Project Initiation Document (PID) Tuckton Revetments ... · Original (but including suggested amendments from AK, MS & MR) 11-3-14 . 2.0 Paul Ambrose Various comments included to

Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE/PROJECT INITATION DOCUMENT 01202 458213 [email protected] (template version 2.1i)

Page 1

G2 Full Business Case (FBC)

Project Initiation Document (PID)

Tuckton Revetments (Project Hub No)

Service Unit: HOUSING, PARKS & BEREAVEMENT SERVICES Risk - High Prepared by/Project Manager: Paul Ambrose Date: 31-3-14 Document Approvals

All Business Cases for projects over 25k must be approved by the following people listed in this table prior to being approved by the Transformation Board and/or Executive Gateway Board (EGB).

Officer/Member/Group Name FBC Approval Date

PID Approval

Date

Project Owner Gary Josey 17/3/14

Executive Director Bill Cotton Sent 11/3/14 N/A

Portfolio Holder Cllr Lawrence Williams 31/3/14 N/A

Portfolio Holder Comment: “I support this necessary business case and I support the need for the work but understand that this will have to be resolved within tight financial constraints.” (31/3/14)

TEC Programme Board (TEC Projects Only) N/A

Executive Gateway Board 16/04/2014 N/A

Cabinet N/A

Project Board N/A

Other Elected Members & Officers Consulted

Name Position Date Cllrs Coope, Davies & Lawton Ward councillors for East Southbourne & Tuckton 19/3/14

Document Revision History

Version Author Changes Date

1.0 Paul Ambrose Original (but including suggested amendments from AK, MS & MR) 11-3-14

2.0 Paul Ambrose Various comments included to Version 1 31/3/14

Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE

Page 2

G2

1 Executive Summary

The existing extensive timber revetments along the River Stour in the area of Tuckton Tea Gardens are now life expired and failing causing a safety risk to navigation and users of the area.

Realistically there are only a small number of feasible options to resolve the problem and there is no “No cost” option.

The favoured option is replacing the existing revetment with a new sheet steel piled structure costing in the region of £560,000 funded from Capital Monies. Anticipated that works would start late Sep or Oct and take 4-5 months with completion due Feb/ March following year. In engineering terms this is a very simple straightforward option.

These revetments have been deteriorating for some time but the situation has been exacerbated and the damage has accelerated due to very high river flows caused by this winter’s exceptional rainfall.

The bank has now been fenced off in the worst affected area as a temporary solution. Fencing restricts access to some moored boats.


Page 3

G2

2 Strategic Fit: The Strategic Case

2.1 Business Needs and Project Background

The Council owns the area known as Tuckton Tea Gardens and is therefore the riparian owner of the river bank. However the river bed is owned by Sembcorp (formerly Bournemouth Water). The River Stour is a main river and comes under the authority for the Environment Agency but they have no duty to maintain the bank.

Urgent replacement of the existing failing timber revetment is necessary to prevent significant bank erosion of the River Stour in the vicinity of Tuckton Tea Gardens. This already presents a danger to users of the Gardens and river and significant areas have had to be temporarily fenced off. However the situation will continue to deteriorate which will require areas to be permanently fenced off leading to a general loss of amenities including the closure and diversion of the main river path and access to moorings.

There have already been a number of localised failures which have created dangers and navigation risks. Each has caused urgent works to be carried out in an unplanned way. Also each one is getting more and more difficult as there is less and less sound timber to be able to “tie back”

Location

Please note there are a second set of timber revetments downstream of Wick ferry not shown on the above plan which are newer and still in generally fair condition (they used steel I beam “King Piles”) but they will eventually fail as well. This business case does not cover those.


Page 4

G2 The problem

Typical failures / collapses.

Feb 2002

Feb 2006 Jan 2014

The existing revetments were constructed over a number of years during the early 1980s using recycled timber from refurbishing Bournemouth Pier. They replaced a much older set of timber revetments which dated back to at least the 1960s and possibly even earlier. It is believed some of the work was carried out each winter by the pier maintenance gang when the weather was too bad to work on the pier. However certainly one phase (Phase 3) of approx 50m was tendered in 1982 and awarded in the sum of £9,876 (Price did not include the timber).

The existing revetments consist of 5m long 250mm by 100mm hardwood King Piles at 2.0m centres and then 4.5m long 150mm by 50mm boards driven in between connecting walings all bolted together with M20 bolts. (See drawing on next page)


Page 5

G2

There are actually two related problems but to understand these one must look at a long profile of river depths. (see below).

(1) The main structural failures have all occurred between about chainage 150m and 250m (measured from the corner by the boat jetty) which coincides with the area of most rapid river flow on the outside of the bend. As can be seen in 2012 the King Piles are trying to support some 3.0m of bank but the piles are only 2.0m into the bed which is totally inadequate for untied piles. Some had structurally failed locally and have had to be anchored back. Further the timbers now show considerable loss of section due to the wood rotting although it is not sure how extensive this is under the ground because anaerobic conditions will tend to preserve the wood.

Further there has been a loss of nearly 0.5m of bed locally during the winter of 2013/14 (shown in red) which will have further weakened the support the King piles give. This “hole” may well fill again during calmer periods but the damage


Page 6

G2 has been done. Other areas (i.e. outside the 150-250m chainage) do not show any significant bed erosion problems.

(2) The second problem is that the large numbers of the planks are now rotten and big gaps have appeared between them allowing material to be lost from the back of the boards. These have appeared without any warning as swallow holes on the surface. These can be anything up to 1.2m deep and are difficult to see in the grass by those currently using the area of the bank for either boat mooring or general amenity purposes. This is occurring along the whole 475m length.

Historical maps show that there has been significant erosion of the bank (up to 12m in places) in the area of the 150 - 250m chainage over a period of about 50 years before the (earlier) revetments were built. It can be assumed that if the revetment was not there this erosion rate would resume.

Typical erosion problems prior to the construction of the current revetments. (Photo shows an older set also collapsed) .Photo dated 31/12/79. It’s hard to see but apparently the yacht Deidre is under the tree.

2.2 Benefits, Objectives and Strategic Alignment

Council Strategic Objective/ Corporate Priority (taken from

Corporate Plan, Service Plans etc...) Project Outcome

Benefits expected as a result of achieving outcomes

An Improved Environment – quality of parks (3.3) and improved facilities for residents and visitors (3.1)

A safe riverside Ensure visitors to the area can safely access and enjoy the river and no further urgent costly repairs

Thriving Economy _ promote as premier resort (4.1) A safe riverside

Although there are no legal rights to access / egress moorings at this point, loss of access may deter boat owners from mooring in this section of the river which would deter visitors etc and affect the local economy


Page 7

G2

2.3 Scope: (In/Out)

Inclusions:

The provision of a new revetment and some minor environmental improvements to satisfy terms and conditions of the Environment Agency Licence.

Exclusions:

Any additional facilities above what is there at present, for example boating activities or fishing.

2.4 Strategic Risk

Risk Mitigation Strategy Owner

Administrative –

Environmental Constraints / Licensing / Planning permissions

Consult with the Planning Authority. Environment Agency and Marine Management Organisation (MMO)

(nb BBC has already had some informal discussions with the EA and Planning Department and there does not seem to be any fundamental objections).

Project Manager

Unconfirmed Funding Source Agree funding before any works commence

Project Manager

Safety of general public and navigation hazard for boat users

Currently fence off area but proceed as quickly as possible with new revetments

Project Manager

Objections from users especially boat owners

Consult widely Project Manager

Weather Cover with Contract terms and conditions

Primarily the Contractor

Unforeseen ground Conditions Some boreholes have already been taken but design should minimise risk

Contractor

(It is suggested a design and construct form of contract is used to make best use of the contactor’s specialist knowledge)

Work not achieved in time Adequate staff resources and planning

Project Manager

Overspend on budget Agree fixed price before works are undertaken and include contingency.

Project Manager


Page 8

G2

3 Options Appraisal: The Economic Case 3.1 Summary of Approach

There is not a measurable loss of income from losing this facility but we can identify the costs to date incurred and these are likely to increase as deterioration continues to a point where all that can be done is the collapsed sections pulled out, the area fenced off and the footpath diverted. There is an “Access and User” Agreement in place between BBC and Sembcorp for the mooring posts along this section of river for which Parks obtains approx £3500 pa. (The fee received covers the whole length of the river from Tuckton Bridge to Broadwaters). The agreement states that: ‘there are no obligations on either party to maintain repair or replace the existing revetments along the river bank at Tuckton (“the Revetments”). Therefore if the bank is taken out of use then Sembcorp may choose to moor boats on the river bed rather than the bank and may try to reduce the agreement fee payable to “Parks.” Very long term the car park will become at risk especially if as predicted by climate change very wet winters become more common but this would not be in the near future.

There is a possibility of cost if any member of the public was injured although currently this has been mitigated against by the fencing but that will have to be maintained. It is possible that there could be a claim from boat users especially if there is any further breaks that could result in debris breaking free and floating (partially submerged) down the river

Costs to date:-

Jan 2002- repairs to revetment (Planning & Transport est. £5000 July 2002- further revetment failure, £1500 Oct 2002- repairs to membrane following wash out £690 Dec 2003- repairs to revetment £1000 Mar 2006- make good sink holes in bank £150 Mar 2006- erect protective fencing to settled area £595 June 2006- repairs to revetment £3250 Sept 2006- make good sink holes and larger area where material lost £1269 June 2008- major repairs to revetment £9885 Jan 2014- erect 190m fencing, make good bank where material lost £5030 Total to date £28,369 and this does not include staff time for monitoring the situation or organising the works


Page 9

G2 Option 1 – Replace entire length of revetment in one go – Preferred Option

Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)

n/a £560,000

Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs

Area safe for public and boat users £500,000 works based on budget prices submitted by 3 different contractors.

£25,000 contingency (this is lower than the 10% recommended in the risk assessment because it is felt that the works are very straight forward)

£35,000 design and supervision etc

Strengths (Including Opportunities) Weaknesses (including Threats)

Simple straight forward scheme All funding required in one go.

Design is basic

Risk Mitigation Strategy

Funding Because the works would be likely to be being completed towards the end of the financial year financing could be spread over 2 financial years. This may cost marginally more but unlikely to very much

Timeline Indicative Funding Source

8 Months unless done as emergency scheme to qualify for Bellwin Funding

Capital but possible funding from Government Bellwin Scheme for part or even all of works. (Still awaiting a Central Government decision at time of report)

Option 2 – Replace entire length of revetment in two or more phases.


n/a £745,000


Area safe for public and boat users £675,000 works nb sheet steel piling which is the main component of this scheme is significantly cheaper if it can be purchased in big bulk orders.

£25,000 contingency – see option 1

£45,000 design and supervision etc


Spending could be spread over several financial years

Significant extra cost

Design is basic


Funding has to be agree over several years


Page 10

G2 Timeline Indicative Funding Source

2 – 3 years Capital but possible Bellwin Scheme for worst section – see option 1

Option 3 – Sheet steel piles for area of high river flows but a more “natural approach to other areas.”


£477,500


Area safe for public and boat users £200,000 on sheet steel piling assuming a length of 150m.(includes “tie in lengths”) £162,500 on more natural section (based on £500/m suggested cost by supplier). £50,000 contingency £65,000 design supervision etc


Lowest cost option

More environmentally friendly if successful

Speaking to “environmental contractor” it can be very difficult to establish vegetation in a tidal zone. The banks will have to be graded back to at least a 1 in 2 slope so there will be a big lose in accessible area open to the public and far less access for boat owners


Difficulty in establishing vegetation due to tidal variation.

Damage to vegetation from boat owners accessing boats and or installing unofficial mooring points

None

Restrict access points


2 years As above

Option 4 – Do nothing


Cost difficult to determine because of unknown residual life but not a zero figure.

Not known with any certainty but likely to increase over time. Eventually the old revetments will become such a hazard so they will have to be removed and disposed but timing and cost is uncertain.



None Adverse publicity, risk of litigation, loss of reputation. Loss of amenity space and impact on tourism.


Page 11

G2 Risk Mitigation Strategy

Litigation / claims Deny all access to area on safety grounds.


Ongoing Revenue

3.2 Preferred Option

Replace existing revetment with sheet steel piles along entire length in one go. (Option 1 could be done in timber to match the original but the timber would have to be hard wood like greenheart or ekki from a sustainable source. The cost is similar to steel but it has a shorter life span and finding a source for such large quantities may be a problem so has not been considered a viable option.)

Option 3 although marginally cheaper is felt to be a much more risky approach with less certainty of outcome.


Page 12

G2

4 Affordability: the Financial Case

Currently no funding is available for these works in the Parks budget for 2014/15. Because of the likely cost of £560,000 it will be a major capital scheme. It is possible (but unlikely) that some of the scheme may be funded from the Councils “Bellwin” application for emergency funding due to the severe weather of the winter of 20103/14 but this is still waiting a Government decision. There has also been some discussion with Sembcorp who own the actual river bed and derive an income from the boat mooring. They in turn pay a small sum for the use of the boat landing area at Tuckton (approximately £10k). To date they have seemed responsive to making a contribution but have declined to actually offer a specific sum. Discussions are ongoing but it is unlikely to be a significant sum compared to the overall project cost.

4.1 Quantification of Risk and Associated Contingency

A contingency has been allowed for in the cost estimate of approx 5%. The actual works are relatively straight forward.

There would be no running costs in the short term but any timber capping would have to be replaced eventually but the existing timbers have lasted at least 25 years. The piles should typically last 50 years and possibly even 100 years. Some of the existing piles around the boat moorings are believed to date back to the 1930s and are still in relatively good condition.

A habitat survey has now been completed and the findings have shown that there are no wildlife / habitat constraints to the work.

The work is right on the edge of the Wick Village Conservation area but could not actually be seen from it.

4.2 Savings

Ongoing repair bills which are currently funded from the revenue budget. These have varied tremendously over the years varying from £0 up to £5,030 but are only likely to increase as deterioration continues. These do not include staff time which is not separately identified.

.


Page 13

G2 4.3 Spend Profile and Cash Flow Please detail when the costs will occur and the savings will be made. This is required for financial purposes

All figures in £k Description 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2019/20 2020/21 Total

Cost to date 0 0

Staff Exit 0

Equipment 0

Internal Staff 15k

External Resource 20k

Moving Costs*** 0

Capital Costs 535k

Other 0

Sub Total Costs 535k

Contingency @ XX% 25k

Total Costs 560k

Staff Savings 0


Page 14

G2 Non-staff Savings 0

Total Savings 0

Net benefit (saving less costs)

0

Cumulative Benefit 0

***Any projects that involve office moves must be approved by Roger Ball and associated costs built into the business case prior to progressing this business case for approval as detailed in this policy

http://www.bournemouth.gov.uk/CouncilDemocracy/CouncilPerformance/CapitalStrategyandCorporateAssetManagementPlan.aspx


Page 15

G2 4.4 Source of Funding

Source of Funding Total (£k)

Executive Gateway Board 560k

Total 560k

Previously Awarded Feasibility Funding

Date Awarded Description of Funding Usage Total (£k)

01/08/2012 River Restoration Works Programme 2012-2015

(Five areas one of which was Tuckton)

£23.5

(part only)


Page 16

G2

5 Achievability: The Project Management Case 5.1 Project Approach

Project management will be carried out in house including applications for Planning Permission, Flood defence and Marine Management Organisation approval.

External Consultant (Partnering consultant) will be employed to prepare contract documents based on model forms of contract (NEC3).

Site supervision will be dependent on what resources are available at the time but possibly external consultant.

5.2 Evidence of Similar Projects

The contract although not typical of works carried out within the Council will use familiar contract terms and conditions.

5.3 Resources Required

Project manager and existing partnering Consultant

5.4 Benefit Realisation

Benefit How will the benefit be measured? Frequency of Measurement

Successful completion of scheme.

Final cost and time scale Once on completion

5.5 Critical Success Factors

Gaining all necessary permissions and approvals.

Preparing Tender documents

Tender coming in within budget

Works being successfully completed

5.6 Assumptions & Constraints

Assumptions

All approvals etc will be forthcoming. We have already spoken informally to the Environment Agency and Planning department neither of whom have raised any unforeseen issues.

That the necessary resources are available.

Constraints

Try to avoid most heavily used periods of time – i.e. summer.

5.7 Interdependencies

Nothing at present


Page 17

G2 IN/

OUT

Project, person or resource that you are dependant upon (IN) or that are dependant on this project (OUT)

Description of dependency (e.g. the complete rollout of the project or the development of a particular part of it)

5.8 Key stakeholders

Stakeholder or Stakeholders Group Relevance to Project

River Users (especially boat owners) Some boat moorings may need to be restricted for safety reasons during the works

Users of the Open Space Access may be restricted during the works although the working area at any one time will be small compared to the extent of the public area.

Sembcorp Some boat moorings may need to be restricted for safety reasons during the works leading to a loss of income

Christchurch Harbour Management Group Interest in all matters relating to Christchurch Harbour

Local business especially those involved with marine business including those on the Christchurch Side

Possible minor disruption of access

Road Users Possibly traffic delays while heavy equipment is brought to and subsequently removed from site as well as deliveries.

5.9 Project Management Organisational Structure

Project Team Name Appropriate Skills & Experience

Project Manager TBC Knowledge of various licensing procedures and project management experience. Familiarity with “Civils” forms of contract.

Project Board Name Appropriate Skills & Experience

Project Owner (SRO) Gary Josey Service Director for both Housing and Parks

Project Assurance Michael Rowland Parks Development Manager

Portfolio Holder Cllr Lawrence Williams


Page 18

G2 5.10 Timescales and Project Plan

Project Start Date Project End Date

As soon as Project board give approval 31st March 1915 (If funding is split over 2 Financial years possibly April or May 2015)

ID

Phase/Activity Estimated Start

Estimated End

Gain Approvals ASAP July 2014

Produce tender documents June 2014 July 2014

Tender process Start August 2014

End August 2014

Award tender Start Sept 2014

<<A full project plan should be attached as an appendix if available>>

5.11 Progress Monitoring and Reporting Process

The project will report on a regular basis following the Council’s mandatory project management process, It will use the standard progress report that captures progress against the key activities/milestones, top risks and issues, progress against benefits targets and an overall summary.

