LGR AND PROPERTY The indispensable role of property in successful unitary authority reorganisation

Neil Webster Chris Gill

Neil Webster MA MRICS CMCS has delivered projects in most areas of the public sector - local government, health, police and education. As an independent consultant, he has a successful track record in delivering interim management and consultancy assignments. He has expertise in developing estate strategies, corporate landlord models, accommodation strategies, and business cases.  Neil is a critical thinker and problem solver experienced at working with boards, businesses and communities and motivating technical teams to establish customer focus and improved performance. He also has a modest part-time role as the Head of Engagement for ACES.  Christopher Gill BSc MBA FRICS CMCS CMgr FCMI works across the UK at all levels of local government, government agencies and combined authorities. As an independent consultant, he has a successful track record in delivering interim management and consultancy assignments. He has expertise in funding, developing and delivering complex property and economic development and regeneration projects in challenging political and multi-agency environments.  Chris is an effective problem solver and deliverer skilled at working with boards, businesses, communities and motivating technical teams to establish customer focus and improved performance. He is on the Executive of the North-East and Yorkshire branch of ACES.

Neil and Chris have worked together on several projects recently. They have been witnessing the absence of property professionals at the table for Local Government Reform (LGR) plans. They argue the case for why it is crucial to think about property issues at the earliest stage possible: “…the message is clear: The property professional is not just an implementer; they are foundational strategic partners.” 

Introduction: The blueprint for a new local government 

The drive for greater efficiency, streamlined services, and simplified governance continues to push Local Government Reform, with the creation of Unitary Authorities being a frequent and ambitious outcome. These reorganisations promise significant savings and better service delivery through the removal of administrative duplication and tend to focus on: 

• Finance and efficiency (cost savings, budgets) 

• Structural issues (new authorities, staffing) 

• Service delivery for high-profile areas (education, highways). 

Meanwhile property, along with many community-focused roles, often receives a lower priority. These are considered the “Cinderella functions” because they are essential but not glamorous, and they risk being sidelined in the pursuit of administrative efficiency, until the penny drops - that people and property and their places are fundamental in achieving promised efficiencies, service improvements and the economic and social outcomes so desperately needed by many of our communities. 

The physical estate—the municipal offices, depots, libraries, leisure centres, community hubs, commercial buildings, HRA and other housing and strategic investment assets—represents the most significant fixed cost, the largest opportunity for capital receipt generation and revenue savings. Yet, in too many instances, property teams are engaged as implementation technicians after the strategic plan is set, rather than as strategic architects and advisers at the outset. This article argues that property professionals must be engaged right at the outset of any unitary authority creation or re-organisation, not part way through, a lesson painfully learned in recent examples across the UK. 

The false start: Why early property engagement is critical 

Unitary authority creation fundamentally involves the merger or dissolution of multiple legacy organisations (county, district, and sometimes parish councils). The initial planning phase is dominated by political decisions, governance models, and rightly front-line service continuity planning. Property, unfortunately, is often relegated to a second tier "back office" issue, a practical problem to be sorted out once the 'big decisions' are made. This represents a fundamental flaw in the LGR planning methodology. 

1. Aligning policy with physical reality 

The core principle of a new unitary authority is to deliver services more efficiently from fewer assets. This requires a robust Strategic Asset Management Plan integrated into the unitary’s business case from Day One. 

• The problem with delay: - When property teams are brought in late, they are often tasked with retrofitting a property strategy to a predetermined political or service structure. For example, a new unitary may decide it needs only three administrative hubs based on simple geographic spread. A property professional engaged early could analyse the spatial needs, building condition, statutory compliance risks, and market value of the inherited estate, revealing that the three "obvious" hubs are, in fact, the most dilapidated, non-compliant, or geographically inconvenient for staff travel 

• The cost of non-compliance: - A property audit is not just about space; it is about statutory and regulatory compliance (e.g., Fire Safety, Asbestos, Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974). Merging multiple estates means inheriting multiple levels of risk and non-compliance. Identifying and quantifying these risks early is essential for budgeting and prioritisation. Property professionals are best placed to lead a comprehensive asset review. 

2. Financial credibility and the business case 

The business case for unitary reorganisation is invariably underpinned by promises of significant financial savings, often cited as tens or even hundreds of millions of pounds over a few years. A majority of these projected savings are derived from estate rationalisation: reducing the number of offices, selling surplus land, and cutting maintenance costs. 

• Valuation and disposal risk: - If the business case is built on assumptions of land value based on historic book values or simple desktop assessments, the projected capital receipts are highly vulnerable to real-world market conditions, planning constraints, and necessary clean-up costs. A property professional is required at the earliest stage to provide accurate analysis and professional valuations of the assets, including the proposed disposal pipeline. Without this, the entire financial underpinning of the unitary creation is speculative and fragile 

• Example from practice: - In past reorganisations across the UK, the initial enthusiasm and political momentum for cost savings sometimes outpaced the practical reality of property disposal. Assets earmarked for quick sale often faced unexpected planning hurdles, environmental issues, or community challenges that the property team, if consulted earlier, could have flagged, leading to delays and shortfalls in projected capital receipts. 

The unitary asset strategy: More than just merging buildings 

The successful property strategy for a new unitary authority is not simply the addition of the legacy council estates: it is the creation of an entirely new, efficient portfolio. This requires property teams to lead on key transitional areas: 

1. The Corporate Property Model (CPM) 

A unitary authority offers the perfect opportunity to implement a unified, robust CPM (a preferred term to “Corporate Landlord”). This shifts control from individual service departments to a centralised property function, ensuring a single standard for accommodation, utilisation, and compliance. 

• Early Intervention: - Establishing the terms of reference, operational procedures, and financial charging mechanisms for the CPM must be a foundational element of the new authority's structure. If service departments are allowed to settle into the old habits of managing their own space, overcoming this inertia later becomes a massive change management challenge. Property leadership can design the CPM to enforce efficient space standards from day one, thus preventing service departments from squatting in excess space 

• Data unification: - Property data is often siloed, disparate, and incomplete across legacy authorities. Property teams must lead the effort to harmonise data standards, merging disparate systems for condition surveys, lease agreements, compliance certificates, and energy performance. This requires an early data cleaning project to establish a "Single Source of Truth" for the new authority's estate. 

2. Strategic service delivery and place shaping 

LGR is not just about saving money: it's about Place Shaping—using the public estate to support economic growth and social objectives. This requires a property strategy that goes beyond simple rationalisation. 

• The Multi-Agency hub: - The property team should lead the design and implementation of hubs, co-locating the new unitary services with partners like the NHS (Integrated Care Boards/ICS), police, and other public bodies. This is where the unitary saves money, while delivering a better, joined-up service. The early identification of suitable buildings, based on location, size, and upgrade cost, is crucial 

• Neighbourhood Health Centres: - linked to the above, the NHS is pushing forward a programme which places repurposed and new multi-purpose properties at the heart of the community. There are around 50 proposed UK wide. Places have been identified, but not specific locations. It is understood that repurposing existing buildings is the default, but that doesn’t rule out LGR changes playing to this agenda, providing the right links can be made between the relevant parties 

• Community Asset Transfer (CAT): - Disposal is not the only option. Property professionals can identify opportunities for CAT of non-core buildings (like smaller libraries or community centres) to third-sector groups, achieving both a revenue saving (by eliminating maintenance costs) and a social dividend (by retaining local services). This requires early engagement with communities and political leadership. 

Conclusion: The mandate for early engagement 

The experience of LGR, especially in high-profile cases, highlights a recurring theme: the biggest risks to the LGR business case often stem from property issues that were identified too late. These risks include over-estimated capital receipts, under-budgeted dilapidation costs, and the subsequent resistance from service users forced to move into poorly planned accommodation remote from transport hubs and other anchor institutions. 

The transition to a unitary authority requires a comprehensive, unified unitary estate strategy. This strategy cannot be drafted in isolation; it must be the physical manifestation of the new authority’s vision. 

To the LGR steering committees and chief executives, the message is clear: The property professional is not just an implementer; they are foundational strategic partners. Their engagement at the very outset—during the formulation of the core financial and service delivery business case—is non-negotiable. It is the only way to ensure the promised savings are realistic, the service transition is smooth, and the new unitary authority is built on a financially credible and functionally sound foundation. Delaying property engagement isn’t saving money—it’s dismantling the very foundation of service delivery. Without these spaces, our ability to serve communities collapses, jeopardising financial stability, community cohesion and threatening the long-term success of Local Government Reform.