Agenda and minutes

            Apologies for inability to attend were reported from Alderman Patterson and Councillors Campbell, Clarke and McVeigh.

            The minutes of the meeting of 19th September were taken as read and signed as correct.  It was reported that those minutes had been adopted by the Council at its meeting on 1st October, subject to:

(i)      the omission of the decision under the heading “Gasworks: Review of Service Charge” in so far as it related to the provision of a shuttle bus service which, at the request of Councillor Hargey, had been taken back to the Committee for further consideration; and

(ii)     the omission of the minute under the heading “Public Consultation on Zero Hours Contracts” in so far as it related to the consultation response questions 3 and 10, which at the request of Councillors McVeigh and Alderman Stoker, was taken back to the Committee for further consideration.

            No declarations of interest were reported.

            (Mr. A. Hassard, Director of Parks and Leisure, attended in connection with this item.)

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1.0    Relevant background information

1.1    At its meeting in August, the Committee were updated on the contractual arrangements being put in place in relation to the Leisure Transformation Programme, in accordance with Committee’s direction and legal advice.

2.0    Key issues

2.1    Contract issues

         Consequent to Committee’s authority in August, work is ongoing to prepare a set of agreements which will give effect to Committee’s direction.  This is in line with Committee’s intention that the Council’s ‘leisure’ assets serve a much broader neighbourhood development and social regeneration agenda.  The agreements include:

·        a payment mechanism which links performance to quarterly payments;

·        an outcomes framework to measure social regeneration impact as well service standards and outputs;

·        VAT and surplus share arrangements in order to maximise value for money;

·        Specific management and performance monitoring arrangements for Girdwood Hub, to work with the Hub Forum and deliver SEUPB required outcomes in relation to peace and reconciliation

·        Quality standards based on legal, health and safety requirements, as well as industry good practice; and

·        Dispute resolution processes.

         Expert legal and business advisors continue to support Council officers in ensuring that the agreements and funding mechanisms are in line with relevant legal frameworks; maximise VAT efficiency; and reflect industry good practice.  Deloitte are also providing a management tool to provide a ‘check and challenge’ function, reviewing final agreements and testing that the final implementation of the new arrangements remain consistent with the business model option agreed by Committee in February 2014.

         There are a number of specific issues arising from these discussions for Committee’s consideration outlined below.

2.2    Finance and funding mechanism

         Considerable work has been undertaken to determine the financial resources, running costs and income projections for leisure services, to inform the funding agreement with the Trust and its Strategic Operating Partner.

         The Director of Finance and Resources has now finalised the financial figures.  The Council’s budget would have been £8,855,101 but the payment to the Operating Partner will be £6,851,325 which demonstrates cash savings to the Council of £2,003,776. 

         Therefore, for 2016/17, the contract value will be £6,851,325 which includes the 3 transferring centres and assures Committee that the contract will guarantee cash savings of £2,003,776 by April 2016.  This is in line with the capital financing strategy agreed by Committee at its meeting in June 2013.  

2.3    Pricing Principles

         In its strategic principles, Committee has already determined that it wishes to see a 5* service for 3* prices i.e. that it should be an affordable and innovative customer and community-focussed service.  All facilities and services shall be provided as efficiently, effectively and safely as possible whilst offering value for money. 

         One of the key benefits of the new arrangements, is that Active Belfast Limited and its Strategic Operating Partner will be able to take a ‘whole-business’ view of price-setting, enabling cross-subsidisation within the service, thereby reducing dependency on rate-borne income.  An overly prescriptive approach  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2a

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1.0   Purpose of report

1.1    The Council’s Capital Programme is a rolling programme of investment which either improves existing Council facilities or provides new facilities. This report provides –

§    key highlights since the last Committee report in August

§    proposed recommendations for movement between the Capital Programme stages

§    specific project updates

2.0    Relevant Background Information

         Capital Programme – Key highlights

2.1    Significant progress has been made in the delivery of the capital programme since it was agreed by SP&R Committee in February 14. The Property & Projects Department is happy to arrange site visits to any capital project. 

2.2    Key highlights since the last update report in August include –

·        the tender for Phase 2 of the Connswater Community Greenway project has been awarded with work now underway.  This will see the completion of a further £20m+ of work including:

-  9km of paths, stretching through to Cregagh Glen and the Braniel Estate 

-  CS Lewis-themed square at Holywood Arches, along with new public art at key gateways 

-  river improvements and new flood defences, through the East Belfast Flood Alleviation Scheme

-  improved bridges and crossings

-  resurfacing of major arterial routes into Belfast 

-  new play areas at Avoniel and Loop River Park

-  new signage, lighting, benches, landscaping and planting. 

All work will be completed by mid 2016, with the Greenway running from Belfast Lough to the Castlereagh Hills.

·        the tender for the main works (£23.4m) for the Belfast Waterfront Exhibition and Conference facility has been awarded with work under way

·        a Letter of Offer for £6million ERDF funding has been received to support the infrastructure for  the £8m Giants Park Environmental Resource Park project at the North Foreshore – the Council is contributing £2million towards this project

·        construction works are also continuing on the £11.7m Girdwood Hub; the new £1.7m 3G pitch at Cliftonville;  the new £430,000 Adventurers Learning Centre at Belfast Zoo; the new pavilion at Suffolk Playing Fields;  Half Moon Lake and Drumglass Park

·        Preparation works are continuing on £3.7m Tropical Ravine refurbishment project with works due to commence in the New Year

·        An artist’s contract has been awarded to undertake the commission of two bronze boxing sculptures of Rinty Monghan and John Caldwell and the tender process to commission an artist for a boxing themed art piece in Woodvale Park is underway

·        Super-Connected voucher scheme - Over 700 applications have been received for connection Vouchers and 3 of the 16 demand stimulation (information) events have been run.  

·        Super-Connected wi-fi in public buildings. The tender has closed and BT have been selected as the service provider. 

3.0    Key Issues

3.1    Members have agreed that all capital projects must go through a three Stage process where decisions on which projects progress are taken by SP&R. This provides assurance as to the level of financial control and will allow Members to properly consider the opportunity costs of approving one capital project over another capital project. Importantly it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2b

            The Director of Property and Projects submitted for the Committee’s consideration the undernoted report:

“1.0    Relevant Background Information

1.1    Members are aware that there are currently a number of Council funding streams which the AWGs have played an integral role in recommending investment decisions given their knowledge of local areas. These include the Capital Programme, Belfast Investment Fund (BIF); Local Investment Fund (LIF) and the Area Interventions. However Members will acknowledge that there a number of major opportunities and challenges facing both the Council and the city currently including:

·   the reform of local government and the proposed enhanced roles and responsibilities in addition to the extended boundaries including community planning, regeneration powers and spatial planning;

·   the emerging Social Investment Fund (SIF) projects;

·   a range of strategic projects being delivered across the city by partner organisations including the Rapid Transit system, the new University of Ulster, the emerging thinking around Urban Villages;

·   the emerging Leisure Transformation Programme (LTP)

         An overview of these funding programmes has been circulated. Together with the continued implementation of Investment Programme, all of the above provide a great opportunity for Members to make a real difference to the economic, social and environmental wellbeing of Belfast, particularly in terms of physical investment decisions. Members agreed that given the above the Council should no longer plan in the context of its current role but should take into consideration the impact of the transferring roles and responsibilities and the enhanced boundaries of the new Council post 2015.

1.2    Given this changing context, Members will recall that in June they agreed that it was timely to look at the objectives and criteria of BIF and agreed that there was scope to look at how BIF/LIF could be realigned with future DSD funding as a neighbourhood regeneration fund.  This was considered to be key given that the Council was proposed to become the regeneration authority for the city with a transferring regeneration budget from DSD. This had particular implications for some emerging BIF projects which required at least 50% match funding from other sources and the DSD, who were a key mechanism for many projects for securing match funding requirement under the current BIF criteria.

