Agenda item

Click here to view a recording of this item on YouTube.

The Strategic Advisor to the Chief Executive and Leader presented the report and the preferred option for replacing St James Swimming Pool with a standalone facility beside Lynnsport, and the panel supported allocating £845,609.17 for RIBA stages two and three, subject to a future full business case and final go/no-go decision.

St James Swimming Pool was approximately 50 years old, increasingly expensive to maintain and approaching the end of its economic life, although it remained operational and subject to safety monitoring. Previous options to integrate a pool into Lynnsport were found to involve significant affordability, construction and disruption risks. The preferred option was a standalone pool adjacent to Lynnsport on the model railway site. The proposed facility would include an eight-lane 25-metre main pool, a four-lane 17-metre learner pool with a movable floor, a splash pad, sauna, steam facilities and spectator seating. The design would increase the main pool from six to eight lanes, provide greater capacity for lessons, clubs and competitions.

Councillor Moore requested a breakdown of the development allocation, the certainty it would provide, the robustness of the £22.93 million estimate, contingencies, borrowing, revenue effects, whole-life costs and the value of the work under local government reorganisation.

The Strategic Advisor to the Chief Executive and Leader explained the detailed breakdown and some contingency information were exempt, while the RIBA process was intended to establish the information needed for the final business case and go/no-go decision. Any decision would remain subject to consideration of the future unitary arrangements and consultation with successor councils and Section 151 Officers. The Interim Assistant Director of Leisure and Culture commented St James was subject to six-monthly inspections by civil and structural engineers, particularly because of problems in the undercroft. The building remained safe to operate, but its deterioration rate could not be predicted precisely.

The Vice – Chair, Councillor Long asked for assurance on the cost of the project. Officers explained the requested £845,609.17 would fund progression through RIBA stages two and three, including design development, technical investigations, surveys, planning and cost planning. It was included within an estimated total project cost of approximately £22.93 million but does not approve construction at this stage.

The Leader, Councillor Beales, provided assurance that the projected development costs were proportionate to the overall project cost. He referred to Local Government Reorganisation and the need to maintain business as usual, including the safe operation of St James’ Swimming Pool. He also emphasised the importance of keeping the shadow authority and future unitary authority fully informed as the project progressed.

Councillor Bhondi sought clarification how much grant funding was available for the proposed swimming pool. The Interim Assistant Director of Leisure and Culture commented potential funding routes included Sport England capital funding, place-expansion funding through Active Norfolk, devolution funding and health and wellbeing or preventative-care initiatives. Sport England would require the scheme to reach at least RIBA stage three, so no firm grant figure was available at this time but will be pursued after RIBA Stage 3 if the proposal is approved by Cabinet and Council. In response to a question from Councillor Nash, the Interim Assistant Director of Leisure and Culture added a standalone Sport England contribution might be up to approximately 10% in suitable circumstances, subject to national and local priorities, with other grants likely to be smaller or targeted at enhancing the facility.

Councillor Nash questioned further if other locations such as Nar Ouse Way or West Winch had been considered. The Strategic Advisor to the Chief Executive and Leader with further comments from Councillor Beales explained Lynnsport provided accessibility, existing infrastructure, shared staffing and operational synergies. Nar Ouse Way would involve significant challenges, including contaminated land and remediation requirements, access and new car-parking infrastructure. The requested development funding was specifically for the Lynnsport option and would not assess alternative sites.

Under Standing Order 34a, Councillor Ryves highlighted the risk of the new unitary following Local Government Reorganisation could decide to not proceed with the project. The Chief of Staff and Monitoring Officer highlighted this was included on the Corporate Risk register under Local Government Reorganisation previously presented to Audit Committee.