Decisions

Matter for Decision

The report referred to a joint consultation response with South Cambridgeshire District Council to Water Resources East (WRE) who were consulting upon their first full draft Regional Water Resources Plan.

 

Decision of the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Infrastructure

      i.         Agreed the consultation response to be sent jointly with South Cambridgeshire District Council set out in Appendix 1 of the Officer’s report and that this should be sent to Water Resources East.

    ii.         Agreed that any subsequent material amendments be agreed by the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Infrastructure (in consultation with respective Chairs 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 Principal Planning Policy Officer.

 

In response to Member’s questions the Principal Planning Policy Officer, Planning Policy Manager and Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development said the following:

      i.         The draft WRE plan looks at reductions in abstraction with short term measures to prevent further deterioration of the environment and longer-term measures to enhance the environment.

    ii.         To address the impact of the current development; a change was needed in where the water was taken in the longer term and how Cambridge Water with external partners would manage that transition. This was not just a Cambridge specific problem but an issue across the East of England.

   iii.         Officers would be working with the Environment Agency looking at ways to improve integrated water management across the region with an understanding on how water planning could be improved for future use.

  iv.         Officers would be willing to address the water issues with surrounding local authorities as this was not a single location issue.

    v.         Officers were also exploring what could be done locally, engaging with the Lead Local Flood Authority regarding surface water management, which might enable better recharge of the aquifer through slower runoff rates to improve infiltration.

  vi.         Officers would continue to address water management while working with local partners to improve the conditions of the chalk streams locally.

 vii.         The Water Company Water Resource Management Plans should set out a strategy for the plan period.  The plans would then go to the water regulator to look at the cost to the consumer.

viii.         The scrutiny committee was not the forum for considering the Equality Impact Assessment, this was for the regulator to make comment. 

 

The Executive Councillor stated that the chalk streams were not adequately protected. The Ecology Officers were exploring the possibility whether the chalk streams could get international recognition under the Ramsar Convention through an application.

 

The Water Resources East Board stated that the Water Resources Management Plan should be at an ‘enhanced’ level not a business-as-usual plan, this was a late decision from the Board.

 

The Committee

The Committee unanimously endorsed the Officer recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport 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.

 

Matter for Decision

The report recommend that members confirm selected elements of the Greater Cambridge Local Plan development strategy via the Development Strategy Update (Regulation 18 Preferred Options).

 

 

 

Decision of the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Infrastructure

 

        i.         Agreed the Greater Cambridge Local Plan Development Strategy Update (Regulation 18 Preferred Options) (Appendix A), and in particular the proposed policy directions in section 5 for the following proposed policies:

a) Policy S/JH: Jobs and homes

b) Policy S/DS: Development strategy (to confirm three key sites  and development strategy principles to inform identification of any further sites)

c) Policy S/NEC: North East Cambridge

d) Policy S/CE: Cambridge East

e) Policy S/CBC: Cambridge Biomedical Campus

      ii.         Noted the findings of Appendix E: Sustainability Appraisal Update as a supporting document that has informed the decisions regarding the Greater Cambridge Local Plan development strategy update

     iii.         Agreed the following supporting documents that have informed the decisions regarding the Greater Cambridge Local Plan Development Strategy Update:

a) Appendix B: Strategy Topic Paper: Development Strategy Update (Regulation 18 Preferred Options),

b) Appendix C: Greater Cambridge Local Plan Consultation Statement: Development Strategy Update (Regulation 18 Preferred Options) which includes responses to representations relating to the content of this report,

c) Appendix D: Greater Cambridge Local Plan Consultation Statement: Equalities Impact Assessment: Development Strategy Update

    iv.         Noted the findings of the following new evidence documents that have informed the draft policy approaches set out in Appendix A: Greater Cambridge Local Plan Development Strategy Update (Regulation 18 Preferred Options) (see Background papers):

a) Greater Cambridge Economic Development, Employment Land and Housing Relationships Evidence Update (Iceni Projects), December 2022

b) Greater Cambridge Housing Delivery Study Addendum (AECOM), December 2022

      v.         Agreed that any subsequent material amendments be made by the Executive Member for Planning and Transport, in consultation with Chair and Spokes.

    vi.         Agreed that any subsequent minor amendments and editing changes that do not materially affect the content be delegated to the Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development in consultation with the Executive Member for Planning and Transport, 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 Planning Policy Manager and Strategy and Economy Manager.

 

In response to Member’s questions the Planning Policy Manager, the Strategy and Economy Manager and Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development said the following:

      i.         Agreed there needed to be an acceptable solution to the water supply issue and a focus on sustainable locations for future development

    ii.         Noted the comment that revised forecasts should be seen as a positive with regards to the increase in homes and jobs which reflected the continued growth of a successful local economy.

   iii.         It was proposed that the draft plan should include strong water standards for residential (design standard of 80L per person per day) and non-residential development; currently exploring the issues raised in the representations.

  iv.         Officers were engaged with consultants who were continuing to develop the integrated water management study to inform the local plan. Officers were also continuing to engage with the water company and the Environment Agency.

    v.         Cambridge Water Company were aware of the need to reduce typical water usage across the area when developing their Water Management Plan, to assist with this aspiration they were rolling out the installation of smart meters.

  vi.         Not as simple to say that all the surrounding areas in Cambridgeshire had the same water resource issues as Greater Cambridge; Greater Cambridge is unique in being supplied solely by groundwater.. 

 vii.         Neighbouring local authorities had been contacted during preparation of the first proposals on a range of issues, including whether they could accommodate any of Cambridges planned growth and would need to be contacted again if the identified needs could not be met within the area in line with the requirements of National Planning Policy.

viii.         Regarding the suggestion to expand the plan period, this would also lead to the identified needs increasing would go up further. However, there was potential for that need to be spread and the suggestion would be explored.

  ix.         The local economy was experiencing a strong growth period. Consultants had looked at similar growth economies around the world and there would be a point of gradual slow down. Continued studies were likely to be required as the emerging Local Plan moved forward.

    x.         Consultants had looked at a range of growth scenarios that might play out across different industrial sectors to draw their conclusions.     

  xi.         To achieve a balance across the economy there was a need for other types of sectors to grow such as the industrial and warehouse sector. The Service would be looking at what could be done to support a variation of roles, not just the life sciences and clusters. 

 xii.         An entire range of infrastructure was being explored such as water, electricity, transport as examples when supporting healthy and sustainable communities.

xiii.         There were significant challenges to achieve water neutrality; in the short term it was expected to require work on reducing water consumption, and highlighting the importance of water recycling including grey water.

xiv.         In simple terms the economy in Cambridge would continue to grow and more homes were required. It was important to demonstrate the proposals were sound and deliverable having regard to the requirements for Local Plans set out in the National Planning Policy Framework.

xv.         Welcomed comments on suggested formatting of the documentation.

xvi.         Noted the comment that accommodation linked to the commercial growth. The Genome Campus was an example of this.  Key worker provision was being discussed as part of exploring the rationale for the expansion of the biomedical campus.

xvii.         Officers were working to understand the housing need for all sectors of workers and how that need could be responded to.

xviii.         Believed there was a conversation to be had around acceleration of delivery of housing rates, recognising the limits of the market housing. However, it was not always in the interest of the development sector to build as many homes as might be required. There was also a limitation on the number of people able to get a mortgage and the number of people who wanted to purchase a property which must be considered amongst other factors.

xix.         The City Council had received public funding to supply an increase in council homes which was one of element of the housing need being identified from economic growth.

xx.         It was important to look at the rate and diversity of the portfolio of new homes that came forward at the same time to achieve an inclusive community.

 

The Committee

 

The Committee unanimously endorsed the Officer recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport 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.

 

No decision.

This report provides an update on progress to date and next steps for the North East Cambridge (NEC) Core Site project, and the Housing Infrastructure Fund programme delivery.

 

The whole NEC area encompasses around one square kilometre within the City and South Cambridgeshire geographies.

 

The North East Cambridge (NEC) Core Site, situated south of the A14, west of the science park and north of the Cambridge business park, is one of the last large scale brownfield development regeneration sites suitable for housing development in Cambridge. The location beside the A14, Cambridge North Station, the guided bus way and the Chisholm Trail, make this a highly accessible and sustainable location. The Core Site of around 49ha is owned by Anglian Water Authority and Cambridge City Council and is located within Cambridge City Council’s boundary. It currently houses the Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant (CwwTP). The relocation of this plant is key to unlocking the potential both for this site and for the wider area.

 

There are three key projects associated with the Council and relating to the proposed Core Site development which include:

 

1. Planning Framework North East Cambridge Area Action plan (NEC AAP or AAP) and the emerging Greater Cambridge Local Plan (GCLP)– led by Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Service.

2. Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant Relocation - Cambridge Waste Water Treatment Plant Relocation Project (CwwTP) – led by Anglian Water and funded through HIF. Cambridge City Council is the grant recipient from Homes England for the HIF funding. Grant Monitoring meetings occur monthly.

3. NEC Core Site Development – led by Cambridge 4 LLP, a joint venture between Anglian Water and Cambridge City Council (with reserved matters to Cambridge City Council and Anglian Water), with master developers U&I and TOWN. The project board, comprising members from U&I, Anglian Water and the City Council, meets quarterly and reports to the LLP Board. The LLP Board, comprising members from Anglian Water and the City Council, meets quarterly and is administered by Anglian Water. All reserved matters are referred for decision to the Anglian Water Board and to Executive Cllr/scrutiny committee at the Council. Quarterly reports are also submitted to the Executive Members.

 

It should also be noted that other key landowners are also progressing development proposals and consented plans within the wider NEC area. Whilst the Core site project team are actively engaged with other landowners, this report does not focus on progress other than for the Core Site. The Planning framework and the CwwTP projects are only covered in very high level summary owing to the Core site project’s interdependency with them.

 

Key progress has been mainly focussed this year on the Development Consent Order application, which is due to be submitted in early 2023. For the Core Site, 2022, like 2021, has been focussed on the widest possible engagement programme, focussed on the vision, values and very early master planning stages. Key elements include:

 

·       Appointment of new master planners and confirmation of main team

·       Progress towards a final DCO application and Approval of the Draft Regulation 19 North East Cambridge Area Action Plan

·       Review of the Master Development Agreement

·       Engagement programme for the Core Site including launch in February 2022

·       Establishment of the Ideas Exchange

·       Schools Programme with Cambridge Curiosity and Imagination

·       People, City and Planet Festival October 2022

·       Implementation of the Core Site Branding exercise

·       Establishment of the AAP wide draft transport strategy, to be completed in 2023

·       Progress on proposals for Meanwhile site activation and Early phase development, in compliance with current site constraints

·       Planning 2023 refresh of the landowner group with independent chair, and submission of capacity bid to Homes England

The outcome of the engagement programme is being fed back into the workstreams on an ongoing basis. Emerging themes include:

 

·       General support for the promises and values and for the early engagement

·       Prioritisation of the values based around Openness to all and Living within Environmental means followed by Integration with nature

·       Focus on the practical implications of low or no car use

·       A truly mixed-use urban place

·       A balance of homes and jobs

·       Successful public realm with vibrant animated streets and close amenities

·       A range of new types of homes & ownership models

Key risks for the Core site remain within the planning and transport arenas, with the added risk this year of the inflationary rises, which are currently impacting on both the Relocation project and Core Site development. The longer-term timelines of the project may provide some mitigation on this basis, but reviewing the business cases and working closely with Homes England and DHLUC will be key during 2023.

 

Decision of the Leader of the Council:

 

·       Note the progress and next steps reports for the project workstreams.

·       Note the increased risks arising as a result of the inflationary pressures and delegate authority to the Director to work on further risk mitigation to assure the Council that the programme remains on track for delivery.

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

 

A Public Speaker made a statement.

 

The Director of Enterprise and Sustainable Development introduced the report.

 

The Director of Enterprise and Sustainable Development said the following in response to Members’ questions:

 

       i.          The Area Action Plan cannot come forward until the final determination of the Development Consent Order (DCO).

      ii.          The DCO would be subject to inspection.

    iii.          The North East Cambridge landowner group were seeking to appoint an independent chair. There were a number of independent task groups. One of those is the general infrastructure. They were re-engaging with utilities, water management, connectivity. They were re-engaging in regard to energy. Early evidence raised some risks in regard to an AAP wide energy provision. They were looking at key sites and neighbourhoods, whichever is more efficient. However this will all be reviewed.

The Committee noted the report.

 

The Leader of the Council agreed to note the report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

 

Not applicable.

This is a regular report to the Scrutiny Committee each cycle providing an update on the activities of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority (CPCA) Board since the last meeting on 10 October 2022 of the Scrutiny Committee.

 

Decision of the Leader of the Council:

 

·       Provide an update on the Board issues and considered at the meetings of the Combined Authority Board held on 19 October, 30 November 2022 and 25 January 2023.

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

 

The Assistant Chief Executive introduced the report.

 

The Leader of the Council provided a verbal report.

 

It was noted that there had been a Combined Authority (CA) board meeting last week and there was a budget debate, as well as the Mayor’s budget. Including a suggestion for a precept of £1.00 per month for council tax for Band D properties to ensure that the 23 bus services saved last year can continue.

 

The Committee noted the report.

 

The Leader of the Council agreed to note the report.

The Chief Executive is reorganising the senior management of the Council and has been consulting staff. The Senior Management Review proposals are integral to the Council’s transformation programme - Our Cambridge. This report provides the scrutiny committee with an overview of the consultation feedback and revisions to the proposals.

 

The foreword to the consultation is at Annex A. The consultation document is a separate attachment. The key elements of the proposals include:

 

·       Re-arranging the management of council teams into five groups to create a flatter structure, improve collaboration, and increase efficiency.

·       Reducing the cost of senior management by 20 per cent through a reduction in the number of posts.

·       Achieving around £0.3m net savings per annum once the new structure is fully implemented.

The Civic Affairs Committee will consider changes to the senior officer pay structure on 8 Feb 2023 which implement aspects of the proposals. The Employment (Senior Officer) Committee is responsible for recommending severance packages over £100k to Council.

 

Decision of the Leader of the Council recommended to Council:

 

 

·       That the Council approves the restructuring proposals set out in this report:

 

a) the deletion of the following posts at Director level: Director of Communities and Neighbourhoods; and Director Enterprise and Sustainable Development; and

 

b) the creation of the following new posts at Director level: Director, Communities; Director, City Services; Chief Operating Officer.

 

c) the deletion of the following posts at Head of Service level:

-        Head of Commercial Services

-        Head of Community Services

-        Head of Corporate Strategy / Assistant Chief Executive

-        Head of Environmental Services

-        Head of Housing Maintenance and Assets

-        Head of Housing Services

-        Head of Human Resources

-        Head of Property Services

-        Head of Transformation 

 

d) the creation of the following new posts at Assistant Director level, which will be composed of 2 levels:

-        Assets and Property (AD2)

-        Assistant Chief Executive (AD2)

-        Housing and Homelessness (AD1)

 

e) to note that the following posts will be subject to slotting-in arrangements with new post titles:

-        Head of Finance to Chief Finance Officer (AD1)

-        Head of Housing Development Agency to Assistant Director, Development (AD1)

 

f)   the creation of a new Head of People and a Head of Transformation on 2-year Fixed Term contracts at Band 11, while future leadership arrangements for ‘Transformation, Digital and HR’ are considered. 

 

g) that the Chief Executive is given delegated powers to take all steps necessary to implement the new structure (other than those delegated to the ESOC) including final determination of the Council's staffing structure below Director level, and

 

H) where specific changes to the Constitution are required the Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer should make such changes.

That the Council notes:

h) the Head of 3C Shared Legal Services (Head of Service) and Council’s Monitoring Officer becomes an Assistant Director grade (AD1) in the new grade structure. 

i) the Head of Building Control (Head of Service) post will be reviewed once the Greater Cambridge Shared Planning Service management restructure has been fully implemented.

j) changes proposed to the senior officer Leadership Behaviours following feedback from the consultation (see Annex B).

k) that the transitional Group structure will provide staff with certainty about line management arrangements and are a starting point for each Group organisational redesign (Annex C).

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

 

The Chief Executive introduced the report.

 

The Chief Executive said the following in response to Members’ questions:

 

       i.          Portfolio division is a decision for Members.

      ii.          There had been comprises made in regard to the naming of groups, however there will be more work done on the group structure over time.

    iii.          It will be possible to reduce to four groups if this was something that needs to be done in future.

    iv.          The Head of HR is proposing some changes to pay for recruitment and retention. A report was going to the Civic Affairs Committee on the 8^th of February about this.

The scrutiny committee unanimously approved the recommendations.

 

The Leader of the Council approved the recommendations.

 

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

 

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

This report presents the GF draft budget for 2023/24 and a summary of the responses to the associated public consultation. The draft budget is balanced using £2.9m of reserves and reduces the overall five-year savings requirement by £0.4m.

 

A briefing note covering the provisional local government finance settlement, council tax and business rates calculations and other proposed updates to the draft budget is included at Appendix B.

 

Following scrutiny, a final GF budget setting report (BSR) will be produced for presentation to The Executive on 9 February 2023, for recommendation to Council on 23 February 2023. Comments from the Scrutiny Committee will be reported to the Executive and Full Council.

 

Decision of the Executive Councillor for Finance, Resources and Transformation and Non-Statutory Deputy Leader recommended to Council:

 

·       That this report, including the estimated Prudential and Treasury Indicators for 2023/24 to 2026/27 (inclusive) as set out in Appendix C, be approved.

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

 

The Scrutiny Committee received an introduction from the Head of Finance, who updated on the final Local Government Settlement being more than expected which in turn will result in less use of Reserves than forecast dependent on consideration by the Executive on 9 February of the final position.  The Section 25 report from the Head of Finance will accompany the updated Budget Setting Report to the Executive.

