Agenda item

To consider the report.

Requested that this item return in August ahead of the full business case being submitted to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport in September.

Steve Hughes, Programme Manager, and Liz Dawson, Service Director for Cultural Services, gave a report on the revised plan for the Octagon Theatre ahead of it being added to the capital programme.

During the discussion, the following points were raised:

·       Is there a specific reason Somerset Council take responsibility for the overspend of the project should it happen? The theatre is currently closed, and the risk does currently sit with this council. The officer responsible is confident it will not materialise and the reduced scheme can be delivered within the budget, and has a track record of projects delivered under budget.

·       Is the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) funding on the way? Town clerk is not aware of the status of this. We meet with the Yeovil Town Clerk on a weekly basis to talk about the devolution programme and where we are with the project. Can take it away as an action to ensure there is no confusion. The approach with DCMS is a phased approach, the outline business case has been submitted. There is a requirement for a final and full business case that will be submitted on time.

·       Paragraph 2.1 – the new scheme will be funded by DCMS, Yeovil Town Council, Grant Funded – is this not confirmed? Should the scheme go ahead, it will be funded by £10m from DCMS, £3.75m from Yeovil Town Council, and the rest of the funding is in hand.

·       There is no risk register against this project, so how can we have 100% confidence after a lot of building around the county has gone over budget? There is a risk register, and an Octagon Project Board. It has been scrutinised and if there are risks we are dealing with them. Any project has risks, but we have already done surveys and have a lot of knowledge. There are a large number of officers working on this, including experts on risk assessments. Once there is a final business case, we will be looking at governance, and there will be a high level of involvement from strategic asset management to ensure we keep on top of risks and deal with them appropriately. The recommendation today is only to add it to the capital build programme – we are not asking for money. This project will come back through the governance process.

·       Could we have a risk register? We will bring that next time this comes to committee.

·       There is in principal support from DCMS and Yeovil Town Council, and affordability is contingent on both these decisions. We won’t be in a position to run the theatre until 2026 – when will YTC take responsibility for it? What is the risk it stays with Somerset Council? There are ongoing discussions around devolution across directorates. Yeovil is a large package, and a lot of HR resource is being used. It is in everyone’s interest to get the deal done in the right and proper process. There is a lot that needs to be done. Can come back and provide more information on Yeovil devolution.

·       What are the essential differences between the original scheme and the new scheme? The original scheme added a balcony, increasing to 900 seats. This one doesn’t increase the auditorium size. This one doesn’t add to the overall footprint of the Octagon, apart from adding the fly tower. The original design was architectural, so this is scaled back.

·       What are the maintenance cost implications around the empty building? The cost when closed is lower than the subsidy when open – it is £140,000 per year closed, the subsidy when open was around £267,000.

·       The project can’t be micromanaged by the committee at this point. It would help to have a timetable put forward by the officers of expected milestones to be completed.

·       Why wasn’t the Outline Business Case added to as an appendix to the report? This can be shared with councillors. It wasn’t relevant as this is about adding it to the capital programme to enable further development at this stage.

·       One reason for not getting large productions was lack of seating capacity – will not increasing capacity undermine the original reason for doing this? This is a very different scheme, refurbishment rather than redevelopment and expansion. It will have an impact on income, but Yeovil Town Council have accepted the principal of devolution based on current costs.

·       How much have we spent so far in fees getting to where we are today? We will need to commission new architects, there will be new project management costs. The initial spend was £1.6m by South Somerset District Council. For the costs going forward it will be managed internally by a programme manager, and all costs will be part of the £15m outlined.

·       Historic Ticket Levy – this was used to support an internal loan to refurbish Westlands. Westlands has now taken up some of the work of the Octagon. What are the impacts? Octagon had a ticket levy for many years, £267,000 was the figure after income and levy to keep it operating. Westlands also had a levy but the position has improved and it is now supporting repayment of that loan. There is crossover in the two facilities, and both are now costing the council less. Ticket levy information is available in the budget setting papers.

·       What are the £140,000 running costs while empty covering? Outstanding utilities, insurance, heating and ventilation. A detailed breakdown could be provided if it is important to the committee.

·       We need to be certain this is something we really want to do and not prompted into doing because there is a large government grant available. As the theatre will be the same size as present, we need to ensure it won’t require a six figure subsidy for Yeovil Town Council. If it weren’t for the grant, we wouldn’t have closed the Octagon, so we would have had an aging facility that required capital and revenue investment, which would have been dependent on borrowing. This will protect jobs, promote tourism, and be good for the local community. It goes beyond just the money. If we do nothing at this stage we will be left with a build that is closed without an obvious alternate use for it. The £10m is for a cultural arts hub, which will be part of the cultural strategy.

·       For the fly tower – is it possible to add this without harming structural integrity? Not a structural engineer, but we will be employing one. There will likely be new foundations and a new steel frame to support the tower. The planning and design was completed for the original design. It will be done safely.

·       What is the timeframe? There is a critical path that can be shared with you. DCMS need to know costs, we need to go onto the capital programme to enable procurement and ascertain costs. We expect to go to DCMS in September. We have a positive ongoing relationship with them.

It was agreed that it would return to the Committee in August, ahead of the full business case going to DCMS in September.