Agenda item

Report attached.

Members considered a report of Councillor Miles Parkinson OBE, Leader of the Council, seeking approval for the Town Centre Investment Plan (TCIP) and the proposed interventions to be included within the Council’s Levelling Up Funding (LUF) bid submission.

The Leader highlighted the main priorities within the TCIP and indicated that the Levelling Up Fund bid would be submitted shortly. The TCIP had been drawn together by key businesses and partners in Hyndburn.

Councillor Peter Britcliffe, Joint Deputy Leader of the Opposition, welcomed the work done so far and hoped that the bid would be a success.  He asked if there was any indication yet as to what would emerge from Lancashire County Council’s LUF bid, which was believed to be in excess of £50m.  It was hoped that Hyndburn would receive its fair share of any funding received by the County Council.  The Leader responded that Lancashire was still developing its bid and was likely to submit this at the end of March 2022.  A presentation had been made to East Lancashire leaders and officers by County Councillor Phillippa Williamson, Leader of LCC, last week.  East Lancashire was the primary area for their bid, which would focus on neighbourhoods and transportation.  Hyndburn stood to benefit from improved disabled access at Accrington railway station, better management of ‘rat runs’ and additional real-time public transport information.  Councillor Britcliffe asked if any improvements were planned to provide disabled access to the eastbound platform Church and Oswaldtwistle railway station.  The Leader responded that he and the MP had attended a meeting with the Northern rail operator recently to discuss potential projects, as some funding was available to carry out assessments for other projects.

Approval of the report was not deemed a key decision.

Reasons for Decision

Following the report presented to the Council on 13^th January 2022, Cabinet had been recommended to formally approve the TCIP, with any minor updates to be agreed with the Stakeholder Board following the public consultation.

Council had also recommended that Cabinet formally approve the Stakeholder Board’s recommendation that the Council’s LUF submission should be based around the following principal interventions;

• Redevelopment to an area within the Indoor Market Hall and outdoor pavilions along Peel Street.
• Improvements and redevelopment to the properties of 43-59 Blackburn Road / 2-4 Church Street.
• Improvements and redevelopment to the block 61-69 Blackburn Road, commonly known as Burtons Chambers.

A further intervention to improve the visual appeal of the high street shops/businesses by working with local independent property owners to deliver façade improvements might also be considered, where sufficient funding within the bid total and Round 2 bid criteria allowed.

The report also highlighted the need for each LUF submission to include a minimum 10% external contribution as match funding and that good project management practice required construction schemes to have a minimum 10% financial contingency fund to cover unknown and/or unavoidable costs.  Both of these were identified within the report presented to the Council at its annual budget setting meeting on the 24^th February 2022.

Whilst the Council’s appointed external consultant had developed suggested responses to the questions needed for the Council’s LUF application, there were a number of specific bid documents / statements which required the Council’s Chief Finance Officer, (i.e. Section 151 Officer) and Chief Executive to make and sign as a true and correct record on behalf of the Council.

The Council was required to give due diligence to its potential procurement strategy for engaging contractors and professional services, (i.e. architects / engineers / project managers).  There were various UK / EU Trade and Co-operation Agreement compliant frameworks available to the Council to either procure the works as a single project, incorporating all interventions, or procuring each intervention as a separate project.  There were benefits and weaknesses with both options but at this current time the preferred option was for the Council to procure separately, thereby seeking the most experienced organisation for each intervention.  This allowed projects to commence in order of readiness, given some interventions were in private ownership and/or had sitting tenants and allowed for potential partners the option of procuring / managing the works on behalf of the Council. However, this would not preclude any contractors / professional services organisation from bidding for more than one project where they could show the required level of experience and sufficient resource.

A number of organisations had already shown a keen interest in wishing to form a joint venture with the Council that would act as the vehicle to implement the interventions and secure their future.  However, to ensure the Council sought the widest selection of potential partners / operators, it was proposed that a prior information notice(s) (PIN) would be published to alert the market of the potential opportunity to work with the Council.  A PIN was a first step along a procurement process prior to the Council posting the required contract notice(s).  Starting the process at this stage, prior to any announcement of the LUF bid, did not identify a preferred partner, but allows preliminary informal discussions to take place and ensured the Council was fully aware of the various offerings in the marketplace.

Alternative Options considered and Reasons for Rejection

Cabinet could choose not to follow Full Council’s recommendation in approving the TCIP, but this was not recommended as the Council required a relevant up-to-date town centre strategic plan which built on and updated the adopted 2012 Accrington Area Action Plan.

Cabinet could choose not to accept the Council’s recommendation to support the Stakeholder Board interventions for the LUF bid submission.  This was not recommended as the interventions identified derived from the rigorous, transparent and lengthy evaluation and selection process and any major redirection at this stage of the bid process would have a material impact on the ability to submit into the second round of the LUF.

Decision                                  (1)   That Cabinet formally approves the TCIP presented to Council on 13^th January 2022 (see Appendix A).

(2)   That the Council’s Chief Executive is given delegated authority, following consultation with the Leader of the Council, to make any final minor amendments suggested by the Stakeholder Board following the TCIP Public Consultation.

(3)   That Cabinet formally approves the principal interventions recommended by the Stakeholder Board to be included within the Council’s LUF bid submission, following the presentation to Council on 13^th January 2022.

(4)   That the Council’s Chief Executive is given delegated authority, following consultation with the Leader of the Council, to make any final amendments or alternative interventions that may be brought forward for consideration in the Council’s LUF bid submission, as further progress continues to be made around refining the costs and project viability.

(5)   That the Council’s Chief Executive and Director of Finance are given delegated authority, following consultation with the Leader of the Council, to sign off the relevant documents required for the Council’s LUF bid submission as highlighted in paragraph 3.5 of the report.

(6)   That Cabinet supports the current thinking on a preferred procurement strategy to deliver the interventions as detailed in paragraph 3.6 of the report, but notes that this could change on receiving further advice or information following the notice of a successful LUF bid.

(7)   That Cabinet notes and supports the Council in commencing the process of procuring potential partners / operators as detailed in paragraph 3.7 of the report, with formal award being subject to notice of a successful LUF bid.