Agenda item

REPORT OF THE PRINCIPAL ESTATES SURVEYOR AND THE ESTATE SURVEYOR

Report seeking approval of the sale of North Hertfordshire District Council’s (NHDC’s) freehold interest in land at The Snipe, Hitchin Road, Weston based on terms negotiated following Cabinet’s resolution on 15th December 2020 (minute number 14). The land is an allocated housing site in the adopted North Herts Local Plan. The commercially
sensitive terms are set out in the Part 2 report.

RESOLVED:

(1)   Subject to 2.4, Full Council granted approval for the Council to enter into a binding contract with the purchaser, conditional upon the grant of planning permission for a residential development as described in Part 2 of this report.

(2)   That Full Council approved the sale to be entered into jointly with the neighbouring landowner and to share the proceeds on the basis of an apportionment equivalent to the percentage of ownership.

(3)   That Full Council approved that the costs of sale and allowable expenses be shared in proportion as stated in 2.2.

(4)   That any objections received in response to the public notice (up to 25 April 2024) be considered by Service Director – Enterprise in consultation with the Executive Members for Finance & IT and Enterprise & Arts and Service Director – Resources, with delegation to determine whether to proceed with the sale or not.  

REASON FOR DECISIONS: These recommendations are made as a result of extensive marketing by the Council’s appointed agents and take into consideration current Council policies on sustainability and carbon emissions, whilst achieving best consideration.

Audio recording - 1 hour 47 minutes 37 seconds

The Executive Member for Finance and IT presented the report ‘Sale of Land at Hitchin Road, Weston Known as the Snipe, Part 1’ and advised that:

·       At the Cabinet meeting in December 2020 the land was declared as surplus to requirements and authority for its disposal was delegated to the Service Director – Resources in consultation with the Executive Member for Finance and IT.

·       External advice on the sale was sought and a Memorandum of Understanding was entered into with an adjacent landowner to market the site jointly.

·       The site was identified in the adopted Local Plan for 40 dwellings.

·       The tenders received were higher than expected and therefore this item had been brought to Council for approval.

·       Alternative options for the site were considered and these were detailed in paragraph 4 of the report.

·       An unconditional offer for the site was received, however it was felt that the density of dwellings on this proposal were not achievable.

·       It was deemed that the site was more marketable with the adjacent plot than being marketed in isolation.

·       The Parish Council have not objected to the proposed development of this site.

·       There were clear aspirations around climate change with the use of Future Homes Standards as detailed in section 14 of the report, and this was the standard for the whole site.

·       There was an expectation for 40% affordable housing on the site.

·       The capital receipts from the sale of the land would assist in the funding of future capital programmes.

·       The report carefully considered the achievable capital receipts and the social benefit from the affordable housing from this sale.

·       There had been a delay in advertising the second notice in this matter and the closing date for comments on this development was the 25 April 2024. Therefore, an additional recommendation was proposed (2.4) to allow any objections to be considered by the Service Director Enterprise in consultation with the Executive Member for IT and Finance with delegated authority to determine whether to proceed with the sale. 

·       Recommendation 2.1 had been amended to incorporate the new recommendation 2.4.

In response to a question from Councillor Muncer, the Principal Estates Surveyor stated that there had been no objections received from the public notices to date.

The following Members took part in debate:

·       Councillor David Levett

·       Councillor Steve Jarvis

·       Councillor Adam Compton

·       Councillor Ralph Muncer

·       Councillor Alistair Willoughby

·       Councillor Claire Strong

·       Councillor Ruth Brown

·       Councillor Ian Albert

Points raised in the debate included:

·       Concerns that the percentage of affordable housing was not guaranteed.

·       Concerns regarding the Memorandum of Understanding and the commitments placed on the Council when it came to determining the application at the Planning Control Committee.

·       The site formed part of the Local Plan.

·       It was sensible to market the two parcels of land together, as this would make the highways and community arrangements more acceptable to residents.

·       The site should be sold with the expectation of a minimum of 40% affordable housing.

·       It was good that a requirement to ensure that the development would achieve Future Homes Standards, was for the entire site, not just the land owned by the Council.

·       There was not enough evidence within the report to satisfy concerns regarding the affordable housing percentage.

·       There were concerns regarding the completeness of the report which restricted Members from scrutinising the proposal to ensure the best decision was taken for residents and the Council.

·       There were outstanding responses to questions regarding the percentage of affordable housing.

·       The commitment to the percentage of affordable housing was outlined at 9.4 of the report.

·       The development would be an investment in the Community with affordable, quality housing.

·       There was not enough contract information regarding the risks, should the houses not be delivered.

·       This offered a chance to provide affordable housing, alongside a partner, and would achieve the desired percentage of housing across the entire site.

·       There had been a benefit from delaying the sale, however the contract may be at risk if the matter was further delayed.

N.B. Councillor Amy Allen left the Chamber at 21:39 and returned at 21:43, following the conclusion of the vote.

Councillor Ian Albert proposed and Councillor Elizabeth Dennis seconded, and following a vote, it was:

RESOLVED:

(1)   Subject to 2.4, that Full Council granted approval for the Council to enter into a binding contract with the purchaser, conditional upon the grant of planning permission for a residential development as described in Part 2 of this report.

(2)   That Full Council approved the sale to be entered into jointly with the neighbouring landowner and to share the proceeds on the basis of an apportionment equivalent to the percentage of ownership.

(3)   That Full Council approved that the costs of sale and allowable expenses be shared in proportion as stated in 2.2.

(4)   That any objections received in response to the public notice (up to 25 April 2024) be considered by Service Director – Enterprise in consultation with the Executive Members for Finance & IT and Enterprise & Arts and Service Director – Resources, with delegation to determine whether to proceed with the sale or not.

REASON FOR DECISIONS: These recommendations are made as a result of extensive marketing by the Council’s appointed agents and take into consideration current Council policies on sustainability and carbon emissions, whilst achieving best consideration.