2.0    Key Issues

2.1    Members will however be aware that since this time the Regeneration and Housing Bill, which is the legal instrument for the transfer of regeneration and community development powers to local authorities from 1 April 2015, has not yet received full consideration by the NI Executive.  This has a number of potential consequences for the Council.  If this transfer does not happen it means that the Council will be unable to develop a combined regeneration fund and, as such, programmes including BIF, LIF, SIF and others will continue as separate programmes, thereby losing the opportunity to maximise the impact of these combined resources for local people and for city development. The opportunity to create an integrated, strategic physical development programme for the city, linked to an agreed set of outcomes would therefore be significantly  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2c

Minutes of meeting of

            The Committee was advised that the undernoted requests for the use of the City Hall and the provision of hospitality had been received:

Appendix 1

Minutes of meeting of

            The Committee was advised that the Northern Ireland Local Government Association would be holding an event on 20th February, 2015 to collectively recognise the civic and community roles which had been played by the outgoing 26 local councils since 1973.  The Association would be inviting the Lord Mayor and the Chief Executive to attend the event in La Mon Hotel, but that the Council could, if it so wished, reserve up to an additional eight seats for the event at a cost of £55 per person.

            The Democratic Services Manager explained that, given the contribution made to the life and work of the outgoing Council by all political parties on the Council, it was considered that the Council should take up the offer to reserve an additional eight places for the event.

            So that all the political parties might be represented, it was suggested that the eight places be allocated as follows:

            Sinn Féin – 2 places

            DUP – 2 places

            SDLP – 1 place

            Alliance – 1 place

            UUP – 1 place

            PUP – 1 place

            The Committee agreed to reserve eight places at the Northern Ireland Local Government Association recognition event and to allocate those places as outlined.

Minutes of meeting of

            The Committee was advised that the Annual General Meeting of the National Association of Councillors would be held this year in Glasgow City Chambers, Glasgow from 28th till 30th November.

            The Democratic Services Manager reported that the Annual General Meeting and Conference was designed to be of great value to Councillors at all tiers of Local Government.  The theme for the Conference this year would be “Licensing and Community Initiatives”.  The cost per delegate of attending the Conference would be £350 plus VAT and it was recommended that the Committee authorise the attendance at the Annual General Meeting and Conference of the Chairman, the Deputy Chairman, the Council’s representatives on the National Association of Councillors (Northern Ireland Region), and a representative from each of the Parties on the Council not represented by the aforementioned Members.

            The Committee adopted the recommendations.

Minutes of meetings of

            The Committee was advised that a request for financial assistance had been received from the Executive Chairman of the Ulster Orchestra.  The request was in the context of a forecast deficit of £400,000 for 2014/15 which had been caused by cuts in funding to the Orchestra by the Arts Council and the BBC.

            The Chief Executive explained that there were two elements to the Ulster Orchestra’s request.  Firstly, that the Council provide a comfort letter agreeing to cover any expenditure, not exceeding £500,000 in total, incurred by the Orchestra which was not covered by its funding up to 31st March, 2015.  That intervention would serve to secure the Ulster Orchestra’s financial position in the short term.

            Secondly, that the Council provide the Orchestra with a rent free period of five years for the use of the Ulster and Waterfront Halls on the basis that that would make a significant difference to the Orchestra’s loss-making position, allowing greater flexibility to develop strategically and further its collaboration on special projects with the Council.

            The Chief Executive reported that the request outlined the benefits of the Ulster Orchestra to Belfast and Northern Ireland, together with proposed developments which were planned for the next six months.  She pointed out that, at present, the Council provided £149,283 of annual grant funding to the Orchestra but received income from the Orchestra in the form of hire and leasing charges.  In 2013/14 that had amounted to £154,362.

            During discussion, the Members indicated that more information was required in relation to funding requests which had been made by the Orchestra to other organisations, the outcome of discussions between the Orchestra and the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure, the Orchestra’s proposals on its future operating model, legal vires and further details on the rent agreement between the Council and the Orchestra.

