Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Decision register
To agree that the Council is committed to the delivery of the NEC AAP, including land disposal or assembly, and subject to formal adoption of the AAP in due course, to use its Compulsory Purchase Orders powers should they be required to facilitate delivery and there is a compelling case in the public interest.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for External Partnerships
Decision published: 17/11/2021
Effective from: 11/10/2021
Decision:
Matter for Decision
A joint Area Action Plan
(AAP) is being prepared by Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire District
Councils for North East Cambridge that will promote future structural change in
the layout and land use of parts of the area. This includes new strategic
walking and cycling connections; residential use of Nuffield Industrial Estate;
the consolidation of industrial uses around the aggregate railhead; and the
relocation of incompatible uses.
In addition to landowners,
developers and other delivery partners, the councils may have a role in
facilitating delivery of a new spatial framework for the area. Depending on the
circumstances and delivery options available, this may include the acquisition
or disposal of land, and may require use of compulsory purchase order powers.
To take the AAP to its
next formal stage, the councils must be able to demonstrate that the AAP is
‘deliverable’, including ensuring any required land assembly or relocations can
be delivered. An ‘in principle’ commitment to delivery of the AAP is therefore
sought from both councils to satisfy this requirement ahead
of the respective authority’s consideration of the Regulation 19 draft of the
Plan programmed for December 2021 – January 2022.
This is a not key
decision as this report seeks to establish an ‘in principle’ commitment to
deliver the AAP; a decision to acquire or dispose of land, or to use compulsory
purchase order powers, would be subject to a separate report to outline the
specific circumstances, the case for Council intervention, and resource
implications.
Decision of Executive
Councillor for Strategy and External Partnerships
i)
Noted that the North East Cambridge Area
Action Plan is contingent upon the separate Development Control Order being
undertaken by Anglian Water for the relocation of the Waste Water Treatment
Plant being approved;
ii) Subject to (i),
agreed that the Council is committed to the delivery of the North East
Cambridge Area Action Plan, including land disposal or assembly, and subject to
formal adoption of the Area Action Plan in due course, to use its Compulsory
Purchase Orders powers if required.
Reason for the Decision
As set out in the Officer’s report.
Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny Considerations
The Senior Planning Policy Officer introduced the report.
It was noted that the scrutiny committee and Executive
Councillor were not being asked to consider the detail of the AAP.
The Committee resolved by 4 votes to 0 to
endorse the recommendations.
The Executive
Councillor approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of
interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Julian Sykes
Update on progress following report to July Committee
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Transformation
Decision published: 17/11/2021
Effective from: 11/10/2021
Decision:
Matter for Decision
The report provided an update on the progress to date
and proposals in regard to the recovery programme and followed on the update
provided to committee in July 2021
Decision of Executive
Councillor for Finance and Resources
Noted the:
i)
content of the report and the update on financial support progress
ii)
emerging draft strategy and the intention to develop it further with
partners and stakeholders before bringing it back to committee
iii)
requirement to review the plans for council assets and related activity
outlined in section 5.10 to ensure that they align broadly with the vision and
principles developed and discussed at committee in January 2021 and also with
reviewed partner proposals around wider transport and other related issues
Approved the
iv)
in-principle proposals for residual grant funding support and delegated
approval of final details, contracting and oversight of implementation and
monitoring to the Strategic Director, in consultation with Chair and Spokes.
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 Strategic Director. It was noted that the grant funding had only
recently been confirmed hence the recommendation to delegate to the Strategic
Director in consultation with Executive Councillor, Chair and spokes.
The Committee made the following comments in
response to the report:
i.
Important to focus on the impact the pandemic has
had on opportunity for young people.
ii.
Would like to see what the Council is doing outside
of the city centre ie in the local neighbourhood centres?
iii.
Appendix A (Making Space for People Jan 2021) needs
to address the changes to retail ie internet shopping. How will Appendix 2 (Emerging Draft Strategy)
gel with both planned Local Plan and Transport Access to City consultations?
iv.
Is there a clear listing of the urgent risks (and
if not the Council’s whose) and prioritising the actions.
The Strategic Director
replied on local neighbourhood centres that the Draft Strategy would address
this, the current focus on the city centre was primarily because of the
Council’s key assets in that area.
The Executive Councillor
stated that the work undertaken by officers during this challenging time had to
be recognised. In answering the points,
he explained that the Vision was a draft but believed it was better to present
where we currently are, to share with the scrutiny committee and interested
stakeholders and residents. The
Executive Councillor agreed that disadvantaged young people must be a priority.
