Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
31 New Build Housing - Campkin Road PDF 1 MB
Minutes:
Matter for Decision
The report referred to the
devolution deal with Central Government and sought approval for a capital
budget for the scheme based on
the
indicative capacity study which had been undertaken for the site and the
outlined appraisals referenced in the Officer’s report and for the delivery
route to be adopted.
Decision of the Executive Councillor for
Housing
i.
Approved the scheme in principle, recommending to Council, the inclusion
of an indicative capital budget for the scheme of £15,964,921 in the Housing
Capital Investment Plan, to cover all of the site assembly, construction costs,
professional fees and associated other fees to deliver
a scheme that meets an identified housing need in Cambridge City.
ii.
Approved that, subject to Council approval of the budget, delegated authority be given to the Exec Cllr
for Housing in conjunction with the Strategic Director to enable the site to be
developed through Cambridge Investment Partnership (CIP) subject to a value for
money assessment to be carried out on behalf of the Council.
iii.
Authorised, subject to Council approval of the budget, the Strategic
Director in consultation with the Executive Councillor for housing to approve
variations to the scheme including the number of units and mix of property
types and sizes outlined in this report.
iv.
Approved the use of the updated Council Home Loss Policy attached as
Appendix 3 of the Officer’s report.
v.
Delegated authority, subject to Council approval of the budget, to the
Strategic Director to commence Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) proceedings on
Leasehold properties to be demolished to enable the development should these be
required.
vi.
Delegated authority to the Strategic Director to serve initial
Demolition Notices under the Housing Act 1985.
Reason
for the Decision
As set out in the Officer’s report.
Any
Alternative Options Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny Considerations
The Committee
received a report from the Senior Development Manager Housing.
In response to
comments and questions from the Committee the Senior Development Manager Housing said the
following:
i.
Did not have the percentage figures for the area of
land the site was to be built on.
ii.
The form of the development had been set by the
need to keep the line of trees which ran along Campkin
Road.
iii.
Acknowledged there had been previous problems with
shared ownership tenures concerning the letting and selling of these properties.
The Committee had previously discussed these issues and possible solutions such
as changes to the tenure to reintroduce as homes for rent.
iv.
The scheme was for all council rented homes.
v.
There was currently no shared ownership in this
scheme.
vi.
The key factor was to deliver rented affordable
housing in the city.
vii.
Was aware that parking in the area was difficult.
The scheme’s proposal was a ratio of 0.65 parking spaces to each dwelling.
viii.
Did not believe the development had a major impact on
the availability of open spaces; the most significant aspect of the open space
was the line of trees earlier referenced.
ix.
In line with planning policy 5% of the dwellings
would be wheel chair adapted.
x.
Through the Climate Change Strategy and action plan
the Council were due to go to tender to install electric charging points across
the council car parks. The electric charging points would also be addressed
through the Council’s individual planning applications.
xi.
Tenants affected by the development would be given
emergency housing status. They would also be permitted to move back but this
would be at a higher rental rate. However there would a range of compensation
packages for a loss of their homes in the first instance and for those tenants
who were under occupied would have the option to downsize.
The Executive Councillor informed the Committee the unsold shared
ownership units on the Virido development had been
approved by Homes England to be turned into Council rented accommodation.
Approval from Planning was required to finalise this.
The Committee resolved by 5 votes to 0 to endorse the recommendations.
The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.