· Burnley Vision Park
· Making Rooms – Lancashire First Fab Lab
· Café Northcote
Minutes:
As the presentations contained exempt information as defined in paragraph 41 (Information provided in confidence relating to contracts) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. It was considered that in the circumstances the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information and the meeting moved into Part II for the next item.
Presentation 1 – Burnley Vision Park
Ms K Hedland from Ekosgen gave a presentation on the above project which had been the subject of an independent appraisal. Details of the findings of the appraisal were circulated to the members of the Committee at the meeting.
It was reported that the assessment gave the project a score of '2' which was that the requirements had been substantially met and the project could progress with certain issues to be resolved. The project would focus on advanced manufacturing/engineering and the professional sector and would be implemented in 3 phases. Growth Deal funding was being sought to enable delivery of phase 1 which would then unlock subsequent phases which would be partially funded by the Borough Council together with a significant package of investment from the private sector. The Committee noted that the majority of jobs to be created as a result of the development would be from the development in the later phases of the project.
It was highlighted that the business case has been appraised against an allocation of £1.7mn from Growth Deal whilst the funding allocation for the project had only ever been £1.2mn. The Board was advised that the project could not be delivered with only £1.2mn and that the assessor was convinced that this was the case. In the interests of transparency and auditability it was agreed that the assessor should assess viability of the project with a £1.2m allocation in order to formally record that the project cannot be achieved without an additional £500k of resource. With this in place it was agreed that the LEP would be asked to consider approving a funding allocation of £1.7mn for the project.
Resolved:
1. That in the
interests of transparency and auditability the independent
assessor be requested to determine whether the project would be
viable with a £1.2m allocation in order to establish whether
the additional £500k was essential to the delivery of the
project.
2. That subject to the confirmation of the project allocation specified at 1 above the LEP Board be recommended to approve the allocation of £1.7m of Growth Deal funding for Project GF02-28 BVP (Burnley Vision Park) with a condition to incentivise the developer to complete all phases of the development.
Ms Hedland left the meeting at this point.
Presentation 2 – GF02-30 Making Rooms – Lancashires First Fab Lab.
Mr C Crow from Regeneris gave a presentation on the independent appraisal of the above project. Details of the findings of the appraisal were circulated to the members of the Committee at the meeting.
It was reported that the project consisted of a Fab Lab which would provide access to a range of technology and equipment to local business/general public together with provision of office space, artistic space and exhibition area and catering facilities.
Following a Q&A session Mr Bailey and Mr Kirby left the meeting while the Committee considered the findings of the appraisal.
The Committee noted that the overall score for the assessment was '3' which reflected that a number of requirements had only been partially met and there remained issues with the submission which needed to be resolved urgently. The specific areas highlighted by the Board for attention included:
· Further development of the options assessment and economic analysis presented in the economic case to support the assumption that there is a gap in the existing provision and a need for a facility of this kind.
· Clarification of how the project will work with existing educational institutions, other providers and link with local employers.
· Confirmation that other funding associated with the artistic elements of the development would not be in conflict with the objectives of the Fab Lab and affect the long term viability of the project.
· Provision of more information associated with projected costs/revenues and evidence of the demand for the different aspects of the project to provide an assurance as to its the long term viability/sustainability.
Mr Bailey and Mr Kirby returned to the meeting and were informed of the view of the Committee.
Resolved: That project GF02-30 Making Rooms – Lancashires First Fab Lab is not referred to the LEP Board for consideration until the sponsor has addressed the various issues highlighted in the independent assessment in relation to the viability and sustainability of the project.
Presentation 3 – GF01-40-S - Café Northcote
Ms K Downes from Regeneris gave a presentation on the independent appraisal of the above project. Details of the findings of the appraisal were circulated to the members of the Committee at the meeting.
In considering the information presented the Committee noted that the independent assessment had given the project an overall score of "3" and concerns were expressed that in relation to the economic and financial cases a score of "4 2 had been given which indicated that requirements had not been met and that critical issues existed with the submission. In considering the assessment the Board highlighted the following areas:
· A clearer and more detailed explanation was required in relation to the number of jobs which the project would generate both directly and indirectly.
· More information was required in relation to the likely scale and source of demand and revenue to be generated by the project.
· Detailed projections of annual operational costs and revenues were required.
· No strong justification had been provided for the level of proposed grant funding.
Resolved: That project GF01-40-S - Café Northcote@Cathedral Quarter is not referred to the LEP Board for consideration until the sponsor has addressed the various issues highlighted in the independent assessment.
Mr Crow and Ms Downes left the meeting at this point.
Having considered the three presentations the meeting then returned to Part I of the agenda (items publicly available).