Agenda item

Discussion paper of the Cabinet Member Sustainability

The Cabinet Member Sustainability introduced the report as circulated with the agenda.  The report informed members of progress on the garden redesign and consultation process and the Cheltenham Festival proposals for Imperial and Montpellier Gardens. The intention was for the designs, together with feedback from the consultation and today’s Council Debate to be reported back to Cabinet for a decision at the end of July. If approved by Cabinet, phase 1 of the works would be worked up in more detail and more accurate costings obtained. Planning and listed building consent would be applied for where required with a view to works being undertaken during this coming Autumn and Winter.

During the debate that followed, Members acknowledged that the festivals were vital for Cheltenham and the council needed to support them. However the gardens were an iconic part of Cheltenham which had been there long before the festivals and needed to be protected. It was accepted that the balance between the festivals and the gardens was a difficult issue to resolve but it was a very important issue to the people of the town and therefore they should have the have the biggest say.

Councillor Malcolm Stennett, as the Chair of Economy and Business Improvement Overview and Scrutiny Committee (EBI), raised particular concerns about the involvement of overview and scrutiny in the process. Whilst he supported the festivals he had seen no proper business plans. On 7 March 2011, EBI had requested a report on the issue but the paper had been light weight and contained no economic information.  Consequently the committee had passed two resolutions. Firstly the committee had recommended that Cabinet receive additional economic and financial information in order for them to be in a position to assess the benefit of implementing changes to the town centre parks in an endeavour to meet the requirements of Cheltenham Festivals. Along with the proposed options consideration should also be given to maintaining the status quo and / or using areas at the racecourse or in Pittville Park. Secondly the committee requested that they be involved in reviewing the economic aspects during the next stage of the consultation and receive a detailed report on the options with a full financial breakdown when it is available.

The Cabinet Member Sustainability had received a reminder in May that EBI were expecting this report at their July meeting. The response received had been disappointing as the Cabinet Member had refused EBI’s request for the second time saying that he saw no benefit in officers spending time preparing the information requested. As chair of EBI, he had insisted that a report was received at their next meeting on the 18 July so that O&S comments could be fed into the Cabinet meeting on the 26^th of July.   He would continue to press for this report.

Councillor Stennett concluded that it was exceedingly worrying that work was proceeding without giving due consideration to the full financial aspects of a business case. It was after all a major change to a conservation area and there appeared to be no future business plans for the next five years.  This seemed unprofessional. What would happen when further expansion of the festivals was requested?  

In response the Cabinet Member Sustainability said he had no more to add to the written responses he had made to Councillor Stennett. The money being spent on the gardens was not solely for the benefits of Cheltenham Festivals but the expenditure was to benefit the people of Cheltenham. Therefore it was not appropriate to justify improvements to the parks in business terms.   He was not prepared to spend thousands of pounds on consultants to verify the economic figures supplied by the festivals.. With regard to future expansion he was clear that the proposed schemes represented the limits for Imperial Gardens and Montpelier Gardens. Cheltenham Festivals were well aware that they would have to look elsewhere for future expansion though in his view a total out-of-town venue would not be an option he would support. 

Members asked a number of questions and and the responses of the Cabinet Member are listed below:

• Will the Cabinet Member give his reassurance that there will be a written response to the concerns raised by Cheltenham in Bloom on page 15 of the report.

·        The Cabinet Member confirmed that he would reply in writing and similarly to other comments he had received. This included those from the Civic Society which had been received too late for inclusion in the papers.

• Will any new trees and plants be obtained from local producers to enhance the local economy?

·        They would do their best but the council was obliged to follow procurement rules and ensure good value for money was obtained on all its purchases.

• Can the Cabinet Member reassure members that the budget allocated of £140,000 will be sufficient to cover the work and what would happen if it proves to be insufficient or there are insufficient funds to carry out the ongoing maintenance work?

·        The Cabinet Member assured members that the plans would be thoroughly costed before taking any action and there was no plan to leave the work unfinished. The ongoing maintenance work was budgeted for and any restoration work following a festival would be carried out at Cheltenham Festival’s expense.
The Leader added that the costs of Phase 1 had been fully costed in this year’s budget and any Phase 2 requirements would form part of future budget proposals.

• How confident was the Cabinet Member in the estimates for the redesign work given the experience of Pitville Park when the tenders for the work on the bridge came in well above the original estimates?

·        He gave his personal assurance that all the works would be delivered to time?

• Will the council receives some of the financial benefits from the redesign work it is carrying out to extend the bar area and Skillicorne Gardens.

·        There would be regular renegotiation of the contract with the caterers and he was confident that the Cabinet Member Sport and Culture would ensure the council receives its fair share of the profits.
The Cabinet Member Sport and Culture said that consideration of Skillicorne Gardens would be taken into account when negotiating any deals with catering companies. Currently the council received 10% of turnover as commission and the contract was due to be renegotiated in October 2011.

• How will the success of the redesign work be measured to confirm that the right decision had been made? Documentation of the alternative options would have been useful.
• What guidance was going to be given to delivery lorries given the recent damage where lorries had ripped up the turf leaving a quagmire?

·        This had been noted and work was in progress to address the issue.

• What action was the council proposing to take on the fast food and mobile take-aways present in the gardens at the recent festival? The experience at the Jazz Festival on the May Bank Holiday was that the mobile food outlets smelt unpleasant and their presence demonstrated a lack of respect on behalf  of Cheltenham Festivals. It was also questioned why the festivals had asked for extra tentage space if it was now being used for fast food outlets?

·        This would be reviewed along with the licensing requirements and the council would want any such services to be of a high standard.
The Cabinet Member Sport and Culture said that burger vans had not been part of the contract so he was concerned to hear about this and would follow it up.

• There had been poor communication from the council to the public on the usage of the gardens and restoration work. Could a public notice be put on the iron railings to explain the timetable?

·        This would be considered with a view to publishing an annual plan in a public place.

• Can the Cabinet Member reassure members that any restoration work is timetabled in both the calendars of Cheltenham Festivals and Parks and Gardens to minimise the destructive aspects to the gardens and ensure the impact of the festivals is hardly noticeable. Precision and attention to detail are needed as the gardens are currently in a frightful state.

·        No amount of precision would allow the grass to regrow overnight after a festival but several options were being considered including planting the grass seed before the Festival. There was already a calendar in place which included spring bedding before the Science Festival and then planting of summer bedding before the Literature Festival and then restoration work for the winter.

• Can the Cabinet Member give a straight yes or no answer to the question asked by the Friends of Imperial Square and Gardens regarding the council’s commitment to enforcement of the Gardens’ Code of Conduct Policy?

·        Yes he would ensure the Code of Conduct was upheld

• Who will be responsible for enforcement of the restoration of any damage to the gardens and who will be accountable to members and to the public? 

·        The contract between the council and Cheltenham Festivals would be enforced in the usual way. He was sure that the member concerned was well aware of the officers responsible for enforcement and therefore he was not prepared to answer the question in the chamber.

• Could a suspended floor area be considered for the grassed areas as well as the beds to minimise damage to the turf?

·        This could be looked at but there was likely to be a cost involved.

The Mayor thanked members for their comments and hoped that they would be considered by Cabinet when making their decision on the outline design in July.