Agenda item

PROGRAMME OF THE DISPOSAL OF ESTATE ASSETS

Report to follow if available.

Minutes:

The Sub-Committee received a presentation update on Assets Disposal.

As a background the sub-committee was informed that the disposal programme intends to generate around £10 million per annum capital receipts as part of the Council's capital strategy. It was stated that last year’s disposal programme, the service generated £9.19 million.

Members were informed that the planned Asset Disposals in the current financial year 2024/25 programme was forecasted at £9.83 million. The following sites have been identified:

1.    Land at Priory Road

2.    Former Century Youth House, Albert Road

3.    Keswick Avenue Car park

4.    Dorrington Gardens Car park

5.    Como Street Car park

6.    Angel Way Car park

7.    Former Scotts School House

8.    Land at Bedale Road/Tiverton Road

9.    Land at Gays Field


Members noted that Priory Road was well advanced in the process and the site would set the template for others. Six other sites are in various stages of planning, process and the disposal arrangements following two cabinet decisions. It was stated that each site will be revalued following the granting of planning permission.

 

Members noted that Priory Road was well advanced in the process and the site would set the template for others. It was stated that sales documentation for disposals to Mercury Land Holdings has been agreed and should be executed this month. Six other sites are in varying stages of the planning process and the disposal arrangements in accordance with Cabinet decisions and subsequent Executive Decision provide for each site to be revalued following the grant of planning permission in order to identify any balancing payment required.

 

The Assistant Director of Regeneration & Place Shaping, Housing & Property mentioned that there were outstanding land query regarding Angel Way with a third party, Member were informed that an application has already been made to the Lands Tribunal for resolution if the parties fail to reach a mutually acceptable position.

Additional engagement were planned with local residents regarding development proposals for Como Street Car park.

 

It was stated that planning application had been submitted prior to disposal. Pre-Application request was submitted and meeting with planning officer was scheduled for later this month.

 

The sub-committee was informed of the following Medium to Long Term plans:

      That Havering had realised in excess of £200m in capital receipts via asset disposal over the past 25 years

      The Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) requirement was to generate £50m capital receipts over 5 years – recent capitalisation order might introduce an increased expectation of disposal activity to generate capital receipts

      Future receipts pipeline presents challenges in identifying a consistent stream of viable asset disposals

      Area based asset review work has identified some medium-term options but with varying lead-in times

Following the presentation, the Sub-Committee received the following responses to questions raised:

 

The status of Mercury House – Members were informed that an options paper was being developed for Cabinet at the moment. It was mentioned that the CCTV unit were still based in the building whilst the service was in the process of relocating the CCTV unit to the new CCTV Monitoring Centre in the upper floor of the Library. It was stated that there were other plans towards realigning all the feeds from the CCTV infrastructure into the new centre.

 

Keswick Avenue Car Park, what alternative provisions have been put in for residents who use it at the moment – Members were informed that there was noted that an impact analysis to support the planning application following a usage surveys of both the standard base and the disabled base in terms of capacity.

 

Requesting a change to the local plan in order to make assets more attractive to dispose off – It was suggested that the service would not be able to influence the outcome as the council would still be regarded as the land owner.

 

The Sub-committee noted the presentation.

 

Supporting documents: