(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hamilton-Cox)
Report of the Head of Property Services
Minutes:
(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hamilton-Cox)
Cabinet received a report from the Head of Property Services to determine whether the Council should be disposing of its land at the former Shell ICI site, and if so consider the best option for the way forward.
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:
Option 1: Do nothing for now.
Advantages - from a strict valuation perspective, although there is good demand for the land at present, many of the uses are potentially speculative and the construction of the M6 Link is likely to bring with it greater demand and potentially increased values.
Disadvantages - The progression of the Land Allocation DPD may limit the ability of the council to deal with the sites in a flexible manner to achieve best and/or best contribution to its objectives particularly for more intensive commercial/employment activity.
Risks - The risk is that some of the interest may disappear or be taken up by other landowners. The council would also be left with its current land management liabilities.
Option 2: Pursue only those enquiries which have a direct link, or are intrinsically linked, to the energy coast priority of the council – paragraphs 3.3, 3.5, 3.7 and 3.8 above.
Advantages – This has a direct link with the council’s current priorities. Consideration needs to be given as to whether some of the uses identified could be dealt with in such a way that they could work together e.g. energy generation with adjacent storage.
Disadvantages – the values arising from these uses may not be the highest that could be obtained if the property was openly marketed for all uses.
Risks – none identified
Option 3: Pursue all enquiries by actively marketing the site and seeking expressions of interest to tease out formal enquiries. A selection process could then be followed based on best bids, preferred uses etc.
Advantages - This would provide most opportunity for development of the site and the potential to bring higher values for the land
Disadvantages – This may result in uses that fit with the council’s current priorities being “priced out” of the market by other uses that are perhaps commercial but not in line with the council’s priorities.
Risks – The risk here is that if the council were to choose a use that was less than “best consideration” it may not be possible to use the General Disposal Consent as the decision to consider such use was not made at the outset. In such circumstances cabinet should be aware that any disposal would then rely on obtaining specific approval from the Secretary of State for a disposal at less than best consideration and that it is quite possible that such consent would not be forthcoming. This would mean that any disposal could not take place.
Option 4: Consider site C as an employment/regeneration opportunity around recycling/waste recovery objectives to be developed alongside the land owned by the county council.
Advantages – This site is physically separated from the other areas of the Shell/ICI site and can therefore be treated in isolation. It benefits from being immediately adjacent to land owned by the county council where similar activities take place/are proposed.
Disadvantages – none identified.
Risk – no specific risks although it should be noted that as access is not controlled by the city council, disposal of the land is dependant on third parties and may take some time to achieve.
The preferred options were 2 and 4 which, because they relate to separate sites, could be taken forward at the same time subject to the risks identified above.
Councillor Hamilton-Cox proposed, seconded by Councillor Smith:-
“That the recommendations as set out in the report be approved.”
By way of an amendment to recommendation (1), Councillor Barry proposed and Councillor Leytham seconded:-
“(1) That recommendation (1) be revised to read; ‘that Cabinet approves the principle of the disposal of land at the former Shell/ICI site at Middleton under option 2 but if a satisfactory offer was not forthcoming under that option, then consideration be given to pursuing enquiries under option 3.
Councillors then voted on the amendment:-
(7 Members (Councillors Barry, Blamire, Bryning, Hanson, Leytham, Sands and Smith) voted in favour, and 1 Member (Councillor Hamilton-Cox) abstained.) whereupon the Chairman declared the amendment to be carried.
Councillors then voted on recommendations (2) and (3) as set out in the report.
Resolved:
(7 Members (Councillors Barry, Blamire, Bryning, Hanson, Leytham, Sands and Smith) voted in favour, and 1 Member (Councillor Hamilton-Cox) abstained.)
(1) That Cabinet approves the principle of the disposal of land at the former Shell/ICI site at Middleton under option 2 but if a satisfactory offer was not forthcoming under that option, then consideration be given to pursuing enquiries under option 3.
(2) That Cabinet approves the principle of the disposal of land at the former Shell/ICI site in accordance with option 4.
(3) That Cabinet approves the principle of accepting an undervalue in accordance with the General Disposal Consent (England) 2003 with full details being provided to Cabinet in a future report following marketing of the site.
Officers responsible for effecting the decision:
Head of Property Services
Reasons for making the decision:
The Shell/ICI site has been problematical and costly for the Council over many years. The proposals in the report identified options that could improve the Council’s position with regards to many of the ongoing liabilities and potentially result in reduced costs whilst also receiving some form of income. The report set out the relationship of the site to many of the planning policies for the district. Potential disposals were also identified which relate to the Council’s corporate plan energy coast priority and in accordance with the Council’s approved disposal strategy as referred to in the body of the report.