Joint Development Group

The Joint Development Group was set up in November 2005 to discuss the “Community Properties of the town and their management. The group comprised three members of each of the The Town Council, The Town Trust and The Old School Community Trust.

Our shared aim is to plan for the best possible resources for the town, fit for the foreseeable future, and to suggest ways in which they may be funded and managed most efficiently.

• In 2006 we created a single table of community assets and their ownership and management
• In 2007 we canvassed all community groups using building facilities in the town for their views, with a questionnaire and a follow-up meeting. The detailed results of that study and a copy of the questionnaire are available.

The information in the report is based on that questionnaire and the resulting meetings together with subsequent discussion within the Joint Development group.

Bradninch Joint Development Group

Report  22 April 2008

A    Introduction

The Joint Development Group was set up in November 2005 by Bradninch Town Council (as Trustees for West End Hall), Bradninch Town Trust (as Trustees of the Guildhall, Old School site and other houses and fields and Bradninch Old School Community Trust (as Trustees of the Youth Drop-In Centre which has been operating at the old school site) to discuss the “Properties and management structure of the trusts”.

The full Terms of Reference were agreed as being:-
1. To identify the Community Assets (CA), their ownership and management.
2. To investigate the benefits of a more efficient management of these assets by:-

• The possible merging of trusts
• Reviewing the objectives of the various trusts
• Being accountable
• Looking at an overview of all CA and finances available

3. To propose a plan for the possible sale of assets for the benefit of the community.
4. To look at selling the Old School and make the Guildhall a more practical building.
5. To use any additional funds from the sale, with Charity Commission (CC) approval for
    Youth provision in the town, (not necessarily a building).

6. Retain some land for car parking for the Guildhall.
7. To review the facility and better manage the asset of West End Hall
8. To remove or re-use the toilet block to the rear of the Guildhall
9. To liaise with other groups within the community on the assets to the benefit of
    Bradninch.

The group comprised three members of each of the organisations with two attending each meeting.

Our shared aim was to secure the best possible resources for the town, fit for the foreseeable future, funded as far as possible with the support of grant aid, and to suggest ways in which they may be managed most efficiently.

In 2006 we created a single table of community assets and their ownership and management (detailed in Appendix 1)

In 2007 we canvassed all community groups using building facilities in the town for their views, with a questionnaire and a follow-up meeting. Amongst other things we asked their opinions of existing facilities also what facilities they would like to be able to use.

The detailed results of that study and a copy of the questionnaire are available as Appendix 2.  The findings here are based on that questionnaire and the resulting meetings together with subsequent discussion within the Joint Development group.

B    Main Findings from The Survey

Some groups were satisfied with the facilities available to them, but many groups were not entirely happy. The main issues identified are:

General
There are several buildings in Bradninch which are available for hire for events and meetings. But there are several problems with the buildings:

1. Most of the buildings are old and can be expected to require substantial funds in the future to keep them in a good state of repair.
2. The buildings tend to have facilities which are becoming outdated, for instance heating and lighting is a problem that is easily identified. Less obvious is the lack of broadband and audio-visual facilities which will be required by an increasing number of users in the future.
3. The number of buildings means that they can be in competition for events, and potentially in competition for funds.
4. One other specific issue is the lack of office and storage space for Town Council business.

Each building is operated by a group or committee responsible only for that building. This can run the risk that decisions are taken in isolation and not necessarily in the wider interests of the community.

Guildhall
The Guildhall is at the heart of the town but has a number of limitations which make it a less than ideal building for community use. From our research, discussion and questionnaires, we identified the following problems:

1. It has minimal parking, which is a problem for most activities and reduces the scope for earning income from many events.
2. Although recently improved, kitchen facilities are relatively limited which can reduce the ambition and profitability of catering at events.
3. Heating, toilets, lighting, seating, disabled access, lack of modern audio-visual technology were all criticised and so was the lack of smaller ancillary rooms.
4. The hall is a poor shape for big events and not intimate enough for small events, the audience area is too small and narrow, the stage is restricting, has poor access and is inflexible, with poor changing and storage facilities, the acoustics, sound-proofing, electrics and lighting are poor. Access to the hall is upstairs so equipment needs to be carried up, which is difficult and can cause damage.
5. Some art and performance events would be more successful if there were adjacent outside areas.

We feel that the Guildhall is an inherently expensive building to maintain and it is likely to take up substantial resources in the future to maintain.   Based on the feedback we received from groups, from reviewing facilities that are available in comparable communities and from our own discussions, it falls short of modern expectations of wiring, safety, accessibility and amenities.

West End Hall
This building has a number of problems, most significantly:

1. It is in a poor state of repair and it will require significant maintenance expenditure.
2. It is let by the Bradninch Youth Centre Trust (whose members are the Town Councillors) on a lease to the Scout Group,. Currently there are 16 years remaining. The lease requires the landlord to maintain the building externally and the Scouts internally, but the landlord has limited funds to do this. This lease could be reviewed by mutual consent.

Youth Facilities
Our research indicates that the facilities for youth in Bradninch are inadequate for a modern growing community. For instance:

1. The scout group has indoor space at West End Hall, but the group has other ambitions which it is not possible to achieve there. There is inadequate external space for the group to use for activities, and lack of storage space for equipment.
2. The playgroup needs more space, better buildings and more outdoor space, and we know that playgroup is looking to move to bigger premises.
3. There is a lack of facilities for teenagers and young people, for instance no building is currently suitable for use as a youth centre, no safe outdoor space that can be used without causing disturbance to neighbours, no soundproof rehearsal space for music practice, and access to some sports facilities is limited.

There is a history of limited interest  by the community in youth affairs, and some signs of alienation between some younger and older people in Bradninch, manifested in various forms of conflict, annoyance etc.  We believe that investing in youth facilities may help address these issues.

C    Options examined by the Joint Development Group

The group considered a large number of options and combinations.  These included renovation of the existing West End Hall, (which would not be able to provide any exterior space) and development of the Old School currently boarded up behind the Baptist Church (which would not allow easy access to facilities.)

After considerable discussion we identified a number of possible ways to address the identified issues. They range from  the very low-key which would not involve many changes or much expense. Other suggestions are much more fundamental and would involve considerable work and expense to carry them out. In this report we present them as four main options:

Option 1:
No major change to the buildings and their management

Option 2:
Minor upgrades to the Guildhall plus new-build dedicated youth building on another site.

Option 3:
Major alterations to the Guildhall plus new-build dedicated youth building on another site.

Option 4:
New-build Community Hall on another site incorporating dedicated youth space.

The next section of the report discusses these in turn:

Option 1:
No Major Change to the Buildings and their Management

This is the ‘status quo’ and assumes that each group which operates a building will continue to do so without any major change in management or ownership.

This option might or might not include minor expenditure on the Guildhall to make it more useful as a community building, for instance minor improvements could be made to soundproofing and acoustics, wiring, some storage space could be found, the lighting could be upgraded, etc. Indeed, since our survey in 2007 some changes have already been made to the Guildhall as a result of feedback from the groups. Of course, the cost will depend on what is being done, but it is assumed in this report that the cost of these improvements will be low, and the benefits probably rather limited because this option makes no fundamental change to the buildings.

The advantage is that this is the simplest outcome, requiring no particular action in the immediate future. Also, if one building has a problem, the others will remain available for community use.

There are a number of disadvantages to this option:

1. Because it is the status quo, it means that current needs and emerging future needs of the community may not be addressed, which limits opportunities for people in Bradninch.  
2. The problems identified above in the Introduction and many of the facilities sought after by local groups will still remain unresolved. Parking is one of the key points which this option does not address, and other problems which remain include the Guildhall kitchen, other facilities, and the size/shape of the halls.
3. These will continue to limit the opportunity for the buildings to generate revenue.
4. Lack of coordination between owners/managers/users of buildings may mean that the Town may miss out on opportunities to get funding for significant improvements to facilities.
5. Because nothing fundamental has changed in this option, it would remain that the long-term maintenance and running costs of the old buildings will be high.
6. Each building will continue to need a committee or group to look after it.
7. The problem of West End Hall will remain unresolved.

Option 2:
Minor upgrades to the Guildhall plus New-Build Dedicated Youth Building on another Site.

This option proposes to do minor improvements to the Guildhall to make it a better community building, and in addition to build a youth building on another site in Bradninch to provide amenities for all the young people’s groups.

Minor upgrades to the Guildhall
As described above, the limitations of the Guildhall mean that its facilities are less than ideal for the main public building for Bradninch. This part of the project proposes carrying out minor alterations. For instance, we envisage work to upgrade the lighting, electrics, bar, kitchen etc.

These works would not alter the structure of the building. They would make the building somewhat more attractive to local groups, and might make it a more attractive venue for events such as bands, theatre groups, private parties & receptions etc.

New-build Dedicated Youth Space
It is unlikely that any group acting alone could generate enough capital funds to develop improved facilities, but working together this funding may become possible. Depending on which groups are involved, this would involve co-operation between Scouts Group, Youth Group and Playgroup to set up a building with joint facilities.

Each group would have their own space plus joint access to common areas such as the kitchen, toilets and meeting rooms. Each group would have its own storage facilities. In practice the groups would be kept apart by having their own time to access the site and during this time each would have exclusive use of their part and the shared facilities.

It is envisaged that this capital cost could be funded by four main capital funding sources:

1. Sale of West End Hall, with the proceeds legally restricted to being used for youth provision in Bradninch.
2. Part of the proceeds of the possible future sale of the Old School site at Millway.
3. Funds raised by Playgroup.
4. External Grant funding, including Devon County Council funding.

The main advantages are:

1. It allows each existing young people’s group to resolve its need for facilities for the foreseeable future, with premises which will be purpose-designed for their needs and additional scope to involve more/new young people/youth groups
2. It resolves the problem of West End Hall.
3. It addresses the lack of facilities for young people.
4. A new building would have better insulation, draught-proofing etc and have lower energy consumption than the older buildings.

The main prerequisites are:

1. Identify a suitable site and get planning permission.
2. Generate sufficient capital to purchase the site and build the premises.
3. A system of management will need to be worked out by the groups to ensure that the premises are effectively managed.
4. Each group must develop secure funding streams to ensure that enough money is available for the upkeep and running of the premise

Summary of option 2

If this activity were carried out, the majority of issues relating to young people’s activities would be addressed,  the Guildhall would become a somewhat better venue, and it would address some of the issues raised by the user groups, including perhaps renovation of kitchen, stage and bar areas.

This option would have the following disadvantages:

1. Lack of parking adjacent to the major community facility would remain as a key problem
2. The poor size/shape of the halls, lack of smaller rooms, storage etc  would continue to limit the use of the Guildhall and thus limit the opportunity for the Guildhall to generate revenue.
3. Many of the facilities sought after by local groups would remain unresolved.
4. The long-term maintenance and running costs of the Guildhall would still be high.

Option 3:
Major Alterations to the Guildhall plus New-Build Dedicated Youth Building on Another Site.

This option proposes to  make substantial improvements including possible structural alterations to the Guildhall to make it a better community building and build a youth building on another site in Bradninch to provide amenities for all the young people’s groups.

Major alterations to the Guildhall
As described above, the limitations of the Guildhall mean that its facilities are less than ideal for the main public building for Bradninch. This part of the project proposes carrying out a major refurbishment so that it becomes more fit for purpose.

In particular, this work will improve the building for letting to local groups, and will make it a more attractive venue for events such as bands, theatre groups, private functions etc.  We believe that the building will be difficult to alter effectively, but subject to survey and planning restrictions, the alterations envisaged here could include:

1. Redevelopment on the existing site and within the existing footprint, with the main façade remaining unchanged.
2. Widening of the ballroom into the upstairs landing to give a better / bigger main room and better use of space which currently is unused.
3. Upgrading the kitchen and bar facilities.
4. Remodelling the stage.
5. Full upgrade of electrics & lighting facilities

New-build Dedicated Youth Space

This element of option 3 is the same as in option 2, and is repeated here.  

It is unlikely that any group acting alone could generate enough capital funds to develop improved facilities, but working together this funding may become possible. Depending on which groups are involved, this could involve co-operation between Scouts Group, Youth Group, and Playgroup to set up a building with joint facilities.

Each group would have their own space plus joint access to common areas such as kitchen, toilets, meeting rooms. Each group would have their own storage facilities. In practice the groups would be kept apart by having their own time to access the site and during this time each would have exclusive use of their part and the shared facilities.

It is envisaged that this capital cost could be funded by four main funding sources:

1. Sale of West End Hall, with the proceeds legally restricted to being used for youth provision in Bradninch.
2. Part of the proceeds of any future sale of the Old School site at Millway.
3. Funds raised by Playgroup.
4. External Grant funding, including Devon County Council funding.

The main advantages are:

1. It allows each existing young people’s group to resolve its need for facilities for the foreseeable future, with premises which will be purpose-designed for their needs and additional scope to involve more/new young people/youth groups
2. It resolves the problem of West End Hall.
3. It addresses the lack of facilities for young people.
4. A new building would have better insulation, draught-proofing etc and have lower energy consumption than the older buildings.

The main prerequisites are:

1. Identify a suitable site and get planning permission.
2. Generate sufficient capital to purchase the site and build the premises.
3. A system of management will need to be worked out by the groups to ensure that the premises are effectively managed.
4. Each group must develop secure funding streams to ensure that enough money is available for the upkeep and running of the premises.

Summary of option 3

After this work the majority of issues relating to young people’s activities would be addressed and the Guildhall would become a much better venue, could address many of the issues raised by the user groups.  

However the following disadvantages would remain.

1. Parking is the key problem which this option does not address, and this will certainly continue to limit the opportunity for the Guildhall to generate revenue to offset the substantial capital outlay.
2. The long-term maintenance and running costs of the Guildhall will still be high, although doing this work could result in some long-term cost savings.
3.  Major funding would be required (possibly from future sale of old school site)

Option 4

New-build Community Hall incorporating Dedicated Youth Space

This final option proposes building an entirely new purpose-designed community building on another site in Bradninch with good road access and parking. Amongst other uses, it would incorporate provision for the identified youth activities.

It is unlikely that any group acting alone could generate enough capital funds to develop improved facilities, but working together this funding may become possible. Depending on which groups are involved, this would involve co-operation between Town Trust, Town Council, Scouts Group, Youth Group, and Playgroup to set up a building with joint facilities.

It is envisaged that this capital cost could be funded by five main capital funding sources:

1. Sale of West End Hall (possibly for 2 housing units), with the proceeds legally restricted to being used for youth provision in Bradninch.
2. Possibly part of the proceeds of the possible future sale of the Old School site at Millway.
3. Funds raised by Playgroup.
4. Grant funding, including Devon County Council funding.
5. Any possible surplus from redeveloping the Guildhall.

There are some significant issues involved with this proposal, especially:

1.  If the Guildhall is retained as a public building it would be in competition with the new community hall. Therefore it is assumed that this planned new building would supersede the Guildhall as the main public building in Bradninch,
2.  It would require a fundamental change in the purpose and constitution of the Town Trust, as the existing constitution of the Town Trust does not allow for such action to be taken.  Significant restructuring of the Town Trust, with Charity commission approval would be needed. The ability to achieve this has not been tested.
3. This plan does not identify an alternative use for the Guildhall. This will require further investigation, in particular any planning restrictions on re-development and constitutional restrictions regarding sale.
4. The new building would require more capital funding than any other option put forward here (though it could be cheaper in the long run because of lower long-term costs because of cheaper maintenance and lower use of electricity/gas).  
5. There would need to be close examination of the implications of managing and owning this property

The main advantages of this option are:

1. This new community building would be designed with sufficient parking.
2. This building would be designed with excellent modern facilities, having the potential to address the great majority of the issues identified in this groups’ research.
3. It would remove the need for expensive long-term maintenance and improvement of the Guildhall and Old Girls School, (which even now are giving major problems to their owners) and will continue to do so for many years.
4. It addresses the lack of facilities for young people, allowing each young people’s group to resolve its need for facilities for the foreseeable future, with premises which will be purpose-designed for their needs.
5. It resolves the problem of West End Hall.
6. The buildings would have better insulation, draught-proofing etc and have significantly lower energy consumption than the older buildings,
7. It has the potential of uniting disparate parts of the community under a single cause – to create a new space for all.

The main prerequisites are:

1. Identify a suitable site and get planning permission.
2. Generate sufficient capital to purchase the site and build the premises.
3. A system of management and ownership will need to be worked out by the groups to ensure that the premises are effectively managed.
4. Each group must develop secure funding streams to ensure that enough money is available for the upkeep and running of the premises.
5. Political will to undertake major change.

D    Sites in Bradninch

A local landowner has identified to the Town Council a number of possible sites for development in Bradninch.

Further work will need to be done on assessing the suitability of these or other plots as possible sites for options 2, 3 or 4 in this document.

Other sites may also become apparent in the future.

E    Outline proposals for governance and management.

The options chosen will influence the most appropriate detail of management and governance.  Here follows an outline of the issues faced by all the options.  

Bradninch buildings and other assets are owned by three groups:

• The Town Trust
• Bradninch Town Council
• A Corporate Trust consisting of members of the council.

The assets and ownership details are all contained in Appendix 1

Assets owned by the various churches are outside the scope of this exercise.

The Town Trust is constrained by its trust deed to look after all its assets in order “To maintain the Town Hall as a reading room and place of recreation and assembly for the inhabitants of Bradninch”

The Corporate Trust has one building (West End Hall) with insufficient income from it to do any required major work. This trust exists to benefit the young people of the town.

The Joint Development Group cannot dictate how the various bodies deal with the various buildings owned by different groups but the following options are put forward for thought and discussion with a view to the improving the future governance of the town’s assets.

Option 1

No change. Governance remains in its fragmented form and the town goes on as before.

Option2

Place all community assets under one trust. This would remove asset ownership from the elected Town Council, leaving it free to run such day to day affairs of the town over which it has influence or control. If the Town Trust followed this model it would have to change its trust deed (via the charity Commissioners) so that its assets were owned for the benefit of the town. This would give the trust greater freedom of action.

It may be worth considering placing the assets in a Community Interest Company (CIC). These CICs have a statutory lock on the assets, must pass a ‘Community Interest Test’ in order to be formed, must produce an annual report and are controlled by a CIC regulator. They were introduced to make it easier for social enterprises to raise finance and to prevent community assets from being sold for private gain. Fuller details of CICs are in the appendix.

Option 3

Form a new body with a strategic role in helping Bradninch people to identify what the community needs. For example, it could lead the process of planning the improvement of community assets and facilities, including sponsoring consultation with interested parties and groups. It must be accountable to the people of Bradninch, possibly with a mandate from the electorate. It should be able to bring in other members to advise it as and when necessary, to get the best possible outcomes.

There should be some acknowledgement of the difficulty of getting different groups to abide by plans made by an umbrella group. This is because of e.g. constraints imposed by constitutions which might prevent a party from carrying out an action

It may be useful for groups to consider the model used by the town of Chagford for the governance of their assets. The town has separate restricted pots of money which are held by the umbrella trust. The monies in each pot are used solely for the purpose for which the money was initially raised.

Afterword

The Joint Group considers that Bradninch needs a plan for the future. To have an organisation that looks after the strategic overview of all assets in the light of the plan might be a way forward.

Opportunities for external funding and partnership working exist today which could not have been envisaged by the founders of the Town Trusts’ governing documents or those that have from time to time revised the documents.   

To some extent this is good news in that opportunities for development and investment exist now to be seized upon.  Achieving external funding in the current climate involves a close examination of the community organisations involved, their management and their inter-relatedness.

The existing trusts might benefit from being modernised and rationalized in order that they may better serve the town and that the townspeople may fully understand and support their role.

This might be the last opportunity to do this for many years to come, and decisions made now will have far-reaching consequences.

F    Recommendations

The group recommends that these four options, together with the associated governance issues, are considered in more depth by the Bradninch Town Council, Bradninch Town Trust and Bradninch Old School Community Trust.  

We also recommend that the full report is made known to the people of Bradninch as part of a wider consultation on the way to make better facilities available to the aspiring groups and the people of Bradninch.

Clearly there are significant issues for the town to address and the group feels that the Town Council is best placed to drive this forward.  

Although the Joint group has fulfilled its role, individual members are willing to contribute to the development of these proposals.

The Chairman of the group thanks all the present and past members of the group for the hard work and thinking that has gone into the report, and he commends it to the parent bodies.

Appendix   4

Members of the group in the period 2005-2008

From Bradninch Town Council:
George Bryant (Chairman)
John Ayres
Catherine Elliott
Dorothy Parsons
Gerald Reed
Luke Taylor
Lorna Knowles (Clerk)

From Bradninch Town Trust:
Julie Drew
John Hole
Nigel Price

From Bradninch Old School Community Trust:
Anthony Richards
Chris Southwell
Simon Tytherleigh