The Committee unanimously resolved (i, iii,
iv) and by 4-0 (ii) to endorse the recommendations.
The Executive
Councillor approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of
interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Fiona Bryant
To enable the Committee to scrutinise the Council's representative on the Combined Authority.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for External Partnerships
Decision published: 17/11/2021
Effective from: 11/10/2021
Decision:
The Leader of the Council updated the Scrutiny Committee on the
issues considered at the last three meetings of the Combined Authority. Members of the Scrutiny Committee raised
points about the use of regulated and un-regulated electric scooters in the
city, noting that the Voi trial, which was regulated, had been agreed to
continue to March 2022.
The Leader undertook to write to the Mayor seeking a wider
consultation on pros and cons of the Voi pilot in the city.
The Scrutiny Committee noted the update on issues considered
at the meetings on 28 July, 25 August and 29 September 2021.
Lead officer: Andrew Limb
Recommend the report to Council, which includes the Council's estimated Prudential and Treasury Indicators 2021/22 to 2024/25. Also, to revise any counterparty limits as applicable.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Transformation
Decision published: 16/11/2021
Effective from: 11/10/2021
Decision:
Matter for Decision
The Council has adopted The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and
Accountancy (CIPFA) Code of Practice on Treasury Management (Revised 2017).
The Code of Practice requires as a minimum receipt by full Council of an
Annual Treasury Management Strategy Statement – including the Annual Investment
Strategy and Minimum Revenue Provision Policy – for the year ahead, a half-year
review report and an Annual Report (stewardship report) covering activities in
the previous year
This half-year report has been prepared in accordance with the Code and
covers the following: -
·
The Council’s capital expenditure (Prudential
Indicators);
·
A review of compliance with Treasury and Prudential
Limits for 2021/22;
·
A review of the Council’s borrowing strategy for 2021/22;
·
A review of the Treasury Management Strategy
Statement and Annual Investment Strategy;
·
A review of the Council’s investment portfolio for
2021/22; and;
·
An update on interest rate forecasts following
economic news in the first half of the 2021/22 financial year.
Decision of Executive
Councillor for Finance and Resources to recommend that Council
i.
Approve the Council’s estimated Prudential and
Treasury Indicators 2021/22 to 2024/25 (Appendix A of the officer’s report).
ii.
Approve that the counterparty limit for building
societies with assets over £100bn be increased by £10m to £30m (Appendix B of
the officer’s report).
iii.
Approve the changes to the Cambridge Investment
Partnership loans in the counterparty list, to bring these into line with the
approved expenditure per the approved capital plan (Appendix B of the officer’s
report).
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 Head of Finance.
In response to a
request for further information, the Head of Finance undertook to provide to
the scrutiny committee the value of the CCLA Property Fund investment
each year since it was purchased.
Subsequent to the meeting, the following was provided:
Date |
Nominal Value (Cash deposited) |
Fair Value |
31 March 2015 |
£10,000,000 |
£9,434,022 |
31 March 2016 |
£10,000,000 |
£10,000,348 |
31 March 2017 |
£15,000,000 |
£14,534,900 |
31 March 2018 |
£15,000,000 |
£15,225,160 |
31 March 2019 |
£15,000,000 |
£15,461,733 |
31 March 2020 |
£15,000,000 |
£14,908,706 |
31 March 2021 |
£15,000,000 |
£14,802,709 |
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse
the recommendations.
The Executive
Councillor approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of
interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Caroline Ryba
To approve capital funding and underwriting conditions for funding from the Royal British Legion, for a scheme to extend Cherry Hinton Library to create a new community hub.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Transformation
Decision published: 16/11/2021
Effective from: 11/10/2021
Decision:
Matter for Decision
To provide additional funding to the capital
project following the decision by a key partner organisation to withdraw
financial support.
Decision of Executive
Councillor for Finance and Resources
i)
Approved £210,000 of funding from capital
receipts or borrowing (according to availability of receipts) in addition to
the £282,000 capital funding already approved in the February 2019 budget bid
(ref. 100256). This brings the total Council capital funding required to
deliver this scheme to £492,000 within a total estimated scheme budget of
£767,000.
ii)
Delegated authority to the Strategic Director in consultation with the
Head of Property Services and Executive Councillor for Finance & Resources,
to approve any leases and associated management agreements for up to 50 years,
as may be required for the management of the CH Hub building.
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 Strategic Project Manager,
Community Services.
The Committee expressed dismay at the way the
Royal British Legion had conducted itself with regard to
this project. Members were supportive
that this facility is provided in Cherry Hinton
nevertheless.
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse
the recommendations.
The Executive
Councillor approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of
interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Allison Conder
To agree the budget strategy and timetable for 2022/23, the net savings requirements by year for the next 5 years, and the revised General Fund revenue, funding and reserves projections.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Transformation
Decision published: 16/11/2021
Effective from: 11/10/2021
Decision:
Matter for Decision
This report presented and recommended the budget strategy for the
2022/23 budget cycle and specific implications, as outlined in the Medium-Term
Financial Strategy (MTFS) October 2021 document, which was attached and to be
agreed.
This report also recommended the approval of new capital items and
funding proposals for the Council’s Capital Plan, the results of which were
shown in the MTFS.
At this stage in the 2022/23 budget process showed the range of
assumptions on which the Budget-Setting Report (BSR) published in February 2021
was based need to be reviewed, in light of the latest
information available, to determine whether any aspects of the strategy need to
be revised. This then provides the basis for updating budgets for 2022/23 to
provide indicative budgets to 2031/32. All references in the recommendations to
Appendices, pages and sections relate to the MTFS.
The recommended budget strategy was based on the outcome of the review
undertaken together with financial modelling and projections of the Council’s
expenditure and resources, in the light of local policies and priorities,
national policy and economic context. Service managers had identified financial
and budget issues and pressures and this information had been used to inform
the MTFS.
It was noted that the budgetary implications of the Depot Relocation
reported elsewhere on the agenda and agreed by the Executive Councillor would be incorporated into an updated
version of the MTFS reported to Full Council.
Decision of Executive
Councillor for Finance and Resources to recommend to Council
i)
To agree the budget
strategy and timetable as outlined in Section 1 [pages 5 to 7 refer] of the
MTFS document.
ii)
To agree the
incorporation of changed assumptions and specific, identifiable pressures, as
presented in Sections 3 and 4 respectively [pages 19 to 30 refer]. This
provides an indication of the net savings requirement, by year for the next
five years, and revised projections for General Fund (GF) revenue and funding
as shown in Section 6 [page 36 refers] and reserves [Section 7 pages 37 to 41
refer] of the MTFS document.
iii)To agree the
revenue budget proposals as set out in Section 4 [pages 19 and 20 refer].
Description |
2021/22 £000 |
2022/23 £000 |
2023/24 £000 |
2024/25 £000 |
2025/26 £000 |
Additional
communications posts and digital consultation platform (license fee) -
recurring |
45 |
125 |
125 |
125 |
125 |
Additional
costs of redevelopment of commercial units at Colville Road Phase 3 |
|
120 |
120 |
|
|
Set
up costs of a new housing company and Registered Provider |
73 |
|
|
|
|
Feasibility
study to expand Cambridge City Housing Company |
70 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
188 |
245 |
125 |
125 |
125 |
Capital
iv) To note the changes to the capital plan and funding as set out in
Section 5 [pages 31 to 35 refer] and Appendix A [pages 49 to 52] of the MTFS
document.
v)
To agree changes to the
budget for the Meadows Community Hub and Buchan Street retail outlet scheme as
set out below.
Ref. |
Description / £’000s |
2021/22 |
2022/23 |
2023/24 |
2024/25 |
2025/26 |
2026/27 |
Total |
|
Proposals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SC694 |
Meadows Community Hub and Buchan Street retail
outlet |
(1,224) |
2,551 |
158 |
- |
- |
- |
1,485 |
|
Total proposals |
(1,224) |
2,551 |
158 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1,485 |
vi) To agree the replacement of third-party contributions of £210k for the
community extension to Cherry Hinton library with council funding.
Reserves
vii)To agree the
transfer of £3.1m and £0.8m of GF reserves into earmarked reserves to support
the delivery of the Our Cambridge transformation and recovery programme and to
provide a contingency fund for the programme [page 41 refers]. Furthermore, to
agree authorisation to draw down funding from these reserves to be as
described.
viii) To agree changes to GF reserve levels, the prudent minimum balance being
set at £6.64m and the target level at £7.98m as detailed in Section 7 [page 39
refers] and Appendix B [pages 53 and 54 refer].
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 Head of Finance.
The Committee made the following comments in
response to the report:
i)
Requested clarification on the additional
communication posts.
ii)
Will the Transformation Programme be analysed
project by project by Scrutiny/Executive Councillor?
