Issue - meetings

Report to follow

Matter for Decision

This was the second of two reports on the agenda on arrangements for prioritising the use of generic S106 contributions. It focused on the S106 contribution types in the Communities portfolio (community facilities, indoor sports and outdoor sports). The approach to these three types differs from those covered in the first report because:

a)   The strategic review of community provision was on-going - it would be premature to prioritise S106 funding for further community facilities projects until the outcomes of that review are known.

b)   Outdoor and indoor sports facilities were recognised as ‘city-wide resources’ and would benefit from a consistent, city-wide approach;

c)    Future priorities for improving sports provision were already set out in recent sports strategies.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Communities

Agreed to:

       i.          Defer the next round of inviting S106 proposals and carrying out priority-setting for community facilities projects until after the completion of the strategic review of community provision;

     ii.          Discontinue devolved decision-making for the outdoor sports S106 contribution type and, instead, combines all unallocated contributions for this type into a city-wide outdoor sports S106 fund;

   iii.          Focus priority-setting in March 2017 over the use of outdoor and indoor sports S106 funding on project proposals which are ready to be considered and already identified as priorities in the Playing Pitches and Indoor Sports strategies. This would be without seeking further S106 proposals/grant applications for sports facilities in autumn 2016;

   iv.          Use the same selection criteria for S106 priority-setting as agreed by the Executive Councillor for Streets and Open Spaces (report Appendix B).

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

The Committee received a report from the Urban Growth Project Manager.

 

The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:

       i.          Expressed concern about the development of recent sports strategies without sufficient consultation with young people.

     ii.          Expressed concern regarding access to facilities.

 

The Head of Community Services, Sport & Recreation Manager plus Urban Growth Project Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

       i.          The needs analysis behind the sports strategies included engagement with sports groups, educational facilities, and national bodies, all of whom have junior clubs and engagement with young people.

     ii.          It was a strategic analysis that enabled the City Council to seek funding from developers for priority projects.

   iii.          Combining generic devolved and strategic S106 sports funding in city-wide funds meant the City Council could deliver against significant strategic needs.

   iv.          The playing pitch strategy also clearly identifies a need for more junior pitches, and reconfiguration of pitches has already been undertaken at Coleridge, St. Albans and Nightingale Avenue recreation grounds for this season to allow for more junior teams.

    v.          There was a range of formal (eg tennis courts) and informal (eg basketball hoops) sports facilities across the city, as detailed in a current sports activity map.

   vi.          The Urban Growth Project Manager undertook to ascertain if on-site funding from East Chesterton Train station was anticipated.

 vii.          The Sports Team work to offer a range of activities to encourage participation, for all age groups, including young people and family games this coming half term holiday.

viii.          The Recreation Manager confirmed that community use agreements protect community access to sports facilities, so people could use facilities in schools etc in the evenings and at weekends, and throughout holiday periods. This was also subject to planning conditions of use (eg times when flood lighting could be used).

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendations.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

 

Post Meeting Note

The Urban Growth Project Manager made some corrections to his report which are available as an addendum to the agenda. The changes corrected some inconsistencies, omissions and typographical errors and did not materially affect the decision of the Executive Councillor. The Urban Growth Project Manager advised committee Members and the Executive Councillor of the changes to the report text post meeting.