Agenda and minutes

To issue a welcome to those present, and to confirm if there are any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Porter.

It was noted that Councillor Rae Bhatia would need to join the meeting later in the proceedings.

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed on the agenda.

Members were asked to declare any interests they may have had in the business to be discussed.

There were no declarations of interest.

The minutes of the meeting of the Economic Development, Transport and Climate Emergency Scrutiny Commission held on 6^th November 2024 have been circulated, and Members will be asked to confirm them as a correct record.

Additionally, the record of a separate meeting held in private on 4^th December 2024 to discuss the proposals for the marketplace is appended.  Members will be asked to note this.

With regard to the record of the meeting held to discuss the Market Place, it was requested that points made about avoiding obstruction of sightlines of locally and nationally listed heritage assets be included in the recommendations and observations.

AGREED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Economic Development, Transport and Climate Emergency Scrutiny Commission held on 6 November 2024 be confirmed as a correct record.

The Chair is invited to make any announcements as they see fit. 

None.

Any questions, representations and statements of case submitted in accordance with the Council’s procedures will be reported.

The following question has been received:

Mr Wynd asks,

“Plans for the marketplace seem to be getting smaller than the original proposal.  It seems no proposition was ever put forward to include all the traders.  When the market moved it was downsized and when it moves back to its original site it will be even smaller. It seems the council are not listening to the public who want a bigger market.  As it stands the proposal makes our market the size of Grantham’s and they are trying to develop theirs whereas we seem not to want one.”

The following question was presented to the Commission by Mr Nick Wynd:

Plans for the marketplace seem to be getting smaller than the original proposal. It seems no proposition was ever put forward to include all the traders. When the market moved it was downsized and when it moves back to its original site it will be even smaller. It seems the council are not listening to the public who want a bigger market. As it stands the proposal makes our market the size of Grantham’s and they are trying to develop theirs whereas we seem not to want one.

In response to the question and a supplementary question, the Head of Economic Development noted that:

• The Market Scheme was generating lots of interest.
• A public consultation had been undertaken.  This had closed on 9^th December 2024 and had received over 1600 responses with a range of views.  The findings from the consultation were currently being analysed.  The main comments of the questioner had also been submitted as part of the consultation.
• In terms of the size of the market, the temporary market on Green Dragon Square had the equivalent number of stalls as those occupied in the old market.  The old market had a number of empty stalls, with around 250 stalls occupied across the week and the equivalent number of stalls were occupied in Green Dragon Square. The proposed market offers slightly more stalls than at present, and would allow for 288 stalls to be occupied across the week, 48 every day.
• In terms of accommodating all traders, the original scheme was still an option on the table for consideration and no final decision had yet been made.
• The precise configuration of the stalls had not yet been finalised as the scheme would first need to be confirmed, although it was thought that in the proposal with 48 stalls, these would be divided into groups of four.
• There had not yet been a detailed conversation with traders about the size of the stalls in the current scheme being considered, but traders would be consulted in due course.
• In response to the points raised about Grantham market, it was noted that Grantham market only opened on a Saturday, with 30 traders each Saturday.  They were currently developing their market at a cost of £1.8m.  In comparison, Leicester City Council was proposing to invest £8-10m on the new Leicester market.  It was also noted that Grantham were also looking to create a flexible market space that could also host events and activities, which mirrors the proposed option for Leicester.
• As it was flexible space the proposed scheme would allow for speciality markets and temporary stalls in the adjacent space.
• The current proposal being considered was for 48 covered stalls with flexible space for other markets.

The Chair thanked Mr Wynd for the question and Officers for the response.

Councillor Rae Bhatia joined the meeting during the consideration of this item.

Any petitions received in accordance with Council procedures will be reported.

The Monitoring Officer reported that none had been received.

The Director of Finance submits a draft report proposing the General Revenue Budget for 2025/26.

Members of the Commission will be asked to consider and provide any feedback which will be submitted to the Council Budget meeting.

As the reports on the Revenue Budget and Capital Programme were related, they were taken as one item.

The Director of Finance submitted a report detailing the proposed Revenue Budget for 2025/26.

The Head of Finance (City Development & Neighbourhoods) gave an overview of the report, key points to note were as follows:

• The medium-term outlook was the most severe ever experienced. The Local Authority, along with many other authorities, would face increasing difficulties with budget balancing.
• The aim of the strategy was to balance budgets up to and including 2027/28.
• Some local authorities had already issued a Section 114 notice and, if successful, the budget strategy would avoid the same outcome for the next three years. 
• The decade of austerity up to 2020 was an influencing factor, during this period services other than Social Care had to be reduced by 53%. This had substantially reduced the scope to make further cuts.
• More recent cost pressures included Social Care and Homelessness, which were not matched by an increase in income.
• The Local Authority used one off monies to support budgets for this and last year.
• It was anticipated that there would be a new round of financial constraint following the Chancellor’s Budget of October 2024. Central Government understood the position for local authorities and some funding for deprived localities was anticipated. However, funding for protected services, local authorities usually fall within this category, was expected to be cut in the period to 2028/29.
• There were five strands to the strategy:

Strand 1: To release one off monies of £110m to buy time. This included £20m from earmarked reserves and £90m previously set aside to fund the current Capital Programme. This left a gap in funding for already approved schemes. Borrowing would be required which would cost the local authority £5m pounds in interest and debt repayments annually.

Strand 2: Included proposed reductions of £13m in the approved Capital            Programme to reduce the amount of borrowing required. The areas covered by this commission would include £1.3m reduction from not proceeding with the planned Malcom Arcade refurbishment.  A £3.2m reduction by not committing to any further city centre improvement schemes under Connecting Leicester. A £5.9m reduction from policy provisions including strategic acquisitions and Highways & transport infrastructure.

Strand 3: Included the proposed sale of properties to secure an additional £60m.  To use this for the budgets, permission is required from The Secretary of State.

          Strand 4: Was to constrain growth in statutory services that are under  

Demand-led pressure. Much work on this had already been done, cost growth had been reduced by estimates of £99m per year.

 Strand 5: Was to make ongoing savings to revenue budget of £20m per year.

• There was a saving target of £4m in the Planning, Development & Transportation Division and a savings target of £2.3m for Tourism, Culture & Inward Investment.
• Those savings would still leave an estimated gap of £90m in year 2027/28.
• The strategy did contain risk, for example if was difficult to predict what new pressures might  ...  view the full minutes text for item 118.

The Director of Planning, Development and Transportation submits a report summarising the delivery of the Ashton Green development programme and progress since the last reporting to the Scrutiny Commission in March 2019.

A presentation will be given at the meeting.

The Director of Planning Development and Transportation submitted a report to provide an update on the Ashton Green Development.

The Programme Manager for Planning Development and Transportation presented an overview of the report using the slides attached. Key points to note were:

• Outline Planning Permission was held for 130 hectares of land. This would enable the creation of up to three thousand homes.
• Local Plan examination was considering an eastern expansion along with plans for a secondary school.
• The latest phase of the plan consolidated the previous 15 smaller developments parcelled into 6 or 7 broader developments.  
• Regarding timescales, Morris Homes had completed 100 in late 2020 and Phase B, Tilia Homes would have completed 162 of 307 homes.
• The Morris and Tilia Homes would include 30% affordable housing.
• Morris Homes was the selected developer for Phase C. The proposal was for 440 homes. Planning Permission was hoped to be secured this year so that work could commence on site.
• Land had recently been taken to the market and there had been a positive response. This would be reported back at a later date.
• On the western side, Phase F had scope for around 915 homes.
• The high-level land use plan includes housing and large scale employment land.
• Green infrastructure including open space and sustainable drainage areas would be managed by the site wide open space Management company, Meadfleet Limited.
• Service payments would be taken from residents, this would pay towards managing the green spaces.
• The site wide masterplan had been updated bringing everything up to date and highlighting development already achieved.
• A significant amount of highway infrastructure had been delivered, about £25m since 2013. External funding of £10m had been secured from Homes England to open up land for 1,000 homes.
• £5m had been secured from National Highways towards the £10m Anstey/ A46 improvement scheme.
• Traffic calming measures, cycling and walking improvements had been put into place as part of this.
• In Phase A, Morris Homes had created an ecology area and landscaping area.
• There was some small-scale work with volunteers.
• Morris Homes hoped to be on site for November 2025 to commence Phase C. This would create 440 dwellings, of which 132 were allocated affordable housing units.
• In addition to the homes, substantial highway improvements were planned.
• It was acknowledged that overall timescales had seen delays. COVID had impacted significantly amongst other factors.
• Developer bids for Phases D and E had seen a good response and it was anticipated that partners could be announced by Easter 2025. This will enable the creation of about 525 dwellings.
• In 2013, land had been sold to Samworth Brothers who rapidly expanded the site. Around 750 new jobs being created as a result. The Local Authority had played a part in this by building a road extension to the site. It was hoped that similarly, there would be increased employment with future phases of large scale employment land to be released.
• The new Ashton Green Design Guide brought everything up to date  ...  view the full minutes text for item 119.

The Chair of the task group submits a report examining bus lane operating hours in Leicester. The Commission will be asked to note the report and support the recommendations set out in paragraph 1.2.

The Chair submitted a report providing an overview of the Commission’s examination of the policy regarding the operating hours of bus lanes in Leicester.

The Chair thanked the officers, members and stakeholders who had been involved in the review.

It was noted that once the report had come through the Commission, it would be presented to the Executive.  There would then be a timeframe for the Executive to respond.

AGREED:

1)    That the report be noted.

2)    That the report be presented to the Executive and the response from the Executive be brough back to the Commission.

Members of the Commission will be asked to consider the work programme and make suggestions for additional items as it considers necessary.

Members of the Commission were invited to consider content of the work programme and were invited to make suggestions for additions as appropriate to be brought to future meetings.

In response to a point raised about post-LLEP arrangements, it was clarified that other business support programmes were available.  It was requested that information be sent to all members so that it was known where support could be found.

The work programme was noted. 

There being no further items of urgent business, the meeting finished at 19:06.