Futures Forum: Knowle: The view from Save Our Sidmouth
there has been further correspondence.
Cllr Twiss to the Herald letters page: 27th September:
Home - Sidmouth Herald
The chair of SOS to the Herald letters page: 4th October:
Dear Sir,
I trust that readers will bear with me in this reply to Councillors Twiss's letter which was in last week's Herald; I only hope that they have the willpower to follow the somewhat tortuous discussions about the real effect on Sidmouth of EDDC's proposed move and the costs of doing so.
As usual, EDDC's comments are complicated by obfuscation and lack of clarity, leaving out inconvenient facts and considerations. We will, we fear, have to agree to disagree about some of the facts relating to the Council's pipe-dream of relocating from Sidmouth, but it is worthwhile asking some questions;-
- Cllr Twiss baldly states that,;-
- "remaining in Knowle is not an option"
- "the move is necessary"
- "the Knowle buildings are not Fit For Purpose"
None of these statements is supported by any facts; they represent an EDDC predetermined view, to which any evidence is then related.,
We challenge Cllr Twiss to define" Fitness for Purpose" and then provide real measured evidence as to how the Knowle fails this definition.
- Cllr Twiss acknowledges that there will be significant job losses in Sidmouth, (90). The 20 jobs he sees as being created were in fact estimated to be created by the provision of a Care Home on the Knowle; which has now been abandoned by EDDC.
In the light of this, perhaps he can tell us where and what these new jobs will be; in any event they will hardly be an adequate replacement for high quality jobs in EDDC offices.
- EDDC's own figures state that local spend by EDDC employees is nearly £1m pa, and that £3.5 m pa accrues to the Sidmouth economy through competitive tendering. Should a move take place, Sidmouth will certainly lose the former, and may well lose much of the latter, because it will be geographically more remote and therefore costs will be higher.
Perhaps Cllr Twiss will let us know how these economic losses to Sidmouth will be replaced?
- Our detailed calculations show that the existing "modern" offices, (built by EDDC in 1970 onwards), are nearly sufficient in area to satisfy their needs. Cllr Twiss disputes our figures.
Perhaps Cllr Twill can provide the detailed calculation which supports his rejection of our figures.
- We know that a 20% Design and Construction contingency has been incorporated, but the existence of Build and Occupation risks has been omitted from the Risk Table.
Perhaps Cllr Twiss will say why EDDC are not considering publically and proactively managing these risks through the Table|?
- Perhaps Cllr Twiss will let us know why EDDC propose to relocate from the Knowle when their proposals are in direct contravention of Policy E3 in their new Local Plan, which states that "Permission will not be granted for the change of use of current or allocated employment land and premises where it would harm business and employment opportunities in the area".
Finally what Cllr Twiss cannot dispute is EDDC's proposal to borrow £4.8 million in order to finance an unnecessary move that Council tax payers were promised would be cost neutral. How sensible is that at a time when Councils everywhere are being forced to tighten their belts?"
Richard Thurlow
Chair, SOS
Today, 11th October, SOS have published a critique of the District Council's decision to relocate:
THE KNOWLE: THE VIEW FROM "SAVE OUR
SIDMOUTH"
East Devon District Council, (EDDC), have an
"ambition" to move from the Knowle, because they say the existing
buildings are "unfit for purpose". They want a new building elsewhere
which is more economic to run and just over half the size of the existing Knowle
buildings.
EDDC's reasons for the move are:
- A reduction in operating costs of
some £240,000 per year over 20 years , (£4.8m)
- More flexible, open plan offices,
with efficient modern working practices.
- A reduction in CO2 of 5200 tonnes of carbon over 20 years.
Earlier this year they applied for Planning
Permission to develop much of the Knowle, including Parkland ,
Car Parks and Gardens, in the face of much public opposition.
EDDC admitted that the effects on Sidmouth would be;-
- Loss of over 90 jobs to Sidmouth
- Possible loss of £3.5m pa in
contracts awarded to firms in the town
- Loss of nearly £1m in income to
Sidmouth provided by the 380+ employees.
