URL: https://stroud.moderngov.co.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=324

Decision Maker: Strategy and Resources Committee

Outcome:

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Purpose: Report setting out next steps to re-procure a developer, including Budget, Project Board, Key Milestones, SVCC Grant Agreement and Meanwhile Uses.

Content: The Head of Property Services introduced the report and provided an update on the progress of the project. She informed the committee that following the withdrawal of the appointed developer, the Council had undertaken a soft market testing exercise to gauge interest in the site and directly engage with developers. This confirmed that the proposed delivery structure and procurement approach was familiar and acceptable to potential partners. The Head of Property Services explained that the report set out the recommendations for re-procuring a developer partner, outlined the proposed procurement approach, governance arrangements and budgetary requirements. Officers had also considered opportunity for meanwhile uses on the site.   Councillor Cook raised a question regarding the ongoing costs of the Port, how secure the current income was and the length of time on the current leases. The Head of Property Services confirmed that there were 10 office suites within the Mill, 9 of which were occupied. The terms of the leases were varied and had been taken out at different times. They had confidence that the Mill was an attractive site which still held a lot of interest for rental.   Councillor Cook asked a follow up question about where the income from the site had been spent. The Section 151 Officer confirmed that as part of the agreement with Homes England, any surplus income from the site had gone back into its redevelopment.   In response to a question from Councillor Braun, the Head of Property Services provided a brief overview of the estimated timeline which would span over the next 18 months. She clarified that they were hoping to shorten some parts of the timeline where possible without impacting the outcome of the new developer procurement. Councillor Hofmann received the following responses to her questions. ·         Officers were hopeful to get the developer agreement signed around May 2027 which would be before the Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) changes came into effect however that was just an estimate. ·         Officers had kept the community up to date with the progress of the site however there wasn’t currently anything to actively consult about.   The Chief Executive provided further information about the impact of LGR on the council’s current capital projects. She stated that they would continue to progress the projects in line with the Council Plan and until such a time that the Government issues a Structural Change Order and a Section 24 notice, which would transfer decision making responsibility over to the transferring body.   In response to Councillor Martin Brown, the Head of Property Services confirmed that the project team would also be exploring alternative tenures such as co-housing.   Councillor Hyndside asked what the community facility was that was mentioned in paragraph 7.2 of the report and also raised concerns of the community becoming attached to the meanwhile uses on the site. The Head of Property Services explained that the new developer would be responsible for designing and applying for planning application for the community facility however they would not be required to build it. The council would be asking for expressions of interest from community groups with proposals for an area of land which will be given for free in order for a community facility to be built. She also explained that it would be clearly communicated that any meanwhile uses on site would be temporary.   Officers provided the following answers in response to Councillor questions regarding the grant funding to Stroud Valleys Canal Company (SVCC): ·         The reasons for reverting the (SVCC) grant funding back to CPI from RPI were listed in paragraphs 8.1-8.5 of the report. ·         CPI was the indexation used by the Council they had only agreed to use RPI initially in order to agree the transfer of the site to SDC. ·         SVCC uses the grant funding for the maintenance and management of the canal and would likely be disappointed at the proposed change. ·         There was a scheduled board meeting tomorrow with the SVCC which Officers would be discussing the proposed changes and any pressure it would create for SVCC. ·         The grant funding for SVCC was originally agreed by Homes England which holds charges over the site.   In response to the Chair, the Head of Property Services explained that the additional £206k would be used for procurement advice, legal advice and other relevant licenses and staffing costs throughout the procurement process.   The Chair asked for further clarity on the grant funding to SVCC and where and how it was being spent. The Strategic Director of Place confirmed that it was an ongoing piece of work and the Head of Property Services added that there were plans for a future formal grant agreement to be entered into.   Proposed by Councillor Turner, seconded by Councillor Cook.   Councillor Braun commented that it was positive to see a good number of interested developers.   Councillor Cook stated that his concerns had been alleviated during the meeting.   The Chair commended the report and thanked the Officers for providing enhanced community representation on the board.   On being put to the vote, the Motion was carried with 10 votes in favour and 1 abstention.   RESOLVED                                                     RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL To: 1)    Delegate authority to the Head of Property Services in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of Strategy and Resources Committee to: a)    Proceed to procure a developer partner for Brimscombe Port using a competitive flexible procedure with the final selection of the partner to be presented to Committee for approval at the completion of the process; b)    Use the previously approved procurement documents subject to making any minor amendments to these documents required to bring them up to date and in line with the Procurement Act 2023; c)    Reconvene the Brimscombe Port Project Board to include Councillors and member/s of the community appointed to act as ‘critical friends’ as described in section 5 of this report and subject to the updated terms of reference being agreed with Group Leaders; and d)    Allow appropriate meanwhile uses on the site until vacant possession is required, subject to any necessary statutory consents being granted, and 2)    Continue to grant fund Stroud Valleys Canal Company £67k per annum but with indexation reverting back to CPI.   The allocation of a total capital budget of £206k to fund costs to progress the redevelopment of Brimscombe Port over the next four financial years until 2028/29.  

Date of Decision: November 13, 2025