Search decisions

Consideration was given to a report of the Director of Economy which sought approval to progress the delivery of housing on the former Kaskenmoor School site at Hollinwood Junction.

The Council entered into a Strategic Partnering Agreement (SPA) in relation to council owned land at Hollinwood Junction with Langtree Group plc on 20^th June 2011.

The SPA set out the mechanisms by which the Council and Langtree would work together to promote regeneration at Hollinwood Junction.

In the spirit of partnership working Langtree submitted a mixed-use employment led planning application for the Albert Street site and this was approved in June 2013.

It has always been the intention that the remainder of the site of the former Kaskenmoor school should be part of the Hollinwood Junction Joint Venture proposals. However, at that time it was unclear how much surplus land was available for development and therefore it was not formally included within the revised SPA in 2014.

Following the completion of the New Bridge and Hollinwood Academy which are both located on part of the former Kaskenmoor school site, the surplus land was identified. Therefore in 2016 Cabinet approved the inclusion of the surplus Kaskenmoor school land in the SPA with Langtree and a deed of variation was completed to document this.

Approval to dispose of the School Site under Schedule 1 of the 2010 Academies Act was received in July 2012. Approval to dispose of the School’s Playing Fields under Section 77 of the Schools Standards and Frameworks Act 1998 was received in January 2014.

The Kaskenmoor site was unallocated in the Council’s Local Development Framework, however, it is adjacent to existing housing and therefore subject to planning, it is considered potentially suitable for residential development.

In line with recent pre-app planning advice, the Kaskenmoor site is expected to accommodate up to 150 x two, three and four bedroom houses to meet the needs of the local community as determined from the Council’s housing strategy.

Options/alternatives considered

The options were considered in the commercially sensitive report contained at Item 12 of the agenda.

RESOLVED – That the Cabinet would consider the commercially sensitive information contained at Item 12 of the agenda before making a decision.

Consideration was given to a report of the Deputy Chief Executive, People and Place which sought approval from the Cabinet to accept Grant Funding Agreements with the Greater Manchester Combined Authority and appoint contractors to deliver the Greater Manchester Green Homes Grant Local Authority Delivery Scheme.

The Greater Manchester Combined Authority approached Oldham Council to develop a Greater Manchester (GM) Green Homes Grant Local Authority Delivery Scheme bid, as Oldham was the only Council within GM that had an OJEU procured Framework Agreement for energy efficiency measures (through its Warm Homes Oldham scheme).

On 28 August 2020, the GMCA submitted a bid for £4.7m to mainly retrofit External Wall Insulation and Air Source Heat Pumps in homes of all tenures occupied by residents with a gross annual household income of less than £30,000 using local Trustmark registered contractors.
Full details of the bid were reported to the GMCA meeting held on 25 September 2020.
On 1st October 2020, Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) confirmed that the GMCA’s application was successful and awarded the bid amount in full.
On 15th October 2020, the GMCA submitted a completed Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to BEIS, which agreed the terms and conditions of the funding and on 29th October 2020, the GMCA received the first instalment of the funding from BEIS.

Option/alternatives considered

Option 1

·         To accept the Grant Funding Agreements issued by the GMCA detailed in the report

·         To issue a Call-off Order for an amount to be disclosed in the commercially sensitive report to E.ON Energy Solutions Ltd under the Warm Homes Oldham Framework Agreement to deliver energy efficiency measures to private sector homes across Greater Manchester, as detailed in the GM GHG LAD Scheme bid.

·         To issue an Authority Notice of Change to Inspiral Oldham Ltd under the Housing PFI Project Agreement for an amount to be disclosed in the commercially sensitive report to install External Wall Insulation to Wimpey No Fines Council homes on the Crossley Estate.

·         To approve the use of an amount to be disclosed in the commercially sensitive report  from the Housing Revenue Account Capital Programme to meet the shortfall in grant funding as detailed within the report.

Option 2 - To reject the Grant Funding Agreements issued by the GMCA detailed in the report. The energy efficiency measures would not be delivered to private sector homes across Greater Manchester and the External Wall Insulation would not be installed to Wimpey No Fines Council homes on the Crossley Estate for an amount to be disclosed in the commercially sensitive report of grant funding would have to be returned to BEIS with the consequential reputational damage that this would cause to Oldham Council and the GMCA.

RESOLVED – That the Cabinet would consider the commercially sensitive information contained at Item 11 before making a decision.

Consideration was given to a report of the Interim Director of Education and Early Years and the Director of Economy which sought the following recommended changes to Kingsland School.

·         Increase the schools PAN (Planned Admission Number) to 100 pupils (70 permanently excluded children and 30 SLC children).

·         Refurbish the lower ground floor of Laurel Bank to enable use by the school at an estimated cost of £500,000.

·         Set a budget for the school based on the newly proposed PAN and agree the release of funds from the Dedicated Schools Grant to cover the schools currently predicted deficit.

Kingsland School currently had a PAN of 70 (40 permanently excluded children and 30 SLC Children).  The PAN of the school has not changed since 2012.  In recent years the number of school age children in the borough had increased to approximately 43,500 in 2020 and was predicted to increase to 47,000 by 2025.  This increase has put enormous pressure on Kingsland School as there had been a corresponding increase in the number of pupils excluded in the borough, consequently the actual numbers of children in the school was always far in excess the official PAN.  Therefore, there was a need to formally increase the PAN of the school.  The current number on roll at the school was 148 (although some of these pupils are on part-time timetables).  A statutory process would need to be followed in order to formally increase the schools PAN. A six-week public consultation was required, and it was also necessary to inform and gain the approval of the Department for Education for the changes proposed to the PAN. 

Option/alternatives

Option 1 – Do nothing.

Option 2: Approve the recommended changes:

·         The current budget was not set at an appropriate level for the school and was complicated by the lack of an appropriate PAN.  Revising the school PAN would enable more effective budget planning. 

·         In addition, the extra funding requirements outlined above would be required to enable these targeted interventions to continue. 

·         The school was currently short of physical space and the development of the lower floor of laurel bank would allow the school to build upon the recent successful Ofsted Inspection and continue its programme of targeted interventions. 

RESOLVED – That:

1.    Option 2 be approved to;

a.     Increase the schools PAN (Planned Admission Number) to 100 pupils (70 permanently excluded children and 30 SLC children).

2.    The spend of up to £500k to support the delivery of the works needed to progress immediately with further delegated authority to the Director of Economy and Director of Finance for an additional £250k should this be required to complete the scheme be approved.

The Cabinet gave consideration to a report of the Director of Finance which provided the Cabinet with details of the performance of the Treasury Management function of the Council for the first half of 2020/21 and provided a comparison of performance against the 2020/21 Treasury Management Strategy and Prudential Indicators.

The Council was required to consider the performance of the Treasury Management function in order to comply with the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s (CIPFA) Code of Practice on Treasury Management (revised 2017). This report set out the key Treasury Management issues for Members’ information and review and outlined:

·         An economic update for the first six months of 2020/21;

·         A review of the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Annual Investment Strategy;

·         The Council’s capital expenditure, as set out in the Capital Strategy, and prudential indicators;

·         A review of the Council’s investment portfolio for 2020/21;

·         A review of the Council’s borrowing strategy for 2020/21;

·         Why there has been no debt rescheduling undertaken during 2020/21; and

·         A review of compliance with Treasury and Prudential Limits for 2020/21.

RESOLVED – That:

1.    Treasury Management activity for the first half of the financial year 2020/21 and the projected outturn position be approved and commended to Council.

2.    Amendments to both Authorised Limit and Operational Boundary for external debt as set out in the table at Section 2.4.5 of the report be approved and commended to Council.

3.    Amendments to the Capital Financing Requirement (CFR) as set out in the table at section 2.4.5 be approved and commended to Council.