Return to Agenda

Division(s): All

ITEM CA7

CABINET - 20 DECEMBER 2005

REVIEW OF PROPERTY ASSETS

Report by Head of Property

Introduction

  1. This report provides information on progress with the Review of Property Assets – Office Reorganisation Proposals and Central Offices Project. Options for progressing the projects are also set out and the implications of delays are considered.

  2. The Cabinet has previously approved a pattern of provision of office hubs across the county and agreed to consider the case for the refurbishment of the Central Offices to Modern Workstyle during the autumn once the implications of the Shared Service Centre and the directorate realignment proposals were clear. The pattern of provision agreed was consolidation of non-central offices into new hub offices in Banbury, Bicester, Witney and East Oxford, two existing offices in East Oxford and two in Abingdon.

    3. Progress since July 2005

  3. Work has continued on the implementation of both the southern and Witney part of the office consolidations.

  4. It is expected that work on the Witney office consolidation (relocation of the MIND day-centre, surrendering the lease of 11a High Street and Cogges Surgery and consolidation of staff based in these locations into Mount House) will be complete by June 2006; this will generate revenue savings to help support the wider countywide consolidation proposals.

  5. The southern part of the office consolidations has also been progressed, with consolidations of staff into existing southern offices. This has freed the former clinic in Abingdon for disposal. However, in line with the request to delay the review implementation (see the section on the realignment of services below) the final moves to vacate High Street Wallingford office and the disposal of these properties have not been progressed. Instead, it is proposed to re-start the moves, if still appropriate, when the implications of the realignment of services are known in mid 2006.

    6. Implications of the realignment of Social & Community Services, Children, Young People & Families and the Shared Service Centre

  6. The proposed realignment of Adults and Children’s Services has meant that accurate projections of the appropriate pattern and scale of offices could not be established. This is because adult social care’s links to the health system will not be clear until the current proposed reconfiguration of the Primary Care Trusts and the Strategic Health Authority is complete. This is not now expected until June 2006.

  7. The White Paper "Out of Hospital Care" expected in January 2006 is expected to make a series of proposals about the relationship between social care and primary care including public health. In addition, the expected timetable for commitment to the Shared Service Centre has been established as early 2006. Together, this means that progression of the review to the implementation stage and consideration of the case for the Central Office refurbishments has been delayed.

    8. Options to Progress the Review

  8. There are now two options for progressing the Review:

    1. to progress the review now, based on the proposals previously agreed by the Cabinet, as detailed above; or

    1. delay progression of the review until the implications of the realignment and Shared Service Centre are clear.

  1. If the review is progressed under Option 1, there is a risk that the provision would not match need once the realignment and Shared Service Centre implications are clear. Whilst there would be some scope to reduce this risk (for example by securing the right to sublet properties) it is expected that the overall levels of risk of progressing the review would still be high.

  2. Patterns of provision for Social & Community Services will not be established before June 2006 as the implications of the White Paper "Out of Hospital Care" (see above) will need to be considered. A major aim of the review is to bring about increased flexibility of provision through the consolidation of office provision for both Social & Community Services and Children, Young People & Families, where possible. This means that the overall need cannot be confirmed before June 2006. However, there is some scope for progression of consolidation appraisals where they only involve Children, Young People & Families office needs.

  3. A comparison of the timetable for progressing now or waiting until the implications of the realignment and Shared Service Centre are clear is set out in Table 1.

    4. Table 1: Existing and Proposed Implementation Stages

    Project

    OPTION 1

    OPTION 2

    Commence Implementation

    Commence Implementation

    Northern

    Consolidation of Offices in Banbury & Bicester

    Autumn 2006

    Mid 2007

    Witney Mount House Consolidation

    - Release of 11a High Street, Cogges & Relocation of MIND.

    Being implemented

    Being implemented

    Oxford

    Oxford Non Central – Consolidation of Offices in East Oxford

     

    Autumn 2006

    Mid 2007

    Southern

    Consolidation into Champion House, Abingdon & Other Minor Moves

    Feb 2006

    July 2006

    Central Offices

    Refurbishment of Central Offices to Modern Work Styles

    Early 2007

    Early 2007

  4. It will be possible to progress some of the background investigations and prepare Option Appraisals for parts of the proposed consolidations during the period of delay proposed under Option 2. However, overall, there is at least a 6 month delay in the implementation of the major consolidations of offices under Option 2, which is the recommended option.

    5. Central Offices Project

  5. The Shared Service Centre proposal will significantly impact on the business case for the refurbishment of the Central Offices. Therefore, re-consideration of the business case will commence early in 2006 when the model for the Shared Service Centre has been approved. Because of the likely impact on the viability of the business case, implementation of the refurbishment (other than small scale changes as part of interim moves) could not commence until after the Shared Service Centre relocations have taken place. This is reflected in the timetable set out in Table 1.

    6. Initial Financial Appraisal

  6. An initial financial appraisal has been undertaken to identify the county-wide implications of the whole Review of Property Assets office proposals based upon the approach already agreed by the Cabinet (this excludes provision for the Central Offices Project and the Shared Service Centre). However, due to the level of uncertainty of office need, it has not been possible to prepare a full financial appraisal. For the same reasons it has not been possible to prepare a more detailed business case for the investment necessary into the Cricket Road Centre in East Oxford. However, at this stage it appears that a capital investment will be required to complete the implementation of the Review.

    7. Conclusion

  7. Progression of the review in advance of the confirmation of levels and patterns of office needs arising from the realignment of Adults’ and Children’s services would be a high risk option and could lead to significant mismatches between levels of provision and needs. The delay by around 6 months would reduce this risk.

    8. RECOMMENDATION

  8. The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to:

          1. agree the revised timetable set out in the report as Option 2 for implementation of the Review of Property Assets Office and Central Offices Projects; and

          2. note that there is likely to be a need for capital funding for implementation of the Review of Property Assets and request that the Capital Steering Group consider this in relation to other capital priorities.

NEIL MONAGHAN
Head of Property

Background Papers: Nil

Contact: Officer Mark Tailby, Team Leader Strategic Asset Management Tel: (01865) 816012

December 2005

Return to TOP