Issue - meetings

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)

Report of Chief Officer (Environment)

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)

Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer (Environment) which sought a decision on the future of the Tasting Garden.

The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:

OPTION 1- Consider that restoration of the artwork is a priority for the Council and that in its role as a steward the Council should properly lead on it.

In order to arrive at this option Cabinet would need to consider the following-

·       What actual evidence is there that this is generally what our citizens want?

·      How would the restoration be funded?  If the Council was to allocate resources for the Garden, in effect they would need to be redirected from another initiative or activity.  Realistically, the Council does not have the resources to directly fund restoration and if so, external funds would need to be raised. We have been told that there are likely to be funds available out there. Experience tells us that obtaining external funding is a complicated and time consuming exercise and match funding may well be required.

·      How would the project be resourced? As stated above just raising the funds is likely to be time consuming and complicated. Due to the need to prioritise and focus on core activities the Council does not currently have available officer time or expertise that could be allocated to this, if such a route was chosen. Therefore, in theory Cabinet would need to consider this as an area for growth. In practice budget reductions from central government mean that ‘growth’ is not an option that can be realistically considered, so Cabinet would have to consider redirection of resource.

·      How would the restored project be maintained? The ongoing maintenance of the artwork would be intensive and would again require ongoing growth – this need is a very real difficulty given the financial outlook and the same point referred to above would apply.

·      Even if external funds are available obtaining them could take a number of years, depending on the route chosen, and in any event the timescales would not fit with the review of the Storey operation, required by 2017/18. What does the Council do with the garden in the interim and how will that support the Storey business plan?  What about the future?  What would need to change?

  OPTION 2- Consider that restoration of the artwork is a  priority for the Council, but only on the firm basis that it was resource- and risk- free for the authority, and so could only take place if full responsibility could be transferred, in some way, to a third party.

There are some examples of this type of model that work well within the District (e.g. Fairfield). Typically land is leased to a community group for a specific purpose, with strict stipulations. However, the examples we have are ones where the risks are much less than this and the projects are of much lower profile.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37