Agenda item

Levelling up Funding and Identification of Council Owned Land, East Leake

The report of the Chief Executive is attached.

Decision:

It was RESOLVED that:

 

a)         the use of the Council-owned land shown in Appendix A of the report for the delivery of a new community hub including a health centre in East Leake, subject to relevant permissions (including planning) and surveys, be supported;

 

b)         the preparation of the LUF application to Government for funding towards a community hub and improved sports pavilion on Costock Road in East Leake be supported; and

 

c)         the inclusion of the value of the land shown in Appendix A of the report as match funding to support a LUF application, with the appropriate safeguards included in the agreements with partners, to ensure that the land is only used for these purposes be approved.

 

Minutes:

The Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Business and Economic Growth, Councillor Edyvean presented the report of the Chief Executive providing an update on the Levelling Up Funding application in relation to Council owned land in East Leake.

 

Councillor Edyvean referred to the Government commitment to the initial £4 billion Levelling Up Fund (LUF), highlighted the key headlines in the report and confirmed that the bid was being supported by Rushcliffe’s MP, Ruth Edwards.  It was noted that East Leake Health Centre was the oldest in the County and had been identified by the local Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) as requiring replacement.  Cabinet was advised that a site owned by the Borough Council had been identified as the preferred new site by the CCG.  Reference was made to the significant development that had taken place over the past few years, which had led to an expansion of the village and the infrastructure provision would need to increase to meet that greater demand. Although Rushcliffe was categorised as a low priority area, East Leake fitted many of the criteria to support a bid and the existence of the Levelling Up Funding allowed the Council to explore a wider project and make proposals for significant local infrastructure improvements, details of which were highlighted in the report.  Cabinet noted that there was Section 106 funding allocated for both the new health centre and to upgrade the existing sports pavilion, and that would be included as match funding within the LUF bid.

 

In conclusion, Councillor Edyvean stated that because of the timescales set out by Government, any bid would be submitted in the later round of bidding, as it was a requirement that any money made available had to be used quickly to deliver the improvements, and the Council was not yet in that position.

 

In seconding the recommendation, Councillor Moore was pleased to note that the Council would have the time to submit a bid at a later stage, when it was fully prepared. As the Chair of the East Leake Growth Board (ELGB), Councillor Moore stated that the need for a new health centre had been a top priority for that Group since its inception, and although progress had been slowed by the pandemic, this new funding opportunity would make a significant difference going forward.

 

In welcoming the bid, Councillor Brennan stated that it was important to look at the broader objectives of supporting the wider regeneration of East Leake and that the Council demonstrated that it was looking to the future.

 

It was RESOLVED that:

 

a)         the use of the Council-owned land shown in Appendix A of the report for the delivery of a new community hub including a health centre in East Leake, subject to relevant permissions (including planning) and surveys, be supported;

 

b)         the preparation of the LUF application to Government for funding towards a community hub and improved sports pavilion on Costock Road in East Leake be supported; and

 

c)         the inclusion of the value of the land shown in Appendix A of the report as match funding to support a LUF application, with the appropriate safeguards included in the agreements with partners, to ensure that the land is only used for these purposes be approved.

Supporting documents: