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.
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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.
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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)
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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.
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
n/a £745,000
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
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
Strengths (Including Opportunities) Weaknesses (including Threats)
Spending could be spread over several financial years
Significant extra cost
Design is basic
Risk Mitigation Strategy
Funding has to be agree over several years
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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.”
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
£477,500
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
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
Strengths (Including Opportunities) Weaknesses (including Threats)
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
Risk Mitigation Strategy
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
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
2 years As above
Option 4 – Do nothing
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
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.
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
Strengths (Including Opportunities) Weaknesses (including Threats)
None Adverse publicity, risk of litigation, loss of reputation. Loss of amenity space and impact on tourism.
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 11
G2 Risk Mitigation Strategy
Litigation / claims Deny all access to area on safety grounds.
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
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.
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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.
.
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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)
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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.
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>>
Risk Mitigation Strategy Owner
Issue Handling Strategy Owner
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
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
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)
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
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 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
TEC Programme Board (TEC Projects Only) N/A
Executive Gateway Board N/A
Cabinet N/A
Project Board N/A
Other Elected Members & Officers Consulted
Name Position Date Cllr Grower, Cllr Baxter and Cllr Marley
Ward Councillors January 2013
December 2013
Document Revision History
Version Author Changes Date
1.1 JF Minor Finance changes 25/03/14
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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.
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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.
2 Strategic Fit: The Strategic Case
2.1 Business Needs and Project Background
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).
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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
The project directly
supports the following
outcome in the corporate
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
The project directly
supports the following
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%
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 5
G2 Council Strategic Objective / Corporate Priority (taken from Corporate Plan, Service Plans etc…)
Project Outcome Benefits expected as a result of achieving outcomes
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
outcome in the corporate
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 7
G2
2.4 Strategic Risk
Risk Mitigation Strategy Owner
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.
The internal project
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
The internal project
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 8
G2
3 Options Appraisal: The Economic Case 3.1 Summary of Approach
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)
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
£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
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 9
G2 Risk Mitigation Strategy
See Strategic Risk Section See Strategic Risk Section
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
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
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
Circa £80K Not Quantified
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
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
Risk Mitigation Strategy
Capital Receipt dependent upon the state of
the property market and the likelihood of
receiving planning approval
Loss of reputation and loss of preferred
partner status with the Homes and
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
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
June 2014-March 2015 Not Identified
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 10
G2 Option 3 – Release the site at nil value to a Registered Provider for delivery of 100% affordable housing
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
Nil Not Quantified, but Minimal
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
More affordable houses within the Borough for
which the Council will have limited
nomination rights
Not Quantified, but minimal
Strengths (Including opportunities) Weaknesses (Including threats)
Risk passed onto third party No capital receipt, no ability to directly
control how the properties are managed
Loss of reputation and loss of preferred
partner status with the Homes and
Communities Agency
Loss of potential long-term surplus
Loss of enhanced long-term capital asset
Risk Mitigation Strategy
Loss of reputation and loss of preferred
partner status with the Homes and
Communities Agency and consequent inability
to access future grant funding
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
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
April 2012 – March 2015 The Registered Provider would need to bid
for funding from the HCA, with no guarantee
of success
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 11
G2 Option 4 – Do Nothing
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
Nil Not quantified, but there will be ongoing
maintenance costs for the open space
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
None N/A
Strengths (Including opportunities) Weaknesses (Including threats)
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
Risk Mitigation Strategy
Loss of reputation and loss of preferred
partner status with the HCA and consequent
inability to access future grant funding
None
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
Ongoing N/A
3.2 Preferred Option
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 12
G2
4 Affordability: the Financial Case
4.1 Quantification of Risk and Associated Contingency
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 20
G3 4.5 Source of Funding
<
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
Previously Awarded Feasibility Funding
Date Awarded Description of Funding Usage Total (£k)
N/A
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 21
G3
5 Achievability: The Project Management Case 5.1 Project Approach
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)
5.2 Evidence of Similar Projects
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.
5.3 Resources Required
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
5.4 Benefit Realisation
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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
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.
Statistical collection and key
performance benchmarking
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
5.5 Critical Success Factors
Receipt of satisfactory tender
Construction and handover of completed units, on time and to budget
Successful letting of completed units
5.6 Assumptions & Constraints
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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
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)
Description of dependency (e.g. the complete rollout of the project or the development of a particular part of it)
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
5.8 Key stakeholders
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
5.9 Project Management Organisational Structure
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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 24
G3 5.10 Timescales and Project Plan
Project Start Date Project End Date
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
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.
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
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.
