The Resources and Public Realm Scrutiny Committee met to consider a call-in regarding decisions made by the Barham Park Trust Committee concerning operational property matters and restrictive covenants at 776-778 Harrow Road. The committee ultimately confirmed the Barham Park Trust Committee's decisions on funding for Year 1 works and lease arrangements for Unit 6, as well as the modification of restrictive covenants at 776-778 Harrow Road.

Call-In: Barham Park Trust Committee Decisions

The committee considered a call-in regarding decisions made by the Barham Park Trust Committee on 24 February 2025. The call-in, submitted by five councillors, raised concerns about the administration of the charity's affairs, particularly regarding the modification of restrictive covenants at 776 and 778 Harrow Road.

Operational Property Matters and Lease Arrangements:

The committee first addressed the decisions relating to an increase in allocated funding for Year 1 works and the finalisation of lease arrangements for Unit 6 with ACAVA.

• Funding for Year 1 Works: Concerns were raised about the use of restricted funds and the VAT implications for the Trust. It was explained that the revised estimate for repair works, £352,221, accounted for professional fees and VAT. The Trust's ability to recover VAT is limited to non-business activities, unlike the Council's broader recovery powers. Some members expressed concern about the basis of advice provided to the Trust Committee regarding VAT and the perceived lack of progress on improvements.
• Lease Re-gear for Unit 6 with ACAVA: The committee discussed the proposed re-gearing of ACAVA's lease for Unit 6. It was confirmed that any lease re-gear would be conditional on ACAVA clearing outstanding arrears. The Trust would conduct a valuation to ensure the best possible rental agreement, though it was acknowledged that units might remain vacant for a period. The sustainability of existing tenants was also a consideration, with assurances that efforts would be made to re-let units promptly if the proposal proceeded.

After discussion, the committee indicated they were minded to confirm the original decisions regarding the funding for Year 1 works and the lease arrangements for Unit 6. Two members expressed a preference for referring the decision back for reconsideration, but the committee ultimately resolved to confirm the Barham Park Trust Committee's decisions, which would take immediate effect.

Modification of Restrictive Covenants at 776 and 778 Harrow Road:

Following the withdrawal of councillors with declared interests, the committee then focused on the modification of restrictive covenants at 776 and 778 Harrow Road.

• Legal and Planning Considerations: Senior Planning Lawyer Martha Grekos and Chief Lawyer Property Planning and Environment Nadeem Khan clarified that the restrictive covenant modifications would align with the planning permission granted in 2023, specifically Condition 28, which mandated a car-free development. They explained that the modifications were necessary to permit the development as approved and would not allow for anything beyond what the planning permission permitted. The term vehicle in the covenants was clarified to include cycles, and it was stressed that permanent vehicle parking would not be permitted, with exceptions only for essential access for emergency services. The modifications were specific to the current development and not for future developments.
• Valuation and Transparency: Concerns were raised about the clarity of the proposed modifications and the basis of the valuation. It was noted that the Designated Adviser worked exclusively for the Trust and that valuers used professional judgment. While the valuation was considered to represent the best terms reasonably obtainable, questions were raised about the inclusion of garages and parking spaces in the report's description of modifications, which appeared to contradict the car-free planning approval. It was assured that the planning permission and its conditions, particularly Condition 28, would be the guiding documents.
• Public Consultation and Charity Commission Guidance: The committee discussed the necessity and benefits of public consultation. While a formal consultation was not deemed legally required under Section 121A of the Charity Act 2011, the Chair noted the petition signed by over 700 residents expressing a desire to have a say in the park's use. The Charity Commission had been engaged following a separate complaint and indicated they would not pursue it further based on the information provided.

Despite some members expressing a preference for referring the decision back due to concerns about the adequacy of the addressed issues, the committee resolved to confirm the Barham Park Trust Committee's decision to approve the modification of the restrictive covenants at 776 and 778 Harrow Road. This decision allows for the delegation of authority to execute the deed and seek Charity Commission consideration for the modification or discharge of the covenants.

Any other urgent business

No urgent business was identified.