Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence from Councillors.

Apologies were received from A Hadley and Cllr B Dion. It was noted that Cllr J Kelly was now on the Executive and therefore no longer a member of the Committee

To receive information on any changes in the membership of the Committee.

Note – When a member of a Committee is unable to attend a meeting of a Committee or Sub-Committee, the relevant Political Group Leader (or their nominated representative) may, by notice to the Monitoring Officer (or their nominated representative) prior to the meeting, appoint a substitute member from within the same Political Group. The contact details on the front of this agenda should be used for notifications.

Cllr F Rice was substituting for Cllr Hadley and Cllr M Davies was substituting for Cllr B Dion

Councillors are requested to declare any interests on items included in this agenda. Please refer to the workflow on the preceding page for guidance.

Declarations received will be reported at the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest made on this occasion.

To confirm and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 24 May 2022.

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 May were approved as a correct record subject to an amendment to clarify that Cllr L Dedman and not Cllr A Hadley was nominated as Vice-Chairman.

To receive any public questions, statements or petitions submitted in accordance with the Constitution. Further information on the requirements for submitting these is available to view at the following link:-

https://democracy.bcpcouncil.gov.uk/ieListMeetings.aspx?CommitteeID=151&Info=1&bcr=1

The deadline for the submission of public questions is 4 clear working days before the meeting.

The deadline for the submission of a statement is midday the working day before the meeting.

The deadline for the submission of a petition is 10 working days before the meeting.

There were no public petitions or questions. A statement was received, as follows from Mr Alex McKinstry, in relation to minute number 16, and read out on his behalf by the Democratic Services Officer a copy was also sent to all Committee members:

I hope the FuturePlaces business plan is debated tonight in open session. My chief concern is the funding mechanism proposed under Part 7: the company receives a fee for development schemes approved by BCP Council, then uses this fee to service its £8 million loan. My worry is that councillors may approve schemes indiscriminately, simply to amortise the loan monies. Other worries include the company's limited progress to date (Part 2.1 of the plan); the Council's leadership sitting on the company's board (Part 4.4); and the millions of pounds of residents' money, invested in a company ostensibly providing guidance only.

To consider the BCP Future Places Report scheduled for Cabinet consideration on 22 June 2022.

The Committee is asked to scrutinise and comment on the report and if required to make recommendations or observations as appropriate.

Cabinet members invited to attend for this item: Councillor Phil Broadhead, Portfolio holder for Development, Growth and Regeneration

Please note that this report contains an appendix with exempt information ‘as defined in Paragraph 3 in Part I of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. If the Committee wish to discuss information in relation to this appendix it may wish to make a decision to exclude the press and public.

(Paragraph 3 - Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

The Portfolio Holder for Development, Growth and Regeneration and the Director for Regeneration presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'A' to these minutes in the Minute Book. The Director of Regeneration and representatives from FuturePlaces were also in attendance and provided responses to a number of enquiries. A number of points were raised and responded to in the ensuing discussion including:

·     Clarification was sought on how the loan would be financed, through the Public Works Loan Board or by other means. It was confirmed that a working capital loan of £8million would be financed by borrowing which would be lent at a commercial rate to the company through the PWLB.

·     It was noted that the anticipated 30 percent profit margin was reflective of the industry norm. The Council procured other services on a cost-plus basis and in order to demonstrate best value these were compared against day rates. There was relative confidence that this had been benchmarked and fell within industry ranges.

·     In response to a question, it was confirmed that the company was 100 percent owned by BCP Council. There was scope for dividends, but these would flow straight back to the Council.

·     Concern was raised regarding the lost £3 million in the first year of operation for a company formed by a London Borough. A point was raised regarding potential loses by the company if the Council did not subsequently agree the individual business cases brought forward by the company. The Portfolio Holder advised that this was why Councillors were members of the Board to ensure that there was follow through on a collective vision. The Gateway process followed a full process of several stages from concept to final approval.

·     In response to an enquiry the Committee was advised that there was a benefit of having a division with a singular focus and expertise.

·     It was noted that Seascape’s purpose was to purchase homes to house homeless persons and other direct purposes, but it was also able to make a profit. A Councillor Commented that they were confident in the Portfolio Holder and Officers to deliver development.

·     This was the first time using a specific funding methodology which would be reviewed annually. It was suggested that this needed to be more frequent, perhaps quarterly. It was explained that this was in line with other Council companies where an annual update was received through Cabinet. Regular updates on individual projects would come forward through the gateway process.

·     In response to a line in the report a query was raised regarding when it would it not be appropriate for Futureplaces to repay borrowed monies. Payment to the company would allow this to be repaid and it was confirmed that it was always appropriate for debt to be repaid.

·     There were a number of headline projects within the business plan. It was noted that some of these were comprised of sub-projects which would be deployed over  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

Bournemouth Development Company LLP (“BDC”) is a joint venture between BCP Council and MUSE Developments Limited a subsidiary of Morgan Sindall Group plc.

The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the current position of the Winter Gardens scheme.

The Portfolio Holder for Development, Growth and Regeneration presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'B' to these minutes in the Minute Book. A number of points were raised and responded to in the subsequent discussion, including:

·     In relation to Futureplaces looking at the potential redevelopment of the Bournemouth International Centre (BIC), whether the Council should proceed with the current consented scheme or would be reconsidering and moving forward with the redevelopment of the entire area including the BIC. There were two options currently available, and the Winter Gardens scheme would be paused until consideration had been given to the full redevelopment potential for the area.

·     Whether the Winter Gardens scheme was being paused because redeveloping the BIC was now being considered or whether the approved scheme was no longer viable. Futureplaces had been asked to look at BIC redevelopment which was the reason the current scheme fr the Winter Gardens was paused. If the redevelopment of the BIC was not considered viable the Winter Gardens scheme would proceed.

·     In relation to the £5million provision the Council had included for potential losses in connection with the Winter Gardens Scheme, the Portfolio Holder advised that there was no financial loss, but the funding provision was made to be prudent and to make provision regarding the different development potential.

·     The BIC project was inherited through the previous administration. The BIC was not quite at the level which the market wanted, demand had moved on and it was hoped to use the opportunity to develop the area. The Portfolio Holder advised that it was not correct that wider opportunities were being considered because the Winter Gardens scheme was unviable. The BDC didn’t have the option of the wider site provision but Winter Gardens was absolutely viable if the Council wished to proceed.

·     Concern was raised that the redevelopment of the BIC was a project which would take years and the Winter Gardens Scheme had already been considerably delayed.

·     The BIC was a key site within the town but was not well utilise as there was a lot of area for active frontage which could be utilised. Redeveloping the BIC site along with the winter gardens site would present opportunities for the reprovision of facilities across the sites

The Chairman thanked officers and all committee members taking part in the discussion.

The Place Overview and Scrutiny Committee is asked to consider and identify work priorities for its future meetings.  Attached is a proposed list of suggested items.

Please could Committee members complete the attached request form if they have any items, they wish to see included on the Committees Forward plan.

Also attached in the current published Cabinet Forward Plan.

The Chairman presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'C' to these minutes in the Minute Book.

The Corporate and Community Overview and Scrutiny Committee was asked to consider and identify work priorities for the year ahead. The Chairman had set out a number of items to be included in the Committees Work Plan and asked Committee members could advise of any items which needed to be included within the Plan in addition to those outlined. Those suggested included:

·       Annual Climate Plan report

·       Update on the Local Plan

·       Local Transport Plan

It was pointed out that there were only three ordinary meetings remaining this year. The number of items currently suggested would require 4 items on each agenda and there were a number of potential issues which may come forward.

To consider and approve the potential suggested future meeting dates as set out below, or to set alternative dates whilst taking into consideration the approved calendar of meetings.

Potential suggested dates: -

Wednesday 21 September 2022 – 6.00pm

Wednesday 16 November 2022 - 6.00pm                                

Wednesday 1 March 2023 – 6.00pm

The dates outlined for future meetings of the committee were agreed as follows:

Wednesday 21 September 2022

Wednesday 16 November 2022

Wednesday 1 March 2023