6 Appendices Business Case

• Initial Risk Assessment (Template available on PPMO BIZ Pages)

• Health & Safety Impact Assessment – submit to [email protected]

• The screening tool for the Equality Impact Needs Analysis has been applied which suggests a full EINA is not required.

mailto:[email protected]

Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT

Page 19

G3 7 Project Initiation Document

7.1 Key deliverables and Milestones – PID ONLY

<<List the main project milestones, deliverables or outcomes, with a brief description of their purpose, deliverable owner and the date the deliverable will be completed by>>

ID Title & Description Owner Planned Date

<<Outline any other progress monitoring and reporting arrangements to be used within the project>>

7.2 Project Meetings – PID ONLY

<<List the key regular meetings to be held by the project teams and the frequency. Below is the list of typical meetings, please add any other meetings that you plan to run for your project>>

Name of Meeting Details of meeting Frequency

e.g. Project team <<Describe the purpose of the meeting for example: to discuss progress and feed into monthly highlight reports to the Project Board>>

Weekly

e.g. Working Group

e.g. Project board

7.3 Issue, Risk and Challenge Management – PID ONLY

The project will follow the Council’s mandatory escalation procedure and change process.

<<Describe the top issues and risks affecting the project. A copy of your full Risk Register and Issue Log should be attached as an appendix>>


Issue Handling Strategy Owner


Page 20

G3

7.4 Quality Management – PID ONLY

<<Outline the key quality criteria, quality control and audit processes to be applied to project management and specialist work in the project, to ensure the required quality levels are achieved>>

Project Output/Product

Define and standards that need to be met (e.g. BREEM, CDM Regs, Building Regs etc)

How do you intend to meet quality

expectations

Who will review the quality of the

product and when?

7.5 Communications Plan – PID ONLY

<<include details of how the project will engage and maintain communications with internal and external stakeholders (a stakeholder is anyone who has an interest in, will be affected by, or has influence over a project). For larger or more complex projects you should complete and attach a more detailed communication plan and a communications strategy as an appendix>>

8 Appendices Project Initiation Document (PID)

• Detailed Gantt Chart (Project Plan) (see PPMO Handbook for an example)

• Benefit Maps / Profiles (Template available on PPMO BIZ Pages)

• Issues Log (Template available on PPMO BIZ Pages)

• Risk Register (Template available on PPMO BIZ Pages)

• Communications Strategy & Stakeholder Analysis (Template available on PPMO BIZ Pages)

• Detailed Communications Plan


Page 1


Four Bungalows at Draper Road, West Howe

(Project Hub No TBC)

Service Unit:

Risk: High/Medium/Low

Prepared by/Project Manager: John Findley Date: 11th March 2014

Document Approvals



PID Approval

Date

Project Owner Gary Josey 12/03/14 N/A

Executive Director Bill Cotton 12/03/14 N/A

Portfolio Holder Cllr Robert Lawton 12/03/14 N/A

Portfolio Holder Comment: Will reduce the council’s current waiting list, will provide a boost for the local economy and further confirms our commitment to providing high quality affordable housing


Executive Gateway Board N/A

Cabinet N/A

Project Board N/A


Name Position Date Cllr Grower, Cllr Baxter and Cllr Marley

Ward Councillors January 2013

December 2013



1.1 JF Minor Finance changes 25/03/14


Page 2

G2

1 Executive Summary • The Council’s Corporate Plan identifies the provision of more affordable housing as a

priority.

• The opportunity to develop 105 units as part of a three year programme has been

identified across a total of 11 sites within the Council’s ownership and approved in

principle by Cabinet on the 15th of February 2012. The Council House Building

Programme 2012-2015 Business Case provides the detail for the entire programme with

individual business cases being produced for each of the schemes.

• To date, 89 of these units are on site or have already been completed, with the

remainder due to start on site shortly. The Council is on target to deliver this

programme by the end of 2014/15 providing this and other proposed developments at

Cheshire Drive are completed.

• The Council has also identified additional capital funding from the Housing Revenue

Account to enable new council house building to continue after 2015.

• The Government is promoting the delivery of affordable housing through programmes

of Council New Build. Policy and regulation have been changed in order to support

this.

• Housing, Parks and Bereavement Services have been successful in being selected as a

Registered Provider (RP) with the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) and Social

Housing Grant has been awarded for the delivery of additional housing up to 2015.

• The open space at Draper Road was deemed to be surplus to requirements as part of

the Play and Open Spaces review in 2009. The site, being open space has limited value

in the current market and any planning application for private development would be

unlikely to succeed because of the need to show that the public benefit of the

development would outweigh the loss of the open space.

• The development of a scheme with 100% affordable council housing and enhanced

financial contributions to improve existing open spaces outweighs the disadvantages

from the loss of the open space and a planning approval was granted in March 2014.

• The proposal helps to meet our delivery obligation with the HCA and the completed

units will have a positive impact on the Housing Revenue Account.


Page 3

G2 • This business case seeks approval of £494K funded through a mixture of HCA grant

(£65K), Housing Revenue Account “New Build” reserves (£350K) and other funding

sources (£64K commuted sums and £15K HRA Revenue) in order to develop the site

for four “affordable” two bedroom bungalows. The new housing will help to

contribute to the overall programme to provide 105 additional affordable houses in

the Borough by 2015. The scheme is forecast to produce £783K surplus to the HRA

over 30 years after the return of principal sums to reserves, plus the capital value of

the retained asset as shown in section 4.4

• It is hoped that the land will be appropriated for housing at nil value but in return the

Housing Revenue Account will be providing a sum for offsite mitigation by the

enhancement of existing open space and play areas in the locality. However

discussions are ongoing with the Department for Communities and Local Government

and HM Treasury and the Business Case assumes the worst case scenario of the land

being appropriated at full value. Should the Council subsequently receive approval

both the costs and funding requirements would be reduced by £60K.



The proposal is to construct four “affordable” two bedroom bungalows on an area of open space in

Draper Road, West Howe and will be fully funded using a mixture of capital and s106 receipts from the

Housing Revenue Account, Grants from the Homes and Communities Agency and funds from the New

Build Reserve.

There is a significant and growing need for affordable housing in Bournemouth. However, market

conditions, reduced grant funding and slow new build starts have markedly reduced the opportunity to

deliver against this need. Provision in the private sector in recent years has been limited to smaller flats

and even this limited supply has largely dried up in the recession. There is a need for both smaller and

family sized homes in order to reduce the amount of time that households with housing need are waiting

on the housing register.

The provision of two bedroom bungalows will help partially meet the need for such accommodation in

the Borough and will help in allowing older people living in family accommodation to downsize.

The Council’s Corporate Plan for 2013/14 identifies the provision of more affordable housing as a priority

and significant resources have been identified within the Housing Revenue Account Business Plan for the

continuing provision of more council housing.

The Government is promoting the delivery of affordable housing through programmes of Council New

Build. Policy and regulation have been changed in order to support this. Housing Landlord Services have

been successful in being selected as a Registered Provider with the HCA and Social Housing Grant can be

allocated to this scheme, based on lettings at Affordable Rents (80% of market rents).


Page 4

G2 2.2 Benefits, Objectives and Strategic Alignment

Council Strategic Objective / Corporate Priority (taken from Corporate Plan, Service Plans etc…)

Project Outcome Benefits expected as a result of achieving outcomes

The project directly

supports the following

outcome in the corporate

plan:

‘increased employment

opportunities through

stronger partnerships with

the local business

community’ through the

use of local contractors

and sub-contractors.

The development will

generate an £330K

additional construction

work within the local

economy.

Best utilisation of surplus

land.

Employment of local people and

the provision of modern

apprentice opportunities.

Increase in the provision of

affordable housing within

Bournemouth on surplus land.

Efficient Council




plan: ‘Increased returns

from the management of

Council assets’ through -

Cost effective

procurement and the

provision of low

maintenance, energy

efficient dwellings.

Increased returns from

the management of

Council assets.

A significant surplus will be

generated by the additional

units, whilst the management

costs of the existing space will

be reduced

Use of new technology to reduce

the carbon footprint in delivering

our services

Efficiency savings through

procurement, which will be

recycled to provide more housing

A significant financial surplus will

be generated to the HRA by the

additional units.

Improving the

Environment



outcomes in the corporate

plan: ‘Increased activity

to respond and adapt to

the effects of climate

change’ and ‘improved

The development will be

designed to meet or

exceed Level Four of the

Code for Sustainable

Homes, thus minimising

the CO2 footprint of the

development.

Tree planting,

landscaping and

The use of new technology will

reduce the carbon footprint in

delivering our services

The utility costs will be

considerably lower for the

residents of the new housing

with an energy efficiency

betterment over current Building

Regulations of at least 44%


Page 5

G2 Council Strategic Objective / Corporate Priority (taken from Corporate Plan, Service Plans etc…)


facilities for residents and

visitors’ through -

sustainable drainage will

help to improve the

environment and avoid

any flooding issues.

Improved open spaces both

onsite and offsite which will be

more desirable for residents to

use and sustainable drainage

onsite will minimise the effect of

the development on existing

drainage systems.

Community Action

The project will directly

support the following


plan: ‘more Council

housing built, more

affordable housing

available, and increased

support for the

development of homes

that are affordable to

first time buyers.

The scheme will be

designed to incorporate

the requirements of

“Secured by Design” and

the Police Architectural

Liaison Officer will be

consulted and where

possible his comments

will be taken on board.

