|
9.1
|
Members considered a report of
the Executive Director of City Futures providing the context
for a recommendation to accept government grant offers from the
Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) of
£19,389,336 for Parkwood as part of the Levelling Up Fund
(LUF). This would fund the project through further feasibility,
design and delivery.
|
|
|
|
|
9.1.1
|
The committee heard that a
stakeholder group had been created and the first meeting had taken
place. There was still opportunity for others to join the group. An
area board would also be established and newsletters to update on
progress were being considered.
|
|
|
|
|
9.2
|
RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the
Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee:-
Approves Sheffield City Council acting as the
accountable body for £19,389,336 of Levelling Up Fund round 3
funding from DLUHC, in relation to Parkwood Springs, subject to the
key terms, responsibilities and risks in the final Memorandum of
Understanding being the same as those summarised in the report.
|
|
|
|
|
9.3
|
Reasons for
Decision
|
|
|
|
|
9.3.1
|
The preferred option, to accept the funding
and deliver the projects within the bid, takes advantage of an
opportunity to regenerate a key part of the city. The funding will
allow us to deliver improvements that residence, business owners
and other key stakeholders are keen to see happen and will make a
real difference to the local communities.
|
|
9.3.2
|
It is therefore recommended to approve
Sheffield City Council acting as the accountable body for Levelling
Up Fund 3 Parkwood Springs subject to the key terms,
responsibilities and risks in the final grant agreement being the
same as those summarised in this Report.
|
|
|
|
|
9.4
|
Alternatives
Considered and Rejected
|
|
|
|
|
9.4.1
|
Do nothing
|
|
|
|
|
9.4.1.1
|
Not accepting LUF funding would
mean foregoing the opportunity to deliver significant capital
interventions in Parkwood and the associated economic,
environmental and social benefits. No benefits would be delivered
along with no contribution to the Council plan.
|
|
9.4.1.2
|
If the proposed programme does not come to
fruition, the impact will be a continued decline in areas that have
already suffered years of economic and social deterioration. These
areas cannot continue to be ignored, if this funding is lost
alternative funding will need to be sought to allow the necessary
investment to be made to support the regeneration of these parts of
the city.
|
PDF 209 KB