Issue - meetings

Bold Street Housing Regeneration

 

 

Meeting: 21/01/2014 - Cabinet (Item 77)

77 Bold Street Housing Regeneration pdf icon PDF 109 KB

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)

 

Report of the Chief Officer (Regeneration & Planning)

Additional documents:

Minutes:

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)

 

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer (Regeneration & Planning) to consider the options for making further progress on the unfinished Bold Street housing regeneration scheme in the West End.  The report considered the opportunities to make positive progress and the financial implications for the Council.

 

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

 

 

 

Option 1: Do Nothing

Option 2:Seek capital growth to achieve cleared site through adding the project to the capital programme.

Advantages

No further acquisition costs.

Aims to achieve positive (cleared site) outcome in the medium to long-term.

Allows for the greatest range of housing tenures as final redevelopment of site can be marketed for private, social or council housing.

Supports completed regeneration of surrounding properties.

Disadvantages

Negates any benefit arising from investment made to date in site.

Ongoing revenue liability for rates, dilapidations, security, insurance etc.

Poor condition properties and vacant site continue to detract from regeneration investment on surrounding streets.

Uncertainty/delays in the acquisition of the privately owned properties lead to ongoing revenue liability for rates, dilapidations, security and insurance.

Ongoing poor condition of properties and vacant lots continue to detract from regeneration investment on surrounding streets.

There is also uncertainty over the future receipt of the cleared site.

Requires an increase in either the need to borrow or the use of reserves to finance the project, which may have an impact on other future priorities (see Financial Implications).

 

 

Risks

Ongoing and increasing

management costs and staff

resources from properties in

poor condition that will dilapidate further.

Complaints from remaining

private owners due to change

in project, possibly leading to

claims.

Adverse impacts likely to be

caused resulting in negative

regeneration effect.

Open ended risk as no telling

when sufficient external funding will be secured.

 

Ongoing and increasing

management costs and staff

resources from properties in

poor condition that will

dilapidate further.

Subject to Council approval as

part of budget process.

Delays and other factors may

result in increased capital costs

of acquisition, demolition and site reinstatement – there are risks

attached to gaining possession

of the whole site.

 

 

 

 

Option 1 ‘Do nothing’ is discounted for the reasons set out in the table and because:

·                     Members have to date given consistent policy and financial support for continued positive intervention in Bold Street. 

·                     There is a lack of a viable exit strategy in a ‘do nothing’ option: there is unlikely to be a buyer for the properties in their current condition and they are not suitable for refurbishment, so the council cannot easily withdraw from its interest in the site.

·                     There are increasing issues with vandalism and anti-social behaviour in and around the properties.

·                     There are ongoing revenue costs associated with these properties such as council tax and security and dilapidations.

 

Option 2 is the officer preferred option and is based around the potential for the Council to apply its own finances  ...  view the full minutes text for item 77