The completion of

additional affordable

housing dwellings.

Well designed schemes which

will reduce the risk of crime and

also the perceived risk of crime.

The quality of the scheme will be

assessed by means of Housing

Quality Indicator scores and

assessed against the Homes and

Communities Agency benchmark

scores.

The demand for affordable

housing will be partially met,

although there will still be in

excess of 2,000 priority

applicants on the Housing

Register.

2.3 Scope: (In/Out)

The appropriation of land to the Housing Revenue Account and the design and construction of four

bungalows.

Inclusions:

Design, construction and ancillary costs including:

(a) Acquisition Costs

Cost of land acquisition

Administration Costs


Page 6

G2 Stamp Duty Land Tax and/or land registration costs

(b) Works

Main works contract costs

Major site development works (where applicable). These include piling, soil

stabilisation, road/sewer construction, major demolition.

Statutory agreements and associated bonds including all fees and charges directly

attributable to such works) where applicable.

Additional costs associated with complying with party wall agreement awards

(including all fees, charges and claims attributable to such works) where applicable.

(c) On costs

Legal fees and disbursements.

Net gains/losses via interest charges on development period loans.

Valuation and administration fees.

Fees for building control and planning permission.

Fees and charges associated with compliance with European Community directives,

and the Agency’s requirements relating to energy rating of dwellings, Eco-Homes

certification and Housing Quality Indicators.

In-house or external consultants’ fees, disbursements and expenses

Insurance premiums including building warranty and defects/liability insurance

(except contract insurance included in works costs).

Contract performance bond premiums.

Borrowing administration charges (including associated legal and valuation fees).

An appropriate proportion of the Grant Recipient’s development and administration

costs.

Exclusions:

Non-site specific feasibility work, high-level strategic control costs


Page 7

G2

2.4 Strategic Risk


Cost overruns Mitigated by the use of a design and

build contract with the balance of

risk being taken by the In-House

Contractor unless the Client changes

the design brief post contract

The internal project

manager & external

Employers Agent

Time Overruns Mitigated by the use of a realistic

timescale and contractual

requirements.


manager, the employers

agent and the in-house

contractor

The Main Contractor

ceasing to trade

Mitigated by the use of the In-House

Contractor, PWT


manager and external cost

consultant or Employers

Agent

Failure to meet the

funding and delivery

requirements of the HCA

Mitigated by the inclusion of such

requirements within the building

contract

The designer, internal

project manager,

employers agent and the

contractor

Health and Safety on site Compliance with the Construction,

Design and management regulations

The Client, Contractor and

the “competent” CDM Co-

ordinator


Page 8

G2


A number of options for meeting the Council’s priorities have been considered and a detailed options

appraisal submitted to Cabinet in February 2012 and subsequently to Executive Gateway Board in

April 2012, concluded that the best delivery mechanism was direct house building by the Council. This

option will help provide more affordable housing, has a positive impact on the Council’s finances and

enables the Council to receive 100% nomination rights in perpetuity whilst maintaining full local

control over the future management and maintenance of these properties.

Other alternatives considered for this project and rejected included:

Sell the site already owned by the Council on the open market – rejected because of the reduced

provision of affordable housing and the difficulties in obtaining a planning approval for this site for a

scheme which doesn’t have an over-riding public benefit (ie not 100% affordable housing)

Release the site to a “Registered Provider” – rejected because of the lack of a capital receipt, the

likely need for greater grant subsidy, the lack of direct control over the future management of the

properties and the reduction in the number of nominations granted to the Local Authority.

Do Nothing – rejected due to the over-riding need for more affordable housing within the Borough

and because of the positive financial impact the new units will have on the Housing Revenue Account

Business Plan.

Option 1 – Secure internal reserves from within the HRA and develop 100% affordable housing with retention of the asset (preferred option)


£783K surplus to the HRA over 30 years after the return of principal sums to reserves, , plus the capital value of the retained asset as shown in section 4.4

£494K, including indirect costs such as development period interest, appropriation etc, financed by HRA New Build Reserve, HRA revenue and capital grants


An additional 4 bungalows for let to those in housing need

Works Costs £330,000

On Costs £104,000

Land Appropriation £60,000

Strengths (Including opportunities) Weaknesses (Including threats) Positive impact on the HRA, provides high quality, highly sustainable accommodation, which also provides a long-term capital asset to the Council. Site layout is low density to compliment the layout of housing locally creating a pleasant environment to live which will reduce anti-social behaviour. Maintains the good working relationship with the Homes and Communities Agency

Changes in Government Legislation etc, which

may affect future income and expenditure

levels


Page 9

G2 Risk Mitigation Strategy

See Strategic Risk Section See Strategic Risk Section


March 2014 – March 2016 New Build reserves

- £350K (incl £30,000 contingencies and

provisional sums and appropriation costs)

HCA Grant Funding - £65,000

Commuted Sums (S106) - £64,000

Other Sources of Funding - £15,000 (HRA)

Option 2 – Sell the site on the open market


Circa £80K Not Quantified


None Not Quantified

Strengths (Including opportunities) Weaknesses (Including threats)

Initial capital receipt to the Council Will not meet the Council priority to provide

more affordable housing

Long-term return to the Council is greater if

the land is retained for council house

building purposes

Loss of reputation and loss of preferred

partner status with the Homes and

Communities Agency

Unlikely that a scheme for private housing

would receive planning approval


Capital Receipt dependent upon the state of

the property market and the likelihood of

receiving planning approval



Communities Agency and consequent inability

to access future grant funding

Seek prior planning approval before disposal

No satisfactory mitigation strategy and the

Council would have to accept this loss


June 2014-March 2015 Not Identified


Page 10

G2 Option 3 – Release the site at nil value to a Registered Provider for delivery of 100% affordable housing


Nil Not Quantified, but Minimal


More affordable houses within the Borough for

which the Council will have limited

nomination rights

Not Quantified, but minimal


Risk passed onto third party No capital receipt, no ability to directly

control how the properties are managed



Communities Agency

Loss of potential long-term surplus

Loss of enhanced long-term capital asset






Inability of the RP to access suitable sources

of funding

Slight mitigation, by releasing the sites to an

RP, but we are still likely to lose preferred

partner status

Support any subsequent bids made to the

HCA for funding


April 2012 – March 2015 The Registered Provider would need to bid

for funding from the HCA, with no guarantee

of success


Page 11

G2 Option 4 – Do Nothing


Nil Not quantified, but there will be ongoing

maintenance costs for the open space


None N/A


The site could be disposed of at a later date

should the market improve and planning

policy changes

Fails to meet the Council’s Priority for more

affordable housing

Fails to make best use of existing land

Does not generate a short-term capital

receipt or a long-term surplus to the Council

Ongoing maintenance liability



partner status with the HCA and consequent

inability to access future grant funding

None


Ongoing N/A


Secure funds from HRA New Build Reserve, appropriate the site for housing and develop the site to

provide 100% affordable housing, with retention of the asset, is the preferred option. This provides

the maximum number of properties for affordable rent (100%) at minimal risk to the Council. No

funding is required from the General Fund, with the majority of funding coming from the HCA and

HRA New Build Reserve with a small element of funding from the Housing Revenue Account.

The financial model is based on actual experience, on tender prices recently received for similar

projects with a 10% works contingency on top.

The exact level of surplus generated to the HRA will be dependent upon a number of factors but the

HRA is forecast to make a surplus in the first year and continues making a surplus thereafter

throughout the life of the scheme. This surplus made can then be used elsewhere.

The Council will also retain the capital value of the completed units, which at current value is likely

to be in the region of an additional £500,000. The additional 4 affordable units will also generate a

“new build homes bonus” of to the Council


Page 12

G2



The financial model is the same as that used for other recently completed housing schemes managed

by Housing, Parks and Bereavement Services, all of which have been delivered on time and to budget.

The model uses assumptions based on actual historic cost data for managing and maintaining the

existing housing stock, recently let tenders and the offer of funding already received from the Homes

and Communities Agency as the basis for the 30 year business plan.

The model has been validated by the use of the PROVAL development appraisal software to ensure

consistency with the financial model used by housing associations and other registered providers.

The model assumes a 10% contingency on the works costs and uses the current internal borrowing

interest rate. In addition a sinking fund has been built into the model to allow for future major

repairs and improvements.

4.2 Running Costs

A detailed 30 year cash-flow is shown in 4.4 and assumes that the funding plus interest is returned to

the HRA New Build Reserve over a period of 25 years.

4.3 Savings

The four bungalows will generate a long-term surplus to the HRA, which can be used in the future

effective operation of the Housing Revenue Account. Following the self-financing buy-out of the HRA,

the Council now have full responsibility for the financial operation and management of the Account.

The anticipated surplus from these properties could be used in the future, for instance for:

(a) Financing additional council housing

(b) Providing additional funding to maintain and improve the existing stock


Page 13

G2 4.4 Spend Profile and Cash Flow

All figures in £k Description 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 Total

Acquisition Costs 60 60

Construction Costs 250 80 330

On-costs 90 14 104

Sub-Total Costs 400 94 494

Contingency @10% of construction costs

Included above

Total Costs 400 94 494

Cumulative Benefit See Cash Flow and NPV calcs


Page 14

G2


Page 15

G2


Page 16

G2


Page 17

G2


Page 18

G2


Page 19

G2


Page 20


<

FUNDING SOURCE AND PROFILE 2013-14

£’000 2014-15

£’000 2015-16

£’000 HRA New Build Reserve 0 256 94 Capital Receipts, Commuted Sums etc 0 64 0 HRA Revenue 0 15 0 HCA Grant 0 65 0 TOTAL 0 400 94



N/A


Page 21

G3


The programme will be managed and constructed in-house, by existing staff within Housing, Parks and

Bereavement Services, utilising specialist consultancy services available within the construction

industry where required.

