A to Z of services          A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P R S T U V W Y Z

Options Appraisal

Corporate Asset Management Plan (Land and Buildings) 2008-2011


9. Options Appraisal


9.1 Strategic Options and their appraisal

From the issues highlighted above, a number of strategic options for asset management have been considered to:

  • Bring in capital resources
  • Deliver value for money and better use of resources
  • Reduce revenue costs
  • Improve procurement
  • Reduce the burden of backlog maintenance
  • Enhance the capacity of Property Services
  • Improve partnership working

Table 15 lists the options with their pros and cons.

Table 15 - Strategic Options

Strategic Option Pros Cons Consider further?
Sale and lease-back of the buildings portfolio
  • Council would be capital rich
  • Bulk sales do not realise full value
  • Lease back arrangements diminish value
  • Revenue pressures are higher for Council
  • Expensive way of borrowing
  • Lost revenue from commercial estate
  • Adverse effect on VAT
  • Risk of landlord serving notice
  • Loss of 'family silver'
No
The setting up of a trust to hold the Council's land and buildings portfolio
  • Can give business rate relief
  • Costly to initiate
  • Can be inflexible
  • May be seen as device
  • Effective for some services e.g. Sport
No
Private Finance Initiatives
  • Easier revenue planning
  • Only way to make large investments
  • Tied into contracts for long periods
  • Changes are costly
Yes
Grants from External Organisations
  • Provides entirely new money
  • Raises profile
  • Can be bureaucratic and slow
  • Strings attached
Yes
Council's Capital Resources
  • Often more flexible than alternatives
  • Competing demands
  • Limited availability
Yes
Outsourcing of Property Services
  • Contractual relationship can sometimes be easier to manage than in house.
  • Can assist with resourcing
  • Council loses control unless sizeable client side.
  • High cost
No
Partnership arrangements for Property Services
  • Can assist with resourcing
  • Can choose 'best of class'
  • Flexible
  • High cost
Yes
Collaboration with other LAs
  • Helps manage peaks and troughs
  • Permits areas of expertise
  • Cost savings
  • Dilution of Council's priorities
Yes
Construction Strategic partnership
  • Good for large volumes of similar projects
  • Less suitable for one-off projects
Yes
Rationalising the portfolio
  • Save on running costs
  • Increased capital receipts to invest in new or retained

 Can result in local resistance unless clearly acceptable alternatives are shown to be available

Yes
Hot desking and working from home
  • Helps recruitment and retention
  • Long term revenue savings
  • Reduced transport and pollution
  • Reduced office space permits redesign and improved environment
  • Culture change resistance
  • Initial capital cost
Yes
Shared accommodation
  • Save on running costs
  • Joined up services
  • Opportunity for improved facilities
  • Barriers between organisations
Yes
Transfer of Community Centres to the 3rd Sector Save on running costs
Opportunity for alternative service provision where no longer provided by TMBC
Parochial management, loss of control, lack of business and construction expertise, potential for poor maintenance Yes


9.2 Preferred Strategy Options

No one solution is likely to provide a solution. From the list in Table 15 the Council has identified a preferred mix of solutions to help close the gap in the current capital and revenue provision and meet the future requirements of the property portfolio.

9.2.1 Private Finance Initiatives

This model is the basis of the Building Schools for the Future programme, which will see approximately £200million of investment in the Borough’s Secondary Schools over the next ten years. The same approach may be available for consideration for the future Primary School building programme.

The current programme involves a significant capital allocation for programme management.

9.2.2 Grants from External Organisations

This approach is likely to be used where funds are required for the refurbishment of listed buildings, for building projects with strong economic development outputs and for supporting landmark projects. The Councils’ Economic Development Unit is adept at identifying new opportunities as they arise.

ERDF funding was obtained to contribute to the restoration of Ashton Market Hall to provide starter business units.

Following the successful Heritage Lottery Funding of repairs to various structures at Hyde Park and the bandstand at Victoria Park, this approach has been used to fund work at Stamford Park and Stage 1 approval has been obtained.

An unsuccessful bid was made for Big Lottery funding to refurbish Clyde House for use by the occupiers, a key social enterprise.

9.2.3 Council's Capital Resources

The Council’s ability to raise ‘flexible’ capital resources (i.e. those which are not linked to specific capital projects) is limited with the main source of such resources being capital receipts. There are competing demands from all service areas delivering key priorities. The current uncertainty around the property market will require considering alternatives to the previous reliance on capital receipts, and may result in affordability issues around the delivery of capital construction projects.

9.2.4 Collaboration with other Local Authorities

The Council is working closely with the Regional Centre of Excellence and its partners within the Association of Greater Manchester Authorities to explore collaboration arrangements. Joint procurement of materials is a particular focus. The provision of specialist services over the sub-region is another. Both of these could result in a reduction of unit costs, which would make funds go further.

