URL: https://democracy.sheffield.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=4925

Decision Maker:

Outcome: Recommendations Approved

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Purpose:

Content: 10.1 The Executive Director Neighbourhood Services submitted a report setting out details of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) which is a fixed, non-negotiable, charge on most developments of 100 square metres or more, or a new dwelling of any size.   The report stated that CIL receipts are split into two funds: Strategic and Neighbourhood. Neighbourhood CIL is collected in a “pot” and redistributed across the wards based on Indices of Multiple Deprivation (IMD)in accordance with a Cabinet decision in 2018. Under that decision, Neighbourhood CIL may be spent using ward-based criteria but prospective uses that are not linked to a single part of the city may not be able to be funded. This means that the Community Infrastructure Levy is currently therefore unable to effectively support communities of interest and identify in the same way that it supports communities of place.   The report therefore proposes to create a specific non-geographical fund for communities of interest and identity, and to review the Governance and guidance relating to CIL to support this.     10.2 RESOLVED: That Strategy and Resources Policy Committee:-       (a) approves in principle the creation of a Non-Geographical Community Infrastructure Levy Fund, specifically for delivering outcomes relating to Communities of Interest and/or Identity, likely to require the top-slicing of the Neighbourhood Community Infrastructure Levy;   (b) agrees that further work is required to design this fund and put in place the right governance arrangements and criteria for applications;   (c) asks that officers prepare further information to support a decision at a Strategy and Resources Committee meeting as early as possible in the 2026/27 municipal year; and   (d) note that the ongoing review of Governance processes for Neighbourhood CIL will include any changes required to support the above, and that a further report to the Committee will present the outcomes of the review and recommend the necessary decisions to support the changes, including where necessary proposals for changes to the Constitution to be recommended to Full Council.   (NOTE: The result of the vote on resolution (a) was FOR – 8 Members; AGAINST – 5 Members; ABSTENTIONS – 0 Members.  Resolutions (b), (c) and (d) were agreed unanimously).     10.3 Reasons for Decision     10.3.1 As it is currently established, Neighbourhood CIL may be spent using ward-based criteria but prospective uses that are not linked to a single part of the city may not be able to be funded. This means that the Community Infrastructure Levy is currently therefore unable to effectively support communities of interest and identify in the same way that it supports communities of place.     10.3.2 The decision would address this issue directly, through the creation of a specific non-geographical fund for communities of interest and identity. Alongside this the Council will review the Governance and guidance relating to CIL to address the lack of clarity around its use and the decision making associated with it.     10.4 Alternatives Considered and Rejected     10.4.1 Alternative Option 1: Rather than creating a specific non-geographical fund, there is an option to simply allow organisations representing Communities of Interest or Identity to bid for Neighbourhood CIL within the Ward that they are based. This would require a change to the current criteria whereby an organisation must deliver a service to the benefit of the specific geographical area, i.e. the Ward.   There are clear demand risks associated with this approach, especially in those areas where a significant number of organisations representing Communities of Interest and / or Identity are based, e.g. the City Centre.   This option would require our Governance approach to be reviewed to ensure bids were assessed appropriately. In that regard we would still recommend that Equality Impact Assessments should be undertaken to support bids.     10.4.2 Alternative Option 2: There is an option to do nothing and to continue with the current approach to Neighbourhood CIL. This approach would not address the current challenges for organisations representing communities of Interest or Identity. It would also not address the current lack of clarity around the use of Neighbourhood CIL or the current Governance approach.     10.4.3 Alternative Option 3: There is an option to change the way in which the top-slice is taken, either through only taking the proportion from income received in future years, i.e. from 1st April 2026 and/or taking a smaller proportion of past CIL income in the first year.   The average annual level of Neighbourhood CIL income is around £400k. If 16.7% of this were taken in future years only this would equate to around £67k for the full year. In the first year there would be no available budget until the beginning of 2027/28.   Should a smaller proportion of past CIL income, for example 1%, be taken this would equate to around £78k as a one-off and £27k per year for future years. These options have been discounted given the very low level of budget this would yield and the delay of any available budget for 2026/27.  

Date of Decision: March 25, 2026