In reply to Members’ questions:
i)
Officers would provide a note analysing the capacity and function of the
corporate communications team and setting out the case for additional communication posts.
ii)
paper recommending additional communication posts.
iii)
Transformation Programme projects would be taken to
the relevant Scrutiny Committee, along with the necessary consultation with
residents, staff and partners.
The Committee by 4 votes to 0 resolved to
endorse the recommendations.
The Executive
Councillor approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of
interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Caroline Ryba
To recommend that the UK Municipal Bonds Agency (UKMBA) Framework Agreement is approved
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Transformation
Decision published: 16/11/2021
Effective from: 11/10/2021
Decision:
Matter for Decision
To seek approval for the
council to enter into legal agreements with the UK Municipal Bonds Agency (the “agency”
or “UKMBA”) to enable the council to borrow from the UKMBA in the future,
should it wish to do so.
Decisions of Executive
Councillor for Finance and Resources
i)
Approved the
council’s entry into the UK Municipal Bonds Agency’s framework agreement and
its accompanying schedules including the joint and proportional guarantee;
ii)
Delegated authority to the Head of Finance as
Section 151 Officer and the Head of 3C Shared Legal Practice as Monitoring
Officer to sign those documents, as appropriate, on behalf of the council;
iii)
Granted the Section
151 Officer delegated authority to agree amendments to the framework agreement
as appropriate.
Noted:
iv)
the
framework agreement and its schedules, including the joint and proportional
guarantee, as set out in Appendix 2;
v)
consideration
of the council’s financial position and financial standing in section 5;
vi)
signing
the framework agreement does not make the Council subject to the joint and
proportional guarantee or other provisions of the framework agreement until
such time it borrows from the agency; and
vii)
the
assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of entering into the framework
agreement in section 6.
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 Head of Finance.
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse
the recommendations.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of
interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Caroline Ryba
The Exec Cllr is recommended to note the findings of the Housing Ombudsman Service in respect of this case and the actions taken by the Council in response
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Housing and Homelessness
Decision published: 12/11/2021
Effective from: 24/09/2021
Decision:
Matter for
Decision
This report summarises a
complaint upheld by the Housing Ombudsman Service relating to a housing repair,
acknowledges that there were shortcomings in relation to working practices
and sets out the action taken in response.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Housing
·
Noted the findings of the Housing Ombudsman Services in
respect of this
case and the actions taken by the Council in response to these findings.
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 Head of Housing.
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendation.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendation.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Lynn Bradley
Regular update on the delivery of new council homes under the 500 programme, together with an update on the work being undertaken to deliver an additional 1,000 Council homes. This update report includes feedback on the Homes England Strategic Partnership Bid.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Housing and Homelessness
Decision published: 12/11/2021
Effective from: 23/09/2021
Decision:
Matter for
Decision
This report provided an update on the housing
development programme.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Housing
i.
Noted the continued progress on the delivery of the Combined
Authority programme.
ii.
Noted the work undertaken to date toward development of the
new housing programme for 2022-2032.
iii.
Delegated authority to the Section 151 officer to start the
process to set- up a housing company as a Registered provider with a full
report of the details of this proposal to be brought to a future committee.
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 Head of the Housing
Development Agency.
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Claire Flowers
This report outlines work undertaken toward development of two housing infill schemes as a first pilot Net Zero Carbon development project, and seeks approval by the Executive Councillor for the proposed developments and associated budgets.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Housing and Homelessness
Decision published: 12/11/2021
Effective from: 23/09/2021
Decision:
Matter for
Decision
Two garage sites had been identified for a proposed
Net Zero Carbon pilot: St Thomas's Road Garages and playground (Coleridge) and
Paget Road Garages (Trumpington).
The scheme was being brought forward because it
represented an opportunity to redevelop existing garage sites to create new
additions to the Councils rented housing stock, built in accordance with Net
Zero Carbon Standards. It was hoped that the project would be
seen as an exemplar for the region and will facilitate knowledge
transfer of Net Zero Carbon technology
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Housing
i.
Approved the scheme budget of £3,947,000. This is split
between St Thomas’s Rd Garages (£2,105,000) and Paget Rd Garages (£1,842,000).
Part of the scheme budget totalling £265,0000 (£141,000 and £124,000
respectively) is subject to a successful bid to the ERDF to cover the cost of
the uplift from Passivhaus to Net Zero.
ii.
Authorised 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.
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 Head of the Housing
Development Agency.
