(a)

the background which included -

?

Torpoint Town Council was the lead for the partnership which was established in July 2015;

?

this was a government initiative to form a network of teams to identify the issues and opportunities faced by coastal communities;

?

the first priority had been to complete an economic plan by 31 January 2016;

(b)

the process which included -

?

strengths;

?

opportunities;

?

weaknesses;

?

threats;

(c)

the vision – ‘in 2030 Torpoint and the Rame Peninsula’s natural and built environment will define the area. The town, an important gateway into Cornwall and the villages and hamlets will be seen as one; part of a thriving and healthy balanced area with communities that will have a vibrant and viable local economy in which local people of all ages can fulfil their potential;

Torpoint and the Rame Peninsula will be sought after places to live and a location for high quality sustainable holidays – whilst still Cornwall’s ‘hidden corner’ – people love to visit’;

(d)

the focus areas included –

?

tourism – promoting the visitor economy;

?

transport – enhancing accessibility and communication;

?

environment – enhancing the attractiveness of public areas and encouraging sustainable uses – making the most of heritage, natural and cultural facilities;

?

community – providing improved community facilities;

?

jobs – supporting employment opportunities (across sectors including agriculture, retail and tourism);

(e)

the next steps included -

?

the completion of the economic plan consultation roadshow;

?

securing finance and support to secure the future of coastal communities team;

?

further develop and encourage partnerships;                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

?

coastal community fund applications.

(f)

the lack of focus within the economic plan of the provision of new housing;

(g)

the inclusion of Saltash regarding provision of water transport links;

(h)

the provision of a cycle route.

(1)

a report is submitted to the next meeting on 25 November 2016 regarding water transport links;

(2)

a web link to the Torpoint and Rame Peninsula Economic Plan is provided to committee members;

(3)

a further update on the economic plan is provided at a future committee meeting.

(a)

205/16 outturn variations – overview;

(b)

review outturn variations which included -

?

Mount Edgcumbe House;

?

Mount Edgcumbe Park; 

?

Mount Edgcumbe Trading; 

(c)

future budget;

(d)

small bodes audit;

(e)

capital.

(a)

monitoring variations 2016/17 (overview)

(b)

revenue monitoring 2016/17 which included -

?

Mount Edgcumbe House;

?

Mount Edgcumbe Park;

?

Mount Edgcumbe Trading;

(c)

Budget risk;

(d)

future year budgets.

?

the vision – to be regional leader, connecting people with landscape, wildlife and heritage;

?

history of the Country Park;

?

achieving the vision, included -

?

achieving capacity with a capital injection of £250,000, through prudential borrowing; this would enable the Park to develop a series of business initiatives that would help it to push towards a zero budget in the next five years;

?

sensitively developing commercial activities was a must for the Park, given its wealth of designations and its core values;

?

increasing the visitor offer, by having more ‘stay opportunities’ and increasing visitor time and spend, was a key to the Park’s financial future; the Park was free to enter but events/activities could be charged for (ie high ropes, Segway, holiday cottages);

?

making Mount Edgcumbe a ‘staycation’ with a portfolio of holiday lets, glamping and a wide varies of activities to participate in;

?

outsourcing would be key theme throughout the business plan; the Park did not have the staffing capacity to hold regular events but it was able to let others effectively hire a first class venue and pass on the risk and capacity to them.

(a)

whether there was an opportunity to encourage private investment in the Park to renovate properties and project manage these works;

(b)

improving social media for the Park which also included the website.

(a)

park matters including High Level Stewardship; 

(b)

buildings and park infrastructure;

(c)

events;

(d)

business development;

(e)

weddings.

(a)

the recent retirement of Commander Gordon Crocker as Chair of the Friends of Mount Edgcumbe Country Park;

(b)

since the last Joint Committee meeting in November 2016 the number of members had increased by 32 to 568;

(c)

the Friends continued to provide financial support to the Park which included funding up to £20,000 for the creation of a garden to celebrate the Queen’s 90^th birthday;

(d)

social events (including an Easter egg hunt and a black tie dinner);

(e)

World War I project.

(a)

Cornwall Council was in the process of submitting a second round of funding applications for sea defence/coastal protection works through the Flood Defence Grant in Aid process (FDGiA) which was managed by the Environment Agency;

(b)

in July 2015 a summary application was submitted for sea defence works between Cremyll Quay and Garden Battery Beach; following this application the Environment Agency had requested further information; in order to provide the information it has been necessary to carry out a Project Appraisal Report (PAR);

(c)

Royal Haskoning had been appointment to prepare the PAR which  was due to be completed by mid-July; however early indications  had shown that there may not be sufficient residential properties requiring protection by the sea defences, therefore the economics would be focussed around the loss of visitors to the Park, the ferry and associated infrastructure;

(d)

the estimated cost of the project for the Cremyll Quay, Cremyll slipway quay and sea wall works would be £600,000; it was hoped to secure 50% of the funding through the FDGiA funding stream.

(e)

the unacceptable length of time it had taken to progress this scheme (12 months in total);

(f)

the likelihood of securing funding for the scheme based on the Environment Agency’s focus on the protection of residential properties.

(a)

that storage of the collection at Mount Edgcumbe was problematic due to the limited space available (the bulk of items not on display, largely furniture were being stored in the attic space);

(b)

a review of the collection had taken place from February to May 2016;

(c)

the review had identified 10 items of furniture in the collections that were candidates for disposal.