Agenda item

Lancaster Cultural Heritage Strategy

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Sands)

 

Report of the Head of Regeneration and Policy

Minutes:

(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Sands)

 

Cabinet received a report from the Head of Regeneration and Policy to consider the outcome and recommendations of the final version of the Lancaster Cultural Heritage Strategy prepared by consultants Blue Sail following extensive consultation.

 

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

 

 

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Risks

1. Do not adopt final Cultural Heritage Strategy objectives/priorities. 

No advantages identified.

No clear up to date and comprehensive statement of direction, in either strategic or development terms, of City Council priorities for Cultural Heritage.

 

Development of Lancaster’s cultural heritage offer will have to take place on a piecemeal basis, lacking a strong and clear economic justification, and without a strong and well developed strategic framework.

 

The Council may miss an opportunity to build upon stakeholder engagement during strategy development.

 

2.  Cabinet endorses Cultural Heritage Strategy objectives/priorities. 

 

 

Clear commitment to and direction for Cultural Heritage as an economic and regeneration driver for the district.

 

Clear economic justification for individual projects and a robust evaluation framework.

 

Wide consultation and formal feedback has led to identification of priorities.

 

Bringing together all key partners to deliver a co-ordinated investment strategy in a manner that maximises the benefit to the local economy and tackles the long under investment in this aspect of the visitor economy will be difficult.

 

 

 

Normal risks associated with practical delivery: achieving development and revenue funding, managing and shaping individual projects and initiatives.

 

 

 

 

3.  Cabinet endorses Cultural Heritage Strategy objectives/priorities with amendments / alternative actions. 

 

 

Depending on time taken to review amendments there should still be:

 

Clear commitment to and direction for Cultural Heritage as an economic and regeneration driver for the district.

 

Clear economic justification.

Further delay possible in bringing together all key partners to deliver a co-ordinated investment strategy in a manner that maximises the benefit to the local economy and tackles the long under investment in this aspect of the visitor economy will be difficult.

 

 

Normal risks associated with practical delivery: achieving development and revenue funding, managing and shaping individual projects and initiatives.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Option 2 was the preferred option as this provideda clear commitment and direction for Cultural Heritage and its contribution to economic regeneration work in the district through the stated policy objectives, priorities and outline action plan. Option 3 was also available to Members and acceptable given the context of changing circumstances/funding environment noted in paragraph 2.6 of the report.  Members were assured that the recommendations had been subject to independent appraisal and wide community consultation.

 

Essentially the Lancaster Cultural Heritage Strategy and the implementation plan was a programme rather than a collection of individual projects. It provided a strategic overview and a framework for any projects that were ultimately supported to move forward.  As individual projects were developed, and if they had individual council resource/risk implications they would be subject to detailed internal appraisal within the council’s own scrutiny and project management systems. Any individual project proposals would need to be considered as part of the annual budget and planning process, in context of future priorities and affordability

 

Councillor Sands proposed, seconded by Councillor Hanson:-

 

“(1)      That the Lancaster Cultural Heritage Strategy and Action Plan are endorsed as the framework for prioritising actions and investment in the district’s’ cultural heritage assets.

(2)        That a presentation of the Strategy be arranged, to be open to all Members of Lancaster City Council.

(3)        That the Action Plan be considered in the context of an overall review of the Council’s Priorities and Budget for 2012/13.”

 

Councillors then voted:-

 

Resolved unanimously:

 

(1)        That the Lancaster Cultural Heritage Strategy and Action Plan are endorsed as the framework for prioritising actions and investment in the district’s’ cultural heritage assets.

(2)        That a presentation of the Strategy be arranged, to be open to all Members of Lancaster City Council.

(3)        That the Action Plan be considered in the context of an overall review of the Council’s Priorities and Budget for 2012/13.

 

 

Officers responsible for effecting the decision:

 

Head of Regeneration and Policy

 

Reasons for making the decision:

 

The decision fits in with the Council’s new corporate and strategic approach towards delivering economic regeneration placing emphasis on developing and focussing on key priorities, policy fit and deliverability.   The Strategy should be welcomed for providing a renewed focus and for taking stock of the current situation.  There are some criticisms of the district’s current approach (or lack of approach) in the Strategy, but as an independent review all key stakeholders should recognise the consultant has acted in the capacity of a ‘critical friend’.   The review and outline action plan will assist more effective targeting on the deliverable ‘high impact’ priority projects that will build upon some of the positive changes seen in the district in recent years.

 

 

Supporting documents: