Agenda item

The Portfolio Holder for the Chard Regeneration Programme advised that the project had grown from a new pool to a leisure centre and town centre improvements. The Chard Regeneration Board had met and agreed to pause the next phase of the works, to look for future partners and investors.  The project was within budget and the Chard Town Council fully supported the Regeneration project.

The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Legal Services advised the funding would come from earmarked reserves.  The works were only paused at the current time and they would move to a full budget rather than a net budget to track the programme in future.  He clarified that paragraphs 15, 16, 17 of the report detailed the monies loaned to the project and the debt carried by SSDC.

The Director of Place and Recovery advised it was important to review the financing of the project and she thanked the finance officers for their work which would shape the future approach to financing projects.  The project had not overspent but the funding has not come forward as expected from external partners, grant funding, and funding from asset sales which had impacted on the Council’s long-term borrowing requirements and revenue budgets.  Advice had been taken that the Holyrood Lace Mill could be sold with existing tenants.  The learning would be applied to other projects in the future and would be reported to the Scrutiny Committee. 

The Section 151 Officer said the increase in the borrowing requirement would impact upon the revenue budget and earmarked reserves may be used to reduce the borrowing requirement.

In response to questions, the Director of Place and Recovery and the Section 151 Officer advised:

·         Funding had been sought from Homes England small size viability fund for residential development of the two mills but they felt the schemes was not viable

·         Funding sought from Sport England would have required their input into the scheme which would have slowed down the leisure centre project and so this was not pursued.

·         The decarbonisation costs were within the contract with Freedom Leisure and although there was some grant funding there would also be an impact on the operation costs of the centre and income to SSDC.  This would be checked with the Property and Procurement Services.

During discussion, the following points were made:

·         Some funding streams were not successful and lessons should be learnt from this

·         The Regeneration Board were aware that Phase 2 would always be difficult.

·         SSDC had a 99 year lease with SCC for the library provision at the Holyrood Lace Mill.

·         The leisure centre was being developed and would be a credit to the town.

·         Were there any alternatives for a shorter term to the 50 year loan?

·         Pleased the Scrutiny Committee would receive a lessons learned report.

The Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee noted that the management fee agreed with the new leisure provider appeared low for a new facility and it was agreed that a written response would be provided.

The Chairman concluded that she was delighted with the development of the leisure centre as an asset for the Chard area and she congratulated the members of the Regeneration Board.

At the conclusion of the debate, he Portfolio Holder asked that recommendation C be amended to reflect SSDC’s commitment to the project and this was agreed.  When put to the vote, Members unanimously agreed the amended recommendations be proposed to Council for approval.