Agenda item

To receive any questions relating to items on the Agenda from members of the public and replies thereto.

The following questions were received from members of the public:

Paul Elstone

Question 1:

How much exactly (including land purchase, S106 Agreements. planning design cost, planning fees, and procurement cost etc.) has the Post Hill site cost this Council to date?  

Answer:

£2,247,000 and that’s the total cost of Post Hill to the Council to date.

Question 2:

How much out of the total cost exposure to this Council was paid to 3 Rivers Development for their work?

A company named as a nominee in the original land purchase agreement and who it was clearly intended at the outset would take the project forward?

Answer:

Zero total cost exposure to the Council that was paid to 3Rivers.

Question 3

How much of the S106 payments made by this Council, were paid to the Tiverton Golf Club to enable them to realign the 12th hole?

It is known that Tiverton Golf Club required £125,000 for this work and on a no cost basis, and something required before the Post Hill site purchased by this Council could be developed.

Answer:

£27,694.00 S106 payment made by this Council for the Tiverton Golf Club.

Question 4:

Paragraph 4.5 of your papers says the tenure mix is subject to further confirmation, however informally the provider has indicated an intention to provide a mix of general needs and shared ownership affordable accommodation.

The site was obtained by the Council as part of an agreement to deliver the affordable housing allocation to the whole development of this area. 

Does “general needs” include market value and not just affordable homes?

Question 5

If so, by selling the land, will the Council be breaking the formal agreement to ensure the appropriate allocation of affordable homes across the whole Braid Park and Fairfax Heath site?

Answer to question 5 & 6:

There is a planning requirement for 70 affordable homes to be delivered.

Question 6

The recommendation is that Cabinet agree approval of the sale of the Post Hill Site. For Cabinet tonight to agree this sale goes very much against the stated position of the Council Leader. Someone who has said that he both wanted and intended to eliminate autocratic and poor Cabinet decision making.

Will the Council Leader supported by Cabinet empower the relevant Committees and Full Council to be fully involved in this important decision ahead of final agreement? 

Nick Quinn

Question 1:

On 6 June 2023, Cabinet approved the transfer of £660,000(earmarked for a new Waste Depot) to be taken from earmarked reserves and used to partially offset a £4.5 Million impairment of 3 Rivers Loans. I see, in the Capital Programme Appendix, that the new Waste and Recycling Depot is now to be funded by 50 year borrowing. Does this mean that, effectively, 3 Rivers losses are being covered by 50 year loans?

Answer:

As highlighted within previous financial report the impairment loans for 3Rivers will have future consequences such as the above example where future expenditures no longer be met through the use of reserves alternative funding sources will be required to progress these projects.

Question 2:

I cannot see in the public report any indication of the numbers of properties that the prospective land purchaser intends to build, nor any guarantee that there will be at least 70 affordable properties. The Council purchased the Post Hill land from a developer under an agreement that the Council would build the 70 Affordable Houses, required by the Planning Permission, for the whole site.

The Council entered into legal agreements to ensure that 70 Affordable Houses were built on this land. If the Council does not build these, or ensures that the prospective purchaser does, will this mean that the developer of the previously completed part of the site is deficient in its planning obligations?

Answer:

There is a planning requirement for 70 affordable homes to be delivered.

Question 3:

If the non-delivery of these 70 affordable properties means a breach of the Planning obligations for the whole development site, will this Council take action against the original developer, or itself?

Answer:

There is a planning requirement for 70 affordable homes to be delivered.