Assets, Property and Facilities Committee Conference Room 2 (FHWGF.007), Ground Floor, Fife House, North Street, Glenrothes Thursday, 17 January, 2019 - 10.00 am AGENDA Page Nos. 1. APOLOGIES 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST - In terms of Section 5 of the Code of Conduct Members of the Committee are asked to declare any interest(s) in particular items on the agenda and the nature of the interest(s) at this stage. 3. MINUTE - Minute of Assets, Property and Facilities Committee of 1st November 2018. 3 - 7 4. 2018-19 CAPITAL MONITORING - Joint Report by the Executive Director - Finance & Corporate Services and the Executive Director - Enterprise and Environment 8 - 12 5. 2018-19 REVENUE MONITORING - Joint Report by the Executive Director - Finance & Corporate Services and the Executive Director - Enterprise and Environment 13 - 19 6. COMMUNITY ASSET TRANSFER APPLICATION BY HYPERCLUB – ROSYTH RESOURCE CENTRE - Joint Report by the Head of Communities & Neighbourhoods and the Head of Assets, Transportation and Environment 20 - 28 7. ASSETS, PROPERTY AND FACILITIES WORK PROGRAMME 2019 29 - 30 8. PRESTONHALL DEPOT, ST ANDREWS ROAD, PRESTONHALL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, CUPAR - Report by the Head of Assets, Transportation and Environment 31 - 33 ITEM LIKELY TO BE CONSIDERED IN PRIVATE IN TERMS OF PART 1 OF SECTION 7(A) TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT (SCOTLAND) ACT 1973 9. PRESTONHALL DEPOT, ST ANDREWS ROAD, PRESTONHALL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, CUPAR - Report by the Head of Assets, Transportation and Environment 34 - 37 Members are reminded that should they have queries on the detail of a report they should, where possible, contact the report authors in advance of the meeting to seek clarification. 1
2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST - In terms of Section 5 of the Code of Conduct Members of the Committee are asked to declare any interest(s) in particular items on the agenda and the nature of the interest(s) at this stage.
3. MINUTE - Minute of Assets, Property and Facilities Committee of 1st November 2018.
3 - 7
4. 2018-19 CAPITAL MONITORING - Joint Report by the Executive Director - Finance & Corporate Services and the Executive Director - Enterprise and Environment
8 - 12
5. 2018-19 REVENUE MONITORING - Joint Report by the Executive Director - Finance & Corporate Services and the Executive Director - Enterprise and Environment
13 - 19
6. COMMUNITY ASSET TRANSFER APPLICATION BY HYPERCLUB – ROSYTH RESOURCE CENTRE - Joint Report by the Head of Communities & Neighbourhoods and the Head of Assets, Transportation and Environment
20 - 28
7. ASSETS, PROPERTY AND FACILITIES WORK PROGRAMME 2019 29 - 30
8. PRESTONHALL DEPOT, ST ANDREWS ROAD, PRESTONHALL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, CUPAR - Report by the Head of Assets, Transportation and Environment
31 - 33
ITEM LIKELY TO BE CONSIDERED IN PRIVATE IN TERMS OF PART 1 OF SECTION 7(A) TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT (SCOTLAND) ACT 1973
9. PRESTONHALL DEPOT, ST ANDREWS ROAD, PRESTONHALL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, CUPAR - Report by the Head of Assets, Transportation and Environment
34 - 37
Members are reminded that should they have queries on the detail of a report they should, where possible, contact the report authors in advance of the meeting to seek clarification.
1
Linda Bissett Head of Democratic Services
Finance and Corporate Services
Fife House
North Street Glenrothes
Fife, KY7 5LT
10 January, 2019
If telephoning, please ask for:
Elizabeth Mair, Committee Administrator, Fife House
Agendas and papers for all Committee meetings can be accessed on
www.fifedirect.org.uk/committees
2
2018 APF
27
THE FIFE COUNCIL - ASSETS, PROPERTY AND FACILITIES COMMITTEE – FIFE HOUSE, GLENROTHES
1 November, 2018
10.00 a.m. – 12.00 noon
PRESENT: Councillors Craig Walker (Convener), David Alexander, Alistair Bain, Alistair Cameron, Alex Campbell, Mick Green, Gary Guichan, David MacDiarmid, John O’Brien, Graham Ritchie, Jonny Tepp.
ATTENDING: Keith Winter, Executive Director, Enterprise & Environment; Alan Paul, Senior Manager, Raymond Johnston, Service Manager (Professional Services), Michael O’Gorman, Service Manager (Estates), Property Services; Tim Kendrick, Community Manager (Development), Norman Laird, Community Manager (Glenrothes), Zahida Ramzan, Policy Co-ordinator (Equalities), Communities; Lee Drysdale, Accountant, Barbara Cooper, HR Service Manager, Elizabeth Mair, Committee Administrator, Democratic Services, Finance & Corporate Services.
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE:
Councillors Dominic Nolan and Andrew Verrecchia.
64. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
No declarations of interest were submitted in terms of Standing Order No. 7.1.
65. MINUTE
The Committee considered the minute of the meeting of the Assets, Property & Facilities Committee of 23rd August, 2018.
Decision
The Committee approved the minute.
66. 2018/19 CAPITAL MONITORING
The Committee considered a joint report by the Executive Director, Finance and Corporate Services and the Executive Director, Enterprise and Environment providing an update on the Capital Investment Plan and advising on the financial position for the 2018/19 financial year.
Decision
The Committee noted the current performance and activity across the 2018/19 Financial Monitoring as detailed in the report.
67./
3
2018 APF
28
67. 2018/19 REVENUE MONITORING
The Committee considered a joint report by the Executive Director, Finance and Corporate Services and the Executive Director, Enterprise and Environment providing an update on the forecast financial position for the 2018/19 financial year for the areas in scope of the Committee.
Decision
The Committee noted the current financial performance and activity as detailed in the report.
68. ANNUAL HEALTH & SAFETY REPORT 2017/18
The Committee considered a report by the Head of Human Resources providing an overview of the performance of the Council in relation to health and safety matters in the year 2017/18.
Decision
The Committee agreed:-
(1) to note the current performance and activity;
(2) to note the progress made to date with regard to improving workforce practices and performance in the organisation;
(3) to note that fire safety measures in school buildings had been upgraded over the years but that members with specific concerns about individual school fire safety should contact Keith Winter; and
(4) that briefing notes be issued to members on the following matters -
work on fire stopping measures above school ceilings
an analysis of the statistics relating to violence and aggression in schools.
69. REMOVAL OF CHARGES FOR CHILDREN'S FUNERALS
The Committee considered a report by the Head of Assets, Transportation and Environment advising of the use of delegated powers to remove burial and cremation fees for children under 18 years old.
Decision
The Committee:-
(1) noted the use of delegated powers to remove burial and cremation fees for
children under 18 years old; and
(2) endorsed the agreement reached between COSLA and the Scottish Government.
70./
4
2018 APF
29
70. COMMUNITY ASSET TRANSFER APPLICATION BY YMCA - GALLATOWN PARK BOWLING CLUB
The Committee considered a joint report by the Head of Communities & Neighbourhoods and the Head of Assets, Transportation & Environment in respect of a formal Community Asset Transfer Request received from Kirkcaldy YMCA under Part 5 of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 to purchase the Gallatown Park Bowling Club and Bowling Greens, Kirkcaldy and establish a community hub.
Decision
The Committee agreed to approve the disposal of the Gallatown Park Bowling Club and Bowling Greens to Kirkcaldy YMCA at less than best consideration in terms of Part 5 of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 and on terms acceptable to the Head of Assets, Transportation & Environment and the Head of Legal Services.
71. ASSETS, PROPERTY & FACILITIES COMMITTEE WORK PROGRAMME 2018-19
Decision
The Committee noted:-
(1) the current work programme for the Assets, Property & Facilities Committee; and
(2) that Members were encouraged to bring forward items for future consideration to be added to the work programme.
72. WAROUT STADIUM, GLENROTHES
The Committee considered a joint report by the Head of Communities & Neighbourhoods and the Head of Assets, Transportation & Environment advising of the proposed renewal of a lease to Glenrothes Social and Recreation Club at Warout Stadium, Glenrothes.
Decision
The Committee noted:- (1) the information contained in the report; and
(2) that a further report detailing the commercial terms would be considered later in the meeting.
The Committee considered a report by the Head of Assets, Transportation & Environment providing an update on the position regarding the remaining compensation claims relating to the Dunfermline Flood Prevention Scheme.
Decision/
5
2018 APF
30
Decision
The Committee noted:-
(1) the information contained in the report; and
(2) that a further report detailing the commercial terms would be considered later in the meeting.
74. WAROUT STADIUM, GLENROTHES
The Committee, under Section 50(A)(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, excluded the public and press from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 8 & 9 of Part 1 of Schedule 7A to the Act. The Committee considered a joint report by the Head of Communities & Neighbourhoods and the Head of Assets, Transportation & Environment detailing the proposed renewal terms of a lease of the upper floor of Warout Stadium, Glenrothes, to Glenrothes Social and Recreation Club.
Decision
The Committee:-
(1) noted the information contained in the report; and
(2) approved the terms of a lease of the upper floor of Warout Stadium, Glenrothes, to the Glenrothes Social and Recreation Club at the rent detailed in the report and on terms and conditions to the satisfaction of the Head of Assets, Transportation & Environment and the Head of Legal Services.
The Committee, under Section 50(A)(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, excluded the public and press from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 8 & 9 of Part 1 of Schedule 7A to the Act. The Committee considered a report by the Head of Assets, Transportation and Environment providing an update on the position regarding the remaining compensation claims relating to the Dunfermline Flood Prevention Scheme.
Decision
The Committee:-
(1) authorised the Legal Services Manager, in consultation with the Head of Assets, Transportation & Environment, to settle the claim as detailed in the report for the land at Elgin Industrial Estate, Dickson Street, Dunfermline;
(2) noted the current position regarding the other outstanding claims.
76./
6
2018 APF
31
76. WEST FIFE DEPOT, HALBEATH, DUNFERMLINE - UPDATE
The Committee, under Section 50(A)(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, excluded the public and press from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 8 & 9 of Part 1 of Schedule 7A to the Act. The Committee considered a report by the Head of Assets, Transportation & Environment providing an update on the proposal to create a single multi-service depot at Halbeath, Dunfermline, to serve West Fife.
Decision
The Committee agreed:-
(1) to note the progress and current status of the project, together with the projected outturn costs; and
(2) that arrangements be made to allow members of the committee to visit the site.
________________________________
7
Assets, Property & Facilities Committee
17 January 2019
Agenda Item No. 4
2018/19 Capital Monitoring
Report by: Eileen Rowand, Executive Director, Finance and Corporate Services
Keith Winter, Executive Director, Enterprise & Environment
Wards Affected: All
Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the Capital Investment Plan and advise on the financial position for the 2018/19 financial year.
Recommendation(s)
Committee is asked to consider the current performance and activity across the 2018/19 Financial Monitoring as detailed in this report.
Resource Implications
None.
Legal & Risk Implications
None.
Impact Assessment
An EqIA has not been completed and is not necessary as no change or revision to existing policies and practices is proposed.
Consultation
None.
8
1.0 Background
1.1 Based on current information, this report summarises the forecast capital outturn for the areas falling under the scope of this Committee for 2018/19. At this stage it is forecast that expenditure will be £24.415m, representing 98.6% of the approved capital programme for 2018/19.
1.2 Appendix 1 shows an analysis of specific projects in the current capital investment plan which have a budget greater than £1m and analyses total project cost rather than only in year spend.
1.3 Appendix 2 details the forecast expenditure against budget for each project. A brief
explanation of any significant forecast variances is provided at section 3 within this report.
2.0 Governance
2.1 On 21 June 2016 the Executive Committee approved revised governance and scrutiny arrangements for major capital projects. At that meeting the Committee agreed an enhanced level of reporting on capital projects through the quarterly capital expenditure monitoring report.
2.2 Major projects are defined as projects with a value of £5m and over. Projects with a value of less than £5m may also be subject to enhanced governance and scrutiny arrangements where there may be greater risk of overspend against budget, a risk of overrun on timescales or where expected benefits may not be delivered. The Investment Strategy Group is currently working to identify these projects as part of a review of the Capital Plan. Elected members will also be able to suggest when a particular project should be scrutinised in more detail.
3.0 Issues, Achievements & Financial Performance
3.1 Key Issues / Risks
3.1.1 Appendix 1 details the total cost forecast position for all capital projects within the areas under the scope of the Committee with an overall value of £1m and over. The key risks associated with the major projects are noted below.
3.2 Major Projects – Potential Risks and Actions
3.2.1 There are no additional or new risks arising in the current reporting period from any of the major projects being progressed.
3.3.1 Appendix 2 provides a summary of the projected outturn for each project for the financial year 2018/19. The appendix shows a forecast outturn of £24.415m against a Capital Investment plan of £24.770m, a spending level of 98.6%.
3.3.2 There is a capital income budget for 2018/19 of £11.021m with a forecast income of
£8.948m, representing 81.2% of the budgeted income.
9
3.3.3 The reasons for significant variances (+/-£0.500m) are detailed below.
3.3.4 Slippage is the term used to describe projects that are expected to spend less than the budget allocation in a particular year due to a delay in timing on the delivery of the project. This is not uncommon in the capital programme and the reasons for this can be wide and varied. Advancement is the term used to describe projects that are expected to spend more than the budget allocation in a particular year due to an acceleration of the budget from future years.
3.4 Significant Variances
3.4.1 There are no projects with a significant expenditure variance of (+/-£0.500m). 3.4.2 The capital receipts variance of £2.075m is specific to the West Fife Depot project.
The original programme had included expected sales of both Dickson Street depot and Milesmark depot during 18/19. The majority of the projected variance is due to a delay in concluding a sale for Milesmark depot. If the transaction is concluded, subject to various conditions, the payment is expected over two tranches in financial years 19/20 and 20/21.
4.0 Conclusions
4.1 The total 2018/19 approved programme for the areas in scope of the Assets, Property & Facilities Committee is £24.770m. The forecast level of expenditure is £24.415m, which represents 98.6% of the total programme, resulting in a projected underspend of (£0.355m).
4.2 The management of capital resources require us to look across financial years, as well as within individual years. The current year performance is only a snapshot of the existing plan and the Directorate will adjust expenditure levels within future years of the plan to accommodate the advancement or slippage of projects.
List of Appendices
1. Total Cost Monitor
2. Capital Monitoring Report by Service
Report Contact Tracy Hirst Finance Business Partner Finance Service Fife House North Street Glenrothes Telephone: 03451 55 55 55 (Ext. 441142) Email: [email protected]
TOTAL ASSETS, PROPERTY & FACILITIES (11.021) (8.948) 2.073 81.2% (2.293)
12
Assets, Property & Facilities Committee
17 January 2019
Agenda Item No. 5
2018/19 Revenue Monitoring
Report by: Eileen Rowand, Executive Director, Finance and Corporate Services
Keith Winter, Executive Director, Enterprise & Environment
Wards Affected: All
Purpose
The purpose of this report is to give members an update on the forecast financial position for the 2018/19 financial year for the areas in scope of the Assets, Property & Facilities Committee.
Recommendations
Committee is asked to consider the current financial performance and activity as detailed in this report.
Resource Implications
None.
Legal & Risk Implications
There are no direct legal implications arising from this report.
Impact Assessment
An EqIA has not been completed and is not necessary as no change or revision to existing policies and practices is proposed.
Consultation
None.
13
1.0 Background
The report summarises the forecast outturn position for 2018/19, taking into account the actual expenditure incurred, and provides a forecast and an explanation of the main budget variances at section 3.
2.0 Issues
2.1 Projected Outturn
2.1.1 Based on current information for the areas falling under the scope of this Committee, of a net expenditure budget of £30.645m the position across all areas is a forecast expenditure of £30.242m resulting in a provisional net underspend of (£0.403m) (1.32%).
2.1.2 Appendices 1 and 2 show projected expenditure against budget across the various areas. It should be noted that the balances are extracted straight from Oracle and are shown as rounded millions. This may mean that there are some rounding differences contained within the appendices but these are immaterial values that do not impact on the overall financial position. The following paragraphs provide a brief explanation of the main areas where there are significant variances (+/-£0.250m) between planned and projected expenditure and income across service managed budgets.
3.0 Major Variances
3.1 Property Services are currently projecting an overspend of £0.556m. Of this variance £0.115m relates to workforce change cost. As previously reported to committee, the balance is mainly a result of the timing of achieving savings for Building Value Programme and Office Rationalisation in 18/19. Work is underway to attempt to bring the realisation of the savings back to the original profile, but it is still anticipated that the full savings will be achieved over the 3 year period. Meantime the projected overspend has been temporarily mitigated in part by a positive forecasted income variance in other areas of service activity, along with an underspend on the settlement for dilapidations at Carleton House.
3.2 The projected underspend of (£0.346m) in Cemeteries and Crematoria, is a result of projected over recovery of income based on actuals for the previous two financial years. The income to date is in line with the previous two financial years. The projected underspend will contribute towards the Property Services pressures.
3.3 There is a forecast underspend in School Catering of (£0.299m) mainly as a result of increasing sales since the introduction of the new menus and online/cash dual payments from August 2017. Additional increases can be seen at new build schools and in locations with coffee bars.
3.4 The movement in variance from the previous reported period is £0.268m. The majority of this is workforce change costs which are now funded within the service due to an underspend elsewhere in the directorate. The individual movements are minor across several areas of the business, with no significant individual movements (+/-£0.250m) to report at this time.
14
4.0 Progress on Budget Savings
4.1 Appendix 3 provides details of revenue budget savings for the areas falling under the scope of the Assets, Property & Facilities Committee, detailing achievements against the current year approved budget savings as at Quarter 1. The format of the appendix may be refined further for future reports. The appendix details:
the 3 year budget period for which the savings were approved
the title of each saving
the savings target relevant to the current financial year
the value of saving forecast as deliverable for the financial year
a Red/Amber/Green Status for each saving
details of any substitute savings
4.2 All savings have been categorised using a Red/Amber/Green status and these are described as follows:
Green – No issues and saving is on track to be delivered Amber – There are minor issues or minor reduction in the value of saving, or delivery
of the saving is delayed Red – Major issues should be addressed before any saving can be realised 4.3 Where a saving is no longer deliverable in the current year it is expected that
substitute savings are identified to ensure that costs remain within budget overall. Where this is the case, the original saving will be categorised red or amber and a substitute saving will be identified. The substitute saving will be categorised as green and identified in the tracker as a substitute.
4.4 The areas in scope for the committee have a significant level of savings to manage within the financial year 2018/19. Overall the savings to be delivered are in the region of £2.4m. Whilst the delivery of savings is becoming more challenging, the relevant areas are looking to minimise the financial impact of any amber or red savings by determining mitigating actions as soon as possible. Across all areas, £0.000m has been identified as Red status, with £0.602m identified as being Amber status.
4.5 The full year saving amounts are detailed along with annual forecast information
detailed in appendix 3. The following paragraphs provides a brief explanation of areas where there are variations at Service level (+/-£0.250m) between the Service savings target and the projected saving being delivered within the current financial year.
4.6 Building Value Programme is currently forecasting that it won’t achieve the proposed
saving of £0.336m in 2018/19, which is a timing issue, as it is anticipated that the full saving will still be achieved over the 3 year period. The service are currently working towards bringing the realisation of the saving back in line with the original profile. There are currently substitutions in place to temporary mitigate this issue as shown in appendix 2.
15
5.0 Conclusions
5.1 The provisional outturn position for the areas in scope of the Assets, Property & Facilities Committee is a net underspend of (£0.403m) (1.32%).
List of Appendices
1 Projected Outturn 2018/19 - Summary 2 Projected Outturn 2018/19 - Detail 3 Approved 2018/19 Savings Background Papers None Report Contact Tracy Hirst Finance Business Partner Finance Service Fife House North Street Glenrothes Telephone: 03451 55 55 55 (Ext. 441142) Email: [email protected]
Area Approved Budget Year Title of Savings ProposalSavingsTarget
£m
Overall Forecast
£m
(Under)/ over£m
Rag Status
Amber - There are minor issues or minor reduction in the value of saving, or delivery of the saving is delayedRed - Major issues should be addressed before any saving can be realised
Approved savings on track to be achieved
Approved savings on track to be achieved
Approved savings on track to be achieved
Approved savings on track to be achieved
Approved savings on track to be achievedApproved savings on track to be achieved
OCTOBER 2018
Approved savings on track to be achievedGrand Total
Green - No issues and saving is on track to be delivered
Increased Building Services integration with Housing ServicesBuilding Value ProgrammeOffice Rationalisation
Carleton House Dilapidations
Bereavement Income via Cremations
Approved savings on track to be achieved
Summary
Rag Status SavingsTarget
£m
Overall Forecast
£m
(Under)/ over£m
19
Assets Property & Facilities Committee
17th January 2019
Agenda Item No. 6
Community Asset Transfer Application by Hyperclub – Rosyth Resource Centre Report by: Paul Vaughan, Head of Communities and Neighbourhoods and Ken Gourlay, Head of Assets, Transportation and Environment
Wards Affected: 6
Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide information on the evaluation of a formal Community Asset Transfer request received from the Hyperclub under Part 5 of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 to purchase the Rosyth Resource Centre. Recommendation(s)
It is recommended that committee members refuse the Community Asset Transfer request from Hyperclub for the sale of the Rosyth Resource Centre in terms of Part 5 of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 for the reasons set out below (also see 3.6).
The request did not provide sufficient evidence on how the group intended to fund the proposal.
The request did not provide sufficient evidence of the appropriate skills and experience required to manage and maintain the asset.
The projected benefits were not based on robust information, and the proposal did not demonstrate value for money.
Agreeing to the request would restrict the Council’s ability to carry out its functions per Section 82(5) of the Act.
Resource Implications
If the request is approved, there will be the loss to the Council of a capital receipt of £146,000.
If the request is refused, the building will be subject to an alternative use, which will be resource-efficient as there will be no need for a new-build facility (see 1.4). Legal & Risk Implications
If the request is refused, Hyperclub may seek a review of the decision to refuse the request. This would be dealt with by the Community Empowerment Act Review Body, with the potential for further appeal to the Scottish Ministers. Impact Assessment
An EqIA is not required because the report does not propose a change to existing policies and practices.
20
Consultation
Community consultation has been undertaken by the applicant organisation, and the asset under consideration has been the subject of a committee report discussed at South and West Fife Area Committee on 14th November 2018 as part of Education and Children’s Services’ early years proposals. Education and Children’s Services has undertaken consultation as listed in the committee report as follows:
Fife-wide online parent consultation, November 2016;
Parent engagement sessions, December 2016;
Continued engagement with Fife Council Early Years workforce;
Scottish Government consultation on the Blueprint for 2020;
Continued engagement with national bodies for 3rd sector and public sector;
Scottish Childminding Association (SCMA), Early Years Scotland (EYS), Scottish Futures Trust (SFT), HUB and a range of early years’ partners;
Continued engagement with local childminders, private nursery owners and managers of voluntary playgroups.
1.0 Background
1.1 Part 5 of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 enables community bodies to request the ownership, lease or management of publicly owned buildings or land. The Act states that such a request can only be made by a community transfer body (CTB), defined as a community controlled body with a minimum membership of 20 people, which must be constituted in the form of a Scottish charitable incorporated organisation (SCIO), a community benefit company or a company limited by guarantee. The CTB and its request must meet the requirements of the Act before the Council can consider the request.
1.2 The Hyperclub was established in 2012, initially as an informal space for children who had been diagnosed with ADHD to play. The club has now grown to accommodate adults with learning and physical disabilities, and provides a number of activities alongside practical skills. The club and activities are self-funded and delivered by 30 local volunteers at its current location in Ballast Bank, Inverkeithing which is hired by the group on an hourly basis to pay for shared facilities.
1.3 A daily programme of activities is provided, including board games, craft and group activities, providing both social interaction and healthy eating on a budget. Outdoor learning is also provided and speakers are invited to come into the club to give various talks. The centre is currently open on a Tuesday and a Friday, with an after-school club operating both days from 6pm – 8pm. From 1- 4pm on a Sunday the club offers social activities for adults, enabling service users to boost their confidence.
1.4 Education and Children’s Services has a requirement to deliver increased nursery hours, and an option appraisal and feasibility study have been carried out in the area. The Rosyth Resource Centre is the preferred location for the development of the additional Early Years facility in Rosyth. This site offers a geographical location which supports a spread of provision across the town, utilises an existing surplus Fife Council asset and which will incur significantly less cost than a new build facility.
21
1.5 Education and Children’s Services’ proposal has been considered at both the Education and Children’s Services Committee on 28th August and the South and West Fife Area Committee on 14th November. Both committees approved the proposal to develop Rosyth Resource Centre for early years provision. It should be noted that, although both reports indicated a new build would be required, the Service has since confirmed that the existing building would be refurbished.
2.0 Process for Dealing with Community Asset Transfer Applications
2.1 The Council has a two stage process for dealing with CAT enquiries and requests. This is not required in terms of the Act but encourages organisations to make an informal application in order for the Council to assess the extent of any advice or support necessary for organisations to make the most of the opportunities that the Act offers. Stage 1 is a pre-application stage, whereby organisations can submit their interest in an asset, outline their proposals for use of the asset and the community benefit that they anticipate will be delivered. Stage 1 applications are considered by a local assessment team (LAT), comprising the area community manager, the community use team manager and officer/s from Property Services.
2.2 A CTB can submit a formal (or Stage 2) request in terms of the Act at any time. A
Community Asset Transfer Team (CAT Team) has been set up to monitor the pre-application Stage and manage incoming requests. Membership of this team includes officers from a range of Council services, including Communities and Neighbourhoods, Legal Services, Finance, Asset Management, as well as a representative from Fife Voluntary Action. The Team is chaired by Tim Kendrick, Community Manager (Development). The CAT Team has set up an evaluation panel to evaluate and score requests in accordance with the criteria set down by the Act. The panel is made up of representatives from Fife Voluntary Action, Communities, Legal, Estates and Finance. A scoring matrix has been developed in order to allow requests to be evaluated objectively, fairly and transparently. The evaluation panel will score a request and make a recommendation to either accept or reject a request.
2.3 Section 82 (5) of the Act states that an authority must agree to a request unless
there are reasonable grounds for refusing it. Reasonable grounds for refusal must be determined in the circumstances of each individual case. However, they are likely to include cases where:
the benefits of the asset transfer request are judged to be less than the benefits of an alternative proposal;
where agreeing to the request would restrict the relevant authority‘s ability to carry out its functions; or
failure to demonstrate (i) the benefits of the proposal (ii) how the organisation proposes to fund the proposal or (iii) appropriate skills, experience and qualifications to deliver the proposal.
22
3.0 Application by Hyperclub
3.1 The Hyperclub was established in 2012 and now provides a range of activities for young people and adults experiencing physical and learning difficulties. The club is open on a Tuesday, Friday and Sunday, offering an after school club and social activities. Approximately 30 children attend each after school club session (on a Tuesday and Friday) and are provided with a healthy snack and drink. The after school club is also used as a distribution point for fair share food.
3.2 The club has a waiting list and cannot accommodate all the activities it wishes to provide within the current location at Ballast Bank, Inverkeithing. By moving to Rosyth Resource Centre the club will be able to offer more activities to more service users and also to partner up with other groups. The club’s aim is to increase service provision and eventually move to seven day opening and to work in partnership with groups such as Fife Young Carers, a local sewing group, a children’s singing group and Rosyth Eats.
3.3 The application was validated on 7th November 2018, published on Fifedirect and a notice affixed to the property advising that any representations could be made by 4th December 2018. No written representations were received. The Hyperclub offered to purchase Rosyth Resource Centre at a price of £4,000. The Council must consider and provide a written decision notice to the Hyperclub by 6th May 2019 in order to meet the six month time limit.
3.4 The CAT evaluation panel each individually scored the Hyperclub request and met to
discuss the request at a consensus evaluation and scoring meeting on Tuesday, 4th December 2018. The panel considered the request using evaluation criteria as laid down by the Act. A copy of the completed scoring matrix is attached. The panel considered that the Hyperclub had submitted an application which was strong in terms of delivering services to a specific client group (people with a range of physical and learning disabilities). However, the scoring panel had concerns in relation to sustainability and a lack of evidence provided in terms of the group being able to manage the asset and provide services over seven days.
3.5 Where the Council is considering a proposal that land (or buildings) be disposed of at ‘less than the best consideration that can reasonably be obtained,’ in situations like the current one, it needs to follow the process set out in the Disposal of Land by Local Authorities (Scotland) Regulations 2010.
The process consists of three steps:
The Council must appraise and compare the costs and other disbenefits and the benefits of the proposal;
Be satisfied that the disposal for that consideration is reasonable; and
Be satisfied that, as regards some or all of the local authority area or persons resident or present there, the disposal is likely to contribute to the promotion of improvement of economic development or regeneration; health; social well-being; or environmental well-being.
The asset has been valued at £150,000 and the Hyperclub has offered a purchase price of £4,000.
23
The benefits of the application are a contribution to the improvement of health and social well-being, as the club is clearly providing services to a specified client group who have a range of physical and learning disabilities which are needed in the area.
The disbenefits are as follows:
1) In relation to the club’s ability to scale up the current provision from three days to seven days and to manage and sustain the asset over the longer term. There was a lack of evidence demonstrating the club’s experience and understanding of its ability to manage and maintain the asset.
2) The loss of circa £146,000 from the disposal at less than market value. It was not considered that the discount proposed reflected the benefits of the proposal.
The costs and other dis-benefits of disposal for the suggested consideration were considered to be unreasonable, given the lack of evidence provided about the organisation’s ability to manage the asset over the longer term.
3.6 Under the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015, the CAT evaluation panel
decided that:
The request did not provide sufficient evidence on how the group intended to fund the proposal. The Hyperclub had not identified all costs associated with delivering the proposal nor how these costs would be covered in the short and long term;
The request did not provide sufficient evidence of the appropriate skills and experience required to manage and maintain the asset;
The projected benefits were not based on robust information, and the proposal did not demonstrate value for money;
Agreeing to the request would restrict the Council’s ability to carry out its functions per Section 82(5) of the Act. There would be a direct impact on the Council’s ability to deliver early years nursery provision. The cost of building an alternative facility would have a budgetary impact and therefore reduce the Council’s ability to deliver its functions
The Hyperclub received a score of 32 points out of a maximum of 108 points and the panel recommended refusal of the transfer on the basis of a lack of evidence provided on how the proposed services will be funded and the asset managed in the longer term. The likely benefits of the request were considered to be less than the benefits of the Council’s alternative proposal.
4.0 Conclusions
4.1 A CAT request was received from the Hyperclub, which has requested to acquire Rosyth Resource Centre from the Council at a purchase price of £4,000. The organisation currently rents facilities in Ballast Bank, Inverkeithing, offering a range of services and activities to people with physical and learning disabilities. Moving to Rosyth Resource Centre would enable the group to widen the services provided, to work in partnership with other groups and to extend its days of opening from its current three days to seven days over time.
4.2 The recommendation for refusal of the request is based on the fact that : (a) the proposal failed to demonstrate sufficient benefit to justify the transfer of the asset at less best consideration, and (b) Education and Children’s Services’ proposal to use Rosyth Resource Centre to deliver early years nursery provision.
The following papers were relied on in the preparation of this report in terms of the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1973:
‘Early Learning and Childcare:’ Report to Education and Children’s Services Committee, 28 August 2018. ‘Early Learning and Childcare:’ Report to South and West Fife Area Committee, 14th November, 2018
Report Contacts:
Tim Kendrick Community Manager (Development) Fife House, Glenrothes 03451 55 55 55 ext. 446109 [email protected]
Michael O’Gorman Service Manager (Estates) Bankhead Central Bankhead Park Glenrothes KY7 6GH 03451 555555 ext 440498 [email protected]
Evaluation & Scoring Matrix (updated October 2018)
1
Scoring Matrix for Stage 2 Applications under Part 5 – Community Empowerment (S) Act 2015
Name of applicant: Hyperclub Asset being applied for: Rosyth Resource Centre
Assessment Criteria Score
Section A – About the Proposal A.1 - Are the aims and objectives of the proposal clearly defined?
2
A.2 - Has the organisation described what services they will deliver and explained why they are required?
3
A.3 - Has the organisation described why they require the asset and what difference this will make to delivery of services in their area?
3
A.4 - How does the proposal compare with similar services being delivered in the same area? What is the additionality/displacement?
2
Section B – Wider support and wider public support B.1 - Has the applicant organisation demonstrated that there is sufficient demand for the proposal?
2
B.2 - Local community support Has the organisation demonstrated that there is sufficient support from the local community? This should be based on widespread consultation of those who would be served by the asset as well as support from community partners. Evidence of stakeholder consultation is required including details of who was consulted, how, what the response was etc.
2
B.3 - Partnerships - Has the organisation provided details of any partnership arrangements required to deliver the proposal successfully?
1
B.4 - Equality - Has the organisation demonstrated how it will take into account the different needs of the community? Does the application demonstrate where a proposal may reduce inequalities?
2
Section C - Impact/ Benefits
C.1 - Assess whether agreeing to the request would be likely to: promotes or improve:
Economic development
Regeneration
Public health
Social well-being
Environmental well-being
Reduce inequalities
2
26
Evaluation & Scoring Matrix (updated October 2018)
2
Section D – Organisational Viability D.1 - Has the organisation demonstrated that they have experience of managing an asset?
0
D.2 - Has the organisation demonstrated that they have experience in delivering the proposed services?
3
D.3 - Has the organisation provided details of individuals who have the skills to a) manage the project b) run and manage the asset? This should include details of the individual skills and experience.
1
D.4 - Has the organisation demonstrated they have clear governance and decision making procedures for managing the asset and delivering the services e.g. there needs to be a clear process for making decisions including who will be responsible for booking rooms, dealing with site problems, compliance with legal issues such as health and safety.
0
D.5 - Has the organisation demonstrated they have a clear understanding as to what is required in relation to managing an asset? E.g. insurance, maintenance of the building, boilers, firefighting equipment and electrical items, EPC, legionella testing etc.
0
D.6 - Has the organisation provided details of the monitoring arrangements to be put in place to ensure the project delivers its key objectives?
0
Section E – Financial Information E.1 - Has the applicant organisation provided their projected income and expenditure and cash flow forecasts? Have they demonstrated there is sufficient projected cash flow to show the proposal is financially viable?
1
E.2 - Has the organisation demonstrated the need as to why the asset should be transferred at less than best consideration?
1
E.3 - Use of Resources Has the organisation identified all the resources required to deliver the benefit? Consider:
Funding obtained so far
Funding and support required from the Council
Other sources of funding
Number of employees or volunteers available to run/maintain the asset
2
E.4 - Has the organisation demonstrated prioritisation of resources in the longer term in order to contribute to sustainable development? Demonstrate future funding or self-financing arrangements. Are the assumptions credible/ evidenced?
2
Section F – Property F.1 - If the organisation seeks a discount then the benefit of the request should be proportionate to the value of the asset and the level of discount. Has the discount been justified?
1
27
Evaluation & Scoring Matrix (updated October 2018)
3
F.2 - Will the project have an overall financial benefit on public sector costs (e.g. removes the maintenance burden from the Council)
-2
F.3 – Has sufficient consideration been given to property costs?
1
F.4 – Has the organisation provided sufficient evidence that they merit and can sustain exclusive use of the asset (based on current user information provided)?
2
G. Local and National Outcomes G.1 - Consider how the proposed benefits of the asset transfer request will contribute to achieving the Council’s outcomes or to national outcomes more generally.
2
G.2 - Consider how the proposal will impact on the Council’s own delivery of services.
-2
G.3 - To what extent does the proposal contribute to local or national priorities? Produce a clear plan for achieving intended outcomes (ideally showing links to local or national outcomes),
1
H - Other information
Assessment Scoring Matrix
To assess proposed use and financial arrangements for the asset. Must be
proportionate and appropriate.
-2 Has negative impact on the Councils activities
-1 Has negative impact on existing provision/ existing benefit
0 = Poor Little or no response in regards to the submission with ill defined unrealistic ambitions
1 = Weak The submission contains only minor detail and is not based on robust information
2 – Moderate
The submission provides a level of detail which enables understanding with acceptable projected benefits
3 = Strong The submission provides sufficient evidence that the issue has been taken into account with sound, sustainable Best Value characteristics
4 = Very Strong
The applicant has included all issues in the submission and has provided additional information which enables detailed understanding with strong and sustainable Best Value characteristics with robust related project benefits
28
Assets, Property and Facilities Committee
WORK PROGRAMME 2019
MEETING on 21st March 2019
Report Lead Officer/Contact
Compulsory Purchase Order – Glenwood Centre Flats
Gordon Mole/Louise Sutherland
Asset Management Annual Update Alan Paul/Louise Playford
Increase in Lair Purchase Costs in Cemeteries Alan Paul/Gillian Clark
Building Value Programme (inc. Halls Review) Ken Gourlay
Area Property Plans Alan Paul
Headstones & Crematoria Alan Paul
Updated: 9 January 2019
30
Assets, Property & Facilities Committee
17 January 2019
Agenda Item No. 8
Prestonhall Depot, St Andrews Road, Prestonhall Industrial Estate, Cupar
Report by: Ken Gourlay, Head of Assets, Transportation & Environment
Ward Affected: 20
Purpose
The purpose of this report is to advise Committee of progress on the marketing and disposal of the rationalised depot facilities at Cupar and to seek authority to dispose as recommended.
Recommendations
It is recommended that Committee:-
1. Note that a further report on this matter will be considered in private later in this Committee;
2. Note the proposed disposal of the Prestonhall Depot; Resource Implications
The disposal will provide a capital receipt for the General Fund. Expenditure will be incurred in adapting an existing depot to provide accommodation for the displaced occupying Services. It is anticipated that these costs will be significantly less than the sales receipt. Revenue savings are also anticipated.
Legal & Risk Implications
Appropriate legal conveyancing documentation will be required to secure the Council’s position. There is potential for delayed settlement to impact on the capital receipt.
Impact Assessment
An EqIA has not been completed and is not necessary for the following reason: the item in this report does not propose a change or revision to existing policies and practices.
Consultation
The Enterprise and Environment Executive Director and the Head of Finance. Councillors Margaret Kennedy, Karen Marjoram, Tony Miklinski and Craig Walker were consulted on the proposed disposal 3rd October 2018.
31
1.0 Background 1.1 The subjects of the Prestonhall Depot comprise of office & depot buildings with
associated yard space all on a site extending to 1.79 Ha within the established Prestonhall Industrial Estate.
1.2 The site is currently occupied by Fife Council as a multi-use depot facility and as
highlighted on Appendix 1. The Council also occupies a Roads and Transport Depot close by within the Cupar Trading Estate.
1.3 The subjects have been occupied by Building Services, Parks Streets & Open
Spaces and Fife Resource Solutions for many years, but as a consequence of the Depot Rationalisation programme, the adoption of more flexible workstyles and the requirement to operate more efficiently from a reduced estate, a recommendation has been put to the Building Value Programme Board, to consolidate depot operations in Cupar, on to the Trading Estate facility and to dispose of Prestonhall Depot.
1.4 The closure was supported by the Services involved and to reduce the holding costs
as much as possible whilst vacant (particularly the empty rates liability), it was proposed to market the building in advance of its vacation and relocation.
2.0 Current Position 2.1 Following a period of marketing, several offers were received at a closing date in
December. The highest of these offers is not conditional on planning consent and is considered to represent or exceed market value, consequently it is considered appropriate to proceed with the disposal.
3.0 Conclusion
3.1 In the light of the offers received it is proposed that the Prestonhall Depot is sold. List of Appendices: Appendix 1 - Location Plan
Background Papers No background papers were relied on in the preparation of this report in terms of the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1973. Report Contact Gordon M Strang Estates Surveyor Bankhead Central Bankhead Park Glenrothes KY7 6GH Telephone: 03451 555555 Ext 440267 Email – [email protected]
