Name 

Minute No. and Subject

Reason

Interest

Councillor Bowyer

Minutes 46, 47, 49 and 50

Member of Mayflower Trust Board

Personal

Councillor Browne

Minutes 46, 47, 49 and 50

Member of Devonport Leisure Management

Personal

Councillor Fox

Minutes 46, 47, 49 and 50

Member of the Mayflower Trust Board

Personal

Councillor Jordan

Minutes 49 and 50

Board Member of the Theatre Royal (Plymouth) Ltd

Prejudice

Councillor Mrs Nicholson

Minutes 46, 47, 49 and 50

Chair of Mayflower Trust Board

Personal

Councillor Wildy

Minutes 46, 47, 49 and 50

Member of Devonport Leisure Management

Personal

(i)

programme governance; 

(ii)

programme workstream overview –

?

Life Centre – progress/cost

?

Leisure Management contract

?

Pavilions

?

Leisure Ice

?

Skate park re-provision

(iii)

Life Centre management structure;

(iv)

Project Managers report.

(i)

the Theatre Royal Plymouth Ltd (TRP) were currently producing proposals for the future shape of the Pavilions facility; once these proposals had been received, the Programme Board would work with TRP to develop the proposals into a deliverable solution;

(ii)

the specification would permit the authority to dictate the pricing structure, which would be in line with the existing one; a mechanism would be in place to target specific groups (ie to improve the uptake in activity levels by priority customers, children and young people, older people and those that live in the most deprived areas);

(iii)

the authority would be able to set the swimming pools programme for the contractor to manage; due to the flexibility of the design of the pools it was not anticipated that the facility would be closed to residents on many occasions during the year;

(iv)

work was currently being undertaken to review the management arrangements for the car park;

(v)

the facility would provide some retail opportunities including a restaurant; these would be operated by the main provider or franchised; it was envisaged that a small retail operation would sell sport related items;

(vi)

it was not envisaged that the catering on the site would be provided ‘in house’ by the authority;

(vii)

currently no sites had been identified for the re-provision of the ice within the city; £2m had been earmarked for the provision of this facility which was contained within the overall budget of £46.5m;

(viii)

soft market testing had been undertaken for the ice re-provision; a good response had been received with interest from five companies;

(ix)

an initial review of the responses indicated –

?

there was interest in the development opportunity

?

the preference for a city centre site

?

that competitive dialogue was the favoured procurement route

(x)

the provision of the existing skate park was funded by Sport England, if this facility was not replaced the authority would be liable to pay back the monies;

(xi)

the existing site for the skate park would be needed for the contractor’s compound; the park would therefore be relocated to an identified site adjacent to Central Park swimming pool by winter 2010/11; the facility would be redesigned with the involvement of  the users when further resources became available.

(i)

a Restricted Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) procurement exercise had been undertaken for the selection of the main contract for the Life Centre; the works being procured included the –

(a)

construction of the new facility

(b)

associated externals/highways

(c)

demolition of the existing Mayflower Centre and Central Park pools; 

(ii)

the demolition of the skate park was included in the programme, although the relocation of the facility to a new location would not be within the contract works; this would be undertaken by others under the direction of the Life Centre Programme Board;

(iii)

tenders were issued on 21 July 2009 and all five bidders had returned their bids on 2 October 2009;

(iv)

the Quality and Cost evaluation process adopted by the authority was undertaken and identified Balfour Beatty as the successful bidder;

(v)

the detailed construction programme submitted by Balfour Beatty identified that the completion of the Life Centre facility would be delivered within the timescale;

(vi)

the contract costs would be contained within the approved budget of £46.5m within the overall approved capital programme; the breakdown costs were as follows -

?

capital receipts

£13,769,021

?

supported borrowing

£  4,650,000

?

unsupported borrowing

£19,525,319

?

grants

£  6,328,000

?

other contributions

£  2,227,660

(vii)

the funding streams would be kept under constant review as part of the ongoing review of the capital programme to ensure that any funding changes as they became known would be contained within the overall programme;

(viii)

the timing of capital receipts and any temporary borrowing which may need to be taken as part of the existing capital strategy would be kept under review and further options would continue to be looked at to help minimise the borrowing requirements.

(i)

unsupported borrowing was borrowing in addition to supported borrowing and was only permitted if the authority could afford it;

(ii)

supported borrowing was a grant provided by Central Government to finance borrowing up to a specified amount;

(iii)

a letter had been sent to the Pavilions giving formal notification of the authority’s intention to withdraw its subsidy which would coincide with the opening of the Life Centre; discussions were ongoing for the retention of the arena facility;

(iv)

with the withdrawal of the subsidy to the Pavilions would cover the cost of the unsupported borrowing;

(v)

the authority only borrowed monies from institutions with the highest credit rating; the Treasury Management Board met on a weekly basis to review the Council’s borrowings;

(vi)

capital receipts in the sum of £2m had already been realised against the project’s capital funding programme of £13,769,021;

(vii)

the overall budget of £46.5m allocated to the project incorporated the spend to date.