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Ben Binns
This report updates the committee on work undertaken to date toward outlining regeneration opportunities across the councils stock, and recommends approval by the Executive Councillor of proposed approaches to regeneration activities. This report is accompanied by an updated regeneration policy detailing the council’s approach to engaging with local residents and stakeholders.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Housing and Homelessness
Decision published: 12/11/2021
Effective from: 23/09/2021
Decision:
Matter for
Decision
The Council committed to a proposed new delivery programme of 1,000 new Council homes at the Housing
Scrutiny Committee on 24th September 2020.
The city’s constrained boundaries as well as emerging
differences in quality standards across new and old council housing stock has
led to a proactive approach by council officers to reviewing the potential for
estate regeneration as part of the programme.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Housing
i.
Noted the progress made to date towards identifying possible
suitable candidate sites to be considered for regeneration as part of the new
housing programme and the estates that have already been identified.
ii.
Noted that the programme of review of estates will be carried
forward including survey work and consultation with residents. Ward Members
will be consulted prior to the commencement of survey work and prior to the
commencement of consultation with residents on particular
estates.
iii.
Approved the revisions to the Council regeneration policy as
set out in Appendix 2 and discussed in Part 5 of the officer’s report and to
add the policy to the council’s lettings policy.
iv.
Approved that the scheme be brought forward at Aylesborough Close with an indicative capital budget of
£19,030,000 to cover all site assembly, construction costs, professional fees
and further associated fees.
v.
Authorised the Strategic Director in consultation with the
Executive Councillor for Housing to approve variations to the scheme at Aylesborough Close including the number of units and mix of
property types and sizes outlined in this report.
vi.
Approved that, subject to Council approval of the budget,
delegated authority be given to the Executive Councillor for Housing in
conjunction with the Strategic Director to enable the Aylesborough
Close 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.
vii.
Delegated authority to the
Strategic Director to commence Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) proceedings on
Leasehold properties to be demolished to enable the development at Aylesborough Close, should these be required.
viii.
Delegated authority to the
Strategic Director to serve initial Demolition Notices under the Housing Act
1985.
ix.
Noted the work done to date toward
investigating the potential for modular rooftop and infill development across
the Council’s holdings as outlined in Part 7 of the officer’s report.
x.
Approved the inclusion of airspace
developments in the programme of new housing development for which finance has
already been made available.
xi.
Approved the outline approach of
proceeding with a Joint Venture partnership as the preferred method for
implementation of modular rooftop (airspace) development, subject to further
investigation and a further report.
xii.
Authorised the Head of the Housing
Development Agency to approve a site for a pilot project subject to
consultation with the Executive Councillor for Housing, the Head of Housing,
the Head of Finance and the Ward Members.
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 Head of the Housing
Development Agency.
The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:
i.
Tenant and Leaseholder
representatives had insisted that a letter was sent to tenants and leaseholders
if their estate was being considered as part of the regeneration programme.
ii.
Noted that a rigorous
examination of sites proposed for regeneration would be undertaken and that
this would include what further works were needed and any alternative options.
iii.
Noted the proposal to
use a joint venture to deliver the air space programme and queried if local
people would be trained to retain specialist knowledge and skills in Cambridge.
iv.
Questioned why a tenant
in rent arrears might not be offered alternative housing. Referred to page 284
of the agenda.
v.
Noted reference to
compulsory purchase powers and demolition notices in relation to Aylesborough Close and queried what steps were taken to
inform the community about these processes.
vi.
Noted reference to roof
top developments and queried if this could happen on existing homes. Asked what
steps would be taken to support existing residents. Did not want the living
standards of existing residents lowered as a result of these proposals.
vii.
Noted that the number of
units on site was doubled and asked if the density on all sites would be
increased.
The Head of the Housing Development Agency and Head of Housing said the
following in response to Members’ questions:
i.
Confirmed that they were only in the early stages
of the joint venture air space project and that local labour and supply chains
would be encouraged.
ii.
Most tenants were on social rent, new homes would
be built for affordable rent. There were clear provisions in the Council’s
Lettings policy; tenants who were affected by redevelopment would be awarded
emergency housing status and would therefore get top priority for rehousing.
iii.
Confirmed that modular roof top developments would
involve building on top of existing houses. There were benefits to this type of
development as it was a good way to get improvements to existing housing stock
for example adding a lift to the development.
iv.
The recommendations proposed in the officer report
were the same as those used on previous reports in relation to formal notices.
Compulsory purchase powers had not had to be used before as they had been able
to work with existing tenants. If it got to the point where there was only one
tenant preventing the development going ahead then more serious options may
need to be considered.
v.
Noted that each site needed to be assessed on its
own merits. Development was a planning led process,
they were not working to a fixed density on sites.
The Executive Councillor commented:
i.
That the council was only at the initial stages of
exploring potential sites for redevelopment, no decisions had been made, they
were only at the start of the process.
The Committee resolved:
- unanimously to endorse recommendations 2.1 and 2.2.
- unanimously to endorse recommendation 2.3.
- unanimously to endorse recommendations 2.4 to 2.8.
- by 7 votes to 0 to endorse recommendations 2.9 to 2.12.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Claire Flowers
To agree a Shared Ownership Policy for current shared ownership stock held by Cambridge City Council.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Housing and Homelessness
Decision published: 12/11/2021
Effective from: 23/09/2021
Decision:
Matter for
Decision
A Shared Ownership Policy has been produced to outline
the Council’s approach to the management of the current units of shared
ownership within the Housing Revenue Account, as well as the approach the
Council will take to support current shared owners in working towards or achieving
100% ownership.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Housing
i.
Approved the Shared Ownership Policy for current stock.
ii.
Agreed that the Council promotes staircasing, to 100%
ownership where financially feasible, with current Shared Ownership
Leaseholders.
iii.
Agreed the revised approach for deciding on the repurchase of
shared ownership units
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 Head of Housing.
The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:
i.
Noted that flexible tenure allowed leaseholders to
sell back shares to the Council in times of hardship and expressed concerns
about the removal of an option for people who were struggling financially. Asked if there were any current examples and
the costs involved of offering flexible alternatives.
ii.
Queried who set the cost of re-buying shares in a
property.
The Head of Housing said the following in response to Members’
questions:
i.
Short of repurchasing shares in a property
(which as the report outlines the Council would only do if it made strategic
sense for the Council to do so) the Council does not directly offer any
intermediate housing options. With regard to
social/affordable housing, there is a paragraph in the Council Lettings Policy
which states:
4.12.1 In line with the
‘Allocation of accommodation: guidance for local housing authorities in
England’, Cambridge City Council will usually only allocate social housing to
homeowners in exceptional circumstances. However, the City Council may allocate
housing that is in low demand. Applicants who are homeowners will usually be
allocated a Band D status. In exceptional circumstances Cambridge City Council
may consider a homeowner’s status. For example, Cambridge City Council may
allocate housing to applicants who require support and whose age qualifies them
for housing for older people, but who have insufficient financial resources to
access housing for older people in the private sector.
If, like any other potentially
homeless applicant, a shared owner has to sell their shares or defaults on the
mortgage, is facing repossession and does not have the financial means to
secure an alternative housing option the Council, through its homelessness
prevention services, can assist an applicant to access the private rented sector
through rent in advance and a rent deposit or via our Housing Benefit Plus
scheme which offers a one or two year rent subsidy and employment support to
help a household get back on its feet.
iii.
The Council used a valuer to calculate the
buy-back value of shares in a property. This was based on market value and
depended on the percentage of the share.
The Committee resolved:
- unanimously to endorse the recommendation 2.11
- unanimously to endorse the recommendation 2.12.
- by 10 votes to 0 to endorse the recommendation 2.13.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Catherine Buckle
To agree menu of car parking arrangements options with associated charges where applicable.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Housing and Homelessness
Decision published: 12/11/2021
Effective from: 23/09/2021
Decision:
Matter for
Decision
This report sets out a car parking strategy for both
existing residents’ car
parking and future new build sites. Its aim is
to provide a template for parking management at new and existing City Homes neighbourhood car parking areas across the City.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Housing
i.
Agreed to the approach to parking as set out in Figure 1 of
the officer’s report and utilise this approach across new build sites, except for those that
are managed by third parties (e.g. Management
Company).
ii.
Agreed to use Cambridgeshire County Council’s Traffic
Regulation Orders
(TRO’s) enforcement on the existing resident car parking areas identified by
City Homes in the future.
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 Head of Housing.
The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:
i.
Noted the system for issuing permits was poor and
the proposals should improve services.
ii.
Queried provision for active travel and access for
the deliveries.
iii.
Queried car club provision and expressed concern
with the equality implication that ‘the issue of carers will be looked at’ and
noted that informal carers would have no-where to park. Noted that tension could arise if there were
no spaces for workmen or contractors to park.
iv.
Noted there were no EV charging points and queried
the council’s strategy taking into consideration that the deadline for when
diesel and petrol cars would no longer be produced would be 2030.
The Head of Housing said the following in response to Members’
questions:
i.
