our CIL investigation later this year.

Advertisements

About nickygavron

Former Deputy Mayor for London, London Assembly Member, Chair of Planning Committee, and Labour Spokesperson for Planning
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Mayor needs to stand up for boroughs on CIL

  1. Single Aspect says:

    Your article screams the need for a reintroduction of the GLC to enforce inter borough cooperation. The GLA doesn’t seem capable of doing the same job.

  2. Pingback: Planning expert endorses Committee’s CIL recommendations | Nicky Gavron AM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s