1 of 18

Report of: Executive Director for Communities ______________________________________________________________ Date: January 2012 ______________________________________________________________ Subject: Community Centre Facilities in Lower Wincobank ______________________________________________________________ Author of Report: Nick Slater 27 34244 ______________________________________________________________ Summary:

1.1. This report proposes the communal block from the closed Newman Court Sheltered Home Scheme be retained and partially refurbished to create a large community facility with flexible space.

1.2. The estimate for the partial refurbishment is £240k. Application will be made through the Capital Programme (i.e. Capital Approval Form - CAF) to prioritise some of the block of resources approved within the Council’s Corporate Resource Pool (CRP) in previous years for investment in community buildings. The final decision on allocation of these resources is for Cabinet.

1.3. The Wincobank community has been without a Council-owned community building since the Wincobank Wash House, Merton Lane, was closed in 2005 and demolished in 2008 on health and safety grounds. The Housing Market Renewal Neighbourhood Development Framework and associated Wincobank Vision documents identified the demand for community space to replace that provided by the Wash House. Updated consultation in 2010 with local Members, the Wincobank Community Association, other local community groups and service providers indicates significant demand for community space in the area.

1.4. Revenue expenditure, including utilities, cleaning, repairs and maintenance would be covered within the Sheffield City Council Community Buildings and Property and Facilities Management Teams budgets.

1.5. Included in the refurbishment of Newman Court would be a new more efficient heating system, rewire and double glazing helping to minimise revenue costs. The generous space at Newman Court provides the opportunity for greater revenue income contributing toward future revenue costs.

1.6. A number of options have been investigated, with local Members, local people and the Council’s Asset Management Group having been consulted. The options, described in greater detail in the body of the report, are

1.6.1. Refurbishment of the communal block from the closed Newman Court Sheltered Home Scheme. It is felt this is the best deliverable option for the people of Wincobank.

SHEFFIELD CITY COUNCIL

Cabinet Report 9

2 of 18

1.6.2. Do nothing. 1.6.3. Modular build (suitable for long term use) on the Merton Lane site. 1.6.4. Modular build (only suitable for short term, 2-3 years, use) on either Merton Lane or Newman Court site. 1.6.5. Traditional (brick) new build at the Merton Lane site. 1.6.6. Purchase and refurbishment of the old medical centre on Merton Lane.

Following analysis of these the first option at Newman Court is the proposed option.

1.7. Initially the Council’s Community Buildings Team will be responsible for management of the building in partnership with the local community association who are keen to contribute to the running of the community centre, for example by arranging access and managing the bookings procedure. To ensure local management the development over time will lead to a transition from the facility being Council run to it being community run. A plan for asset transfer in the longer term is included in the body of the report.

1.8. This report seeks approval from Cabinet

1.8.1. For the provision of a community centre facility in the lower Wincobank area. 1.8.2. To retain the communal part of the recently closed Newman Court Sheltered Home Scheme, including the car park, to provide the proposed community facility. 1.8.3. To amend a Cabinet decision of 28th February 2007 giving approval for the long-term closure and subsequent demolition of 6 sheltered home schemes, including Newman Court, as part of the Older People’s Housing Strategy 2007-2012. 1.8.4. To part refurbish the retained block to make it suitable for community use and hire.

______________________________________________________________ Reasons for Recommendations:

15.1. It is felt this is the best deliverable option for the people of Wincobank because it 15.1.1. is the cheapest and best value for money 15.1.2. is an existing sound structure which lends itself to refurbishment and the provision of a good quality community facility 15.1.3. will provide a larger site and more flexible space giving opportunity for greater income generation, creating better chances for sustainability 15.1.4. has the potential to provide a greater range of activities 15.1.5. has better parking facilities enabling easier access for more people

15.2. Application will be made through the Capital Programme (i.e. Capital Approval Form - CAF) to prioritise £240k of the block of resources approved within the Council’s Corporate Resource Pool (CRP) in previous years for investment in community buildings. Revenue costs will initially be covered from the Community Buildings and Property and Facilities Management Teams budgets. Once open income from the centre will contribute to ongoing revenue costs.

