Report of the Strategic Director – Growth and Development attached

This report sets out the feedback that the Council has received following consultation with residents, businesses, landowners and other stakeholders to the draft Eastlands Regeneration Framework and proposes a response to the key issues that have been raised within the consultation process.

The Committee considered a report of the Strategic Director – Growth and Development, which sought the Committee’s endorsement to the Executive’s approval of the Eastlands Regeneration Framework, following consultation with residents, businesses, landowners and other stakeholders.

The Leader referred to the main points and themes within the report, addressed the recent consultation undertaken by interested parties and also addressed the national press coverage in relation to the proposals. This included:-

·                Although this was an updated Eastlands Regeneration Framework, it was not fundamentally different to what had previously been considered and agreed;

·                An overview of the public consultation approach, with two specific matters that had drawn a significant interest –

·                the proposals within the Etihad Campus Commercial Zone Sub Area for a second large indoor arena; and

·                the proposals to bring forward a commercial led scheme – MXM – on Pollard Street, in and around the New Islington tram stop.

·                In relation to the MXM proposal, the Framework did not propose any changes to what had previously been identified for the use of this brownfield site, other than a specific proposal had now been received which was consistent with the existing Framework;

·                It was proposed that 50% of the land at Pollard Street would be green public space of high quality, including a linear park proposal. 

·                The MXM proposal would also create 2,500 jobs for the East Manchester area;

·                The proposal for an Arena within the Etihad Campus area was consistent with the Framework for East Manchester going back over 20 years, as a key aim of the Framework (historically referred to as Sport City) had always been to deliver a large scale leisure provision;

·                Any proposal for a large scale leisure provision on this site would be subject to a whole range of particular tests, including a significant ground transformation plan, a market analysis of sustainability;

·                Clarification on how an expression of interest in a possible Arena had arisen and that that there had been no planning application submitted for an indoor Arena within the Etihad Campus area; and

·                Addressing misleading information contained within a leaflet from SMG Europe (current operators of Manchester Arena), which had been circulated to residents in East Manchester which had had impacted on the consultation responses.

The Chair of the Committee outlined and clarified the purpose and role of the Scrutiny Committee in considering the report, reaffirming that the Committee was not scrutinising a proposal for a new arena as no proposal had been received, but rather it would concern itself with the decision making process, looking at the Council’s consultation on the Framework, how it worked, the feedback and responses and recommendations to the Executive.

The Chair of the Committee invited Mr John Sharkey, Executive Vice President of European Operations for SMG Europe, to address the Committee on the proposals within the Framework.  He set out the concerns SMG Europe had in relation to the proposals within the Framework.  The main concern being the inability for the Manchester market to adequately support two large seater arenas, which he advised had been supported by independent experts (Black, Grant Thornton and Oxford Economics), and the potential impact such a development would have on the existing Arena and other city centre businesses.  He offered to share the findings from the independent experts with the Council or alternatively suggested that the Council undertook its own independent assessment before including the opportunity for a new 20,000 capacity Arena within the framework.

The Chair of the Committee then invited Councillor Flanagan (Ward Councillor for Miles Platting and Newton Heath), Councillor Taylor and Councillor M Dar (Ward Councillors for Ancoats and Beswick) to address the Committee with their views and comments on the proposed Framework.  The key points referred to by the Ward Councillors included:-

·                The regeneration of East Manchester was long overdue;

·                Whilst the Council was required to maintain a neutral stance during any consultation, its position had been compromised by the misleading information contained within the information published by SMG, which potentially had a long term negative impact on the Council;

·                Ward Councillor were disappointed that they had not been engaged with by SMG Europe prior to their canvassing of East Manchester residents;

·                Whilst Ward Councillors would be supportive of a 21^st century world class sport, leisure and recreational offer and the associated employment opportunities this would bring for East Manchester and its residents, they would not be supportive of any development at the Etihad Campus which would have a detrimental impact on congestion within their wards area;

·                It was suggested that the Regeneration Framework needed to take into account the commitment the Council had recently made in tackling climate change and reducing carbon emissions;

·                It was felt that Phillips Park should be included within the Regeneration Framework as it could be a key asset for the area;

·                There was concern about any potential loss of green space as a result of the Pollard Street development and assurance was sought that the Council would take all necessary steps to ensure as much green space was maintained; and

·                It was suggested that any development within the East Manchester area needed to be inclusive of local residents views and that they were given priority when it came to job creation and affordable homes in the area.

