Issue - meetings
Corporate Municipal Building Works
Meeting: 22/01/2013 - Cabinet (Item 101)
101 Corporate Municipal Building Works 
PDF 1 MB
(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hamilton-Cox)
Report of the Head of Resources
Minutes:
(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hamilton-Cox)
Cabinet received a report from the Head of Resources to inform Cabinet of the extent of backlog works outstanding to buildings following the completion of a 5 year Condition Survey (November 2012) on the Council’s Corporate and Municipal building stock and requested Cabinet to take forward the additional investment needed as part of its budget proposals for 2013/14 onwards. This was to ensure buildings were fit for purpose and legally compliant and allowed sufficient flexibility to respond to changing needs, such as any arising from the forthcoming property review.
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:
|
|
Do nothing (presented for information to highlight the Council’s position and obligations).
|
Option 2: For Cabinet to take forward the increased investment needs as part of its budget proposals, as a 5 year planned maintenance programme.
|
Option 3: Consider taking forward an alternative programme of works that is a compromise between options one and two based on affordability and the availability of funding.
|
|
Advantages |
There are no advantages to this option. The Council has acknowledged that the “do nothing” option has been followed in the past and as a result, the backlog of building work has increased to the levels outlined in this report.
|
This option would be in line with the current Corporate Property Strategy and would ensure that all buildings meet basic health and safety standards.
This option would halt the deterioration of the Council’s corporate non-housing building stock preventing building closures and putting in place the foundations for a planned maintenance programme providing improved financial certainty moving forward.
|
This option would need to allow all urgent and poor condition works (Year 1& 2, D & C failure) to be completed, thus warding off serious building failure. |
|
Disadvantages |
The Council has a duty of care to building users, its employees and members of the public and would be in breach of regulations should health and safety be contravened as a result of building failure.
|
This is a long term initiative and it would be a few years before the real financial benefits became apparent. |
The majority of element failure falls within year 1 & year 2. |
|
Risks |
Doing nothing will eventually result in major failures of either the building structures or services. This will in turn result in the council being unable to undertake many of its core activities, and closure of buildings and the possibility of legal (including criminal) proceedings.
For these reasons this option, whilst outlined for information, is not considered viable. |
As this work is carried out alongside the joint property review with Lancashire County Council there is a chance of investing in a building that is then identified for closure although this would be closely monitored as both projects progress. However, it is worthy of note that any work undertaken to a building identified for closure may increase sale prospects and is likely to increase sale proceeds in many situations. ... view the full minutes text for item 101 |