15.3. The Housing Market Renewal Neighbourhood Development Framework and associated Wincobank Vision documents identified the need for community space to replace that provided by the Wash House. Updated consultation in 2010 with local Members, the North East Community Assembly team, Wincobank Community Association, other local community groups and service providers indicates significant demand for community space in the area.

15.4. The Wincobank Community Association are keen to contribute to the running of the community facility. It is planned that development over time will lead to a transition from the facility being Council run to it being community run.

3 of 18

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

16.1. Cabinet confirms its belief that the proposals contained in this report are likely to promote social well-being in Sheffield.

16.2. So much of the resolution of Cabinet made at its meeting on 28th February 2007 as approved the demolition of the sheltered housing scheme at Newman Court be rescinded as regards the area shown edged red on the plan at Appendix 3 of this report. 16.3. Subject to the Secretary of State’s consent, the land shown edged red on the plan at Appendix 3 is appropriated from housing purposes to Section 120 Local Government Act 1972 and land shown edged blue on the plan at Appendix 3 is appropriated from Section 120 Local Government Act 1972 to Part II housing purposes

16.4. Subject to the consent to the appropriation, a community centre facility is provided in the lower Wincobank area on land shown edged red on the plan at Appendix 3 of this report.

16.5. That the retained block is altered and refurbished for that purpose and the Executive Director Communities be authorised to approve the specification for the works.

______________________________________________________________ Background Papers: Housing Market Renewal Neighbourhood Development Framework and associated Wincobank Vision documentsD

- Brightside & Shiregreen Neighbourhood Strategy – Wincobank Neighbourhood Development Framework document

- Wincobank Vision Report

Category of Report: OPEN If Closed add – ‘Not for publication because it contains exempt information under Paragraph, of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).’

* Delete as appropriate

4 of 18

Statutory and Council Policy Checklist

Financial Implications

YES Cleared by: Revenue – P&FM Peter Slater (10/11/2011) – CB Team Nick Slater (08/11/2011) Capital Programme Group (28/11/2011)-confirmed Miranda Plowden 29/11/2011

Legal Implications

YES Cleared by: Andrea Simpson 11/11/2011

Equality of Opportunity Implications

YES Cleared by: Phil Reid 15/11/2011 Reference CDU-1112-265 : Provision of Community Space at Wincobank - November 2011

Tackling Health Inequalities Implications

NO

Human rights Implications

NO

Environmental and Sustainability implications

YES

Economic impact

NO

Community safety implications

NO

Human resources implications

NO – Sue Palfreyman confirmed ok (09/11/2011)

Property implications

YES – Confirmed ok by Nalin Seneviratne (08/11/2011)

Area(s) affected

North East Assembly

Relevant Cabinet Portfolio Leader

Cllr Bryan Lodge Cllr Mick Rooney

Relevant Scrutiny Committee if decision called in

Strategic Resources and Performance

Is the item a matter which is reserved for approval by the City Council?

NO

Press release

NO

5 of 18

Draft Cabinet Report - Community Centre Facilities in Lower Wincobank 1. Summary

1.1. This report proposes the communal block from the closed Newman Court Sheltered Home Scheme be retained and refurbished to create a large community facility with flexible space.

1.2. The estimate for the partial refurbishment is £240k. Application will be made through the Capital Programme (i.e. Capital Approval Form - CAF) to prioritise some of the block of resources approved within the Council’s Corporate Resource Pool (CRP) in previous years for investment in community buildings. The final decision on allocation of these resources is for Cabinet.

1.3. The Wincobank community has been without a Council-owned community building since the Wincobank Wash House, Merton Lane, was closed in 2005 and demolished in 2008 on health and safety grounds. The Housing Market Renewal Neighbourhood Development Framework and associated Wincobank Vision documents identified the demand for community space to replace that provided by the Wash House. Updated consultation in 2010 with local Members, the Wincobank Community Association, other local community groups and service providers indicates significant demand for community space in the area.

1.4. Revenue expenditure, including utilities, cleaning, repairs and maintenance would be covered within the Sheffield City Council Community Buildings and Property and Facilities Management Teams budgets.

