Agenda and minutes

– to note the names of members of the public wishing to speak on general matters affecting the District or on agenda items (in the case of the latter, representations will normally be received at the time of the agenda item, after the Portfolio Holder’s introduction and any questions from Cabinet Members).

Three members of the public and/or representatives of local interest groups spoke regarding various matters on the agenda and their comments are summarised under the relevant minutes below.

Portfolio Holders made a number of announcements as summarised below:

·    The success of recent successful prosecutions by the Council for fly-tipping was highlighted.

·    The Council was providing resources for additional grass cutting to deal with overgrowth due to the recent weather conditions.  In addition, options for varying the grass cutting programme for next year were being investigated.

·    The Council had installed solar powered lighting in the car park at Kidmore Lane, Denmead.

Cabinet noted a correction to the date of the meeting to 23 May 2018 (not 26 March as stated on the minutes).

The Chairman drew Cabinet’s attention to the recommendations of the Cabinet (Leisure Centre) Committee that the draft Design Framework be approved as set out in Appendix 1 of report CAB3035(LC), subject to the following changes:

1.         Clarification of the Sport and Leisure Park boundary

within the Design Framework.

2.         Exploration of options to enable managed pedestrian

access from Milland Road through the Stadium to the Sport and

Leisure.

3.         Clarification of the Design Framework principles

relating to the height of development of the depot site in relation

to neighbouring buildings.

4.         Recognition of accessibility of the Design Framework

including amending the Vision statement to include a statement

that the Centre should appeal to “all abilities”.

Cabinet noted that the word “facility” should be included at the end of point 2.

Cabinet agreed to the following for the reasons outlined above and set out in the Report.

            RESOLVED:

That the minutes of Cabinet (Leisure Centre) Committee held 23 May 2018 be received (as attached as Appendix A to these minutes) and, subject to the amendment outlined above, the recommendations contained therein be agreed.

Councillor Griffiths introduced the Report.

During public participation, two members of the public and/or members of local interest groups spoke as summarised below.

Janet Berry (Highcliffe Community Forum for Action)

·                that the plans for the boxing club altered proposals in the Design Framework which had only recently consulted upon.  Improvements to the Number 4 bus service should be included in proposals;

·                Children and young people must be fully engaged in the design process;

·                that the issue of future use of the former depot site had not been resolved;

·                The local community must be involved in future proposals on an ongoing basis particularly in relation to pedestrian access to the facilities from Milland Road.

Geoff Wright

·                that the projected cost of £38m was a significant sum which needed to be considered carefully in relation to what will be provided

·                Highlighted that a major component of the cost would be the construction costs for which a preferred contractor had been selected.  Given this, how would the contractor be incentivised to achieve best value for the construction costs. 

At the invitation of the Chairman, Councillors Thompson, Murphy and Laming addressed Cabinet as summarised below.

Councillor Thompson

·                Supported the proposal for a new centre located at Bar End. It is an exciting project and our biggest to date so its importance means that we must get it right. 

·                Sought clarification  regarding the proposed design of the glass wall in the sports hall in relation to glare and the importance of ensuring the opinions of club users were taking into account.

·                The importance of considering access arrangements to the new centre, including cycle and pedestrian routes from different areas of the city.  Whilst Park and Ride parking spaces are being increased the bus capacity should also be increased in line with this and the findings of the Movement Strategy must be taken into account.

Councillor Murphy

·                Welcomed the proposed indicative designs for the building but appealed to take account the fears and wishes of the community;

·                that Highcliffe residents had not been consulted before about the proposals for the boxing club and requested assurances that this consultation would take place;

·                Existing playing field areas in Highcliffe should remain accessible for free play purposes;

·                Recognition that ensuring access from Milland Road required further consideration but highlighted that children from the local primary school would otherwise have a much longer walk to the centre. 

·                Concern that current traffic and parking issues along Milland Road could be acerbated by the proposed relocation of the boxing club.

Councillor Laming

·                The depot site must be included within the Design Framework;

·                The designs should be include a viewing gallery for the sports hall;

·                sought clarification regarding the suitability of the proposed glass wall in the hall;

·                The requirements of those with disabilities must be properly addressed and the centre be a centre for all.

The Chairman thanked contributors and welcomed the general support for a new centre.  However, she noted that a number of comments made either related to other  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Councillor Griffiths introduced the report and highlighted the proposal  for the boxing club to be relocated from its current location on the Garrison Ground to enable the new Leisure Centre to be built.  The report proposed that further work be done to evaluate whether the Club could be accommodated within a new multiuse pavilion on the King George V Playing Field (KGV).  Councillor Griffiths emphasised that consultation would be undertaken on these proposals and the report’s third recommendation be  amended to take account of this.

Janet Berry (Highcliffe Forum) spoke during public participation as summarised below:

·                that the local community had not been consulted on the proposals before now, and in particularly as part of the recent consultation on the Design Framework that this proposal seemed to contradict;

·                What steps would be taken to mitigate additional traffic in local roads and how would any overflow parking be managed?

