Decision

RESOLVED That Cabinet:

1. 1)           Noted that further feasibility work and engagement with NHS partners has resulted in the proposed scheme increasing in scale from that originally envisaged, with the estimated project cost increasing from £3.0 million to £4.94 million.
2. 2)           Noted that the updated proposal is based on the potential delivery of a Medical Facility of up to 870m² Gross Internal Area, subject to ongoing NHS service planning.
3. 3)           Recommended to Council that Council agree in principle to increase the Capital Project budget to £4.94 million, subject to the Council securing a formal written commitment from the NHS confirming its intended occupation and use of the facility on terms satisfactory to the Council.
4. 4)           Subject to 1.3 above, recommend to Council approval of the Strategic CIL funding request for up to £4.94 million required to deliver the scheme. 1.5 Recommend that Council approve capital spend of c. £276K to fund the professional fees and associated costs required to progress the project through planning, technical design and contractor tender. 1.6 Note that a further report will be presented prior to commencement of construction seeking approval of the final project budget and confirming the formal NHS commitment to occupy and operate the facility. 

Reasons for decision

The proposed Paxton Court Medical Facility presents a significant opportunity to deliver modern healthcare infrastructure on a vacant Council-owned site in South Borehamwood.

The site provides an opportunity for the Council to facilitate the delivery of healthcare infrastructure while retaining strategic control of a Council-owned asset.

Following ongoing engagement with NHS partners and further feasibility work, officers have identified the potential to accommodate a Medical Facility of up to approximately 870m² Gross Internal Area on the site. This reflects current NHS requirements and provides an opportunity to deliver significantly enhanced healthcare infrastructure for South Borehamwood. However, NHS service planning remains ongoing and the final operational model, occupier requirements and service configuration have not yet been confirmed.

Approval of the recommended funding will enable officers to undertake the design, planning and technical work required to establish whether a viable deliverable scheme can be brought forward. This represents the next phase in testing the proposal and moving the project towards planning submission and contractor procurement. The project will only progress to construction following confirmation of a formal NHS commitment to occupy and operate the facility

Failure to progress the project at this stage would leave the site vacant and under-utilised and may significantly reduce the opportunity to secure healthcare use in the future. In the context of local government reorganisation, there can be no certainty that a successor authority would continue to prioritise healthcare delivery on the site or seek to safeguard the asset for community infrastructure purposes. Alternative future options could include disposal of the asset to generate capital receipts or redevelopment for other purposes. Progressing the scheme now therefore provides the best opportunity to safeguard the site's potential to deliver a much-needed community facility for local residents.

Alternative Options Considered

Option 1 - Do Nothing –

This option would involve retaining the site in its current vacant state and not progressing the proposed Medical Facility or seeking planning permission. 4.2 This option is not recommended as it would leave a Council-owned brownfield site vacant and under-utilised. It would also delay the productive use of the site, fail to build upon the work already undertaken to develop the proposal, and result in the continued costs associated with managing a vacant site. 4.3

Option 2 - Sell the Freehold –

This option would involve the disposal of the site to a third party for redevelopment. However, the existing means of access to the site is personal to the Council and cannot be transferred as part of a freehold sale. Any disposal would therefore need to be structured around securing a new independent access directly from Cleveland Crescent, or potentially through an alternative disposal arrangement such as a long leasehold interest, subject to detailed legal advice. This option is not recommended. Securing direct access from Cleveland Crescent would present significant planning and highway challenges, given the road's narrow width, cul-de-sac layout and existing resident parking bays. In addition, disposal of the site would remove the Council's ability to influence its future use and reduce opportunities to facilitate the delivery of a healthcare facility that meets identified NHS requirements. The Council would also relinquish strategic control of the asset and its ability to secure wider community benefits through its future development.

Option 3 – Alternative Development –

This option would involve progressing the site for an alternative use, including residential or commercial development. This option is not recommended as the Council has continued to work with NHS partners to refine proposals for the site and has identified the opportunity to deliver a purpose-built Medical Facility that responds to identified healthcare requirements. Progressing the site for a Medical Facility is therefore considered to provide the greatest strategic benefit and best reflects the Council's current objectives for the site.