Issue - meetings

As this report contains a confidential appendix it may be necessary, by virtue of paragraphb3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006, to exclude the press and public during this item.

 

The committee resolved to exclude the press and public during this item as the report contained an exempt appendix, by virtue of paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006.

Matter for Decision: To consider the Affordable Housing Programme.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Housing:

 

The Executive Councillor resolved to:

 

i. Approve revisions to the 3 Year Rolling Programme 2012.13 to 2014.15 in the context of the wider Affordable Housing Programme

 

Reason for the Decision:

 

As per the officer report

 

Any alternative options considered and rejected:

 

Not Applicable

 

Scrutiny Considerations:

 

The committee received a report from the Head of Strategic Housing.

The committee made the following comments on the report

i.          Caution was expressed about the practice of re-developing garages in favour of housing, particularly in area of pre-existing limited parking. It was explained that with the increased popularity of smaller city style cars, the assumption that modern cars were too large should be challenged. The Head of Strategic Housing noted the concerns, however explained that in certain circumstance access or other constraints would preclude development including future use as garages.

ii.          Concern was expressed about the process, particularly the lack of pre-existing consultation with Ward Councillors or communities. The Head of Strategic Housing explained the rationale behind the process, and the mechanism for informing affected tenants.

iii.          Clarification was requested on the consultation in relation to Colville Road, Auger Road and 641-643 Newmarket Road. The committee were assured that the first two groups would be consulted, but that it had been discovered that the latter was a commercial premises not in the ownership of the city council, therefore would be removed from the list.

iv.          Concern was expressed about the length of time between initial notification of a proposal and further developments in specific examples, and the effect of the consequential uncertainty for existing residents. The Executive Councillor explained the mechanisms in place to support residents through this potentially uncertain time.

v.       It was noted that planned maintenance work had only just been completed at Anstey Way, and it was questioned whether the proposed scheme was likely to be viable. The Head of Strategic Housing explained that the report was requesting permission to investigate the viability of redeveloping the site identified in Anstey Way and that the condition of any existing properties wouold be taken into account.

vi.      In response to further concerns about the process, it was agreed share an example letter sent to resident with members of the committee. The Director of Customer and Community Services provided an overview and reminder of how and why the established process had been introduced

 

The Scrutiny Committee considered and endorsed the recommendations in the report by 4 votes to 0.

 

The Executive Councillor for Housing approved the recommendations.

 

Conflicts of interest declared by the Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)

 

N/A