Agenda item

Report of the Overview & Scrutiny Committee

The Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee introduced a report in order that Cabinet could consider the recommendations of the Overview  Scrutiny Committee regarding the Morecambe Future High Streets bid. A Task Group had been set up following the unsuccessful Morecambe Future High Street bid to make recommendations to increase the City Council’s chances in the future.

 

In introducing the report Councillor Austen-Baker, Chair of Overview & Scrutiny advised the meeting that the recommendations had been agreed by the Overview & Scrutiny Committee but rejected when initially presented to Cabinet in 2021 unaccompanied by a report.  Councillor Austen-Baker had not been  a member of Overview & Scrutiny at that time but had written the report based on the recommendations agreed two years ago.  The Leader thanked Councillor Austen-Baker and the task group for their efforts in undertaking this work.

 

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

 

 

The Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s Preferred Option was Option 1. To accept the recommendations set out in the report.

 

The recommendations were as follows:

 

RECOMMENDATION 1

That Officers ensure in future bids that consultants have a local knowledge base, and that use is made of expertise available in the area, including nearby universities.

 

RECOMMENDATION 2

That comparisons with other locales should be like-for-like: there is no benefit in comparing a seaside-based, seasonal tourist town with major city yields and operations.

 

RECOMMENDATION 3

That a Capital Strategy policy be developed to include the purchase of land in Morecambe.

 

RECOMMENDATION 4:

That any future bids (whether for Morecambe or other parts of the district or the district as a whole) involve consultation with a wider base of stakeholders, with a broader scope of interests, and further that all councillors in the affected area are invited to participate, from Town, City and County councils.

 

RECOMMENDATION 5

That full consultation takes place with County highways, rail and Eden North to ensure a whole structured, environmentally-friendly transport plan is conceived for the area.

 

RECOMMENDATION 6

That more sustainable regeneration proposals are developed following wider consultation.

 

RECOMMENDATION 7

That conversion of empty business premises and new build of housing should be undertaken throughout the town centre, to bring back the community feel of the whole central area.

 

RECOMMENDATION 8:

That the Winter Gardens is an essential part of Morecambe’s future and should be a part of any future bid of a similar nature.

 

RECOMMENDATION 9:

That the Council tries to source other funding for hyperfast broadband in Morecambe.

 

RECOMMENDATION 10:

(i)               That this bid is not reused/recycled in the future, as it is outdated and no longer fit for purpose post-COVID.

(ii)              That a new Morecambe Area Action Plan is drafted with full participation of all Morecambe councillors and with business representatives.

(iii)            That for clarity, an Executive Summary be attached to officers’ reports on, which also defines the original Council brief, tasks undertaken, personnel involved and third party outsourcing responsibilities.

 

RECOMMENDATION 11

That, as a rule, final bids (which ultimately involve spending commitments by the Council) should be signed off by the Departmental Head, the Chief Executive, the portfolio-holder and the Leader of the Council.

 

 

Councillor Heath as Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility, and Chair of Overview and Scrutiny at the time that the recommendations of the Task Group were agreed, confirmed she proposed to take each recommendation separately with the exception of recommendations (1) & (2) which were taken together.

 

Councillor Heath proposed, seconded by Councillor Hamilton-Cox:-

 

“That recommendations 1 and 2 be accepted; recommendation 3 be rejected; recommendation 4 be accepted; recommendation 5 be noted and forwarded to Lancashire County Council as part of the input to the Lancashire transport plan;

recommendation 6 be rejected, recommendation 7 be accepted with the following additional wording added at the end; “these elements to inform the Morecambe Regeneration Plan”; recommendation 8 be accepted; recommendation 9 be noted as it was currently being implemented; recommendation10 (i) be accepted; 10 (ii) amended to ‘consideration is given to providing a Monitoring Report for evaluating the impact of the existing Morecambe Area Action Plan.  The update will then inform any future new Morecambe Area Action Plan, which if produced would be taken forward via the usual democratic planning process.  Additionally, Morecambe’s Neighbourhood Plan, which is being prepared by Morecambe Town Council could have a design code.’  10(iii) be rejected; recommendation 11 be revised to “That Cabinet consider the protocol for expressions of interests and Bids as soon as possible.”

 

Councillors then voted:-

 

Resolved unanimously:

 

(1)             That the following recommendations from the Morecambe Future High Street Bid Informal Task Group be accepted:

 

·        That Officers ensure in future bids that consultants have a local knowledge base, and that use is made of expertise available in the area, including nearby universities. (Recommendation 1 as set out in the report)

·        That comparisons with other locales should be like-for-like: there is no benefit in comparing a seaside-based, seasonal tourist town with major city yields and operations. (Recommendation 2 as set out in the report)

·        That any future bids (whether for Morecambe or other parts of the district or the district as a whole) involve consultation with a wider base of stakeholders, with a broader scope of interests, and further that all councillors in the affected area are invited to participate, from Town, City and County councils. (Recommendation 4 as set out in the report)

·        That Recommendation 5 as set out in the report be noted and forwarded to County Council as part of the input into the Lancashire Transport Plan.

·        That conversion of empty business premises and new build of housing should be undertaken throughout the town centre, to bring back the community feel of the whole central area. These elements to inform the Morecambe Regeneration Plan (Recommendation 7, amended)

·        That the Winter Gardens is an essential part of Morecambe’s future and should be a part of any future bid of a similar nature. (Recommendation 8 as set out in the report)

·        That recommendation 9 as set out in the report be noted as it was currently being undertaken.

·        That this bid is not reused/recycled in the future, as it is outdated and no longer fit for purpose post-COVID. (Recommendation 10(i)

·        That consideration is given to providing a Monitoring Report for evaluating the impact of the existing Morecambe Area Action Plan.  The update will then inform any future new Morecambe Area Action Plan, which if produced would be taken forward via the usual democratic planning process.  Additionally, Morecambe’s Neighbourhood Plan, which is being prepared by Morecambe Town Council could have a design code. (Recommendation 10 (ii) amended)

·        That Cabinet consider the protocol for expressions of interests and Bids as soon as possible. (Recommendation 11, revised).

 

Officers responsible for effecting the decision:

 

Chief Executive

Head of Sustainable Growth

 

Reasons for making the decision:

 

It is important that Overview & Scrutiny should act as a ‘critical friend’ to Cabinet.

 

The report contributes to the Council’s priorities, most notably those associated with an Inclusive and Prosperous Local Economy.

 

The recommendations that were rejected were not approved for the following reasons:

 

 

Recommendation 3 was rejected as this was considered out of date as there was now a Capital Strategy Group.

 

Recommendation 6 was rejected as more clarity was required.  It was part of the Council Plan to look at regeneration in the future.

 

Recommendation 10(iii) was rejected as it was now considered to be superfluous.