 

Cllr Bick proposed an amendment:

 

“Add new recommendation (3):

 

“Invite the Executive to reconsider the following budget items:

 

·       S5118 - Closing some Public Conveniences

Until the council has agreed an overall public toilet strategy, identifying logical locations where needs should be met, necessary investment in ongoing facilities and future coinless access options

 

·       S5143 - Environmental Services – reductions In staffing

On the basis that this would reduce capacity for one of the council’s primary activities at a point when the need is for more, rather than less coverage across the city to support increasing regulation and increasing population

 

·       S5102 – Cancel Big Weekend City Event

Until alternative models for funding and mounting this or a similar event have been examined

 

·       S5110 – Remove remaining subsidy for last 3 bus routes (from 2024/25)

And revisit when the budget for 2023/24 is considered, when we know what the GCP strategy would be and how this would affect bus services”

 

The Chair proposed that the amendment be passported to the Executive for consideration with no debate.  This was agreed by the Scrutiny Committee.

 

There was then some debate on whether the amendment had in fact been supported by the Scrutiny Committee. The meeting was adjourned whilst advice was sought from the Monitoring Officer on the process for presenting the amendment to the Executive.

 

Once re-convened the Chair proposed the amendment be altered to refer to invite the Executive to consider (ie. not re-consider).  Cllr Bick requested the amendment be voted on as submitted.

 

The amendment was lost by 3 votes to 5.

 

The Chair then proposed the amendment be altered as above which was approved by 5 votes to 0.

 

Scrutiny Committee unanimously supported the recommendations for the Executive Councillor for Finance, Resources and Transformation:

 

-Agree the proposed updates to the draft budget set out in Appendix B

-Note and consider the outcomes of the public consultation presented in Appendix C

-That the Executive is requested to consider the budget items listed above.

 

The Executive Councillor for Finance, Resources and Transformation approved the recommendations and re-iterated that a review of the new budget process should be undertaken by the scrutiny committee at the conclusion of this year’s process.

 

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

 

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

To provide comments on the contents of the company's draft business plan to the company's Board of Directors.

This report presents an update on the council’s wholly owned housing company, Cambridge City Housing Company Limited (CCHC). The updated business plan for CCHC for the period 2022/23 – 2031/32 is attached. CCHC performed well over the past year in terms of letting its own stock, with low void levels, minimal arrears, and low levels of antisocial behaviour over the past year. The Annual General Meeting will be on 8 March 2023. Since Covid-19, CCHC leased 5 properties from the council to re-let to rough sleepers to help meet their needs, providing accommodation to help keep them safe and provide support. However, this model has proved to be unsuitable for this cohort and as tenancies are brought to an end, at the request of the council these leases are being collapsed prematurely.

 

Decision of the Executive Councillor for Finance, Resources and Transformation and Non-Statutory Deputy Leader:

 

·       Note the comments of the Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee on the draft business plan; and

·       To inform the board of directors of Cambridge City Housing Company of the comments of the Strategy & Resources Scrutiny Committee for consideration in finalising the Business Plan

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

 

The Head of Finance introduced the report.

 

The Head of Finance said the following in response to Members’ questions:

 

       i.          Would enquire what happens to people whose leases were closed.

      ii.          Financial implications of bringing HRA leases to a premature close were that any losses that came from damage, failure to collect rent, leases themselves, the Council would bore the cost.

    iii.          The Council had a relatively small number of properties (23), they are managed by Townhall Lettings. They keep in touch with tenants and signpost to help when needed. By doing so they have been able to keep the voids quite low.

    iv.          Have not had a problem with large amount of void works.

     v.          Always keep loan under review.

 

The scrutiny committee approved the recommendations 7-0 (1 abstention)

 

The Executive Councillor for Finance, Resources and Transformation and Non-Statutory Deputy Leader approved the recommendations.

 

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

 

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

The Executive Councillor will recommend the strategy to Council. (Item to be considered by Council on 23 February 2023.)

The council continues to develop and expand well-established, long term capital planning. This report presents the capital strategy of the council together with a summary capital programme for the General Fund (GF) and Housing Revenue Account (HRA). The previous capital strategy was approved by Council on 24 February 2022. The strategy is focused on providing a framework for delivery of capital expenditure plans over a 10-30 year period. These plans cover spending on operational assets to support service delivery and on investments which provide an income for the council alongside meeting the council’s objectives in relation to economic development and place-making, regeneration and climate change mitigation. Governance arrangements are also outlined in order to ensure the capital programme continues to deliver value for money.

 

Decision of the Executive Councillor for Finance, Resources and Transformation and Non-Statutory Deputy Leader recommended to Council:

 

• The capital strategy to Council

• Note the summary capital programme

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

 

The Deputy Head of Finance introduced the report.

 

The Head of Finance and the Deputy Head of Finance said the following in response to Members’ questions:

 

       i.          How proportionality is measured was that it is an ongoing assessment. It was about risk. It was about the proportion of the Councils income that was reliant on commercial activities and the proportion that is council tax, business rates, government grants for example. There was a higher risk around commercial income.

      ii.          Equality and Poverty implications are measured by complete equality impact assessments. There was an equality impact assessment attached to the budget setting report. There were specific indications when it comes to anti-poverty.

    iii.          Had conversations with Lion Yards owner/operator in regards to the re-generation of this commercial area. The owner/operator decided to not involve the Council.

    iv.          On Park Street there were three different tranches. The drawdown of the £85 million loan is spread over 2-3 years. The interest rate was variable on the three tranches and it is between 1.6-1.7%. If the Council were to arrange Public Works Loan Board (PWLB) loans at this point in time, to draw down now interest rates would be 4.5-5%.

     v.          When asked how much this would save the council over the life of the loan stated that could not give an exact number at this moment and would need to get back to Committee about that. However can say is it would be in the millions of pounds.

 

The Director of Enterprise and Sustainable Development said the following in response to Members’ questions:

 

       i.          The Council needs to be clear about its social purpose. Many of the smaller commercial units have played a part in that. The overarching valuations of the investment plan over a longer term the values are going up and the rental income is going up. They were working to minimise voids and support business through a difficult period and an ongoing difficult period. Over the last two years they have been working on setting up payment plans to avoid voids.

      ii.          The re-letting of smaller spaces, there are a wide range of uses that can meet the rental income within the city.

    iii.          Overall, the value of the commercial portfolio is rising over a long-term basis.

    iv.          The asset management plan will be published in the spring.

 

The scrutiny committee unanimously approved the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor for Finance, Resources and Transformation and Non-Statutory Deputy Leader approved the recommendations.

 

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

 

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

The Council’s current contract for electricity supply ends on 30 September 2024. A new supply contract is required to ensured continued supply at best possible rates.

Decision of the Executive Councillor for Finance, Resources and Transformation and Non-Statutory Deputy Leader:

 

·       Approve continuing to purchase electricity via the Eastern Shires Purchasing Organisation (ESPO) energy framework.

·       Recommend the next contract period for the provision of electricity should run for four years from 1st October 2024 to 30th September 2028. Cambridge City Council may terminate this agreement by providing at least twelve months’ notice, prior to the anniversary date of 1 October each year, following the initial 2-year period.

·       Authorize the Strategic Director or Head of Housing Maintenance and Assets to approve the actual electricity price tariff when the procurement is completed by ESPO.

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

 

The Contract and Procurement Manager introduced the report.

 

The Contract and Procurement Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

 

       i.          The term of the contract was fixed but the price may fluctuate in accordance with the frameworks terms and conditions.

      ii.          Using the buying power of the ESPO to try and reduce the volatility of inflation the current heating supply market.

    iii.          The Council were locked into the dates that are set by ESPO. They have the buying power to get the best possible price.

    iv.          The Council could go through an independent broker however the Council does not have the necessary expertise to get the best price and negotiate through a broker.

     v.          If the Council did nothing now it would not stop us from participating with the framework. As whether we could extend the existing contract, the Contract and Procurement Manager would need to look into this as he was not party to the conversations with the Asset Manager and ESPO.

    vi.          Confirmed that the Council will be using 100% renewable sources.

  vii.          Confirmed that the contract could be terminated after two years, with a twelve month notice.

 

 

The scrutiny committee unanimously supported the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor for Finance, Resources and Transformation and Non-Statutory Deputy Leader approved the recommendations.

 

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

 

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

Recommend this report to Council, including the estimated Prudential & Treasury Indicators for 2023/24 to 2025/26.

The Council is required to receive and approve, as a minimum, three main treasury management reports each year. The first and most important is the Treasury Management Strategy (this report), which covers:

 

•       capital plans (including prudential indicators);

•       a Minimum Revenue Provision policy which explains how unfinanced capital expenditure will be charged to revenue over time;

•       the Treasury Management Strategy (how investments and borrowings are to be organised) including treasury indicators; and

•       a Treasury Management Investment Strategy (the parameters on how investments are to be managed).

