Agenda item

For Cabinet to consider supportive match funding for Playzone projects in Whittlesey and Wisbech.  

AGREED to:

·         note the report and the benefits that the development of PlayZones in Fenland will offer, namely;

•      increasing community physical activity levels and subsequently community health

•      encouraging under-represented groups such as women and girls, disabled people and older people to become more physically active

•      supporting a reduction in anti-social behaviour

•      supporting community cohesion;

·         note the General Fund Budget Estimates and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) Report, agreed by Cabinet and Council in February, which projects a financial shortfall for 2025/26 of £1.432m increasing year on year amounting to around £3.4m by 2027/28. Although there are currently many uncertainties regarding the budget for 2025/26 and the MTFS, there remains a significant structural deficit which the Council will need to address. Any additional costs for items not already included in the budget will incur additional revenue costs of circa. £81k p.a. for every additional £1m required based on an assumed 30 year borrowing profile;

·         allocate the necessary match funding requirement of £80,925.29 for the Manor Field facility and the match funding requirement of £74,988.99 for the Barton Road facility; 

·         identify that this project is a capital project (as the original PlayZone report was dated November 2024;

·         delegate authority to the Corporate Director, in consultation with the Portfolio Holders for Environment and Leisure and the Leader of the Council in his capacity as Portfolio Holder for Finance to develop the PlayZones as required in paragraph 3.3, through the Football Foundation PlayZones Framework and to award, mobilise and implement such proposal with further authority to take all reasonable ancillary actions to ensure implementation;

·         authorise the Monitoring Officer to execute and complete all requisite legal documentation in relation to the matters outlined above; and

·         to support further bids to the Football Foundation for a PlayZone facility in Wisbech Park and a location in March or Chatteris and instructs officers accordingly, noting that any successful funding for two facilities will also be likely to require match funding from the Council in the region of £80,000 per facility if other funders decline to support the projects.

Members considered supportive match funding for Playzone projects in Whittlesey and Wisbech presented by Councillor Boden.

Members made comments, asked questions and received responses as follows:

·         Councillor Hoy expressed concern with the Barton Road scheme as she was told by the previous portfolio holder that the Wisbech Park scheme is not suitable but that is contradictory to what the report says because the report is clear that a scheme is viable there. She feels Wisbech Park is a great location given that it is in the centre of town and a lot of people in the area do not have access to transport, with in the deprived areas there being a reliance on walking. Councillor Hoy stated that her concern with Barton Road scheme is that it is out of town and how will people access it and also that there was a lot of objections to when the secondary school was proposed in this area, she is not sure if there has to be a planning application for Playzones, but if it does there could be problems in the planning process for the Barton Road scheme. She requested that members think about which of the two Wisbech schemes progressed first rather than necessarily naming one of them.

·         Councillor Boden made the point that matter for consideration before members today is to consider the offer of financial support for these two specific schemes and whilst there were originally five schemes put forward to the Football Foundation, it has decided that these two should be the first ones. He added that it is not to say that the other three do not qualify, it is merely that in making their decision these are the two they decided to put forward first and they have not given the Council the option to say that the choices can be swapped and it is a case of accepting it or not accepting it. Councillor Boden felt that Councillor Hoy would be favourable to accepting the money for Wisbech rather than not accepting it, noting that Barton Road is in Wisbech town itself regardless of what some people may think in the locality and the Council is not the one who made the choice about which sites to go with first and part of the proposal coming forward is asking that Cabinet to agree that further bids should be supported to the Football Foundation for a Playzone facility in Wisbech Park and a location in March or Chatteris.

·         Councillor Tierney agreed with the comments of Councillor Hoy, he does not have any problem with the Barton Road scheme and is not sure the residents will be as upset about this as they were about a school but he does think Wisbech Park is a far better location and although it cannot be changed it is a big mistake.

·         Councillor Mrs French expressed her disappointment that Estover was not chosen in the first place and she was told by the previous portfolio holder last week that it had been discounted totally. She stated that she has received an e-mail from the Netball Association, which outlines what the youth of March do and March Town Council has agreed to give Estover £80,000 per year over the next 3 years. Councillor Boden reiterated that a recommendation will be coming forward about whether to support further bids to the Football Foundation including for a location in March, with the most obvious location being Estover.

·         Councillor Count stated that he has received the e-mail from the Netball Association which he has replied to today with a holding response whilst he looks into the matter further. He expressed concern that an application was submitted for a Playzone and that has been rejected because it is 2 metres too big to use as a netball facility but in the Cabinet report it says that Estover has been turned down because they are considering another facility. Councillor Count questioned whether when the paper was written was something else to be undertaken with the netball courts instead or is there something else being proposed for Estover in which case could there be an update to all Cabinet members after the meeting or if not what does the paper actually mean by they are considering an alternative facility at Estover? Councillor Boden stated that to his knowledge nothing has been ruled out for the future, there may need to be an amendment to a proposal made but all five sites were made available for the Football Foundation to consider and it was for them to make the decision about which ones it moved forwards so depending upon what is agreed at the recommendation a location in March will continue to be put forward and as far as he is aware this will continue to be Estover, if it turns out that another one is appropriate March members will be made aware of this and it will be subject to Cabinet debate before anything is actually put forward.

·         Councillor Mrs French expressed her belief that the other facility is a 3G pitch.

Proposed by Councillor Boden, seconded by Councillor Seaton and AGREED to:

·         note the report and the benefits that the development of PlayZones in Fenland will offer, namely;

•      increasing community physical activity levels and subsequently community health

•      encouraging under-represented groups such as women and girls, disabled people and older people to become more physically active

•      supporting a reduction in anti-social behaviour

•      supporting community cohesion;

·         note the General Fund Budget Estimates and Medium-Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) Report, agreed by Cabinet and Council in February, which projects a financial shortfall for 2025/26 of £1.432m increasing year on year amounting to around £3.4m by 2027/28. Although there are currently many uncertainties regarding the budget for 2025/26 and the MTFS, there remains a significant structural deficit which the Council will need to address. Any additional costs for items not already included in the budget will incur additional revenue costs of circa. £81k p.a. for every additional £1m required based on an assumed 30 year borrowing profile;

·         provide the necessary match funding requirement of £80,925.29 for the Manor Field facility and the match funding requirement of £74,988.99 for the Barton Road facility; 

·         identify that this project is a capital project as the original PlayZone report was dated November 2024;

·         delegate authority to the Corporate Director, in consultation with the Portfolio Holders for Environment and Leisure and the Leader of the Council in his capacity as Portfolio Holder for Finance to develop the PlayZones as required in paragraph 3.3, through the Football Foundation PlayZones Framework and to award, mobilise and implement such proposal with further authority to take all reasonable ancillary actions to ensure implementation;

·         authorise the Monitoring Officer to execute and complete all requisite legal documentation in relation to the matters outlined above; and

·         to support further bids to the Football Foundation for a PlayZone facility in Wisbech Park and a location in March or Chatteris and instructs officers accordingly, noting that any successful funding for two facilities will also be likely to require match funding from the Council in the region of £80,000 per facility if other funders decline to support the projects.

(Councillor Mrs French declared that she is a member of Planning Committee and took no part in the voting thereon)