Issue - meetings

(Housing Portfolio Holder) To consider the attached report (C-034-2014/15).

(Housing Portfolio Holder) To consider the attached map in conjunction with the report (C-034-2014/15).

(1)        That, in accordance with the previous decision of the Council Housebuilding Cabinet Committee, the former garage site and associated amenity land at Burton Road,(‘the Land’) (as shown edged red on the plan attached to the report) identified for the development of Council House Building, be appropriated for planning purposes under provisions laid out in Section 122 of the Local Government Act 1972 (‘the 1972 Act’) and Section 226 (1) (a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (‘the 1990 Act’)  on the grounds that the Land was no longer required for the purposes for which it was currently held (as under-utilised garages and grassed amenity land) in the Housing Revenue Account;

(2)        That the Housing Portfolio Holder be delegated authority to sign a memorandum confirming the Cabinet decision that the Land had been appropriated from housing purposes to planning purposes prior to the planning application being submitted;

(3)        That the Leader of the Council be requested to amend the Terms of Reference for the Council Housebuilding Cabinet Committee to delegate authority to the Cabinet Committee to appropriate Council-owned land, held for housing purposes and  identified for Council housebuilding for planning purposes under provisions laid out in Section 122 of the 1972 Act  and Section 226 (1) (a) of the 1990 Act on the grounds that the land was no longer required for the purposes for which it was currently held in the Housing Revenue Account; and

(4)        That, for future development sites where consent from the Secretary of State would be required and pursuant to Section 19 of the Housing Act 1985 insofar as required,  the Director of Communities be given delegated authority to apply to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government for such consent, and subject to receipt of that consent, to advertise the Council’s intension to make the appropriation in accordance with the provisions of Section 122(A) of the 1972 Act.

The Housing Portfolio Holder presented a report concerning the appropriation of lane at Burton Road in Loughton.

The Housing Portfolio Holder reported that the Council Housebuilding Cabinet Committee had identified land at Burton Road in Loughton as suitable for redevelopment with the specific purpose of providing affordable housing for applicants on the Council’s Housing Register. The site was currently occupied by garages and grassed amenity land, but the majority of the garages stood empty so it was felt that the current use of the land was not fit for purpose. By appropriating the land for planning purposes, the Council would be able to secure its redevelopment. The land needed to be appropriated prior to the planning application being submitted, as there was no retrospective process for appropriation and there was a risk that the proposed redevelopment scheme could be frustrated by third party rights. The process for appropriation was laid out in Section 122 of the Local Government Act 1972 and Section 226 (1)(a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The Housing Portfolio Holder was also seeking authority to sign a memorandum confirming the appropriation of the land prior to the planning application being submitted.

The Housing Portfolio Holder requested that for future phases of the Council Housebuilding Programme, the terms of reference for the Council Housebuilding Cabinet Committee be amended, by the Leader of the Council, so that the Cabinet Committee could be delegated authority to appropriate Council-owned land for planning purposes on the grounds that it was no longer required for the purposes for which it was currently held in the Housing Revenue Account, under the relevant legislation listed above.

Finally, the Housing Portfolio Holder stated that although the consent of the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government under Section 19 of the Housing Act 1985 was not required on this occasion, as neither the land nor the garages were connected to the tenancy of a dwelling, this might not always be the case in the future. Consequently, the Cabinet was also requested to delegate authority to the Director of Communities to apply for such consent in the future, if required.

Decision:

(1)        That, in accordance with the previous decision of the Council Housebuilding Cabinet Committee, the former garage site and associated amenity land at Burton Road,(‘the Land’) (as shown edged red on the plan attached to the report) identified for the development of Council House Building, be appropriated for planning purposes under provisions laid out in Section 122 of the Local Government Act 1972 (‘the 1972 Act’) and Section 226 (1) (a) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (‘the 1990 Act’)  on the grounds that the Land was no longer required for the purposes for which it was currently held (as under-utilised garages and grassed amenity land) in the Housing Revenue Account;

(2)        That the Housing Portfolio Holder be delegated authority to sign a memorandum confirming the Cabinet decision that the Land had been appropriated from housing purposes to planning purposes  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65

(The Director of Communities) To consider the attached report (CHB-016-2013/14).

