Agenda item

The Director of Property and Construction – Dragonfly Development Ltd. presented the report to the Committee.

A Member asked if the changing of the materials at the Roseland Crematorium had changed the timeline of completion, and the Director of Property and Construction – Dragonfly stated there had been no material issues and other factors had affected the completion date.

The Chair noted there were three projects that were live, with the Woburn and Pendean project being held up by the possible Blackwell Community Centre.  The Community Centre had already been costed, but the Parish Council had chosen to not fund it themselves due to financial uncertainty and asked if this was resulting in cost increases for the Council.  The Director of Property and Construction – Dragonfly explained the final cost would not be known until completion but if the delay continued the site would take longer to complete and there would be a cost to having a site team present throughout.

The Chair of the Committee asked questions regarding where responsibility lay for the final decision regarding the Community Centre in Blackwell and raised concerns about the project being delayed to retain the community centre as part of the project.  The Monitoring Officer confirmed that the decision regarding the scheme in Blackwell was for Executive to take.

The Portfolio Holder for Growth explained the success of the project did not depend on the Community Centre being realised.  The Chair asserted it was having a negative impact on the project and needed resolving for the good of the taxpayer, and the Portfolio Holder for Growth agreed it was having a negative impact, but stated the Council was doing all it could to manage this; several meetings in the previous week of the Committee had taken place, though in the end it was not in the hands of the Council to resolve, only to manage.

The Chair raised questions regarding any conflicts of interests with the scheme. The Monitoring Officer explained that where any decision of the Executive had an impact on Dragonfly Development Ltd. or its management, any member of the Executive with an interest, by virtue of their directorship of Dragonfly Development Ltd., would need to declare that interest.

A Member asked how projects were chosen and by who.  The Chair stated it went through Council and the Director of Property and Construction – Dragonfly added a pre-existing list of potential sites would be brought forward by demand; if there was a need for a certain type/number of properties in one area, this was what drove certain projects.  The Member followed up by asking how sites got on this list, and the Director of Property and Construction – Dragonfly answered that Dragonfly Development Ltd. was building on land the Council already owned, but the Council did not own geographically favourable sites for building upon (e.g., large, open, flat fields).  Small sites already consisting of garages and/or spare land was typically patched together to create suitable sites for building. 

In answer to a question regarding the Roseland Crematorium, in particular about the contract sum being £450,000 over the original quotation issued, the Business Growth Manager  gave an overview of the costs involved for the Council and for Dragonfly as the contractor.  With market and inflationary pressures taking place, it was the responsibility of Dragonfly Management (Bolsover) Ltd. to reduce costs attached to the project.  This added cost covered the increase in risk, the contingencies, and general costs associated with the project.  Through value engineering, though, could the risk be reduced along with the overall cost.

Moved by Councillor Duncan Haywood and Councillor Jane Yates

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

The Director of Property and Construction – Dragonfly, the Director for Economic Development (Devolution), and the Business Growth Manager left the meeting.