Agenda item

Members asked questions of Portfolio Holders in accordance with Procedure Rules 8.1 and 8.2 as follows:

·       Councillor Hicks stated that the BBC have reported that the former Barclays Bank site in March cost the Council £750,000 to purchase and the decision was made by members of the Planning Committee, against officer’s recommendation, for the building to be demolished at a cost of £371,000. He added that the decision was then made to place the site up for sale for £295,000 and as a result £800,000 of taxpayer’s money is being effectively lost. Councillor Hicks asked Councillor Boden, as Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Finance, whether he believes that those decisions make good financial sense? Councillor Hicks added that whilst he is aware that the project was never a profit-making scheme, there needs to be some accountability, as a Council, for losing such a significant amount of taxpayer’s money. He asked what the original plan for the site was as he has asked and nobody has been able to tell him what the long-term plans were for the actual site. Councillor Hicks asked Councillor Boden if he could explain if there were plans for the site what they were and why were they not carried out? Councillor Boden thanked Councillor Hicks for giving him advance notice that he would be asking a question which required a detailed answer. He explained that transactions relating to the former Barclays Bank site in March very successfully satisfied Government’s criteria for spending the grant money they allocated to March under the national Future High Street Fund initiative and they additionally, although not necessarily intentionally, will prove shortly to be significantly financially advantageous to Fenland District Council, but more importantly, they are a key part of a scheme which will significantly benefit the town of March for years to come. Councillor Boden stated that to understand the transactions relating to the former Barclays Bank site in March, it is necessary to look at three different stages of the process, as "success" was defined in different ways in each stage, with the first stage being the use Government authorised under its national Future High Street Fund initiative, the second is the temporary use made of the site after it was purchased and the third stage is the disposal of the site. He referred to the background in which The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (the MHCLG) announced a national £675million regeneration programme, the objective of which was to renew and reshape town centres and high streets in ways that improve user experience, drive economic growth, and ensure long-term sustainability. He continued that the MHCLG identified a number of approved uses and outcomes including:

• investment in physical infrastructure
• acquisition and assembly of land, including to support new housing, workspaces and public realm
• improvements to transport access, traffic flow and circulation
• supporting change of use, including housing delivery and densification.

