The FOI on Southchurch Library is in: No mention of “beyond repair” and the only time the report mentioned the “end of it’s life” was in reference to the hot water heater for £2K.

Let me first thank the Freedom of Information team at the council for providing the requested information in such a timely manner. It has meant that the truth of the matter can finally be resolved after much speculation - including from myself.

The Council conducted a ‘Condition Survey Report’ on Southchurch Library in 2023, which made no mention of “beyond repair”, the words Cllr Cowan, leader of Southend City Council, used at the Policy and Resource meeting or “end of it’s life”, as quoted on social media by his right hand man, Cllr Dent, Cabinet member responsible for libraries.

Did they lie? Were they exaggerating? Were they interpreting the information and drew those conclusions perfectly innocently? Or did they say those words with an agenda?

Either way - their words were wrong, mis-leading and the result could still be the closure and demolition of Southchurch Library with the books transferred into Southend Adult College.

Condition is not “life expired”

The condition of each element of the library was assessed from Grade A to D; ‘A’ being “performing as intended” and ‘D’ “Life expired and/or serious risk of imminent failure”. Crucially, out of 135 elements assessed, not one was classified as D - life expired.

We know both councillors are unqualified in this arena, yet they announced their contradictory views despite having seen the 2023 report.

They might have easily said “The building is in very poor condition and requires extensive upgrades to all elements. The cost of these upgrades may be prohibitive and consideration should be given to rebuilding the library in its entirety to achieve a usable and maintainable building”, which is what the report surmised.

This is accurate to the report and would not have put them both in a place where questions of integrity are naturally being raised.

That being said, nowhere in the report does it say to rebuild the library - merely consideration should be given. Moreover, when I journeyed through the report, multiple times I might add, it is quite clear that no such action is necessary.

Of the one hundred and thirty five elements of Southchurch Library assessed, not one single element was prioritised as a ‘1’, which is “typically urgent work that will prevent immediate closure of premises and/or address an immediate high risk to the health and safety of occupants and/or remedy a serious breach

of legislation.” Most were ‘2’ and some were the 3.

Type of Survey

Let me draw your attention to the type of survey that was conducted - which was not hidden in any way I must state.

The report was a non-intrusive visual survey, which means the building was not subjected to any detailed and qualified assessment on the actual integrity of the building.

What does this mean? It means, categorically, that it is impossible to claim that the library is “beyond repair” or “end it its life”.

Given the conclusions of this survey then it would seem obvious for intrusive surveys to be carried out. However, presumably this has not been done as the FOI asked for the report where the recommendations for the library’s closure was made. Nothing else was sent to me and this married up with Cllr Dent’s mention about a 2023 report.

If this is the case, as looks likely, then until any such surveys are undertaken and concluded, all conversation about its move to the college should be off the table.

Tailored to suit

Firstly, in the email from the Freedom of Information Team, the report was undertaken by the Council’s’ Property and Estate Management Service. If taken as read, then the council itself utilised their internal expertise to conduct the report, and it is obvious to state a report can be made to measure the objective.

What? And how much?

The total amount of repairs the report identified amounted to around £250K.

Looking at some of the detail of the elements highlighted, many appear either superficial or unnecessary.

Let me run you through a few of their recommendations:

• To ensure maximum efficiency, it was said to replace the fluorescent strip lighting for LEDs at a cost of £30K.

  
  

  While efficiency is always good, never would it justify that kind of money and consideration might be given to putting it on ice.

• The external paving will cost £30K to replace because it is uneven. Unquestionably, we all want safe walkways, but the state of the pavements here appear no less uneven than any other part of Southend.

• “Consideration should be given to replace the fibre board ceiling as it is in fair condition”.

  
  

  If that is the case then there is no need to spend the £15K they suggested.

• Somehow they have quoted £20K to replace a few doors with fire resistant ones. While costs can vary, this appears hugely inflated.

• There is an unused sanitary incinerator in staff toilet and they say it would cost £20K to take it out. The report states it has asbestos, but that is not consistent with the non-intrusive visual survey.

• The carpet and vinyl flooring “ looks dated” and has some “wear and tear”. I would suggest saving the £6K if that is the case.

• Apparently, the kitchen in the staff room is “dated”, “unusable”, and the oven could do with replacing - £3.5K to sort.

  
  

  Perhaps leave this too?

• The part that did marry up with Cllr Dent’s “end of its life” quote was the hot water heater at a cost of £2K!

Somewhere around £125K could be taken off the £250K figure quoted by the report and that makes things a whole lot more affordable and realistic. The report does not state where the rest of the cost was coming from, and if they are anything like the above I fancy this could be a whole lot less.

Given these recommendations, what I cannot understand is that instead of conducting asbestos and structural surveys, for example, they have simply ignored the problems and condemned it for demolition.

We cannot keep knocking things down because the council have completely neglected their duty to maintain our assets properly - that is a very poor mindset in which to run a council.

Maintaining council property to a good standard is what we pay our council tax for and we need, instead, to think of getting our house in order first before spending money in the wrong places.

How about freezing remuneration for the Executive team in charge of causing the neglect, which would amount to roughly £100K.

Or save the £80K earmarked for ‘City Day’, and instead show some genuine civic pride and bring a well-used library back to life.

Petition

Over 350 residents have signed the petition to ‘Save Southchurch Library’, and this a significant number given how hard the process is.

By some good luck and planning, those residents who want to sign, but have no facilities to do so, can visit Southchurch Library where there are computers and brilliant librarians ready to help.

Sign here to register your opposition to closing Southchurch Library: https://democracy.southend.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=124&RPID=33978617&HPID=33978617

The 2023 council report on Southchurch Library:

Southchurch Library Condition Survey 2023_Redacted.pdf

Download PDF • 2.30MB