A mid-year treasury management report is produced to update Members on the progress of the capital position, amending prudential indicators as necessary, and advising if any policies require revision.

The Outturn or Annual Report compares actual performance to the estimates in the Strategy. The statutory framework for the prudential system under which local government operates is set out in the Local Government Act 2003 and Capital Financing and Accounting Statutory Instruments. The framework incorporates four statutory codes. These are:

 

•       the Prudential Code (2021 edition) prepared by CIPFA;

•       the Treasury Management Code (2021 edition) prepared by CIPFA;

•       the Statutory Guidance on Local Government Investments prepared by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) (effective 1 April 2018); and

•       the Statutory Guidance on Minimum Revenue Provision prepared by DLUHC (effective 1 April 2019).

The Council’s S151 Officer has considered the deliverability, affordability and risk associated with the Council’s capital expenditure plans and treasury management activities. The plans are affordable. Where there are risks such as the slippage of capital expenditure, or reductions in investment values or income, these have been reviewed and mitigated at an acceptable level. The Council has access to specialist advice where appropriate. Treasury Management Reports are required to be adequately scrutinised before being recommended to the Council. This role is undertaken by the Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee.

Decision of the Executive Councillor for Finance, Resources and Transformation and Non-Statutory Deputy Leader recommended to Council:

 

·       That this report, including the estimated Prudential and Treasury Indicators for 2023/24 to 2026/27 (inclusive) as set out in Appendix C, be approved.

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

 

The Deputy Head of Finance introduced the report.

 

The scrutiny committee unanimously approved the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor for Finance, Resources and Transformation and Non-Statutory Deputy Leader approved the recommendations.

 

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

 

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

 

 

 

The Head of Finance introduced the General Fund Budget Setting Report (BSR) 2023/24. It was noted that a public consultation on the draft BSR had been carried out following approval of the draft BSR at the 8 December 2022 Executive meeting. A summary of the public consultation responses was included as Appendix B to the BSR covering report.

 

Following scrutiny of the draft budget at the Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee, the BSR had been updated for the Executive meeting to reflect:

-       the provisional and final financial settlements which provided an additional £2 million funding;

-       business rate collection surplus; although these numbers are still provisional and subject to further work;

-       changes to budget proposals;

o   S5110 Bus Subsidises saving had been removed

o   URP5012 Increase in Member allowances

o   S5118 Closing some Public Conveniences – Quayside toilets had been removed from the budget saving proposal.

o   B5144 Contribution to Energy Costs Earmarked Reserve added

-       a change from a use of reserves of £2.9 million to a contribution to reserves of £2.5 million and accompanying narrative; 

-       inclusion of Head of Finance’s section 25 report.

 

The Executive Councillor for Finance Resources and Transformation outlined the context for changes made to the BSR following the public consultation. 

 

The Executive spoke to areas of change within the BSR and also explained why particular savings within the BSR had been retained. Opposition Councillors were then invited to ask questions.

 

Councillor Bick expressed concern with the budgetary process followed at the Strategy and Resources Scrutiny Committee regarding amendments to the BSR.

 

In response to Opposition Councillors questions, the Executive made the following comments:

i.      Noted that a number of factors were feeding into the transformation programme, this included the Senior Management review, the development of the Operational Hub and the decision regarding the Guildhall.

ii.    Noted that feedback from the public consultation emphasised the priority attached to maintaining essential public services. Discussions would need to take place with staff about how core services could be improved through the transformation process.

iii.   A summary of the outturn forecast for the general fund was included within section 4 of the BSR (page 40 of the agenda).

iv.  With reference to budget proposal URP 5012 – Increase in Member Allowances – advised that this was a technical response to give effect to a decision which had been made at Full Council to increase member allowances in accordance with the rate of the national living wage. It was felt appropriate to do this to open up representative democracy to all.

v.    With reference to budget proposal S5117 – Vacant Posts removal – advised that this budget proposal was part of a cross council process which looked at posts which had been vacant for a long period of time.

vi.  With reference to budget proposal S5143 Environmental Services – reduction in staffing - advised that the new staffing arrangements with 6 Environmental Enforcement Officers working in pairs worked well. Noted that the Council’s response to fly tipping involved not only Enforcement Officers but also officers from the Streets and Open Spaces Team and the Waste Team. It was anticipated that a new ICT system would assist people to report instances of fly tipping.

vii. With reference to budget proposal S5139 – Streets and Open Spaces Recruitment Freeze – advised that the council had struggled to recruit into certain roles (rapid response, LG driver and general operative) in the Streets and Open Spaces Team. The Council had undertaken an open day at the Depot, which had resulted in the successful employment of two new employees. As part of the transformation process, felt it was sensible to review the need for certain roles where the council had struggled to recruit people into them. Noted that market occupancy rates were back to pre-pandemic levels on a Friday and Saturday, but occupancy rates mid-week were still challenging. Noted some market traders had retired following the pandemic. To try and increase market stall occupancy rates, the Council had been advertising market stalls on the radio and were also trying to support new young market traders.

viii.        Budget proposal S5118 – closing some public conveniences – advised that the costs to clean and maintain public conveniences were increasing and the council needed to ensure that toilets were available in a good, clean and safe condition. Options had been explored to increase the price of coin operated toilets to 50p or to introduce card payment options but these options would introduce costs which would negate savings made on the cleaning / maintenance of toilets.   

ix.  Budget proposal S5102 – cancel big weekend city event –there was a perception that there were a lot of opportunities for sponsorship of events but unfortunately following the covid pandemic, commercial sponsorship was not available in the same way as it was previously.  Consideration was being given to including the Mela in an expanded ‘music in the park’ event. The council was looking to enhance events which took place in local communities. 

x.    Budget proposal S5113 – it was hoped that the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority would fund the bus subsidies in the future.

 

The Executive resolved unanimously to recommend Council to:

        i.       Approve

• Revenue Pressures and Bids shown in Appendix C(b) and Savings shown in Appendix C(c) in the BSR.

 

• Non-Cash Limit items as shown in Appendix C(d) in the BSR.

 

• Bids to be funded from External Funding sources as shown in Appendix C(e) in the BSR.

      ii.        Confirm delegation to the Chief Financial Officer (Head of Finance) of the calculation and determination of the Council Tax taxbase (including submission of the National Non-Domestic Rates Forecast Form, NNDR1, for each financial year) which is set out in Appendix A(a) in the BSR.

    iii.        Approve the level of Council Tax for 2023/24 as set out in Appendix A (b) (to follow for Council) and Section 2, page 2.

    iv.       Delegate to the Head of Finance authority to finalise changes relating to any further corporate and/or departmental restructuring and any reallocation of support service and central costs, in accordance with the CIPFA Service Reporting Code of Practice for Local Authorities (SeRCOP).

      v.       Approve proposals outlined in Appendix D(a) in the BSR for inclusion in the Capital Plan.

    vi.       Subject to (v) above, approve the revised Capital Plan for the General Fund as set out in Appendix D(c) in the BSR and the Funding as set out in Section 5, page 17.

  vii.        Note the impact of revenue budget approvals and the resulting contribution to reserves [Section 6, page 21].

 viii.        Create an Energy Cost Earmarked Reserve as set out in Section 6, page 21.

    ix.       Note the resulting level of reserves [Section 6, page 21].

      x.       Note the Chief Finance Officer’s Section 25 Report included in Section 8 of the BSR.

    xi.       Note the schedule of proposed fees and charges for 2023/24 in Appendix F of the BSR

a) Approve the proposed charges for HRA housing rents and service charges.

b) Consider the revenue budget proposals.

c) Consider the capital budget proposals.

Matter for Decision

As part of the 2023/24 budget process, the range of assumptions upon which the HRA Business Plan and Medium Term Financial Strategy were based, have been reviewed in light of the latest information available, culminating in the preparation of the HRA Budget Setting Report.

 

The HRA Budget-Setting Report provides an overview of the review of the key assumptions. It sets out the key parameters for the detailed recommendations and final budget proposals and is the basis for the finalisation of the 2023/24 budgets.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Housing

      i.         Approved that council dwellings rents for all social rented and social shared ownership properties be increased by 5%, recognising that inflation measured by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) at September 2022, plus 1% would result in an increase of 11.1%, that the government has introduced a cap on rent increases at 7% from April 2023, but that a local decision is made to implement a lower rent increase to mitigate the impact on tenants. Rent increases will take effect from 3 April 2023. This equates to an average rent increase of £5.36 per week.

    ii.         Approved that affordable rents, inclusive of service charge, are also increased by 5% in line with the increase for social rents. This equates to an average rent increase of £7.81 per week.

   iii.         Approved that rents for affordable shared ownership properties are increased by 7% or RPI at January 2023 plus 0.5% whichever is the lower, from April 2023, recognising that although the government rent cap does not apply to this tenure, an increase of in excess of 7% may put undue financial pressure on these households.

  iv.         Approved that garage and parking space charges for 2023/24, are increased by inflation at 3%, recognising that although inflation is currently at a higher rate, there is a need to balance increases with the ability to let vacant garages, and that charges for parking permits are reviewed, with any resulting charges summarised in Section 3 of the HRA Budget Setting Report.

    v.         Approved the proposed service charges for Housing Revenue Account services and facilities, as shown in Appendix B of the HRA Budget Setting Report.

  vi.         Approved the proposed leasehold administration charges for 2023/24, as detailed in Appendix B of the HRA Budget Setting Report.

 vii.         Approved that caretaking, building cleaning, window cleaning, estate services, grounds maintenance, temporary housing premises and utilities, sheltered scheme premises and utilities, digital television aerial, gas maintenance, door entry systems, lifts, electrical and mechanical maintenance, flat cleaning, third party services, specialist equipment and catering charges continue to be recovered at full cost, as detailed in Appendix B of the HRA Budget Setting Report, recognising that local authorities should endeavour to limit increases to inflation as measured by CPI at September 2022 (10.1%) plus 1%, wherever possible.

viii.         Approved with any amendments, the Revised Budget identified in Section 4 and Appendix D (1) of the HRA Budget Setting Report, which reflects a net reduction in the use of HRA reserves for 2022/23 of £16,521,190.

  ix.         Approved with any amendments, any Non-Cash Limit items identified in Section 4 of the HRA Budget Setting Report or shown in Appendix D (2) of the HRA Budget Setting Report.

    x.         Approved with any amendments, any Savings, Increased Income, Unavoidable Revenue Bids, Reduced Income Proposals and Bids, as shown in Appendix D (2) of the HRA Budget Setting Report.

  xi.         Approved the resulting Housing Revenue Account revenue budget as summarised in the Housing Revenue Account Summary Forecast 2022/23 to 2027/28 shown in Appendix J of the HRA Budget Setting Report.

 

The Executive Councillor recommended Council:

        i.       Approve the revised need to borrow over the 30-year life of the business plan, with the first instance of this anticipated to be in 2023/24, to sustain the proposed level of investment, which includes ear-marking funding for delivery of the 10 Year New Homes Programme.

      ii.        Recognise that the constitution delegates Treasury Management to the Head of Finance (Part 3, para 5.11), with Part 4F, C16 stating; ‘All executive decisions on borrowing, investment or financing shall be delegated to the Head of Finance, who is required to act in accordance with CIPFA’s Code of Practice for Treasury Management in Local Authorities.

    iii.        Recognise that the decision to borrow significantly to build new homes impacts the authority’s ability to set-aside resource to redeem the HRA Self-Financing debt at the point at which the loan portfolio matures, with the need to re-finance debt in the latter stages of the business plan.

iv. Approve capital bids, as detailed in Appendix D (3) and Appendix E of the HRA Budget Setting Report.

v. Approve the latest Decent Homes and Other HRA Stock Investment Programme, to include re-phasing of elements of the programme into later years, as detailed in Appendix E of the HRA Budget Setting Report.

vi. Approve the latest budget sums, profiling and associated financing for all new build schemes, as detailed in Appendices E and H, and summarised in Appendix K, of the HRA Budget Setting Report.

vii. Approve allocation of £10,964,000 of funds from the budget ear-marked for the delivery of new homes into a scheme specific budget for East Road, in line with the scheme specific report presented as part of the committee cycle.

viii. Approve the revised Housing Capital Investment Plan as shown in Appendix K of the HRA Budget Setting Report.

ix. Approve inclusion of Disabled Facilities Grant expenditure and associated grant income from 2022/23 onwards, based upon 2022/23 net grant awarded, with approval of delegation to the Head of Finance, as Section 151 Officer, to approve an in year increase or decrease in the budget for disabled facilities grants in any year, in direct relation to any increase or decrease in the capital grant funding for this purpose, as received from the County Council through the Better Care Fund.

x. Approve delegation to the Head of Finance, as Section 151 Officer, to determine the most appropriate use of any additional Disabled Facilities Grant funding, for the wider benefit of the Shared Home Improvement Agency.

xi. Approve delegation to the Strategic Director to review and amend the level of fees charged by the Shared Home Improvement Agency for disabled facilities grants and repair assistance grants, in line with any recommendations made by the Shared Home Improvement Agency Board.

xii. Approve delegation to the Strategic Director, in consultation with the Head of Finance, as Section 151 Officer, to draw down resource from the ear-marked reserves for potential debt redemption or re-investment, for the purpose of open market land or property acquisition or new build housing development, should the need arise, in order to meet deadlines for the use of retained right to buy receipts or to facilitate future site redevelopment.

xiii. Approve delegation to the Head of Finance, as Section 151 Officer, to make any necessary technical amendments to detailed budgets in respect of recharges between the General Fund and the HRA, with any change in impact for the HRA to be reported and incorporated as part of the HRA Medium Term Financial Strategy in September 2023.

xiv. Note the result of the Homes England Compliance Audit in respect of rough sleeper property acquisitions at confidential Appendix M, recognising there is no corrective action to be taken.

 

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.

 

In response to a member question the Executive Councillor advised that rents were proposed to be increased by 5% as they felt this was the appropriate level of increase in the current economic climate. An increase of 7% would be too much. 

 

The Head of Housing Maintenance and Assets noted that funding had been allocated within the budget to pay for works to bring council homes up to Energy Performance Rating (EPC) rating C. Works could include external wall insulation, ventilation upgrades and new windows. Each property would be surveyed and assessed to see what works would be suitable to bring the property up to an EPC C rating. 

 

Councillor Howard introduced the Green and Independent Group’s commentary on the Housing Revenue Account Budget Setting Report.

 

Councillor Porrer introduced the Liberal Democrat Amendment to the 2023/24 Housing Revenue Account Budget Setting Report.

 

Lulu Agate read out a comment on behalf of Tenant Representative Colin Stevens regarding the Liberal Democrat budget amendment papers. Colin felt it was possible to keep homes warm and have an airflow (by opening windows) and by educating people this may reduce the need for repairs and empower people to live in a property in a responsible fashion.  The Housing Ombudsman had carried out research into how best to communicate with tenants about how tenants can better their own situation.

 

Mandy Powell-Hardy noted that if tenants did not report repairs to the Council this could create and exacerbate DMC issues.

 

The Assistant Head of Finance and Business Manager and the Head of Housing Maintenance and Assets said the following in response to Members’ questions:

i.               Advised that there was not an existing backlog in response repairs. There had been a significant underspend during the financial years 2020/21 and 2021/22 during the Covid pandemic period for a variety of reasons. There was not a dedicated officer employed to deal with damp, mould and condensation (DMC) as per the Liberal Democrat Budget amendment. Officers [a surveyor, tenant liaison officer and multi-skilled officer] were currently seconded to deal with DMC issues. Reporting levels for responsive repairs were back to pre-covid levels, but it was noted that these appear to be lower value repairs. It was expected that reporting levels of DMC would reduce during the summer months even if a level of proactive works continued. DMC concerns were also expected to be picked up through the tenancy audits.

ii.             Advised that a surveyor had been seconded from the Void Inspections Team to respond to responsive repair issues and a surveyor from the Responsive Repair Team was covering DMC inspections. A tenant liaison officer was providing administrative support. The was no backlog of work created by the secondments.

iii.            There was not an out of hours service for routine repairs but there was an out of hours service for emergency repairs (24 hours per day 365 days a year). Senior Officers were looking into whether appointments for tenant repairs could be offered outside officer’s contracted working hours of 8-4pm. A discussion with officer’s would be required as potentially changes to officer’s contracts of employment (which specifies certain working hours) would be required.

iv.           The only way to speed up the tenancy audits process would be to put more resource into it to deliver it more quickly. Tenancy audits were undertaken by a number of housing officers but the resource currently equated to one full-time post.      

 

The Liberal Democrat Group amendments were voted on and recorded separately.

 

The following votes were chaired by Diana Minns.

 

1.3 a) A proposal to employ two full time equivalent additional Multi-Skilled Operatives for a fixed period of 2 years (£100,840 per annum), with a view to these posts working specifically to address any backlog in responsive repairs and to avoid future underspends in this budget by giving staff the additional resources required to catch up. These posts will be employed on contracts (full or part time) that support out of hours working to allow the backlog to be addressed in late afternoons, evenings and on Saturdays, thus reducing some of the persistent ‘no access’ issues that have been experienced by the service and which may often be caused by tenants being out at work and not able to allow access during standard working hours.

 

The amendment was lost by 4 votes in favour, 8 against and 1 abstention.

 

1.3 b) A proposal to pilot the potential for the existing workforce to volunteer to work additional hours as overtime in the late afternoons, evenings or on Saturdays to support catching up the backlog, should staff wish to undertake this work. This would supplement the work done by the two FTE additional posts above, and the opportunity to earn overtime pay would be entirely voluntary. A fund of £11,470 is set aside to allow this pilot to proceed. This is equivalent to 300 hours overtime including all on-costs.