- Transfer of nearly 80 Sidmouth
based jobs elsewhere
Due to errors in the planning application,
they had to submit it four times. They spent over £300,000 on this exercise
plus the cost of technical employees’ time, which they assert they cannot cost.
We estimate the total cost of that exercise as being well over £500,000.... of public
money
Fortunately, the strength of feeling in the
town, our opposition, and EDDC's own Planning Committee led to the rejection of
the proposal.
But EDDC still believe that they need to move
and have prepared further reports and
papers to justify it. Much of the earlier work, costing over £500,000 has not been reused. As a result they decided at a meeting in July, to vacate the Knowle, and will use the
remainder of the year to determine where and when to relocate.
To fund the move, EDDC proposes that a
Developer be appointed to build the new office and develop the Knowle buildings
and the Manstone depot for 70 houses. Despite
earlier assurances that the move would be " cost neutral" to the
Taxpayers, ( but not to Sidmouth), EDDC say they may now borrow up to £4.8m to
fund it, (the costs to be recovered over 20 years of savings from the move!).
We believe that;-
·
the move is unnecessary as they
could renovate the newer buildings on the site, the area of which is
nearly the area they require. They could
fund this by selling off the old Victorian buildings for housing.
·
they have both selectively used
and interpreted data which supports their case, and have repeatedly ignored
factual data which counters their argument.
·
they have based their case on fundamentally flawed
information.
·
They use opinion and emotion
when facts and statistics are needed.
The major flaws are;-
- They have made a mistake in
calculating the size of their existing "newer" offices at the
Knowle, (built by themselves in the 1970s/1980s), leading to the view that
it is not large enough for their needs. In fact it is nearly sufficient for the size they
say they need in a new location.
- Their estimate of the costs needed
to bring the Knowle up to reasonable standards is over £15.2m, but this
includes the large old Victorian building which is 60% of the total and
which is not needed. (It should be noted that in July last year the
estimate was £12.96m!... so much
for EDDC cost estimating!)
- They have never costed in detail
the work needed to bring these "newer" offices up to modern
standards.
- They estimate that they would need
to spend some £1.5m to rectify deficiencies in all the existing buildings
but this is only needed now because as EDDC admit THEY HAVE NOT CARRIED OUT PLANNED MAINTENANCE FOR YEARS.
- They justify their estimate of
savings of operating costs by comparing those of a new office against the operating costs of the whole
of the existing Knowle buildings. If they were to refurbish the
"newer" buildings at the Knowle to modern standards, these
"savings" would largely disappear.
- Carbon savings have been assessed
on only the new building's operation. A Government paper states that it
will take 50 years for a new building to recover the costs in carbon release
of a new build. EDDC have ignored this inconvenient truth.
- They have ignored the costs of
staff time and the planning and implementation of the move.
- Many of the risks EDDC say are associated
with the relocation, they list as HIGH.. but most importantly, they have
omitted one of the major risks, that of increased unforeseen construction
costs; a significant risk
- There is no evidence of any cost-benefit
analysis that assesses the impacts on their employees, Sidmouth residents
and businesses and more widely on all of
- None of the possible locations for
a new building are as central to the population of the District as is Sidmouth
ALL these flaws and omissions point to the
preparation of a project which is founded in emotion rather than reality and
facts. We agree that the existing Victorian office is outmoded and not as
efficient as is needed, but we do not believe that EDDC have examined in any detail the
retention, refurbishment and modest expansion of the newer parts of their offices, which we believe is a viable option.
EDDC are still pursuing this move with a
single-minded enthusiasm seldom seen in projects of more general benefit to
taxpayers. They show a determination to win the argument regardless of the many
facts which undermine it.
In this time of economic difficulty , how can
EDDC even contemplate borrowing over £4m to spend on a new office, whose
recovery rate, even if ALL their predictions are correct, will be over the next
20 years?
We do hope that the project, if it does unfortunately
go ahead against all rationality, does not become the disaster we fear. We, the
residents of East Devon , would pay for it for
years to come.
Knowle relocation…summary of SOS views | Save Our Sidmouth
.
.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment