Please can the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy provide a breakdown of CIL (Community Infrastructure Levy) spending, detailing the exact monies generated from each development in each Ward and on what it has been spent on and where, in a chronological order since May 2011?
My residents of Trent Valley and I are fed up with our green belt and green spaces being concreted over with yet more housing. We have all seen the negative impact and contribution that this has had on the recent flooding of Burton Joyce. Can the Cabinet member responsible for planning confirm that no land will be taken out of the Borough’s existing green belt to enable housing allocations as part of this Council’s contribution to the Greater Nottinghamshire Strategic Plan?
Can the Cabinet member responsible for finance confirm how much of the Government’s ‘Welcome Back’ fund was allocated to Gedling Borough Council, how much was actually spent and on what it was spent on?
Minutes:
1) A question to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy was received from Cllr Mike Adams, as follows:
“Please can the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy provide a breakdown of CIL (Community Infrastructure Levy) spending, detailing the exact monies generated from each development in each Ward and on what it has been spent on and where, in a chronological order since May 2011?”
Response by Cllr Jenny Hollingsworth:
“As of the 10th November 2022, Gedling Borough Council have collected a total of £6,718,298 through the Community Infrastructure Levy since its adoption on the 16th October 2015. This is comprised of 135 individual receipts from 76 chargeable developments across the Borough. Officers have helpfully pulled together detailed information in a spreadsheet and it includes reference numbers, site addresses and monetary values. Clearly it is not feasible for me to present the details of each payment in this forum, but I am happy to share the spreadsheet with Councillor Adams and his wider Conservative Group.
With regards to the allocation and expenditure of the CIL receipts, the regulations split this into three separate portions:
The following is an update on the allocation and expenditure of each portion of the Gedling Borough Council CIL.
Strategic Portion
As of the 10th November 2022, £5,149,615 has been collected. This Council has committed to allocate a total of £4.48 million towards the Gedling Access Road (GAR)/Colliery Way and payment will be made to the County, following the completion of a transfer agreement, which is currently being progressed. The other projects currently identified in the approved Infrastructure List include secondary school contributions at the Chase Farm and Top Wighay developments, and a Visitor Centre at Gedling at Gedling Country Park. The prioritisation of the projects and value of the future CIL commitment is yet to be determined.
Parish Neighbourhood Portion
In accordance with the CIL regulations a total of £531,618 of CIL receipts have been transferred from Gedling Borough Council directly to the local parishes from within which they were collected. This is 15% of the receipt or 25% where a Neighbourhood Plan has been made. CIL receipts are collected over a 6 month period and transferred to the relevant parish council at the end of March and September. Any receipts which were received after the 30th September 2022 will be transferred to the relevant parish council in April 2023. The current value of receipts transferred is as follows:
Burton Joyce: £80,533
Calverton: £360,922
Lambley: £6,738
Linby: £15,366
Ravenshead: £67,235
Woodborough: £824
In accordance with the CIL Regulations parish councils are responsible for ensuring that any relevant CIL receipts received are expended in accordance with the regulations and must report any expenditure to Gedling Borough Council. To date the following projects have been reported to Gedling Borough Council:
Burton Joyce PC: Removal of a tree in Village Centre
Lambley PC: Multi Use Games Area Improvements
Linby PC: Highway works
Ravenshead: Petanque Courts at Ravenshead Leisure Centre, Additional CCTV Camera's, and New fencing at Cornwater Arena
Non-Parish Neighbourhood Portion
Where chargeable development takes place in an area where there is no parish council, Gedling Borough Council determine, in consultation with its residents, how to expend this element of the CIL receipts. As of the 10th November 2022, a total of £589,343 has been collected from CIL receipts for the Non-Parish Neighbourhood Portion. Since the adoption of the Gedling Borough Council CIL in 2015, we have undertaken consultations to consider and assess any nominated projects which have been submitted for Non-Parish Neighbourhood Funding Awards. To date, £317,260 has been awarded to the following projects.
2017/18: Cinderpath Lighting: £3,500
2018/19 Car Park Extension at Gedling Country Park £100,000
2018/19 Changing Room Facilities at Lambley Lane £40,000
2019/20 Green Lung Corridor £50,000
2019/20 Arnold Marketplace Development £43,000
2020/21 Footpath Extension at Willow Park £25,000
2020/21 Internal works and alterations at Netherfield Forum Children, Young People and Families Hub £55,760
A consultation report for possible expenditure in 2022/23 will be considered by Cabinet on the 8th December.
The CIL Regulations allow the Borough Council to expend 5% of monies collected through CIL receipts to cover the administrative costs associated with implementing and operating the Gedling Borough Council CIL. As of the 10th November 2022, a total of £335,915 has been collected.
You have suggested that Cllr Smith may ask a follow up question seeking clarification on why receipt collected in areas without a parish council (a non-parish area) cannot be expended in areas with a parish council. Councillor Helen Greensmith previously sought advice on funding opportunities to instigate a playground renovation in Lambley, following a request for CIL funding being declined by Gedling Borough Council.
In the case of the Davidsons Homes development (Mapperley Plains), the chargeable floor space is situated entirely within a non-parish area of Gedling Borough. It is accepted that part of the new traffic island is situated within the parish of Lambley but this element of the development does not comprise chargeable development, and has not therefore generated any CIL receipt. The CIL Regulations clearly specify that where chargeable development takes place in an area where there is no parish council, the charging authority retrains the levy receipts but must spend the neighbourhood portion on, or to support, infrastructure where the chargeable development takes place. The expenditure cannot there be within areas of a parish council.
This expenditure of the non-parish funding should be done in consultation with the local neighbourhood. A consultation report for expenditure in 2022/23 will be considered by Cabinet on the 8th December.”
2) A question to the Portfolio Holder for Sustainable Growth and Economy was received from Cllr Sam Smith, as follows:
“My residents of Trent Valley and I are fed up with our green belt and green spaces being concreted over with yet more housing. We have all seen the negative impact and contribution that this has had on the recent flooding of Burton Joyce. Can the Cabinet member responsible for planning confirm that no land will be taken out of the Borough’s existing green belt to enable housing allocations as part of this Council’s contribution to the Greater Nottinghamshire Strategic Plan?”
Response by Cllr Hollingsworth:
“The Draft Greater Nottingham Preferred Strategic Approach Document was recently shared with a reconvened Cross Party Working Group, following approval by the Joint Planning Advisory Board (JPAB) on the27th September. The meeting was used as an opportunity to explain the background to preparing the Greater Nottingham Strategic Plan and to talk through the broad content. Councillor Smith attended the Working Group in the absence of Councillor Adams so he should be familiar with the proposals.
Most of the planned housing growth is already included in existing Local Plans. However, for clarity, the Preferred Approach document includes reference to strategic sites ‘carried forward’ from the Aligned Core Strategy which have planning permission but where works have either yet to start or where a significant amount of development is still to take place.
In line with sustainability principles and the settlement hierarchyset out in the Preferred Approach document, as much housing as is feasible will be located within and adjoining the main built up area of Nottingham. For Gedling Borough, development continues at Teal Close, Netherfield and on the Chase Farm site. In addition, strategic scale releases for growth are proposed including an extension to the Teal Close site to accommodate a further 360 homes. The Sub Regional centre of Hucknall is also an appropriate location for growth and two sites which adjoin the Hucknall area are carried forward within the Preferred Approach document at Top Wighay Farm and land North of Papplewick Lane. In addition, an extension to the Sustainable Urban Extension at Top Wighay Farm site is proposed within existing safeguarded land for 640 homes.
The Preferred Approach does therefore propose the removal of land from the Green Belt at Teal Close as it is not possible to meet our future housing requirements within the existing urban boundary and previously allocated housing land. The Preferred Approach document is supported by a comprehensive evidence base, including a Site Selection Report which has helped inform which sites are recommended for development.
A detailed report is due to be considered by Cabinet on the 8th December, seeking approval of the Preferred Approach document, so far as it relates to Gedling, to allow a period of public consultation.”
3) A question to the Portfolio Holder for Corporate Resources and Performance was received from Cllr Helen Greensmith, as follows:
“Can the Cabinet member responsible for finance confirm how much of the Government’s ‘Welcome Back’ fund was allocated to Gedling Borough Council, how much was actually spent and on what it was spent on?”
Response by Cllr Payne:
“The Council received a Welcome Back Allocation of £220,000 against its claim of £202,754
The Welcome Back fund approved the Council expenditure of £174,247
All of the expenditure submitted to the Welcome Back fund complied with both internal procurement rules and the ERDF regulations with the exception of the Covid Marshalls. Due to the need for expediency, quotes were sought for the Covid Marshalls appointment as per the Council procedure but the contract was not advertised prior to the award.
The funding received provided:
• 20 Covid safe bins for the Borough
• Part Time Comms officer for Covid response information
• Part Time Retail consultant to support high street retail businesses
• 20 benches for retail centres
• Advertising space across the borough
• Footfall cameras and data sets to monitor safe return to shopping areas
• Events activity including Christmas 2021
• Covid memorial stone
• Rediscover website and Christmas campaign
• Covid planter to make anniversary
• Environmental health packs and business quality scheme
• 9 fountain planters and bedding plants
• Safety messaging for the borough
• Videos on rediscover web page
Rejected Expenditure
• Covid Marshalls
All monies was spent to encourage people back to the Borough and to support businesses to get back on their feet in particular retail and hospitality.”