Agenda item

Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder - Land at Dalton

Minutes:

Present:-

 

 

 

Councillor G. Smith

Cabinet Member for Economic Regeneration and Development Services – IN THE CHAIR

Councillor S. Ellis

Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods

Mr. G. Elliott

Chairman, Dalton Parish Council

Councillor P. F. Burke*

Parish Councillor

Councillor D. Pickering*

Parish Councillor

Councillor P. Lakin*

Parish Councillor

Mrs. S. Lewis

Clerk to Dalton Parish Council

Mrs. S. Pickering

Dalton Parish Council

Mr. G. Bostock

Sheffield Diocese

Mr. R. Liversidge

Valuation Manager, RMBC

Ms. C. Smith

Senior Valuation Manager, RMBC

Mr. T. Cray

Executive Director, Neighbourhoods

Mr. T. Bell

Housing Market Renewal Team Leader

Mr. T. Mumford

Head of Legal and Democratic Services

 

* declared a personal interest as Members also of the Borough Council.

 

 

Councillor Smith welcomed those present and introductions were made.

 

The Chair of the Parish Council stated that they had requested this meeting because over the past three to four years the Parish Council, the Borough Council and Diocese regarding three areas of land at Dalton.  The three parties had been involved in a joint marketing venture and had spent a significant amount of time since 2002 on this issue.  The three had a Participation Agreement which had been drawn up about 12 months ago.

 

Recently the Parish Council had been informed that the land in Council ownership was to become part of the Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder.  The Parish Council had therefore asked for this meeting to clarify the situation.

 

The Housing Market Renewal Team Leader provided some background information about the regeneration work.  It was explained that the ODPM had allocated an amount of money to South Yorkshire to try to support the housing market where it was fragile and vulnerable to collapse and where there were neighbourhoods of low demand housing.  The Housing market renewal area in Rotherhamhad been split into five Area Development Frameworks (ADF’s) and Dalton was in Rotherham East ADF.  An ADF Manager and Consultants were appointed and the Consultants had carried out a Masterplanning exercise.  Information had been gathered for a baseline assessment and that had been analysed and Spatial Masterplans had been developed utilising this information.  Steering Groups had been established made up of community stakeholders and officers to help develop the masterplans and action plans contained in them.

 

The Masterplan set out a vision for the East area of Rotherham within which this land sits.  The Council did not wish to propose development of any land in isolation and wanted to consult stakeholders.

 

There had been recent talks with a Housing Association about how to unlock the potential of Dalton and there had been previous discussion with the Parish Council and Yorkshire Housing.

 

Housing Market Renewal had three key objectives which were to increase housing choice by improving the range and affordability of housing;  increase housing quality by improving design and providing property that met aspirations, and creating sustainable housing.

 

At this stage there were no firm plans for the land, however, a bid had been put in to Government for funding for a detailed plan to be prepared for the area which would include very detailed consultation street by street.

 

The Chairman asked for clarification of ownership of the three sites and copies of a plan identifying all three areas was distributed.

 

The Valuation Manager reported that the Valuation Section had been working with the other two parties to produce a scheme to market the areas as one site and a tri-partite agreement had been drafted but not completed.  A copy was held by Legal Services.

 

All three parties were at the point of being ready to market early in the New Year when the decision was made by the Council to hand over ownership to the Pathfinder project.

 

The Chairman pointed out that it was possible to develop each of the other pieces of land separately as they each had access.  However, it was confirmed that the Council was still keen to work with both the parties on a solution.

 

The Executive Director, Neighbourhoods, pointed out that it was hoped that the site would not be taken to the market without a clear brief re: the right quality and mix of housing, inward investment etc.

 

The current Housing Market Renewal timeframe was that the outcome of the bid for funding should be known by late Autumn/Christmas 2005.  Within the bid it was hoped resources for a detailed brief on this site would be approved allowing work on a range of options to start in April 2006, with a range of options determined by Summer 2006.

