Issue - meetings

The text of the public question was published on the meeting page available via: Agenda for Housing Scrutiny Committee on Tuesday, 21st November, 2023, 5.30 pm - Cambridge Council

The responses to the public question and supplementary question are detailed below: 

The Executive Councillor for Housing and Homelessness responded:

i.               They had worked with ward councillors and officers to bring forward the review of potential options for Ekin Road.

ii.             There had been an independent survey undertaken and the communications company had knocked on every door to get feedback from all residents.

iii.            The results of the survey would be published in advance of the next Resident Liaison Group meeting.

iv.           Three quarters of the residents had engaged with the council. Councillors had attended consultations and they had offered to visit any resident who was concerned about the Ekin Road review.

v.             Noted that a proposal for Ekin Road hadn’t been approved. When there was a proposal for redevelopment, council officers would consider how many residents may have to move out. Consideration would be given to how much time would be needed, whether there were new council homes being built nearby or what individual needs were. The Council had considerable experience in working with tenant and leasehold households throughout the moving process.

vi.           If the East Barnwell development was approved by the committee, then this may be a moving option for residents if redevelopment for Ekin Road was approved. 

vii.          The council had a significant number of properties in the Barnwell area.

viii.        The survey highlighted that some Ekin Road residents did not wish to remain living at Ekin Road and would be seeking properties elsewhere in Cambridge.

ix.           The Council would help leaseholders and freeholders who were looking to purchase a new home in the city by working with partners to identify possible opportunities.

x.             The two redevelopment options looked at the possible purchase of freehold and leasehold properties. The council had undertaken compulsory purchase orders (CPOs) that had been confirmed by the Secretary of State. It had not been necessary to proceed to the end of the CPO process and evict anyone from their homes. This was due to the successful negotiations with residents. If redevelopment was approved at Ekin Road, then the council would work with homeowners to reach a solution. There are very clear regulations on the use of CPOs that protected homeowners and the council.

xi.           Had attended the initial consultation event and would be attending the next Ekin Road Liaison Group meeting.

xii.          Had full confidence in the team of officers and their partners who had a significant track record of managing estate regeneration projects.  They had experience in taking more than 800 council homes through the planning process. Over 100 households had been helped to move to enable these developments. In addition to these sustainable homes, the council had provided new shops, four new community centres and other community facilities such as pre-schools, new parks and play areas.

Supplementary public question:

        i.       It was 18 months into the process and residents hadn’t seen much of the Councillors.

      ii.        There was 5 degrees of separation between the company doing the survey and Councillors.

    iii.        Noted that it had been said that every door had been knocked on, but this did not mean that every household had been consulted.

    iv.       Had spoken with a household that Sunday and they had no idea that a survey was being undertaken.

      v.       Questioned why it was one response per household and not a response per person.

    vi.       Asked if the Council had undertaken a successful CPO for a freehold property.

  vii.        Noted reference had been made to properties being available because of the East Barnwell redevelopment but commented that this redevelopment was 5 years away from completion.

 viii.        Noted the Information Commissioner had issued a notice requiring the release of documents for a freedom of information request response.

The Assistant Director of Development responded:

        i.       Advised that the documents referred to regarding the freedom of information response had been released, one of which had already been published on the Council’s website.  

      ii.        The Council had experience with CPOs and had sought legal advice when required. The Council had never had to proceed fully with a CPO as successful negotiations had taken place with the homeowner. 

The Executive Councillor for Housing and Homelessness responded:

        i.       To manage responses, it was reasonable to proceed on a response per household rather than a response per person.

      ii.        Noted comments made regarding availability of housing at East Barnwell not being available for 5 years and commented that no decision had been made regarding Ekin Road and therefore the requirement for alternative housing may not arise for the same period of time or longer.