To receive a progress update from Thematic/Project Leads:
§ ESAC
§ Springboard to Employment
§ South Church Enterprise Park – workspace
§ Walking and Cycling
§ Durham Dales Gateway
§ Town Centre Diversification
§ Tindale Triangle
Minutes:
Geoff Paul gave a presentation to the Board which included a Business Case update in respect of each project, identified risks and delivery timelines. The following projects were highlighted:
ESAC
Full assurance of this project would not be possible until the Summer of 2023. A third-party Consultant had been appointed to support the process given the complex planning nature of the scheme with a view to the submission of a hybrid planning application next year.
In terms of risks associated with the scheme, it was suggested that a Board meeting be arranged to consider identified risks in due course.
The Chair noted that an identified risk was that the ‘methodology was unclear’. Geoff Paul confirmed that this related to the process for achieving project delivery, rather than the details of the corridor which had been agreed and were unchanged.
Town Centre Diversification
A four-month extension for the submission of the Business Case had been agreed and submitted to Government.
Geoff Paul reported on a development with the Beales Hotel scheme. An indication had been received from the developer that £2m allocated for the project would be insufficient.
Springboard to Employment
Cost estimates were challenging but the project was on target for the submission of a Business Case in July 2022.
South Church Enterprise Park
As with Springboard to Employment, cost estimates were challenging but the project was on target for the submission of a Business Case in July 2022.
Heritage Walking and Cycling Routes
Geoff Paul presented a map which showed nine individual walking and cycling routes. The focus was on building a network of walking and cycling routes around the town, encouraging a modal shift. These routes also connected to wider routes, including the Northern Saints Trails.
Rob Yorke and David Maddan made reference to an alternative proposal to the Escomb Loop which had been considered by the thematic group but had not been put forward by the group. The route was from Binchester to Witton Park and would offer benefits in connectivity and overnight stay opportunities.
The Board discussed at length whether consideration should be given to the alternative proposal before a decision was made on a preferred option.
Geoff Paul informed the Board that this would impact upon the preparation of a Business Case within the agreed timeframe.
The views of BEIS were sought and Jonathan Gilroy explained that at this stage project changes and/or a request for an extension would be considered in terms of whether the changes were of greater benefit.
Tindale Triangle
Geoff Paul expected that the Town Investment Plan Business Case would be completed by 29 July. The project aimed to alleviate congestion and facilitate 306 dwellings of mixed owner-occupier and affordable housing on infill sites identified on the presentation plan.
The Chair raised the alternative proposal offered by a developer which would create a retail development offering 460 jobs, and sought the views of the Board on this.
Councillor Elizabeth Scott was of the view that out-of-town retail and leisure facilities detracted from the town centre, the primary purpose of Stronger Towns.
Rob Yorke was of the opinion that the alternative proposal would compliment the town. The north end of town was culture and heritage driven. The original planning permission for Tindale had been granted on the basis that the road network was sufficient. The proposed alternative development would be located on the by-pass. This was an opportunity to create jobs and to increase land value which would in turn attract further development. It would also attract people from Shildon to the town.
Jonathan Ruffer and Brian Sutton both agreed that the creation of jobs was a major advantage in favour of the alternative proposal which would also bring leisure facilities to the town. Nik Turner stated that she would like to see the pros and cons of each proposal before making a decision.
Natalie Davison-Terranova agreed that more information was required. She had been involved in the Masterplan development for the town, including the public consultation process. It was clear from this that regeneration of the town centre was the key concern of the public. Out of town retail development was very much a 90s’ concept, which was now at odds with the subsequent focus nationally on town centre regeneration. It was a concern that a situation appeared to be emerging presently in which the town centre was primarily geared towards those interested in art and heritage, whilst everyone else had to go to Tindale.
The Chair noted that shops had left the High Street already and the north end of the town would become a community value.
Geoff Paul stated that consideration of a new proposal would require detailed financial consideration around Subsidy Control. There may also be planning implications to consider. Any change in the Board’s position would also require a further extension request to Government.
Jonathan Gilroy and Alex Jarvis advised the Board that because of the change in scope a different process would be required which would include ministerial input. If the alternative proposal delivered improved outputs then it would be viewed favourably but it would also be considered along with the broader schemes.
Following discussion it was AGREED that
a) the progress updates be noted;
b) a ‘pros and cons’ study of proposals in respect of the Heritage Walking and Cycling Routes and Tindale Triangle be completed and presented to a Special meeting of the Board in mid-July;
c) the completed Business Cases be shared with the Board before being considered at the meeting on 28 July 2022.