Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies of absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Craig, Davies, Housden and Pearcy. Councillor Hurst was travelling to the meeting and was hoping to join later.

To receive declarations of interest.

There were none.

To approve the Minutes and exempt Minutes of the meetings held on 9 June 2022.

The Chair of the Committee will answer questions from members of the public submitted in accordance with the Council’s procedures.

Public questions were submitted. They were answered by the Chair, Councillor Cornell. (Refer to the recording of the meeting).

The Interim Strategic Director of Transformation and Change and the Fit for the Future Programme Manager gave an update on the Fit for the Future (FFF) Programme and highlighted the following points:

• Changes to the HR system had been implemented sooner than expected due to a higher quote from the existing provider.
• The new HR system project began in March with a deadline of the end of April to ensure that staff could be paid in May using the new system.
• HR and Finance teams had put in a lot of work in order to implement the new system and migrate the data within 2 months.
• A project of this size would normally have taken 7-8 months.
• The iTrent system that had been implemented offered more functionality than had been available with the previous system and would improve Officers self service and decrease the amount of time HR would need to spend on admin.
• The next phase of the HR system project would begin in September 2022.
• They were looking at re-engineering processes to improve them within the service delivery workstream.
• It was important that when they introduced new processes they not only changed what they did but how they did it.
• They would be running a workshop for the Leadership and Management Team to help embed the values and behaviours into services.
• The process re-engineering was underway for the first cohort and there would be two further cohorts later in the year.
• They were very close to finishing the implementation of the bulky waste process on the digital platform.
• The Community Connection workstream was being approached in a way that it would help communities to be empowered with the ability to make decisions to and take action of their own volition.
• IT security was high on the agenda and they were focused on further improvements to their defences and were looking at how they would respond and recover from a hack.
• Work was ongoing on the new housing platform procurement.
• Put lots of effort in engaging with the FFF Champions and had campaigns running around security.
• They had been interviewing for a digital platform developer however they had found it challenging to recruit to the role.

In response to Councillor Pearson, the Interim Strategic Director of Transformation and Change confirmed that overall the project was on track but there were a couple of areas where he would like to see further progress.

In response to Councillor Turner, the FFF Programme Manager confirmed that there a 5 year contract had been agreed for iTrent with fixed costs.

The Strategic Director of Resources drew Members attention to the information sheet that had been published and circulated. He confirmed that they had spent the day going through the expressions of interest and putting together a draft list. They would be publishing the draft investment plan including an indicative amount they would be recommending to be allocated against 3 key themes, the plan would be taken to full Council on the 21^st July 2022.

Councillor Hurst asked how often the list would be reviewed, the Strategic Director of Resources confirmed that they would need to submit the draft plan on the 1^st August 2022 which would be considered by the Government over the summer. He advised that there may be scope in the future to revise however there would be a very defined allocation for each year which would need to be spent each year and could not be rolled over.

In response to Councillor Turner, the Strategic Director of Resources advised that there was not flexibility in the scheme however things that can move quickly would be allocated to the first year and those projects that may not be ready could be held until the 2^nd or 3^rd year.

To consider the work programme.

See Agenda Item 4 for deadlines for submission.

There were none.

To set out the procurement and decision-making process to select a preferred tenderer from the three prospective tenderers to bring forward the redevelopment of Brimscombe Port, update members on the current position with demolition works, the proposed community centre for the site and with the Homes England Loan Agreement.

The Head of Property Services advised that the reports that the Committee were considering were a culmination of the last 8 years of focused work to de-risk and bring forward the brownfield site for development. The report focused on the procurement process to secure a developer for the site and how the decision would be made later tonight on whether to select the preferred bidder.

The Head of Property Services gave a brief overview of the report and introduced the following key elements:

• The competitive dialogue process followed had been set out in section 2 and summarised in Appendix E
• The output specification and tender evaluation matrix had been included in the appendices.
• Section 3 set out the legal and commercial reasons and the need for confidentiality of the preferred bidder’s name to be retained until the standstill period had expired.
• Any subsequent appointment would be subject to Homes England approval.
• Section 4 contains an update on the community facility and the position with the Parish Council, Officers would be meeting their working group to discuss the position further.
• Section 5 provides an update on Homes England
• Members were being asked to approve the Heads of Terms of the Development Agreement.
• Section 7 provided an update on the demolition works, 98.5% of the material by tonnage was recycled or reused.
• Current budget position was set out in the table, there was currently a shortfall forecasted on the budget however, future surplus income from management of the site was expected to offset this.
• Meetings with the developer were being arranged, there would be time for the local community to engage and feedback in addition to the formal planning permission process.

Councillor Turner asked who would have oversight of the community engagement plan. The Head of Property Services confirmed that the developer would have responsibility for delivering on community engagement and the Project Board would have oversight.

Councillor Pearson raised concerns regarding any changes to the budget that may come about from community engagement. The Head of Property Services confirmed that any changes during the process of community engagement or planning permission could affect the budget.

In response to Councillor Turner the Head of Property Services confirmed that the Parish Council had been making their views clear in recent meetings regarding the community facility. It was advised that the Parish Council had not yet seen the proposal and that community facilities were really important not only for the local community but for visitors to the Port. It was confirmed that there were opportunities to discuss this further with the Parish Council and Officers recognised that the Parish Council was small and they would continue supporting them.

Proposed by Councillor Turner and seconded by Councillor Pearson.

Councillor Pearson expressed his wish to see Brimscombe Port developed and advised that it was one of the reasons that the heritage lottery funding was granted and therefore they needed to ensure it was completed.

Councillor Braun thanked officers for the work they had undertaken to reach  ...  view the full minutes text for item SRC.104

PROPOSED:      That, pursuant to the provisions of Section 100 (A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the matter detailed at Agenda Item 10 on the grounds that involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

On being put to the vote, the Motion was carried.

To seek approval to select a preferred tenderer for the redevelopment of Brimscombe Port, who will be appointed as Developer in due course, and to delegate authority to enter into a Development Agreement with the selected tenderer.

The Head of Property Services advised that the report set out the clear recommendation to select tenderer 1 as the preferred bidder and to delegate authority to appoint the bidder and enter into a development agreement subject to Homes England approval. The completed tender report had been included at Appendix A. The Head of Property Services confirmed that the budget position that had been published in the public report had been included in the exempt report but with the financial receipt to the council of the preferred bidder in it which gave a surplus, but that this could change through the planning process. The recommended designs were shown on the screens and on boards within the Council Chamber and Members were reminded they needed to base their decision on the scoring.

The meeting was adjourned for 50 minutes to provide members with copies of the exempt information.

Councillor Brine left the meeting.

The following answers were given in response to questions:

• The scheme still needed to go through the planning process and therefore there was a limit as to how much time the bidders would have spent on the designs prior to being selected as the preferred bidder and were aware of the proposed cycle route. There would be more detail provided in the planning application regarding bike storage and cycle routes.
• A few car park space licences had been provided previously but it had been made clear that these were only to be provided for a short term and were not included in the number that the developer has been asked to provide.
• The use of the car park spaces by the school and its community has been clear as a temporary use. There would be parking on the port but as to who can use it would be looked at during the planning stage. Conversations with the school would need to be held.
• There are mechanisms around how the public investment will be handed over to the developer, part of that would be retained to ensure the canal works were completed.
• Assurance was provided for the scoring of the governance structure, management arrangements and business plan. It was confirmed that the business plan scoring was based on the land value and it was a numerically driven score.
• There would be opportunities to revisit the placement of the affordable homes through planning,so they were not concentrated in one block.
• The design included a mix of residential, permanent and visitor moorings
• The preferred bidder had received a score of 4 regarding social value which meant that they had met the requirements of the output specification.
• A community interest or management company would be proposed for the maintenance of the public areas which would be funded by the residents of the site.
• The Council would work with the Parish Council to find a solution for the community facility and there were lots of options that could be explored but if the land was to be transferred for £1 the Council would  ...  view the full minutes text for item SRC.106