Nocton Village Hall Refurbishment

Plan A, Plan B or Plan C

"We currently face uncertain times in our village as the prospect of the village hall rebuild is shrouded in ambiguity. Our latest information is that the re-development has once again been postponed until 2018 at the earliest. This makes it extremely challenging for your social club committee to plan for the future."

Source: 'Oktoberfest' letter recently published by Nocton Club Committee

Nocton Village Hall

I refer to my blog relating to the most recent meeting of the Village Hall Rebuilding Sub-Committee.

Following attendance at that meeting and with my own emerging concerns about the project, I decided to appraise myself of both process and progress of the plans to rebuild the Village Hall.

I have revisited all Parish Council, Village Hall Working Group and Rebuilding Sub-Committee Minutes back to 2014, to determine what the implications are for the project today.

To refresh our memories about how we arrived at this position, I have used extracts from the paragraphs in the helpful 'Business Case and Plan for the Replacement of Nocton Village Hall' (presented 27th July 2017), supported by extracts/references from various Minutes of Parish Council and Sub-Committee meetings.

Business Case Extracts

Para 2.1
In 2011 it was noted that cracks were appearing in the walls of the Hall (see image below) and there were also problems with leaking drains.  This was initially attributed to subsidence but a structural survey carried out in 2014 as the situation worsened showed the floor slab to be unstable and sinking.

Crack in south wall showing fixings for the Tell Tale gauges

[no further movement was ever proved - likely due to initial settlement]

Para 3.1
Initially, the Parish Council planned to remove the internal walls, relay the floor slab and then extend and re-plan the interior...

Parish Council Minutes dated 4th February 2014
Recorded that costs for replacing the floor slab were in the region of £22,000. There would also be an opportunity to repair the foundations at the front corner of the Village Hall at a further cost of £10,000. Councillors agreed unaminously, in principle, to remove the floor slab and replace it with a suspended floor... which would then provide a more fundamental redevelopment of the building and its facilities.

Reference: York Sills Report (Robert Webster) Feb 2014

Para 3.1 cont'd
A small working group, comprising representatives of the Parish Council, the Village Hall Management Committee (VHMC) (see below) and users of the building was established by the Parish Council to agree a revised layout, etc for the refurbished building.  The Group was supported by an Architect and Structural Surveyor who gave their services free of charge.  The work of the Group was also informed by the results of a village-wide survey which supported the concept of providing a much-improved Village Hall.

Parish Council Minutes dated 4th March 2014
The Parish Council agreed to adopt the project plan and establish the Project Team...

Reference: Project Plan and Appendix

Para 3.2
During these discussions, however, it became apparent that the cost of refurbishment was likely to be such that demolition of the Hall and its replacement with a larger building more suited to the needs of the growing village was a significantly more cost-effective solution.  A new, rather than refurbished, building also provided an opportunity to provide one which was considerably more thermally and energy efficient and with significantly reduced maintenance costs.

Parish Council Minutes dated 1st April 2014
The Parish Council considered a report from Cllr Goldsworthy regarding the proposed Constitution and Terms of Reference of the Nocton Village Hall Refurbishment Project Team.

This appears to be the moment where the refurbishment plans started to morph into a full new rebuild.

I haven't been able to locate any comprehensive financial breakdown of what it might have cost to refurbish the Village Hall, rather than replace it in its entirety. This makes it rather difficult to compare the 'value for money' investment of obtaining a Public Works Loan to complete a full rebuild.

Para 4.1
Following the structural survey, and after the decision to follow the rebuilding route rather than to repair and refurbish, a comprehensive survey was carried out of all households in the village during 2015 to ascertain residents’ views on the nature of a new village hall.

Parish Council Minutes dated 17th June 2014
A more comprehensive refurbishment brief was presented and agreed by Parish Council.

Reference: Refurbishment Brief

Para 6.1
The initial arrangements for managing and overseeing the project were handled by the full Parish Council.  However, and as the project developed, the Parish Council established a Village Hall Rebuilding Sub-committee (VHRSC) (which included representatives from the VHMC and Village Social Club) to deal with the more routine aspects of the project.

