Agenda item

The Panel received a report which detailed progress with proposals for the St George’s Guildhall Complex and the submission of a grant to the Heritage Lottery Fund.

The Executive Director reminded the Panel that they had received information on the project and this was an update before the Heritage Lottery Fund Stage 1 application was submitted.  He explained that since their last update a consultation exercise had been carried out, the results of which had been included in the agenda.  He highlighted that there had been some negative responses to the consultation, predominantly relating to the seating numbers for the Guildhall.  The Executive Director explained that meetings had been held with representatives from the main user groups which had been beneficial in setting out proposed options for seating arrangements.  The favoured option which was being looked at was to have half of the auditorium as fixed tiered seating and half with removable seating.  This option would provide the seating capacity requested by the user groups as well as the flexibility to offer different seating arrangements for smaller performances.  The flat floor area would give much greater flexibility in use of the Guildhall particularly for daytime activities.

The Executive Director referred to the report which provided details of previous studies on the Arts Centre over the last 17 years.  He explained that it was unnecessary to bring in more consultants to carry out work which had already been done, so elements of previous studies had been incorporated into the scheme.

The Principal Project Surveyor provided the Panel with details of the project and proposed plans.  He explained that an initial project enquiry had been submitted to the Heritage Lottery Fund and favourable feedback had been received.  Historic England had also been consulted on the project.  The Panel was informed that the project included installation of a lift and a glass structure to link all of the spaces.  Options for the White Barn would also be looked at, although this was outside of the Heritage Lottery Fund application.

The Principal Project Surveyor explained that the next steps would be for the Project Team to work up the proposals and the Stage 1 Heritage Lottery Fund Bid.  It was hoped that the Bid would be submitted by the November deadline and if successful delivery of the project could commence in early 2019.  The Panel was informed that it was important that the Bid was of a high standard and included all the necessary detail.  If it was not possible to pull all of the information together by the Heritage Lottery Fund deadline it would have slip to the next deadline.

The Executive Director explained that officers had met with the Heritage Lottery Fund and Heritage England and received positive feedback.  Architects had also met with the Quantity Surveyors and estimated costs drawn up.  An estimated cost of £3m for the Capital works of the project had been calculated.  The activity plan cost would be approximately £300,000.  Work was still ongoing on costs as the cost of the project currently exceeded the regional grant threshold.  Other funding streams were also being investigated, such as Arts Council Lottery Funding, as some of the project costs were directly related to the Arts, for example lighting and sound equipment.

The Portfolio Holder for Culture, Heritage and Health addressed the Panel.  She explained that a lot of public consultation had been carried out, which was important.  Lots of information was made available at Heritage Open Day and views of visitors and residents had been obtained.  Lots of respondents said that it was important to conserve the Heritage of the buildings.  The Portfolio Holder explained that some areas were unused a lot of the time at the moment in the evenings and user groups had requested that adequate seating be provided.  The option being considered for seating provided a lot of flexibility and would hopefully result in increased use.

The Portfolio Holder for Culture, Heritage and Health informed the Panel that further meetings would be held with the main user groups so that they were kept informed of progress and their views taken into consideration.  She explained that the building was likely to require repair works in the future and without external funding support, the Council would have to bear all of the costs.

The Panel made the following comments on the proposals:

·         It was good to see the lift included in the proposals, which would improve access and hopefully result in more people using the facility.

·         Correspondence had been sent to all Members of the Panel relating to the Guildhall and the Portfolio Holder for Culture, Heritage and Health confirmed that she had responded to the correspondence and further consultation was taking place.

·         A strong Marketing Strategy would be required and the Executive Director explained that the Heritage Lottery Fund, after being made aware of the history of the site, had requested a strong Stage 1 Business Case and wanted to see lots of evidence.  The Executive Director explained that this was why it was crucial to get the Bid correct and if necessary delay submission.

·         A Designated Arts Officer may need to be considered.

·         There was lots of local people with local expertise and their input needed to be taken on board when it came to future programming.

·         Access to the Fermoy Gallery needed to be improved, as well as security and humidity, and then it may be possible to attract more touring exhibitions.

·         Consideration needed to be given to access to people with disabilities.  Councillor Bubb addressed the Panel under Standing Order 34 and explained that he was Chairman of the West Norfolk Disability Forum who could be involved in the project to ensure that it was all accessible to people with disabilities.

·         Details of the closure whilst the work was ongoing would be provided in the Stage 2 bid.  There could be implications for the commercial businesses on the site and these would have to be investigated.  Work was ongoing with Alive Leisure and Creative Arts England to ensure that there was a continuous arts offer during the closure period.

·         The idea of the glass roof was good and it was important to create a comprehensive area and linked up spaces.

·         The Interpretation Boards were welcomed as they would provide information on the history of the building.

·         The Panel hoped that the bid would be submitted by the November deadline as they all felt that it was important that there were no delays.

·         Decent toilets were requested and it was confirmed that these did form part of the project.

·         The main priority should be protecting the heritage of the building.  Secondly the priority should be to ensure that the site was commercially viable to reduce Council subsidy.

The Portfolio Holder for Culture, Heritage and Health informed the Panel that consultation with interested parties was vital and reminded those present that the Guildhall was a Grade 1 Listed Building.  Work with hirers would continue as it was important that the Arts Centre was fully utilised by local people.  She referred to the decreasing budgets available to the Council and explained that the building needed to be commercially viable.  It was also important that the space was flexible and accessible.  The Panel was also informed that visitors came to the King’s Lynn Festival from all over the world.

RESOLVED: The comments of the Panel were noted.