Agenda item

(Housing Portfolio Holder) To consider the minutes from the recent meeting of the Council Housebuilding Cabinet Committee, held on 4 February 2014, and any recommendations therein.

Prioritisation of Potential Developments

(1)        That the following general strategic approach be adopted for the prioritisation of potential sites taken forward for development under the Council’s Housebuilding Programme:

(a)        Generally, over a period of time, development sites be spread around the towns/villages where sites are located, on a rotational basis, so that all locations have the benefit of affordable housing being provided in their area;

(b)        Priority for the development of potential sites be given to areas in which the highest number of housing applicants live;

(c)        Towns/villages with sites that could potentially deliver the greatest number of new properties be prioritised in preference to locations where less properties could be delivered; and

(d)        If possible, development packages/phases would generally comprise sites within the same town/village, in order to reduce the contractor’s site set-up costs;

(2)        That, taking account of the strategic approach set out in (1) above, locations be grouped together into the following two Groups and the Priority Orders shown (Note: applicants can express preferences for more than one area):

 (*) = Including the Year 1 sites                                (#) = Excluding the sites at The Broadway

(3)        That development packages/phases be formulated each year, on a rotational basis – in the Priority Order shown in Group A above – until the capacity for the potential number of homes in a location reduces to less than 10, at which point the location be moved into GroupbB;

(4)        That, where less than 20 homes could be provided within a development package/phase in one ofthe locations within Group A above, one or more sites within Group B also be included within the development package/phase, on a rotational basis – in the Priority Order shown in Group B above – to comprise a package/phase of between 20 and 25 homes; and

(5)        That an annual review of the priority orders within Groups A and B in (2) above be undertaken by the Cabinet Committee having regard to the same strategic approach set-out in (1) above.

The Housing Portfolio Holder presented the minutes from the meeting of the Council Housebuilding Cabinet Committee held on 4 February 2014.

The Cabinet Committee had made recommendations to the Cabinet regarding the Prioritisation of Potential Developments. Other issues that the Cabinet Committee had considered included the Future Use of Garage Sites Unsuitable for Redevelopment, Phase 2 Feasibility Report, Review of Rent Cap – EFDC Affordable Rent Policy, Phase 1 Update, Financial Reports, Risk Register, and the Five-Year Project Plan.

The Vice-Chairman of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee drew the Cabinet’s attention to the section within the proposed Safeguarding Policy, to be considered later in the meeting, that referred to the provision of play facilities and green space. The Council did not want to intensify future developments to the point where there were no play facilities or green space, as this could simply be creating the slum housing of the future. The Chairman of the Housing Scrutiny Panel agreed with these comments and added that the new Council Housing should be both affordable and of sufficient quality; the Portfolio Holder was asked what amenity space would be lost by increasing the minimum number of properties to be built at Burton Road in Loughton from 25 to 31?

The Portfolio Holder responded that there had been a full discussion at the Cabinet Committee meeting regarding this item (Phase 2 Feasibility Report) and reminded the Cabinet that the original proposal for 25 dwellings had been for part of the site at Burton Road; subsequently, more land had become available at the site and a further six dwellings were now proposed for development. A further report on the site would be considered at a future meeting of the Cabinet Committee, where a higher density than 31 dwellings would be proposed due to a reduced provision of parking. The Portfolio Holder was cautioned that parking was a big issue on the housing estates throughout the District at the current time.

Decision:

Prioritisation of Potential Developments

(1)        That the following general strategic approach be adopted for the prioritisation of potential sites taken forward for development under the Council’s Housebuilding Programme:

(a)        Generally, over a period of time, development sites be spread around the towns/villages where sites are located, on a rotational basis, so that all locations have the benefit of affordable housing being provided in their area;

(b)        Priority for the development of potential sites be given to areas in which the highest number of housing applicants live;

(c)        Towns/villages with sites that could potentially deliver the greatest number of new properties be prioritised in preference to locations where less properties could be delivered; and

(d)        If possible, development packages/phases would generally comprise sites within the same town/village, in order to reduce the contractor’s site set-up costs;

(2)        That, taking account of the strategic approach set out in (1) above, locations be grouped together into the following two Groups and the Priority Orders shown (Note: applicants can express preferences for more than one area):

 (*) = Including the Year 1 sites                                (#) = Excluding the sites at The Broadway

(3)        That development packages/phases be formulated each year, on a rotational basis – in the Priority Order shown in Group A above – until the capacity for the potential number of homes in a location reduces to less than 10, at which point the location be moved into GroupbB;

(4)        That, where less than 20 homes could be provided within a development package/phase in one ofthe locations within Group A above, one or more sites within Group B also be included within the development package/phase, on a rotational basis – in the Priority Order shown in Group B above – to comprise a package/phase of between 20 and 25 homes; and

(5)        That an annual review of the priority orders within Groups A and B in (2) above be undertaken by the Cabinet Committee having regard to the same strategic approach set-out in (1) above.

Reasons for Decision:

The Cabinet was satisfied that the Cabinet Committee had fully addressed all the relevant issues in relation to the recommendations and that these should be endorsed.

Other Options Considered and Rejected:

The Cabinet was satisfied that the Cabinet Committee had considered all the relevant options in formulating their recommendations. The Cabinet did not consider that there were any further options.