Council housing land deal criticised

Opposition councillors say they will complain to the Government after claiming land was sold for housing below its value, writes Local Democracy Reporter, Bill Edgar.

Cross-party members at Durham County Council raised the alarm after the authority signed a deal for the former Caterhouse Pit site, which is part of the wider Sniperley housing development on the edge of Durham City.

Liberal Democrat, Independent, Labour and Conservative councillors argue the council’s valuation relies on average house prices across County Durham rather than the higher-value DH1 housing market, potentially undervaluing the site and breaching its duty to secure the “best consideration reasonably obtainable” under the Local Government Act. 

But Durham County Council has rejected the claims, saying cabinet members had all the relevant information before approving the sale.

A call-in request to scrutinise the decision was denied by council leaders after they said the authority followed the correct process. 

Now, opposition councillors say they will escalate their concerns with the Government.

Liberal Democrat councillor Mark Wilkes told a scrutiny meeting: “I was previously a cabinet member in that role. I was given figures, which suggested what the value of the council’s land was. What the cabinet has agreed is a fraction of that amount. 

“I will now be writing to the Secretary of State and working with other councillors because it is not right for this local authority to give away land at below value.” 

The group of councillors argue that Caterhouse Pit should be retained because of its historic links to the former Framwellgate Colliery and its use by residents as an informal green space and wildlife area. 

Further concerns centre on plans to use part of the site for sustainable urban drainage systems (SuDS) serving the wider development.

In a letter sent to Durham County Council, the councillors claim the land has significant strategic value because its use for drainage infrastructure would free up more of developer County Durham Land’s own land for housing, increasing the value of the overall scheme.

The plea concluded: “Our call-in request is for this to be referred back to Cabinet with the ask that a second valuation of the land is obtained due to what we believe is a clear undervaluation in this report in terms of both the nominal value of Caterhouse Pit and the evidence-based undervaluation of the average house price for this location. 

“If the Caterhouse Pit site is deemed to be of no value to the developer, then we request that consideration be made to transferring this to the community as a community asset for its protection for generations to come.”

Yet, the authority said an independent valuation had been reviewed by its own valuers and endorsed by statutory officers. It added that the proposed sale price fell within the valuation range and complied with its legal obligations.

It also rejected concerns over Caterhouse Pit, noting the land is not designated as a nature reserve or listed as an asset of community value.

However, the council’s response added that removing the plot from the deal could force a renegotiation on less favourable terms, delay housing delivery and put the wider development at risk.

“I understand that those requesting the call-in were afforded the opportunity to submit questions to Cabinet and to raise their concerns directly at the meeting on April 22 but chose not to do so,” the council ruled. 

“Officers have addressed these matters in separate correspondence to explain the position on the points raised as part of this call-in. 

“I do not consider that the case for call-in has been met and therefore cannot be considered to be reasonable.”