National Heritage Memorial Fund;

National Heritage Memorial Fund;

PART 1 / ITEM NO.
REPORT OF THESTRATEGIC DIRECTOR FOR CUSTOMER & SUPPORT SERVICES
TO: TheDeputy City Mayor
ON: 11th June 2013
TITLE:13/63072/ACV - Assets of Community Value application for
pair of Stothert and Pitt Cranes, Ontario Basin, Trafford Road
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Deputy City Mayor refuses the inclusion of the Stothert and Pitt Cranes at Ontario Basin on the list of Assets of Community Value.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A community nomination has been received in respect of the pair of Stothert and Pitt Cranes at Ontario Basin, Trafford Road
If the Deputy City Mayor considers that the site falls within the definition of an Asset of Community Value as set out in section 88 of the Localism Act 2011, the Council is required to include the land in the Local Authority list of Assets of Community Value and to register a the consequent restrictions on sale with HM Land Registry.
This report recommends that the cranes fall outside the definition of assets that can be listed.
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS:
(Available for public inspection)
Localism Act 2011
Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012
Community Right to Bid: Non-statutory advice note for Local Authorities

KEY DECISION: No

DETAILS:
  1. Introduction
Part 5 Chapter 3 of the Localism Act, and the Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations, which together deliver the Community Right to Bid, aim to encourage communities to become more active in joining together to save and take over assets which are significant to them. The scheme gives communities the opportunity to identify assets of community value and have them listed and, when they are put up for sale, more time to raise finance and prepare to bid for them.
The provisions give certain groups a right to nominate a building or other land for listing by the Local Authority as an asset of community value. Provided that the nomination is made by a qualifying group (a “Community Nomination”) it must be listed if the Deputy Mayor is satisfied that a principal (“non-ancillary”) use of the asset furthers (or has recently furthered) their community’s social well-being or social interests (which include cultural, sporting or recreational interests) and is realistically likely to do so in the future. After listing, the land owner has the opportunity to request a review of the listing. When a listed asset is to be sold or leased for more than 25 years, local community groups will in many cases have a fairer chance to make a bid to buy it on the open market.
Upon receipt of a Community Nomination, Local Authorities have 8 weeks to make a judgement about whether the asset meets the definition set out in section 88 of the Act or whether it falls within one of the excluded categories, including residential property, set out in Schedule 1 of the Regulations.
Current use
Section 88 (1) of the Localism Act states that, a building or other land in a local authority's area is land of community value if in the opinion of the authority—
(a) an actual current use of the building or other land that is not an ancillary use furthers the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community, and
(b) it is realistic to think that there can continue to be non-ancillary use of the building or other land which will further (whether or not in the same way) the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community.
Recent past use
Section 88 (2) of the Localism Act states that, a building or other land in a local authority's area is land of community value if in the opinion of the authority -
(a) there is a time in the recent past when an actual use of the building or other land that was not an ancillary use furthered the social wellbeing or interests
of the local community, and
(b) it is realistic to think that there is a time in the next five years when there could be non-ancillary use of the building or other land that would further
(whether or not in the same way as before) the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community.
If the Deputy Mayor agrees that the asset meets the section 88 definition, the Council must place it on the List of Assets of Community Value, on the Local Land Charges Register and, if the land is registered apply for a restriction on the Land Register.
If the Local Authority do not agree that the asset meets the section 88 definition, or it is one of the excluded categories they must place it on a list of assets nominated but not listed.
Once an asset has been listed nothing further will happen unless and until the owner decides to dispose of it either through a freehold sale or the grant or assignment of a lease of 25 years or more.
A person who is an owner of land included in a local authority's list of assets of community value must not enter into a relevant disposal of the land unless, where applicable, each of conditions A to C of section 95 of the Localism Act is met.
Condition A - is that that the owner has notified the local authority in writing of that person's wish to enter into a relevant disposal of the land.
Condition B - is that either— (a) the a period of six weeks starting on the date of the owner’s notification has ended without the local authority having received during that period, from any community interest group, a written
request (however expressed) for the group to be treated as a potential bidder in relation to the land, or (b) a period of six months starting on the date of the owner’s notification has ended.
Condition C - is that a period of eighteen months starting on the date of the owner’s notification has not ended.
The provisions do not restrict in any way who the owner of a listed asset can sell their property to or at what price. Nor do they confer a first right of refusal to community interest groups.
2. Consideration of the application
Site details
The application relates to a site at Ontario Basin off Trafford Road which accommodates two cranes.
The cranes date to 1966 and were originally travelling cranes serving number 6 dock (now known as South Bay). They were moved to their current position at the end of the former Number 8 dock (now known as Ontario Basin)in 1988, effectively becoming fixed items of street furniture as an indication of the original industrial use of the docks.
The surrounding area is mixed in nature with commercial and residential properties within close proximity. The cranes are located adjacent to a public footpath and the metro link line which runs between the footpath and the road.
Site owner/interests
Owner: Salford City Council
Community Nomination
The application is submitted by Salford Quays Heritage And Nature Group.
Details of the group constitution have been submitted in support of the application. The objectives of the group are detailed within this document as follows:
-The preservation of the heritage of Salford Quays
-The conservation of the environment/wildlife of Salford Quays
-To encourage the goodwill and involvement of the wider community
-To foster community spirit and encourage civic pride
-To promote Salford Quays as an international tourism/eco-tourism destination
Membership of the group is open to anyone who has an interest in assisting the group to achieve its aim and is willing to adhere to the rules of the group. Any money acquired by the group shall be paid into an account operated by the Management Committee in the name of the group and all funds must be applied to the objects of the group and for no other purpose.
Section 89 (1) (b) of the Localism Act states that land in a Local Authority’s area which is of community value may be included by a Local Authority in its list of assets of community value in response to a community nomination.
Section 89 (2) defines ‘community nomination’ as a nomination which nominates land in the local authority's area for inclusion in the local authority's list of assets of community value, and is made;
(i) by a parish council in respect of land in England in the parish council's area,
(ii) by a community council in respect of land in Wales in the community council's area, or
(iii) by a person that is a voluntary or community body with a local connection.
Regulation 5 of The Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012 provides details of what is meant by ‘a voluntary or community body’.
In this instance, the applicants, Salford Quays Heritage And Nature Groupis an unincorporated body – (i) whose members include at least 21 individuals, and (ii) which does not distribute any surplus it makes to its members and therefore falls within the definition of a voluntary or community body under regulation 5 (1) (point c).
Is the current/recent use of community value?
The supporting statement submitted with the application sets out that the cranes have industrial heritage value as they represent internationally important representations of the original use of the docks and stand as a testament to the dockers who grafted to make Salford the largest inland port in the world.
It goes on to say that the cranes are the last survivors of those which once served the docks of the port of Manchester and that they are iconic, well loved assets of the community who view the cranes with Salfordian pride and that saving the cranes has universal support within the Salford community.
The cranes were previously detailedon the local list, indicating that theywere considered to be of local significance, which would concur with the supporting statement submitted with the application which details that the cranes are part of the industrial heritage of the area. It should however be noted that following a review of the local list on 14th May 2013 the cranes have been removed from the listdue to their condition and the fact that authorisation has been given for their removal.
It is accepted that currently the siting/presence of the cranes has furthered the social wellbeing and interests of the local community as required by Section 88 (1) (a) of the Localism Act and therefore is of community value. It is worth noting that the cranes meet the definition of Land under the Act whereby it includes “part of any other structure.”)The use does not fall within one of the excluded categories detailed in Schedule 1 of the Regulations.
Could future use be of community value?
In terms of the future use of the site, the regulations require the Local Authority to consider whether it is realistic to think that there can continue to be non-ancillary use of the building or other land which will further (whether or not in the same way) the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community. (Section 88 (1) (b)).
In relation to the future use of the site, the supporting statement sets out that the group intends to apply to the Heritage Lottery Fund for a funding grant to cover all the costs of the restorationand future maintenance. The group consider that with vision and innovation the cranes can become iconic landmarks that can be utilised to attract increased numbers of tourists to The Quays, therefore increasing local job opportunities, especially during the 120 year anniversary of the docks that is happening in 2014. It also states that the cranes will be retained for the benefit of future generations of Salfordians.
It appears from the supporting statement that no funds have been applied for or granted at this stage.
It should be noted that officers from the Council submitted a HLF Heritage Grant pre-application for funding in 2012. The response received expressed concerns regarding value for money and indicated that a full application was unlikely to be considered a priority for funding. The following sources of external funding were also investigated without success:
  • The Pilgrim Trust;
  • Trusthouse Charitable Foundation;
  • National Heritage Memorial Fund;
  • The Association for Industrial Archaeology – Restoration Grant; and
  • English Heritage – Grants for Historic Buildings, Monuments and Designated Landscapes.
The cranes are in a poor state of repair and safety measures (including protective fencing around the base of the cranes and a footpath closure) are currently in place to protect the public from the risk of falling debris. In the absence of significant funding to undertake the necessary repair work in the immediate future, their condition will inevitably continue to deteriorate further and it is considered that eventually there would be no other solution but to remove them from the site to remove the safety risk to the public.
Whilst it is acknowledged that the cranes are of community value, consideration should be given to the future use and siting of the cranes.Concerns have been raised in the past by Urban Vision in relation to the condition of the cranes and the works required if they are to be maintained in a safe condition. A detailed condition report was produced by Urban Vision in June 2011 which sets out that the cranes are in a very poor state of repair and a large amount of repair and refurbishment works at a significant cost are required if they are to be retained and maintained in the long term future.
A report was produced and presented to the City mayor on 26th November 2012, which sought authorisation for the dismantling and permanent removal of the cranes. This report sets out that the costs associated with the repair of the cranes would be in the region of £648,500 to £982,990. These costs exceeded the council’s available 2012/13 Capital Programme allocation for the repair of the cranes.
In November 2012, the City Mayor approved the removal of the cranes and a timetable of works for the removal operations is currently being produced. The cranes are proposed to be removed as quickly and safely as possible and whilst the timetable has not been finalised as yet it is likely that the cranes will be removed during summer 2013.
It should also be noted that an application was submitted to English Heritage in December 2012for the listing of the cranes. The cranes were not recommended for listing by English Heritage for the following principal reasons:
  • Date: constructed in 1966 and relocated to their current position as street furniture in 1988, their date of manufacturing and particularly the later siting mean that the threshold for special interest is very high indeed;
  • Design: the cranes are not of a design that won an award or seen as having been innovatory or influential;
  • Inspiration for artists: the claim that these particular cranes have inspired artists of national renown is not proven;
  • Historic: although forming iconic markers of the importance of the Port of Manchester in the C20, the cranes are not typical in either design, nor current position. Their significance would be more appropriately recognised locally rather than through national designation.
A review of the decision was then submitted to English Heritage, the outcome of which was to uphold the original decision not to list the cranes.
As stated above the cranes have recently been removed from the Council’s local list, given their condition and that authorisation has been secured for their dismantling and permanent removal.
The adding of the cranes to the list of assets of community value would not alter the proposed outcome for the cranes. If the cranes are removed then they will no longer further to social wellbeing or social interests of the local community.
If the cranes were to be retained and significant funding could not be obtained to undertake the necessary repair and refurbishment work in the near future, it is considered that theircontinued deterioration and unsafe condition will mean that they are no longer of any value to the community and would not further the social wellbeing or social interest of the local community.
It is therefore considered realistic to think that in the not so distant future, the cranes will not continue to further (whether or not in the same way) the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community.Whether this is because the cranes have been dismantled and removed from the site or whether they have fallen into such a state of disrepair that they can no longer be considered to be of value to the community. The cranes do therefore not meet the requirements of Section 88 (1) (b) of the Localism Act and therefore it is recommended that the cranes are not added to the list of assets of community value.
Is the site listable?
As detailed above the current use of the site is considered to be of community value, however, for the reasons outlined above, it is not considered that the site could continue to further the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community as required by Section 88 (1) of the Localism Act.
It is therefore recommended that the site is not included in the list of Assets of Community Value.
Councillor Comments:
Ward Councillors have been consulted on the application. No response has been received to date.