Agenda item

The minutes of the Executive of 12 February 2019, with the exception of Minute No. 6 which had been considered at the Extraordinary Council meeting immediately preceding this meeting, were presented by the Leader, Councillor Edwards, and taken as read.

 

In respect of Minute No. 14 (Vision for a Transformational Housing Delivery Programme), both the Portfolio holder for Economy and Culture and the Portfolio Holder for Health and Wellbeing, Communities and Sport welcomed the vision for delivering a transformational housing programme for Exeter which, over the next 20 years, would support planning in the city and the production of the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan (GESP).

 

Exeter had to provide for 13,100 houses within its municipal boundaries in the next 20 years with a total of 53,000 required for the GESP area. This emerging vision was to make Exeter one of the leading global cities in the area and to effectively respond to urban challenges and environmental futures.

 

The Leader moved and the Deputy Leader seconded the recommendation and it was carried.

 

In respect of Minute No. 19 (The Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities (Incorporating) the Annual Statement of Minimum Revenue Provision), the Leader moved and the Deputy Leader seconded the recommendations and they were carried.

 

In respect of Minute No. 18 (Treasury Management Strategy 2019/20), the Leader moved and the Deputy Leader seconded the recommendation and it was carried.

 

 

Minute No. 21 (Update Report on Built Sports and Leisure Facilities),

 

Following on from the earlier presentation of a petition seeking the retention of the Ski Slope and its exclusion from the sale of the wider Clifton Hill site, the Deputy Lord Mayor reported thatquestions had been received from Councillors Mrs Thompson, Musgrave and Prowse in accordance with Standing Order Number 8, relating specifically to the recommendation on the future of Clifton Hill. She therefore invited those questioners to ask their specific questions at the start of the debate on this matter as follows:

 

Questions from Councillor Thompson

 

Question – It has been confirmed in reports to Committees, the Clifton Hill site will be offered for sale on the 'Open Market', so will the City Council's Private Development Company be making an offer for the site in competition with other private developers?

 

The Leader responded and stated that it was a matter for the Directors as to whether Exeter City Living chooses to submit a bid for the site.  However, it was important to note that the site had not been approved as part of the current business plan and the cost was likely to be in excess of the devolved financial amounts that they were able to spend.  Therefore, if Exeter City Living wish to bid for the site, they would need to submit a suitable, robust business case to Council for consideration.

 

Question - By not specifically getting a valuation for only the brown field Clifton Hill Sports Centre Building site, to exclude the golf range, ski slope, rifle range and green open spaces (to include purpose built student accommodation), has the Council, whilst meeting the legal requirements, effectively created a 'best consideration avoidance'?

The Leader responded and stated that the City Surveyor was authorised to identify a best value option for the disposal of the whole Clifton Hill site; whilst taking the steps to ensure that the land would be used for residential accommodation and not for purpose built student accommodation. This voluntary condition of sale had been imposed to benefit the economic, social and environmental well-being of the community. Based on the scenarios considered, the valuation advice that we have received indicates that there would be no financial detriment to the Council in the imposition of the restriction.

 

Based on estimated remediation cost figures, valuation advice identified the greatest financial value, in the region of £9 million, as being generated by disposal of the whole site for open market residential accommodation. Disposing of only the Clifton Hill Sport centre building site (i.e. part of the site) would not achieve best value for the Council.

 

Options had been considered for a smaller part of the site in the context of the site as a whole (broadly that currently occupied by the sports centre building and not contaminated), being developed for either purpose built residential rental accommodation or care accommodation; however, these would return a lower total whole site value than open market residential accommodation (£8.85m & £8.8m respectively for the whole site). Student accommodation had also been considered on this smaller part of the site, and whilst for this part of the site returns the greatest value, would return the lowest total site value as a whole (£8.5 million for the whole site) due to the considered detrimental effect on core values of new build residential accommodation on the rest of the site.

 

No option has been considered for the whole site to be developed as purpose built student accommodation.

 

The valuation advice received by the Council was based on professional knowledge and experience of the property market, and the likely parties who would be interested in the Clifton Hill site as a development opportunity. Whilst the marketing information for the development site would include planning guidance, it remained a possibility that bids would be submitted, which still include purpose built student accommodation. Should the highest bid for the disposal of the whole Clifton Hill site include student accommodation, Members would need to acknowledge the value lost by not accepting that bid due to the Council’s restriction against purpose built student accommodation and proceeding with the next highest bid which did not include any student accommodation. A further report to Executive would be required to explicitly acknowledge any undervalue.

