Decision

RESOLVED: that Cabinet:

Authorises the Assistant Director Assets & Environment in consultation with the Executive Director Finance and Finance Portfolio Holder to transact each of the following, in each case with the ability to enter into any documents or agreements required to facilitate or enable the proposed transaction:

a)     Surrender and re-grant of the lease on Land at Browns Road, Daventry (Daventry Town Football Club).

b)     Freehold disposal of Long Buckby Library, Long Buckby to Long Buckby Parish Council. 

c)     Freehold disposal of Milton Malsor Village Park to Milton Malsor Parish Council for nil value.

d)     Freehold disposal of 44a Chalcombe Avenue and Land Adjacent to the sitting tenant.

e)     Grant of a 125-year lease to Creating Tomorrow Academy Trust for the provision of play space and a MUGA on the Eastern Way Field, Daventry for nil value.

f)       Freehold disposal of land at Ladybridge Drive.

g)     Freehold disposal of Albion House and acquisition of East Island.

h)     Grant of a lease at for Nordis Signs at Cornhill Close, Northampton at less than best consideration.

In each case to which it applies, also authorises the Assistant Director subject to the same consultation requirements, to consider any objections to proposed disposal of open space and following this to proceed or not, in whole or part, and/or with conditions, with the disposal concerned.

Endorses the placement of the land at Ransom Road on the VCS Available Property list with a note indicating the terms the Council would propose to apply.

Approves the revised approach to retained rights over land to be transferred on a non-commercial basis to town or parish councils set out in the report. This would apply to all such transfers not yet concluded, if the relevant town or parish council so wished, and to all future transfers unless a further revision is approved.

REASONS RESOLVED: Specific reasons for decisions in relation to each site are given in the relevant appendices.  In relation to the arrangements for land transferred to parish councils, the arrangements strike a reasonable balance, protecting the wider public interest whilst giving the relevant parish councils the confidence to invest in land for the benefit of their communities.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS:

Specific property transactions

The Council owns a large and varied estate. This calls for ongoing management to ensure it is delivering the best outcomes for the residents of West Northamptonshire, in line with the Council’s vision and goals. As a result of ongoing work, several assets have been identified where disposal (freehold or leasehold), or acquisition would be beneficial.?It is sensible for the Council to continue to review its estate and ensure it delivers the best overall value, taking policy and financial considerations together, for the residents of West Northamptonshire. The issues and choices in each proposed transaction are set out in the relevant Appendix. In each case it is suggested the optimal choice is to proceed with the proposal, as it will help the Council secure useful outcomes for the community, either through income or directly, whilst reducing its net costs. 

The Council is also continuing to further review its estate to identify properties which do not serve a strategic purpose and do not have a financial case to continue holding, especially if alternative investments are available.  In the appendices, references to the ‘Council’ include references to WNC’s predecessors where appropriate.

Town and parish council transfers

This Council, and previously Daventry District Council, included in transfers of community assets such as open space to parish or town councils a right for the Council to re-acquire land, or rights over land, for a nominal sum where this was needed for the provision of infrastructure. 

This approach has been accepted by a number of town and parish councils, who understood it was not a right the Council would exercise arbitrarily or without regard to their interests. However, it has become a barrier to others, who feared an unreasonable approach by this Council at some point in the future.

It is preferable to have a consistent approach to these matters, but it is not practical to negotiate with all potentially affected town and parish councils. Therefore, discussions have been had with the Northamptonshire County Association of Local Councils (NCALC) on principles it considers likely to acceptable from a town and parish council perspective. Of course, NCALC cannot bind its members, but its advice is likely to be helpful to them. NCALC is clear it would prefer there were no such provisions at all, but understands WNC considers it must bear in mind the broader public interest when it makes such transfers. 

It is proposed that non-commercial transfers of community assets to town and parish councils include an agreement allowing WNC to install, or have installed, and use or have used, infrastructure such as paths, roads, public transport routes, cables, pipes, under, on, or above land transferred, and to maintain that infrastructure and to have it adopted (for example as highway or by a water company). WNC would:

a)     Meet the affected town or parish council’s reasonable legal, valuation, and other professional costs involved in such transactions.

b)     Make good any damage caused including damage to retained land, boundaries, access points, planting, and facilities, restoring them as far as practical to their previous condition (for example, reinstating grass along the edge of a new path).

c)     Pay fair compensation for the loss of value to anything the parish or town council had invested in the land since it was transferred to it as a result of the provision of the infrastructure.

The land to be used for any specific infrastructure scheme would be identified on a plan and would be limited to the minimum reasonably required for the provision of that infrastructure. 

The rights would not allow WNC to permanently harm a building (although it might, for example, run a pipe under one), materially interfere with its safe and beneficial use and enjoyment, or occupy it. However, in genuinely minor cases such as where the ‘building’ was something like a shed it may be relocated or re-provided. The rights would only apply to statutory allotments to the extent this is legally permissible and subject to any statutory consents or procures required (running a cable over a statutory allotment is unlikely to be a problem, but putting a path through one could be). 

Provision would be made for determination by a suitable independent expert to resolve any dispute over the extent of land required to provide a piece of infrastructure, the reinstatement to be provided, or the loss of value to a parish council’s investment.

This revised approach is designed to be fair to both parties: the parish or town council would not face a freehold transfer of land away from them and would receive fair compensation for anything they had invested, but correspondingly WNC would not have the risk of facing a ‘ransom’ position for land it had given to the parish or town council concerned, when it was pursuing infrastructure provision in the wider public interest.

Provision would also be included for dealing with grants, where there grant-giver needed assurances that what they had funded would have a minimum life. In such cases WNC’s rights would not be exercised in a way that would cause breach of grant conditions or clawback during the relevant grant protection period, unless the grant-giver consented or suitable mitigation or compensation was agreed. WNC would have the option of repaying the grant if it considered this worthwhile. 

The other standard provisions – limiting the use to community and allied uses appropriate to the property in question and a right of pre-emption if the parish council wished to dispose of the property – would remain. These do not appear to have caused any particular concerns.