Attendees: Cllr R R Dray (Chairman), Cllr D S Efde (DE), Cllr A H Eves (AE), Cllr D J Sperring (DS), Cllr M J Steptoe (MS), Cllr Mrs J R Lumley (JM), Matt Harwood-White (MHW), Naomi Lucas (NL)
Guests: Cllr S E Wootton (SW), Colin Taylor (CT), Kirk Hardy (KH), Cllr M G Wilkinson (MW), Cllr C M Stanley (CS)
Apologies: Cllr J L Lawmon
Notes: Julie O’Brien (From recording)
Duration: 10:00 to 11:54
The Chairman reminded participants that the contents of the meeting are private and confidential until such time as the notes are published as a public record.
Note 01/22
Notes of previous meeting/matters arising
Notes of the previous meeting held on 17 December 2021 were agreed as an accurate record, subject to the following amendment to minute 96/21:
- Third paragraph on page 2 with statement from Cllr Wootton to be amended as follows: ‘SW reminded Members that the Council’s original anticipated £1.5m net investment in the project was to provide state of the art RDC offices in Rochford, disposing of buildings that are surplus to requirement and reinvesting in new multi-purpose community facilities in Rayleigh.’
Matters arising
Minute 99/21 – It was confirmed that the land at London Hill and adjacent to the Windmill Sensory Garden is outside of the scope of the Asset Delivery Programme. Any considerations made here in due course would be dealt with as a separate matter.
Note 02/22
Community Centre Workstream
CT reminded Members that he had been brought into the programme to lead the work to revisit the Council’s requirement for the Mill Arts & Events Centre site following the meeting of Council on 2 December 2021. There would be a series of fortnightly meetings at which he would lead various discussion points to progress the workstream. The objective is for the Panel to reach a consensus on how to move forward with the development at this site. This will inform a position paper which would in turn support the production of a new outline business case for the site.
It was observed that:
- The Panel would revisit the requirements for the site and do so with the benefit of the stakeholder feedback from the public, user groups and statutory consultees as this would help inform the work of the group.
- Any material change to the Mill site proposals would require a new business case to encapsulate this, as set out in the report to Council in December 2021.
- The heritage and historical perspective of the Mill site is clearly very important and a key factor in deliberations.
- The community building does need to be multi-purpose. The topic of ‘user needs’ would be looked at in greater detail at the next meeting.
- A further topic will include a review of the refurbishment and remodelling options for the Mill Arts & Events Centre.
- The Panel will strive for consensus in determining the vision for the site
CT asked that Members feedback to him ahead of the next meeting on what their understanding of community needs were at the Mill site and their vision and/or priorities. This preparatory work can then be circulated by CT ahead of the next meeting ready for further discussion and development.
Action: Member feedback to be sent to MHW regarding user needs and vision for the Mill site (All)
CT provided a short presentation to the group addressing what needs to be achieved for this Workstream today. The following points were noted:
- The Output Specification entered into with gbpartnerships (as the preferred Bidder) sets out the Council’s required deliverables. gbpartnerships are under contract to deliver to the current Output Specification commitments. Any subsequent re-negotiation on terms of contract may have cost and risk implications attached.
- Investigating other funding streams to achieve the desired outcome, not necessarily focused on residential units, could be explored.
- Further public engagement will take place.
- The Mill site has to facilitate the needs of all residents across the Rochford district and provide best value for money for taxpayers as a whole.
- Removing or reducing residential units from Mill site proposals would have a financial impact as this capital receipt had been assumed within the agreed ADP Final Business Case. Addressing any concerns with residential units would need to be balanced with additional cost to the Council and public purse.
- Third party management and/or self-funded operation of a community centre could have risks attached in terms of substantial ongoing running costs to sustain operations at an optimum level and may need the Council to subsidise.
CT was grateful for the input from Members, which the Chairman and MHW echoed.
Note 03/22
Communication and engagement
MHW advised that, stakeholder focus group meetings were being organised for sites which were now going through the formal planning process.
More details will be provided to the Partnership Panel once confirmed.
Note 04/22
Member issues and questions
Nothing to report in addition to the points already discussed during the meeting
Note 05/22
Items for next Partnership Board
Nothing to report.
Note 06/22
Any Other Business
Next meeting scheduled for 21 January 2022 at 10am. Details to be shared with Members once confirmed.