 

Councillor Thompson asked a supplementary question. In order to avoid any future allegation of best consideration not being achieved would it be possible to have that valuation?

 

The Leader stated that no it was not possible. It could be carried out if you are willing to pay for the valuation.

 

Question - As Executive did not exclude the ski slope from the sale of the whole Clifton Hill site, was this to avoid triggering the need for another valuation of the remaining land where best consideration for purpose built student accommodation could possibly exceed the £9m approximate valuation for the sale of the whole site?

 

The Leader stated that if the ski slope land was removed from the development site, there would be a significant loss of open market residential units (c. 140) from the scheme. Valuation advice currently indicates that the marketability of the site would be impaired and value for the whole development site would fall substantially. Best value for the site would no longer be achieved.

 

A lesser capital receipt for the development site impacts upon the Council’s ability to fund repair spend at other leisure centre sites, with additional sources of funding needing to be identified for the resultant shortfall.

 

Questions from Councillor Musgrave

Question - What steps will the council take to ensure the protected trees on the boundary of the Clifton Hill Site are protected?

The Leader responded that the City Council recognised the important contribution that trees made to our local amenity and biodiversity, and took their protection very seriously.  He stated that he would expect if the ownership of this land changed, a further level of protection would be carefully considered. 

Councillor Musgrave asked a supplementary question, asking if a guarantee could be given to ensure all trees around the Clifton Hill site are protected on top of the 10% guarantee to retain public open space?

 

The Leader said that a guarantee could not be given but that everything would be done to protect the trees.

Question - Exeter Ski club claim their lease is in place until 2022 with an automatic right to renewal, is this correct and if so how can the sale of the land proceed?

The Leader stated that the Exeter Ski Club lease expires in 2022: the tenant was entitled to seek a new tenancy on expiry unless the landlord can obtain possession on one or more of the grounds set out in section 30(1) (a-g) of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (as amended). 

 

Councillor Musgrave asked a supplementary question on what the cost would be to the Council to buy the Ski Club and the other tenants out of their leases?

 

The Leader advised that he did not know.

Question - The Clifton Hill site used to host a poorly regulated landfill site, what assessment of additional developer costs has been made and has this been factored into the capital receipt estimates for the site?  

The Leader responded that a full assessment had been made based on the available information including monitoring records. Valuation advice identified the greatest financial value, in the region of £9 million, as being generated by disposal of the whole site for open market residential accommodation taking into account remediations.

Councillor Musgrave asked a supplementary question on whether the Leader would be happy to buy a house on the contaminated land on this site and, if not, how he could expect Exeter residents to live there.

The Leader said that he would be happy to live there.

Question - Will the council publish the projected costs of financial compensation to Clifton Hill tenants for changes to contract and loss of income?

The Leader stated that as set out in Section 8 of the report, the recommendation was for the site to be sold, subject to the existing tenancies for the Golf Driving Range and Ski Slope.  The new owner would be responsible for any payment of compensation that might be due.  The Council would not be privy to this information.

Question - Many have laughed at the thought of a virtual ski slope, what consultation with the existing ski slope was undertaken prior to the creation of this proposal?

The Leader stated that the suggestion for including an indoor ski facility within the Community Sports Village concept had come from the leisure experts advising the Council.   This type of facility would be considered with a range of other options as part of the consultation process on the Exeter Live Better and Move More Draft Built Facilities, Playing Fields, Pitches, Play Areas, Parks and Opens Spaces Report.  If there proved to be no appetite for this type of facility then this would be reported back to Council in July.

 

Councillor Musgrave asked a supplementary question asking whether the Council would consider building a virtual pool rather than the one planned for the St Sidwell’s Point Leisure Centre?

 

The Leader responded in the negative.

Question - How confident are the Council that their equalities impact statements meet the full requirements of the 2010 Act?

The Leader responded that he was confident that the information made available to Members, including the Equality Impact Assessment had ensured that Council had considered and met the Public Sector Equality Duty set out in the 2010 Act.

Councillor Musgrave asked a supplementary question stating that he was not confident and asked what advice had the Council taken before making the proposal for a virtual ski slope in respect of the Equality Impact Assessment?

The Leader stated that officers would have carried out due diligence in their investigations.

Question - It was suggested at Executive that repairs to Riverside (now over £5 million) cannot proceed without the sale of Clifton Hill. Isn’t it true that without the bottomless pit that is the new leisure centre, both the Riverside and Clifton Hill would have been repaired and fully re-opened months ago?

The Leader said that this was not correct.