Some of the key points that arose from the Committees discussions were:-

·                The decision taken by Council to bring forward the target date to 2030 for zero carbon had major implications for this Framework and there needed to be detailed consideration around all aspects of how the Framework would be delivered, including the building of homes, energy use, the use of grey water and transport opportunities;

·                As there had been a 20 year ambition to regenerate the East Manchester area, had there been any viability assessment undertaken to see if there was an appetite for a second internationally significant venue and, if so, what the possible implications on local businesses and trade would be;

·                A Member expressed concern in relation to the potential “value loss” within the city centre if a new Arena was developed at the Eastlands campus due to its possible negative impact on the existing city centre provision and queried if any modelling had been conducted on what this would look like for businesses owners in the city centre;

·                Clarity was sought as to what was referred to in the report as market driven as it appeared to be contradictory at points;

·                How would the Council look to mitigate the negative publicity that has taken place so far;

·                How much of the ambition within the Framework is a reflection of East Manchester residents needs and wants;

·                Concern was expressed as to why had the Council only consulted with 4000 households whilst SMG Europe’s own consultation had been distributed to 5,700 households;

·                Was the MXM proposal in progress and if so what was the purpose in consulting on this;

·                It was felt that the comments made by Bridge 5 Mill around local and regional investment into the area and an over-emphasis on national and international investors, had not been properly addressed in the report; and

·                Had the meeting request by Hope Mill Theatre been organised yet and if so what was the outcome.

The Leader advised that prior to the Council’s decision to declare a climate emergency and bring forward the target date for zero carbon emissions, he had held discussions with the Strategic Director – Development and Growth and agreed that all future SRF’s should have our carbon ambitions as a key pillar and that when this Framework was to be considered by the Executive on 24 July, he would be proposing that it be amended to reflect this.  In terms of the Council’s ambition over the last 20 years to regenerate East Manchester, this had been based on detailed discussion with local communities.  Until 2010, there had been significant government support in terms of resource to have this level of interaction with communities in East Manchester.  However, from 2010, funding had been cut and as such had taken a significant period of time to be able to get the regeneration of East Manchester back on track.

The Committee was advised that Marketing Manchester had undertaken pieces of work on the impact of events on the overall economy of the city, which included hotel stays, the use of food and beverage outlets and retail.  They did not specify where the events took place, but had identified that the biggest single generator of footfall for these businesses was from football.

The Executive Member for Housing and Regeneration commented that there was a real opportunity within the Framework to deliver zero carbon in terms of housing supply and a new partnership between ManLife and Great Places would help deliver additional affordable and social housing as part of the New Islington area.

The Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing reminded the Committee that the Framework set out a broad vision for the Eastlands area and was not a planning policy document or site allocation document.  Fundamentally, if the Council was to go through a planning policy review, it would be at this stage where the modelling of the impact of a proposal such as an Arena would be undertaken or if an application came forward there would need to be a long robust process, including a market assessment and analysis which would include the impact on any other venues in and around the city centre.

The Leader advised that both the Executive Member for Leisure, Culture and Skills and himself had met with the proprietors of Hope Mill Theatre and there had been an agreement to work together in order to sustain what they have achieved.  In terms of the MXM proposal, there had been discussions taken  place around this development over the last 18 months to 2 years and it was expected that a planning application would be submitted later in the year.  He advised he was not able to provide an answer as to why the Council had consulted with 4000 households whilst SMG Europe had consulted with 5,700 but agreed that Officers would look into this and provide a response to the Committee.

Furthermore, the Leader advised that in terms of local and regional investment, there was a range of investment within the proposals.  In terms of businesses, MXM was very much based at local regional business rather than national or international businesses. With any investment there was a need to consider who invested, but it wasn’t often known where the money came from.  He added that there was a clear objective to have local, regional and national businesses represented in the East Manchester area.

Decision

The Committee:-

(1)       Endorses the recommendations asked of the Executive as detailed below.

The Executive is recommended to:-

·                Note the summary of issues and comments received from residents, businesses and other interested parties set out in Section 3 to 5 of this report and approve the suggested amendments set out in these sections to the final version of the Eastlands Regeneration Framework;

·                Approve the proposed approach set out in Section 3 of this report in respect of new commercial led opportunities associated with the Pollard Street Sub Area;

·                Approve the proposed approach set out in Section 5 of this report in respect of new commercial led opportunities associated with the Etihad Campus Commercial Zone Sub Area; and

·                Delegate to the Strategic Director – Growth and Development, in consultation with the Leader of the Council and the Executive Member for Housing and Regeneration, authority to approve the final version of the Eastlands Regeneration Framework, with the intention that, if approved, it will become a material consideration in the Council’s decision making as a Local Planning Authority.

(2)       Recommends that the Executive incorporates the Council’s carbon reduction targets into the final version of the Eastlands Regeneration Framework;

(3)       Recommends that in approving the proposed approach in respect of new commercial led opportunities associated with the Pollard Street Sub Area, the Executive agrees to incorporate the preservation and promotion of high quality public realm and green space within the proposals; and

(4)       Request that the Executive take into account the views of the Committee and Local Ward Councillors in respect of new commercial led opportunities associated with the Etihad Campus Commercial Zone Sub Area.

[Councillor Hitchen declared that she had a conflict of interest in considering this item as she was a member of the Council’s Planning Committee which potentially could receive planning applications in relation to proposals within the Regeneration Framework.  Consequently, she left the meeting during consideration of this item].

[Councillor Hacking declared a personal and no prejudicial interest in this item as he is a Governor of Manchester College and Board Member of the LTE Group].