Additional recommendation added on 08.03.2023.

The Economic Development and External Funding Manager introduced the report which set out the background discussions between SBC and Countryside Properties regarding a parcel of land at Great East Hall, Sittingbourne.

The Chair invited Members to make comments, which included:

·         This was a typical situation that occurred across the Borough not just at Great East Hall; and

·         officers needed to make it clear with Countryside Properties that they needed to follow up on whatever was agreed.

A Member said that he was not against the idea of a community shop at Great East Hall, but considered it was important that the Council made the best decision for the local residents by exploring options for the site that would enable the community shop. Councillor Mike Whiting proposed a fourth recommendation: That officers investigate an enabling development to bridge the funding gap that exists, by considering a hybrid retail/residential joint venture to deliver the community shop on the land identified in the report, and that this is brought back to Members for consideration and a final determination. This was seconded by Councillor Lloyd Bowen.

The Chair invited Members to make comments on the proposed fourth recommendation, which included:

·         How much was the funding gap outlined in the report?;

·         if there was something else that could be done to the land it should be explored;

·         concerned there were possible nearby planning applications that were proposing provision in the locality and thought there could be no need for this shop on the land in the future;

·         recognised that officers had an agreed programme of works and that they had no spare time to explore further options;

·         recognised that the Council needed to make the most of the opportunity, but there were other projects in the Borough that were higher priority;

·         thought that recommendation (1) already suggested that any proposals would be coming back to the Committee, so the proposed recommendation was premature;

·         the Council should start with the community shop, and then explore other options once this was completed;

·         thought it was important that the officer scope was widened to explore all options available for the parcel of land; and

·         the community had been waiting a long time for a community shop, so pace was key.

The Economic Development and External Funding Manager responded to say that a final figure on the funding gap would be based on the size and nature of construction of the shop. Based on some outline feasibility work the gap could be £300,000 - £400,000, although modular construction could reduce this figure.

The Head of Regeneration, Economic Development and Property commented on officers’ resource and said that the proposed recommendations in the report required officers to help enable the project, but she considered that the proposed fourth recommendation would require officers to take a lead role in the project. She noted that with the forthcoming reduced staffing levels set in the 2023/24 budget, a workstream would need to be identified to enable a new initiative to be added. In the absence of identified capital funding to develop and deliver a fuller scheme, she noted that the Policy and Resources Committee might need to be engaged.

The Chair acknowledged community concerns regarding existing pressure on amenities at Great East Hall an that any proposals which added to that pressure would need to be carefully considered.

On being put to the vote the proposed fourth recommendation was rejected.

Resolved:

(1)  That it be agreed that in principle officers can proceed with negotiations for the transfer of the site to Swale Borough Council, with any transfer subject to terms that can be agreed and an application to vary the relevant section 106 agreement for final Committee approval.

(2)  That it be agreed that in principle an appropriately sized and located parcel of land within the site, to enable the delivery of a community shop be identified and reserved. Any transaction would be subject to the receipt and independent review of a funded delivery plan for its construction, business plan demonstrating financial sustainability and the formation of an appropriate legal entity through which the project can be progressed.

(3)  That if the conditions to enter into a transaction to enable the delivery of a community shop are not met by September 2024, a further committee report be considered for the continued reservation of the land identified for its construction.