1

Report to Portfolio Holder for Finance,

Service Delivery & Improvement

xx November

2016

Subject: Local Infrastructure Fund applications: proposals for funding

Status: Open

Report Ref: N/A

Ward(s): Basing, Brookvale and Kings Furlong, Buckskin, Burghclere, Highclere and St Mary Bourne, Kempshott, Kingsclere, Norden, Overton, Laverstoke and Steventon, Pamber and Silchester, Rooksdown, Upton Grey and the Candovers, Whitchurch

Key Decision: Yes

Key Decision Ref: N/A

Report of: Executive Director of Finance, Service Delivery and Improvement

Contact: Lesley Murphy – Policy and Performance Manager. Direct line: 01256 845236, email: lesley.murphy@basingstoke.gov.uk Kate Sawdy – Senior Grants Officer Direct Line: 01256 845238 Kate.Sawdy@basingstoke.gov.uk

Appendices: 1. Table of recommended allocations

2. Scoring criteria

Papers relied on to produce this report:

Local Infrastructure Fund application forms and supporting documentation

SUMMARY

1. This Report

1.1 The purpose of this report is to present applications received in the most recent round of the Local Infrastructure Fund (LIF) and make proposals for funding.

2. Recommendations

It is proposed that the Portfolio Holder considers the information presented in this report and approves the following:

2.1 Funding of up to £953,400 is released from available LIF monies for the projects recommended as ‘Approved’ in the table in Appendix 1 of this report, subject to the conditions set out in Section 8 and Appendix 1 of this report being met.

2.2 No funding allocation is made in this round to Overton Parish Council for a car park expansion in Overton village, Overton, Laverstoke and Steventon ward; application to be deferred to the next LIF round, pending further assessment of need following the introduction of new parking controls in the village.

2

2.3 Section 106 capital contributions of £1,667 arising from Planning application BDB73890 (Open Space & Play Area Improvements) are released to contribute towards the cost of the Laverstoke and Freefolk Play Area project

2.4 The LIF scheme application process is further improved to ensure more robust projects that are better ready for implementation.

PRIORITIES, IMPACTS AND RISKS

3. Contribution to Council Priorities 3.1 This report accords with the council’s Budget and Policy Framework and directly

supports the Council Plan priorities of preparing for controlled and sustainable growth, improving residents’ quality of life and supporting those that need it.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Term Definition

LIF Local Infrastructure Fund

BDBC Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council

NHB New Homes Bonus

S106 Section 106 developers funds

HCC Hampshire County Council

EOI Expression of Interest

CDO Community Development Officer

FPO Facilities Provisions Officer

MAIN CONSIDERATIONS

4. Background

4.1 The LIF programme is funded by the New Homes Bonus (NHB). The council has allocated the majority of the NHB received to improving infrastructure; 20% of which has been supporting the LIF scheme.

4.2 The LIF scheme is intended to support projects that provide sustainable community infrastructure, which makes the most difference for local residents. There are currently two LIF application rounds each year.

4.3 This report considers proposals received in the most recent round of applications that closed on 30 September 2016

4.4 There is one application above £250,000 submitted in this LIF round. This is subject to a separate Cabinet decision and is not included in this report.

5. Proposed projects and LIF funding allocation

5.1 All LIF applications received in this round have been subject to review in accordance with LIF criteria and scoring that were agreed by Cabinet on 16 February 2016 (Decision Number KD962 CSDI – link to Cabinet report is here).

3

5.2 A summary of applications received and recommendations for funding is provided in Appendix 1. Consideration has also been given to the nature of the projects in relation to the priorities of the LIF scheme:

health and safety requirements

improvements to accessibility

modernisation of a current facility

extensions, new buildings or facilities to meet increased demand or proven deficits

5.3 Applications for infrastructure support that are outside areas of housing growth, or that meet the intention of wider borough benefit, have been considered for support as part of the ‘unringfenced’ LIF funding allocation.

6. Reflection on current LIF round

6.1 It has been evident from this round and the last round of the revised LIF scheme that a number of organisations are submitting applications at the last minute that are not fully worked up and do not include a full suite of the necessary supporting documentation, despite being provided with clear guidance notes.

6.2 There are issues around capability and capacity for several applicants and, although the Community Development team provide valuable assistance when possible, they do not have the remit or capacity to support every application in detail.

6.3 In addition, there are past grant recipients that have failed to make expected progress and are struggling to realise their projects due to a range of unforeseen factors, with the result that quotations can become out-dated and costs rise.

6.4 There continues to be applications seeking funding for items un-related to infrastructure improvements and, in some cases, routine maintenance.

6.5 On a more positive note, applicants to this LIF round will be potentially attracting £639,930 in additional partnership funding to the benefit of the borough.

Proposed application process improvement

6.6 To address the issues identified around developing projects, and with the aim of bringing forward more robust applications, it is proposed that the twice-yearly funding programme will incorporate an increased lead-in time for better quality applications. This would include:-

A fixed date for Expressions of Interest (EOI).

A discussion with the LIF Officer, and relevant Community Development Officer (CDO) or Facilities Provision Officer (FPO) where possible, to provide appropriate support and guidance prior to issuing a full application form

A twelve week period to develop the project and complete the full application form.

4

A progress meeting with the applicant’s CDO/FPO and the LIF Officer during the twelve week period to ensure they are on track and to address any issues that may have arisen.

6.7 All applications will be required to meet the deadlines set with the exception of LIF applications for emergency repairs, which will be considered on a case by case basis.

6.8 It is proposed that the next LIF round will open on 16 January 2017 with a deadline of 13 March 2017 for Expressions of Interest and 14 July 2017 for submission of full applications. Decisions should be announced at the end of September.

7. Corporate Implications

Financial Implications

7.1 The council has set up a LIF which now allocates 20% of NHB Grant to projects that improve community infrastructure in the local area. The total amount of unallocated LIF as reported in July 2016 was approximately £3.79 million.

7.2 In addition approximately £0.6 million relating to previously earmarked allocations in respect of Bramley Footbridge and Overton Riverside Walk projects has been released back into the LIF provisions budget which now totals approximately £4.39 million.

7.3 Of the available LIF, £3.0 million remains ring-fenced until March 2019 for areas that had housing growth up to October 2014. The balance of £1.39 million is available to support infrastructure needs in all areas.

7.4 If the proposals for LIF funding recommended in this report are agreed, specific budgets of up to £953,400 will be released from LIF provisions into the main capital programme, once any specific conditions attached to the projects (outlined in Appendix 1 of this report) have been met. If all approved projects as detailed in Appendix 1 are agreed, then this will leave an available sum of approx. £3.47 million for future allocations, of which £2.62 million will remain ring-fenced until 31 March 2019. However, there are additional projects that will be presented in a Cabinet report, which, if approved, will reduce this figure by approximately £460,000.

7.5 In addition to the above, Section 106 funding of up to £1,667 will be used to contribute towards the cost of the refurbishment of Laverstoke and Freefolk playground and equipment (see Appendix 1). If approved the following budget virements will be processed:

£661 Open Space Improvements (S.106) to LIF S.106 provisions. £1,006 Play Area Improvements to LIF S.106 provisions.

This funding will be released from LIF provisions into the main capital programme, once any specific conditions attached to the projects (outlined in Appendix 1 of this report) have been met.

5

Risk Issues

7.6 The general risk for the LIF is that projected costs may be understated or anticipated partner contributions may not be received, leaving a need for further funding. In order to mitigate against this, applications for funding need to demonstrate evidence of partner funding and that an adequate level of contingency is included within the schemes’ costings. HR Issues

7.7 All projects will be supported by relevant BDBC officers. Equalities

7.8 When considering the Public Sector Equality Duty and the impact of the proposals on the protected characteristics groups (Equality Act 2010), it can be concluded that they are positive for all groups and no issues have been identified. Legal Implications

7.9 The provision of grant funding to third parties is a discretionary function and the council must have a statutory power upon which to exercise that discretion. The Localism Act 2011 introduces a power of general competence; providing local authorities with the power to do anything that individuals may generally do. It includes the power for council to make grant payments to third parties. In exercising its discretion, the council must consider all relevant factors, including the grant application forms. In determining whether to agree to award grant funding to a third party the council must also consider, amongst other things, whether the application meets the criteria for funding, value for money of the proposed work to be undertaken, the benefits of the proposal to the area.

8. Terms and Conditions for all approved projects

8.1 Any funding agreed will be subject to such conditions as are appropriate in order to safeguard the purpose for which the funding was intended. For the projects included in this report, these include:

an agreement that the project will not require any further funding from the council after the stated project end date and that there will be no on-going liabilities to the council;

relevant Planning, Building Control, Property and other legal permissions being granted;

work being carried out and procured in accordance with BDBC standards and procedures;

plans for work being developed in consultation with relevant BDBC officers

relevant partner funding being secured (with a minimum of 10% or 25% depending on whether the project is in an area of housing growth or not);

on-going maintenance being carried out by the recipient organisation;

any outstanding financial information relating to the application being in order;

any other relevant supporting information and general LIF terms and conditions.

6

Any eligible S106 money, that is not accounted for elsewhere, being used first to reduce liability on the LIF fund.

Where relevant, additional specific conditions for projects are identified in Appendix 1 of this report.

9. Portfolio Holder Comments 9.1 Each of the approved projects represent a positive application of Local Infrastructure

Funding. They clearly have community and ward member support identified through consultation and I am sure will each contribute to the development of the communities that support them. I am, therefore, pleased to be able to fully support the proposals as laid out in this report.

10. Communication and Consultation

10.1 The LIF application process requires that Ward Councillors be consulted regarding their support for the proposals; all projects in this report have been presented to respective Ward Councillors. In addition, and where relevant, Parish and Town Councils have been asked for their views on the proposals. The decision-making process for LIF involves consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Finance, Service Delivery & Improvement (following, where appropriate, consultation with any relevant Ward Councillors, Portfolio Holder/s and/or the Leader of the council).

11. Conclusion

11.1 This report presents LIF applications received in the most recent round of the Local Infrastructure Fund (LIF) and makes proposals for funding. The projects presented meet LIF criteria and will enhance a range of community facilities across a number of communities in the borough.

7

Appendix 1 – Summary of LIF Proposals Received and Recommendations for Funding

Project Organisation Ward Ring-fenced LIF funds or LIF general fund

LIF £ applied for

Score out of 120

Approved or declined (including justification)

LIF £ recommended for allocation

Additional conditions of funding

Installation of Solar PV systems and low energy LED lighting at the Fieldgate Centre

Kingsclere Community Association

Kingsclere £0 ring-fenced LIF available in Kingsclere

£40,364 85 Approved – LED Lighting as this will reduce costs and improve energy efficiency for greater sustainability. Declined – solar panels at this time due to likelihood of repairs/replacement of roof by BDBC in the next few years.

Up to £17,000 Consideration of the possibility of installing motion sensors to increase energy efficiency

Provision of a multi-use, full size artificial sports pitch with floodlighting at Testbourne Community School

Testbourne Community School

Whitchurch £0 ring-fenced LIF available in Whitchurch

£200,000 99 Approved – will provide a flexible community facility that addresses current and future need, increasing the ability to participate in sport.

Up to £200,000 Requirement to ensure use of facility not limited to school users and the wider community will benefit.

Any available S106 money to be used to reduce the amount required from LIF

Refurbishment of Ecchinswell Village Hall including replacement of doors, windows, installation of a sprung floor and

Ecchinswell Village Hall Association

Burghclere, Highclere and St Mary Bourne

£63,100 ring-fenced LIF in Ecchinswell/ Sydmonton/ Bishops Green

£45,697 70 Approved – will ensure greater security and energy efficiency as well as a facility that is fit for purpose and better suited to current

Up to £35,000 Partner funding is sought from Greenham Common Trust.

