Decision Maker: Mid Suffolk Cabinet

Outcome:

Is Key Decision?: Yes

Is Callable In?: Yes

Date of Decision: March 10, 2026

Purpose: To approve and agree the Review of Housing Options for climate positive living scheme  

Content: It was RESOLVED: -   That subject to receiving planning consent:-   1.1          That Cabinet agreed to proceed with Option 3, market and dispose of the land on the open market with the benefit of planning consent for sustainable homes.   1.2          That Cabinet approved to undertake the demolition of the existing bungalows and prepare the site for development ahead of any sale.   1.3          That the appointment of demolition contractors and any associated consultants be delegated to the Director for Property, Development and Regeneration in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Housing and Property.   1.4          That the negotiation and completion of the sale of the land be delegated to the Director for Property, Development and Regeneration in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Property and Housing and Property.     REASON FOR DECISION To enable the site to be marketed with a planning consent in line with the Council’s brief, and for the Council to undertake the demolition to help unlock the site for the development of new high-quality homes which meet the council’s aspirations for climate positive homes that are truly sustainable.   Alternative Options Considered and Rejected:   Option 1- MSDC deliver the scheme Subject to achieving planning consent this option would see 5 market homes delivered on the site to replace the 6 existing bungalows. The brief of the project was to provide homes which met the Council’s aspirations of low carbon homes which promoted sustainable, climate positive homes by decarbonising the built environment. This would create a legacy project for the Council to raise aspirations in the local area of building to a high standard whilst bringing the whole life carbon of the home to near zero, by using bio-based construction materials. This not only had a positive impact on the environment, but it also created a sustainable home to live in due to the reduction of cost on utility bills, utilising technologies such as solar panels and air source heat pumps combined with a fabric first approach utilising modern methods of construction and bio-based materials. The scheme had been designed to meet the brief described above and a planning application was being prepared for submission. The team have assessed delivering the 5 homes as market homes or as affordable homes. To replace the existing dwellings with affordable housing was not viable, and the location did not lend itself to affordable housing due to poor public transport links and lack of amenities. The locality of the area and the landscape of the existing properties within the area, leant itself to redevelopment of market homes. This would be a unique offer within the market currently and provide sustainable homes for those who had both a focus on environmental and economic sustainability. To deliver the scheme, the land would need to be transferred to the General Fund to enable market homes to be delivered. This option had been discounted due to development risk attached to the delivery of a market led scheme to the Council. Option 2- Regeneration of the existing dwellings Condition surveys had been completed on the properties by an asset surveyor within the Council. The reports concluded that the properties were at the end of their economic life, and that the properties would require extensive works both internally and externally to bring them to a modern lettable standard, but that this would not fundamentally improve the fabric of the buildings and therefore the performance or liveability for residents. The properties had also had asbestos surveys completed which identified areas of asbestos within the properties which would require removal and rectification by specialists which would be a significant cost given it would be required to 6 properties. This option had been discounted as it was not financially viable or practicable. Option 4-Do nothing   This was not a viable option. The properties state of disrepair would increase over time along with the impact this had on the wider community and the cost implications to the HRA of being void and the failure to use this site for beneficial purpose.   Any Declarations of Interests Declared: None Any Dispensation Granted: None