Overall project control will be administered by the Housing Development Manager, assisted by the

appointment of a suitably qualified and experienced “employer’s agent” and “CDM co-ordinator”.

The procurement of the construction activities will be by “design and build”.

This approach to project management and the sharing of risk has proved successful on a number of

recently completed schemes.

Modern methods of construction will be utilised where possible to maximise quality and minimise the

risk of construction defects. This approach will also reduce the amount of time required on site and

will enable the properties to be built with extremely high levels of insulation. The properties have

been designed to meet or exceed Level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes (CFSH)


The Council has completed a number of new housing developments, using the same funding and

project management approach as that suggested here, all of which were completed to budget and

largely on time.


Most of the in-house resources required, will be provided by Housing, Parks and Bereavement Services

from existing assets.

There will be a need for specialist external consultants during the construction phase and the cost of

these services has been included within the overall budget


Benefit How will the benefit be Measured? Frequency of Measurement

Increase in the provision of high

quality, affordable housing

Statistical collection and key

performance benchmarking

Annually

The residents of the new scheme will

benefit from high quality sustainable

and affordable housing. The completed

project will provide additional much

needed housing provision with low

running costs.

Code for Sustainable Homes

Certification and thereafter by the

use of tenant surveys and the use of

a post-completion “housing quality

indicator” assessment

The use of the Standard Assessment

Procedure

Annual

survey


Page 22

G3 Benefit How will the benefit be Measured? Frequency of

Measurement The well designed low density site layout will create a pleasant environment to live which will reduce anti-social behaviour.



Annually

The development will further cement

our good working relationship with the

Homes and Communities Agency, thus

opening up additional funding

opportunities for both housing and non-

housing schemes in the future.

Successful receipt of grant funding On

completion

of the units

Increased job opportunities within the

construction sector during the

construction phase.

Letting of Building Contracts and

requirements within such contracts

for the provision of apprenticeship

schemes. Site meeting

minutes/health & safety

documentation

Quarterly

The generation of long-term surplus to

the Housing Revenue Account

Production and monitoring of annual

accounts

Annually


Receipt of satisfactory tender

Construction and handover of completed units, on time and to budget

Successful letting of completed units


Assumptions

A number of standard assumptions are included within the financial model. These assumptions are based on data collected on our existing stock and on recently completed new-build projects and have previously been agreed with Finance as being reasonable assumptions based on the best information currently available to the Council.

Constraints

The main external constraint on the programme is the availability of funding from the HCA, which not only provides an element of additional funding but also allows the Council to operate outside the constraints which would be imposed by central government on council development, should the HCA not be involved. It is therefore imperative that the Council comply with the Funding Agreement and meet the timetable for delivery


Page 23

G3 5.7 Interdependencies

IN/OUT Project, person or resources that you are dependent upon (IN) or that are dependent upon this project (OUT)


In Compliance with the HCA Funding

Agreement

Appropriation of the Draper Road site to

Housing

Failure to comply may result in the HCA

funding being withdrawn

Project unable to proceed

Out Management of the completed units Managed by existing Housing Landlord staff


Stakeholder or Stakeholder group Relevance to project Housing, Parks and Bereavement Services Responsible for the future management and

maintenance of the completed units

Homes and Communities Agency Part funders and statutory regulator

Future Residents and neighbours Will occupy and/or be affected by the proposed

developments

Local Ward members Represent the views of local residents

EGB and Cabinet Will monitor and assess performance against

targets


Project Team Name Appropriate Skills and Experience Project Manager John Findley Housing Development Manager

Project Board Name Appropriate Skills and Experience

Project Owner (SRO) Gary Josey Director of Housing, Parks and

Bereavement Services

Project Assurance Employers Agents Frazer Garner Associates, suitable

qualified quantity surveying practice with

significant expertise in similar schemes

Senior Supplier Individual

Contractor

In-House contractor

Senior User Ian Shaw Head of Housing Management

Portfolio Holder Councillor Lawton Portfolio Holder for Housing


Page 24



March 2014 April 2016

ID Phase / Activity Estimated Start Estimated End

Receipt of satisfactory Planning Approval

January 2014 March 2014

Construction of New Units 1st April 2014 31st March 2015

Handover and letting of completed units 1st April 2014 8st April 2015

Defects Period 1st April 2014 31st March 2016




Page 25

G3

6 Appendices


Page 26

G3 Environmental Impact Checklist

Issue: Construction of Four Bungalows at Draper Road, West Howe Meeting Date: 11th March 2014 Accountable Manager: Gary Josey Impact Assessor: John Findley, Housing Development Manager 01202 458370 [email protected]

Key

+ Balance of positive Impacts ? Balanced or unclear impacts - Balance of negative impacts n/a Not applicable

Impact Criteria Impact Comments

Natural resources impact on use of natural resources – for example energy, water, raw materials

+

The use of natural resources during the construction phase will have a short-term negative impact, but the lifetime use impact of the highly energy efficient housing units is significantly lower than the equivalent existing housing stock.

Quality of environment contribution to safe and supportive environments for living, recreation and working

+

The development will be designed to meet Level Four of the Code for Sustainable Homes, thus minimising the CO2 footprint of the completed development. The scheme will also enhance the local environment and remove a potential focus for anti-social behaviour

Bio-diversity protects and improves wildlife and habitats

?

The scheme has received planning approval without any objections from English Nature. Some open space will be lost, but additional planting will improve the overall bio-diversity over the whole site.

Waste and pollution effects on air, land and water from waste and emissions

+

The development will be designed to meet Level Four of the Code for Sustainable Homes, thus minimising the CO2 footprint of the completed development.

Council Priority and Objectives for Improving our Environment: • Reduce traffic congestion • Improve streetscene • Improve recycling & energy

management • Respond to climate change • Improve quality of existing

space

+

There will be a small increase in travel movements as a result of the new housing. This impact will be mitigated by an appropriate s106 contribution to enhance the transport infrastructure. Recycling facilities will be incorporated into the scheme and the lower CO2 footprint of the new scheme will reduce the schemes impact on climate change.


Page 27

G3 Equality Needs Impact Assessment


Page 28

G3


Page 29

G3


Page 30

G3


Page 31

G3 Indicative Plans


Page 32

G3


Page 33

G3 Whole Life Appraisal


Page 34

G3 Initial Risk Assessment


Page 35

G3 Health & Safety Impact Assessment – submit to [email protected]



Page 36

G3


Page 1


Three Houses at Cheshire Drive former Play Area, Townsend


Service Unit:


Prepared by/Project Manager: Mark Sheppard Date: 13th March 2014

Document Approvals



PID Approval

Date







Cabinet N/A

Project Board N/A


Name Position Date Cllr Trickett, Cllr Weinhonig and Cllr Adams

Ward Councillors December 2013




Page 2

G2


priority.









Cheshire Drive and Draper Road are completed.





this.




• The play area at Cheshire Drive was deemed to be surplus to requirements as part of

the Play and Open Spaces review in 2009 with the majority of play equipment having

been decommissioned by this time. The site, being open space has limited value in the

current market and any planning application for private development would be



• The development of a scheme with 100% affordable council housing outweighs the

disadvantages from the loss of the open space and a planning approval is expected to

be granted in late March 2014.




Page 3

G2

• This business case seeks approval of £486K funded through a mixture of HCA grant, and

Housing Revenue Account “New Build” reserves and other funding sources in order to

develop the site for three “affordable” three bedroom houses. The new housing will

help to contribute to the overall programme to provide 105 additional affordable

houses in the Borough by 2015.



The proposal is to construct three “affordable” three bedroom houses on a former play area in Cheshire

Drive, Townsend.

The proposed development will be fully funded using a mixture of capital and s106 receipts from the

Housing Revenue Account, Grants from the Homes and Communities Agency and funds from the HRA New

Build Reserve.







The provision of three bedroom houses will help partially meet the need for such accommodation in the

Borough and will help to allow families in over occupied accommodation to have more appropriate

dwellings.








2.2 Benefits, Objectives and Strategic Alignment




Page 4






plan:




the local business





generate an £329K



economy.


land.







Efficient Council







Cost effective

procurement and the

provision of low

maintenance, energy



the management of

Council assets.





be reduced



our services






additional units.

Improving the

Environment










designed to meet or





development.

Tree planting,

landscaping and













Page 5




help to improve the








drainage systems.

Community Action





housing built, more

affordable housing


support for the



first time buyers.

The scheme will be


the requirements of




consulted and where



The completion of


housing dwellings.









scores.






Register.

2.3 Scope: (In/Out)

The design and construction of Three Houses at Cheshire Drive.

Inclusions:




Stamp Duty Land Tax and/or land registration costs

(b) Works

Main works contract costs


Page 6

G2 Major site development works (where applicable). These include piling, soil






(c) On costs


Net gains/losses via reduced interest in development period











costs.