 

The amendment was lost by 3 votes in favour, 7 against and 3 abstentions.

 

1.3 c) A proposal to include a revenue bid of £51,840 per annum to employ a dedicated Damp, Mould and Condensation (DMC) Officer. The post would work proactively with data on existing repair requests from tenants and from void inspections to future proof the housing stock across the city against case of damp, mould and condensation. They would deploy mitigation measures to ensure that if one house experiences a problem, the knowledge is rolled out to all similar stock types before future problems arise and ensure that operatives are empowered to treat the root cause and not just the effects of DMC. They would also work with environmental health to educate residents to help reduce risk.

 

The amendment was lost by 4 votes in favour, 6 against and 3 abstentions.

 

1.3 d) A proposal to invest £10,000 in additional consultancy input to complete the energy modelling assessment exercise across the entire portfolio of council housing stock. This would build upon an earlier exercise that was completed for a small proportion of the housing stock as part of submitting a current bid for Social Housing Decarbonisation Grant Funding in the autumn of 2022. Importantly, it would ensure that the data is readily available for future government bids.

 

The amendment was lost by 4 votes in favour to 9 against

 

1.4 a) Amendment to revenue bid B5038 for increased staffing capacity for Housing IT Development, to make the post a two year fixed term post, as opposed to a permanent post. This would reduce costs by £50,930 per annum from 2025/26 onwards, whilst still allowing IT development, improvement and enhancement to take place over the next two years. This fits within the Corporate Transformation timescales and with the proposed review of ICT provision across the council and allows future HRA IT development to align with General Fund provision.

 

The amendment was lost by 2 votes in favour, 8 against and 2 abstentions.

 

b) Amendment to revenue bid B5083 for increased staffing capacity for Service Improvement, to make the post a two year fixed term post, as opposed to a permanent post. This would reduce costs by £59,550 per annum from 2025/26 onwards, whilst still allowing service improvement to be delivered over the next two years. This then fits within the Corporate Transformation timescales and allows for review once the impact of the additional resources from Bids LDB1 and LDB2 has been assessed alongside this post in two years.

 

The amendment was lost by 2 votes in favour, 8 against and 2 abstentions.

 

1.4 c) An increase in garage rents of 5%, as opposed to the 3% currently incorporated into Budget, recognising that this will still impose an increase at a rate far lower than inflation. This will generate additional income of £16,060 per annum and is in line with the current proposals to raise rental income to 5%.

 

The amendment was lost by 5 votes in favour, 6 against and 1 abstention.

 

The Committee resolved:

i.               by 9 votes in favour to 0 against and 3 abstentions to endorse the recommendations a-d

ii.             unanimously to endorse recommendations e-g.

iii.            by 9 votes in favour to 0 against and 3 abstentions to endorse the recommendations h-k

 

The following vote was chaired by Councillor Thittala Varkey.

 

The Committee resolved by 7 votes in favour to 0 against and 1 abstention to endorse recommendations L - y.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.

 

Post meeting note

 

An amended version of the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Budget Setting Report (BSR) was presented to Council on the 23 February 2023 following a number of key changes which arose since Housing Scrutiny Committee had met on the 24 January 2023. The changes are set out in the Housing Revenue Account Budget Setting Report (BSR) 2023/24 to Council. Agenda for Council on Thursday, 23rd February, 2023, 6.00 pm - Cambridge Council. The report amended some of the Executive Councillor for Housing decisions which had previously been taken on 24 January 2023 and the Executive Councillor for Housing recommendations to Council on 23 February 2023. Please refer to the 23 February 2023 Council minutes for the final decisions.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

 

 

Record of Executive Decision

 

£500M LOCAL AUTHORITY HOUSING FUND REFUGEE SCHEME – APPROVAL TO DELIVER LONGER TERM HUMANITARIAN SCHEME ACCOMMODATION THROUGH THE 22-32 NEW BUILD HOUSING PROGRAMME, PARTLY FUNDED BY CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

 

Decision of: Councillor Bird, Executive Councillor for Housing

 

Reference: 23/URGENCY/HSC/2

 

Date of decision: 3/2/2023    Date Published on website: 8/2/23

 

Decision Type: Key Decision

 

Matter for Decision: Urgent approval to deliver longer term humanitarian scheme accommodation through the existing 2022-32 new build housing programme, partly funded by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities

 

Why the Decision had to be made (and any alternative options): The date for formalising the agreement and entering into an Memorandum of Understanding with DLUHC falls between Committee Cycles, and cannot wait for the next Housing Scrutiny Committee date in March 2023. As detailed further in Appendix A.

 

The Executive Councillor’s decision: The Executive Councillor agreed to:

 

2.1.   Delegate Authority to the Section 151 Officer to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities to allow for the payment of allocated funding to the Council.

 

2.2.   Approve that the delivery of longer term accommodation to cater for recent humanitarian schemes be delivered as part of the Councils 2022-2032 New Build Housing Programme.

 

2.3.   Approve that an indicative budget of £11,367,366 be drawn down and re-phased from the sum already ear-marked and approved for investment in new homes in future years, to cover the costs associated with delivering 30(Thirty) homes to serve as longer term accommodation catering for the eligible cohort as defined in 3.2 and to recognise grant funding of £4,968,683 towards this expenditure. Following the meeting of this need the properties delivered will revert to General Needs Housing held within council stock.

 

2.4.   Authorise the Strategic Director to approve the purchase of open market properties into Council Stock to serve as housing for the eligible cohort as defined in 3.2., subject to consultation with the Executive Councillor for Housing, the Head of Housing, and the Head of Finance.

 

2.5.   Delegate authority to the Strategic Director to reallocate current pipeline housing delivery and / or acquisitions to serve as housing for the eligible cohort as defined in 3.2., subject to consultation with the Executive Councillor for Housing, the Head of Housing, and the Head of Finance.

 

2.6.   Approve that the property at 8 St Thomas Road which is under purchase negotiations by the Council be allocated to cater for the eligible cohort as indicated in 3.2., with this property to become available to support wider local authority general housing and homelessness responsibilities after the immediate needs of the eligible cohort have been addressed.

 

2.7.   Delegate authority to the Strategic Director in consultation with the Executive Councillor for Housing to approve use of Council land as sites for modular PODs on an individual basis to deliver homes to cater for the eligible cohort as indicated in 3.2.

 

Reason for the decision: As detailed in Appendix A.

 

Scrutiny Consideration: The Chair and spokes of the Housing Scrutiny Committee was consulted prior to the action being authorised.

 

Report: See Appendix A

 

Conflict of interest: None.

 

Comments: Part 4C section 6.1 of the Councils Constitution, permits decisions to be taken which are outside of the budget framework if the decision is:

a matter of urgency (this is correct)

it is not practical to convene a quorate meeting of the Council, (this is correct); and

the Chair of the Housing Scrutiny Committee agrees the matter is of urgency (the Chair agreed).

 

The next available ordinary Full Council meeting is 23 February 2023 which is too late.

 

The decision will be reported back to the Housing Scrutiny Committee at the next meeting in March 2023.

 

With regard to purchase of homes from the open market, focus was requested to ensure that  EPC standards across council stock are still met. Officers confirm that this is being taken into account. 

 

In response to concerns about modular (pod) homes officers have confirmed that the discrepancy between deliverable size and current National Space standards is marginal, and while not met these homes make highly efficient use of available space.

 

In response to concern noted due to very tight deadlines for delivery, officers responded that there are some risks, but targets are deemed achievable.

 

In response to concerns about the impact on households currently on the housing register, officers confirm that, refugee families would be entering the register through existing processes anyway, with a large majority eligible for high banding and associated priority for housing allocations.

 

Officers have confirmed that assurance on future use of modular homes will be agreed within the planning process with officer inputs. Any reassurances which are put in place in line with planning approvals for these homes will be required to met in perpetuity.

 

Officers have confirmed that properties delivered under this funding scheme will provided as permanent tenancies for qualifying households.

Officers have confirmed that the properties to be provided will be eligible for Right to Buy, as all of our existing new build programme is currently.

 

Officers have confirmed that currently rent tenure is being modelled at affordable rents, subject to clarity awaited from DLUHC. This is at 60% of market rent, in line with the new build housing delivery.

 

Officers have confirmed that a revision of the HRA Budget Setting Report will be presented to Council to reflect this decision.

Appendix A

Executive Summary

 

1.1.       The Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) have introduced a £500 million capital fund to support Local Authorities who have been assessed as facing the greatest challenges in providing move on and settled accommodation for recent humanitarian schemes (Afghan and Ukrainian refugees).

 

1.2.       Cambridge has provisionally been identified as eligible for capital grant funding (under section 31 of the Local Government Act 2003), with the following indicative allocation:

 

1.2.1. A main element of £4,640,000 in funding to be used to provide a minimum of 29 homes.

 

1.2.2. Bridging element: £328,683 in additional funding to allow the provision of at minimum 1 larger 4+ bed home to be allocated to households currently residing in bridging accommodation.

 

1.3.       Delivery is required to be part funded/financed by local authorities, amounting to 60% of costs to be met by the Council. This would require council top up funding of £6,090,000 in respect of the main element and £308,683 in respect of the bridging element.

 

1.4.        A budget is requested to be drawn down from the sum already ear-marked and approved for investment in new homes. The cost is to cover the costs associated with delivering a minimum of 30 (thirty) homes to serve as longer term accommodation catering for recent humanitarian schemes (Afghan and Ukrainian refugees), with this stock to become available to support wider local authority general housing and homelessness need after the immediate needs of the eligible cohort have been addressed.

 

1.5.       DLUHC have indicated that funding allows for the rerouting of existing pipeline delivery to accommodate for priority refugee housing need.  A proposal to meet the requirements of this fund is set out in this report.

 

1.6.       DLUHC funding pre-allocated under this scheme is significant and could allow the potential to increase the overall new build housing delivery across the 10-year programme in the long term.

 

1.6    Delivery is requested by a target date of 30 November 2023,

 

Recommendations

The Executive Councillor is recommended to:

 

1.7.       Delegate Authority to the Section 151 Officer to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities to allow for the payment of allocated funding to the Council.

 

1.8.       Approve that the delivery of longer term accommodation to cater for recent humanitarian schemes be delivered as part of the Councils 2022-2032 New Build Housing Programme.

 

1.9.       Approve that an indicative budget of £11,367,366 be drawn down, and re-phased, from the sum already ear-marked and approved for investment in new homes in future years, to cover the costs associated with delivering 30(Thirty) homes to serve as longer term accommodation catering for the eligible cohort as defined in 3.2 and to recognise grant funding of £4,968,683 towards this expenditure. Following the meeting of this need the properties delivered will revert to General Needs Housing held within council stock.

 

1.10.   Authorise the Strategic Director to approve the purchase of open market properties into Council Stock to serve as housing for the eligible cohort as defined in 3.2., subject to consultation with the Executive Councillor for Housing, the Head of Housing, and the Head of Finance.

 

1.11.   Delegate authority to the Strategic Director to reallocate current pipeline housing delivery and / or acquisitions to serve as housing for the eligible cohort as defined in 3.2., subject to consultation with the Executive Councillor for Housing, the Head of Housing, and the Head of Finance.

 

1.12.   Approve that the property at 8 St Thomas Road which is under purchase negotiations by the Council be allocated to cater for the eligible cohort as indicated in 3.2., with this property to become available to support wider local authority general housing and homelessness responsibilities after the immediate needs of the eligible cohort have been addressed.

 

1.13.   Delegate authority to the Strategic Director in consultation with the Executive Councillor for Housing to approve use of Council land as sites for modular PODs on an individual basis to deliver homes to cater for the eligible cohort as indicated in 3.2.

Background

 

1.14.   Funding

1.14.1.      DLUHC have introduced a £500 million capital fund to support local authorities who have been assessed as facing the greatest challenges in providing move on and settled accommodation for recent humanitarian schemes (Afghan and Ukrainian refugees).

 

1.14.2.      Cambridge has provisionally been identified as eligible for capital grant funding (under section 31 of the Local Government Act 2003), with the following indicative allocation:

 

•       main element of £4,640,000 in funding to be used to provide a minimum of 29 homes.

 

•       Bridging element: £328,683 in additional funding to allow the provision of at minimum 1 larger 4+ bed home to be allocated to households currently residing in bridging accommodation.

 

1.14.3.      For ‘main element’ housing, government funding equates to 40% of total capital costs (Calculated by DLUHC as averaging £140,000 grant per property) plus £20,000 per property. For ‘bridging element’ housing, government funding is calculated as equating to 50% of total capital costs plus £20,000 per property.

 

1.14.4.      30% of the funding provided by DLUHC will be paid in Q4 2022/23 and 70% in 2023/24 (the 2023/24 funding is paid once the LA has spent 60% of their 2022/23 funding.

 

1.14.5.      Delivery is required to be part funded/financed by local authorities, amounting to the sum £6,398,683  to be incurred by the Council.

 

1.15.   Eligible Cohort

 

1.15.1.      Given the objectives of the fund, those eligible for the housing are those who are homeless, at risk of homelessness or who live in unsuitable Temporary Accommodation (including bridging accommodation) and who also meet the below definition.

Those on the:

•       Afghan Citizen Resettlement Scheme (including eligible British Nationals under this scheme) (ACRS),

•       Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP)

•       Ukraine Family Scheme (UFS),

•       Homes for Ukraine (HFU),

•       Ukraine Extension Scheme (UES)

 

1.15.2.      For those in bridging accommodation, there are multiple routes to move people on from temporary accommodation. These include support from the Home Office and the Find Your Own Accommodation pathway.

1.15.3.      For those not in bridging accommodation, the local authority does not have to have accepted a Housing Act 1996 Part 7 homelessness duty in respect of the household for the household to be eligible, but the local authority should satisfy themselves that the household is already or would otherwise be homeless or at risk of homelessness if this accommodation was not available.

 

Identified Housing Need

 

1.16.   Currently 138 households within the City are accommodated by hosts under the Homes for Ukraine scheme, with a further 5 households in temporary accommodation. 16 household under the Afghan Citizen Resettlement Scheme and Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy have been supported by Cambridge City Council to resettle in Cambridgeshire.

 

1.17.   The Currently indicated housing mix is set out below:

 

Size	Households	Percentage
1bed	86	54%
2bed	43	27%
3bed	17	11%
2 or 3 TBD	8	5%
4bed	5	3%

 

 

1.18.   The Funding identified by the DLUHC Scheme is identified for delivery of 2,3, and 4+ bedroom Homes.  Clarity has however been sought on the meeting of an identified 1-bedroom need as evidenced above. DLUHC have indicated that “a limited provision of 1 bed homes may be considered by LAs because these better suit the needs of the eligible cohort in the area”. While this need is clearly defined in the above analysis, delivery of 1 bedroom homes is indicated to kept to a minority component of the housing delivery under this programme, with the ambition being to deliver primarily larger homes in line with the key funding objectives.

 

1.19.   As matters stand, by far the largest component of demand is likely to come from Ukrainian refugee households presently in Cambridge under one of the two schemes.  Significant work is being put into maintaining existing sponsorship arrangements and, before these sponsorship arrangements inevitably end, finding households privately-rented accommodation.  Funding has been gained by the Council from the County which is being used to encourage landlords to let to these refugee households and also cover the entry costs into the sector.  We have also committed up to 20 City Homes properties as refugee-specific accommodation and housing associations have agreed to make additional offers on top.. These offers have focused only on those households who the Council owes a statutory homelessness duty to and would need to rehouse in any event.

 

1.20.   It is felt, however, that the efforts described above will not by themselves meet the scale of demand.  The supply of private sector homes in Cambridge is uncertain, and it is in the nature of the sector that lettings are usually of relatively short duration.  Financial support to help households meet the gap between benefits or low earnings cannot prudently continue indefinitely, leading to rents being unaffordable when support stops.  Additionally, we have already seen instances of Ukrainian households form other parts of the country wishing to join family members in Cambridge, attracted by its good schools, facilities, international reputation and well-establish support groups.     

 

Considerations

 

1.21.   Care need to be taken to ensure that any allocated housing facilitate integration into the local areas and so a number of factors need to be considered:

1.21.1.      Property distribution – While on face value a scattered housing distribution may seem preferable, thought needs to be given to the opportunities for refugee families to support one another, and so consideration has been given to distribution of allocated housing across housing estates, where integration can be influenced together with a sense of community. Likewise the use of smaller clusters of housing is considered where modular homes may be delivered as a rapid delivery solution.

1.21.2.      Access to infrastructure – Access to good transport connections across the city has been considered. Likewise access to community facilities which can be used as meeting areas/support hubs.

 

1.22.   While open market purchase of properties into council stock may provide the required housing delivery there are a number of complicating factors in adopting solely this route:

1.22.1.      Competitive housing market in parallel with budgetary constraints will limit the ability of the council to acquire properties which meet required Value for Money criteria while delivering the target number of 30 homes required.

1.22.2.      Properties purchased on the open market may require significant refurbishments works to bring them up to use standard. While there is an allowance in the funding for refurbishment works, this workload will lead to a maintenance backlog. Refurbishment works and pilot EPC-Raising schemes are already underway through E&F and staffing capacity to undertake this additional work timeously may be under strain if a bulk purchase route was relied upon.

1.22.3.      Allowance has been indicated to provide for purchasing of housing stock within the other LA boundaries. This, however, poses significant long term maintenance and management considerations for the council given increased distances from central facilities. Additionally it is noted that surrounding LAs have been allocated similar funding and so competition for like properties would be inevitable.