9.2.5 Construction Strategic partnership

The BSF and LIFT programmes are in effect long-term construction partnerships with attendant facilities management and financing.

9.2.6 Rationalising the portfolio

This is a key area and is already under way (see 8.4 above). Linked to the Accommodation Strategy this approach is intended to result in an acceleration of disposals.

9.2.7 Working Differently

This is now being developed as an integrated part of the Council’s Transformational agenda through a project to build an exemplar office. See also ‘Working Differently’ in section 5.4 above.

9.2.8 Shared accommodation

This is an area with considerable potential being actively explored by Property Services

The Council is a contracting authority and on the Strategic Partnership Board for the LIFT programme which will provide co-located health facilities over a 20-year period. Although the first such facility in Tameside, the Ashton St Petersfield Resource Centre is currently unlikely to have space for the co-location of Council services, subsequent sites will have scope. Tameside and Glossop PCT has undertaken a review of their needs and has produced a revised LIFT development plan. This will give Tameside Council the opportunity to explore synergies. The aim will be to share purpose built joint facilities and dispose of or reuse less suitable buildings.

The community use of schools is also under consideration, and community rooms area being incorporated into two of the sample schools to provide extended use out of school hours.

9.2.9  Transfer of Community Assets to the 3rd Sector

The council has a good track record of dealing with the transfer of assets to community groups. The recently published ‘Quirk Report’, acts as a reminder on best practice for dealing with such issues. The Council is currently reviewing its policy and process in terms of how it might deal with the transfer of assets to community groups. The Council can demonstrate its support of this initiative through the existing management arrangements for three of its community buildings and the (albeit unsuccessful) application for Big Lottery funding associated with the proposed long lease transfer of premises to a leading 3rd sector partnership organisation.

9.2.10 Accommodation Strategy

Tameside Administrative Centre is the office accommodation ‘hub’ but it is unlikely to be considered the ideal location for all services, which may be better served by township ‘spokes’. 21st Century customer aspirations for the provision of services when and where they want them is resulting in a rethinking of accommodation. A number of service areas are now expressing a preference for more effectively reaching their customers by developing customer points in local areas and ‘shop front’ locations in town centres. Cross-organisation working means that some services are now provided on a multi-agency basis requiring points of contact outside the traditional council offices.

The approach in Children and Young Peoples Service to a four out-station model has been mapped against other Council service needs, the Building Schools for the Future programme, and the requirements of partner bodies, such as the Primary Care Trust and locations for touch-down centres for locality workers. This may result in either investment in existing buildings in local areas where it is cost effective or the development of entirely new facilities, which may include co-location with partner organisations along the lines described above.

Besides improving services a key objective will be efficiency savings on premises related costs. Combined with co-location and some initial ‘invest to save’ funding for new technology there is scope for ongoing revenue savings once the new ‘spoke’ facilities are established.

Notwithstanding migration to the ‘spokes’ there are still a number of key administrative buildings, which provide central services. The intention is to move these staff to the centre and where possible release buildings for disposal.

If the resulting changes mean less occupancy of the ‘hub’, the aim will be to release sufficient space for rent to other organisations seeking a town centre location close to good public transport services. This will fill the revenue gap created by those moving out.

The Accommodation Strategy is currently being substantially updated, to take a long term view towards implementation and benefits realisation.

The purpose of the office accommodation strategy will be to: -

  • Set standards for all office accommodation
  • Optimise use of office space
  • Ensure equity in allocation and use of office space
  • Provide a flexible working environment
  • Contribute to cultural change within the organisation
  • Dispose of surplus expeditiously
  • Achieve a balance between TMBC ownership, and leased in portfolio.
  • Support staff well-being and health and safety
  • Maximize co-location opportunities for front and back office functions.
  • Assist in recruitment and retention of personnel
  • Enable higher productivity of staff
  • Assist in the management of work/life balance
  • Contribute to the objectives of reducing travel for work and minimising climate change.
  • Assist in ensuring Tameside’s status as a high performing authority

9.2.11 Accommodation project appraisal using whole life costs

Each project within the accommodation strategy is to have a business case based on a whole-life cost and income evaluation of the available options. The Asset Development Register and its associated condition surveys hold data on the likely 10year capital cost of retaining buildings. This will be combined with data on running costs and rental over the same period. A discount cash flow rate provided by the Council’s financial services is to be applied to establish net present value of each proposal. Stakeholders will be involved in the final decision to ensure that customer and quality issues are taken into account.

The increase in the scope of flexible working should result in a greater volume of business performed per square metre within new facilities.

Page last updated: 1 December 2008