Exclusions:



Page 7

G2 2.4 Strategic Risk




risk being taken by the Contractor

unless the Client changes the design

brief post contract


manager & external

Employers Agent



requirements.



agent and the contractor

The Main Contractor

ceasing to trade

Mitigated by prudent procurement

processes




Agent

Failure to meet the





contract


project manager,


contractor





ordinator


Page 8

G2

















Business Plan.



£450K surplus to the HRA over 30 years after return of the principal sums to reserves, plus the capital value of the retained asset as shown in section 4.4

£486K, including indirect costs such as development period without interest income, appropriation etc, financed by HRA New Build Reserve and capital grants


An additional 3 Houses for let to those in housing need


On Costs £112,000




levels



Page 9

G2 See Strategic Risk Section See Strategic Risk Section


March 2014 – March 2016 HRA New Build reserves

£373.5K (incl £37,500 contingencies and



Commuted Sums - £48,000






None Not Quantified






building purposes



Communities Agency

















Page 10







nomination rights







Communities Agency









of funding



partner status


HCA for funding




of success


Page 11






None N/A




policy changes


affordable housing









None


Ongoing N/A


Secure reserves from within the HRA New Build Reserve and develop the site to provide 100%

affordable housing, with retention of the asset, is the preferred option. This provides the maximum

number of properties for affordable rent (100%) at minimal risk to the Council. No funding is required

from the General Fund, with the majority of funding coming from the HCA and HRA New Build

Reserves with a small element of capital funding from the Housing Revenue Account.



The exact level of surplus generated to the HRA will be dependent upon a number of factors including

the actual market rent level at the time of completion. The HRA starts making a surplus in the first

year and continues making a surplus thereafter throughout the life of the scheme. This surplus made

can then be used elsewhere.


to be in the region of an additional £500,000. The additional 3 affordable units will also generate a

“new build homes bonus” for the Council


Page 12

G2










The model assumes a 10% contingency on the works costs. In addition a sinking fund has been built

into the model to allow for future major repairs and improvements.

4.2 Running Costs

A detailed 30 year cash-flow is shown in 4.4 and assumes that the funding is returned to the HRA New

Build Reserve over a period of 25 years.

4.3 Savings

The three houses will generate a long-term surplus to the HRA, which can be used in the future







Page 13





On-costs 96 16 112



Included above




Page 14

G2


Page 15

G2


Page 16

G2


Page 17

G2


Page 18

G2


Page 19

G2


Page 20


<


£’000 2014-15

£’000 2015-16

£’000 HRA New Build Reserves 0 317.5 56 Capital Receipts, Commuted Sums etc 0 48 0 HRA Revenue 0 16 0 HCA Grant 0 48.5 0 TOTAL 0 430 56



N/A


Page 21

G3


The programme will be managed by existing staff within Housing, Parks and Bereavement Services,

utilising specialist consultancy services available within the construction industry where required.













largely on time.












Annually






running costs.







Procedure

Annual

survey

The well designed low density site layout will create a pleasant

Statistical collection and key Annually


Page 22


Measurement environment to live which will reduce anti-social behaviour.









completion

of the units



construction phase.






documentation

Quarterly




accounts

Annually






Assumptions


Constraints


5.7 Interdependencies


Page 23

G3 IN/OUT Project, person or resources that you are

dependent upon (IN) or that are dependent upon this project (OUT)



Agreement


Housing










developments



targets


Project Team Name Appropriate Skills and Experience

Project Manager John Findley Housing Development Manager




Project Assurance Employers Agents McNaughts; suitable qualified quantity

surveying practice with significant

expertise in similar schemes


Contractor

In-House contractor



5.10 Timescales and Project Plan


Page 24

G3 Project Start Date Project End Date











Page 25

G3

6 Appendices


Page 26



Page 27

G3

Equality Impact Needs Assessment The Diversity Promise – Making it Happen!

Title of Policy/Service/Project Construction of three houses at Cheshire Drive, Townsend

Service Unit Housing

Lead Responsible Officer and Job Title

John Findley, Housing Development Manager

Members of the Assessment Team: Mark Sheppard

Date assessment completed: 13th March 2013

About the Policy/Service/Project: What type of policy/service/project is this? (delete as appropriate) Existing New/proposed Changing What are the aims/objectives of the policy/service/project? (please include here all expected outcomes) Increase in High quality sustainable and affordable housing. The completed project will provide additional much needed housing provision with low running costs The development will further cement our good working relationship with the Homes and Communities Agency, thus opening up additional funding opportunities for both housing and non-housing schemes in the future Increased job opportunities within the construction sector during the construction phase as well as providing additional training opportunities by means of a local apprenticeship scheme The generation of long-term surplus to the Housing Revenue Account Are there any associated services, policies or procedures? Yes/No If Yes’, please list below:

List the main people, or groups of people, that this policy/service/project is designed to benefit and any other stakeholders involved? Families, either homeless or living in existing unsuitable or over-occupied housing

Will this policy/service/impact on any other organisation, statutory, voluntary or community and their clients/service users? No


Page 28

G3

Consultation, Monitoring and Research Where there is still insufficient information to properly assess the policy, appropriate and proportionate measures will be needed to fill the data gaps. Examples include one-off studies or surveys, or holding informal consultation exercises to supplement the available statistical and qualitative data. If there is insufficient time before the implementation of the policy to inform the EINA, specific action points will be need to be clearly set out in the action plan. Steps must include monitoring arrangements which measure the actual impact and a date for a policy review. Consultation: What involvement/consultation has been done in relation to this (or a similar) policy/service/project and what are the results? Consultation with the relevant portfolio holder on the strategic approach to new council housing and the portfolio holder and ward councillors on the individual scheme, the Homes and Communities Agency and relevant council staff. If you have not carried out any consultation, or if you need to carry out further consultation, who will you be consulting with and by what methods? N/A

Monitoring and Research: What data, research and other evidence or information is available which is relevant to this EINA? The completed units will be let and managed on the same basis as our existing housing stock and all EINA’s and other policies which apply to our existing stock will also apply to these new units.

• Is there any service user/employee monitoring data available and relevant to this policy/service/project? What does it show in relation to equality groups? Annual CORE Data, resident surveys etc Admission for new residents to the scheme will be by objective eligibility criteria, which will be operated and monitored by Housing Solutions, who undertake property allocations for the Council to ensure that the properties are let to those in housing need. If there is a lack of information, what further information do you need to carry out the assessment and how are you going to gather this? N/A


Page 29

G3 Assessing the Impact

Actual or potential benefit Actual or potential negative outcome

Age

Admission for new residents to the scheme will be by objective eligibility criteria, which will be operated by Housing Solutions, who undertake property allocations for the Council to ensure that the properties are let to those in housing need

The specific properties are designed for couples. However there will be no loss of existing provision for other client groups as a result of this project and the provision of additional bungalow accommodation may free up existing family dwellings which are currently under-occupied

Disability

Properties will be constructed to the Part M of the Building Regulations. The design of the houses will also embody the principles of Lifetime Homes which seeks to enable ‘general needs’ housing to provide, either from the outset or through simple and cost-effective adaptation, design solutions that meet the existing and changing needs of diverse households. This offers the occupants more choice over where they live and which visitors they can accommodate

No issues regarding disability have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Gender

Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register

No issues regarding gender have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Gender reassignment


No issues regarding gender reassignment have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Pregnancy and Maternity


No issues regarding pregnancy and maternity have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Marriage and Civil Partnership


No issues regarding marriage and civil partnership have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs


Page 30

G3


Race


No issues regarding race have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Religion or Belief


No issues regarding religion or belief have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Sexual Orientation


No issues regarding sexual orientation have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Any other factor/ groups e.g. socio-economic status/carers etc


No other issues have been identified all factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Human Rights

Will facilitate Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights - the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing

No human rights issues have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Stop - Any policy which shows actual or potential unlawful discrimination must be stopped, removed or changed. If impacts have been identified include in the action plan what will be done to reduce these impacts, this could include a range of options from making adjustments to the policy to stopping and removing the policy altogether. If no change is to be made, explain your decision: N/A


Page 31

G3 Action Plan Include:

• What has/will be done to reduce the negative impacts on groups as identified above.

• The arrangements for monitoring the actual impact of the policy/service/project

Issue identified Action required to reduce impact Timescale Responsible

officer

Which Business Plan

does this action link

to?

The specific

properties are

designed for families

and are therefore

not suitable for singles and

couples

Accommodation for singles and couples has been and is in the

process of being built elsewhere in Bournemouth and the release of

existing smaller properties currently over-occupied by

families will allow them to be let to this client group.

The identification of housing need for specific client groups within

the Borough will be monitored as part of the ongoing Housing

Strategy Process.

Ongoing

Strategic Housing Services Manager

Housing Strategy


Page 32

G3 Indicative Plans


Page 33

G3


Page 34



Page 35



Page 36

G3 Health & Safety Impact Assessment


Page 1


Three Houses at Cheshire Drive Open Space, Townsend


Service Unit:


Prepared by/Project Manager: Mark Sheppard Date: 13th March 2014

Document Approvals



PID Approval

Date







Cabinet N/A

Project Board N/A


Name Position Date Cllr Trickett, Cllr Weinhonig and Cllr Adams

Ward Councillors December 2013




Page 2

G2


priority.









Cheshire Drive and Draper Road are completed.





this.




• The Open Space at Cheshire Drive was deemed to be surplus to requirements as part of

the Play and Open Spaces review in 2009 with the majority of play equipment having

been decommissioned by this time. The site, being open space has limited value in the

current market and any planning application for private development would be



• The development of a scheme with 100% affordable council housing outweighs the

disadvantages from the loss of the open space and a planning approval is expected to

be granted in late March 2014.




Page 3

G2

• This business case seeks approval of £838K funded through a mixture of HCA grant, and

Housing Revenue Account “New Build” reserves and other funding sources in order to

develop the site for six “affordable” residential units. The new housing will help to

contribute to the overall programme to provide 105 additional affordable houses in the

Borough by 2015.

• The residential accommodation will be as follows. One detached two bedroom, 4 person, house One detached three bedroom, 5 person, house One detached one bedroom, 2 person, bungalow A terrace of three two bedroom, 4 person, houses



The proposal is to construct six “affordable” residential units on Open Space in Cheshire Drive,

Townsend.

The proposed development will be fully funded using a mixture of capital and s106 receipts from the

Housing Revenue Account, Grants from the Homes and Communities Agency and funds from the HRA New

Build Reserve.







The provision of one, two and three bedroom houses will help partially meet the need for such

accommodation in the Borough and will help to allow families in over occupied accommodation to have

more appropriate dwellings.









Page 4

G2 2.2 Benefits, Objectives and Strategic Alignment






plan:




the local business





generate an £641K



economy.


land.







Efficient Council







Cost effective

procurement and the

provision of low

maintenance, energy



the management of

Council assets.





be reduced



our services






additional units.

Improving the

Environment









designed to meet or





development.

Tree planting,

landscaping and











Page 5






help to improve the









drainage systems.

Community Action





housing built, more

affordable housing


support for the



first time buyers.

The scheme will be


the requirements of




consulted and where



The completion of


housing dwellings.









scores.






Register.

2.3 Scope: (In/Out)

The design and construction of Three Houses at Cheshire Drive.

Inclusions:




Stamp Duty Land Tax and/or land registration costs

(b) Works


Page 6

G2 Main works contract costs

Major site development works (where applicable). These include piling, soil






(c) On costs


Net gains/losses via reduced interest in development period











costs.

Exclusions:



Page 7

G2

2.4 Strategic Risk




risk being taken by the Contractor

unless the Client changes the design

brief post contract


manager & external

Employers Agent



requirements.



agent and the contractor

The Main Contractor

ceasing to trade

Mitigated by prudent procurement

processes




Agent

Failure to meet the





contract


project manager,


contractor





ordinator


Page 8

G2

















Business Plan.



£809K surplus to the HRA over 30 years after return of the principal sums to reserves, plus the capital value of the retained asset as shown in section 4.4

£838K, including indirect costs such as development period without interest, income, appropriation etc, financed by HRA New Build Reserve and capital grants


An additional 3 Houses for let to those in housing need


On Costs £197,000




levels



Page 9

G2 See Strategic Risk Section See Strategic Risk Section


March 2014 – March 2016 HRA New Build reserves

£616K (incl £64,000 contingencies and



Commuted Sums - £96,000






None Not Quantified






building purposes



Communities Agency

















Page 10







nomination rights







Communities Agency









of funding



partner status


HCA for funding




of success


Page 11






None N/A




policy changes


affordable housing









None


Ongoing N/A


Secure reserves from within the HRA New Build Reserve and develop the site to provide 100%

affordable housing, with retention of the asset, is the preferred option. This provides the maximum

number of properties for affordable rent (100%) at minimal risk to the Council. No funding is required

from the General Fund, with the majority of funding coming from the HCA and HRA New Build

Reserves with a small element of capital funding from the Housing Revenue Account.



The exact level of surplus generated to the HRA will be dependent upon a number of factors including

the actual market rent level at the time of completion. The HRA starts making a surplus in the first

year and continues making a surplus thereafter throughout the life of the scheme. This surplus made

can then be used elsewhere.


to be in the region of an additional £1,000,000. The additional 6 affordable units will also generate a

“new build homes bonus” for the Council


Page 12

G2










The model assumes a 10% contingency on the works costs. In addition a sinking fund has been built

into the model to allow for future major repairs and improvements.

4.2 Running Costs

A detailed 30 year cash-flow is shown in 4.4 and assumes that the funding is returned to the HRA New

Build Reserve over a period of 25 years.

4.3 Savings

The three houses will generate a long-term surplus to the HRA, which can be used in the future







Page 13





On-costs 177 20 197



Included above




Page 14

G2


Page 15

G2


Page 16

G2


Page 17

G2


Page 18

G2


Page 19

G2


Page 20

G2


Page 21


<


£’000 2014-15

£’000 2015-16

£’000 HRA New Build Reserves 0 556 60 Capital Receipts, Commuted Sums etc 0 96 0 HRA Revenue 0 29 0 HCA Grant 0 97 0 TOTAL 0 778 60



N/A


Page 22

G3


The programme will be managed by existing staff within Housing, Parks and Bereavement Services,

utilising specialist consultancy services available within the construction industry where required.













largely on time.












Annually






running costs.







Procedure

Annual

survey

The well designed low density site layout will create a pleasant

Statistical collection and key Annually


Page 23


Measurement environment to live which will reduce anti-social behaviour.









completion

of the units



construction phase.






documentation

Quarterly




accounts

Annually






Assumptions


Constraints



Page 24

G3 5.7 Interdependencies

IN/OUT Project, person or resources that you are dependent upon (IN) or that are dependent upon this project (OUT)



Agreement


Housing










developments



targets


Project Team Name Appropriate Skills and Experience Project Manager John Findley Housing Development Manager




Project Assurance Employers Agents McNaughts; suitable qualified quantity

surveying practice with significant

expertise in similar schemes


Contractor

In-House contractor




Page 25













Page 26

G3

6 Appendices


Page 27



Page 28

G3

Equality Impact Needs Assessment The Diversity Promise – Making it Happen!

Title of Policy/Service/Project Construction of six residential units at Cheshire Drive, Townsend

Service Unit Housing

Lead Responsible Officer and Job Title

John Findley, Housing Development Manager

Members of the Assessment Team: Mark Sheppard

Date assessment completed: 13th March 2013

About the Policy/Service/Project: What type of policy/service/project is this? (delete as appropriate) Existing New/proposed Changing What are the aims/objectives of the policy/service/project? (please include here all expected outcomes) Increase in High quality sustainable and affordable housing. The completed project will provide additional much needed housing provision with low running costs The development will further cement our good working relationship with the Homes and Communities Agency, thus opening up additional funding opportunities for both housing and non-housing schemes in the future Increased job opportunities within the construction sector during the construction phase as well as providing additional training opportunities by means of a local apprenticeship scheme The generation of long-term surplus to the Housing Revenue Account Are there any associated services, policies or procedures? Yes/No If Yes’, please list below:

List the main people, or groups of people, that this policy/service/project is designed to benefit and any other stakeholders involved? Families, either homeless or living in existing unsuitable or over-occupied housing

Will this policy/service/impact on any other organisation, statutory, voluntary or community and their clients/service users? No


Page 29

G3

Consultation, Monitoring and Research Where there is still insufficient information to properly assess the policy, appropriate and proportionate measures will be needed to fill the data gaps. Examples include one-off studies or surveys, or holding informal consultation exercises to supplement the available statistical and qualitative data. If there is insufficient time before the implementation of the policy to inform the EINA, specific action points will be need to be clearly set out in the action plan. Steps must include monitoring arrangements which measure the actual impact and a date for a policy review. Consultation: What involvement/consultation has been done in relation to this (or a similar) policy/service/project and what are the results? Consultation with the relevant portfolio holder on the strategic approach to new council housing and the portfolio holder and ward councillors on the individual scheme, the Homes and Communities Agency and relevant council staff. If you have not carried out any consultation, or if you need to carry out further consultation, who will you be consulting with and by what methods? N/A

Monitoring and Research: What data, research and other evidence or information is available which is relevant to this EINA? The completed units will be let and managed on the same basis as our existing housing stock and all EINA’s and other policies which apply to our existing stock will also apply to these new units.

• Is there any service user/employee monitoring data available and relevant to this policy/service/project? What does it show in relation to equality groups? Annual CORE Data, resident surveys etc Admission for new residents to the scheme will be by objective eligibility criteria, which will be operated and monitored by Housing Solutions, who undertake property allocations for the Council to ensure that the properties are let to those in housing need. If there is a lack of information, what further information do you need to carry out the assessment and how are you going to gather this? N/A


Page 30

G3 Assessing the Impact


Age

Admission for new residents to the scheme will be by objective eligibility criteria, which will be operated by Housing Solutions, who undertake property allocations for the Council to ensure that the properties are let to those in housing need

The specific properties are designed for couples. However there will be no loss of existing provision for other client groups as a result of this project and the provision of additional bungalow accommodation may free up existing family dwellings which are currently under-occupied

Disability

Properties will be constructed to the Part M of the Building Regulations. The design of the houses will also embody the principles of Lifetime Homes which seeks to enable ‘general needs’ housing to provide, either from the outset or through simple and cost-effective adaptation, design solutions that meet the existing and changing needs of diverse households. This offers the occupants more choice over where they live and which visitors they can accommodate

No issues regarding disability have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Gender


No issues regarding gender have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Gender reassignment


No issues regarding gender reassignment have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Pregnancy and Maternity


No issues regarding pregnancy and maternity have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Marriage and Civil Partnership


No issues regarding marriage and civil partnership have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs


Page 31

G3


Race


No issues regarding race have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Religion or Belief


No issues regarding religion or belief have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Sexual Orientation


No issues regarding sexual orientation have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Any other factor/ groups e.g. socio-economic status/carers etc


No other issues have been identified all factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Human Rights

Will facilitate Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights - the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing

No human rights issues have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs

Stop - Any policy which shows actual or potential unlawful discrimination must be stopped, removed or changed. If impacts have been identified include in the action plan what will be done to reduce these impacts, this could include a range of options from making adjustments to the policy to stopping and removing the policy altogether. If no change is to be made, explain your decision: N/A


Page 32

G3 Action Plan Include:

• What has/will be done to reduce the negative impacts on groups as identified above.

• The arrangements for monitoring the actual impact of the policy/service/project

Issue identified Action required to reduce impact Timescale Responsible

officer

Which Business Plan

does this action link

to?

The specific

properties are

designed for families

and are therefore

not suitable for singles and

couples

Accommodation for singles and couples has been and is in the

process of being built elsewhere in Bournemouth and the release of

existing smaller properties currently over-occupied by

families will allow them to be let to this client group.

The identification of housing need for specific client groups within

the Borough will be monitored as part of the ongoing Housing

Strategy Process.

Ongoing

Strategic Housing Services Manager

Housing Strategy


Page 33

G3 Indicative Plans


Page 34

G3


Page 35



Page 36


Health & Safety Impact Assessment


Page 37

G3

G3 Programme & Project Management Office

CHANGE REQUEST 01202 458213 [email protected] (template version 0.20)

Page 1

Document Approval

Officer/Member/Group Name Approval Date

Project Owner Gary Josey 11th Feb 2015

Executive Director Bill Cotton 11th Feb 2015

Portfolio Holder Councillor Robert Lawton 11th Feb 2015

Portfolio Holder Comment This will further expand on the good work already being carried out in Boscombe to help regenerate the area

Project Board/Programme Board N/A

TEC Programme Board (TEC Projects Only) N/A /A

Executive Gateway Board (for projects approved by EGB) TBC

People consulted – for information only

Officer/Member/Group Name Consultation Date

Ward Member N/A

Portfolio Holder Councillor Robert Lawton 11th Feb 2015



Change Request Targeted Purchase and Conversion of Houses in Multiple Occupation (358)

Service Unit: Housing, Parks and Bereavement Services

Risk: High

Prepared by: John Findley Date: 15th January 2014


Programme & Project Management Office

CHANGE REQUEST

Page 2

1 Overview

Description of change The original business case was predicated on providing 9 units of accommodation, by acquiring and converting three houses in multiple occupation, funded by a mixture of reserves and “right to buy” capital receipts together totalling £1.407 million. Approval is requested to expand the programme to provide an additional 8 dwellings using an additional £1.333 million of funding from the Housing Revenue Account and “right to buy” capital receipts.

Reasons for change and why? The first tranche of three houses in multiple occupation have now been acquired and it is proposed to expand the programme to acquire a further two or three HMO’s. In conjunction with additional purchases funded by “Inward Investment” this will allow a significant number of poor quality HMO’s to be decommissioned and replaced with higher quality self-contained housing, owned and managed by the Council.

This funding will also allow the Housing Revenue Account to develop some of the worst HMO’s which will not be viable to convert using “inward investment”.

Impact Analysis The benefits and impacts are the same as the original case, however doubling the number of units will provide an even greater opportunity to have a positive impact on the built environment of this part of Bournemouth.

2 Project Measures

Does the change affect the project measures?

Time Cost Quality

The original timescale was completion by March 2015, the doubling of the programme will extend the completion date to September 2016

The budget will be increased from £1,407 million to £2,740 million

The quality of the completed units and other measurable outputs will remain the same


CHANGE REQUEST

Page 3

2.1 Cost Changes

Financial Year 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 Future Years Total

Approved spend (thousands) £1,374 £33 £ £ £ £1,407

Proposed spend £1,100 £1,107 £500 £33 £ £2,740

Total Change £ -274 £1,074 £500 £33 £ £1,333

Source of funding for change See

below See below

Sources of Funding of change

Housing Revenue Account £-214 £714 £350 £23

£933

Right to Buy Receipts £-60 £360 £150 £10 £400

Funding Required £ -274 £1,074 £500 £33 £ £1,333

3 Recommendations

The Council’s Corporate Plan for 2013/14 identifies the provision of more affordable housing as a priority. It also identifies the regeneration of Boscombe as a priority and these proposals help to partially meet those aims.

The Boscombe Housing Strategy vision states

‘Boscombe will be a place which has a vibrant, mixed and sustainable community who live in good quality housing which is affordable, in an area with appropriate infrastructure and exciting opportunities.’

The extension of this successful programme will help speed up the delivery of the Council’s priority to help regenerate Boscombe and its is recommended that the expansion of the programme by increasing the budget to £2,740,000 funded by the Housing Revenue Account and “”Right to Buy” receipts is approved.


CHANGE REQUEST

Page 4

Complete the following sections after you have presented to the Project Board

4 Decision

<< Project Manager should complete this section after the Project Board have made a decision about this change. Was the change approved, rejected or deferred? If the change was rejected or deferred please include reasons why>>

5 Document Updates

<< Please update the following documents and include a brief description of what has been changed and ensure all the documents are uploaded onto Project Hub along with this one>>

Document: Section Changed

Business Case

PID

Project Plan

G3 Programme & Project Management Office

CHANGE REQUEST 01202 458213 [email protected] (template version 0.20)

Page 1

Document Approval

Officer/Member/Group Name Approval Date

Project Owner Gary Josey 20/03/2014

Executive Director Bill Cotton 20/03/2014

Portfolio Holder Councillor Robert Lawton 20/03/2014

Portfolio Holder Comment This will reduce the council’s current waiting list for Council Housing have a positive effect on the finances of the HRA

Project Board/Programme Board

TEC Programme Board (TEC Projects Only)

Executive Gateway Board (for projects approved by EGB)

People consulted – for information only

Officer/Member/Group Name Consultation Date

Ward Member

Portfolio Holder



Change Request Purchase of Existing Flats

Service Unit: Housing, Parks and Bereavement Services

Risk: High

Prepared by: Mark Sheppard Date: 13th March 2014



CHANGE REQUEST

Page 2

1 Overview

Description of change The original business case was predicated on providing four flats, by purchasing and repairing existing properties. This was to be funded by a mixture of HCA funding, capital receipts and prudential borrowing totalling £526k.

Following the successful delivery of the units, EGB is asked to note the expansion of the programme to purchase an additional 10 flats using £1.36 million of funding from the Housing Revenue Account and “right to buy” capital receipts.

Funding for the change is included in the 2014/15 HRA budget which has recently been approved by Cabinet and Full Council. Therefore this change request is primarily to make the Executive Gateway Board aware of the intended expansion of the programme

Reasons for change and why? The initial purchases have now been acquired and it is proposed to expand the programme to acquire a further ten dwellings. In conjunction with additional purchases funded by “Inward Investment” this will increase the number of high quality housing, owned and managed by the Council.

Impact Analysis The benefits and impacts are the same as the original case, however increasing the number of units will provide an even greater opportunity to have a positive impact on reducing the waiting list for accommodation in the borough as well as generating a long term funding surplus for the Housing Revenue Account.

2 Project Measures

Does the change affect the project measures?

Time Cost Quality

The original timescale was completion by March 2014, the expansion of the programme will extend the completion date to December 2014

The budget will be increased from £526 million to £1.89 million

The quality of the purchased units and other measurable outputs will remain the same


CHANGE REQUEST

Page 3

2.1 Cost Changes

Financial Year 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 Future Years Total

Approved spend (thousands) £0 £0 £ £ £ £0

Proposed spend £529 £1.360 £ £ £ £1,886

Total Change £0 £1,360 £ £ £ £1,360

Source of funding for change See

below

Sources of Funding of change

Housing Revenue Account £0 £1,000 £ £

£933

Right to Buy Receipts £0 £360 £ £ £400

Funding Required £0 £1,360 £ £ £ £1,333

3 Recommendations


The extension of this successful programme will help speed up the delivery of additional Council homes and it is recommended that the EGB note the expansion of the programme, increasing the budget by £1,360 funded by the Housing Revenue Account and “Right to Buy” receipts.

Complete the following sections after you have presented to the Project Board


CHANGE REQUEST

Page 4

4 Decision

<< Project Manager should complete this section after the Project Board have made a decision about this change. Was the change approved, rejected or deferred? If the change was rejected or deferred please include reasons why>>

5 Document Updates

<< Please update the following documents and include a brief description of what has been changed and ensure all the documents are uploaded onto Project Hub along with this one>>

Document: Section Changed

Business Case

PID

Project Plan

Documents

Project Initiation Document (PID) Tuckton Revetments ... · Original (but including suggested amendments from AK, MS & MR) 11-3-14 . 2.0 Paul Ambrose Various comments included to