Issue - meetings
Bailrigg Garden Village Governance Proposals
Meeting: 03/10/2017 - Cabinet (Item 35)
35 Bailrigg Garden Village Governance Proposals 
PDF 227 KB
(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)
Report of Chief Officer (Regeneration & Planning)
Additional documents:
- Expression of Interest Appendix A.docx, item 35
PDF 3 MB
- Project Plan (Draft) Appendix B.docx, item 35
PDF 508 KB
- Governance and work flow diagrams Appendix C.pdf, item 35
PDF 28 KB
- Equality Impacts Bailrigg Garden Village Governance, item 35
PDF 207 KB
Minutes:
(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)
(Councillors Leyshon and Whitehead having both declared pecuniary interests in the following item left the meeting at this point and did not participate in the discussions or vote.)
Cabinet received a report from the Chief Officer (Regeneration & Planning) which sought approval for the governance arrangements for the Bailrigg Garden Village project.
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:
|
|
Option 1: To agree the proposed Governance Structure |
Option 2: To agree a Governance structure which excludes any representation from the University on the Project Board |
Option 3: not to agree a Governance Structure. |
|
Advantages |
Establishes the structure for reporting and control of the project at an early stage before significant decisions need to be made. |
Eliminates entirely any suggestion of conflict of interest with the University’s role |
None |
|
Disadvantages |
None |
Distances the university from shaping strategy and using its significant resources and innovation to help shape the Garden Village. |
Further delay in progressing the project. Failing to meet the expectations of the HCA. Reputational damage. |
|
Risks |
Risk of conflict of interest associated with the University’s role has been mitigated. |
Risk of alienating the university from the project. |
Ministerial intervention |
Option 1 is the officer preferred option. The project is now entering an important stage where significant areas of work need to be commissioned and external funding accounted for and monitored. Ministers are keen to see progress and the HCA are pressing for formal governance processes to be set up. Now that the issue of how to treat the university as part of the governance structure has been resolved progress on establishing the structure and putting it into operation needs to occur.
Councillor Hanson proposed, seconded by Councillor Warriner:-
“That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved.”
The Cabinet Members present then voted:-
Resolved unanimously:
(1) That the Governance Structure for Bailrigg Garden Village illustrated in Appendix C to the report, be approved and put into operation.
(2) That the Project Plan contained in Appendix B to the report, be noted and the Planning Policy Cabinet Liaison Group be asked to monitor the natural evolution of that plan, with key decisions required against milestones being referred back to Cabinet as appropriate.
(3) That it be noted that a further £130K bid for top up Capacity Funding was submitted to the Homes and Community Agency in August under delegated authority and that this funding should be accepted by the Council, if successful.
(4) That delegated authority be given to the Chief Officer (Regeneration and Planning) in agreement with the Chief Officer (Resources) to approve the making and acceptance of further external funding bids as appropriate for project development / capacity purposes only.
(5) That the General Fund Revenue Budget be updated as appropriate to reflect any additional expenditure and associated funding arising from recommendations 3 and 4, subject to there being a nil impact on the Council’s overall resources.