Decision details

(i)  To adopt a new policy that protects amenity land / green spaces in housing estates, and only enables the sale of such land in exceptional circumstances. Exceptional circumstances will relate to the provision of access needed or land required for adaptations for disabilities.

(ii)  To delegate authority to the Executive Director, Wellbeing & Housing following consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing, Adults & Health to make any minor changes to the policy during its life span.

(iii)  To delegate authority to the Executive Director Well-being & Housing following consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing, Adults & Health, to take all necessary actions to give effect to the above recommendations.

The purpose of this report protection of Council owned green spaces, or amenity / garden land commonly found within Southampton Council housing estates, by ceasing the sale of these parcels of land, except in cases mitigating disability related accessibility issues.

Since 2012, residents have had the opportunity to purchase amenity land to extend their homes / gardens, and in some cases, purchases have been used for the development of an additional property. Prior to this date, residents could negotiate short term licences.

However with the launch of The Green City Plan 2030 the Charter sets out the importance of the protection and enhancement of the natural environment, and green spaces, and this is also the position set out in the adopted Development Plan. The Strategic Planning Team is seeking to strengthen all environmental policies as part of the emerging Southampton City Vision Local Plan to tackle key issues relating to climate change, ecology/biodiversity, and health. Hence, the review of the local plan along with the Green City charter creates an opportunity to review the current amenity land sale policy.

The following option was considered:

· Continue with the existing approach to the sale of amenity / garden land.

 · Allow residents to continue to negotiate licences for land use.

These options were rejected due to the inconsistency with the Council’s Green City Plan 2030 commitments, and the officer time involved in continuing with the current approach.

None