Noted the report was the start of the process and
hoped it would make the process easier.
ii.
Officers were working with the County Council
regarding access and an area had been identified for e-cargo bikes. Access for
deliveries and contractors where a barrier existed typically worked on a fob
system with the ability to ring a flat for deliveries. In terms of e-cargo
bikes, they wouldn’t expect them to use the barrier as there would usually be a
cycle lane out. If not, a fob system would allow them entry and exit.
ii.
Car Clubs were part of the Council’s Design Guide
and would become increasingly important as car park ratios declined. The amount
of car club spaces would also depend on how close and how many bays there were
to the development.
iii.
Noted that Environmental Health Officers were
working with County Council Officers on a pilot on-street EV charging scheme.
iv.
Noted that new build sites would be well served for
EV charging provision but that further consideration
needed to be given to existing sites.
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Anna Hill
To approve the revised Empty Homes Policy for adoption.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Housing and Homelessness
Decision published: 12/11/2021
Effective from: 23/09/2021
Decision:
Matter for
Decision
The Empty Homes Policy is due for review every three
years. The review of the Empty Homes Policy 2017 was delayed due to the Covid19
pandemic. The revised Policy reflects operational changes at Cambridge City
Council, mainly the removal of the Empty Homes Loan and the inclusion of
partnership working with Town Hall Lettings, the Council’s social lettings
agency.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Housing
i.
Approved and adopted the revised Empty Homes Policy 2021
attached as Appendix 1 to the officer’s report.
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 Empty Homes Officer.
The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:
i.
Asked to see a table showing the number of empty
properties and length of time empty. Also for a link
to the Empty Home Officer’s list of empty properties to the Council tax list of
empty properties.
ii.
Said it would be interesting to see if there
were clusters of empty properties.
iii.
Asked how many properties were empty due to
probate delays.
iv. Queried
if more information could be included on the Council’s website to explain why
properties may remain empty for some time.
The Empty Homes Officer said the following in response to Members’
questions:
i.
There were 2 long term empty properties, over 10
years on their list due to probate delays.
There was not a list of which properties were empty solely due to
probate.
ii.
Asked to be sent details of empty properties
that the committee were aware of.
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendation.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendation.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Simonetta Macellari
Approval of latest financial assumptions for the HRA financial forecasts, of any in year budgetary changes for the HRA and of the approach to setting the budget for 2022/23.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Housing and Homelessness
Decision published: 12/11/2021
Effective from: 23/09/2021
Decision:
Matter for
Decision
The HRA Medium Term Financial Strategy
provided an opportunity to review the assumptions incorporated as part of the
longer-term financial planning process, recommending any changes in response to
new legislative requirements, variations in external national and local
economic factors and amendments to service delivery methods, allowing
incorporation into budgets and financial forecasts at the earliest opportunity.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Housing (Part 1)
i.
Approved the Housing Revenue Account Medium Term Financial
Strategy attached to
the officer’s report, to include all proposals for change in:
·
Financial assumptions as detailed in Appendix B of the
document.
·
2021/22 and future year revenue budgets, resulting from
changes in financial assumptions and the financial consequences of changes in
these and the need to respond to unavoidable pressures and meet new service
demands, as introduced in Section 5, detailed in Appendix D
and summarised in Appendices G (1) and G (2) of the document.
ii.
Approved delegated authority be given to the Strategic
Director to be in a position to confirm that the authority can renew its
investment partner status with Homes England.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Housing to recommend to Council (Part 2) to:
iii.
Approved
proposals for changes in existing housing capital budgets, as introduced in Sections 6
and 7 and detailed in Appendix E of the document, with the resulting position
summarised in Appendix H, for decision at Council on 21 October 2021.
iv.
Approved
proposals for new housing capital budgets, as introduced in Sections 6 and 7 and
detailed in Appendix E of the document, with the resulting position summarised
in Appendix H, for decision at Council on 21 October 2021.
v.
Approved the revised funding mix for
the delivery of the Housing Capital Programme, recognising the latest assumptions for the
use of Grant, Right to Buy Receipts, HRA Resources, Major Repairs Allowance and
HRA borrowing.
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 Assistant Head of
Finance and Business Manager.
The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:
i.
Queried the cost of building new homes versus
the cost of retrofitting older properties.
ii.
Asked to see the greenhouse gas impact of the
development proposals (ie: the effect on emissions if
the council didn’t do anything).
The Assistant Head of Finance and Business Manager said the
following in response to Members’ questions:
i.