Allocation to

8

re-decoration. needs. Declined - funding for general re-decoration as this is deemed a maintenance cost and therefore ineligible

cover up to 90% of total project costs.

Renovation of Mapledurwell pavilion toilet and changing rooms

Mapledurwell & Up Nately Parish Council

Basing £8,400 ring-fenced LIF in Mapledurwell

£5,090 75 Approved – will upgrade this facility to prevent it becoming unusable and provide more suitable changing facilities to support borough pitch availability.

Up to £6,200 (90% instead of 75% requested due to being in an area of housing growth)

N/A

Refurbishment of Mortimer West End playground and equipment

Mortimer West End Parish Council

Pamber and Silchester

£1,000 ring-fenced LIF in Mortimer West End

£22,000 70 Approved – will provide a new and revitalised play area that better meets safety standards and the needs of the local population

Up to £30,000 An additional amount of £8,000 has been provisionally added which will not be allocated if VAT can be claimed back.

A porch extension to Wessex Christian Fellowship Building

Wessex Christian Fellowship

Brookvale & Kings Furlong

£350,200 ring-fenced LIF in Brookvale & Kings Furlong

£65,000 82 Approved – will improve disabled access and provide storage that will free up space in the building and increase capacity for activities to meet the needs of a growing population.

Up to £65,000 N/A

Replacement of main front and back doors at St Mary Bourne Village Centre

St Mary Bourne Village Centre Association

Burghclere, Highclere and St Mary Bourne

£35,000 ring-fenced LIF in St Mary Bourne

£13,500 76 Approved – will address need to improve security and energy efficiency to ensure continued safe use and sustainability of the village centre

Up to £13,500 N/A

9

Refurbishment and upgrade of The Ridgeway Centre youth room to provide a more usable space plus replacement/ repair of heating and hot water system

Buckskin & Worting Community Association

Buckskin £3,200 ring-fenced LIF in Buckskin

£49,900 87 Approved – will provide a more usable space with flexible facilities that are better suited to local demand and an increased potential for income generation and sustainability.

Up to £50,000 N/A

Refurbishment of Laverstoke and Freefolk playground and equipment

Laverstoke and Freefolk Millennium Green Trust

Overton, Laverstoke and Steventon

£48,300 ring-fenced LIF in Overton, Laverstoke and Steventon Plus £1,667 S.106 funding (BDB ref:73890)

£27,623 71 Approved – will ensure playground meets safety standards and is fit for purpose, meeting the needs of the local population now and in the future.

Up to £30,667

£29,000 LIF & £1,667 S.106 (Additional funds included to cover adequate contingency).

N/A

Refurbishment of Oakridge Hall for All including kitchen, toilets, reconfiguration of reception area, flooring, curtains, Wi-Fi, re-decoration and furniture

Norden Community Association

Norden £13,600 ring-fenced LIF in Norden

£125,377 97 Approved - interior refurbishment work and fixed fittings to provide updated facilities that will attract a wider range of users and support the hall’s sustainability. Declined - general redecoration except in making good refurbishment of kitchen and toilet area. Furniture and equipment also declined as not part of fixed fittings.

Up to £107,000 N/A

10

Refurbishment work at Ellisfield Memorial Hall including kitchen, heating, circuit board upgrade and installation of a defibrillator

Ellisfield Memorial Hall

Upton Grey and the Candovers

£300 ring-fenced LIF in Ellisfield

£14,196 76 Approved – will modernise and upgrade the hall to ensure continued use and a workable central hub for this rural community

Up to £17,100 (90% instead of 75% requested due to being in an area of housing growth)

N/A

Provision of a sand-dressed astro-turf pitch at Down Grange Sports Complex

Basingstoke Hockey Club

Kempshott £32,000 ring-fenced LIF in Kempshott

£200,000 100 Approved – will provide a flexible sporting asset that will enable local, county and national provision for this increasingly popular sport as well as other sports. It also helps to address BDBC’s Playing Pitch Strategy 2015-26

Up to £200,000 N/A

Creation of ‘The Spinney’ woodland trail around the Rooksdown estate

Land Restoration Trust

Rooksdown £601,200 ring-fenced LIF in Rooksdown

£183,600 86 Approved – will establish a joined up woodland trail that enables facilitation of a range of health and wellbeing activities and improves connectivity and access to local woodland, particularly for those with access issues.

