Agenda item

To consider the report of the Director of Culture, Leisure and Tourism.

Agreed:

RECOMMENDED that Council:-

(1)   note the contents of the Business Case; and

(2)   authorise officers to work with the community group to assess the viability of the business case, noting that any recommendation around CIL would return to Executive and Council for determination.

Reason for Decision: As set out in the report.

Councillor Wood declared a non-pecuniary interest and left the meeting during consideration of the following item.

The Executive received the report which informed Members of the work that had been undertaken to date by the local community regarding the future development of the Pinhoe Community Hub. The Council had provided funding support to the Pinhoe Community Hub Trustees for a feasibility study, which was presented at the meeting.

Officers would continue to work with the Trustees to enhance the business case and develop a robust capital investment portfolio, which would be reviewed for potential funding resources before a subsequent recommendation to Executive and Council, to support the project.

At present the capital build was projected at £2 million with a request for Council resources of £1.3 million from CIL and Section 106 funds towards the project. Members were advised that the proposals included a new library, a community café, a self-sufficient business hub and work spaces and changing rooms for the adjacent playing fields.

Particular reference was made to an updated annual infrastructure funding statement and to work on a Community Infrastructure Levy funding programme, which would set out financial commitments to future infrastructure projects and would be presented to the Executive later in 2022.

In the absence of Councillor Leadbetter, the following questions were read out:-

·        In consideration of the External Auditor’s Findings and Recommendations as presented to Audit & Governance Committee 25.11.20 re Pinhoe Hub would the City Council be able to assist with ongoing support if ongoing running costs monies could not be raised from other sources; and

·        Were there any future proposals for the existing library site?

The Leader in responding, highlighted that he would seek clarification from Councillor Leadbetter on the points raised and a response would be provided.

Councillor D. Moore, as an opposition leader, spoke on this item and welcomed the work of the community and trustees and acknowledged that a community hub was important for the area and raised several issues:-

·        Clarification was sought on ensuring that the building would be built to the highest environmental standards in construction and operation, and achieve a recognised low carbon standard for its construction to meet the Councils climate target and ensure that the community wasn’t left with any expensive liability.

·        Clarification was sought on the lease arrangements, which should be clear to ensure funders could commit to substantial funding;

·        The Community Grants Panel determined how the neighbourhood portion of the community infrastructure funded a range of projects for communities. There had been concern that the process for any recommendation being returned to the Executive and Council for determination circumvented the agreed grants process. The Annual Infrastructure Funding Statement also made reference to smaller projects being funded from the neighbourhood proportion of CIL. Why had the Community Hub not followed the same process?

·       Would the Leader agree for any recommendation around CIL would follow the Councils’ agreed grants process for the allocation of CIL monies, rather than return to the Executive.

The Leader responded that the report sought approval for Officers to continue working with Pinhoe Trustees to develop the business case. This would involve the future approach to its’ environmental impact, establishing a lease and setting up the necessary governance. The Leader confirmed that any recommendations would be taken to the Executive and Council.

The Portfolio Holder for City Management stated that the project had been developed in response to concerns over the loss of library facilities which had expanded to encompass the development of other services and that some £750,000 had been raised by the Trustees themselves.

The Portfolio Holder for Communities and Culture agreed that a new facility was needed for residents and supported the work of the business case. She confirmed that the Council funding had not come from the 15% of CIL monies relating to community grants but from the remaining balance of 85%.

RECOMMENDED that Council:-

(1)   note the contents of the Business Case; and

(2)   authorise officers to work with the community group to assess the viability of the business case, noting that any recommendation around CIL would return to Executive and Council for determination.