Agenda item

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, questions at special meetings are restricted to reports on the agenda and must be received by the Democratic Services Team within two working days of the normal publication date of the agenda - by 5pm on Thursday 1^st October 2020. Written replies will be provided.

The Chairman thanked members of the public for the questions received. Normally, only two questions per person was permitted however, on this occasion, due to the importance of the subject to be discussed, the Portfolio Holder had responded to all. 

A total of 140 questions were received and these, together with the Portfolio Holder’s responses can be viewed via the following link:- RRH PDS 6th Oct 2020 - Questions and Replies.  The Chairman invited supplementary questions to be submitted for the Portfolio Holder’s response. 

The Portfolio Holder also made the following statement:-

‘Chislehurst Library plays an important part in the overall library delivery strategy and it is envisaged that this will continue over the long term.  The proposed redevelopment of the library has been known about for many years.  Potential developers had previously held public meetings in December 2013 and Ward Members have updated the community via their own messaging and to the Chislehurst Society.

The decision to originally dispose of the library was made by the Executive in September 2014 as a Part 2 Decision.

The Executive agreed at its meeting in September 2014 that Chislehurst Library, together with the adjoining pay and display car park, should be marketed, on the basis that a replacement library would have to be provided as part of the consideration for the site.

The current library is poorly laid out, leading to access issues. It is also significantly dated in its appearance. A development opportunity allows for the provision of a new library of equivalent size, but constructed with modern materials, which will reduce the Council’s long-term maintenance and revenue running costs.

Experience elsewhere has shown that where libraries are renovated, and improved, use significantly increases and remains higher than prior to any improvement works.

Following that decision, the library was marketed, and a successful bidder was identified.  However, whilst It would not be appropriate to discuss the commercial affairs of another party, it is safe to state that it was not possible to conclude a Development Agreement with that party due to a lack of clarity on fundamental parts of the agreement which would have left uncertainty as to funding, deliverability of the scheme and as to what the actual scheme was going to be as there was no clarity as to whom the commercial third party occupier would be.

The decision was therefore taken last year to re-market the site on the open market on the same basis but seeking clear information from bidders so that certainty could be provided to the Council on deliverability of any scheme. The recommendation based on the outcome of that marketing exercise is the subject of the Call In we are discussing today.

Let me be clear, the purpose of selling this building is to create a new library on the same site as part of a wider development.  Therefore, the local community benefit from a new library at no cost to the Council.  In addition, the community will benefit from a new medical facility.

In terms of the process, this is the same for all surplus property sold by the Council. A report is submitted to the relevant PDS committee and then to the Executive and if approved, the property is then marketed. The officers, their advisers and the relevant Portfolio Holder analyse the bids and usually after a second stage round a buyer/developer is selected and a further Part II report is submitted making a recommendation to proceed with one party. This is always within Part II as the bids made by different organisations are commercially confidential. This completely normal process has been followed in this case.’

Committee Member and Ward Member Councillor Sharma asked what the impact had been on other libraries following redevelopment.  The Portfolio Holder reported that public use had increased at all redeveloped sites.

Councillor Sharma also asked what members of the public could expect to see during the consultation process.  The Portfolio Holder stated that consultation would take place during the planning application process by way of public exhibitions in relation to the proposals.  Information would also be made available on the Council’s planning website.  All questions received would be responded to.

The Portfolio Holder confirmed that following a review of the three bids shortlisted for consideration, only two of the proposals were deemed viable and from those, the highest bidder had been selected. 

The Portfolio Holder also confirmed that the Development Agreement would provide appropriate guarantee mechanisms in the form of Collateral warranties and Step In rights in the unlikely event that the selected developer was unable to deliver the proposed scheme.