Invitees:

Mark Shephard – Corporate Director Communities

Cllr Hywel Williams – Deputy Leader

Cllr Charles Smith – Cabinet Member Education and Regeneration

Satwant Pryce – Head of Regeneration Development and Property Services

Fiona Blick – Group Manager Property Services

The Scrutiny Officer introduced a report on rationalising the Council’s estate which is a key project relating to the Smarter Use of Resources corporate priority.

The Corporate Director Communities informed the Committee that the intent of the report is to demonstrate the extent of the Council’s asset management portfolio, the strategic direction of travel, the progress made with Community Asset Transfer and other major projects.

The Committee questioned the progress made on acquiring property for investment.  The Group Manager Property Services stated that the Council has an eclectic mix of commercial property within its portfolio. The majority of which are not held for purely investment purposes.  Examples of those properties are at the Innovation Centre in the Science Park, to provide start-up space for businesses.  Property has also been acquired at Waterton Cross, specifically as an investment and to generate an income from letting out the premises.  She stated that the service has a budget of £0.5m to acquire additional property for investment but nothing suitable had been identified within the borough council.  A bid had been placed for additional capital monies, following advice from CIPFA and Alder King, but the bid had proven unsuccessful at this stage.   The Corporate Director Communities stated that if further funding was made available to invest in commercial property there was the potential that the Council would be able to generate more income.  He also informed the Committee that many local authorities had gone down alternative routes of investing in commercial developments in order to generate new income streams.  However, there were clearly also some risks associated with this approach.

The Committee questioned the reason for 126 non-operational properties being retained.  The Group Manager Property Services informed the Committee that the properties ranged from starter units to properties at the Innovation Centre and Science Park and small garages.  She stated that some non-operational properties are commercial; some properties serve a socio-economic role whilst some properties had simply been inherited. 

The Committee commented that many sites in valley communities which had been deemed to be surplus needed to be cleared as the sites were not commercially viable and questioned whether a community approach could be adopted in determining the future of the site.  The Group Manager Property Services stated that this approach was already taken when appropriate, for example in the Ogmore Valley; however it was found that often it had proven too much of an undertaking for the community and therefore the transfer of the asset to the community could not take place and the site was disposed of on the open market.  The Group Manager Property Services informed the Committee that the most successful disposals had been when the site had been disposed to Town and Community Councils. 

The Committee commented that there were a number of sites which had been left in a poor visible state after the building had been demolished but not disposed of.  The Corporate Director Communities stated that the Welsh Government led Valleys Task Force had considered sites affected by blight, as this was an issue affecting a lot of South Wales particularly in valley areas where the value of land was not always high, and that there was a strong case for both Welsh and UK Government intervention to improve the aesthetic look of sites when buildings had been demolished. 

The Committee referred to the budget of £890k available for Community Asset Transfer and questioned would there be competing demands for funding in the event of the budget being utilised if all applications for the transfer of assets were approved.   The Corporate Director stated that the funding was specifically to improve parks pavilions as part of the CAT process, and that any future funding was dependent on the success of spending the existing budget of £890k.  The Deputy Leader commented that the funding of £890k would have to be drawn down first prior to a further budget being allocated to community asset transfer.                               

The Committee asked whether there were opportunities to preserve the heritage of sites, such as the stonework from schools which were to be demolished.  The Group Manager Property Services stated that if communities were interested in preserving the heritage of sites which were to be demolished, officers would be interested in looking at those proposals.  The Corporate Director Communities informed the Committee that a precedent had been set in that plaques had been retained locally from the former Berwyn Centre.  The Deputy Leader commented that he could not see problems with the heritage of sites being retained in communities. 

The Committee questioned whether consultation takes place with registered social landlords and the third sector on sites the Council proposes to demolish.  The Group Manager Property Services confirmed that officers work closely with registered social landlords on the disposal of school sites and other sites to consider their potential redevelopment.  She stated that some sites are disposed at market value, while other sites are disposed at nominal value. 

The Committee questioned whether apprenticeship opportunities could be secured as part of the redevelopment of sites and projects.  The Corporate Director Communities informed the Committee that there is potential for apprenticeship opportunities but there was pressure to maximise capital receipts from land disposals.  He stated that the potential for generating apprenticeship opportunities could be looked at as part of the procurement of projects where appropriate.  He informed the Committee that the Council already required that apprenticeships be secured as part of the school modernisation building programme. 

The Chairperson thanked the invitees for their contribution.         

Conclusions

The Committee made the following conclusions:

1. Members recommended that the Authority engage with the local community, including Town and Community Councils before council owned buildings are demolished and allow an opportunity to retain the heritage of the Community.  Members recommended that a written plan be drawn up well in advance with clear timelines on the consultation period so that all consultees are clear on the timings involved in the process.
2. Members were concerned that there was a lot of land in the Borough that had been left in a poor visible state after the building had been demolished but not disposed of. The Committee supported the Directorates desire for Welsh Government intervention to aide with making communities more aesthetically pleasing when a building has been demolished.

Members recommended exploring the opportunity of generating Apprenticeship opportunities during the procurement process.  Members recommended that this could be made a part of the contract when companies bid for properties/ land.