Agenda item

The Committee received a powerpoint presentation on the development of the £6.7m Pendine attractor Project that including proposed delivery timelines, future governance options, high level financial forecasts, key actions and future communications.

The following issues were raised on the report:-

·       It was confirmed the provision by the Pendine Community Council for 10 overnight parking bays for motorhomes did not include parking for touring caravans;

·       With Regard to a question on the estimated additional £3.3m pa the development could generate for the local community, the Committee was advised that estimate was based on Visit Wales visitor calculations and related to three elements. The first was in respect of the fact each day visitor spent an average £23 per person and it was estimated the attraction could generate an additional 40,000 day visitors when fully operational. Secondly, overnight bed stay visitors spent on average £93 and an additional 6,500 bed night stays had been estimated. Thirdly, day visitors staying longer in the area would spend an additional £3-£5 p.p. on refreshments etc. Additionally, there was the wider tourism impact with a multiplier of 1.5 to 1 for every pound spent being re-circulated within the community.

·       In response to a question on the potential for linking the attractor centre with the facilities at the Outdoor Education Centre, the Head of Leisure confirmed that option was being explored especially with regard to the busy summer months;

·       Reference was made to the proposed Joint Management Arrangement with the Pendine Community Council. It was confirmed any surplus income generated by the centre would be ring-fenced for the regeneration of Pendine. If that Agreement were to cease, any surplus would be split between the County Council and the Community Council pro rata set against the level of investment by each party.

·       Reference was made to the future management arrangements for the Hostel and to whether it would be possible for it to be utilised for other purposes, for example, educational by teaching people how to operate catering establishments.

The Head of Leisure confirmed that alternative uses for the centre had been examined for example providing accommodation for the Outdoor Education Centre but that could almost then become an educational provision, which was a statutory function.  Other potential uses included respite provision for social care and tourism etc. However, one of the issues with the centre’s operation related to what the Council, as a local authority could do itself, or as part of a JMA with the community council, and legal clarification was currently being sought on that aspect.

With regard to the hostels’ future management arrangements, discussions were on-going on that either being in-house or via a third party and the council would be undertaking a marketing exercise to test the level of interest. If the Council were to operate the hostel itself, the potential existed for both increased revenue and risk. If the 3^rd party option was pursed, any agreement would need to include financial considerations such as profit share or rental arrangements. The Council would retain ownership of the asset, as landlord, and the operator being the tenants would have maintenance and operational responsibilities. Both options had been subject to financial modelling and were viable.

UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED that the report be received.