The Director of Finance will submit a report (Document “Y”) which sets out the overall progress made by the Property Programme (formerly b-works) to date and on the 2016/17 projects. The report also highlights the future direction of the Programme.

Recommended –

The Director of Finance submitted a report (Document “Y”) which set out the overall progress made by the Property Programme (formerly b-works) to date and on the 2016/17 projects. The report also highlighted the future direction of the Programme.

The Estates Manager gave a detailed overview of the Programme, during which the following aspects were highlighted:

·        That the Property Programme was a ten year ‘invest to save’ strategy, to deliver a well managed and fit for purpose estate.

·        The Programme was in year 9 of a 10 year resourced programme.

By the end of 2016/17 it is projected that the Programme will have delivered:

·        £7.3m of on-going per year gross revenue savings from vacating over 69 properties. The savings from the start of the Programme to the end of 2016/17 total £27.2m and will be equivalent to £42m by the end of the Programme in 2018/19.

·        Vacating the buildings will have reduced operational floor space occupied by approximately 83,000 m2 (25%) – equivalent to in excess of 8 Jacobs Wells, with a further 14,000m2 in the pipeline.

·        Additionally approximately 50 Community Asset Transfers applications were currently in the process of being assessed.

·        That £39m of capital receipts from disposing of surplus properties. An additional benefit to the district is that many of the surplus properties are subsequently redeveloped by the purchasers thus aiding regeneration.

·        That over £50 million of backlog maintenance reductions from investing in retained premises and disposing of surplus properties.

·        That the Programme had delivered the infrastructure necessary to enable flexible and mobile working.

·        To deliver the above benefits the Programme will have incurred approximately £15.4m of revenue expenditure and £52m of capital expenditure from the start of the Programme in 2008/9 to the end of 2016/17.

·        The Programme had recently completed work on a scheme to refurbish Argus Chambers and part of Britannia House.

Projects approved in 2016/17 included:

·        A £2m Essential Maintenance programme.

·        £0.2m Shipley Library refurbishment and creation of a Community Hub.

·        £750k for the refurbishment of the 5 upper floors of Argus Chambers.

·        £2m for the refurbishment of the ground floor space and reconfigured upper floor space in Britannia House.

·        The relocation of staff from Jacobs Well to Argus Chambers/Britannia House.

·        Depot Strategy – £3m scheme to create a new depot facility.  This scheme will enable the vacation of Shearbridge Depot, Harris Street Depot and the Tramshed, Wakefield Road.

During the discussion Members asked a number questions, the questions together with the responses are set out below:

A Member stated that Community Asset Transfers (CAT) were becoming more pertinent recently, and that it was difficult for people to know how to commence the CAT process.  He ascertained what help was available to enable individuals and community groups to navigate through the process, negotiate with the Council, as many people lacked the capacity and confidence to do this.  In response the Estates Manager explained that the whole CAT process can be accessed online, which takes you through the criteria and process.  In addition if individuals or organisations contacted the department, the department was happy to support people through the process.  Advice was also given on how to develop a business case and where to seek advice, together with information on funding streams that may be available.

The Assistant Director commented that the volume of CAT requests was high and currently the service was dealing with 51 applications, sometimes involving multiple assets.

A Member stated that he had concerns that people may not be given enough time when going through a CAT process, and that in some cases it may be the only community building in the area, and the reality of taking on an old building may be a huge undertaking and therefore it was important that support was given to communities.  In response the Estates Manager stressed that the Council was encouraging people to come forward and ‘have a go’, however in many cases the business case that was submitted required further work.

A Member stated that he was concerned that some groups had been advised that they either go through the CAT process, otherwise the building would close, and they had not been given any information or advice beyond that.

A Member endorsed the above comments, and stated that he was not convinced that groups were being advised about the options open to them, and it was important that there were clear lines of communications and clear advice given to interested parties.  The Assistant Director assured Members that the service will ensure that the information and advice given was consistent.

A Member stated she had been involved in a number of Community Asset Transfers, and although it was a good idea, there was the potential for it to go skew -whiff, particularly as there was very little funding available, particularly in relation to National Lottery funding.  In addition it was difficult for community groups to borrow money and it maybe worth exploring the setting up of loan system to assist community groups in coming forward.

In relation to a question regarding backlog maintenance it was stated that buildings were assessed in terms of their operational viability and whether or not they should be disposed.

The Chair ascertained what the acceptable level of backlog maintenance was against the value of the estate and how the rolling maintenance programme was conducted.  In response it was pointed out that property surveys were undertaken on a 5 year rolling programme, and in the context of the property programme, the Council now had a better understanding of the condition of its estate than ever before.

In relation to a question regarding tax liability on the estate, it was suggested that a report detailing information about the Council’s Investment Portfolio could be presented to this Committee.

In response to a question regarding the longer term objectives of the Property Programme and how it related to the Council’s overall objectives, it was pointed out that as the Council continued to rationalise its estate, the property portfolio could be used to generate income streams, or used in advancing employment opportunities or for housing purposes.

The Estates Manager stated that there were still a number of capital projects to complete and that a new programme will be developed in due course, of which the details will also be reported to this Committee.

Resolved –

(1)       That this Committee requests that a report detailing information            about the Council’s investment portfolio and policy be presented           to this Committee in March 2107.

(2)       That the next report in 12 months time, also includes details of the        forward strategy for the property programme.

ACTION:       Assistant Director Estates ? Property