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 27
G3 Equality Needs Impact Assessment
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 34
G3 Initial Risk Assessment
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 35
G3 Health & Safety Impact Assessment – submit to [email protected]
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)
Three Houses at Cheshire Drive former Play Area, Townsend
(Project Hub No TBC)
Service Unit:
Risk: High/Medium/Low
Prepared by/Project Manager: Mark Sheppard Date: 13th March 2014
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 17/03/2014 N/A
Executive Director Bill Cotton 17/03/2014 N/A
Portfolio Holder Cllr Robert Lawton 17/03/2014 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
TEC Programme Board (TEC Projects Only) N/A
Executive Gateway Board N/A
Cabinet N/A
Project Board N/A
Other Elected Members & Officers Consulted
Name Position Date Cllr Trickett, Cllr Weinhonig and Cllr Adams
Ward Councillors December 2013
Document Revision History
Version Author Changes Date
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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 and Draper Road 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 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
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 outweighs the
disadvantages from the loss of the open space and a planning approval is expected to
be granted in late 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.
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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.
2 Strategic Fit: The Strategic Case
2.1 Business Needs and Project Background
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.
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 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.
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).
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 4
G2 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 £329K
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
The project directly
supports the following
outcome in the corporate
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
The project directly
supports the following
outcomes in the corporate
plan: ‘Increased activity
to respond and adapt to
the effects of climate
change’ and ‘improved
facilities for residents and
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
sustainable drainage will
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%
Improved open spaces both
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 5
G2 Council Strategic Objective / Corporate Priority (taken from Corporate Plan, Service Plans etc…)
Project Outcome Benefits expected as a result of achieving outcomes
visitors’ through -
help to improve the
environment and avoid
any flooding issues.
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
outcome in the corporate
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 design and construction of Three Houses at Cheshire Drive.
Inclusions:
Design, construction and ancillary costs including:
(a) Acquisition Costs
Administration Costs
Stamp Duty Land Tax and/or land registration costs
(b) Works
Main works contract costs
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 6
G2 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 reduced interest in development period
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.
An appropriate proportion of the Grant Recipient’s development and administration
costs.
Exclusions:
Non-site specific feasibility work, high-level strategic control costs
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 7
G2 2.4 Strategic Risk
Risk Mitigation Strategy Owner
Cost overruns Mitigated by the use of a design and
build contract with the balance of
risk being taken by the 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.
The internal project
manager, the employers
agent and the contractor
The Main Contractor
ceasing to trade
Mitigated by prudent procurement
processes
The internal project
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 8
G2
3 Options Appraisal: The Economic Case 3.1 Summary of Approach
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)
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
£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
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
An additional 3 Houses for let to those in housing need
Works Costs £374,000
On Costs £112,000
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
Risk Mitigation Strategy
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 9
G2 See Strategic Risk Section See Strategic Risk Section
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
March 2014 – March 2016 HRA New Build reserves
£373.5K (incl £37,500 contingencies and
provisional sums and appropriation costs)
HCA Grant Funding - £48,500
Commuted Sums - £48,000
Other Sources of Funding - £16,000 (HRA)
Option 2 – Sell the site on the open market
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
Circa £80K Not Quantified
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
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
Risk Mitigation Strategy
Capital Receipt dependent upon the state of
the property market and the likelihood of
receiving planning approval
Loss of reputation and loss of preferred
partner status with the Homes and
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
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
June 2014-March 2015 Not Identified
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 10
G2 Option 3 – Release the site at nil value to a Registered Provider for delivery of 100% affordable housing
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
Nil Not Quantified, but Minimal
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
More affordable houses within the Borough for
which the Council will have limited
nomination rights
Not Quantified, but minimal
Strengths (Including opportunities) Weaknesses (Including threats)
Risk passed onto third party No capital receipt, no ability to directly
control how the properties are managed
Loss of reputation and loss of preferred
partner status with the Homes and
Communities Agency
Loss of potential long-term surplus
Loss of enhanced long-term capital asset
Risk Mitigation Strategy
Loss of reputation and loss of preferred
partner status with the Homes and
Communities Agency and consequent inability
to access future grant funding
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
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
April 2012 – March 2015 The Registered Provider would need to bid
for funding from the HCA, with no guarantee
of success
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 11
G2 Option 4 – Do Nothing
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
Nil Not quantified, but there will be ongoing
maintenance costs for the open space
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
None N/A
Strengths (Including opportunities) Weaknesses (Including threats)
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
Risk Mitigation Strategy
Loss of reputation and loss of preferred
partner status with the HCA and consequent
inability to access future grant funding
None
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
Ongoing N/A
3.2 Preferred Option
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 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 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.
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 3 affordable units will also generate a
“new build homes bonus” for the Council
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 12
G2
4 Affordability: the Financial Case
4.1 Quantification of Risk and Associated Contingency
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. 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
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 13
G2 4.4 Spend Profile and Cash Flow
All figures in £k Description 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 Total
Acquisition Costs 0 0
Construction Costs 334 40 374
On-costs 96 16 112
Sub-Total Costs 430 56 486
Contingency @10% of construction costs
Included above
Total Costs 430 56 486
Cumulative Benefit See Cash Flow and NPV calcs
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 20
G3 4.5 Source of Funding
<
FUNDING SOURCE AND PROFILE 2013-14
£’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
Previously Awarded Feasibility Funding
Date Awarded Description of Funding Usage Total (£k)
N/A
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 21
G3
5 Achievability: The Project Management Case 5.1 Project Approach
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.
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)
5.2 Evidence of Similar Projects
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.
5.3 Resources Required
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
5.4 Benefit Realisation
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
The well designed low density site layout will create a pleasant
Statistical collection and key Annually
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 22
G3 Benefit How will the benefit be Measured? Frequency of
Measurement environment to live which will reduce anti-social behaviour.
performance benchmarking
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
5.5 Critical Success Factors
Receipt of satisfactory tender
Construction and handover of completed units, on time and to budget
Successful letting of completed units
5.6 Assumptions & Constraints
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
5.7 Interdependencies
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 23
G3 IN/OUT Project, person or resources that you are
dependent upon (IN) or that are dependent upon this project (OUT)
Description of dependency (e.g. the complete rollout of the project or the development of a particular part of it)
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
5.8 Key stakeholders
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
5.9 Project Management Organisational Structure
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 McNaughts; 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
5.10 Timescales and Project Plan
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 24
G3 Project Start Date Project End Date
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
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.
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 26
G3 Environmental Impact Checklist
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
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
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
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
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
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
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
No issues regarding marriage and civil partnership have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 30
G3
Actual or potential benefit Actual or potential negative outcome
Race
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
No issues regarding race have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs
Religion or Belief
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
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
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
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
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 35
G3 Initial Risk Assessment
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 36
G3 Health & Safety Impact Assessment
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)
Three Houses at Cheshire Drive Open Space, Townsend
(Project Hub No TBC)
Service Unit:
Risk: High/Medium/Low
Prepared by/Project Manager: Mark Sheppard Date: 13th March 2014
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 17/03/2014 N/A
Executive Director Bill Cotton 17/03/2014 N/A
Portfolio Holder Cllr Robert Lawton 17/03/2014 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
TEC Programme Board (TEC Projects Only) N/A
Executive Gateway Board N/A
Cabinet N/A
Project Board N/A
Other Elected Members & Officers Consulted
Name Position Date Cllr Trickett, Cllr Weinhonig and Cllr Adams
Ward Councillors December 2013
Document Revision History
Version Author Changes Date
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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 and Draper Road 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 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
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 outweighs the
disadvantages from the loss of the open space and a planning approval is expected to
be granted in late 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.
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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
2 Strategic Fit: The Strategic Case
2.1 Business Needs and Project Background
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.
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 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.
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).
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
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 £641K
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
The project directly
supports the following
outcome in the corporate
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
The project directly
supports the following
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%
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 5
G2 Council Strategic Objective / Corporate Priority (taken from Corporate Plan, Service Plans etc…)
Project Outcome Benefits expected as a result of achieving outcomes
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
outcome in the corporate
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 design and construction of Three Houses at Cheshire Drive.
Inclusions:
Design, construction and ancillary costs including:
(a) Acquisition Costs
Administration Costs
Stamp Duty Land Tax and/or land registration costs
(b) Works
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 6
G2 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 reduced interest in development period
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.
An appropriate proportion of the Grant Recipient’s development and administration
costs.
Exclusions:
Non-site specific feasibility work, high-level strategic control costs
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 7
G2
2.4 Strategic Risk
Risk Mitigation Strategy Owner
Cost overruns Mitigated by the use of a design and
build contract with the balance of
risk being taken by the 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.