 

Questions from Councillor Prowse

 

Question - Who are we to hold to account for the failure not to recognise that equality impact assessment would be required to dispose of the land on which is sited the Ski Club who for 30 years has offered and promoted skiing facilities to a disabled. (The Adaptive Ski Club)?

 

The Leader confirmed that there was no legal requirement to have an Equality Impact Assessment.  The Public Sector Equality Duty simply required public authorities to consciously think about the need to do the things set out in the general equality duty as an integral part of the decision-making process.

The EQIA recognises that the impact of a closure of the Ski slope would be high on those people with disabilities who use the ski slope.  However, there were possible mitigating actions including the investment in a Community Sports village, which would reduce that negative impact since any enhanced facility would be accessible to all.

 

Councillor Prowse asked a supplementary question stating that, as no equality impact assessment on the proposed sale of the Clifton Hill site had been available at the Place Scrutiny Committee on 31 January, had any Member sought advice in respect of the impact of a sale on the adaptive ski facilities prior to the impact assessment being presented to Executive on 12 February? 

 

The Leader responded that some Members had visited the Ski Club prior to the Executive meeting and confirmed that the impact assessment had been available for Members at Executive.

 

Question - Does the Leader believe that the impact assessment prepared after the Place Committee meeting of 31^st January and presented to the Executive on the 12^th February was accurate, and more importantly comprehensive given the lack of time available to prepare it?

The Leader stated that compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty required authorities when exercising their functions, to consciously think about the need to: 

a)      eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under this Act;

b)      advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;

c)      foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.

 

There was no legal requirement to have an Equality Impact Assessment.  The Public Sector Equality Duty simply requires public authorities to consciously think about the need to do the things set out in the general equality duty as an integral part of the decision-making process. He said that he believed that the Impact Assessment was both accurate and comprehensive and that it focused Member’s attention to the issues they needed to take into account when making a decision to sell the site.

 

The Leader reiterated the recommendation from the Executive and their due diligence in making a recommendation to Council to sell the whole Clifton Hill site for the Council. It was important to carry out necessary repairs to the Council’s existing built leisure facilities, including the much valued Riverside Leisure Centre.  They were committed to achieve the best value for the site, as well as returning the open green space there to the community. He referred to the supplementary advice given by the City Surveyor which offered additional background to the sale of the site. Councillor Sutton seconded the recommendation.

 

Councillor Musgrave proposed an amendment to the recommendation in respect of 2.1(a) which inserted the words “with the exception of land currently occupied by the Exeter Ski Slope” after the wording to sell the Clifton Hill site. This was seconded by Councillor Mitchell.

Councillor Musgrave referred to the much valued facilities of the ski club and the Adapted Ski club, and particularly to the users of the latter whose alternative would be to travel to Gloucester.  He had been disappointed in the proposal for a virtual ski facility which was an inappropriate replacement and did not fulfill the City Council’s claim to make people more active. He considered that the sale of the site could go ahead without the inclusion of the Ski slope and hoped that Members would not allow the sale to proceed in order to prevent the loss of this valuable asset for the city.

In supporting the amendment, a Member also commented on the potential loss of a leisure facility and the Council’s goal of encouraging greater activity by the citizens of Exeter. He also stated that the sale of the ski slope would only mean the reduction of 8% of the land mass which equated to only 100 houses. A Member queried the late availability of the Equalities Impact Assessment and expressed concern that there were very few successful virtual ski simulators in the country due to the high cost to the user, the lack of instructors and difficulties in obtaining the necessary insurance.

Councillor Mitchell in seconding the amendment referred to the excellent work of the Adapted Ski Club to its less able bodied members and that a virtual ski facility would impact detrimentally on their health and wellbeing. He referred to the improved pool facilities at the St Sidwell’s Point Leisure Centre which may inspire future champions, and felt that both ski clubs could offer the same opportunity.

Those Members not supporting this amendment, and in support of the original recommendation, commended the campaigns of the ski club and adapted ski club members to preserve these facilities. Members made many heartfelt speeches and spoke of the difficult decisions now being faced by the Council to address the reality of austerity, the ongoing challenging financial situation and the need to balance the many needs of the city. A Member also spoke of his realisation that a virtual ski facility would be a poor substitute, but was thankful that as a result of Members’ deliberations that efforts would be made to continue a dialogue between both ski clubs and the City Council, to identify alternative provision.  There were difficult decisions to be made but there was an opportunity to realise this asset for the majority of the citizens of Exeter in order to provide much needed housing and to invest in the existing sports leisure facilities in the city.  A Member referred to the ski clubs’ eloquent case to remain on the site and, in referring to future consultation for a relocation, particularly for the Adapted Ski Club, asked for engagement with the School for the Deaf, the Ellen Tinkham School, local schools and the University of Exeter to ensure that the process was as transparent and comprehensive as possible.

A Member had been impressed by the campaign run by the ski clubs in highlighting the value offered by these amenities and of her own and family’s personal experiences at the ski club. She stated that, despite the painful decision being proposed, she would take some comfort that every effort would be made to relocate the ski slope. Members asked if some dry storage space could be offered to the ski clubs to enable them to keep their equipment. Support was given to the recommendation in the report, with the proviso that the open green space would be saved. Members welcomed the intention that the open space would remain in the ownership of the City Council. 

Councillor Musgrave made a number of closing remarks, referring to the petition to save the ski slope and to the great disappointment that would be felt by campaigners and the local community should a decision to close be made.

In accordance with Standing Order 27(1), a named vote on the amendment to the recommendation was called for, and the voting recorded as follows:-

Voting Against:

 

Councillors Begley, Bialyk, Branston, Edwards, Foale, Hannan, Harvey, Lamb, The Deputy Lord Mayor, Morse, Owen, Packham, Pattison, Pearson, Sheldon, Sills, Sutton, Vizard N, Vizard M, Wardle, Warwick, Wood and Wright.

 

(23 Members)

 

Voting For:

 

Henson, D, Mrs Henson, Holland, Leadbetter, Mitchell, Musgrave, Pierce, Prowse and Thompson

 

(9 Members)

 

Absent:-

 

The Lord Mayor

Councillors Denham, Foggin, Gottschalk, Keen, Newby and Robson

 

(7 Members)

The amendment was put to the vote and LOST.

Councillor Mitchell proposed a second amendment to the recommendation in respect of 2.1(a) and the insertion of the following: - “ensure the parcel of land to the rear of the existing Clifton Hill Sports Centre building and car park, to the right of the access road as you enter the site, be retained in its entirety.  This will include the open green space and tree lined boundaries with Portland Street, Gladstone Road and the rear of the Ski slope adjacent to Polsloe Road”. This was seconded by Councillor Musgrave.

Councillor Mitchell wished to offer a constructive way forward and to ensure that the green space would not be surrounded by development on all of its boundaries which would negate the importance and usefulness of the green space. Although he had been opposed to the closure of the Clifton Hill Sports Centre he did not want this amendment to effect any future development on the site.  He pointed out the following:-

• the space was completely different to the organised space of Belmont Park;
• the green open space represented a quiet area in an otherwise built up location and was used by many in the community;
• open spaces were vital for the physical and mental wellbeing of the community;
• to help protect wildlife and  biodiversity, and
• was an important wildlife corridor

 

The Leader replied and considered that the area of green space had already been agreed and its protection was well documented in a number of recent discussions, most recently at the Executive.  Councillor Musgrave spoke in support of the amendment and stated that Councillor Mitchell’s amendment was not just about the 10% open space that had been agreed, but was about the boundary surrounding this area and the protection of existing wildlife. Members opposing the amendment also stated that the protection of the green space had already been assured. A Member suggested engagement with the local community as part of future negotiations with any potential developer to ensure the future protection of this valuable green space.

 

In accordance with Standing Order 27(1), a named vote on the second amendment to the recommendation was called for, and the voting recorded as follows:-

 

Voting Against:-

 

Councillors Begley, Bialyk, Branston, Edwards, Foale, Hannan, Harvey, Lamb, The Deputy Lord Mayor, Morse, Owen, Packham, Pattison, Pearson, Sheldon, Sills, Sutton, Vizard N, Vizard M, Wardle, Warwick, Wood and Wright.

 

(23 Members)

 

Voting For:-

 

Henson, D, Mrs Henson, Holland, Leadbetter, Mitchell, Musgrave, Pierce, Prowse and Thompson

 

(9 Members)

 

Absent:-

 

The Lord Mayor

Councillors Denham, Foggin, Gottschalk, Keen, Newby and Robson

 

(7 Members)

The amendment was put to the vote and LOST.

Councillor Musgrave proposed a further amendment to the recommendation in respect of 2.1(a) by the insertion of the following words “on condition that, after the council has covered the cost of further ground investigation works, costs associated with terminating existing leases and other unforeseen costs, the net proceeds the council receives is not less than the predicted low-end estimate of £8.5million. Should the predicted capital receipt drop below this figure, the matter will return to Full Council for debate and an all Member vote on how to proceed”. This to be inserted after the current wording “best value capital receipt” This was seconded by Councillor Mitchell.

Councillor Musgrave appreciated that the realisation of best value for the site was important and he wished to ensure that the matter would be brought back to Full Council for debate, should the anticipated low end estimate of £8.5 million not be achieved.

The Leader spoke against the amendment and said that if the land was sold onto a developer the costs of the termination of the lease agreements by the site’s tenants would be the responsibility of any new owner.

Following a number of requests from the Deputy Lord Mayor and in accordance with Standing Order No 23 (3), the meeting was adjourned at 8.58 pm for seven minutes because of disturbance from a member of the public. The individual in question left the building.

On resumption of the meeting, Councillor Musgrave sought support for his amendment.

In accordance with Standing Order 27(1), a named vote on the amendment to the recommendation was called for, and the voting recorded as follows:-

 

Voting Against:-

 

Councillors Begley, Bialyk, Branston, Edwards, Foale, Hannan, Harvey, Lamb, The Deputy Lord Mayor, Morse, Owen, Packham, Pattison, Pearson, Sheldon, Sills, Sutton, Vizard N, Vizard M, Wardle, Warwick, Wood and Wright.

 

(23 Members)

 

Voting For:-

 

Mrs Henson, Holland, Leadbetter, Mitchell, Musgrave, Pierce, Prowse and Thompson

 

(8 Members)

 

Abstention

 

Henson, D.

 

(1 Member)

 

Absent:-

 

The Lord Mayor

Councillors Denham, Foggin, Gottschalk, Keen, Newby and Robson.

 

(7 Members)

The amendment was put to the vote and LOST.

Members debated the recommendation of Executive

In supporting the original recommendation, a Member thanked the local residents for their commitment to the Save the Green Space Campaign. He thanked Members for their support to protecting the green space at Clifton Hill but emphasised the importance of a balanced approach in the consideration of the future of the site which would enable investment elsewhere in the city’s sports and leisure facilities including the renovation of the Riverside Leisure Centre, for the benefit of the residents west of the River Exe as well as the wider city. The Member appreciated the disappointment of the staff and users of the ski clubs, but welcomed the opportunity to work with them to ensure the future provision of a ski slope facility in the City.

A Member also spoke of the difficult decisions being taken, but she welcomed the investment in the Riverside Leisure Centre to re-establish this much valued facility, particularly for residents west of the River Exe. She thanked Members and officers for their efforts in extremely difficult financial circumstances, and for the opportunity to enable investment in much needed homes. She also commented on the long term sustainability of the Built Facilities Strategy, which would secure valuable leisure facilities for Exeter citizens. She believed that this was a responsible strategic way forward for the City. She commended the work and commitment by the Newtown and St Leonards’ ward councillors to their residents.

The Portfolio Holder for Health and Wellbeing, Sport and Leisure also referred to the benefits for residents of west of the River Exe in ensuring the continued operation of the Riverside and committed to work with the local Members and the local community around Clifton Hill.  He referred to the forthcoming consultation on the Built Facilities Strategy and to plans at the Exeter Arena site to develop a community sports village. He noted the many comments about the virtual ski facility and following on from a meeting between the Director and the ski club he undertook to ensure that engagement would continue. The Council would continue to work with the ski club who had the legal right to remain under the current lease arrangements to ensure the provision of a ski facility in the future.

The Leader also thanked Members for their professional conduct in dealing with this difficult matter, and he thanked the ski club campaigners for their efforts and invited them to continue to engage in further discussion.   

In accordance with Standing order 27(1), a named vote on the recommendation was called for, and the voting recorded as follows:

 

Voting for:-

 

Councillors Begley, Bialyk, Branston, Edwards, Foale, Hannan, Harvey, Lamb, The Deputy Lord Mayor, Morse, Owen, Packham, Pattison, Pearson, Sheldon, Sills, Sutton, Vizard N, Vizard M, Wardle, Warwick, Wood and Wright.

 

(23 Members)

 

Voting against:-

 

Henson, D, Mrs Henson, Holland, Leadbetter, Mitchell, Musgrave, Pierce, Prowse and Thompson

 

(9 Members)

 

Absent:-

 

The Lord Mayor

Councillors Denham, Foggin, Gottschalk, Keen, Newby and Robson

 

(7 Members)

 

The Resolution was CARRIED.

 

In respect of Minute No. 23(Major Grants Minutes 21 January 2019), the Leader, responding to a Member, advised that good progress was being made with discussions with both the Exeter BMX Racing Club and the Exeter Cycle Speedway Club on their future operation and the potential asset transfer and that ward Councillors would be kept informed.

 

RESOLVED that the minutes of Executive held on 12 February 2019 be received and, where appropriate, adopted.