Decision details

The report provides information about the HIF process, the Council’s proposed package of interventions that require funding, associated risks and Council expenditure. It also seeks authority to delegate the acceptance of the final details of business case to the Cabinet Member for Development & Transport.

That the Leader:

1.         Endorses Sheffield City Council’s commitment to enabling and accelerating new housing in the target area for this funding request, to improve the diversity of house types, property tenures and quality of homes available in the city.

2.         Approves the proposal to apply for HIF funding of up to £56m in conjunction with Sheffield City Region for this project as outlined in this report.

3.         To note that if the HIF bid is successful a further report will be brought forward to approve the acceptance of the funding, once the terms and overall project structure have been confirmed.

4.         Approves the procurement strategy for the highways and flood feasibility works as detailed at section 8 of this report.

5.         Approves the procurement strategy for the highways surveys as detailed at section 7.2.4 of this report being carried out by Amey in accordance with Schedule 7 of the existing Highways PFI contract.

6.         Delegates the contract awards relating to recommendations 4 and 5 to the Director of Finance & Commercial Services.

7.         Approves the Council funding required for the bid preparation, development and design work and bid submission as detailed in section 7.2.2 of this report.

8.         Notes the Financial Implications of this proposal as set out in Section [7] of this report.

1.    It is recommended that the Leader approves the submission of the Business Case to Government (MHCLG) as this offers the most appropriate funding opportunity to deliver a comprehensive package of intervention to unlock housing growth in a part of the city that can be revitalised.

2.    There is demand for more homes to be built in Sheffield and there is strong rationale for why many of these homes should be built close to the city centre on vacant and underutilised brownfield land. Although the private sector is engaged in bringing forward some development activity in this area there are a number of sites where development activity has stalled or is yet to start.

3.    The Council is unlikely to be in position in the near future, to fund these strategic enhancements. The transition may happen over time without Council intervention, but it would be slow and may not provide the quality or type of homes and public spaces that are needed to realise the housing and economic potential of this new neighbourhood. It is also unclear how the negative effects on the highway network will be avoided.

4.    The benefits of such an approach are more people using the city centre to support its vibrancy, making better use of previously developed land, removing blight from derelict land, regenerating parts of the city, making better use of existing infrastructure through significant strategic intervention

5.    The proposed interventions will help to transform the perceptions of this area, it will encourage private investment to deliver new homes in the area and give the Council a greater chance of securing homes that are suited towards the needs and demands of residents.

6.    The proposed suite of interventions are being recommended to the Leader as the most suitable combination of activity to unlock new housing in this location whilst still meeting the requirements and evaluation principles of the HIF.

1.    Do Nothing – by not submitting this business case, it will miss an opportunity to secure funds that can be used in a comprehensive way to tackle a variety of obstacles to new homes in this part of the city. This will result in many of the sites remaining undeveloped, missing an opportunity to regenerate a key part of the city, provide additional homes and generate economic benefits for the city and wider region. It could also result in SCC investing its own resources if it does not want to stifle development in this area or, wants to influence the type of housing being built.

2.    Seek a Reduced amount of HIF – this could still deliver a range of benefits, but would not offer the comprehensive suite of intervention to realise the full 15-20 year potential of this area as a revitalised and successful neighbourhood. A reduced option is included in the business case and comprises: 

Reduced Option – this is mainly around reducing the work around the Shalesmoor Roundabout and works would be limited small-scale improvements to the existing configuration re-route of pedestrian paths and crossings only and, some reductions on the level of place-making activity.