Accessibility settings

In order to remember your preferences as you navigate through the site, a cookie will be set.

Color preference

Text size

Agenda item

Gloucestershire Economic Growth Scrutiny Committee Update

To receive an update from the Council’s representative on matters considered at the last meetings (20 October and 17 November 2021). 

Minutes:

61.1          Attention was drawn to the report from the Council’s representative on the Gloucestershire Economic Growth Scrutiny Committee, circulated at Page No. 24 and on the separate papers, which gave updates on matters discussed at the meetings held on 20 October and 17 November 2021.

61.2          The Council’s representative on the Gloucestershire Economic Growth Scrutiny Committee advised that the meeting on 20 October had focused on the review of the Local Transport Plan and the GFirst Local Enterprise Partnership “Getting Building Fund Programme” with the 17 November meeting concentrating on modern methods of construction, the Gloucestershire Infrastructure Investment Fund and the Executive Director’s report on economic growth issues for the country. 

61.3          With regard to modern methods of construction, a Member questioned whether these would actually ever come forward and what was being done to progress schemes in Tewkesbury Borough.  In response, the Council’s representative advised that there were already schemes within the borough including modular housing in Winchcombe.  He indicated that modular housing could be made to look any way but people tended to favour the more traditional looking housing so it often looked like ‘normal’ housing to the untrained eye.  There were fantastic savings to be had as modular housing was much cheaper to run so it was possible that affordable housing might truly be affordable in time.  The Chief Executive explained that the presentation at the meeting on 17 November was the second in a series of three with the first having focused on what modern methods of construction actually were and this one looking at it from a manufacturer’s point of view in terms of what they thought the issues were.  Modern methods of construction had lots of advantages in terms of the speed of delivery, the nature of the housing and the ongoing costs which meant they lent themselves to being used for affordable housing as they could be supported by registered providers who sometimes delivered them using government grants; despite this, modern methods of construction were not as common or as well-used as they might be in the affordable housing sector.  The third presentation in the series would be from a private sector housing developer and the aim would then be to provide a report for the Gloucestershire Economic Growth Joint Committee in order to consider how best to move forward.  Modern methods of construction were a relatively new concept, particularly for the private sector, and developers were likely to say that the reason they did not bring forward more products was because the market did not want them – there were many other reasons including price and the fact they were different but, until the market started to drive the process, it would be difficult for modern methods of construction to become well-known.  One manufacturer in the Forest of Dean was working to provide homes for the private sector on smaller more bespoke developments but it would be some time before people were able to see the advantages of modern methods of construction in terms of net carbon zero and the savings in terms of heating costs etc.  He suggested that it may be useful to arrange a seminar on modern methods of construction in the New Year so that all Members gained a basic understanding of what that meant and the various types. 

61.4           A Member indicated that Councillors had previously had an opportunity to see some modular housing being built and it had been very impressive; there had been very little mess on the roads and, although the housing had been moved around the country and bolted together six times, it was impossible to see the joints.  The Council’s representative on the Gloucestershire Economic Growth Scrutiny Committee indicated that the build took place in controlled conditions as opposed to out on a building site where weather conditions were unpredictable, this meant that quality was in-built and he was of the view that it may be more appealing to those who would rather work in a factory environment than a bricklayer on an outdoor building site.  The Chief Executive felt there was a very important point in relation to climate change and carbon reduction as traditional building sites involved around 20-30% waste, which was the equivalent of around one in six houses, whereas the quality control measures associated with modern methods of construction reduced waste to less than 5%.

61.5           With regard to the Gloucestershire Infrastructure Investment Fund, a Member asked whether any infrastructure investment was being specifically targeted in Tewkesbury Borough.  In response, the Chief Executive explained that the Getting Building Fund Programme was aimed at supporting growth and innovation in the digital and cyber sectors and, whilst other growth infrastructure projects had been put forward, no projects within Tewkesbury Borough had received funding due to the focus being on digital at this time.  Nevertheless, the infrastructure pipeline for Gloucestershire for a range of infrastructure projects - which were often reviewed by the Gloucestershire Economic Growth Scrutiny Committee and the Gloucestershire Economic Growth Joint Committee – included a significant number of projects available for funding within Tewkesbury Borough.  The Growth and Enterprise Manager undertook to provide Members with the GFirst Local Enterprise Partnership’s annual review document which detailed a number of infrastructure projects, some of which were for Tewkesbury Borough.  A Member asked whether funding was still available for the A38/A40 link road and the Head of Development Services explained that each Council had to produce an annual infrastructure funding statement setting out the key projects that money could be allocated towards.  The list had been considered by the Executive Committee at its meeting last week and would go to Council in December.  The projects included were all transport-led and an update had been provided on progress against each.  The Member asked if any projects were ever deleted from the list and, if so, whether Members would be informed and was advised that information was received from Gloucestershire County Council regarding schemes required to take forward growth of the wider Joint Core Strategy area and any projects that had been delivered would be removed along with those which the County Council indicated were no longer required – the Head of Development Services advised that, in her experience, things tended to be added to the list rather than being removed; however, if there was a change in circumstances, such as another piece of infrastructure being required which meant that it was consumed within a wider project, Members would be informed via the list.

61.6           It was

RESOLVED          That the Gloucestershire Economic Growth Scrutiny Committee updates be NOTED.

Supporting documents: