Committee Report: Wigan Pier Quarter - Eckersley Mills Complex
Report to: |
Cabinet |
|---|---|
Date: |
16th November 2006 |
Subject: |
Wigan Pier Quarter - Eckersley Mills Complex |
Report of: |
Director Designate of Environmental Services |
Contact officer: |
Peter Rowlinson (Telephone: 01942 404206) |
Purpose / summary: |
This report sets out a proposed approach to the improvement of the Eckersley Mills complex. In particular, it proposes the provision of grant aid to refurbish parts of the complex but subject to grant conditions to ensure the long‑term refurbishment of the complex. |
Alternative options considered and reason for selecting the one recommended: |
The alternative options are to provide grant or not to offer support. The reasons behind the choice are set out within this report. |
Recommendation / decision: |
It is recommended that Maryland Securities Ltd be offered grant aid totalling £700,000 towards the refurbishment of Number 1 Mill within Eckersley Mills but subject to a range of grant conditions intended to secure the long‑term regeneration of the complex and to protect the interests of existing tenants. |
Key Decision: |
This report does not involve a key decision. |
Implications: |
|
Financial: |
Provision of grant aid of £700,000 to be met from approved budgets from Heritage Lottery, ERDF and NWDA |
Staffing: |
None |
Policy: |
UDP, Wigan Pier Quarter |
Equal Opportunities – has a Diversity Impact Assessment been conducted? |
N/A |
Wards affected: |
Douglas |
Special Interest Members – Which have been consulted |
N/A |
Summary of reasons for report being closed in the public interest: |
N/A |
Tracking/Process:
|
Consultation |
Ward Members |
Partners |
|---|---|---|---|
|
- |
- |
- |
Panel |
Overview & Scrutiny |
Cabinet |
Council |
- |
- |
16.11.06; 01.12.05 |
- |
There are no Background Papers to this Report within the meaning of Section 100D of the Local Government Act 1972.
Proper Officer |
Martin Kimber |
|---|---|
Date |
23 October 2006 |
1.0 Background
1.1 The Eckersley Mills complex is the largest group of listed buildings within the Borough. The complex lies off Pottery Road within the Wigan Pier Conservation Area and is prominently located adjacent to the Wigan Pier complex and Trencherfield Mill.
1.2 The complex is in a generally poor condition and has deteriorated considerably over the years. There has been some investment by Maryland Securities Ltd, who acquired the complex in 1999 and 2001 but this has not arrested the decline.
1.3 The Council has been pursuing the renovation of the mills complex and has been in discussions with Maryland Securities since 2001 in an attempt to secure an agreed course of action. In the meantime, there have been significant difficulties in recent months with the partial demolition of a chimney and the collapse of the roof of Number 2 Mill.
1.4 The concerns of the Council led to a report to Cabinet on 1 December 2005 recommending that Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) be pursued. This proposal followed increasing frustration at the lack of progress being achieved through discussions with Maryland. The decision to pursue CPO action has led to an increased amount of activity from Maryland who have made it clear that the firm would oppose a CPO.
1.5 Over recent months Maryland has appointed a full development team and have made other concessions which have indicated a more realistic approach to the regeneration of Eckersley Mills. These include:
- A recognition of the need for a residential led development which reduces likely grant requirements to realistic levels.
- An acceptance of mixed use development including opportunities for creative industries and community uses.
- A recognition of the need to identify development partners and the consequential acceptance of the necessity to sell substantial parts of the site.
- Agreement to establish improved relationships with existing tenants and the local community.
An initial masterplan has now been presented which appears to offer an exciting opportunity for the site.
2.0 Funding Issues
2.1 Between 2002 and 2004, the Council secured some £6.8 m to support the regeneration of the Wigan Pier Quarter. This funding came from Heritage Lottery, European Regional Development Fund and North West Development Agency. The intention was to support a range of projects to begin the process of regeneration. It was acknowledged that the funding identified would not be sufficient to undertake the full regeneration but would achieve a substantial impact and begin the process of attracting private sector investment.
2.2 Thus far, investment has secured the following:
- £4 m investment in grant aid for the Trencherfield Mill scheme.
- £285,000 has been invested in the improvement of the long derelict former Vulcanite site on Pottery Road.
- There has been substantial improvement of the canal towpath, including the introduction of lighting around Wigan Pier.
2.3 There are substantial remaining resources which have been allocated to the following projects:
- Way We Were – development of new uses.
- Refurbishment of British Waterways property.
- Eckersley Mills.
- Additional public realm works and public art.
2.4 This funding is time limited and in the case of the remaining Heritage Lottery funds (over £700,000) these must be spent by December 2007 or they will be lost. Similar deadlines exist for the other funding regimes.
2.5 Given the timescales for securing planning consent and construction, it is important that early decisions are now made to allocate the remaining resources.
3.0 Eckersley Mills
3.1 The key project is Eckersley Mills. A project has been submitted by Maryland Securities to refurbish Mill Number 1. This has been deemed eligible for grant by Heritage Lottery.
3.2 The proposal involves the refurbishment of the exterior of the mill, including:
- building cleaning;
- new windows;
- formation of new lifts and fire escapes;
- new electricity supplies.
3.3 The estimated cost of these works is £2,137,000 and grant aid of £700,000 is requested. The works will provide additional available floorspace for employment purposes, either for new users or the relocation of existing tenants. These works will provide the necessary outputs to justify grant assistance for the three funding elements.
4.0 Issues Around Grant
4.1 In determining whether to support the grant application, a number of issues need to be considered. These are:
- Eligibility for Grant: this is confirmed.
- Maryland as Appropriate Partner: there has been considerable debate about the suitability of Maryland as an appropriate partner and there are doubts about whether their motives in pursuing the current grant are leading to the long‑term regeneration of the mills complex.
- Funding Opportunities: there are concerns that if current funding is not taken up and is returned, this will prejudice future funding applications, particularly to Heritage Lottery. This is dealt with in more detail in Section 6.
- It is important that the landowner be given full opportunity to make progress with its regeneration proposals but that, in view of the importance of this site and failures on the part of the landowner to make significant progress, the potential for possible compulsory acquisition be deferred but not discounted at this stage. In the event of a failure by Maryland to accept the grant or comply with its conditions then this potential route for securing the regeneration of the property be reconsidered. If this grant is paid and Maryland does not progress the wider scheme then the opportunity for action remains and the grant will not create additional profit for the owner, given the substantial contribution Maryland will be making from their own resources.
5.0 Consultation
5.1 As part of the Heritage Lottery processes, a consultation group has been established which has considered the grant application at two meetings. At the second meeting the group, which contains local members, residents, businesses and other stakeholders, voted unanimously to support the grant application, albeit with a range of conditions.
6.0 Funding Opportunities
6.1 As part of the negotiation process, the potential for re‑use of the available funding elsewhere in the Wigan Pier Quarter has been thoroughly investigated. Opportunities exist to redirect part of the grant but the majority of grant could not be reallocated and would have to be returned to funding bodies. We have identified additional funding resources to allow the opportunities for redirection to be funded so that a larger project can be secured within available resources.
7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
7.1 Having considered all the factors in the matter, it is concluded that the only practicable step is to make the offer of grant aid. This has the merits of securing some improvement to the buildings but it is proposed that any grant offer be tied to a number of grant conditions which will in turn be the subject of clawback and legal charge provisions. These are:
- Maryland to agree the adoption of a masterplan agreed with the Council before grant is paid.
- Restoration proposals for the chimney to Number 1 Mill, restoration of Number 2 Mill, the engine house to Number 2 Mill and Mill 3A be agreed before grant is paid.
- Mechanisms for the implementation of a long‑term restoration plan be agreed before grant is paid.
- A joint working group between Maryland and the Council be established to take forward the project.
- A tenant management plan be agreed to ensure that tenants are given the maximum protection and ability to remain in the complex for as long as possible.
- Regular liaison takes place between the Council and tenants.