Agenda item

To consider the following Regeneration related Cabinet report scheduled for Cabinet on 20 December 2019:

·         Bournemouth International Centre Short Term Investment Plan

·         Winter Gardens – Including Exempt Information

The O&S Board is asked to scrutinise the reports and make recommendations to Cabinet as appropriate.

Cabinet members invited to attend for this item:

Councillor Mark Howell – Portfolio Holder for Regeneration and Culture

The Cabinet report will be published on 12 December 2019 and available to view at the following link:

https://democracy.bcpcouncil.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=285&MId=4171&Ver=4

Bournemouth International Centre Short Term Investment Plan

The Portfolio Holder for Regeneration and Culture presented the report to the Board, a copy of which had been circulated and which appears as Appendix 'F' to the Cabinet minutes of 20 December in the Minute Book. The Portfolio Holder referred to the recommendations in the report and welcomed any questions or comments from members of the Board.

• The Portfolio Holder was asked for further detail on the two options for the Purbeck Hall vertical extension. The Head of Leisure, as lead officer for the BIC development, explained that details of the remodelling programme including the level of investment required had been developed in consultation with a specialist consultant following the initial Cabinet report in July 2019. The identification and prioritisation of projects had been tested with BH Live and specialist officers.
• The Portfolio Holder responded to questions on the borrowing arrangements and the level of interest rate. The Head of Leisure confirmed that the income from BH Live supported the overall budget enabling the Council to borrow and invest in its assets.
• A Board member questioned the use of borrowing to fund maintenance, the cost of which should be covered by the operation. The Portfolio Holder stressed that the focus of the report was on investment.
• It was clarified that the lifespan of the works on the Purbeck Hall vertical extension was 25 years. This lifespan, and the costs and works timetable listed in Table 3 of the report related to Option 2, the more expensive and preferred option.
• The Portfolio Holder was asked whether the short-term investment would enable the BIC to host the larger political party conferences. He spoke about the difficulties in competing with other venues such as Manchester in attracting these bookings.
• A Board member commented on the huge amount of investment proposed compared to the figures given for other venues in paragraph 6 of the report. The Portfolio Holder explained that the figure for the BIC reflected the significant scale of the works and previous underinvestment.
• The Portfolio Holder confirmed that reference to climate emergency would be included in future reports.
• The Portfolio Holder was asked what impact the two options for the Purbeck vertical extension had on the key objectives for the remodelling. He explained that Option 2 was the preferred option because it provided more space, and this offered more scope for different configurations and the flexibility to run things concurrently.
• Board members commented on the ambition of Option 2 and that it would result in much needed improvements to the café area. The Portfolio Holder confirmed that the proposal would significantly increase the number of covers.
• The Portfolio explained that the order of projects listed in Table 3 gave priority to those projects which would have the highest impact while being mindful not to affect events which had already been booked in.

The Portfolio Holder was asked why the consultation on the proposals had not been listed in the report. He explained that details had been provided in the previous report to Cabinet in July. It was suggested that this this information should have been included in the current report, in view of the level of investment being sought and the public interest. It was noted that there had been no consultation with ward councillors or tourism partners. The Head of Leisure reported that a commercial decision such as this was primarily a matter between the Council and BH Live with support from specialist advisors and would not normally be subject to wider community consultation. He assured the Board that there would be engagement with key stakeholders as part of the longer-term reimagining of the BIC. The Head of Construction and Facilities Management responded to a question about the external advice received. She explained the role of ICW as specialist consultants in their field. ICW had held workshops and discussions with former and potential clients to identify what was required for the BIC to retain its place in the market in the short to medium term.

In conclusion the Board supported investment in the BIC but questioned the need to commit to the figure of £4.7million for short term remodelling at this stage, prior to the longer-term vision for the BIC being determined. The Portfolio Holder stressed that only £1.8 million of this figure would be committed in advance of the longer-term development options study. He stated that not approving the £4.7million at this stage may have an impact on tendering costs and event bookings.

RESOLVED that Cabinet be recommended to:

1)    Delete recommendation a of the report;

2)    Amend recommendation b to read:

‘Approves the use of up to £1.8m of Prudential Borrowing at assumed interest rate of 5.5% over 25 years’.

Voting: For – 11, Against – 4

Winter Gardens – including exempt information – It was noted that this report was no longer on the agenda for the Cabinet meeting on 20 December 2019.