(1)     That the Cabinet Committee approves the development feasibility for the Burton Road Site, Loughton consisting of a 56-home scheme to progress to detailed planning stage, and if planning permission is received the invitation of tenders as Phase Two of the Council’s Housebuilding Programme;

(2)       That it be noted that the estimated capital investment required to deliver a scheme consisting of 56 new affordable rented Council properties in Phase Two, is around £8.9m including fees and works;

(3)       That an estimated subsidy of £1.512m  for a 56-home scheme be set aside for Phase Two in order to achieve a pay-back of 30 years with a positive Net Present Value (NPV) as required by the Council’s Development Strategy;

(4)       That a financial contribution of £18,400 to the NHS to fund healthcare should be included as part of the resultant planning permission by way of a Unilateral Undertaking, subject to the money being specifically spent on services in the Loughton area; and

(5)       That the Housing Portfolio Holder be authorised to submit a detailed planning application for the Burton Road development site.

The Assistant Director (Housing Property and Development) presented a revised report and feasibility studies regarding the Burton Road site in Loughton. Members were reminded that at the last meeting of the Cabinet Committee they had requested that the density of the site be increased and a new site design and feasibility study be brought to this meeting for approval. Officers presented the Cabinet Committee with two designs for the site:

(a)           a 42-home development; and

(b)           a 56-home development.

The Head of Development, East Thames Group stated that the Financial Appraisal models for both the Burton Road options had been formulated in line with the Council’s approved:

(i)         Development Strategy;

(ii)        Economic Assumptions Framework; and

(iii)       Affordable Rent Policy.

The costs used to formulate the appraisal had been taken from the cost build-up provided by Pellings LLP’s Quantity Surveyor.

The Head of Development, East Thames Group advised comparative information had been provided in the report to enable Members to decide between the two schemes. He stated that the information was broadly divided into two areas; financial and non-financial.

Financial

For both schemes:

(a)        Revenue first exceeds cost in Year 1;

(b)        The loan repayment was Year 30;

(c)        They each had positive Nett Present Values (NPV) of £2,196,159 (Option 1) and £3,182,344 (Option 2) respectively; and

(d)        They each had an Internal Rate or Return (IRR) of 5.34% (Option 1) and 5.46% (Option 2) respectively.

Whilst Option 2 had a higher level of capital investment it also produced a greater return (better NPV and IRR).

Option 1 had an NPV per person of £14,739 whilst Option 2 was £25,664.

Option 1 had an NPV per unit of £52,308 whilst Option 2 was £56,828.

Option 1 had a debt per unit of £130,308 whilst Option 2 was £132,558.

Option 2 had a lower build cost per square metre of £1,894 (gross floor area) as opposed to Option 1 which had a build cost per square metre of £1,685 (gross floor area). This was partly due to the fact that the level of enabling works remained broadly similar, as was the allowance for risk in the ground.

Non-Financial

Option 1 accommodates 149 people whilst Option 2 accommodates 212 people; 63 more people in Option 2.

Option 1 produces 30 family homes (2 bed homes and above) whilst Option 2 produces 42; 12 more family homes in Option 2.

Option 1 delivers 9 houses compared to 18 in Option 2; 9 more in Option 2.

The second option would therefore provide more family accommodation and hence a significantly greater child density, which was a decision making factor.

The Head of Development, East Thames Group also confirmed that Secure by Design certification would be sought as per the Council’s approved Development Strategy.

It was noted that Secretary of State consent would be required to appropriate the land for planning purposes, in order to facilitate the development.

Recommended:

(1)       That, subject to Secretary of State consent, the former garage site and associated amenity  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30