1.5. Included in the refurbishment of Newman Court would be a new more efficient heating system, rewire and double glazing helping to minimise revenue costs. The generous space at Newman Court provides the opportunity for greater revenue income contributing toward future revenue costs.

1.6. A number of options have been investigated, with local Members, local people and the Council’s Asset Management Group having been consulted. The options, described in greater detail in the body of the report, are

1.6.1. Refurbishment of the communal block from the closed Newman Court Sheltered Home Scheme. It is felt this is the best deliverable option for the people of Wincobank. 1.6.2. Do nothing. 1.6.3. Modular build (suitable for long term use) on the Merton Lane site. 1.6.4. Modular build (only suitable for short term, 2-3 years, use) on either Merton Lane or Newman Court site. 1.6.5. Traditional (brick) new build at the Merton Lane site. 1.6.6. Purchase and refurbishment of the old medical centre on Merton Lane.

Following analysis of these the first option at Newman Court is the proposed option.

1.7. Initially the Council’s Community Buildings Team will be responsible for management of the building in partnership with the local community association who are keen to contribute to the running of the community centre, for example by arranging access and managing the bookings procedure. To ensure local management the development over time will lead to a transition from the facility being Council run to it being community run. A plan for asset transfer in the longer term is included in the body of the report.

6 of 18

1.8. This report seeks approval from Cabinet

1.8.1. For the provision of a community centre facility in the lower Wincobank area. 1.8.2. To retain the communal part of the recently closed Newman Court Sheltered Home Scheme, including the car park, to provide the proposed community facility. 1.8.3. To amend a Cabinet decision of 28th February 2007 giving approval for the long-term closure and subsequent demolition of 6 sheltered home schemes, including Newman Court, as part of the Older People’s Housing Strategy 2007-2012. 1.8.4. To refurbish the retained block to make it suitable for community use and hire.

2. What does this mean for the people of Sheffield

2.1. The refurbishment of Newman Court provides space which could facilitate a wide range of activities and services. The generous amount of space creates the opportunity for income generation which would make it a sustainable, long term facility for community use.

2.2. Since the demolition of the Wash House there has been a demand for community space in lower Wincobank. Some groups that previously used the Wash House have continued at other venues but are benefiting fewer people and some groups have had to fold. The provision of this larger community facility will enable the development of a wide variety of activities for the local community, as well as the expansion of existing groups. Local groups are keen to cater for greater numbers and parents from a local school are interested in starting a parent and toddler group.

2.3. The community facility will assist the Council to implement key aspects of its Corporate Plan: Standing Up for Sheffield, as the new facility could be used for: -

• Enabling individuals and communities by empowering local residents in managing local resources and by bringing people together on a regular basis. The proposed community facility will create an opportunity which is planned to lead to an asset transfer in the future.

• Enabling the Council and its partners to increase activities for young people to become active and engaged.

• Providing positive activities for people to spend their time on and therefore reducing anti-social behaviour and crime helping communities to be and feel safe and secure.

• promoting lifelong health and wellbeing for adults and children offering health education courses and activities to promote good physical and mental health such as dance, aerobics etc.

• Providing activities, including training courses, that give opportunities for people to develop confidence and new skills thereby improving employment opportunities and contributing to a strong and competitive economy.

• Making Sheffield a great place to grow old by offering a wide range of activities for local older people to participate in at a venue which is easily accessible in their local community.

3. Outcomes and Sustainability

3.1. In retaining and refurbishing Newman Court the Council will secure an attractive multi-purpose and sustainable community facility for the people of Wincobank and neighbouring areas.

3.2. There is the potential for an increase in the range of activities for the whole community. It will enable specific service providers, for example Activity Sheffield and Sheffield Futures, to offer activities for younger and older people for which appropriate space currently does not exist.

7 of 18

3.3. In the short-term the Community Buildings and Property and Facilities Management Teams will need to subsidise the revenue costs associated with running the building, ie utility, cleaning, repairs and maintenance. This is already identified within existing budgets. Revenue costs will be kept to a minimum due to the refurbishment of the building which includes a new more efficient heating system, rewiring and double glazing.

3.4. Once the building is operational the Community Buildings Team will work in conjunction with Wincobank Community Association and other partners to develop the use of the building and increase revenue income, improving its financial sustainability.

4. Accountability and Deliverability

4.1. The Community Buildings Team is within the Communities Portfolio. It supports the management and development of council owned community buildings and delivery of the Council’s Community Buildings Strategy.

4.2. Initially the Council’s Community Buildings Team will be responsible for management of the building in partnership with the local community association, the Wincobank Community Association. This is a locally active community organisation which registered as a charity in 1974. The management committee is made up of local volunteers and has some previous experience of managing a community space. They are keen to assist with the running of the community centre, for example by arranging access and managing the bookings procedure.

4.3. The Community Buildings Team will lead on the longer term aim for asset transfer with support from the Community Assembly. Options to be explored includeD

4.3.1. Build capacity of Wincobank Community Association (WCA) and asset transfer to

them. 4.3.2. Discuss with WCA and other local interested parties the possibility of merging to

form a local organisation with capacity for asset transfer. 4.3.3. Discuss with 3rd sector organisations that have previous asset transfer

experience the possibility of forming a partnership with WCA for asset transfer – may lead to a greater chance of raising external funds.

4.3.4. Aim for asset transfer by December 2014. (allowing for refurbishment to be completed and development of and capacity building of a more local group). This will be the subject of a further report to Cabinet.

Actions to progressD

Action Timescale Comments

Develop process to fairly determine 3rd sector organisations to approach for partnership in asset transfer

February 2012

CBT consult with - Community Assembly Team, P&FM, Communities Performance & Resources, DCEX Policy & Research

Discussions with WCA & others re developing a local organisation for asset transfer

Start February 2012

Possible local interested parties - Brendan Ingles Gymn, Hinde House Family of Schools

Discussions with 3rd sector organisations re partnership with WCA for asset transfer

Start February 2012

4.4. The Community Buildings Team will work closely with colleagues in Design and Project Management and Kier Asset Partnership Service Ltd in order to deliver the proposed community facility at Newman Court.

8 of 18

5. Demand

5.1. The Wincobank community has been without a Council-owned community building since the Wincobank Wash House, Merton Lane, was closed in 2005 and demolished in 2008 due to health and safety issues.

5.2. The Housing Market Renewal Neighbourhood Development Framework and associated Wincobank Vision documents identified the demand for community space to replace that provided by the Wash House.

5.3. While updating information on demand, local groups specifically highlighted the opportunity to cater for greater numbers that would be presented by larger space for community use. Service providers said the larger space could enable them to offer new activities in the area. There is interest from the Community Assembly for meetings and from local Members for surgeries.

5.4. After a period of six years without a community building it will take some time to build up user group numbers to a level comparable with other community buildings. However, there is evidence of demand which we feel relatively comfortable can form the hub of development.

6. Consultation

6.1. Between November 2009 and February 2010 the following consultation took place about the demand and location for the community facility

• Meetings with local Members and the Wincobank Community Association.

• Other local groups and service providers were emailed and phoned for their views.

• As a result of the above approaches - local residents views were captured by the Wincobank Community Association and other local group leaders.

• Housing Enterprise and Regeneration, including the Regeneration team, manage and are stakeholders in the Newman Court site and consequently have been involved in meetings discussing the various options and required actions.

• Asset Management Group – progress reports have been presented regularly since August 2009. Additionally some members of the group have been on location visits to help assess the most favourable option.

• The North East Community Assembly Manager has been involved in meetings discussing the various options and required actions.

• North East Community Assembly team and local Members have been kept informed of progress and asked for feedback.

6.2. Others have contributed to discussion and information for the consideration of options, including

• Kier Asset Partnership Services – surveyed the area for alternatives and produced the initial options appraisal paper, updating this during the development of the project.

• Sheffield Homes – have responsibility for the demolition of the Newman Court Sheltered Housing Scheme and have been involved in meetings discussing the various options and required actions.

• Kier LLP – produced the estimates for the refurbishment of Newman Court, provision of a temporary modular build for the Newman Court and Merton Lane sites.

• Sheffield Design & Project Management provided the design on which the estimates for the modular building options have been based, additionally providing estimates for a traditional new build facility at Merton Lane.

9 of 18

7. Summary of options

7.1. Summary table highlighting the main details for each option

Option Comments (1) Permanent solution - Retention

and part refurbishment of the communal block at Newman Court

• Cheapest, best value for money option – estimate including fees and contingency £240,000.

• Existing sound structure which lends itself to refurbishment and the provision of a good quality community facility.

• Its larger size means opportunity for greater income generation, less contribution from the Council’s current funds and creates better chances for sustainability.

• Possibilities of a greater range of activities providing a larger contribution to aspects of the Council’s Corporate Plan.

• Better parking provision – easier access for more people especially those from neighbourhoods further afield.

• Being adjacent to Brendan Ingles gym affords possible links between them. Additionally may be able to make use of the outside play area between the two buildings.

• Local members feel this site would unite the areas of Wincobank either side of Newman Road.

We feel this is the best deliverable option for the people of Wincobank.

(2) Do nothing

• Lack of community space sufficient to meet demand.

• Numbers of beneficiaries restricted for activities that are provided and some services not provided.

• There could be reputational risk to the Council.

(3) Permanent solution – new

modular build on Merton Lane site

• Significantly more expensive – estimate including fees £504,850.

• A sellable site.

• Limited car parking.

• More difficult to make a sustainable option.

(4) Permanent solution – new build,

traditional (brick) on Merton Lane site

• Ruled out due to cost (£470,000).

(5) Permanent solution - former

medical centre on Merton Lane, opposite the old Wash House site

• This site is now sold and not an option.

(6) Temporary solution – used

modular build on Merton Lane site

• Provision of any temporary solution has been discounted on the grounds of cost. A temporary solution would range between £165k to £190k – with a 2 to 4 year life, then requiring investment for a permanent solution.

• There could be reputational risk to the Council - a loss of confidence in the Council as to whether permanent provision would ever be made.

(7) Temporary solution – used

modular build on Newman Court site, ie once Sheltered Home Scheme fully demolished

7.2. More detail from the options appraisal, supporting the information above, appears in Appendix 1.

10 of 18

8. Financial Implications of our preferred option

8.1. The estimate for the partial refurbishment is £240k. In accordance with Financial Regulations application will be made through the Capital Programme (i.e. Capital Approval Form - CAF) to prioritise some of the block of resources approved within the Council’s Corporate Resource Pool (CRP) in previous years for investment in community buildings. The final decision on allocation of these resources is for Cabinet. A CAF has been submitted to Cabinet for approval at the meeting of 11 January 2012.

8.2. Refurbishment costs for the retained block at Newman Court are estimated at £167.7k. A contingency has been added to help mitigate the risk of unexpected works during refurbishment and the risk of rising costs during the development of the project. Costs for security measures during the development of the project will be approximately £3k. Therefore project cost estimate is £240.0k, as followsD

Contractor estimate 167,700

Contingency 17,300

Asbestos (survey & contingency for removal if necessary) + Building Regs

13,500

Fees quoted by Design & Project Management

41,500

Total

240,000

8.3. Refurbishment of the retained block at Newman Court would minimise revenue costs.

8.4. Estimated revenue costs are £13,000 per annum. The estimate is based on running costs for two buildings of a similar size currently managed by the Council’s Community Buildings Team. These would include paying for utilities, cleaning, rates, repairs and maintenance and annual servicing contracts.

8.5. Revenue costs would be covered within the Council’s Community Buildings and Property and Facilities Management Teams revenue budget. Income generated from use of the facility would contribute to these costs. Securing asset transfer opportunities and ensuring a sustainable network of community buildings through neighbourhood development plans will reduce the call on revenue in the longer term.

8.6. When the site is appropriated from one statutory purpose to another, there is a compensating book transfer of the value of the site to the purpose from which it was transferred, almost as though there had been a sale. In the present case it is proposed that the site of the former Wash House at Merton Lane is appropriated to housing purposes by way of compensation for the loss of part of Newman Court. Valuations of the sites have not been undertaken, however the size/scale and proposed future use (housing) and location of both sites are similar and the values are believed to be the same.

9. Legal Implications

9.1 The Council has power to do anything which they consider will promote economic, social and environmental well-being of their area and the power may be exercised for the benefit of all or any of the persons resident or present in the area (Section 2, Local Government Act 2000). The power does not enable a local authority to do anything which they are unable to do by virtue of any prohibition restriction or limitation on their powers contained in any enactment or which is prohibited by an order made by the Secretary of

11 of 18

State and when exercising this power the Council must have regard to any guidance issued by the Secretary of State and to its own Sustainable Communities Strategy. Exercise of the power to provide community facilities would be consistent with the Secretary of State's Guidance and with the sustainable community strategy (‘the Sheffield City Strategy’ prepared pursuant to Section 4 of the 2000 Act),

9.2 If the Newman Court option is preferred, the decision of Cabinet made at its meeting on 28th February 2007 approving proposals for the closure and subsequent demolition of 6 sheltered home schemes, including Newman Court must be amended so as not to apply to the part of the building required for the community facility

9.3 Newman Court is presently held for the purposes of Part II Housing Act 1985. As that part of the site which is to be used for the community centre would no longer be used for housing purposes it must be appropriated from housing purposes to another purpose. The Council has power under Section 19(2) Housing Act 1985 to appropriate from housing purposes but the exercise of the power is subject to the consent of the Secretary of State. Although the Secretary of State has power to give general consents he has not done so and a specific consent will be necessary. 9.4 The site of the former Wash House is presently as part of the Council’s commercial estate under the power in Section 120 Local Government Act 1972. Land held for this purpose may be appropriated for Part II Housing purposes under Section 19(1) Housing Act 1985. The Secretary of State’s consent is not necessary for an appropriation for housing purposes.

10. Human Resource Implications

10.1. The Council’s Community Buildings Team will need to undertake responsibility for project managing, in partnership with Sheffield Design & Project Management, any improvements to the retained building.

10.2. There are no human resource implications as project management will be covered by existing resource.

11. Environmental Implications

11.1. The retention, refurbishment (including improvements that will reduce energy consumption) and re-use of a building, which is no longer required for its original purpose, is a more environmentally sustainable option than demolition and rebuild.

11.2. Refurbishment works will include improvements that will reduce energy consumption, ie new heating system, windows and doors.

12. Property Implications

12.1. At such time as the remainder of the Newman Court site and the Merton Lane site are declared surplus the Director of Property and Facilities Management Services and Kier Asset Partnership Services will need to take steps to market and obtain expressions of interest for those sites.

12 of 18

13. Planning Implications

13.1. Newman Court is within an existing ‘Housing Area’ as designated by the adopted Sheffield Unitary Development Plan (UDP). Within such areas, the UDP defines Community Facilities and Institutions (D1) as an ‘acceptable’ use. As such, policy would allow for the situation of a Community Centre at Newman Court on the condition that it would not damage the appearance or residential character of the neighbourhood.

13.2. After initial discussions with Planning about the proposals for Newman Court they believe that the scale of the proposals would be in keeping with the neighbourhood and, as such, would meet the above requirement. Planning will be consulted during the process of designing the final specification for refurbishment.

14. Equality of Opportunity

14.1. An Equality Impact Assessment has been completed with support from the Communities Development Unit and will be amended if necessary with their continued support throughout the project development.

14.2. Local Members and Wincobank Community Association have been fully supportive of equality of provision during consultations about the provision of community space.

14.3. The Community Buildings Team will work closely with Wincobank Community Association to ensure access is given to all of the local and wider community.

14.4. Sheffield Design &Project Management will be employed to produce a full specification and will consider equality of opportunity in doing this.

14.5. Completing the Equality Impact Assessment has ensured full consideration will be given to equality of use and accessibility during the design and refurbishment of the community facility. Aspects will include physical accessibility as well as what requirements there are to enable a broad range of activities accessible to all.