Up to £183,600 Appropriate legal permissions from land owners.

Creation of forty additional car parking spaces at Overton Hill car park

Overton Parish Council

Overton, Laverstoke and Steventon

£48,300 ring-fenced LIF in Overton, Laverstoke and Steventon

£76,800 60 Declined – deferred to next LIF round due to new parking controls being introduced in the village in November 2016 that may impact the proposed provision of 40 additional car

N/A N/A

11

park spaces. These parking controls have been implemented in consultation with the Parish Council to prevent all day street parking in the centre of Overton. BDBC will be monitoring the results of this over the coming months, including the effect on the occupancy of Overton car park. This will enable a better understanding of the resulting need so an application can be made in the next round for the most appropriate solution.

12

Appendix 2 – LIF Scoring Guidance

All schemes must meet the conditions noted and will be scored against the following weighted criteria. The weighting scores applications out of 100 but additional points are obtainable for projects benefitting areas of housing development.

Core Criteria Score

A. There is evidence of need and community support for the scheme. For example, identified in plans, via written public consultation or Indices of Multiple Deprivation

B. There is evidence that the scheme is an effective solution to address the need identified and demonstrates significant, long lasting impact on the local community

C. The applicant demonstrates financial need for the support (e.g. reserves levels) and that on-going costs for the project can be supported by the applicant (e.g. via trading, increased footfall etc.) or another responsible organisation (e.g. highways authority).

D. There is evidence that project management requirements have been considered and accounted for as part of a business plan

E. The scheme cost is justified by the benefits (i.e. demonstrates value for money) and capital cost analysis is evidence based and realistic

Scoring Criteria Score

Deficient – Response to the question significantly deficient or no response received.

0

Limited – Limited information provided, or a response that is inadequate or only partially addresses the question.

1

Acceptable – An acceptable response submitted in terms of the level of detail, accuracy and relevance.

2

Comprehensive – A comprehensive response submitted in terms of detail and relevance.

3

Outstanding – As comprehensive, but to a significantly better degree, or likely to result in increased quality, including improvement through innovation and strong likelihood of achieving great outcomes.

4

Weighting for the schemes evaluation is as follows:

Criteria Maximum score available

Criteria ‘weighting’ Total maximum value of score

1 4 X 6 24

2 4 X 6 24

3 4 X 5 20

4 4 X 4 16

5 4 X 4 16

100

13

Any application that scores 0 on any answer or 1 on more than one question will not be supported. Applications must also score at least 50 out of 100 from Part A to be successful.

Additional points

Applications may receive up to 20 additional points dependent on the extent to which a scheme benefits residents living in areas of housing growth since November 2009:

Scoring Criteria Score

The scheme is based in an area impacted by housing growth since November 2009

or

there is clear evidence that the majority of participants (over 75%) benefitting from the scheme reside in such an area*

20

The scheme is not based in an area of housing growth since November 2009 but there is clear evidence that a large proportion of participants (over 50%) benefitting from the scheme reside in such an area*.

15

The scheme is not based in an area of housing growth since November 2009 but there is clear evidence that some participants (over 30%) benefitting from the scheme reside in such an area.*

10

No evidence is provided, or information provided suggests that the scheme bears no relation to an area of housing growth since November 2009

0

* measured by information on current or future beneficiaries expressing written need.

FINAL SCORE

Core score (out of 100) =

Additional points (out of 20) =

Total Score