            After further discussion, the Committee agreed to defer consideration of the request by the Orchestra for the Council to enter into a “cash deficiency agreement” to enable the aforementioned information to be obtained and that the request for a five year rent free period be referred to the Shadow Strategic Policy and Resources Committee to enable that to be considered as part of the 2015/16 rate setting process.  It was agreed also that appropriate Board members should attend a future meeting of the Committee.

            The Committee noted the minutes of meeting of the Budget and Transformation Panel on 9th October.

            The Committee granted authority for the commencement of tendering exercises and delegated authority to the Director of Property and Projects, in accordance with the Scheme of the Delegation, to accept the most advantageous tenders received in respect of the following:

            The Committee approved also the extension of the current contracts for paint and oils and timber products by up to six months on the basis of existing contracted prices, in order to permit the refinement of the specifications and the rebalancing of the overall procurement priorities.

            The Director of Organisational Development submitted further for the Committees consideration the undernoted report:

“1.0  Relevant Background Information

1.1    At its meeting on 1 October the Council agreed that  the draft response to the  Department of Employment and Learning (DEL)  consultation paper relating to zero hours contracts, be taken  back to the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee for further consideration of the responses to Questions 3 and 10.

2.0    Key issues

2.1    A draft response (attached at Appendix One) contains proposed revisions to the answers provided at Questions 3 and 10 and also proposes minor revisions to some of the other answers to strengthen the Council’s position on this subject.

2.2    Revised draft answers  to Questions 3 and 10 are set out below for members consideration:

         Q3.  Would banning zero hours contracts or exclusivity clauses create any negative impacts for SMEs?  The revised draft response is as follows:

         Belfast City Council only endorses the use of zero hours contracts where both parties to the contract enjoy flexibility; i.e., where there is no detriment to workers when they are offered work but are unable to accept work, ( i.e. where there are no exclusivity clauses). Such an approach can provide advantages, provided these contracts are not open to abuse by employers.

         Q10. Do you think that there would be benefit in introducing a compensatory arrangement similar to that adopted in the Republic of Ireland which would guarantee a minimum payment for workers on zero hours contracts who had an expectation of work, but who were not called to work in a given week?  If so, could you suggest 1) what the minimum payment might be based upon; and 2) in what circumstances such a payment might be triggered

         For circumstances in which zero hours contracts are misused by employers a compensatory arrangement might offer a deterrent to such misuse.  This however would not be necessary for properly constituted zero hours’ contracts which genuinely offer flexibility to both parties to the contract, where there is no detriment to workers when they are offered work but are unable to accept work, (i.e. where there are no exclusivity clauses).  

3.0    Resource Implications

3.1    Financial

         There are no financial implications contained in this report.

3.2    Human Resources

         There are no HR implications contained in this report. 

3.3    Asset and Other Implications

         There are no Asset or Other implications contained in this report.

4.0    Recommendations

4.1   Members are asked to agree the revisions to the Council’s response to DEL’s public consultation on zero hours’ contracts attached at Appendix One.”

Appendix 1

            It was reported that, in accordance with Standing Order 55 and the authority delegated to him, the Director of Finance and Resources had authorised the appointment of members of staff who were related to existing officers of the Council.

Noted.

(Councillor Hussey to raise)

            In accordance with Notice on the Agenda, Councillor Hussey raised the issue of the vesting of land adjacent to Orangefield Park by the Council.

            The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 19th June, it had approved a recommendation of the Parks and Leisure Committee to commence a process to vest an area of land adjacent to Orangefield Park in connection with the relocation of the Knock River in order to achieve the required flood defences in the area.

            Councillor Hussey requested the Committee to consider deferring its decision to vest the land for a period of time to enable consultation to be undertaken with the residents.  He indicated that, in his view, the residents had not been consulted properly by the Council in relation to the vesting and further consultation needed to be undertaken.

            A Member pointed out that the East Belfast Partnership, together with Council officials and Rivers Agency staff, had held public meetings to which all  residents who would be affected by the proposal to vest the land had been invited.  The response to the proposal that the strip of land might be acquired and maintained by the Council had been largely supported.

            After further discussion the Committee agreed to continue with the process of vesting the land but that in the meantime Council officers consult and inform the affected residents of the process.

            The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 22nd August, it had approved a number of recommendations that would enable a further development brief to be prepared for the Council’s remaining land at Maysfield and that would also include a portion of land currently owned by the Northern Ireland Transport Holding Company. 

            The Director of Property and Projects explained that, following the strong market interest generated from the initial release of the Council’s former Maysfield Leisure Centre premises, it was evident that there remained a latent demand for further development opportunity at that same location.  In addition, the Members would be aware of a number of recent high profile property transactions in Belfast, notably the former Belfast Met buildings in College Square East and Brunswick Street, Clarendon House and the iconic Windsor House. All those sales were indicative of a resurgent private sector appetite for development opportunities in the city.

            He pointed out that in a Development brief the Council would retain the ability to control the future development proposals from the private sector in terms of the uses, timing and other factors that reflected the Investment Programme, such as support for economic activity and job creation.  The second Maysfield Brief had been advertised earlier in the week and was seeking submissions by 21st November to purchase the site.

            The Director stated that, as with the first Brief, the prime objective was to secure further quality urban regeneration for the river front location, to create additional economic activity aimed at sustaining job creation and, crucially, within a reasonable time frame.  As before, similar selection criteria had been incorporated in the current Brief which also detailed the scoring matrix to ensure the market fully understood the Council’s requirements.  Under section 96 (5) of the Local Government Act 1972 the Council was required to achieve Best Price in the disposal of any of its property assets.  The Lands and Property Services section had provided a market value which had been adopted in the Brief and which bids must match/exceed to ensure that the statutory obligation was met.

            After discussion, the Committee noted the information which has been provided and agreed that a report on any submissions be submitted to a future meeting of the Committee for consideration and approval.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1     Relevant Background Information

1.1    On 19th September 2014, the Strategic Policy & Resources Committee gave approval that the contract for the shuttle bus service at the Gasworks should not be renewed when it expires on 30th November 2014 but with a short extension of the contract to 31st March 2015.  At Council on 2nd October 2014, at the request of Councillor Hargey, this decision was taken back for further consideration.

2       Key Issues

2.1    Concerns have been highlighted that there has been no consultation with the local community groups in relation to this specific proposal and that the cessation of the shuttle bus service may lead to an increase in parking congestion in the immediate vicinity.

2.2    Members will be aware that the shuttle bus is not funded by the Council and is paid for in full by the tenants of the Gasworks through the service charge.  The request for removal of the service came from a number of the developer Landlords within the Estate with the aim of identifying cost saving measures for tenants.

2.3    Under the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveryors Service Charge Code of Practice, the Council are obliged to monitor and keep under review the service charge and be responsive to the needs of tenants. The Council is obliged to consider their requests and make amendments that are deemed reasonable and not to the detriment of the Estate.

2.4    However, Members will be aware that Council had previously agreed a Masterplan for the undeveloped Northern Fringe lands at the Gasworks which outlined proposals for progressing development on a site by site basis. As part of the redevelopment of the Northern Fringe, the Council gave an undertaking to continue to work with Members and the local community in respect of delivering community benefits in the area.

2.5    It is therefore proposed to meet with the local community organisations to discuss the wider development of the Council’s remaining undeveloped land at the Northern Fringe and ensure that the local community is fully consulted in relation to any future development proposals for these lands including use and access.

2.6    The intention is to hold a number of planning sessions in a focused manner with a clear end date for an agreement on final usage. The fact that BMAP has at last been finalised now sets out some parameters for planning this area.

3       Resource Implications

3.1    Financial

         The withdrawal of both of the shuttle bus and security service will reduce the service charge costs payable by the tenants at the Gasworks and will ensure that the Gasworks is competitively placed against competing business locations in the marketplace. Whilst occupation levels of buildings located within the Gasworks are fairly high, there nevertheless remain vacancies within some of the buildings.

         Landlords and lettings agents have highlighted the high services charges as having a negative impact on the ability to secure sub tenants to the vacant units. Any reduction in the service charge costs should  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6c

            The Director of Property and Projects submitted for the Committee’s consideration the undernoted report:

“1        Relevant Background Information

1.1       (i) Roselawn Cemetery - Northern Ireland Electricity Wayleave Agreement

            At its meeting on 12 June 2014 the Parks and Leisure Committee approved permission for Northern Ireland Electricity to remove overhead electricity cables which are affected by memorial trees and to have these cables put underground in a route approved by relevant Council Officers and NIE. An extract of the relevant minute of the Parks and Leisure Committee has been circulated.

1.2       NIE have offered to be responsible for the works and cost of re-laying the overhead cables in the areas affected. The Council’s Parks and Leisure Department are to provide a suitable trench for the underground cabling and this will require a wayleave agreement between the Council and NIE.

1.3       (ii) Duncrue Complex – Eircom Wayleave Agreement

            The Council’s Digital Services section has requested a wayleave agreement to facilitate an enhancement to the services provided by them and to obtain a connection onto the Eircom network already in place at Duncrue Complex. Duncrue Complex is an IT resilience site for Digital Services and there is an IT hub located within the complex.

1.4       As part of Local Government Reform planning powers will be transferred to the Council and this will necessitate existing Planning Service IT systems being incorporated into the Council’s existing IT maintenance contract.

1.5       Whilst the service connection link for Planning Service may ultimately have to be located directly into the office accommodation they will occupy, Digital Services also wish to make contingency arrangements for a possible connection into Duncrue Complex. There is a lead in time required for engineering and other associated works to be agreed.

1.6       (iii) Deed of Dedication at Orangefield Playing Fields

            At its meeting on 12 January 2012 the Parks and Leisure Committee agreed to enter into a Deed to dedicate a substantial part of Orangefield Playing Fields as part of the Queen Elizabeth II Fields Challenge.  The minute (Appendix 3) noted the need for legal and estates issues to be addressed as part of this process.  The extent of the land to be included in the Deed totals approximately 35.32 acres.

1.7       A further report was provided to the Parks and Leisure Committee on 16 October 2014 setting out in more detail the impact of the proposed Deed on the value of the site and upon future use of the asset.  A copy of the report has been circulated and the Director of Property and Projects will provide an update to Members on the meeting of the Parks and Leisure Committee.

1.8       (iv) Proposed Bridge at Dundonald

            At its meeting on 16 October 2014 the Parks and Leisure Committee received a report seeking in principle approval to the provision of access to allow Castlereagh Borough Council (CBC) and their contractors to carry out site investigations and to allow for the subsequent installation of a pedestrian bridge across Belfast City  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6d

            Bonfire Management Programme 2014

            In considering the minutes of the meeting of the Good Relations Partnership of 13th October, a Member drew the Committee’s attention to the decision of the Partnership under the heading Bonfire Management Programme 2014 in which the following had been agreed;

      “The Partnership then proceeded to review the alleged breaches and supporting information relating to the remaining eight bonfires on the list, following which it was

Moved by Mr. P. Mackel,

Seconded by Councillor Attwood,

That the Good Relations Partnership agrees to recommend to the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee that the remaining 30% of funding be allocated to the Lower Shankill Community Association and South Belfast Malecare and agrees to recommend also that that portion of funding in relation to the Graymount  Community Group, the Lower Oldpark Community Association, Pitt Park, Suffolk Community Forum, The Hub (on behalf of York Park Bonfire Committee) and Walkway Community Association be withheld, on the basis that they had failed to use best endeavours to comply with the conditions governing the Council’s Bonfire Management Programme.

Further Proposal

Moved by Alderman Stoker,

Seconded by Councillor Reynolds,

That the Goods Relations Partnership take no decision on the matter and that it be referred to the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee for consideration.

      On a vote by show of hands two members voted for the proposal and ten against and it was declared lost.

      The original proposal standing in the name of Mr. P. Mackel and seconded by Councillor Attwood was thereupon put to the meeting when ten members voted for and two against and it was declared carried.

      The Partnership noted that a report on the potential delivery by the Council of a Bonfire Management Programme for 2015 would be submitted to a future meeting.” 

            The Member made the point that, in his view, there had not been a appropriate analysis undertaken in relation to the types of breaches which had occured.  He pointed out that the same penalty of a 30% deduction in funding had been made for the differing levels of breaches of the criteria and that needed to be refined so that groups who attempted to adhere to the criteria were not penalised in the same way as groups which breached the criteria over a longer term.

            After further discussion, it was

            Moved by Alderman Robinson,

            Seconded by Councillor Kennedy,

      That, with the exception of the Greymount Community Group and the Hub (on behalf of York Park Bonfire Committee), the remaining groups be allocated the remaining 30% of funding.

            On a vote by show of hands six Members voted for the proposal and seven against and it was accordingly declared lost.

            The Committee agreed that the Partnership, in reviewing the terms for the award of funding for the Bonfire Management Programme 2015 be requested to include more detail on the expectations with regard to action to remedy breaches when they occurred (including contacting other Statutory Agencies) and that these would be taken into account when considering  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7a

            The Committee approved and adopted the minutes of the meeting of the Diversity Working Group of 3rd October.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1     Relevant Background Information

1.1    Belfast currently has 5 Higher Education Institutions across the city and by 2018 will have 2 major University campuses close to the city centre. There is also a growing international student market which presents a significant opportunity for Belfast in terms of international marketing, tourism and knowledge research.

1.2    International and UK research has shown that students studying and living within cities make a significant contribution to local and regional economies.  To inform Council’s ongoing work with partners on developing Belfast as a ‘Learning City’ and in developing a coherent strategic approach to student housing in the city, supplementary research to identify the economic impact of students in the city of Belfast has been completed. This report requests that Members note the research findings, a summary of which has been circulated.

1.3    Members will be aware of a number of key workstrands that have been taken forward by the Council over recent years which have identified the need to develop Belfast as a Learning city and destination of choice for students, to harness the potential for economic growth, recommending a number of key actions for Council and its partners in relation to future provision of student accommodation in the city. Related workstrands have included:

a)     Draft City Centre Regeneration Strategy and Investment framework

b)     Belfast City Masterplan Review.

c)     Anchor Institutions Research

d)     Integrated Economic Strategy.

e)     Holylands and Wider University Area Strategic Study

1.4    In taking forward the Strategic Study report recommendations, Belfast City Council has been leading a Joint Team (including DSD, NIHE, DoE, SIB), to develop a coherent strategic approach to provision of student housing within the city.

1.5    Members will recall as part of this work, Council published a ‘Framework for Student Housing and Purpose Built Student Accommodation’ in April 2014 (developed with partners on the Student Housing Joint Team with input by HEIs and other stakeholders) which sets out the need for purpose built student accommodation in Belfast that is high quality, safe, secure, well managed and properly accredited accommodation. The Framework proposes a range of proposed planning criteria regarding the location, design, management impact of, and need for future proposals for student accommodation (Appendix III).

1.6    As agreed by Strategic Policy and Resources Committee on 21 March 2014, support for these criteria are highlighted in responses from Belfast City Council to planning consultations by Planning Service on PBSA planning applications in the city. This approach aims to ensure that emerging PBSA developments deliver the standard of accommodation and accredited management required, to meet the needs of the ‘Learning city’, attracting more local and international students to the City and managing impacts on communities.

1.7    To strengthen this approach, the Framework document proposes that these criteria could form the basis for a future revised planning policy for PBSA (HMO Subject Plan, Policy HMO7) after 2015, following transfer of planning powers under Local Government Reform).

2       Key Issues

         The research into the Economic Impact of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8a