Agenda item

Considered

 

The decision of the Executive relating to the acquisition of Resolution House in Scarborough, drawing on the reports provided and officer responses.

 

The Chair invited Councillor Maw to speak to his rationale for requesting the Call In.  Councillor Maw outlined his reasons for initiating the Call In, seeking to ensure the council had adequate evidence before committing to significant capital expenditure and relocating staff.  He highlighted concerns about potential gaps in the Executive report, including reliance on an outdated EPC rating, the absence of detailed costings for adaptations to Resolution House and other buildings in the estate review and uncertainties regarding staff numbers and operational suitability.  He also questioned whether the urgency of the proposed purchase was justified and sought assurances that wider impacts - particularly on Scarborough Town Hall’s heritage, town centre vitality and economic activity - had been fully assessed.  Clarity was given that the concern was around completeness of information.

 

Councillors Donohue‑Moncrieff and Jefferson subsequently put a range of questions

and concerns to the committee as signatories to the Call In.  These included

concerns about the lack of early consultation, the speed of the process, and the

economic risks to Scarborough of removing staff from the town centre, in addition to

the accessibility of Resolution House and a desire to retain use of the Town Hall for

civic purposes.

 

Gary Fielding (Corporate Director, Resources) addressed a number of the issues raised by response, including reference to the fact that Align Property Partners had provided independent professional input and Resolution House was judged to be in excellent condition with superior energy performance.  Gary also highlighted that the site offered substantially better parking provision than the Town Hall as well as lift access.  Anglo American had indicated that some of their staff had routinely walked to the office from Seamer station so it was presumed that access via public transport was feasible.  It was affirmed that customer access in Scarborough town centre would continue through Castle House.

 

The Chair sought clarity on the further action to be proposed through the Call In.  Councillor Maw formally proposed that the matter be referred to full Council and was seconded in this by Councillor Jefferson.

 

The Executive Member sought to provide responses on certain points raised thus far including noting that an economic impact assessment for Scarborough was not deemed necessary when North Yorkshire House was closed and that Seamer station, based on Google mapping, is 0.6 miles from Resolution House (13-minute walk).

 

The Chair invited the Corporate Director to respond to the Member questions/concerns and the following additional points were highlighted:

 

·       the Town Hall is no longer fit for purpose for staff - evidential photographs of the significant deterioration of the site were displayed for the committee

·       the condition of the building has in itself led to dwindling staff occupancy

·       the choice for Members is either to spend £19m to bring the Town Hall up to an acceptable condition or spend £4.5m to purchase Resolution House.

·       Estimates suggest that the resulting loss of trade in Scarborough town centre would be a fraction of the cost to the council to provide ongoing maintenance of the Town Hall. 

·       Resolution House may also be attractive to certain partners looking to potentially co-locate and tentative discussions are underway. 

 

Committee members were invited to then discuss and debate the matter.  Discussion included the following key areas:

 

·       Members supporting the acquisition highlighted the serious deterioration of both Scarborough Town Hall and Ryedale House, noting long‑standing maintenance backlogs and poor working environments.

·       Several Members emphasised the need to maintain easy, accessible customer‑facing services in town centres.  Officers confirmed work would continue with partners to ensure visibility of services and to enhance the digital offer alongside face‑to‑face provision.

·       Strong concerns were expressed about the future of the Grade II listed Town Hall, with Members highlighting emotional, historical and democratic importance.  Members stressed the need for a clear strategy for the civic functions of the site, including potential transfer to Scarborough Town Council, which, unlike North Yorkshire Council, could access certain grants for its enhancement.

·       Members expressed dissatisfaction with how the proposal was communicated publicly, describing it as late, unclear and lacking reassurance about the future of the historic building.

·       The Corporate Director responded that alternative buildings options were less favourable and stated that the decision creates the opportunity to plan a proper masterplan for the Town Hall site.  Due diligence and condition surveys will be undertaken as part of the acquisition process.  Members were invited to note the strong carbon‑reduction benefits from reducing the estate and using more energy‑efficient buildings.  Gary Fielding also confirmed a willingness to work with Scarborough Town Council and community stakeholders on civic‑use solutions.

·       The Executive Member rejected claims of “hollowing out” in Scarborough, noting significant recent investment in Scarborough by the council.  It was acknowledged that communications could have been stronger but the time‑sensitive nature of the opportunity was emphasised.

 

Returning to Councillor Maw’s seconded proposal to refer the Executive decision to full Council, the Chair requested that a named vote be taken, with the results as follows:

 

Councillor Arthur	For
Councillor Baker	Against
Councillor Chance	Against
Councillor Goodrick	Against
Councillor Griffiths	Against
Councillor Heseltine	Against
Councillor Ireton	Against
Councillor Jefferson	For
Councillor Knapton	Against
Councillor Maw	For
Councillor Seston	For
Councillor Sharma	For
Councillor Trumper	Against
Councillor Williams	Against

 

There were no abstentions.  It was noted that the proposal failed.

 

The Chair moved that the committee endorses the Executive decision to acquire Resolution House and that no further action is taken as regards the Call In.  This was seconded by Councillor Ireton.  A vote by show of hands gave a result of eleven in favour and three against and as such was carried.

 

As a result, the decision made at Executive on 17th March 2026 came into immediate effect.

 

The Chair closed the meeting by noting that the next scheduled meeting of the committee would be 15 June 2026.