(Cabinet Member with Special Responsibility Councillor Hanson)
Cabinet received a report from the Head of Regeneration & Planning to report on further project implementation to improve key streets and spaces within the city centre and request that the decision on the centrepiece for Market Square be deferred to the June meeting.
The options, options analysis, including risk assessment and officer preferred option, were set out in the report as follows:
The proposal made in the report followed extensive community engagement. It was based on design concepts approved by Cabinet, which the Council had made budgetary provision for in the General Fund Capital Programme. The ERDF investment award was towards specific deliverables and to a whole programme of improvements. It could not be drawn down if the scope of works was reduced significantly. With this as the context, two options were presented. The difference between the two options concerned the centrepiece to Market Square. Option one included a single elevated structure as the centrepiece. Option 2 for a twin or divided structure. The plans and drawings in appendices 1 and 2 on the supplementary report refer. The two options had very similar seating capacities and both could be used for impromptu and informal performances.
|
Option 1 |
To implement the proposal set out in section 2.0 of the report with a centrepiece to Market Square comprising a single elevated structure (as per the option 1 drawings in Appendix 1).
|
|
Advantages |
A full renewal of the length of Cheapside, Horseshoe Corner and Penny Street can be achieved in 2013/14 to a much higher specification than the county council could otherwise afford. The Lancaster Square Routes concept proposal for Market Square can be delivered in full by September 2014, including part of Market Street. The option represents a large investment for the city council with upwards of £2 of external investment secured for every £1 invested by the city council. Investments of this magnitude are hard won and unlikely to be available again. The proposal will give a better environment for trading in the established commercial and retail centre of the city. This should help the competitiveness of Lancaster centre with other centres and drive footfall. It will complement the Castle and Canal Corridor North developments should these come on stream. Market Square itself will be better laid out to support an improving Charter market. On non market days the improvements will be convivial for quiet enjoyment and best designed to accommodate events and a range of performances. The effect should be that at many times the Square becomes a much more vibrant place,
The proposal makes it possible for the city council and the Arts Partnership to grow Market Square as a venue of choice for certain types of performance and events.
Specific re. the centrepiece Is wholly consistent with the agreed concept design for Market Square, with the first phase completed last year. Centrepiece is multi-purpose as it can be used as seating and as staging for performances. It also fits well with other uses for the Square including the Charter Market. The linear length of seating made available effectively doubles on provision otherwise available in the Square. Builds in the ability to use the structure for a wide range of performances. The dimensions are proportional to the setting and the potential size of the audience. Builds in steps to meet building regulation requirements for staged performances |
|
Disadvantages |
Specific re. the centrepiece
It is more obstructive to pedestrian movement than option 2.
Will not offer a sufficient depth of stage for certain larger bands.
|
|
Risks |
The Castle and Canal Corridor developments may shift the centre of gravity of the centre in terms of pedestrian activity. In this context therefore it is important to do what is possible to make Market Square and Market Street attractive and so to support trading now and into the future. The delivery programme builds in tolerances to cover for financial and programming risks. Specific re. the centrepiece That the centrepiece does not find favour with people. This is a risk with any public design installation and no more so here in the very centre of the city. The agreed concept design follows extensive consultation, which elicited a generally positive response. The extensive design and community engagement work informing the proposal suggests the square does need a fitting and multi-purpose centrepiece. |
|
Option 2 |
To implement in full the proposal set out in section 2.0 of the report with a centrepiece comprising twin elevated structures (as per the option 2 drawings in Appendix 1) and also including for investing in demountable units.
|
|
Advantages |
As per option 1.
Specific to the centrepiece
Is broadly consistent with the agreed concept design for Market Square. Centrepiece is multi-purpose, as seating and as a space for performance and fits well to other uses to be made of the Square including for the Charter Market. In the linear length of seating made available is comparable with that proposed in option 1.
Gives better permeability for pedestrians than option 1.
Makes it possible for people to sit facing one another.
A stage area the same as that provided in the option 1 proposal is achievable via use of demountable units.
|
|
Disadvantages |
Specific to the centrepiece Is a variant on and to some extent does depart on the agreed concept design for Market Square.This option will require officers to seek a discrete variation from DCLG in the ERDF investment concerning the form of the centrepiece. In many circumstances use as a stage will be dependent on installing the demountable units. Officer time involved in managing the design and placement of the demountable units. There will also be added officer time needed to plan and manage a system for storing and hiring these out. In turn any such system may have revenue costs for the council but that might be covered by charging. |
|
Risks |
As per option 1 - that the centrepiece does not find favour with many people. That the investment in demountable staging units proves not to give best value if 1) either the city council and its partners fail to drive and market use of the Square for performance and / or 2) demand to utilise the Square in ways requiring this prove limited. The risk of not securing the specific variation required in the ERDF investment offer is considered very low. |
Both options delivered improvements consistent with corporate policy and made full and best use of available finance including European funding. Both enabled the city and county councils to bring together their investments and benefit from strong partnership working to deliver long sought after improvements. Officers considered that both options presented for the centrepiece would prove fitting and beneficial and accordingly a preferred option was not suggested.
The report set out how the council might move forward and deliver much needed improvements to public realm within the city centre, the main economic driver within the city. It was about opportunity to deliver in ways and to time frames that minimised financing implications for the city council, took maximum advantage of external funding available and thereby offered best value expenditure for both the city and county councils. It presented options for what officers considered to be a new fitting and beneficial centrepiece to Market Square.
Councillor Hanson proposed, seconded by Councillor Sands:-
“That the recommendations, as set out in the report, be approved.”
By way of amendment, Councillor Barry proposed and Councillor Hamilton-Cox seconded:
“That officers provide detailed breakdown of the costs of the two plinth options and consider the advantages and disadvantages of cheaper options.”
With the agreement of the meeting after some discussion and having been advised that the options he requested were capable of being provided through the original proposal, Councillor Barry withdrew the amendment.
It was proposed by Councillor Hamilton-Cox, seconded by Councillor Blamire and accepted as a friendly amendment by the proposer and seconder of the original proposal:
“That the decision regarding the gating of Chancery Lane be deferred.“
Councillors then voted on the substantive motion:-
Resolved unanimously:
(1) That the proposal for public realm works made in section 2.0 of the report and as described in the supporting appendices be approved, with the decision on the detailed options for the centrepiece to Market Square deferred to the Cabinet meeting in June 2013, along with the decision regarding the gating of Chancery Lane.
(2) That the Head of Regeneration and Planning be authorised to proceed with all work to implement the proposal but as regards the centrepiece not to make any commitments pending Cabinet deciding on the detailed option.
(3) That the Head of Governance be requested to invite all council members to attend an informal briefing on the options for a centrepiece and the theme embodied artwork should take so that members can be fully informed and then advise the Portfolio Holder of their views.
Officers responsible for effecting the decision:
Head of Regeneration & Planning
Head of Resources
Head of Governance
Reasons for making the decision:
Lancaster Square Routes is to help support and sustain the commercial centre of the city as per the corporate priorities for economic growth and the environment. It fulfils the corporate priorities as contained in the 2012-15 Corporate Plan - Economic Growth, Health and Wellbeing, Clean Green and Safe Places and Community Leadership. It contributes, in particular, to Economic Growth by helping sustain the attraction of commercial centres and so support trading and jobs. The proposal is consistent with the Lancaster District Core Strategy and in particular Policy ER2. The initiative is highly complementary to the activity of the Lancaster BID Partnership that is demonstrating a unity of purpose and collective commitment to town centre improvement. Deferring the decision on the detailed options on the centrepiece would allow all councillors to be consulted on the two options whilst deferring the decision on the gating of Chancery Lane would enable further information to be sought from the Police.