To consider the principle of transferring to Parish Councils, for use as amenity space, land no longer required for the Borough Council’s current needs.

1.  That the concept, as set out in paragraph 1.3.5 of the report of the Property and Procurement Manager, be agreed.

2.  That delegated authority be given to the Property & Procurement Manager to progress discussion with Parish Councils regarding potential transfers of land on a leasehold basis. 

3.  That if the Parish Councils express an interest in any of the sites identified in Appendix 1 of the report of the Property and Procurement Manager, the Property & Procurement Manager may progress disposal in accordance with the Constitution.

Council Officers recently undertook a far reaching review of Council land holdings and identified a number of sites, of which some were suitable for development. A further set of sites, not considered suitable for development, may be suitable for transfer to Parish Councils. However the sites identified in Appendix 1 of the report of the Property and Procurement Manager would form the pilot for this work.

Progressing these sites would not preclude Parish Councils making proposals to approach the Council concerning other sites either during the pilot, or subsequently.

Parks and Open Spaces and Planning officers reviewed a number of sites identified by Corporate Property, of these, a number were considered potentially surplus and are detailed in Appendix 1 of the report of the Property and Procurement Manager.

Transferring land to Parish Councils would allow local considerations to be incorporated into on-going management, and also allow access to funding sources not available to Maidstone Borough Council.

Such a transfer would be very much in line with current national thinking in terms of asset management and the transfer of assets to the community and would accord with the Cabinet’s aim of increasing local participation and control. It would accord with recent decisions including the agreement to transfer two plots of land to Parish Councils and also decisions relating to the management of community halls and public conveniences.

The proposed route would be that Parish Councils would be approached in relation to the land identified in Appendix 1 of the report of the Property and Procurement Manager, and asked if they would consider taking responsibility for any of the sites within their area. The preferred method of transfer would be:

·  The agreement would comprise a lease of 125 years on a peppercorn rent

·  The Lease would be specific to the organization and non-transferrable;

·  The Lease would state the specific use to which the land would be put;

·  The lease would contain obligations to put, keep and maintain the site in a good and tidy condition;

·  The Lease would contain a break clause in favour of the Council, should it identify an alternative suitable commercial use for the site.

Should any Parish Council wish to proceed, then the disposal process would be in accordance with Maidstone Council’s constitution. In brief, this would comprise:

·  A declaration of the land as surplus by the Cabinet Member for Leisure and Culture

·  Publication of an advertisement in the local newspaper, as required by S123 of the Local Government Act 1972

·  Subsequent to the outcome of the Notice a final decision would be made by the Cabinet Member for Corporate Services to agree the disposal and Terms & Conditions thereof.

The initial process is likely to take a minimum of 4-6 months and the costs of undertaking this exercise has been estimated using the standard officer day rates provided as part of the project management toolkit. The estimated internal costs up to the point of drafting any leases are £15-20k, the cost of drafting any leases thereafter would be likely to be between £1-2k for each. In addition there would be costs for any s123 notice which are likely to be the region of £500 +VAT per two week insertion, for each advertisement.

If the Council chose to retain these parcels of land, opportunities for communities to enhance facilities at a local level would be reduced.

Discussions with:

Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee

Management Team