City Surveyor and representative of AECOM to be heard.
The Board received a presentation from the representative of AECOM on the latest position of the Investment Property Group CAS programme.
The Chair suggested that Item 7 be considered concurrently with Item 5 as the two were linked.
A Member questioned what the AECOM representative thought were the most important risks to be considered on the IPG CAS programme. The AECOM representative replied that developing the required graduality of detail for specific issues to be addressed at each building or site would be the primary risk to be addressed. The City Surveyor added that there will be a risk in the required costs to undertake the project and the capacity to complete these works in the sector.
Responding to a query from a Member on the procurement of services outside of the City of London Corporation the City Surveyor agreed that it would be important to upskill Officers within the Energy and Sustainability Team specifically to retain skills within the City of London Corporation. The City Surveyor added that the centre of excellence within the Department would help to maintain and build upon the skill of Officers.
The Board discussed the governance of the Climate Action project noting the requirement to properly audit the project and review the success of the project’s implementation in the Investment Property Portfolio. It was suggested that external data verification and that a specific senior officer with the responsibility for oversight of the Climate Action implementation be considered. The Director of Innovation & Growth informed the Board that a senior officer was due to be hired into this role and that external audits would be undertaken across the Climate Action Programme. It was added that a report would be prepared for the Board’s consideration on a quarterly basis to provide Member oversight of the Climate Action project with regard to the Property Investment Portfolio. It was added that an ongoing assessment of the trajectory of the project toward carbon neutrality would be a helpful addition to this reporting. A Member commented that confirmation of appropriate metrics would be vital for the Board’s oversight. The Chair instructed Officers to confirm the metrics for assessing the success of the Climate Action project and to establish a timeline for its implementation.
The Chair requested further information on the costs of funding and overall financial viability of the Climate Action project including the impact on returns. The Director of Innovation & Growth explained that the affordability of the Climate Action Strategy would need to be assessed by portfolio with the costs being funded from the Designated Sales Pool. The City Surveyor added that these costs would only be confirmed after the required preparatory surveys are completed.
Responding to a Member’s query the Director of Innovation & Growth explained how the Y1 plans, attached as appendixes to the report, connected to the subject of the report. It was highlighted that three workstreams were accountable to PIB under CAS. These include the plan for the operational estate and two other workstreams to establish design standards and embed resilience which are both shared workstreams with the operational estat.e
It was questioned by a Member why governance was identified as an important risk for the Climate Action project as it appeared that the energy audits were more of a major concern. The Chair suggested that a substantive response to this query be undertaken outside of the meeting.
The Deputy Chairman noted his support for the Climate Action project and commented that this was the not the final stage in this process which would clearly going to involve a lot of ongoing work. The Chair and Deputy Chairman suggested that a separate session for the Property Investment Board to discuss this matter further be considered.
RESOLVED- That the presentation be noted.