**A pre meeting for Members to prepare for the Panel will take place 45 minutes before the meeting**
The Press and Public are welcome to attend for the consideration of any items which are public.
Councillor Bainbridge (Chair), Councillors Allison, Ms Ellis-Williams, Glendinning, Mrs Mitchell, Mitchelson, Sunter, Dr Tickner (Vice Chair)
Substitutes: Councillors Alcroft, Atkinson, Mrs Birks, Brown, Bomford, Collier, Mrs Finlayson, Glover, Lishman, McKerrell, Morton, Patrick, Pickstone, Robson, Shepherd, Miss Sherriff, Southward, Miss Whalen and Wills.
To consider any matter which has been the subject of call-in.
The Policy and Performance Officer submitted the Quarter 1 Performance Report 2022/23 against the current Service Standards and an update of the delivery of the Carlisle Plan 2021-23 actions as defined in the Plan. Performance against the Panel’s 2022/23 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) were also included. (PC.22/22). The Policy and Performance Officer highlighted the Summary of Exceptions that were set out in section 1.5 of the report and drew Members attention to the summary of results from the 2021/22 online customer satisfaction survey. In considering the report Members raised the following questions and comments: - The Panel asked for clarity with regard to the measure CSe22: Actual city centre pedestrianised zone revenue as a percentage of city centre expenditure. The Policy and Performance Officer explained that the indicator measured the revenue income from events held in the city centre against the expenditure. It showed that for every £1 spent the Council received 77p in return. The Panel discussed the measure and felt that, although recovering costs was beneficial, events in the city centre contributed to the economic vitality of the city and helped engage visitors and benefit retailers. The Panel asked for further details on the events, and costings, held in the City Centre. The Policy and Performance Officer agreed to seek written responses to the following questions from Service Heads: - Did CSe 14: Actual car parking revenue as a percentage of car parking expenditure include a reduction in revenue due to the free parking within the city centre? - The Sands Centre Redevelopment Project was approximately four to five weeks behind programme, what was the potential impacts on costings of the delay? - The current rough sleeper figures for Carlisle. - Why was the frequency of grass cutting being reduced?
- A Member commented that it would be beneficial to the Panel to have actual figures for context included with the performance information. The Policy and Performance Officer agreed to include additional information in future reports. - Was the Disabled Facility Grants (DFGs) supply chain and contractor availability back logs due to financial constraints and would the back log be cleared before Cumberland Council came into sovereignty?
The Communities, Health and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder clarified that the significant increase in the cost of supplies had resulted in the jobs costing more than originally priced through the framework. In addition there has been some difficulty in finding available contractors. The Council was working with the NHS to clear the back log through a priority system which ensured those with the greatest needs were dealt with first. It was hoped that the back log would be cleared, however, she was due to attend a meeting with the Regulatory Services Manager and she would provide the Panel with an update following that meeting. RESOLVED - 1) That the Panel had scrutinised the performance of the City Council with a view to seeking continuous improvement in how the Council delivers its priorities (PC.22/22). 2) That Panel are provided with written responses to the following: - details of the events, and costings, held in the City Centre; - did the actual car parking revenue account for the free car parking scheme; - the potential impact on costings of the delay in the Sands Centre Redevelopment; - why was the frequency of grass cutting being reduced. 3) That the Communities, Health and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder provides the Panel with an update on the Disabled Facilities Grants back log following her meeting with the Regulatory Services Manager.
The Head of Regeneration submitted the Economic Strategy Action Plan Update (ED.21/22). The report provided an update on the progress of the delivery of: the Carlisle Economic Strategy Action Plan; the Town Deal; and, the Future High Streets Fund. In considering the update Members raised the following questions and comments: - Was there a preferred partner for the Central Plaza and Caldew riverside sites? The Head of Regeneration confirmed that there was developer interest in he Central Plaza site, the work the Council was undertaking was to make the site more attractive and affordable for developers. With regard to the Caldew Riverside site, the Head of regeneration stated that the Council had carried out the remedial work on the site, as a result Homes England had expressed interest in the site and work was being carried out on feasibility and masterplanning. A Member requested that an update be given to Members via a briefing in October. - The Panel congratulated the Head of Regeneration and his team for their excellent work in securing funding and preparing transformative projects. - Would the current financial issues impact the projects? Was there an option to review the projects for affordability and perhaps reduce them to maintain the more significant projects? The Head of Regeneration confirmed that the programme was being managed to be agile. he was confident that the projects would be delivered with some value engineering but there would be opportunity to discuss redistribution of funding if required. - Did the projects offer the opportunity to work in partnership to increase skill level to keep jobs local? The Head of Regeneration confirmed that the Shared Prosperity Fund bid was a revenue bid focused on people and skills to address the skills gap and create a robust workforce. The bid had been aligned to the construction trade deficit to create opportunities with partners. - What steps had been taken to protect the projects as the Council moved towards Local Government Reorganisation? The Head of Regeneration had confidence in the Governance arrangements in place for the projects and it was expected that all projects would be in the implementation stage by Vesting Day. Similar work was being undertaken across Allerdale and Copeland and Shadow Executive were being regularly updated on the work. - Would Members have the opportunity to provide feedback on the Market Square proposals before they went back out to consultation? The Economy, Enterprise and Housing Portfolio Holder informed the Panel that there would be a workshop to engage Members in the process. - Would the City Council be able to feed into the design proposals for Devonshire Street? The Head of Regeneration explained that, although Cumbria County Council were leading on the project as the Highway Authority, the agreement allowed the Council input on the design.
- There was some concern that the Economic Strategy focused on the centre of Carlisle and those in the rural area felt the Strategy was not for the areas they lived. How would the Rural Strategy be incorporated into the Economic Strategy?
The Head of Regeneration explained that the Economic Strategy was an overarching district wide strategy, the Town Investment Plan and the Rural Strategy complimented the Economic Strategy. RESOLVED - 1) That the progress on the delivery of the Carlisle Economic Strategy Action Plan, Town Deal and Future High Streets Fund be noted. 2) That the emerging risks to the delivery of the Action Plan and the regeneration programmes be noted. 3) That a briefing updating Members on the projects included in the Economic Strategy be arranged for October.
The Policy and Scrutiny Officer submitted report OS.21/22 which provided an overview of matters related to the work of the Place Panel.
In considering the Work Programme the Panel asked that the draft Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan be added to the Work Programme if the next meeting fell within the consultation period. the Panel also asked that the Market Square consultation be added to the work programme. The Policy and Scrutiny Officer drew the Panel's attention to section 4 of the report. She reminded the Panel that they had recommended at their meeting in July that the Chair of both the Place Panel and People Panel meet to discuss potential changes to the Scrutiny Remits. The meeting took place and the Chairs agreed that the following items be moved from the Plane Panel remit to the People Panel remit: - Homeless (strategy, hostels, prevention) - Housing - empty properties, standards and improvements - Housing advice and support If the Panel agreed to the changes a report would be submitted to Council to make the necessary amendments to the Constitution. RESOLVED - 1) That the Overview Report incorporating the Work Programme and Key Decision items relevant to the Place Panel be noted (OS.21/22); 2) That the following items be added to the Panel's work Programme if the consultation periods allowed it: - Draft Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan Consultation - Market Square Consultation 3) That the following items be moved form the Place Panel remit to the People panel's remit: - Homeless (strategy, hostels, prevention) - Housing - empty properties, standards and improvements - Housing advice and support
-NIL-
Enquiries, requests for reports, background papers etc to: democraticservices@carlisle.gov.uk