Agenda item

(Director of Communities) To consider the attached report (CHB-015-2014/15).

That, following consideration of a revised feasibility study and viability assessment for the sites at Queens Road, North Weald and Centre Drive (Site B) Epping, which took account of the Cabinet Committee’s comments made at its December 2014 meeting consideration.

(1)        Queens Road, North Weald

(a)        The revised feasibility study of 12 x 3 bedroom, 2 storey units with a total of 28 car parking spaces be agreed as a viable site to progress to a detailed planning stage;

(b)        The terms of any existing licence/lease, allowing access to the allotments, be maintained; and

(c)        A further report be submitted to the Council Housebuilding Cabinet Committee should negotiations with the tenant in Queens Road, regarding the re-siting of the substation break down.

(2)        Site B, Centre Drive, Epping

The revised feasibility study of 1 x 3 bedroom house, 2 storey’s high with a total of 3 car parking spaces be agreed as a viable site to progress to a detailed planning stage.

The Chairman stated that he would stand down as Chairman for item (1) Queens Road, North Weald, and Councillor R Bassett assumed the Chairmanship for this item.

The Assistant Director of Housing (Property) presented a report to the Cabinet Committee. He advised that at the last meeting of the Cabinet Committee on 18 December 2014, it had been decided that the sites at Queens Road, North Weald and Centre Drive, Epping, Site B be deferred for further information and revised feasibility studies.

(1)        Queens Road, North Weald

The Assistant Director advised that the revised feasibility study was for 12 x 3 bedroom houses which were 2 stories high and each had 2 car parking spaces. There were also 4 extra visitor car parking spaces on the site.

He reported that no firm costs could be confirmed at this meeting for the re-siting of the substation, but that it had been estimated at £120,000.

Members were concerned that if negotiations with the tenant regarding the re-siting of the substation broke down then the Council, being the owners of the land, could by delegated authority issue a notice of seeking possession to the tenant. Members asked if negotiations broke down with the tenant and before any firm decisions were made, they would like this item to come back to the Cabinet Committee for further discussion.

 (2)       Site B, Centre Drive, Epping

The Assistant Director advised that the revised feasibility study was for 1 x 3 bedroom house which was 2 stories high with 3 car parking spaces.

Decision:

That, following consideration of a revised feasibility study and viability assessment for the sites at Queens Road, North Weald and Centre Drive (Site B) Epping, which took account of the Cabinet Committee’s comments made at its December 2014 meeting consideration.

(1)        Queens Road, North Weald

(a)        The revised feasibility study of 12 x 3 bedroom, 2 storey units with a total of 28 car parking spaces be agreed as a viable site to progress to a detailed planning stage;

(b)        The terms of any existing licence/lease, allowing access to the allotments, be maintained; and

(c)        A further report be submitted to the Council Housebuilding Cabinet Committee should negotiations with the tenant in Queens Road, regarding the re-siting of the substation break down.

(2)        Site B, Centre Drive, Epping

The revised feasibility study of 1 x 3 bedroom house, 2 storey’s high with a total of 3 car parking spaces be agreed as a viable site to progress to a detailed planning stage.

Reasons for Decision:

At its meeting in December 2014, the Cabinet Committee asked that each of the 2 sites at Queens Road, North Weald and Centre Drive (Site B) Epping sites be revised to provide an alternative mix of dwellings. Each site is presented on its own merits at this stage. However, when each of the feasibility studies have been considered, the Cabinet Committee will then be asked to batch the sites in line with the Policy on Prioritisation of Sites.

Other Options Considered and Rejected:

1.            Not to progress with any of the schemes presented in the agenda report.

2.            To develop the sites with a different number of homes, or with an alternative mix of property types or parking allocation.