Agenda and draft minutes

In the absence of both the appointed Chair and Vice-Chair of the Community & Environment Committee, nominations were sought for a Chair to be elected from the Members present.

It was moved by Councillor David Hughes, seconded by Councillor Marilyn Franks and

RESOLVED (unanimously)

That Councillor Steve Wain be elected Chair of this special meeting of the Community and Environment Committee.

The Chair declared the motion CARRIED.

To enable members of the public to ask questions, express views or present petitions, IF NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN, (by telephone, in writing or by email) BY NO LATER THAN 12 NOON OF THE WORKING DAY PRECEDING THE MEETING. As per Procedural Rule 14.4 at any one meeting no person may submit more than 3 questions and no more than 1 such question may be asked on behalf of one organisation.

There was no public participation.

Members are required to declare the existence and nature of any interests they may have in subsequent agenda items in accordance with the District Council’s Code of Conduct. Those interests are matters that relate to money or that which can be valued in money, affecting the Member, her/his partner, extended family and close friends. Interests that become apparent at a later stage in the proceedings may be declared at the time.

Item 4 – Ashbourne Reborn Programme Update

Councillors David Hughes, Peter Dobbs, and Anthony Bates declared non-pecuniary interests in Item 4 as members of the Ashbourne Reborn Programme Board.

Councillor Stuart Lees declared non-pecuniary interests in Item 4 as Chairman of the Ashbourne Ex-Servicemen’s Club, as a member of the Ashbourne Shrovetide Committee, and as a member of the Ashbourne Reborn Programme Board.

Councillor Sue Bull declared a non-pecuniary interest in Item 4 as her husband was a member of both the Ashbourne Shrovetide Committee and the Ashbourne Reborn Programme Board.

The report summarises activity to progress the Ashbourne Reborn Programme, highlights key programme risks and sets out next steps. This includes recent changes to the Government reporting timetable and the approach to associated processes including Project Adjustment Requests.

The Regeneration and Place Manager and Principal Regeneration Officer introduced the report which updated Members on the progress to date of the Ashbourne Reborn Programme. The report summarised recent project activity, highlighted key programme risks, and set out the next steps for the Programme. The report also detailed a proposed adjustment to the programme expenditure profile. It was clarified that no additional funding was being requested but there was a process to go through to move budget within the programme to reflect a greater proportion of the construction period now falling within 2025/26 rather than 2024/25.  However, Government funded LUF expenditure would still conclude within the 2025/26 financial year.

Member approval was sought for the content of the adjustment request, prior to submission to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG). Councillor David Hughes, as Chair of the Ashbourne Reborn Programme Board, thanked the officers and partners involved in the programme and noted the large amount of work that had already taken place on both projects.

The report included background information relating to the Ashbourne Reborn Programme and the two projects which it comprised. Significant progress had been made with the preparatory work for both projects, with preferred main contractors procured and the main works due to begin in early January 2025. However, consistent with the majority of LUF projects across the country, delivery timeframes and budget pressures had presented a considerable challenge. Costs for professional services and materials had risen considerably from the evidence-led estimates at the time of the bid, reflecting the influence of significant inflation and challenging market conditions. This had led to the need for value engineering and careful re-scoping on both projects, which in turn had extended the time required to update and finalise designs. It was noted that partners had continued to work collaboratively to progress both projects and bring costs closer to the available budget, and they remained confident that the outputs agreed with MHCLG could be delivered within acceptable thresholds.

It was moved by Councillor Andy Nash, seconded by Councillor Peter Dobbs and

RESOLVED (unanimously)

1.     That the Committee considers progress to date and the position regarding programme, cost, deliverables and risks be received and noted.

2.     That the Committee approves the submission of an updated expenditure profile at the earliest opportunity, through the imminent Quarterly Monitoring Return or Project Adjustment Request as required by MHCLG, based on the proposed expenditure profile in Appendix 1 to the report.

The Chair declared the motion CARRIED.