Decision details

Councillor Eamonn O’Brien, the Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Finance and Growth, presented the report which identifies the list of sites for Phase 2 of the Accelerated Land and Property Disposals Programme and sought approval for the property asset disposals. The Leader advised that although there was the opportunity for significant capital receipts, this had to be balanced with social value and, as such, the Disposals Programme included significant community and Ward Member engagement on the options for each site.

In response to Members’ questions, it was noted that community groups and local sports associations were working with the Council regarding the options for Philips Park, and more information on the site would be provided when available. With regards to how sites would be marketed, it was noted this was dependent on the merits and specifics of each site, Some would not be appropriate for housing and local groups might be able to take on smaller plots for community use. It was reiterated that all options would be reviewed in conjunction with Ward Members and the local community.

Decision:

That Cabinet:

1.   Approve the disposal of the Phase 2 property assets that are surplus to requirements.

2.   Approve the inclusion of additional land to 1 site from the Phase 1 list.

3.   Accept that the Brownfield Housing Fund will assist with disposal options for the sites identified as housing development sites.

Reasons for the decision:

There are limited Council resources to deal with the constant requests from individuals or third parties looking for opportunities to purchase our property assets. Phase 2 will continue the programme to bring in the required resources to comprehensively allow the Council to dispose of its chosen property assets in a strategic and co-ordinated way, and via a manageable phased approach.

There is a cost to maintain the Council’s assets and failure to manage them properly could cause a potential health and safety risk, as well as a reputational risk to the Council as the landowner.

Other options considered and rejected:

None. There is a cost to maintain the Council’s assets and failure to manage them properly could cause a potential health and safety risk, as well as a reputational risk to the Council as the landowner.