Meeting documents

Councillor N Blake

Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Major Projects

 

To consider the attached information.

 

Contact Officer:  Teresa Lane (01296) 585006

(a)       Decision(s)

 

That Council be recommended to approve a budget of up to £250,000, to be met from the General Revenue Fund to enable the preparatory work for the next stages of the redevelopment of Aylesbury town to progress in support of the Council’s economic and commercial AVDC strategies.

 

(b)       Reason(s) for Decision(s)

 

            To enable a mixed scheme for the next phases of redevelopment of Aylesbury Town Centre.

 

(c)       Alternative Option(s) Considered

 

            AVDC could choose to do nothing and wait for a developer to come forward and suggest a scheme for the next phases of redevelopment.  However, this would be highly unlikely to happen and a high risk strategy, given the competition from other centres seeking to attract development partners for similar sized schemes.  Leaving it the market would also mean that the Council’s ability to shape and influence what happens next would be very much reduced.

 

            There is a risk that unless AVDC continues to take the lead, momentum in the town centre could stall, putting at risk the already considerable investment that has taken place.

 

(d)       Relevant Scrutiny Committee

 

            Finance and Services.  However as this matter will be considered by full Council, it is not subject call-in.

 

(e)       Conflicts of Interest / Dispensation(s)

 

None.

 

 

 

 

In 2014, AVDC had published a masterplan for the phased redevelopment of the Exchange Street Car Park, Aylesbury.  (For ease of reference a copy was appended to the Cabinet report).  Although indicative, the master plan set the context for phase one – the redevelopment of the area between the restaurants outside the cinema and Long Lionel.

 

Outline planning permission for Phase One which comprised restaurant and commercial space on the ground floor with one and two bedroomed apartments on four floors above, together with a stunning new public square, had been granted in late 2014.  The reserved matters application was due to be considered by the Strategic Development Management Committee on 21 September.  If approved, construction was expected to start on site in early Spring, 2017, with completion approximately 18 months later.

 

The progress made on the plans for Phase One had been monitored with interest by the market.  The collective investment in recent years by both the private and public sectors was a sign of the growing confidence in the town centre and its future.

 

There was also a recognition that as the County Town, expected to accommodate significant housing growth on its fringe as part of the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan (VALP), Aylesbury had the scope and potential to attract more retail and food and beverage outlets whilst providing a highly desirable location for town centre living.  More quality space would be expected to feature as an important part of the mix.

 

These assertions were supported by a recent study by The Retail Group which had been commissioned as part of the evidence base for the draft VALP.  The final conclusions of the study were awaited but the early indication was that there was demand for additional retail space whilst recognising that it was also important to ensure that existing retail space was fully occupied and not compromised by new space.

 

With regard to food and beverage demand, a study by Coverpoint in 2013 had confirmed that upwards of 15 additional operators were needed to reflect the changing role of town centres, where leisure dining had become a visit in its own right, as well as now being an increasingly popular part of a visit for retail shopping.  The growth in the food and beverage sector remained very strong and even though new restaurants had opened since 2013, they had mostly replaced former operators rather than taken new space.  The delivery of the new restaurants in phase one of Waterside North would still leave considerable unmet demand and would help attract other operators who wanted to be part of the Aylesbury food and beverage community.

 

There also continued to be a compelling case for town centres to be a hub for new homes and any schemes which emerged for future phases of redevelopment were likely to include new housing as well as quality open space, helping to connect pedestrian circuits through the town and provide a place for people to dwell, relax and socialise.

 

The draft VALP Aylesbury Town Centre Policies (appended to the Cabinet report), supported continued development of the town centre and reflected the vision of the town described in the Aylesbury Town Centre Plan.

 

With regard to future phases of redevelopment, the draft VALP did not limit this to the Waterside North site.  VALP identified an area which embraced a wider area for redevelopment.  However, the scope of area for future phases would depend on a number of factors, not least the market, developer interest in Aylesbury (which was expected to be good) and the financial viability of any draft scheme put forward.

 

Nationally, there was an expectation that local authorities would take a leading role, working with businesses and community involvement to bring about successful long term changes on town centre function and provision.

 

In effect, AVDC was ahead of the game, and for some years had taken a leading role in the regeneration of the town centre.  It had taken a place shaping role and financial and economic development objectives to deliver a wide range of new facilities, including the theatre, Travelodge, new car parks, public space and, more recently, the University Campus Aylesbury Vale.

 

This had returned both direct and indirect benefits.  By using prudential borrowing and Council assets, AVDC had funded build costs and used the rental income from tenants to generate a return on investment and a revenue income stream to contribute towards the costs of delivering other services.  Indirectly, AVDC had delivered:-

 

·         An increase in business rates (of which AVDC retained a percentage) as other operators had moved into the town.

 

·         Protection of the Council’s investments e.g. customers visiting new restaurants also patronise the theatre.

 

·         Over 200 jobs, creating wealth in the local economy and sustainability.

 

·         The theatre brought people to the town centre with spin-off spend for local businesses.

 

·         AVDC’s role and reputation had helped secure a £3.3m grant from the South-East Midlands LEP for Waterside North Phase One.

 

AVDC was now bringing Phase One of Waterside North to fruition.  With supporting funding from Aylesbury Vale Advantage, it had led the process from working with the architects and the market to develop the masterplan to procuring a development partner and detailed planning approval.  It was, therefore well placed to continue in this role and ensure that the momentum building in the town was not lost.

 

The Council would not be in a position to take any scheme forward without a private investment partner and/or support funding from other sources.  However, in order to attract quality investment partners and potentially other funds in a very competitive market, it would need to have carried out certain preparatory work first.

 

As with Phase One, any future development would need to be supported by a business case and meet the objectives of the commercial AVDC programme.  Costs incurred now by AVDC would be built into the business case and recouped over time.

 

Cabinet was advised that there were six areas work that now needed to be commissioned:-

 

 

(a)  A retail Review to Identify Market Opportunities and Operator Interest

 

The Retail Group had been commissioned by Planning to update the capacity retail requirements of Aylesbury and other centres to inform the VALP policies.  However, to help shape the future development of Aylesbury Town Centre, the brief needed to be extended to understand current retail trends, gaps in the retail offer and start a dialogue with target operators to "pitch" Aylesbury and obtain a realistic understanding of their interest in locating in the town.  The indicative cost was £25k.

 

(b)  Additional Master Planning Support to Define the Scope of the Next Phases of Development and Specify the Development and Planning Outcomes the Council wished to Achieve

 

The Council had a number of significant land and operational interests in the town centre, including surface and decked car parks, mixed commercial accommodation and land being used for informal/formal vehicular and pedestrian access.

 

There might also be land and property which AVDC would like to see being brought into beneficial economic uses, which was currently in third party ownership.  When considering the next phases of development, the Council would need to support these development factors with an indication of its planning objectives in the form of a master plan or development framework.  Whilst a framework had had been published in 2014 for the redevelopment of the whole of Exchange Street car Park and some adjacent areas, the area in scope as defined in the draft VALP, was now much more extensive.  Thinking around the composition of mixed-use schemes had also moved on.  The indicative cost of this work was £25k

 

(c)  Soft Market Testing

 

Soft market testing of the emerging proposition was an important opportunity to engage with active developers and gauge the market appetite for the project.  Through the soft marketing process the Council would also gain insight into aspects of the master plan which required further consideration before a formal marketing process commenced.

 

The agreed project would be market tested with a pre-agreed list of developers and investment partners.  These might comprise developers which were principally known for their retail expertise, some who might be better known for their contracting expertise, and some who focussed on residential led schemes and others with a regional focus.

 

The soft market testing would enable AVDC to establish current developer interest in the project, benefit from developer ideas and thoughts about the best approach to delivering the next phase of development and understand current capacity to respond to a tender invitation.  The Council could also use soft market testing to explore AVDC’s role in the delivery process, critical aspects of the scheme which required more detailed consideration prior to marketing and the scope to participate in a joint venture if that was one of the Council’s preferred options.  The indicative cost was £10k.

 

 

(d)  Valuation Advice Relating to Land and Property Included in the Scope or Affected by any Next Phases

 

The next phases of development were not necessarily constrained to land just within AVDC ownership.  Understanding third party interests would be an important part of producing the master plan or development framework.  In order to inform the viability of a prospective scheme, the Council would need to prepare a land assembly cost assessment, which would take account of acquisition by agreement as well as through the use of any compulsory purchase powers that might be necessary.  The indicative cost of this work was £15k.

 

(e)  Marketing the Development Proposal and Procurement

 

The successful implementation of the next phase would involve many ingredients,  one of the critical being the procurement of the right development partner.  In order to deliver the Council’s objectives, it would be necessary to consider carefully the partner selection and there would be a need to have a robust business plan in place prior to the formal marketing being implemented.

 

There was a need to evaluate the procurement options open to the Council and to evaluate the relative benefits of each option before deciding on the procurement strategy.  Once a strategy was in place, the Council could move on to delivering the procurement process.  This process could be complex and lengthy but the aim would be to simplify it where this could be achieved and to make it as streamlined as possible to ensure that interest was attracted from quality development partners.  The indicative cost was 135K.

 

(f)   Commissioning a Parking Strategy

 

With the housing growth anticipated on the edge of the town and the Council’s aspiration to increase employment and visitor footfall in the town centre,  the Council needed to review its parking capacity and plan for the future.  Parking would need to be included in the master plan or the development framework, referred to earlier in this Minute.  But this strategy would need to extend beyond the area in scope and consider the whole town needs alongside any parking arrangements and plans by the private sector and Bucks County Council.  The Bucks County Council input would also reflect their on-street parking and transport plans.  The indicative cost was £30k.

 

The total indicative cost was therefore £240,000.  If approved, the different services would be procured on a competitive basis using a relevant procurement framework.  At least two different commercial services would be needed to fulfil the brief, given the specialist nature of some of the work.  However, where possible, existing contractual arrangements would be used – for example, with HB Law.

 

The estimated costs would initially be met from the General Revenue Fund, but would need to be recouped as part of the business case for any scheme coming forward as a result of the forward investment.

 

RESOLVED –

 

That Council be recommended to approve a budget of up to £250,000 to be met from the General Revenue Fund, to enable the preparatory work for the next stages of the redevelopment of Aylesbury Town to proceed in support of the Council’s economic and commercial AVDC strategies.