Agenda item

To consider options in relation to the Brandhall site, Oldbury.

Resolved:-

 

1.1 The Cabinet determined that the preferred option for the Brandhall site, Oldbury as:

 

Option 3 - Provision of land for a new primary school, a new public park and development of circa 190 residential dwellings.

 

1.2 That should Cabinet determine the preferred option to be Option 1b, 2, 3, or 4 then the Director of Finance in conjunction with the Director of Regeneration and Growth be authorised to identify the best option to fund the preferred option including the submission of any external funding applications and any required market testing as may be necessary.

 

1.3 That subject to 1.2 above and once more detailed costs are available, a further report be bought back to Cabinet setting out the funding strategy for the preferred option and seeking approval for inclusion into the Capital Programme.

 

1.4 That should Cabinet determine the preferred option be option 2, 3, or 4 delegated authority be given to the Director of Regeneration and Growth to submit a planning application or applications in line with the preferred option.

 

1.5 That should Cabinet determine the preferred option to be option 2, 3, or 4 then delegated authority be given to the Director of Regeneration and Growth and the Director of Finance to allocate a minimum of £2.5m of Community Infrastructure Levy Funding from the 80% Main CIL fund towards the capital cost of the replacement of Causeway Green Primary School.

 

1.6 That should Cabinet determine the preferred option to be Options 2, 3 or 4, then the Director of Children and Education submit a further report to Cabinet setting out full proposals for a capital scheme to provide a replacement primary school at Brandhall for Causeway Green Primary School.

 

1.7 That should Cabinet determine the preferred option be option 2, 3, or 4 delegated authority be given to the Director of Regeneration and Growth to take necessary steps (including publication of necessary statutory notices under S.122(2A) of the Local Government Act 1972 (and consideration of any objections received) related to the appropriation of any public open space for Education or Housing purposes [and for the Director of Finance to make the necessary financial adjustments, with regard to the appropriation], and authorises the appropriation of the public open space for Education and/or Housing purposes.

 

1.8 That should Cabinet determine the preferred option to be Options 3 or 4 then reserves from Regeneration and Growth Directorate be allocated for resources to project manage the delivery of the preferred option.

 

1.9 That should Cabinet determine the preferred option to be Option 3 or 4 then approval be given to add this to the Council’s approved regeneration Pipeline as a new project.

 

1.10 That in relation to the proposed Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Cabinet:;

 

b. Approves the designation of land at Brandhall as a Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC) excluding any land required for development to deliver the preferred option determined under recommendation 1.1 above.

 

 

Approval was sought from Cabinet to determine the preferred option for the Brandhall Site, Oldbury.

 

         The Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Growth gave a detailed explanation of each option that was being considered and moved that option 3, provision of land for a new primary school, a new public park and development of circa 190 residential dwellings should be the preferred otion for Branhall.  The Cabinet member also moved that in relation to the proposed Site of Importance for Local Nature Conservation, the Cabinet approve B – the designation of land at Brandhall as a Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC) excluding any land required for development to deliver the preferred option.

 

Reason for Decision

It was considered appropriate to provide an opportunity for members to reconsider options (including a do-nothing option) for the future of the Brandhall site given the outcomes of the public consultation and the additional technical and financial information gathered to date.

 

 

 

The Local Sites Partnership (LSP) had recommended to the Council that the Brandhall site be designated at as a Site for Local Importance for Nature Conservation. Members were required to determine whether to accept in full, in part, or not at all the recommendation from the LSP.

 

The Chair of the Economy Skills Transport and Environment Scrutiny Board questioned whether any alternative sites had been considered to relocate Causeway Green Primary School. In response, the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Growth stated that alternative options for the replacement of Causeway Green Primary School had been considered however the minimum size requirement for a school was 2.3 hectares and there were no available sites of that size within the vicinity of the existing school. A site at Grafton Road was considered but the site was only 0.5ha which was less than a quarter of the size required. Consideration was also given to Cakemore Playing Fields however these fields were used for organised and recreational sport so were not available for redevelopment. 

 

The Vice-Chair for Economy Skills Transport and Environment Scrutiny Board asked whether the proposed provision of a new school on the Brandhall site would be Academy run or local authority run. In response, the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Growth explained that, as this was a replacement for an existing school, it would remain a maintained school; and whilst Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council had no plans to convert the school to an Academy, the Government White Paper required all schools to become an academy by 2030.

 

The Chair of Children and Education Services Scrutiny Board raised whether it was usual for C.I.L. monies to be used to support infrastructure i.e. £2.5 million for the replacement of Causeway Green Primary School. The Cabinet Member of Regeneration and Growth stated that the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) was a mechanism to secure funding contributions towards the future infrastructure needed to underpin the borough.  It could help support new physical and social infrastructure such as schools and roads and also improve existing facilities.  The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 (as amended) set out exactly how CIL can be used. 80% of the CIL monies collected would be used for strategic infrastructure: to fund the provision, improvement, replacement, operation or maintenance of infrastructure to support the development of the area. Therefore, the majority of CIL funds could only be used to fund infrastructure and schools were recognised as being in this category and eligible for CIL investment.

 

A further question was asked regarding whether the new 2 Form Entry school could be justified when there was soon to be a surplus of school places. In response, the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Growth stated that the replacement of Causeway Green Primary would ensure that the Council continued to be provide school places for the local community, in a popular and Ofsted rated “good” school. It was correct that the Council did now have some surplus places across schools but local authorities try to maintain between a 5-10% surplus to ensure that we could meet demand for mid – places. Over the course of the last 12 years with the unprecedented increase in the birth rate and inward migration the Council, despite delivering over 50000 new primary places, had only been able to maintain a surplus of less than circa 3% which was not sustainable.

 

In response to the Chair of Children and Education’s question on the number of vacant places at Causeway Green Primary School, the Director for Children and Education Services highlighted that at that point in time there were no vacancies within the school. The projection for September 2022 was there was likely to be one or two vacancies across all year groups, with a view for these to be immediately filled.

 

The Chair of the Budget and Corporate Scrutiny Management Board asked why the school had been allowed to get into its current condition by both the school and Council. The Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Growth explained that Causeway Green Primary School was a 1950s Hills Construction (sectional concrete slab) and as such, had always had a limited life expectancy , which because of a good maintenance regime over the years, it had been able to exceed without yet developing structural issues. The building now had reached the end of its life which was reflected in the Government’s Priority Schools Building Programme and Sandwell along with a number of councils had been successful with bids to replace Hill’s constructed School (Abbey Infs & Yew Tree Primary).  Causeway Green had been identified by the Council as the next school to be replaced. 

 

The Chair of Budget and Corporate Scrutiny Management Board also asked whether an estimate on how much the Council had made and spent on the matter to date, including officer time. In response, the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Growth stated that the council did not routinely record officer time, a this was a masterplan, officer time was not recorded and the only cost that could be provided was those that have been incurred through the commission of the masterplan. The spend incurred to date was £236,289.73.

 

The Chair of the Budget and Corporate Scrutiny Management asked a further question on what assurances could be provided that all options had been explored for the relocation of the school. It was stated that replacing the school on the existing site would be because of the size, layout and access be complex, difficult to manage, costly, and would elongate the construction period to a minimum of 3 years. All of this would need to be done whilst keeping the existing school operational, which would have a detrimental impact on teaching and learning with restricted or no access to outdoor teaching spaces and the loss of internal spaces at critical times. Rebuilding on the exiting site would also not address the very access and egress to the school and would predetermine the design/built solution rather than teaching and learning be the key driver. In terms of pupil place planning was essential that a primary school continues to serve its local community, no other site large enough and in Council ownership to accommodate a 2fe building and site had been identified in the local area.

 

In response to the Chair’s question regarding why there was a difference in results between the environmental survey conducted by the Council and the Action group, the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Growth stated that the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal Report was conducted in 2021 and recommends that due to the mobility of animals and the potential for colonisation of the site, it was suggested that an updated ecological survey be undertaken prior to the redevelopment of this site should this not occur by August 2022. It also set out the limitations of the study which could provide an answer for why differences in results were seen.

 

The Chair of Budget and Corporate Scrutiny Management questioned what communications the Council had with relevant authorities in relation to the deed of covenant and how likely was it that this could be varied by agreement. The Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Growth stated that until the plans for the site were finalised and a deed of variation was to be agreed, the Council would not expect our legal representatives to have prior correspondence with the external authorities.

 

The provisions of the deed of dedication alter significantly after 25 years in that NUFU was required to act reasonably, and it was clear from the wording of the deed, that it was not intended to absolutely prevent any development for the entire period of the deed of dedication.

 

The title has been reviewed by the Council, and there were no legal restrictions preventing the proposed development. The Council was permitted to appropriate land for any purpose it is entitled to hold property, pursuant to S.122 of the Local Government Act 1972 (subject to the relevant consultation requirements).

 

A question on what estimates the Council had made of the costs it had spent in relation to this matter, including officer time, since it first consulted on options for the site in 2019 was asked by the Chair of Budget and Corporate Scrutiny Management Board. In response, the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Growth highlighted that the Council did not routinely record officer time unless we were to capitalise those costs as part of a funded project. As this was a masterplan, officer time had not been recorded and the only cost the Council could provide were those that had been incurred through the commission of the masterplan. Spend incurred to date is £236,289.73.

 

A further question on the number of consultations the Council had undertaken was questioned by the Chair of Budget and Corporate Scrutiny Management Board. It was explained by the Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Growth that the Council had arranged two consultations for the site. The 2019 rationale was to consult Sandwell residents on the Council’s proposal to close Brandhall Golf Course and Club House and utilise the site to build a new school (replacement for Causeway Green Primary School), develop a new park and open space for the local community and provide much needed local housing. The Council provided three initial indicative options of how the proposed development options could be provided. The 2021 rational was to offer the local community an opportunity to influence key aspects of the masterplan including the look, and the kinds of open space and any community facilities provided within it. There was also a report on Community Involvement that proposed to ensure that residents were consulted on with future plans of the Council.

 

Councillor Anandou, as ward councillor for Brandhall, thanked the action group for the work undertaken to save the green space and urged Cabinet to listen to the wishes of the residents. In response to the Councillors question, the Director of Regeneration and Growth clarified that the decision to declare the Brandhall Site surplus to requirements was in relation to its function as a golf course.

 

Alternative Options Considered

 

There were a number of alternative options explored in the report. This included:

 

That Cabinet determined the preferred option for the Brandhall site, Oldbury from the options below;

·      Option 1a - No change

·      Option 1b - Development of a new public park

·      Option 2 - Provision of land for a new primary school and development of a new public park

·      Option 3 - Provision of land for a new primary school, a new public park and development of circa 190 residential dwellings

·      Option 4 - Provision of land for a new primary school, a new public park and development of circa 360 residential dwellings

 

                  That in relation to the proposed Site of Importance for Nature

                  Conservation Cabinet either;

·      Approved the designation of land at Brandhall as a Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC) in accordance with the recommendation of the Local Sites Partnership.

·      Approved the designation of land at Brandhall as a Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC) excluding any land required for development to deliver the preferred option determined under recommendation 1.1 of the report.

·      Did not approve the designation of land at Brandhall as a Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC).

 

Agreed:-

 

(1)     that approval be given to the preferred option for the Brandhall site, Oldbury as:

 

Option 3 - Provision of land for a new primary school, a new public park and development of circa 190 residential dwellings;

 

(2)     that subject to (1) above, the Director of Finance in conjunction with the Director of Regeneration and Growth be authorised to identify the best option to fund the preferred option including the submission of any external funding applications and any required market testing as may be necessary;

 

(3)     that subject to (2) above and once more detailed costs are available, a further report be brought back to Cabinet setting out the funding strategy for the preferred option and seeking approval for inclusion into the Capital Programme;

 

(4)     that subject to (1) above, delegated authority be given to the Director of Regeneration and Growth to submit a planning application or applications in line with the preferred option;

 

(5)     t that subject to (1) above, delegated authority be given to the Director of Regeneration and Growth and the Director of Finance to allocate a minimum of £2.5m of Community Infrastructure Levy Funding from the 80% Main CIL fund towards the capital cost of the replacement of Causeway Green Primary School;

 

(6)     that subject to (1) above, the Director of Children and Education submit a further report to Cabinet setting out full proposals for a capital scheme to provide a replacement primary school at Brandhall for Causeway Green Primary School;

 

(7)     that subject to (1) above, delegated authority be given to the Director of Regeneration and Growth to take necessary steps (including publication of necessary statutory notices under S.122(2A) of the Local Government Act 1972 (and consideration of any objections received) related to the appropriation of any public open space for Education or Housing purposes [and for the Director of Finance to make the necessary financial adjustments, with regard to the appropriation], and authorises the appropriation of the public open space for Education and/or Housing purposes;

 

(8)     that subject to (1) above, reserves from Regeneration and Growth Directorate be allocated for resources to project manage the delivery of the preferred option;

 

(9)     that subject to (1) above, approval be given to add this to the Council’s approved regeneration Pipeline as a new project;

 

(10)   that in relation to the proposed Site of Importance for Nature Conservation Cabinet;

 

(b)     approval be given to the designation of land at Brandhall as a Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation (SLINC) excluding any land required for development to deliver the preferred option determined under recommendation (1) above.