Issue - meetings

Cromer Tennis Hub

 

 

Meeting: 23/08/2019 - Cabinet (Item 10.)

10. Cromer Tennis Hub pdf icon PDF 320 KB

Summary:

 

This report sets out the current position in relation to the Cromer Sports Hub and gives options for Members to take the matter forward.

 

 

Conclusions:

 

The options identified give Members avenues to either take the project forward in its current form or to withdraw from it. Members should weigh the relevant factors, including the financial, community and reputational impacts before reaching a decision.

 

 

Recommendations:

 

That Members consider the options set out below.

 

1.    To give delegated authority to the Head of Legal in consultation with the Portfolio Holders for Leisure and Finance to effect the necessary legal arrangements required in respect of the preferred option identified.

 

2.      If the decision is taken to stop the project, that delegated authority be given to the Head of Legal in consultation with the Head of Finance and Assets and the Portfolio Holders for Leisure and Finance to effect the necessary reserve transfers required in respect of the revenue funding requirements.

 

 

Additional documents:

Decision:

ITEM 10: CROMER TENNIS HUB

 

DECISION

RESOLVED:

 

1.           To give delegated authority to the Head of Legal in consultation with the Portfolio Holders for Leisure and Finance to effect the necessary legal arrangements required to terminate the contractual and other  arrangements in respect of the Community Sport Hub at Cromer and to continue with the satellite community tennis facilities as identified in the resolution to Council dated 21 November 2018.

 

2.           That delegated authority be given to the Head of Legal in consultation with the Head of Finance and Assets and the Portfolio Holders for Leisure and Finance to effect the necessary reserve transfers required in respect of the revenue funding requirements.

 

Reason for the decision:

Having weighed the relevant factors, including financial, community and reputational impacts it was considered that withdrawing from the project was the preferred option.