Council eyes £12m new offices
Politicians are being urged to give their backing to plans for a £12 million scheme to develop new council offices.
Bath and North East Somerset Council needs to reduce the number of buildings it occupies and has been looking at a range of options - including the possibility of a £13 million new headquarters on the edge of the city centre.
-
But its favoured option is to redevelop Keynsham Town Hall into new offices for itself, while creating a new library and visitor centre, offices which could be leased to other organisations, and shops.
The council would keep the Guildhall as its political headquarters - although it may no longer need the whole building.
It would hang onto Lewis House in Manvers Street - which would be refurbished, Northgate House in Upper Borough Walls and The Hollies in Midsomer Norton.
The move would see the authority - which currently has 12 different offices across its district - giving up premises such as Trimbridge House in Trim Street, Plymouth House in Monmouth Street, and Riverside in Keynsham.
It currently employs 1,951 head office staff who share 1,563 desks, but the council’s preferred option would cut work stations to 1,307.
There would also be a 43 per cent reduction in the total space its offices occupy in a move that will eventually save it £1.5 million a year.
The shake-up would take several years to complete but the council’s ruling cabinet is being asked to agree that B&NES should try to find a development partner for the Keynsham redevelopment scheme when it meets next Wednesday.
It is partly being driven by the imminent end of leases on some of the buildings the council currently uses.
A report to the meeting says building a new base in Bath would mean virtually pulling out of Keynsham and create “a significant negative impact” on the town - already hard hit by the rundown of the Cadbury chocolate factory.
Officials have looked at no fewer than 38 different locations in a wide-ranging examination of the council’s options for the future.
The biggest impact would be on the 18th century Guildhall, one of the city’s best-known and most prominent buildings.
A previous council report has suggested that just 20 staff would ultimately remain there and that a property expert would be brought in to identify “alternative and more appropriate uses for the accommodation within the building.”
The report to next week’s meeting does not shed any light on what might happen to the rest of the landmark building although it does say that potential income “from the release and redevelopment of the Guildhall” has not been taken into account in the council’s financial calculations.
The building has in the past been touted as a possible site for a casino.
B&NES says the shake-up will reduce its carbon footprint - cutting energy consumption by up to 70 per cent - free up office space in Bath, and encourage office-sharing with other organisations such as the NHS.
Cabinet member for resources Councillor Malcolm Hanney said: “With the council using significantly less office space by flexible working and other measures, there will be major efficiency savings. Importantly, with huge pressures on public finances, the proposal will see accommodation and service costs go down by 10 per cent a year. This will help the council to protect frontline services as it faces difficult financial pressures.”
22 Comments
View all
by Happy days, Bath
Friday, November 27 2009, 7:57AM
“Quote Bath and North east Somer set needs to reduce the number of buildings it occupies''
I WONDER if this has anything to do with the fact that Th e conservatives in power are going to transfer all the government owned buildings into a holding company and charge rents to councils for occupation”
by Kirsten, Bath
Thursday, November 26 2009, 2:00PM
“Keynsham? It's the fourth album by the Bonzos.”
by Migrant Worker, Bath
Thursday, November 26 2009, 1:50PM
“Moe's and rogerh's statements make a lot of sense, as usual. Spending lots of money with a vague prospect saving later always makes sense in theory. By the way, where and what is "Keynsham"?”
by rogerh, Bath
Thursday, November 26 2009, 11:32AM
“"Bath and North East Somerset Council needs to reduce the number of buildings it occupies..."
Needs to? They may want to but in what sense do they need to? Surely the claim that one large new building is the cheaper option is a theory rather than a proven fact.”
by rogerh, Bath
Thursday, November 26 2009, 10:25AM
“If you want to minimise travel and therefore your environmental footprint surely you need to base yourself as close as possible to your users and your work. So do you choose Bath (pop. 84,000 or Keynsham (pop. 15,500)? Do these savings include any allowance - in either sterling or carbon - for travel? And how will this £12m be funded? Some PFI deal on the never-never?”
by Moe, Bath
Wednesday, November 25 2009, 10:03PM
“When a private company needs to save money by cutting jobs and real-estate, they'll cut jobs and sell-off their real-estate. When the public sector does it, they spend several million in a long-term investment that may eventually yield savings, so long as you ignore many of the subsidiary costs associate with the change.
In this example, with an estimated £1.5M/year saving, the would need to stick to this plan for eight years just to break even. In reality, there would probably be three or four more 'cost-saving' initiatives in that time.
This is MoD standard policy - save money by collocating everyone in a purpose-built multi-million pound office complex, then 'save money' year-on-year by moving people back and forwards. Long terms strategies only work if you stick to them over the long-term, and government departments never do.
In reality, it saves money from someone's specific budget. Someone has to pay for the moves; and someone has to pay for the inevitable outsourcing required to replace the lost jobs. Overall, it ALWAYS costs more to the taxpayer.”
by Dave Larkhall, Larkhall
Wednesday, November 25 2009, 8:57PM
“Thankfully JC you are so right. Hot desk policy! Whatever next. We'll be having sustainibility, affordable housing, lessons will be learned and other jargonistic utterances thrown at us next.
The only desk I use is the one with my half empty bottle of rum drawer, supports my continuous flow of black coffee machine, and last weeks cheese sarnies.
I think the proposals are great, having always worked on the basis that housing all my staff under one roof encourages joined up writing and thinking. So, if you want your own desk, IKEA do some great deals.
As for the planning department. Isn't their office in Trim Street? Very apt.
Sorry anon, couldn't resist that.”
by Dave Larkhall, Larkhall
Wednesday, November 25 2009, 8:36PM
“Anon, I won't then.
Except Ugh!”
by Anon, Bath
Wednesday, November 25 2009, 8:14PM
“Caroline
I don't think the problem is going to be where the Office is. The real problem is going to be the fact that the number of Planning Officers or Listed Building Officers is going to be cut by April next year. The numbers haven't been announced but it is likely to be significant.
If you think access to Officers is hard now, imagine what it would be like when they have double the workload.
The notion of 'doing more for less' is a false dawn. It is impossible to have increased workloads, have sufficient time to consider the applications properly and improve the ''customer experience''. Remember when an application comes in, the applicant is a customer but so are the neighbours and anyone else who wants to comment on the merits or otherwise of a scheme.
All this is happening at a time when Major Projects (the department that brought you the Bath Transportation Package and is a non-statutory function of the Council) has a ring-fenced budget that can't and won't be touched.
Planning on the other hand (either love them or hate them, Dave from Larkhall you don't have to comment) is a front line, statutory duty the Council must provide and yet significant cuts to staff numbers are coming, soon.
The losers, will be the public and the quality of decisions of planning applications. It won't really matter if the office is based in Bath, MSN or Keynsham, if there are too few Officer's their to provide advice or deal with applications.
Its the Directors, Chief Executive and Members of BANES Council's choice.”
by JC, Bath
Wednesday, November 25 2009, 7:57PM
“Dave - Clearly you have never experienced a hot desk policy, where a lot of your time is wasted trying to find and book a desk. The same Management manual extols the benefits of team working and informal relations, which badly-run hot desking can stop. From what I hear, and I stress that it is only hearsay, a lot of Private Companies have revised the policy so that all office-based staff have a fixed workspace, and it only applies to those who are out of the office most of the time. Sadly, the Public Sector just slavishly follow the principle, chasing easy cost savings.”