Councillor Boden stated that the Council applied for funding for March Town Centre from the Future High Street Fund and was successful in obtaining MHCLG funding for March of £6.49 million for public realm improvements, land acquisitions and refurbishment of Council-owned assets, with March additionally receiving £2 million CPCA match funding, Cambridgeshire County Council fully funded new roadways, a mini-roundabout and all associated highways works, and there was investment from Cadent Gas and Anglian Water both of whom fully replaced their aging underground utilities. He stated that the purchase of the former Barclays Bank building was one of ten interventions delivered as part of the March Future High Street Fund scheme and the purchase and demolition of the Barclays site was wholly funded by the Future High Street Fund grant, no Council capital funding was used, with the Barclays site meeting the Government’s criteria of targeting regeneration investment at areas or sites demonstrating market failure. Councillor Boden made the point that the Council was not just given £6.49 million of Government money and told to get on with it, Government had to give permission for how the money was spent and it did so on the basis of the Benefit Cost Analysis for the project, calculated strictly according to the Treasury Green Book principles, with the Government approval being required for the details of the scheme in March before they permitted the grant money to be spent. He added that initially the schemes the Council put forward to Government, for which approval was obtained, included development of a site at Acre Road, however, the potential acquisition there fell through and the Council, therefore, sought to repurpose that part of the grant to enhance the wider regeneration strategy by among other things unlocking the Barclays Bank site, which is a key location site in the town centre that the private sector was unable or unwilling to bring forward. Councillor Boden stated that agreement was given by the Government to repurpose the funds previously authorised for Acre Road after the revised calculation of the Benefit Cost Ratio for the scheme as a whole was shown to be even greater than it had been when Acre Road had been included. He emphasised that Government did not authorise any of this investment to make a short-term transactional profit, with the grant monies spent on improving shop fronts, converting above-shop premises into residential units, demolishing and relocating the public toilets and enhancing the streetscene and public realm all being authorised by Government based on the economic and social benefit generated, not on an investment return basis and, for the Government, the March scheme proved a real success, with a Treasury Green Book Benefit Cost Ratio of 3.15, meaning that for every £1 of Government grant money that was spent, £3.15 of economic and social benefit will be generated. Councillor Boden continued that, in the financial terms used by the Government, the March Future High Street Fund grant, as enhanced by substituting Barclays Bank for Acre Road, was a resounding success, as the Government’s BCR requirement was 2, whereas the revised March scheme’s BCR was almost 60% above that target and, in total, according to the official way Government evaluates grant funding, the £8.49 million of public money put into the scheme delivers almost £27 million in socio-economic benefits in March. He added that the change from funding Acre Road to funding the Barclays site was the subject of a formal Project Amendment Request and was, therefore, separately considered by Government before they gave approval for the use of their grant funding for that purpose, based on the enhanced Benefit Cost Ratio that this achieved. Councillor Boden stated that separately to that Government required evaluation of the proposed redevelopment of the Barclays Bank site, Council officers were required by Cabinet to perform due diligence on the Project Amendment Request in relation to the Barclays site and, as part of this, officers obtained detailed written independent legal advice from a leading firm of lawyers whose work includes specialisation in public authority law so the purchase and redevelopment of the Barclays Bank site was lawful and it more than satisfied the Government's requirement in terms of value for money. He reiterated that Government was not purchasing the site to generate a development profit, they were authorising the site's redevelopment to achieve a substantial, quantifiable and quantified regeneration gain for March. Councillor Boden referred to the second stage of the process, there was a significant additional benefit obtained in that the subcontractors carrying out the physical work in and around Broad Street were able to use the Barclays Bank site as their project office and store, which saved between £250,000 and £300,000 in operational costs for that work, which excludes time-related efficiencies, and the money thereby saved was invested in public realm improvements which were additional to the original plan and completion of the scheme ended up earlier and better than otherwise would have occurred, with the Barclays site also used for public consultations. He referred to the third stage of the process relating to the former Barclays Bank site, which is the redevelopment phase and he is limited in what he can say about this stage at the moment since tender documents have only recently been received from bidders and are still being evaluated by officers prior to a report being submitted to next month's Cabinet for a decision to be made. Councillor Boden stated it was not the intention of this phase to make any development profit, and the fact that Fenland District Council will make a significant profit is a fortunate by-product of the whole process, but he clearly cannot mention any numbers at this point and within the tender process, potential bidders were all informed of the time requirement both for obtaining planning permission and for building out the new premises on the site, both to avoid any danger of land banking and to bring the advantage of a completed scheme to Broad Street as quickly as possible. He added that, in terms of private sector investment into the site, he has no knowledge at all of the content of the tender responses, but on general principles he would be surprised if the developer investment into building out the site after acquisition will not be in the high hundreds of thousands of pounds. Councillor Boden expressed the view that, once completed, redevelopment of the key site of the former Barclays Bank will have been achieved, to the benefit of Government whose grant money will have produced a high social and economic benefit, to the benefit of the Council, in an amount to be determined next month, and more importantly to the benefit of all those who use March Town Centre and who will benefit for years to come from the improvements generated as a result of the successful March Future High Street Fund schemes. He concluded by listing those significant public realm improvements as follows:

·       reduced shop vacancy rates

• new businesses opening and creating employment
• increased footfall and dwell time
• increased town centre spend
• rising land values
• improved greenery and lighting
• additional parking capacity at City Road
• resurfacing of the Market Place car park
• additional taxi bays
• additional bus bays
• heritage protection through reconditioning the Fountain.
• heritage enhancement through war memorial lighting and flag installation
• demolition of old toilets and construction of new modern facilities
• reduced vehicle journey times
• improved road safety through reduced vehicle speeds
• increased pedestrian priority through multiple new crossings
• improved air quality due to reduced standing traffic
• reduced environmental noise
• reduced anti-social behaviour through use of "designing out" principles.
• removal of a key market-failure site widely regarded as an architecturally inappropriate eyesore in a most prominent location

• creation of an attractive, development-ready anchor site
• delivery of additional residential accommodation through "living above the shop" grants
• delivery of improved shop fronts.

Councillor Boden summarised that the Council has achieved almost 60% more socio-economic benefit from the March Future High Street Fund than Government had required, a significant capital receipt will be received by the Council, as well as externally funded improvement to its assets and the benefit from regeneration will be felt in March for a generation or more.

·       Councillor Cutler explained that she sits on the Village Hall Committee which recently merged to manage Murrow Playing Field, with Murrow having no facilities for a thriving village and is in dire need of play equipment, gym equipment and picnic benches. She added that she welcomes hearing young families state that they choose to take their young children to Parson Drove, Gorefield, Guyhirn playing fields or Wisbech Park as that would be wonderful because choice is a good thing but expressed the view that it is very sad to hear families say that they have to travel to other villages or to the town, because there is nothing for them in Murrow. Councillor Cutler stated that she is aware that the Council does not own the playing field, making the point that if residents cannot contact their local council for help when they need it then who can they turn to, and is aware that the Council cannot provide everything but expressed the view that when there is a village within its district which is so badly neglected, it is very sad if the Council does not attempt to do something. She stated that there are other playing fields in her ward that would also be pleased to receive updated play equipment if it is offered but Murrow does have the greatest need, explaining that she has not been asked by residents to put forward a request for the other playing fields, but the residents of Murrow have asked for assistance. Councillor Cutler made the point that she has responded to Councillor Seaton’s email concerning Pride in Place Impact Funding which is available for villages and outlined the requirements for Murrow and she thanked Councillor Seaton for his communication. She asked Councillor Boden to advise her whether the assessment for Murrow playing field has been completed yet to form part of the Fenland Inspire project? Councillor Boden stated that he recognises the work that Councillor Cutler has undertaken to promote the need for additional expenditure on play equipment in Murrow, with the Council having been awarded £1.5 million and most, if not all, of that funding will be spent on play equipment and play areas. He added that there is not a comprehensive list of play areas and play equipment in the whole of the district and whilst the Council provides a significant amount of play equipment and play areas in the district there are also several places particularly in the rural areas where charities have provided that equipment and there are also a number of areas, especially in the last few years, where Section 106 Agreements and developers have been used to provide the equipment and continue to support its maintenance themselves or by the introduction of a management company and residents organisations which succeed the developers. Councillor Boden explained that given the fact the completion of the ordering of play equipment needs to be completed by March 2027 as part of the grant conditions it is imperative that the correct decisions are made and the best people who will know what is required, where it is required and where there is land available for equipment to be installed are the elected members as they have the best local knowledge. He stated that at the earlier Cabinet meeting it was agreed that Councillor Imafidon who is the Portfolio Holder responsible will write immediately to all members of the Council to ask for their detailed opinion as to what they feel is required and where and this exercise will need to be undertaken very quickly due to the fact that at the March meeting of Cabinet there will be a list provided of all of the proposed schemes which will be undertaken. Councillor Boden made the point that there is always the risk of danger or perception of favouritism geographically more than anything else and, therefore, Cabinet have also agreed that out of the £1.5 million, a figure of £250,000 will be allocated to each of the four towns and the remaining £500,000 will be allocated to the parish areas outside of the four market towns. He explained that he knows that proportionately, the figures favour the parish areas rather than the town areas, however, he knows that there is more difficulty accessing play equipment in some of the rural areas as opposed to some of the town areas, making the point that all of the towns already have a fair amount of play equipment, whereas in the rural areas it can be some distance away. Councillor Boden stated that members have a thorough knowledge of their own areas and will know what is required and where it is required and he encouraged members to respond to the email that they will all receive from Councillor Imafidon. He stated that whilst he will not give any assurances to Councillor Cutler, he is of the opinion that the circumstances which she has described appear to match exactly what is being looked for and as long as there is the place to be able to locate the play equipment then, in his opinion, he believes that what she is putting forward may stand a very good chance.

·       Councillor Miscandlon stated that, 18 months ago, the Corporate Management Team and officers undertook a visit to the Manor Leisure Centre, with it being agreed at that time that there should be a footpath introduced measuring 1.46 metres around the Leisure Centre, considering that is the only park area owned by the Council that does not have a footpath within it and it is extremely muddy because for 3 to 4 months of the year, parts of the field cannot be used unless you are wearing wellington boots. He added that the decision was made to introduce the pedestrian footpath, costings were obtained but there does not appear to be any further progress and he asked for an update with regards to the proposal in order that he can answer questions being raised by residents and users of the Manor. Councillor Miscandlon added that due to almost 46 days of continuous rain and drizzle it has meant that the lower end of the grassed area at the Manor is now virtually unusable for anybody. He asked for confirmation as to when the footpath is going to be implemented so that pedestrians, pushchairs and wheelchair users can use the facility without having to use wellington boots and waders? Councillor Seaton stated that he agrees that there has been a delay and part of that delay has been due partly to Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) and where the Inspire projects are now running, with Phase 1 of the projects already being in full progress and Phase 2 will be stalled until the details concerning LGR is known. He stated that originally it was thought the information would be made available in June, however, it appears that the detail will not be known until later in the year, although there is still so much uncertainty. Councillor Seaton agreed that the Manor is the only park in the market towns which does not have a pathway and once further clarification concerning LGR is made available, Phase 2 of Inspire will commence. He explained that there will need to be the requirement for a small amount of funding to implement the pathway as there will be the need to obtain a design, to go out for tender and to obtain permission from Middle Level Commissioners due to the proximity of the river and it will also need to obtain planning permission. Councillor Seaton made the point that as soon as LGR information is known then Phase 2 projects will commence and, in his opinion, he can see the footpath project being given priority.

·       Councillor Hoy stated that Wisbech has a higher number of Grade 2 Listed Buildings per square metre than Westminster, which is not in total as Westminster has over a thousand and Wisbech has 266 but her figures are based on square meterage. She added that she has recently ascertained that if there is a Grade 2 Listed Building which is derelict then you do not have to pay business rates, which, in her opinion, seems to be very counterintuitive to get people to repair such buildings. Councillor Hoy asked Councillor Boden whether he would consider writing to Central Government in conjunction with Steve Barclay MP to place pressure on the Government to consider changing the policy as, in her view, it seems a nonsensical policy and that is why so many people leave empty Grade 2 Listed Buildings because if they repair them, they are then liable to pay business rates. Councillor Hoy explained that, with regards to Constantine House, there was work undertaken following a fire and, in her opinion, the building is now starting to look run down. She added that she is unsure whether it is being land banked as a tax write off and asked whether she could be advised whether the owners details are available and if that is the case then can they be contacted to ascertain what their future plans are and also to find out whether they are paying business rates on the building? Councillor Boden stated that the point with regards to Constantine House is outside of his direct responsibility, but he will ensure that she receives a written response to her question. He added that, with regard to the point made concerning Grade 2 Listed Buildings, he is hesitant about giving any support for anything to do with the changes to national nondomestic rate system, it is a horrendously complicated system with many associated checks and balances within it, but added that it may seem advantageous to start taxing owners of buildings to try and encourage them to bring them back into use. Councillor Boden added that there is an effective procedure in place when dealing with Council Tax payments and empty homes but the unended consequences of that could be quite significant in terms of buildings which end up being abandoned, however, he will give some thought to the point raised by Councillor Hoy as a response could be more complicated rather than a simple answer.

·       Councillor Taylor stated that he has raised concerns with the Highway Authority at the County Council due to concerns over some of the cambers on the roads which will likely be the cause of accidents involving tractors and trailers during the year. He explained that he is aware that there was a machine called a Pothole Pro offered to the County Council and the manufacturer JCB offered the machine to the Highway Authority for a week as well as the offer of members of staff who are trained to operate the piece of machinery, with to the best of his knowledge this machine digs the pothole into a square, seals the edges and fills the hole with fresh tarmac before re sealing and it was stated that there could be 900 potholes filled in properly by this machine within one week. Councillor Taylor stated that the Chief Executive of the County Council stated that the machine was not required as the Highway Authority were content to use the dragon patchers and he referred to the Highways Act, questioning whether the Chief Executive of the County Council can make that decision when some of the councillors are stating that they do want it. He stated that when he reviewed the HOPs Guidance which is for highways standards, it would appear that the County Council are on the verge of receiving a financial penalty and potentially claims for damages and he cannot understand why the County Council would not take up the offer of a free machine for a week with just the requirement of providing new tarmac and removal of the old material. Councillor Taylor questioned whether the Chief Executive has the authority and the right to refuse the offer? Councillor Boden stated that the question falls outside of the scope of the Council, making the point that members are all aware of just how desperate the pothole situation is, with it being during the winter months when the potholes appear and it appears that there has no work undertaken by the Highway Authority from December when the potholes began appearing and all the way through to the beginning of February and in some locations, work is still to commence. He expressed the view that the situation is truly appalling and there have many cases of vehicles suffering damage as a result. Councillor Boden explained that in some situations that statutory override of Section 58 of the Highways Act will not apply as the County Council have been aware for a very long time of the defects and they have failed to act in the appropriate timescale to get the defects rectified. He added that as a result he finds the point made by Councillor Taylor to be shocking as he can imagine JCB are offering their equipment as a promotional tool for their own business interest and they are not just doing it for the interests of the people of Cambridgeshire, with JCB trying to showcase their ‘Pothole Pro’ which they believe is a tool which works well, and he understands their commercial reasons for making the offer. Councillor Boden made the point that he knows that the County Council has brought in extra capacity due to the situation which has now arisen and, in his view, he would have thought that the Highways Authority would have taken up the offer of the free machine and free manpower. He added that there is a contractual issue as the County Council already have a contract in place to undertake highways work, however, that can be overridden as a payment to the contractor for the work for the profit that they lose as a result of the work undertaken by the Pothole Pro machine. Councillor Boden expressed the view that if the allegation which Councillor Taylor is making are true then he finds it truly shocking for the County Council and even more so for the residents of Fenland.