Parish Council Minutes dated 10th May 2016
Cllr Williams explained that the tenders received for the proposed Village Hall rebuild had been evaluated, and the Parish Council had agreed at its meeting on 25 April, 2016 to invite Simmons (sic) Group, Lincoln to enter into discussions to take the project forward.

Parish Council Minutes dated 12th July 2016
In response to a question from a villager, Councillors explained the reasons behind the decision to rebuild rather than refurbish the Hall. In order to clarify the position further, the Parish Council agreed to deliver a letter to all households in the village with the next edition of the Nocton News explaining the current position and why a new Hall needed to be built. The letter would also explain the next steps and how it was proposed to fund the new Hall.

Reference: Annex C - Business Plan and Case for Refurbishment of Nocton Village Hall

Parish Council Minutes dated 29th November 2016
The Parish Council agreed to:
a) reaffirm the appointment of Simons Group Ltd to carry out the design and construction of the new Village Hall, including the application for planning permission, and to request the Clerk to confirm the position accordingly.  
b) authorise the Village Hall Rebuilding Sub-Committee to incur expenditure of up to £10,000 + VAT to progress the Village Hall redevelopment planning application, and to ask the Sub-Committee to meet with Symons (sic) before Christmas, 2016 to finalise the Village Hall plans.

Parish Council Minutes dated 11th April 2017
The Parish Council:
... b) considered the amended internal layout plans. It was proposed by Cllr Kaye, seconded by Cllr Williams and it was resolved that the amended plans, as attached as an Appendix to the Minutes, be approved and confirmed to Simons for proceeding to planning application;
... d) agreed to receive a detailed financial appraisal at the next meeting on the project now that final costings had been received.

Parish Council Minutes Extraordinary dated 27th July 2017
The Parish Council considered a detailed report by the Chair which reviewed a range of matters associated with rebuilding the Village Hall, including:
i) the business case and business plan;
ii) consultation with residents;
iii) a financial appraisal for the project and the potential effects on the precept for 2018/19;
iv) an assessment of risks; and
v) future management arrangements.
It was proposed by Cllr Jones, seconded by Cllr Williams and it was resolved that an application to the Public Works Loan Board (PWLB) for the funding necessary to rebuild the Village Hall, approved in principle at the meeting of 9 May 2017 (minute 25 b), be formally taken forward. This will be on an annuity basis and for a maximum of £500,000 (depending upon final costs), over a period of 50 years.

Para 7.2
It is considered that the only major building risk in terms of severity is that the ground conditions on site may not be as stable as is projected.  Structural analysis would indicate, however, that the probability of this is considered to be extremely low.  In any event, any additional costs to stablise the ground would be met from the project’s contingency provision.

I can find no early reference to risks to the build or planning permission from the root spread of the lime trees fronting Main Street in the conservation area... although surely this must have been considered as a risk, given the earlier York Sills (Webster) Report.

Reference: Tree Protection Orders and Trees in Conservation Areas

Para 7.5
The new Village Hall Management Committee Community Trust) (VHMCCT) will be crucial in ensuring the new Village Hall’s viability – both financially and as a vibrant facility which is seen as meeting the needs of all Nocton’s residents ...  It is, therefore, essential that sufficient trustees are appointed with the enthusiasm and willingness to carry out the whole range of functions associated with managing the building (including bookings, cleaning, repair and maintenance, etc).  Equally importantly will be the need for the new Trust to devise and implement strategies to market the new premises in order to maximise income...  Failure to secure the appointment of an effective body of local people to manage the new Hall would be a significant risk to the success and, indeed, the viability of the project.

Para 8.4
The financial effect on villagers through funding the new Hall through an increase in the precept will be minimised by charging the VHMCCT a rent for the use of the village hall.

Para 8.5
The forming of a Charity to run the new facility opens up sources of additional funding previously unavailable and will impose a rigorous management discipline on the new VHMCCT.

Annex A
Para 1.0
At that meeting [9 May 2017] it was agreed (in principle) to apply to the Secretary of State for a Public Works Loan (PWL) for a maximum sum of £500,000 over a period of 50 years.

Para 1.2
...  no application can be made until this [planning permission] has been received.  Nor, indeed, can any applications be made for external funding.

Para 3.1
As part of the PWL application process, the Parish Council is required to consider the effect of the Loan’s repayments on the precept for 2018/19 and beyond.  It is, however, impossible to determine with any degree of accuracy the effect on next year’s precept by funding this project by way of a PWL because at this stage of the project the costs cannot be determined with absolute precision.

Para 3.6
A PWL of, say, £475,000 would result in annual loan repayments of £18,054 giving rise to an increase in the Band “D” rate of £27.83 to £94.17 (+42%).

Suggested future action

We are at a pivotal moment for the Village Hall, one which will involve spending a substantial amount of public money on what some might regard as a vanity project for the village. I appreciate a great deal of work, money and effort has been invested in planning for a brand new Village Hall, but with the recent withdrawal of the planning application, perhaps now is a good time to take stock and review the situation.

When all the background information has been gathered about why the planning application was withdrawn and we learn what the impact will be on the plans and future costs, I believe before the Parish Council decide to pursue:

• Plan A - continue with a full rebuild of the Hall with Simons Group managing the project, or
• Plan B - hand over the management of the project directly to the builders - Maher Millard Construction (which emerged as an option at the Sub-Committee meeting on 29th August 2017, following a question from a member of the public)

consideration should also be given to revisit a rather cheaper option (Plan C), one that involves returning to the original recommendations from the Webster Report (2014), of keeping the original Village Hall, but replacing the floor slab with a suspended floor, localised underpinning of the wall and carrying out a full refurbishment of the interior e.g. partition walls, new toilets, kitchen, plus storage, rewiring and insulation etc.

Reference: York Sills Report (Robert Webster)

This will require a full cost/benefit analysis for each of the Plans.

Why you might ask?

Firstly, there are clearly difficult issues with the original plans that have necessitated the withdrawal of the planning application. We have yet to discover what these issues are, but I think we can be reasonably certain it will have some effect on the build design and/or have an extra cost implication for the development.

Secondly, the estimated costs are already reaching the maximum amount we can expect from a Public Works Loan, and there have already been amendments made to the design, attempting to keep within the £500,000 ceiling, allowing for contingencies.

Thirdly, a mandate for the favoured line of action should be sought by way of a referendum/public ballot, as indicated in the Sub-Committee Minutes dated 18th April 2016.

Village Hall Rebuilding Sub-Committee Minutes dated 18 April 2016
"The Parish Council was intent on being as open and inclusive as possible, and the final decision on the funding of the redevelopment would be decided by public ballot."

It concerns me slightly that on 4th July 2016 the Sub-Committee seemed to row back from a public ballot (as indicated in the 'confidential' session of the meeting):

Village Hall Sub-Committee Minutes dated 4th July 2016
"... the Sub-Committee noted that in order to apply for the necessary borrowing approval the Parish Council would need to have evidence of support for the project and that residents had been informed of the cost of the project and how it would be met.

It would not be necessary to hold a village referendum, but letters of support from villagers and current village hall users as well as the Social Club and VHMC would be sought, together with the replies received on the questionnaire which had been circulated previously."

It is interesting to note from the initial consultation exercise, out of 320 questionnaires issued, just one-third were returned (103 people responded). Of those respondents, approximately 70 people had used the Village Hall at some time during the last 12 months, with only 21 who used it monthly. As far as I am aware, no people registered an interest in volunteering their services to assist with the Village Hall.

Relying on information gained from the previous public consultation is now rather tenuous. It certainly doesn't demonstrate a convincing mandate from the community for a costly, ambitious plan for a total rebuild project.

To conclude

If there are further alterations to the plans for the Village Hall, and/or there are extra costs involved, then a new mandate needs to be sought from the community. We also need to have access to a full cost breakdown for retaining the existing building, taking into account the recommended repair and renovation work. The cost comparisons can then be considered in their entirety, along with the corresponding risks and benefits, so a final judgement can be made on the best way forward. Only then will residents of the village be able to review each option properly, before making their preference known in a public ballot.

Whichever route is taken (Plan A, B or C), it is only democratic for the community to have another opportunity to say whether or not they agree with the revised/amended plans, before monies are actually borrowed and people are faced with bigger council tax bills each year thereafter.