·                Would the ability for general community use of pavilions be retained and would the kickabout area be relocated?

·                Requested that the actions in the Highcliffe Forum Community Plan be supported and considered

At the invitation of the Chairman, Councillors Weir and Burns addressed Cabinet as summarised below.

Councillor Weir

·                that she appreciated an officer briefing but the Winchester Town Forum had not been consulted on proposals due to the impact on the Town Account budget.  She requested further clarity regarding the ongoing revenue requirements as she believed this was a district-wide project;

·                the implications of the proposals on access arrangements from the local area.

Councillor Burns

·                The original 1940 deed of dedication of KGV dedicated it as public playing fields and she believed that the provision of pavilion(s) on the land was contrary to this purpose;

·                that the report’s proposals accorded with the contents of the Design Framework which envisaged that the boxing club would be located to the north west of the new stadium.

The Chairman stated that the financial implications were met from the General Fund and that further discussions would be held with Councillor Weir outside of the meeting to clarify the ongoing revenue funding requirements beyond those set out in the report.  Members also highlighted that the idea of reviewing  and/or enhancing the existing pavilions was included within the Design Framework. 

The Head of Programme confirmed that there were existing pavilions on KGV – two currently in use and one which was very old and dilapidated.  There were no proposals to increase the overall size of the area occupied by pavilion(s) but more to rationalise the overall provision. .  Matters relating to the access arrangements would be considered as part of the future consultation on the proposals. The whole of the KGV area would still be available for general use outside of the time the pitches were being used for football games.

Councillor Warwick stated that the possibility of a new pavilion on KGV had been considered some years ago by the Council including the option of a facility being named after a former Southampton Football Club player  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Councillor Griffiths introduced the report and set out that the procurement process be adjusted to that previously agreed in November 2017 to allow the Council some scope for negotiations once the tenders were received (should they require it).  The specifications for the management contract were contained within exempt appendix 1.

Emma Back of Winchester SALT spoke during the public participation period in relation to this item as summarised below

·         that the Council did not understand or listen to the community sport sector and was not addressing their requirements. 

Cabinet Members highlighted that a great deal of engagement had taken place both over recent months and in recent years as the proposals were developed.  This had included meetings with Winchester SALT and other representatives of local sports and community clubs.  The Council would meet the requirements of clubs as far as possible now and into the future.   The general commitment of volunteers involved in all local clubs and their value to the local society was also acknowledged.

Councillor Griffiths emphasised that the procurement process to be adopted would allow consideration of community access and the possibility of offering discounted use for local community groups.  The Head of Programme confirmed that tenderers would be expected to work collaboratively with local clubs and the contract specification required that priority must be given to clubs with a membership from within the district.

Members confirmed that they had had regard to the contents of the exempt appendices in reaching the decision set out below.

Cabinet agreed to the following for the reasons outlined above and set out in the Report.

            RESOLVED:

1.         That the principles of the procurement with the proposed inclusion of a negotiation element be approved and the commencement of the procurement process for an Operator to manage the new Sport and Leisure Centre be authorised.

2.         That the contract term be a period of 15 years with an option to extend for a period or a further  5 years at the Council’s sole discretion but in line with the performance management requirements.

3.         That the Services Specification be approved and authority be delegated to the Head of Programme in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Health and Wellbeing to make any required further minor amendments and any such further changes to the Specification as may reasonably deemed necessary in the event of the Council exercising it rights to negotiate on the tenders received.

4.         That delegation be given to the Head of Programme in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Health and Wellbeing to complete the required tendering documentation including the draft contract.

5.         That Meadowside Leisure Centre shall not be included in the contract for the operator of the new Sport and Leisure Centre.

6.         That it be agreed that all weather football pitch and tennis courts at North Walls Recreation Ground are not included as part of the new operator contract.

7.         That the evaluation weighting of a 60% overall score for commercial aspects and 40% for quality aspects and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

(i)            To pass a resolution that the public be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the following items of business because it is likely that, if members of the public were present, there would be disclosure to them of ‘exempt information’ as defined by Section 100 (I) and Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

Item                                                                      Para No. of Schedule 12a

to the Act giving description of

exempt information giving rise

to the exclusion of the public

                   Procurement of a Centre Operator                                                         3

                   Deed of variation to existing Leisure Centre Operator Contract             3

RESOLVED:

1.         That in all the circumstances, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

2.         That the public be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the following items of business because it is likely that, if members of the public were present, there would be disclosure to them of ‘exempt information’ as defined by Section 100I and Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972.

In order to respond to Members’ questions as required, the following external consultants remained during the consideration of the exempt appendices to this report only:

Simon Molden and Taryn Dale of the Sports Consultancy and Jon Hunt of Mace

Cabinet considered the contents of the exempt appendices which contained the draft specification, the evaluation criteria and soft market testing (detail in exempt minute). 

Cabinet considered the content of the report which considered a deed of variation to the existing Leisure Centre Operator (detail in exempt minute).