Agenda item

PARKWAY DEVELOPMENT UPDATE

Meeting of Cabinet, Tuesday, 17th January, 2023 3.30 pm (Item CAB107)

Decision:

RECOMMENDED:

1) That Council be recommended to approve anamendment tothe Capitalbudget estimate from £48.367m to £54.462m, as detailedin section 9 of the report through a revised Capital Programme.

2) That the Executive Director (Development Services), in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Development & Regeneration and Monitoring Officer begiven delegatedauthority to approve the final terms of a Project Partnering Contract (PPC) 2000 with Lovell Partnership Limited (LPL) under the Major Housing Partnership DevelopmentManagement Agreement(30 April2015) todeliver thisproject.

3) Thatthe Councilshall disposeof theproperties as set out in Table 1 of the report, with the affordable and private rented tenures transferred to the Council’s wholly owned subsidiariesWest Norfolk Housing Company Limited (WNHC) and WestNorfolk PropertyLimited (WNPL).

4) That the Executive Director (Development Services), in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Environment, the Portfolio Holder for Development & Regeneration, and the Monitoring Officer, determine the future management arrangements for the proposed wildlife and environment site to the East of the development.

Reasonfor Decision

· To deliver on council corporate objectives:

· Delivering growth in the economy and with local housing

· Protecting and enhancing the environment, including tackling climate change; deliver on the council’s commitment to be carbon neutral by 2035;

· Improving social mobility and inclusion through stimulation of economic activity in the local area;

· Creating and maintaining good quality places that make a difference to people’s lives.

· To deliver affordable and private rented (PRS) housing for acquisition by the council’s wholly owned housing companies to support the delivery of council corporate objectives

Minutes:

Click here to view the recording of this item on You Tube

Cabinet considered a comprehensive report onthe ParkwayDevelopment Scheme which set out the situation to date and the proposals going forward,seeking finalapproval toproceed with the development. The report set out the detail of the proposals including the financial elements, proposed tenure and environmental factors in the proposed build and surrounding ground. The Chair reported that he hoped discussion and debate on the item could be kept in the public domain, but that should members wish to discuss the exempt appendices that would take place at the end of the item. No requests were received to discuss the exempt papers.

The Assistant Director D Ousby in presenting the report updated members on some minor amendments to the report, a copy of which was published with the agenda papers.

Under standing order 34 Councillor de Whalley spoke on the report and raised issues such as flood risk, the climate crisis, the impact on future generations, Active travel which would mean it would be increasingly difficult to use the iron bridge for cycles and pedestrians.

Under standing order 34 Councillor Joyce commented that the scheme should cease and be accepted as a loss, as he considered there was nothing in it for the people living there. He also questioned the cost, the transfer to the Housing Company and the public subsidy of the scheme and suggested it should go out to competition. He acknowledged tenants needed security of tenure.

Under standing order 34 Councillor Blunt drew attention to the need to provide homes for people. He congratulated officers on the comprehensive report, and drew attention to the fact that the Regeneration and Development Panel supported it and commented that this was the best site in King’s Lynn for houses. He considered the design and quality as excellent.

In debating the report by Cabinet attention was drawn to the fact that they considered most people objecting to the development were those who had a home whereas many young people were not able to have houses whether rented shared ownership or purchased unless they were developed. The immense pressure to provide homes in the Borough was referred to.

Cabinet commented that the environmental elements taken into account in the proposed build were second to none. The high costs involved were referred to but the benefits provided by the scheme were high.

Attention was drawn to the earlier scheme where more houses were proposed, but that after listening to the objections, the 226 was now proposed, the changes in which were supported when they were made and the high standards of environmental elements were supported. Work was also planned with the NWT for the land adjacent. Officers were thanked for the comprehensive report.