Agenda item

Local Growth Fund Round 3 and Large Local Major Schemes

To seek endorsement of the Local Growth Fund Round 3 (LGF3) and Large Local Major Scheme (LLMS) bid submissions to Government proposed by the Kent & Medway Economic Partnership & the South East Local Enterprise Partnership.

 

Minutes:

Cabinet received a report detailing the launch by Government of two new calls for project proposals that would help to unlock economic growth in local areas.

 

Sarah Nurden, Strategic programme Manager (KMEP) introduced the item for members.  In particular she referred to the following:

 

  1. That there were currently two significant funding opportunities available to the Council:

 

  1. In the first call, Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) were

invited to bid for a share of the third tranche of Local Growth Funding (LGF), worth £1.8 billion across England.

 

  1. In the second call, LEPs were invited to bid for a share of the Large Local Major Schemes funding, worth £475m across England.

 

  1. Ms Nurden addressed the LGF fund opportunity and reported that:

 

  1. The Kent and Medway Economic Partnership (KMEP) had met on 14 June and prioritised 34 business cases that had been put forward for consideration. The prioritisation exercise had taken account of various considerations including, value for money, deliverability, total match funding, and the wishes of stakeholders at sub-county level.

 

  1. 21 schemes were selected to be submitted to Government via SELEP.  Of those 21 schemes one had later withdrawn; East Kent Spatial Development

 

  1. The submission must be made via SELEP as Government had been clear that submissions from each of the federated areas would not be accepted.

 

  1. Ms Nurden then turned to the second opportunity, the Large Local Major Scheme (LLMS) and reported the following:

 

  1. That there was £475million available nationally and that SELEP had been invited to submit a web tag compliant scheme worth 75m.  A web-tag compliant bid was one which met the requirements of the Department for Transport and would be extremely resource intensive to produce.  However, an option to bid for development funding in order to produce such a bid was available.

 

  1. The matter was discussed at the recent KMEP meeting and it was agreed to seek improvements to Junction 7 on the M2, known locally as Brenley Corner.  Ms Nurden explained that Junction 7 of the M2 was located on the strategic European transport route of the A2/M2 that ran from the Port of Dover through to the Midlands and the North of England, via the Dartford Crossing but that the current configuration of the junction regularly created peak hour congestion as traffic on the strategic Highways England road network mixed with traffic on the local road network.  Improvement works to this junction were deemed critical to supporting any new Lower Thames Crossing.

 

  1. Ms Nurden continued; she explained that the purpose of the consideration of both matters by Cabinet was to seek endorsement of the list of bids, confirm that KCC would be willing to act as the accountable body for schemes within its geographical boundaries and that delegation of authority to the Council’s S.151 officer to write a letter of support for the bids and draw down funding should they be successful was supported.

 

The Leader thanked Ms Nurden for her introduction and her hard work in difficult circumstances.  He expressed disappointment that the federated nature of SELEP was not to be reflected in the way that Government would accept prioritisation of schemes and warned members that the order may change as the list progressed through the various stages required by the current structure.  He hoped that the South East would be treated fairly and that any contribution received would reflect the contribution that the area made to economic growth in Britain.

 

The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health, Mr Graham Gibbens spoke to the item, he welcomed the news that a development bid would be made to address the issues at Brenley Corner which he believed had worsened significantly in recent years.  As a result he believed that it was unrealistic to expect significant further development in the area of Kent beyond it; East Kent, until the issues had been addressed.

 

The Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport, Mr Matthew Balfour, also addressed the meeting.  He assured members that the Directorate was aware of the issues Mr Gibbens and others had described, but was also looking to the future.  When a new Lower Thames Crossing was built it would be necessary to relieve HGV pressure on the M20 through the A2/M2 corridor and therefore this and other issues with the supporting infrastructure must be resolved.  Strong representations to government and Highways England had been made to ensure that it was understood that a crossing alone would not be sufficient to alleviate current issues and cope with future demand but that the supporting infrastructure must also be fit for purpose.

 

The Leader agreed that this was a crucial issue for Kent, not only for the current enjoyment of the roads by residents but in order to facilitate future economic growth in the area and therefore the country.

 

It was RESOLVED that:

 

  1. The Local Growth Fund Round 3 (LGF3) and Large Local Major Scheme (LLMS) bid submissions to Government proposed by the Kent & Medway Economic Partnership be endorsed.

 

  1. That the proposal that KCC act as the accountable body for projects within Kent County Council’s geographical boundaries that are selected by the Government to receive LGF3 and LLMS funding be endorsed.

  2. That the proposal that authority be delegated to Section 151 Officer to sign on KCC’s behalf a grant offer letter or equivalent, where this is required to draw down funds following business case approval be endorsed.

 

The decision would now be considered by the Environment and Transport Cabinet Committee and on consideration of its comments and the endorsements of Cabinet the Leader would take a formal decision to agree the recommendations.

 

 

 

 

Supporting documents: