Agenda item

9.1

The Executive Director City Futures submitted a report seeking approval for an improved approach to regeneration in Gleadless Valley that better works alongside the community, investors and partner organisations to see the ambitions in the Gleadless Valley Masterplan come to fruition. The proposal is to develop a One Council and partnership working approach to the delivery of the Gleadless Valley Regeneration Programme in order to unlock and accelerate delivery of housing and green space improvements and deliver sustainable social and economic benefits to the local community. The proposals include an improved approach to regeneration, a new delivery structure to drive social and economic regeneration and new governance arrangements to facilitate partnership working.

9.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Strategy and Resources Policy Committee:-

(a)    notes that due to rapid build cost inflation, the existing Gleadless Valley Masterplan proposals previously approved in 2022 are no longer deliverable within the allocated Council budget and that delivery of the housing and green space improvements has stalled;

(b)    approves the development of an improved approach to regeneration in Gleadless Valley involving working across the council, with voluntary and community groups and with delivery and investment partners to bring additional expertise, capacity and funding into the programme;

(c)     agrees that the current approved Gleadless Valley Masterplan proposals should be reviewed and updated to reflect the new approach to regeneration. The review should also consider the potential for physical improvements to housing and open spaces to be complemented by social and economic interventions to address the high levels of deprivation in the area and build thriving communities. Once the review is complete the draft revised proposals to be brought back to the appropriate Council Policy Committee for consideration and approval;

(d)    agrees that a Delivery Plan for the updated Gleadless Valley regeneration proposals should be developed over the coming year in partnership with the local community and potential delivery partners and investors. The Delivery Plan, once drafted, to be brought to the appropriate Council Policy Committee for consideration and approval, at which point the full financial implications and risks will be considered;

(e)    agrees to the establishment of a new Gleadless Valley Regeneration Board, bringing together residents, local community organisations, delivery partners and Council representative with the purpose of advising on the overall strategy for Gleadless Valley and aligning stakeholders to deliver the vision;

(f)      agrees that residents living in blocks that are identified in the existing masterplan for demolition or remodelling should be informed that the plans for their blocks are being reviewed and may change; and

(g)    approves the transfer of £662,300 from the Gleadless Valley Housing Revenue Account Capital Allocation into a Gleadless Valley Housing Revenue Account revenue budget to cover additional expenditure in the current financial year to implement the new approach to regeneration and develop the Delivery Plan.

9.3

Reasons for Decision

9.3.1

The Council embarked on the masterplan work in 2017 and spent four years developing the masterplan proposals in partnership with the local community. Rising construction costs have made it unaffordable for all of the proposed works to be funded by the council’s capital programme.

9.3.2

Scaling back the masterplan to meet the council’s budget would fail to deliver meaningful change for Gleadless Valley residents. Instead, the proposed approach will explore opportunities to use council spending to seed fund and de-risk the Valley for external investment from the likes of: Housing Associations, Institutional investors, the Combined Authority, Homes England and third sector organisations.

9.3.3

This new approach would also allow Gleadless Valley to better contribute to the ambitions that the council and partners have for the future of Sheffield as set out in the City Goals and Council Plan, for example inclusive housing growth, net zero and great local centres and facilities.

9.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

9.4.1

Alternative Option 1: Allocating additional HRA capital funding to the project in order to deliver the masterplan proposals in full

This option is rejected as unaffordable within the HRA business plan. Sticking precisely to the existing masterplan would also fail to deliver significantly against the council’s net zero commitments, or housing growth targets (a net increase of only 115 homes based on current plans) and would not address resident priorities for improved shops and services.

9.4.2

Alternative Option 2: Allocating additional HRA capital funding to the project in order to deliver the refurbishment, remodelling and green space improvements while delivering the redevelopment aspects of the masterplan through disposals to housing associations

This option would still require a very significant uplift in the capital allocation to the project (from £40m to c£100m excluding any works to the shopping centres) which is considered unaffordable within the HRA business plan.

9.4.3

Alternative Option 3: Reducing the scope of the proposed works to meet the available HRA capital budget.

This would allow delivery of (for example) around half of the refurbishment proposals in the masterplan plus some public space improvements. It would be a fast and relatively low risk delivery option but would deliver very limited improvements, lead to significant reputational damage and fail to deliver meaningful change for Gleadless Valley residents.

9.1

The Executive Director City Futures submitted a report seeking approval for an improved approach to regeneration in Gleadless Valley that better works alongside the community, investors and partner organisations to see the ambitions in the Gleadless Valley Masterplan come to fruition. The proposal is to develop a One Council and partnership working approach to the delivery of the Gleadless Valley Regeneration Programme in order to unlock and accelerate delivery of housing and green space improvements and deliver sustainable social and economic benefits to the local community. The proposals include an improved approach to regeneration, a new delivery structure to drive social and economic regeneration and new governance arrangements to facilitate partnership working.

9.2

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Strategy and Resources Policy Committee:-

(a)    notes that due to rapid build cost inflation, the existing Gleadless Valley Masterplan proposals previously approved in 2022 are no longer deliverable within the allocated Council budget and that delivery of the housing and green space improvements has stalled;

(b)    approves the development of an improved approach to regeneration in Gleadless Valley involving working across the council, with voluntary and community groups and with delivery and investment partners to bring additional expertise, capacity and funding into the programme;

(c)     agrees that the current approved Gleadless Valley Masterplan proposals should be reviewed and updated to reflect the new approach to regeneration. The review should also consider the potential for physical improvements to housing and open spaces to be complemented by social and economic interventions to address the high levels of deprivation in the area and build thriving communities. Once the review is complete the draft revised proposals to be brought back to the appropriate Council Policy Committee for consideration and approval;

(d)    agrees that a Delivery Plan for the updated Gleadless Valley regeneration proposals should be developed over the coming year in partnership with the local community and potential delivery partners and investors. The Delivery Plan, once drafted, to be brought to the appropriate Council Policy Committee for consideration and approval, at which point the full financial implications and risks will be considered;

(e)    agrees to the establishment of a new Gleadless Valley Regeneration Board, bringing together residents, local community organisations, delivery partners and Council representative with the purpose of advising on the overall strategy for Gleadless Valley and aligning stakeholders to deliver the vision;

(f)      agrees that residents living in blocks that are identified in the existing masterplan for demolition or remodelling should be informed that the plans for their blocks are being reviewed and may change; and

(g)    approves the transfer of £662,300 from the Gleadless Valley Housing Revenue Account Capital Allocation into a Gleadless Valley Housing Revenue Account revenue budget to cover additional expenditure in the current financial year to implement the new approach to regeneration and develop the Delivery Plan.

9.3

Reasons for Decision

9.3.1

The Council embarked on the masterplan work in 2017 and spent four years developing the masterplan proposals in partnership with the local community. Rising construction costs have made it unaffordable for all of the proposed works to be funded by the council’s capital programme.

9.3.2

Scaling back the masterplan to meet the council’s budget would fail to deliver meaningful change for Gleadless Valley residents. Instead, the proposed approach will explore opportunities to use council spending to seed fund and de-risk the Valley for external investment from the likes of: Housing Associations, Institutional investors, the Combined Authority, Homes England and third sector organisations.

9.3.3

This new approach would also allow Gleadless Valley to better contribute to the ambitions that the council and partners have for the future of Sheffield as set out in the City Goals and Council Plan, for example inclusive housing growth, net zero and great local centres and facilities.

9.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

9.4.1

Alternative Option 1: Allocating additional HRA capital funding to the project in order to deliver the masterplan proposals in full

This option is rejected as unaffordable within the HRA business plan. Sticking precisely to the existing masterplan would also fail to deliver significantly against the council’s net zero commitments, or housing growth targets (a net increase of only 115 homes based on current plans) and would not address resident priorities for improved shops and services.

9.4.2

Alternative Option 2: Allocating additional HRA capital funding to the project in order to deliver the refurbishment, remodelling and green space improvements while delivering the redevelopment aspects of the masterplan through disposals to housing associations

This option would still require a very significant uplift in the capital allocation to the project (from £40m to c£100m excluding any works to the shopping centres) which is considered unaffordable within the HRA business plan.

9.4.3

Alternative Option 3: Reducing the scope of the proposed works to meet the available HRA capital budget.

This would allow delivery of (for example) around half of the refurbishment proposals in the masterplan plus some public space improvements. It would be a fast and relatively low risk delivery option but would deliver very limited improvements, lead to significant reputational damage and fail to deliver meaningful change for Gleadless Valley residents.