The internal project
manager, the employers
agent and the contractor
The Main Contractor
ceasing to trade
Mitigated by prudent procurement
processes
The internal project
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 8
G2
3 Options Appraisal: The Economic Case 3.1 Summary of Approach
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)
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
£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
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
An additional 3 Houses for let to those in housing need
Works Costs £641,000
On Costs £197,000
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
Risk Mitigation Strategy
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 9
G2 See Strategic Risk Section See Strategic Risk Section
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
March 2014 – March 2016 HRA New Build reserves
£616K (incl £64,000 contingencies and
provisional sums and appropriation costs)
HCA Grant Funding - £97,000
Commuted Sums - £96,000
Other Sources of Funding - £29,000 (HRA)
Option 2 – Sell the site on the open market
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
Circa £80K Not Quantified
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
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
Risk Mitigation Strategy
Capital Receipt dependent upon the state of
the property market and the likelihood of
receiving planning approval
Loss of reputation and loss of preferred
partner status with the Homes and
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
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
June 2014-March 2015 Not Identified
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 10
G2 Option 3 – Release the site at nil value to a Registered Provider for delivery of 100% affordable housing
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
Nil Not Quantified, but Minimal
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
More affordable houses within the Borough for
which the Council will have limited
nomination rights
Not Quantified, but minimal
Strengths (Including opportunities) Weaknesses (Including threats)
Risk passed onto third party No capital receipt, no ability to directly
control how the properties are managed
Loss of reputation and loss of preferred
partner status with the Homes and
Communities Agency
Loss of potential long-term surplus
Loss of enhanced long-term capital asset
Risk Mitigation Strategy
Loss of reputation and loss of preferred
partner status with the Homes and
Communities Agency and consequent inability
to access future grant funding
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
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
April 2012 – March 2015 The Registered Provider would need to bid
for funding from the HCA, with no guarantee
of success
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 11
G2 Option 4 – Do Nothing
Total Expected Financial Benefit (£k) Total Expected Financial Cost (£k)
Nil Not quantified, but there will be ongoing
maintenance costs for the open space
Expected non Financial Benefit High level Breakdown of Costs
None N/A
Strengths (Including opportunities) Weaknesses (Including threats)
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
Risk Mitigation Strategy
Loss of reputation and loss of preferred
partner status with the HCA and consequent
inability to access future grant funding
None
Timeline Indicative Funding Source
Ongoing N/A
3.2 Preferred Option
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 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 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.
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 £1,000,000. The additional 6 affordable units will also generate a
“new build homes bonus” for the Council
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 12
G2
4 Affordability: the Financial Case
4.1 Quantification of Risk and Associated Contingency
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. 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
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
Programme & Project Management Office FULL BUSINESS CASE
Page 13
G2 4.4 Spend Profile and Cash Flow
All figures in £k Description 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 Total
Acquisition Costs 0 0
Construction Costs 601 40 641
On-costs 177 20 197
Sub-Total Costs 778 60 838
Contingency @10% of construction costs
Included above
Total Costs 778 60 838
Cumulative Benefit See Cash Flow and NPV calcs
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 21
G3 4.5 Source of Funding
<
FUNDING SOURCE AND PROFILE 2013-14
£’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
Previously Awarded Feasibility Funding
Date Awarded Description of Funding Usage Total (£k)
N/A
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 22
G3
5 Achievability: The Project Management Case 5.1 Project Approach
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.
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)
5.2 Evidence of Similar Projects
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.
5.3 Resources Required
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
5.4 Benefit Realisation
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
The well designed low density site layout will create a pleasant
Statistical collection and key Annually
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 23
G3 Benefit How will the benefit be Measured? Frequency of
Measurement environment to live which will reduce anti-social behaviour.
performance benchmarking
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
5.5 Critical Success Factors
Receipt of satisfactory tender
Construction and handover of completed units, on time and to budget
Successful letting of completed units
5.6 Assumptions & Constraints
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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
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)
Description of dependency (e.g. the complete rollout of the project or the development of a particular part of it)
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
5.8 Key stakeholders
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
5.9 Project Management Organisational Structure
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 McNaughts; 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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 25
G3 5.10 Timescales and Project Plan
Project Start Date Project End Date
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
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.
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 27
G3 Environmental Impact Checklist
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 30
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
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
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
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
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
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
No issues regarding marriage and civil partnership have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 31
G3
Actual or potential benefit Actual or potential negative outcome
Race
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
No issues regarding race have been identified but this factor will be considered/monitored along with any service users’ identified needs
Religion or Belief
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
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
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
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
Properties will be eligible for all eligible applicants on the housing register
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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
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
Programme & Project Management Office PROJECT INITIATION DOCUMENT
Page 36
G3 Initial Risk Assessment
Health & Safety Impact Assessment
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
Document Revision History
Version Author Changes Date
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
Programme & Project Management Office
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.
Programme & Project Management Office
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
Document Revision History
Version Author Changes Date
Change Request Purchase of Existing Flats
Service Unit: Housing, Parks and Bereavement Services
Risk: High
Prepared by: Mark Sheppard Date: 13th March 2014
Programme & Project Management Office
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
Programme & Project Management Office
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 Council’s Corporate Plan for 2012/13 identifies the provision of more affordable housing as a priority
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
Programme & Project Management Office
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