 

1.23.   Traditional new build delivery will not meet the required delivery timelines. In order to be able to meet the additional housing required to serve the eligible cohort two sub-routes have been identified:

1.23.1.      Modular (pod) homes

·      These homes have already been delivered across 3 sites by the city, with their use to date being targeted to move-on accommodation for rough sleepers. Hill who provided these 16 solohaus modules are able to deliver larger units, which may serve to accommodate families. Modular homes offer two substantial benefits which may allow us to meet the delivery targets set by DLUHC:
1) Speed of delivery – These are volumetric modular units which require minimal site preparation works and can be delivered by the Nov 2023 Deadline.

2)  Price – Open market purchases are likely to exceed the indicative DLUHC Guidance figures. Delivery of modular homes on council owned property will allow a reduction of overall delivery costs, offsetting potential market purchase expenditure.

·      Two potential modular home clusters have been preliminarily identified which may individually meet the 6-unit identified target for delivery. These homes will however be below current space standards, as would any potential open market acquisition of ex-council stock as well as many existing council stock homes.

·      There would need to be further investigations into the sites identified and discussion with ward Cllrs.

 

1.23.2.      Rerouting of existing housing delivery

 

·      DLUHC have indicated that the proposed approach of looking at what is already in programme to meet this need is acceptable, as delivery by the time frames is key.

 

·      DLUHC funding pre-allocated under this scheme is significant and allows potential to increase the overall new build housing delivery across the 10-year programme in the long term.

 

·      Furthermore the larger family-size homes identified to be the largest component of this programme currently impose a significant burden on constrained finances within the general new build programme and this priority funding allows significant progress toward meeting the new homes unit mix targets.

 

Delivery

The DLUHC funding is defined in focus on 2, 3 and 4 bed properties, with indication given that some 1-bed properties can be included based on identified need, clearly evident in Cambridge. The level of funding however provides an opportunity to increase current delivery of larger family homes and this opportunity needs to be used to best effect. In line with DLUHC guidance the below sets out a recommended approach:

 

1.24.   Delivery Routes identified

 

Possible eligibility - Refugee housing funding
Scheme	Completion date	Note/issues	Proposed Homes delivered
St Thomas Rd 4-bed acquisition	Feb/ Mar '23	Required buyback of 4bed property to allow redevelopment site access. Property may be retained in stock as either a 3bed or (if remodel feasible) 4bed	1
Campkin Road   or   the Haven	Apr-23	The Campkin Road development has 25 homes eligible for this funding out of the 75 being delivered. The site Sits within a much wider estate, and allows distribution as well as split allocation between Afghans and Ukrainians.   The Haven is a purchase currently being completed by the council, providing 8-flats into council stock. While currently designated for Sheltered / Supported use there is scope to consider reallocating this housing block for refugee housing	16-17
Market acquisitions	varied	Likely to exceed £350k/unit indicated in grant calculation. Needs to be considered along with pod homes and reallocation of existing delivery stream to ensure target can be met within budget constraints. Refurbishment works on acquisitions will impact E&F backlog and impact E&F capacity for works to existing stock	7-10
Pod /Mobile homes	varied c8-12month completion timeline	2-3 bed models offer cost effective delivery. Can play role in lowering overall costs. Rapid delivery possible which can possibly meet unit targets.  Site availability will be limiting factor.  Opportunity affected by any requirement to meet existing space standards. Long term these units may be earmarked for TA or used alternatively as 1bed accommodation to ensure that they are acceptable from a planning perspective.	6

 

 

Unit size Mix

 

Scheme	1Bed	2Bed	3Bed	4Bed
St Thomas /4-bed acquisition				1
Campkin Road and/or the Haven	7/8	9
Market acquisitions			6/7	1/3
Pod /Mobile homes		6
Total %	26%	49%	19%	6%
Need %	59%	30%	10%	1%

 

1.25.   Programme and comment.

 

The indicative programme for the project is as follows:

 

Tasks	dates
Approval to enter into funding agreement	January/February 2023
Signing of funding agreement	February/March 2023
First tranche payment	February/March 2023	Contingent on completion of funding agreement by either 15/02 or 15/03
Acquisition of 4-bed property	March 2023	Contingent on vacant Possession
Delivery of reallocated pipeline housing, with replacement additional housing to be delivered across housing programme	April 2023
2nd tranche payment	March/April 2023	Contingent on spend of 60% of tranche 1
Completion date for overall delivery targets	30 November 2023

 

1.25.1.      Using homes under construction at Campkin Road and the Haven acquisition together with the in process purchase of a purchase at St Thomas Road will allow the council to exceed the target expenditure of the 1^st Tranche funding, allowing full drawdown of the 2^nd Tranche Payment by March/April 2023 and mitigating significant delivery risk

 

1.25.2.      Utilisation of the Haven may be reliant on a change of Use Application to the Planning Authority. If this is not achieved by 31st March 2022 alternative option of 7-8 further homes at Campkin Road will need to be considered

 

1.25.3.      Risk primarily lies with the Modular home component and open market acquisitions. These are subject to factors outside of immediate council control, but the reallocation of existing pipeline allows for limiting reliance on these additional components and risk is therefore reduced to a manageable level. Risks are outlined in Section 9.

 

1.25.4.      The minimum target delivery to serve the funding is 30 homes. Financial modelling has indicated that the above delivery route Should allow the council to meet this target, with potential to exceed the required delivery by an additional 1-3 homes, dependant on actual costs to be incurred.

 

1.25.5.      The varied approach to delivery outlined is a guidance indication for feasibility. Actual delivery to meet DLUHC targets will vary within this programme framework as opportunities develop.

Implications

a)   Financial Implications

Assuming that the Council’s top up funding is drawn down for this project from existing schemes with budget approval and from the existing funds ear-marked for new homes in the 10 Year New Homes Programme, there will not be any increase in gross expenditure. A gross budget of £11,367,366 will be re-allocated from existing approved resources for this specific project. The relevant budgets will be identified once the properties to be included for this purpose have been confirmed. The Council will however, also need to recognise the additional grant income associated with the project, which is at a higher grant rate than that already built into financial assumptions of grant from Homes England. Subject to this urgent decision, a revised version of the HRA Budget Setting report 2023/24 would be presented to Council in February 2023.

 

b)   Staffing Implications

 

This project would be managed by existing staff complement of the Council. Given the rapid delivery times to meet there is a requirement for funding of a further project management position to lead this work. This requirement is included in the budget allocation outlined.

 

c)   Equality and Poverty Implications

 

A focused EQIA will be undertaken for this scheme.

 

d)    Environmental Implications

A specific Climate Change Rating Tool will be completed. New Developments will be delivered in line with the Sustainable Housing Design Guide. Market purchases will be added to the works programme for sustainability improvements being delivered by Estates and Facilities.

 

e)   Procurement Implications

 

None. Delivery will be in line with OJEU compliant procurement regulations.

 

f)     Community Safety Implications

 

New Development housing will be built in accordance with Secure by Design Guidelines.

Consultation and communication considerations

 

There will be early engagement with Ward Councillors to identify site opportunities and potential issues. There will also be formal consultation through the planning process once the application has been submitted. 

 

Risks

 

Below is a table setting out key risks associated with the project:

 

Risk	Likelihood	Impact	Mitigation
Delivery failure The funding required best endeavours from the council.   DLUHC is committed to funding any contract LAs enter into, even if completion occurs after the Nov-23 deadline date.	Medium	Reputational risk to the council. Repayment of allocated funds.	Early identification of opportunities to mitigate delivery failure risk. Open discussion with DLUHC regarding proposed approach and inherent risk.
Planning risk – modular homes The funding required best endeavours from the council.   DLUHC is committed to funding any contract LAs enter into, even if completion occurs after the Nov-23 deadline date.	Low	Delays to a planning approval process not allowing meeting of the 30 Nov 2023 Deadline.	Early discussions with Planning Officers will be required to ensure timelines are met.
Failure to complete on Market purchases Significant competitive pressure on market acquisitions.	Medium	Delivery Failure	Non-reliance on high levels of purchase – varied portfolio for delivery Early progression of purchase opportunities
Public opposition /Member buy-in Significant local housing pressure may lead to negative public opinion of prioritising foreign nationals	Low	Reputational Risk. Delivery Failure	It will be important to engage with the local ward Cllrs early on to identify opportunities and issues. A consultation strategy will need to be agreed. The full buy-in by national government needs to be relied upon.
Exceeding proposed budget Due to unexpected reliance on additional market acquisitions or required increased purchase value for market homes	Low	Additional HRA funding required	Non-reliance on single delivery route.

 

 

Background papers used in the preparation of this report

·      20/35/HSC New Council Housing Programme - i.  Approved the bringing forward of a development programme to provide new housing in 2022-32 by the Council

 

Appendices

None.

Inspection of papers

To inspect the background papers or if you have a query on the report please contact Jaques van der Vyver, Housing Development Agency Programme Manager, tel: 01223 - 457928, email: jaques.vandervyver@cambridge.gov.uk.