No councils had been successful in gaining
partnership status with Homes England, officers had a meeting with them the
following day for feedback on their application. The benefit of having
strategic partnership status was that it would have guaranteed a grant for the
whole of the development process.
ii.
Some registered providers had been successful in
gaining strategic partnership status and these were generally larger
organisations than the City Council.
iii.
Ditchburn Place had some issues with void
properties whilst refurbishments were being carried out
but this was necessary to enable the refurbishment to be undertaken. The Covid pandemic also had an impact as the
vulnerable nature of residents and the number of communal areas meant that they
weren’t able to re-let the properties. They were now
able to re-let and were down to the last few properties.
The Committee resolved:
- by 10 votes to 0 to endorse the recommendations 2.1 – 2.2.
- by 6 votes to 0 to endorse the recommendations 2.3 – 2.5.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Julia Hovells
The report provides an update on the Estates & Facilities on compliance related work within the service, including a summary on gas servicing, electrical testing and fire safety.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Housing and Homelessness
Decision published: 12/11/2021
Effective from: 23/09/2021
Decision:
Matter for
Decision
The report provided an update on the compliance
related activities delivered within the Estates & Facilities Team,
including a summary on gas servicing, electrical testing
and fire safety work.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Housing
i.
Noted current position of the Council regarding Compliance,
and the progress of ongoing associated works.
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 Interim Risk and
Compliance Manager.
The Interim Risk and Compliance Manager and Director of Neighbourhoods
and Communities said the following in response to Members’ questions:
i.
The asbestos register included garages as it
covered solid structures.
ii.
Would follow up whether the emergency lighting had
been fixed.
iii.
Had requested the Internal Audit Team considered
potential for learning in relation to the gas safety issues, with a report
coming back to this committee when that work is completed.
iv.
Future reports would include an update on Hanover
and Princess Courts and Kingsway until works had been completed.
v.
Nobody would be left without heating for their
home. If tenants had gas central heating, the proposal was to change them to
electric central heating. 19 homes to date had been capped off.
The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendation.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendation.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Lynn Bradley
Approve revised Under Occupation Assistance Policy.
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Housing and Homelessness
Decision published: 12/11/2021
Effective from: 23/09/2021
Decision:
Matter for
Decision
The report presented the revised Under Occupation
Scheme Policy. The proposed changes reflected the Council’s intention to
provide help to more tenants who wished to move but lacked the financial
resources to do so.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Housing
i.
Approved the revised Under Occupation Scheme Policy as set
out in appendix 2 of the officer’s report.
ii.
Approved the implementation of the revised Under Occupation
Scheme Policy from 1st April 2022.
iii.
Extend the spending limit under this scheme in Financial Year
2021/22 by £10,000 to a total £31,900 through virements from underspent budget
areas, with BSR adjustments applied if necessary
through the next budget cycle
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 Head of Housing.
The Head of Housing said the following in response to Members’
questions:
i.
The fundamental driver is that no-one suffers
financial hardship.
Councillor Dalzell
proposed the following amendment, additional text underlined and
deleted text struckthrough.
Under ‘2. Recommendations’ add an additional recommendation:
‘2.3 To extend the spending limit under this
scheme in Financial Year 2021/22 by £10,000 to a total £31,900 through
virements from underspent budget areas, with BSR adjustments applied if necessary through the next budget cycle.’
Under ‘3.
Background’, amend:
3.7 To address the issues outlined, the council
seeks to introduce the following:
·
In the current
financial year, raise the financial cap on this scheme by £10,000 now through
virements from underspend budgets, or through adjustments in the 2022/23 HRA
Budget Report if required.
·
From 1 April 2022, reduce
the under-occupation payment so that more tenants can benefit from the scheme
·
Introduce a Financial
Statement assessment so that those who may be experiencing financial hardship
are prioritised and the burden of debt is minimised or avoided.
Under ‘6. a
Financial implications’
Approval would be given for overspends on
the current budget for 2021/22 by up to £10,000 funded through virements from
other budgets, which can be further supported by additional funding in 2022/23
HRA Budget Setting Report if required.
The budget of £21,900 for 2022/23 will
remain unchanged and a mid-year review of the impacts of the new policy
will take place in September 2022. To help inform the mid-year review,
additional performance monitoring will be implemented to assess if the aims set
out in this report have been achieved and financial adjustments considered
within the MTFS.
The Committee unanimously resolved to accept the amendments.
The Committee resolved unanimously to endorse the amended
recommendations.
The Executive Councillor
approved the amended recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest
Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.
Lead officer: Anna Hill