To comment on the Cabinet report.

The Chairman introduced the Cabinet report regarding the full OJEU procurement process that had been carried out to appoint a development partner for Maidenhead Golf Club development project.

The Chairman summarised the report and informed the Panel that:

·         Section four showed the potential benefits of the project.

·         Paragraph 2.5 informed that the Cabinet Regeneration Sub-committee on 27 June 2017 delegated authority to design and commence a process to procure a development partner for the Golf Course.

·         Paragraph 2.6 showed the stages undertaken since authority to proceed was approved by Council in October 2017.

·         Paragraph 2.7 informed that the set capital budget had been used to purchase properties in support of the proposed development.

·         The procurement process was explained that resulted in three submissions being received from the three shortlisted developers.

·         That the submissions were scored by Savills and officers of the Property Company and moderated by officers and Gowling WLG.

·         The moderated scores and recommendation to Council were shown.

The Executive Director informed that Panel that a full OJEU procurement process had been carried out to appoint a development partner for Maidenhead Golf Club. Approval was now sought to enter into a contractual relationship with the selected developer.

In October 2017 Council approved the procurement route to select a development

partner for the future development of the site. The development of the site would

provide a range of benefits including in excess of 30 affordable housing, education

provision, community infrastructure, public open space, and economic vitality. The

Council would receive £235 million that when you included CIL and S106 contributions would be £300 million.

The report outlined the selection process and ratings used and would be presented to Council on 19 July 2018. It was noted that Members had not been involved in the

selection process.

Councillor Brimacombe mentioned that he was disappointed that no Lead Member had attended the meeting to answer questions on this important report.  He also mentioned that the report should have highlighted that the agreement with the golf club was dependent on certain conditions and that one of these was the Borough Local Plan (BLP).  It had also been reported in the local press that the golf club had yet to agree to move.  Affordable housing was mentioned within the report but the authority was yet to introduce an affordable housing policy.

In response the Panel were informed that all legal agreements were conditional and that this report was about the appointment of a development partner.  With regards to the BLP this was a risk that the Panel had discussed in previous reports and accepted.

The risk to the council was low as they were putting forward land and not money; the retained the asset.  The development partner carried the risk as they were investing money to get to each phase of the development. If the development did not go forward the council would still own the land.

Councillor Brimacombe also mentioned that there was a lot of talk by the Government about social housing vs affordable housing and that there was a risk that our stance may be different to Government Policy if we proceed so far down this route.  The Chairman replied that we could only do our best for the ratepayers and how the law stands.  The Council retained flexibility and any plans were subject to planning consent. 

Cllr Ilyas asked about the ratings for design and planning.  The Panel were informed that quality and price were looked at but design was given 40% of the weighting of all categories as it was important to get a high quality development and not just focus on the financial rewards. 

Cllr L Evans mentioned affordable housing and if this was detailed in the BLP.  The Panel were informed that agenda pack page 42 detailed requirements and how they needed to demonstrate the delivery of 30% affordable housing.  All the submissions went beyond this requirement and looked at the BLP and showed mixed tenure. 

Resolved unanimously: that the Corporate Services O&S Panel considered the Cabinet report and endorsed the recommendations subject to the following amendment, recommendation iii) be altered to say paragraph 2.24. (Cllr Brimacombe abstained from voting due to a declaration of interest).