Agenda item

Option 1: Acquire the redundant parts of the former Skerton High School site; undertake combined site master planning; commence a pilot scheme

 Advantages:

Integrating the redundant parts of the school site into the Mainway proposals, increases housing numbers; improves housing mix; delivers community amenity; provides playing fields for wider community and sports group use; improves access to and from Mainway for pedestrian / cycle and vehicles – linking the riverside to Ryelands and beyond. Enhanced placemaking and creates a real opportunity to reverse the cycle of decline and make Skerton East a place to live with one of aspiration.

Acquiring the site establishes the control needed to deliver this transformational opportunity rather than allowing the site to go to a third party who may not deliver anything on the site that meet the core priorities of the Council.

Undertaking a co-ordinated masterplan and early phase detailed design for planning approval, will ensure how core design principles will flow through the combined site; provide improved permeability, connectivity, construction materials, etc that underpins how the new development would function and enrich the lives of residents and the wider community. The early establishment of the design team and development partner for phase 1 is key to meet timeline expectations.

Accelerating an early phase, provides clarity and assurity as to the proposed strategy of retaining the core buildings on Mainway. It communicates the vision of the Council to the community after some perceived delays in progressing the scheme. It sets the stall out as to how the regeneration of the area will come forward and delivers on site examples of the wider masterplan vision. The strategy of retaining the core buildings, is important from a viability and zero carbon objective for Mainway.

Disadvantages:

The cost of delivering a combined Mainway & school site programme is significant and prohibitive to the resources and capacities of the Council based on the current Treasury parameters that dictate borrowing capacity. Dependent on the review and adoption of potential different Treasury strategies, funding 100% of the Mainway development could restrict wider Council priorities.

The school site will have holding costs to be allowed for until developed through.

 The masterplan will take into account that a S77 approval may not be granted, but in that instance whilst a portion of that work would be wasted expense, every effort will be to minimise that element.

 There is no disadvantage in accelerating an early phase of the Mainway work. The worst scenario that that exercise might realise, is that the existing blocks are not suitable for long term retention and need to be demolished. This is highly unlikely – but the earlier this is known the better and the delivery strategy can then switch to looking a new build options.

Risks:

Whilst detailed due diligence has been undertaken on the title and the physical nature of the site, such as voids in the ground, asbestos, covenants etc. it is believed all identified risks have been assessed and mitigated, all development comes with some risk, and this should be noted.

A delay in pursuing the school purchase may lead to Lancashire County Council deciding on a different course of action and even a sale to a third party.

The school transfer will be subject to Secretary of State approval – which is not guaranteed.

 The proposals laid out are based on the premise that the Mainway blocks can be completely stripped back to their concrete structure, reconfigured and then refurbished – assessed from the independent advice thus far received. The rationale of accelerating a limited initial phase is to ensure this strategy is robust. Should it prove not to be, then a demolition and new build plan will need to be pursued. Results from the initial phase will be reported back to Cabinet, as soon as the concrete structures have been completely exposed and assessed.

All social housing has the opportunity for tenants with ‘rights’ to exercise their ‘Right-to-Buy', as the pilot blocks (and any subsequent blocks) are modernised there is a risk of such applications being received. However, there is protection of around 15 years for this where the Council would be able to recoup money spent through the ‘cost-floor’ plan.

A delay in procuring and appointing a design team and development partner for phase 1 will lead to a further delay in the submission and approval of planning consent; start on site and the key understanding of the refurbishment strategy. The Mainway blocks continue to deteriorate and represent sub-standard living for most residents. Community expectation of action by the Council will again be questioned.

Option 2: Do Not Acquire the School site; do not pursue a combined masterplan; do not undertake a pilot phase.

Advantages:

Not pursuing the acquisition will mean no further cost implications for the Council.

Disadvantages:

Leaving the site as a redundant site, should Lancashire County Council not do anything with it, will impact on the ambitious and huge place making investment being proposed for Mainway, threatening the wider regeneration opportunity.

Should the County Council decide to dispose of the site on the open market, the City Council is then open to the risk of who buys it, what they might seek to deliver on it and how that may well significantly reduce the social, environmental and community benefits, that having control over the site would provide. An independent development turning its back on Mainway would not deliver the wider opportunity that an inclusive, co-ordinated development would.

A redesign of Mainway alone, can only reflect the area in question and cannot anticipate what may or may not happen on the adjacent school site by a third party. Mainway would have to continue to rely on an inferior access and could be isolated from wider regeneration.

Delaying an initial phase, increases overall risk; decreases confidence by the community and would lead to residents spending longer in substandard housing than they need to.

Risks:

Not having control of the redundant elements of the school site directly undermines the significant investment in Mainway.

Creating a single Mainway masterplan cannot utilise and draw in the wider Skerton community. It would remain an isolated estate which, would not make the most of the capital employed and continue to result in similar problems already experienced with this type of estate.

Not pursuing a pilot scheme increases risk and cost of the overall scheme. It delays establishing a clear strategy for how we best bring forward this key regeneration project. Further delay in pursuing the scheme increases the risk of Right to Buy being exercised which will push the overall future costs of a project up.