 

The Diocese’s representative pointed out that it was not a piecemeal proposal.  This was a nine acre site.  It was an opportunity for the three parties to create a situation to do the best for the neighbourhood and to realise an asset.  His view was that the Pathfinder fragmented this site.  He suggested that if the Council wanted to control the sort of housing that went on to this site then this could be controlled in the planning process.

 

The Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods pointed out that what the Pathfinder was doing was providing an understanding of the market and identifying what there was a need for, what was in the community’s interests and what was sustainable.  The Pathfinder was bringing something to the land that was advantageous to all the parties.  The issue for the Diocese was whether it wanted to realise the best price for their land.  The Council, as part of the HMRP, certainly wanted more than that.

 

The Diocese’s representative referred to Section 123 of the Local Government Act which set out criteria which meant the Council had to let the market decide.  He pointed out that it had taken several years to get to this stage and now the Agreement and discussions had stopped and the parties were left with a considerable delay.

 

The HMR Team Leader responded that a development brief should be used in taking the land to the market to prevent speculative developers from having a negative impact on the local housing market.

 

Councillor Lakin said this had not been discussed at the Steering Group and pointed out that a speculative developer could move in immediately on to either Parish or Diocese land without Pathfinder approval.

 

Recent regeneration work in parts of Dalton had gone well.  The issue was what was the best way forward and this needed discussion with the other two partners.  At the moment it seemed that the Pathfinder had stopped the process. 

 

The Housing Association did not have the money to build the blue chip design that the Council wanted across Rotherham. 

 

The HMR Team Leader thought that the issue was that the other two parties were wanting a timeline and assurance that there will be development promptly to realise the asset and to lift the area.  The Pathfinder was about getting the right type of development, and being proactive in achieving this.

 

The Cabinet Members for Economic Regeneration and Development Services and for Neighbourhoods confirmed that all three areas were in the Pathfinder and that the area had been designated regardless of ownership.  The other two groups would get a better land value if the site was marketed as one site.

 

The Chairman of the Parish Council said it was the timeline that was crucial and the lack of communication.  The scenario began in 1998.  Parish owned land was cleared in 2003 and a new allotment site was developed in 2003/2004. Now the Parish Council were being told it would be 2006.  The Parish Council thought it had a planned way forward with the Tripartite Agreement but had found out “by the back door” that was not going to happen.

 

A general discussion ensued which looked at the following issues and tried to identify options:-

 

(i)       pursuing the original draft agreement and marketing all three pieces of land

(ii)      each party going its separate way.

(iii)      the possibility of accelerating the Pathfinder timeline

(iv)      the Council’s policy of requiring 7½% affordable housing in the Pathfinder area.

(v)      the need to take into account the significant impact of any development of these three pieces of land on surrounding areas

(v)      the need for knowledge of the housing market, community needs

(vii)     benefits of the Pathfinder

(viii)    the possible development of a planning brief noting that the three sites were designated greenfield

(ix)      the former civil defence site (a brownfield site) - noting that this was already out to tender, and the development of this would impact on the Parish Council & the Diocese

(x)      noted that there had been a communications breakdown.

 

 

Following the above discussion the Chairman ascertained that there seemed to be a consensus as follows:-

 

1.       There was a need to maintain the momentum for the realisation of all three parties’ assets.

 

2.       That all three sites should be marketed together, and the possibility of bringing the development forward within the Pathfinder be explored and Transform South Yorkshire be asked to look at producing a mini-Masterplan exercise.

 

3.       That the Head of Planning Services be asked to draw up a Planning Brief, aimed at meeting the Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder targets, for all three sites as one site.

 

4.       That the possibility of the acquisition of the Diocese owned land be investigated, and the Diocese and the Council obtain separate valuations.

 

5.       That a further meeting be held to report on the progress of 1 – 4 above.

 

The Chairman thanked everyone for their attendance and closed the meeting at 8.00 p.m.