·       Councillor Nawaz referred to the Workwell Programme, which is being run in Fenland, appears to be operating quite well and that the statistics which are given are singular and he asked for a breakdown of the statistics relating to each Fenland town and details of the contact centres in each town and how Workwell can be promoted further. He added that the Government’s Getting Britain to Work programme is being instituted through the CPCAs committee and he asked whether there is any integration between the two initiatives? Councillor Wallwork stated that she will provide a breakdown to demonstrate where the referrals are coming from. Councillor Nawaz added that Fenland appears to be very low in the socio economic status in deprived areas of UK regardless of the key performance indicators which are used. Councillor Wallwork explained that the figures for the month of January demonstrate that the figures for Whittlesey are quite low when considering the referrals for the whole of Fenland, with there having been three active referrals for Whittlesey where those three individuals have actively engaged in the project and the further detail will be circulated in due course. She added that with regards to the promotion of Workwell, all of the Primary Care Network team who are front facing NHS workers have been engaged along with all of staff who work in the local GP Surgeries and the Workwell team try to attend anything community based to promote the project and, in her view, the reason why there are less referrals from certain places are due to the fact that although they have been operating since October 2024, they are actually quite a new service. Councillor Wallwork added that trust is a large factor and they have to become established before they can engage with partner agencies. She stated that she is unsure as to whether Workwell and the CPCA have any joined up working to date, but she will investigate that further.

·       Councillor Nawaz stated that there was a public consultation undertaken with regards to the Manor Leisure Centre and he asked what the outcomes were of the consultation, including as to whether they were incorporated into the Royal Institute of British Architects third drawing as he would like clarification concerning the mixed gender changing rooms. Councillor Count stated that the consultation responses were fully dealt with in the last paper that went to Cabinet and he agreed to send the papers to Councillor Nawaz so that he could read all of the responses for all areas. Councillor Nawaz explained that he has undertaken his own survey in Whittlesey and he received 315 replies, 277 of the responses were against mixed gender changing rooms, 21 did not mind either way with 17 responses being in favour. Councillor Nawaz asked whether it would be possible for the Council to incorporate his survey findings to reflect the wishes of the residents of Whittlesey and questioned whether the Council knows best and the freedom of choice of the residents of Whittlesey is to be denied? Councillor Count stated that with regards to mixed changing rooms these were brought forward by Sport England who are obviously heavily involved with facilities across the whole of the country and it appears to be working very well nationally. He added that mixed changing rooms are already operating in changing rooms in the Council’s leisure centres across the district and members were all invited to visit the other leisure centres to see how well they operate. Councillor Count stated that he appreciates that Councillor Nawaz has taken the time to engage with residents to ascertain their feedback, but his individual survey is not matched by national findings through Sport England and the recommendation of the experience of the whole of the district excluding those who are yet to have them. He added that there will be a non-mixed changing room on the dry side and that facility will be on offer to anybody should that be their preference to enter the pool.

·       Councillor Hay stated that there are three public toilets in Chatteris to serve the whole of the town and they are situated near the library in the middle of the town but two of the toilets have not been usable for some months now as they are locked up as she understands that there is a problem with the locks but the third toilet which is the disabled toilet is in a very poor condition and people are refusing to use it. She explained that one man with severe medical needs has written to the Council to advise that the toilet was in such a poor condition he refused to use the toilet and went home instead. Councillor Hay stated that there are also mothers with young babies who will not use the changing facilities due to the condition of the disabled toilet which also does not have a toilet seat and asked when she can expect to see the facilities brought up to an acceptable and usable standard? Councillor Boden stated that he has already spoken to Councillor Hay regarding this matter and he has a great deal of sympathy on the matter and he does not believe that there will be budget availability to undertake work which is why he has been taking steps to find a way outside of the budget to enable work to be carried out. He added that whilst he can not make any cast iron guarantees he will contact Councillor Hay and the Clerk of the Town Council in order to provide an update on when works can be undertaken which he hopes will be fairly soon.