Agenda and minutes

There were no declarations of interest made by Members.

The Chair welcomed all present and introduced the following officers from Torfaen County Borough Council:

Robert Murray            Principal Planning Officer

Adrian Wilcott              Principal Planner

Victor Mbvundula        Asset and Disposal Manager

The Chair advised that the meeting had been convened to consider a Call-in request in respect of the Cabinet decision taken on 2^nd December 2015 in respect of ‘The sale of the old County Hall site, Croesyceiliog – revised bids’.

The Scrutiny Manager advised the Committee on the process as outlined in the Constitution.  The purpose was to consider the appropriateness of a decision that had already been taken by the Executive, a decision that had been called-in by Members.  Members were advised that the Committee was not able to make a decision themselves but were able to do one of the following:

1.    Accept the Cabinet’s decision.

2.    Refer the matter back to Cabinet for re-consideration (with reasons).

3.    Refer the matter to Council for consideration.

The Chair invited Members who requested the call-in to briefly outline their reasons for calling in the decision.  The following points were noted:

·         Members requested assurance that the best deal for Monmouthshire had been negotiated, particularly in respect of the value of the land.  MCC own half the land, alongside Torfaen County Borough Council and had paid half the demolition and negotiation costs but Members were concerned that we were not receiving half the land value.

·         There were concerns that TCBC would be in receipt of Section 106 funds and long term revenue through Council Tax, but MCC share of the land value was reducing.

·         There were concerns surrounding the market value of the land due to changes since the original bid, referring to the Police Headquarters site and the removal of the ancient woodland status.

·         Reference was made to the benefit in kind from the planning application. 

·         Concerns were raised that the negotiations started in February had now ceased and new report had come forward referring to a new bidding process for the site.

·         There were concerns that the increase in site, including the woodland, had not gone to full tender, which may have attracted more interest.

·         There were concerns that there was no mention in the report that MCC would pick up the legal bill from TCBC.

·         The value of the site was gauged by the developer having taken into account Section 106 and affordable housing requirements and under the current proposal MCC would receive 50% of the net value of the site, not gross value.  TCBC would not only benefit from the capital receipt, but also from up to 66 affordable homes and Section 106 agreements.

·         Members requested complete clarity on the costs incurred.

The Chair invited the Cabinet Member to provide a response.

The Cabinet Member thanked Members for the questions and advised that the position with regards to the transaction had been set out at the beginning of the period when the site was to be disposed of.  It had been determined that MCC would be responsible  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.