Agenda item

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1.0      Relevant Background Information 

1.1        Members are aware that since their inception the AWGs have played an integral role in recommending investment decisions in terms of LIF and Local Interventions to the SP&R Committee. It was also previously agreed at SP&R in November 2012 that the AWGs would play a central part in recommending decisions related to the Belfast Investment Fund (BIF) given their knowledge of local areas and to date 19 of these have been recommended to progress to Stage 1 -Feasibility. However the final decisions on what projects to invest in under BIF lies with the SP&R Committee.

2.0        Current status – BIF projects

2.1        Members are aware that BIF was established to enable the Council to take a lead role and work in partnership to deliver key investment projects across the city.  An overview of the objectives of BIF has been circulated. Members have previously agreed an approval process for all BIF projects.  This process reflects the Stage Approval process that SP& R has previously agreed that all Council capital projects must go through whereby decisions on which projects progress are taken by SP&R Committee in its role as the Council’s investment decision maker. The first stage of this process is the development of a Strategic Outline Case (SOC) which will test the four abilities of the projects – that is, feasibility, deliverability, affordability, sustainability.

2.2        Members will recall that they received a detailed report on area working at their meeting last month where it was highlighted that it is key that investment decisions on projects are not taken in isolation and it is important the links and inter-dependencies between projects and different funding streams are taken into consideration. This is particularly important in the case for BIF projects which Members are subject to securing match funding of at least 50% from other sources. Members will appreciate that the investment context is changing as under LGR the Council will become the regeneration authority for the city with a transferring regeneration budget.  As a result of LGR Members will be aware that DSD funding will cease to exist in just over a year’s time and this will have an impact on the potential match funding requirement. There are a number of projects where DSD are identified as a potential funder and where funding has in principle been profiled however DSD require a commitment to progress these projects in order to ensure that this funding is not lost – this is particularly relevant to projects which are in an advanced state of readiness.

2.3        Last month the SP&R Committee agreed to prioritise a number of BIF projects in the short-term due to their state of readiness, potential funding being available etc.  A number of these projects have now completed their SOCs and Committee is asked to consider if they wish to move them onto the next stage and the completion of an Outline Business Case (OBC). The key components of an OBC have been circulated.  It is also recommended that due to the levels of investment under BIF that projects are subject to an independent economic appraisal or if an EA has already been carried out that the Council tests this.

2.4        Members are asked to note that the projects listed below are being recommended for progression at this stage because they are more advanced than other BIF projects and they have a source of match funding either in place and/have ‘in-principle’ funding commitments or are have been prioritised for funding under other funding  streams.

2.5        Stranmillis Gateway – Members are asked to note that this is part of the wider Lagan Corridor project. The Stranmillis Gateway will become the Council’s asset in the longer term as part of the LGR. This project is also closely linked with and will complement a number of other key projects along the Lagan which will help reanimate and develop the wider river frontage including the Mary Peter’s Track, the Mountain Bike Trail and the John Luke Bridge which the Council has recently invested in and is close to both the Lockkeepers Cottage and Barge and which will transfer to the Council from Castlereagh under LGR.  Ulster Garden Villages have committed £1m to this project and DSD have indicated their willingness to support this project if it is progressed now. It is recommended that an Economic Appraisal is commissioned in relation to this project.

2.6        St. Comgall’s – Members are asked to note that the St. Comgall’s project has been prioritised as a project for SIF funding under the Belfast West zone.  As this project was over £1million, it has been the subject of a full green book economic appraisal by DFP.  As outlined in the SIF report which is also on the agenda for discussion today, the EA is currently with the economists for review and the project has not yet been approved. It is recommended that instead of commissioning another economic appraisal that the Council test the validity of the EA which has already been carried out. It is also recommended that the Council work with St. Comgall’s and OFMDFM to produce a detailed business plan for the facility. It is anticipated that the Council will become the delivery agent for this project if it receives funding.  This project is also linked with the Belfast Rapid Transit project. 

2.7        St. Mary’s CBS Pitch Development – DSD are currently in the final stages of completing an Economic Appraisal on this project.  Planning permission is already in place and the school has funding of its own to contribute to the project. Members are asked to note that an integral part of this project will be ensuring that there is secured community access to the facility to ensure it is available to local residents.  This will be more closely examined if the project is progressed to the next stage together with looking at the wider benefits of the project and the management/governance arrangements.   

2.8        Members are asked to agree if they wish to move the projects as outlined above to the next stage (Stage 2) and the development of outline business cases.  Members are asked to note that this does not constitute a decision to invest in a project and that further detail on these will be brought back to Committee in due course to inform a final investment decision.  Any costs associated with the development of OBCs will come from the Feasibility Fund.  

2.9        Members are asked to note that officers will continue to work with groups to progress the development of the remaining BIF projects to help bring these up to a state of readiness where Members can take informed investment decisions to a later stage.

3.0        Area Working Group Updates including LIF and Local Interventions

3.1        At the most recent round of AWGs, officers updated Members on the external meetings they have facilitated on the LIF proposals. In accordance with Council procedures, individual Members declared any conflicts of interest and this was noted in the minutes of the AWG. Members also had the opportunity to discuss potential reallocations of LIF monies for projects which are no longer progressing. On the basis of the information presented, the Shankill and North AWGs have made the following recommendations for the consideration of the Committee:

            SHANKILL AWG -  Local Investment Fund

3.2        The Shankill AWG has made the following recommendation for the consideration of the SP&R Committee in relation to their Local Investment Fund money.  Members are asked to note that this contribution is a reallocation from :

            NORTH AWG -  Local Investment Fund

3.3        The North AWG has made the recommendations below for the consideration of the SP&R Committee in relation to their Local Investment Fund money. This is from reallocations from projects which are no longer progressing.  A number of further projects are under consideration.

            NORTH AWG -  Local Investment Fund

3.4        Members will recall that the North AWG agreed in October 2013 to focus their intervention monies on a series of community safety focused initiatives including the installation of alleygates.  Subsequently the North AWG has made the following recommendations for the consideration of the SP&R Committee in terms of a number of targeted interventions.  Members are asked to note that this is out of the original budget allocation of £100,000

            Local Investment Fund

3.5        Members are asked to note that the Local Investment Fund received the award for the ‘Best Initiative by Councillors’ at the recent NILGA Awards at the end of March. This recognised the role of Councillors in directing investment towards smaller scale local projects which have helped to transform and regenerate neighbourhoods.

4.0        Equality Implications

            Emerging equality implications to be considered as further details emerge of projects   

5.0        Recommendations

            Committee is asked to note the contents of this report and  -

            Belfast Investment Fund

·         agree if the suggested BIF projects as outlined in  2.4 above (Stanmillis Gateway; St. Comgall’s and St. Mary’s CBS) are progressed to the next stage and completion of an Outline Business Case due to their state of readiness and potential of match funding.  Members are asked to note that this does not constitute a final decision to invest in any BIF project and that further detail on these projects will be brought back to Committee in due course for Members to make the final investment decision

·         note that officers are continuing to work with groups to progress the development of the remaining BIF projects to help bring these up to a state of readiness where Members can take informed investment decisions

            Local Investment Fund and Local Intervention monies

·         agree the Local Investment Fund and Local Intervention recommendations as proposed by the North and Shankill AWGs

·         note the Local Investment Fund was awarded the ‘Best Initiative by Councillors’ at the recent NILGA Awards “

            The Committee adopted the recommendations.