Agenda item

To formally report the receipt of a petition submitted requesting the suspension of property dealing and development of TDC land parcels in Great and Little Oakley and offer the land to the Parish Councils.

RESOLVED that Cabinet notes the petition, thanks the petitioner and requests that these views and others are taken into account as and when the property dealing procedure unfolds, subject to available resources.

Earlier on in the meeting, as reported under Minute 142 above, Councillor Bush had

declared a Declaration of Interest in relation to this matter insofar as he was a Member the Great Oakley Parish Council.  He thereupon withdrew from the meeting whilst this item was considered and determined and he then subsequently rejoined the meeting.

Members were reminded that an e-petition had been submitted by Tom Howard, as

lead petitioner, on 12 May 2023 That petition had been signed by 46 persons

and stated:-

“We call on Tendring District Council to immediately suspend the property dealing procedure and any plans to develop or sell for development the following sites in the Great Oakley and Little Oakley: • Woodlands, Great Oakley – Ref GO001G • Sparrows Corner, Great Oakley – Ref GO002G • Seaview, Little Oakley – Ref LO001H • Bayview Crescent – Ref LO002BH • Bayview Crescent, Little Oakley – Ref LO002CH Furthermore, we request that Tendring District Council explores alternative options that would retain this important amenity land in these rural Parishes. We specifically request, that Tendring District Council initiates discussions with Great Oakley Parish Council and Little Oakley Parish Council to explore options for them to take on all of these sites either via purchase for a nominal fee (e.g. £1 per plot) or a 99 year lease with a nominal peppercorn rent (e.g. £1 per annum) in exchange for the Parish Councils taking on the maintenance liability”.

Asset management was an executive function and therefore the Cabinet was the

appropriate body to consider this matter.

Cabinet was made aware of the Assistant Director (Building and Public Realm)’s

assessment and advice as follows:-

“Following a motion put to the full Council in November 2020 by Councillor Placey the Cabinet requested a review of Council owned assets that could be used for the construction of new Council homes or used or released in return for capital receipts in order to support Council priorities.

As part of that exercise a total of 69 sites were identified, with three already pending action after earlier decisions.

A report for Cabinet consideration was prepared identifying the sites and inviting determination of in respect of which of them to commence the property dealing procedure. Three previously identified sites were identified for priority disposal action, two of the then identified sites were identified for action.

On 15 July 2022 Cabinet agreed the identified priority actions and decided to progress with the property dealing procedure in relation to all of the identified sites.

Officers have begun to progress the identified priority actions, as resources permit, but no detailed assessment of any of the other sites has yet been undertaken.

On 04 November 2022 Cabinet considered a report outlining the Council’s financial outlook including a number of housing and property investment requirements that could not be funded.

It is likely that looking forward it will be increasingly necessary to practice asset management in order to deliver property and other obligations and aspirations.

Section 123 of the Local Government Act 1972 provides that any proposal for disposal of open space must be advertised in the local press and representations taken into account. Any planning application will necessitate statutory and neighbour consultation and due consideration to any responses. Both of these would happen at a later stage in the property dealing process. Cabinet may wish to note the petition, thank the petitioner and request that these views and others are taken into account as the property dealing procedure unfolds, subject to available resources”.

Cabinet also had before it the following comment submitted by the Assets Portfolio Holder:-

“These five sites have been identified as part of a process to review potential development or other options throughout the District that identified a total of 69 sites for some potential action with the consideration of three others already under way. They should not be considered in isolation or outside of that process. No decision has been taken to build on or dispose of any land. This process was begun following questions raised at the full Council and has consumed considerable time and effort to get to this stage. Given the Council’s financial position and aspirations for housing and public space improvement the Authority must look towards careful use and rationalisation of its properties in order to reduce costs, avoid clinging to unproductive space and facilitate investment in services and facilities. I recommend that Cabinet notes the petition, thanks the petitioner and requests that these views, including potential transfer to parish councils, and others are taken into account as and when the property dealing procedure unfolds, subject to available resources”.

The lead petitioner, Tome Howard, attended the meeting and presented his petition to Cabinet.

Having duly considered the Petition together with the information provided in the report:-

It was moved by Councillor M Stephenson, seconded by Councillor Baker and:-

RESOLVED that Cabinet notes the petition, thanks the petitioner and requests that

these views and others are taken into account as and when the property dealing

procedure unfolds, subject to available resources, subject to available resources.