Issue - meetings

A report from the Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Growth and the Cabinet Member for Housing is attached.

Councillor Eamonn O’Brien, the Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Finance and Growth, presented the report which set out the details regarding the procurement and selection of a preferred development partner for comprehensive delivery of the ELPM site.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Noted the collaborative approach with Homes England that has been pursued, including the entering into of a legally binding Collaboration Agreement with Homes England to comprehensively deliver the ELPM site for housing, open space and replacement cricket facilities;

2.    Noted the outcome of the development procurement exercise and confirmed the officer recommendation to appoint the preferred development partner and underbidder developer; and

3.    Agreed to the financial payment arrangement for the capital receipt, based on the terms as set out in the Part B report.

Reasons for the decision:

As set out for the Part A report.

Other options considered and rejected:

·         To not proceed with appointing a developer partner for the delivery of the ELPM site. This is rejected as it would mean abandoning the procurement and be open to challenge. It would seriously undermine our shared key objective with our partner of delivering the comprehensive redevelopment of this major brownfield site for housing and present a reputational risk.

·         To agree an alternative option with regard to the payment structure which has been rejected as it does not present an attractive financial proposition.

A report from the Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Growth and the Cabinet Member for Housing is attached.

Councillor Eamonn O’Brien, the Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Finance and Growth, presented the report which set out the progress made to de-risk the site and pursue a delivery strategy to bring the site forward for redevelopment for housing, together with open space and replacement cricket facilities. The report included the procurement and selection of a preferred development partner for comprehensive delivery of the ELPM site, details of which were contained in the Part B report later in the agenda.

In response to Members’ questions, it was noted that a ‘fabric first’ building approach for homes was a part of the Housing Strategy, as passive/low energy homes would be crucial in securing future residents against rising utility prices as well as being positive for the environmental situation. It was noted that this report focussed on the development partner, but a future report would set out detail on viability of what could be built on the site and how we meet our objectives on zero carbon homes.

Decision:

Cabinet:

1.    Noted the collaborative approach with Homes England that has been pursued, including the entering into of a legally binding Collaboration Agreement with Homes England to comprehensively deliver the ELPM site for housing, open space and replacement cricket facilities;

2.    Agreed to the appointment of a preferred developer and under bidder developer as set out in the part B report; and

3.    Agreed to the financial payment arrangement for the capital receipt, based on the terms set out in the Part B report.

Reasons for the decision:

·         To ensure that Cabinet are kept fully informed on progress regarding the delivery of the East Lancashire Paper Mill site working in collaboration with Homes England.

·         To report on the outcome of the developer procurement process, which has resulted in approval of a preferred development partner for the site, which will enable the delivery of much needed new homes and ensure the site is comprehensively developed to high design and sustainability standards.

·         To secure a capital receipt payment arrangement which offers the Council the most attractive financial proposition.

·         To facilitate the Council’s Brownfield first approach to housing delivery.

Other options considered and rejected:

The other option considered and rejected was set out in the Part B report.