15. Reasons for Recommendations

15.1. It is felt this is the best deliverable option for the people of Wincobank because it 15.1.1. is the cheapest and best value for money 15.1.2. is an existing sound structure which lends itself to refurbishment and the provision of a good quality community facility 15.1.3. will provide a larger site and more flexible space giving opportunity for greater income generation, creating better chances for sustainability 15.1.4. has the potential to provide a greater range of activities 15.1.5. has better parking facilities enabling easier access for more people

15.2. Application will be made through the Capital Programme (i.e. Capital Approval Form - CAF) to prioritise £240k of the block of resources approved within the Council’s Corporate Resource Pool (CRP) in previous years for investment in community buildings. Revenue costs will initially be covered from the Community Buildings and Property and Facilities Management Teams budgets. Once open income from the centre will contribute to ongoing revenue costs.

15.3. The Housing Market Renewal Neighbourhood Development Framework and associated Wincobank Vision documents identified the need for community space to replace that

13 of 18

provided by the Wash House. Updated consultation in 2010 with local Members, the North East Community Assembly team, Wincobank Community Association, other local community groups and service providers indicates significant demand for community space in the area.

15.4. The Wincobank Community Association are keen to contribute to the running of the community facility. It is planned that development over time will lead to a transition from the facility being Council run to it being community run.

16. Recommendations

It is recommended that:

16.1. Cabinet confirms its belief that the proposals contained in this report are likely to promote social well-being in Sheffield.

16.2. So much of the resolution of Cabinet made at its meeting on 28th February 2007 as approved the demolition of the sheltered housing scheme at Newman Court be rescinded as regards the area shown edged red on the plan at Appendix 3 of this report. 16.3. Subject to the Secretary of State’s consent, the land shown edged red on the plan at Appendix 3 is appropriated from housing purposes to Section 120 Local Government Act 1972 and land shown edged blue on the plan at Appendix 3 is appropriated from Section 120 Local Government Act 1972 to Part II housing purposes 16.4. Subject to the consent to the appropriation, a community centre facility is provided in the lower Wincobank area on land shown edged red on the plan at Appendix 3 of this report.

16.5. That the retained block is altered and refurbished for that purpose and the Executive Director Communities be authorised to approve the specification for the works.

14 of 18

Wincobank Community Space – Options Appraisal (page 1 of 3) APPENDIX 1 Summary of the main issues between two feasible options.

Newman Court Merton Lane Costs

Designed demolition/renovation of existing building £240,000 (including fees and contingency) Security costs during project development approx £3,000

New modular build (suitable for planning permanent permission) £504,850 (including fees)

Development potential

1. Clearly within a residential area – may be more attractive for residential

development. 2. Retention of existing block as community centre may not interfere with

access to residential development as the site is surrounded by 3 roads. 3. Parking facilities would be incorporated more easily within this site

development. There is also parking available on Newman Road.

1. Site currently has back of houses surrounding 3 sides. 2. Front of the site faces an ‘industrial unit’ and site of the old

Medical Centre. 3. Medical Centre site is sold subject to contract & planning.

Planning application is to convert to single residential property.

4. This positioning could lessen interest for development of this site.

5. If Merton Lane site developed for residential could have possible parking issues – currently no street parking. The design within the development may mitigate some of this risk.

Community facility

1. Demand - currently little provision of community space in Wincobank

and some interest from Sheffield Futures/Activity Sheffield/PCT and other local groups. Feedback suggests previous groups may reform if space provided. It is recognised use would take some time to grow – but general feeling is the demand would be there.

2. Good sized provision would aid sustainability of provision, provides space that could be used by service providers - income generator.

3. Better parking provision – existing small car park plus Newman Road parking.

4. Adjacent to Brendan Ingles gym affords possible links between them. Additionally may be able to make use of outside play area between the two buildings.

5. Local members feel this site would unite the areas of Wincobank either side of Newman Road.

6. Wincobank Community Association are keen to contribute to the management arrangements and running of a community centre

1. Demand – see Newman Court item 1. 2. Size of site limits provision of community space – see

comparisons below – little opportunity for income generation.

3. Parking would be an issue – 4 to 5 spaces within site required by Planning – possibility of 2 disabled on street parking.

4. It may be that many potential users are local and will walk or get public transport.

5. Site of previous provision would be familiar to community/users.

6. Wincobank Community Association are keen to contribute to the management arrangements and running of a community centre.

7. The lifespan of a modular build can be sufficient to consider it a permanent solution.

15 of 18

Wincobank Community Space – Options appraisal (continued, page 2 of 3). APPENDIX 1

Newman Court Merton Lane Consultation

Key comments in favour of Newman Court

1. The North East Community Assembly and the local community in Wincobank are unanimous in supporting the Newman Court option

2. It unites the two sides of Wincobank (either side of Newman Road)

3. It can be linked to the Brendan Ingles Gym just below giving us an excellent opportunity to get a thriving youth club going

4. There are excellent parking facilities

5. It is just below Wincobank School and would give some of the parents there an opportunity to realise their aims of developing a mother a toddler group

6. This option gives us a better chance to make it become more sustainable in the long term.

Key comments in favour of Merton Lane

1. The Merton Lane site is possibly not an attractive opportunity to developers. Location, parking issues and cost of ground works mean that it may be a vacant site for a very long time

2. In placing a community facility at Merton Lane there is an opportunity here to find a use for the Merton Lane site and allow Newman Court to be developed in the future (as soon as the market recovers).

3. Though Newman Court does deliver a solution for community space the Newman Court site would be a marketable site, and a relatively attractive one, for residential development – possibly attracting a better value than the Merton Lane and part Newman Court sites together.

4. If the community building remained at Newman Court, the rest of the site would still will be marketable although it would be more constrained and possibly have access issues due to the topography which may cost money to resolve

Size provision re Community facility

1. Ground floor Main room 78m2 , 2. three (office/small meeting/store) rooms, 3. kitchen, toilets. 4. First floor Main room 48m2 - development dependent on fundraising –

could be done by community group after asset transfer 5. Potential additional rooms to convert from existing flat – not in costings. It

would be possible for the local community association to raise funds to refurbish this additional space.

1. Main room 80m2 , 2. meeting room 17.7 m2, 3. store room 4. toilets and small kitchen.

The difference financially is difficult to quantify. Estimates for each option differ by over £200k in favour of retaining the block at Newman Court. HoweverD

• feasibly a modular build on the Merton Lane site could cost less than £400k, must be acceptable to planning as a permanent solution not a temporary build.

• the full Newman Court site would possibly deliver more receipt than the combined value of a reduced Newman Court and Merton Lane sites, but not necessarily due to affordable housing considerations. There are several factors involved but based on the size of the sites aloneD

– if the whole site is available for development, any purchaser may be required to provide an element of affordable housing. Offers for the site are likely to be lower because the developer will have to provide an element of low-cost housing.

– if part of the site is retained for community purposes the remaining smaller site will fall below the threshold requiring affordable housing to be provided. The purchaser will not be required to provide low-cost housing possibly enabling a higher price offer for a smaller site.

16 of 18

Wincobank Community Space – Options Appraisal (page 3 of 3) APPENDIX 1 Summary of other options considered

Option Comments – reasons for discounting Do nothing

Lack of community space sufficient to meet demand. Numbers of beneficiaries restricted for activities that are provided and some services not provided. There could be reputational risk to the Council.

Permanent solution – new build, traditional (brick) on Merton Lane site

Ruled out due to cost (£470,000)

Permanent solution - former medical centre on Merton Lane, opposite the old Wash House site

Consideration was given to purchasing this site and reconfiguring the inside to make it fit for purpose as a community facility – this site is now sold and not an option

Temporary solution – used modular build on Merton Lane site

The provision of any temporary solution has been discounted on the grounds of cost. A temporary solution would range between £165k to £190k – with a 2 to 4 year life, then requiring investment for a permanent solution. Consequently the overall cost of provision would exceed costs for other options. There could be reputational risk to the Council - a loss of confidence in the Council as to whether permanent provision would ever be made. The local community and local Members would not be happy with a temporary solution with further disruption to local users and activity/service providers.

Temporary solution – used modular build on Newman Court cleared site, ie once Sheltered Home scheme fully demolished

17 of 18

Former Newman Court Sheltered Housing Scheme, Sheffield – aerial photograph. APPENDIX 2 The thick red line highlights the boundary for the block and car park proposed to be retained for a community facility.

18 of 18