Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Rebecca Hunter and Councillor B Wright.

Bruce Hunter attended in place of Rebecca Hunter, and Councillor T Mansbridge attended as a substitute for Councillor B Wright.

Members are requested to declare the existence and nature of any disclosable pecuniary interests and/or other interests, not already on their register of interests, in any item on the agenda and withdraw from the meeting at the appropriate time.

None.

To approve as a correct record and the Chair to sign the Minutes of the Clay Cross Town Board held on 8 July 2024.

RESOLVED – That the Minutes of the Clay Cross Town Deal Board held on Friday, 12 July 2024 were approved.

To agree the Terms of Reference

The Board considered a report on the updated Clay Cross Town Board Terms of Reference following the annual review. They heard that there had been very few changes since last year. One of which being that Board Members were now embedded in the Terms of Reference.

A King suggested that there may be a need to increase the frequency of Board meetings as projects reached critical stages. They heard that the Terms of Reference included provisions for the Chair to call additional meetings if the need arose.

Councillor C Cupit asked that a tracked changes document be included in the future. Officers indicated that would be possible.

RESOLVED – That the revised Terms of Reference for the Clay Cross Town Board be approved.

Quarterly Powerpoint Presentation

The Board received a programme update on the Clay Cross Town Deal projects in Q2 of the financial year, as well as an evaluation of the associated risks moving forward.

Members were informed of the progress being made across the projects and the key milestones that have been achieved. This included the Clay Cross Active sub-station works being completed, works continuing with Inside Ltd to confirm scope and deliverables of the Town Centre Regeneration project, and 16 applications for the Low Carbon Challenge Fund being approved.

Members were informed of the top risks associated with each part of the programme and the mitigation against each of these. The top programme risk was identified as rising costs causing budgetary issues, regular cost reviews and value engineering would be utilised to ensure projects stay within budget. The delay in TRO/278 approval, impacting the start of connection works, was highlighted as one of the main risks facing the Town Centre Regeneration project.

The Board were updated regarding the main sub-contractor on Clay Cross Active, ISG, recently going into administration. Members were informed that ISG was a sub-contractor of Alliance Leisure, as such there the financial implications on the Council would be considered. Members were reassured that Officers had been working alongside Alliance Leisure to determine the situation regarding documentation and sub-contractors, announcements would be made as concrete information became available.

Members discussed the report, they welcomed the positive progress made in the previous quarter.

Councillor Charlotte Cupit requested a detailed breakdown of costs along with a timeline of anticipated milestones. It was explained that the timeline was part of the forthcoming presentation from Inside Ltd. Further details on finances were provided along with the explanation that the figures would be refined in due course.

Members requested an update on the TRO/278 approval, it was confirmed that meetings had been held to progress. Some elements were waiting on being signed off, a meeting to review this would be taking place at the beginning of October and Members would be kept up to date with developments. It was shared that partners were also working on elements to ensure the project was kept up to speed.

Some Members questioned the impact of having a vacant Project Manager position. The function that the Project Manager performed was explained, Members were reassured that the respective teams are working together to fill gaps.. It was suggested that as projects were completed the value of a Project Manager diminished. In this context, Members were informed that an external agency had been commissioned to carry out an independent review of the Project Manager post and how the project would be managed moving forward.

RESOLVED –

1. That the Board noted the Clay Cross Town Deal Programme Update.

2. That the Board noted the risks involved with the programmes and the mitigations that had been put in place to address these.

Introductory Presentation by Inside Limited

The Board received a presentation from Inside Ltd detailing their part in the regeneration works. They highlighted that Clay Cross was an important project and were pleased to be able to report good progress being made across several areas.

The presentation detailed the structure of the team working on the project, showing the link between the management and local team. Particular attention was drawn to the community engagement that Inside Ltd conducted. In this context, they explained that an information hub had been set up to engage with the community and share the vision of the project.

The Project Director provided an overview of the works that had been completed to date and the works that would soon be started. It was explained that archaeological excavations had caused a delay, but they had now been completed along with investigations and condition surveys. Members watched a timelapse video showing the archaeology conducted at Baileys Square. Members received a timeline of when different sections of the project were expected to start and finish. The presentation ended by going into further detail on the community engagement still to come. This included working with local schools to produce artwork for the site, a monthly newsletter and the grand opening.

Members thanked Inside Ltd for the detailed presentation and welcomed their engagement with the local community. It was requested that Inside Ltd come and address the Parish Council in a similar manner. The Project Manager suggested that this would be possible.

Councillor C Cupit discussed that it might be useful to have a separate meeting to explore where the blockages were with the 278. It was explained that it was not easy to deliver a project like this, however, the right people and systems had been put in place to run the project as smoothly as possible.

The Board heard that the main issues of budget and timescales were considered normal at this stage of development.

It was  considered that the project was progressing well, though not without it’s challenges of budget and timescale slippage which is being managed and monitored closely.

In this context, some Members requested that the meetings became monthly rather than quarterly. The Chair considered that consistent updates between the quarterly meetings would be more appropriate.

L Jones MP appreciated the information provided but requested a detailed breakdown on the progress of the Bridge Street and Market Street projects. It was suggested that it would be difficult to pin down a timescale based on a number of factors still in play. However, this is something which would solidify as the project progresses.

Inside Ltd finished by highlighting that most of the previously unknown factors were now known. They championed their flexibility and readiness to start construction. The project was moving into the next stage where progress would become faster and more visible. 

Verbal update from the Estates Team

The Board received a verbal update detailing the progress made on leasing the units in Baileys Square. Members heard that the intention was to attract mainly hospitality businesses in order to build a thriving nighttime economy. Kelham Island, of Sheffield, was referenced as having a similar atmosphere to what this project is trying to create.

So far, six of the units are accounted for with a typical lease of 15 years.

Some feedback suggested that the units were being pitched too high in terms of rental. However, it was highlighted that none of the businesses that had taken a unit identified price as a problem. The main issue was convincing companies to establish a base in Clay Cross. The potential of the area was widely accepted but possible suitors were hesitant to be the first ones to move. It was felt that once a couple of early adopters were there, the project would have no issue attracting the right businesses.

The board received an update on the marketing being conducted. Members heard that a brochure and website were being created, emphasis was placed on soft marketing as being particularly important to the project. One-to-one talks with potential businesses as well as attending and holding open events as a  useful way of spreading the message. The future of the marketing would focus more on national advertising, particularly in areas like Sheffield and Nottingham.

Members agreed that there was a need for an early adopter but the potential for the site was great. Clarification was given on the rental price and service charge costs.

A King asked if any other leisure businesses have been contacted and it was confirmed that music schools and art galleries had been contacted to bring arts and culture into the area.

Presentation

The Board received an update on the Low Carbon Challenge Fund (LCCF). The financial specifics were detailed, along with the number of applications which had been received. Progress against the aims of the LCCF was highlighted as being extremely positive. The payback for businesses, as a result of energy saving costs and carbon savings, was noted as being quite impactful. The organisations benefiting from the fund were highlighted, with the bulk of the money going on solar panels, LED lighting and insulation.

Case studies from the LCCF were highlighted, along with feedback from the businesses who had received funding. One of the studies showed that an exemplar company had 30% of its fleet now running on hydro treated vegetable oil, a video was shared relating to this and explaining their aims for carbon and energy saving.

K Apps suggested that this work could be shared as part of an event being carried out to mark the Green Entrepreneur Fund coming to an end. Members welcomed this proposal.

Members heard that Clay Cross Parish Council had submitted a letter in relation to the A61 road crossing relocation, it detailed concerns the Parish had with the project. These included a lack of need for the proposal, negative feedback from residents and the unnecessary removal of trees. The letter also condemned the planned new car park in respect of its design and the additional traffic it would bring to an already busy road. Therefore, the Parish Council had requested that the project not proceed.

The Chair responded by expressing that he understood the concerns of the Parish Council. However, the scheme had been rigorously examined through the planning process. The value of considering the overall aims of the regeneration project was highlighted, and the importance of the car park was noted.

Councillor C Cupit requested that this item be discussed further at an appropriate forum as it hadn’t been tabled as an agenda item. Some Members highlighted other issues relating to the car park and agreed that a further consultation might be helpful.

Cllr Cupit  made the Board aware of other changes that the County Council were making to the A61 road network through Clay Cross.

The Chair agreed that it is sensible that the A61 works be looked at holistically and not as an individual project. This should be looked at with a balanced view and the regeneration aims of the  CCTD be taken into consideration.

L Jones MP noted that it was hard to determine the best way forward. There was still some information gathering to do and suggested that this needed to be discussed as its own agenda item at the next meeting. 

Members heard that the contract with Inside Ltd, which this project was a part of, needed to be signed imminently. Therefore, any  consultation exercise could put the Town Centre Regeneration project in jeopardy. The Board was reminded that this issue had been through previous consultations and planning approval. It was felt that the concerns raised were understandable, but the project was to far ahead to be abandoned but this would not preclude changes being made down the line. Additionally, the Board felt that Inside Ltd had expressed themselves as flexible to changes and the best option would be to explore the issues raised with them outside of the meeting.

The next meeting of the Clay Cross Town Deal Board will be held on 6 December 2024 at 10.00 am at Mill Lane Offices.

The next meeting of the Clay Cross Town Deal Board would be held on 6December 2024 at 10.00 am.