To consider the above report

Members considered approval for a capital budget of £30,881,000 to re-provide the Magnet Leisure Centre at Braywick Park to be added to the approved capital programme.

Councillor S. Rayner stated this was a once in a generation opportunity to build a new leisure centre whilst keeping the current centre open in the meantime. Capital receipts from the housing development on the old site would then pay for the new leisure centre. The architects had shared the council’s vision from the start of creating a beautiful building to enhance the parkland setting. The technical design would mean running costs would be 75% lower each year than current costs. Members noted the additional leisure offering included in the design, as detailed in paragraph 2.3 of the report.

Councillor S. Rayner explained that consultation had taken place with residents including an exhibition in the town centre and at the Magnet and letters to homes close to the Braywick site.  Sportsable, the Access Advisory Forum and local sports clubs had also been consulted. These discussions had led to changes including making the pool competition size, improved disabled facilities and a viewing court for squash competitions.

Councillor Werner commented that he would be supporting the proposal as it was the only offer available, but he felt it was not a good offer. People who could not drive would not be able to get there. An hourly shuttle bus services was inadequate. He had had many communications from people who wanted a town centre location for the new facility.  The proposals were just a bit better than the current leisure centre. He felt there had been no vision or ambition. The borough was an Olympic sporting borough and included Bisham Abbey and Eton College. The new leisure centre would not even have a proper swimming pool.

Councillor Dudley responded that feedback from residents did not reflect Councillor Werner’s comments. He highlighted that in one evening the council would be investing £56.5m in the borough.

Councillor Sharma commented that he had met many residents at the consultation event. A regular bus services would mitigate concerns. When a Post Office had been moved in his ward he found that those who were now closer to it were pleased and those a bit further away were happy to travel a bit further for better facilities.

Councillor McWilliams commented that this was a fabulous opportunity to build a new leisure centre. A joint Overview and Scrutiny panel had been held to discuss the proposals at which transport questions had been raised. A number of bus routes, cycle lanes and parking spaces would be provided.

Councillor D. Wilson commented that when he had first been elected in 1991 the council had been considering refurbishing the leisure centre at a cost of £7m. It was felt then that it was in the wrong location. Braywick Park already had a number of sporting facilities so was the obvious location. Bus links would be provided. The 8 lane pool would be extended to 10 lanes.

Councillor Love commented that when the old pool had begun leaking the previous administration had suggested it would need to be shut down for up to 18 months to be repaired. When he had become Chair of Leisure and Culture he had told officers this made no sense. Repairing the pool would cost £3.1m whereas a new pool would cost £6.3m. The current administration had looked at the numbers and considered the options. The Magnet was seen as one of the best run leisure centres in the country.

Councillor Brimacombe commented that he felt this was a fantastic project, which must be delivered on time and on budget. Much of the representation had been supplier side; he had not seen much user side representation. The cost plan would usually be accompanied by other project management documents.  He urged those responsible to ensure there was a proper programme management in place which represented both supplier and user side representation. Page 64 demonstrated this would be a phased project. He requested a report be brought forward detailing the governance of the project.

Councillor Da Costa stated that he was comforted that the paper had been presented to an Overview and Scrutiny Panel. However, again, he felt there was no discussion of how it would be funded and what effect this could have on spending in other areas. How did it fit in with the big picture? He requested confirmation on borrowing before the council realised other assets. Councillor Saunders confirmed that borrowing would be required.

Councillor Dr L. Evans highlighted that the joint Overview and Scrutiny Panel had looked at the proposal in detail. The new start of the art facility would be one of few public leisure centres with non-chlorinated water which did not affect those with skin conditions. Mechanical ventilation would ensure high levels of sustainability in terms of  energy use. She congratulated the team.

Councillor E. Wilson explained that he had visited the exhibition and heard people say that it was ‘all talk, no action’. The council had clearly delivered three times at this meeting. The proposal was a project delivering multiple outcomes for the borough, not simply the new building.

Councillor Clark supported the proposal to build a state of the art new facility rather than refurbish a tired old one. The regeneration programme would produce the funding to fulfil the ambitious plans.

Councillor Saunders referred Councillor Beer to the recognition four years previously that the Magnet Leisure Centre on St Clouds Way was approaching the end of its physical life and its structural integrity was coming into question.  It was decided then that two options were not credible. The council would not spend many millions trying to modestly extend the structural life of the existing buildings. It would not seek to demolish and rebuild on the same site because there would inevitably be a period of unacceptable closure depriving residents of the leisure centre for up to two years. A new leisure centre was therefore needed and the obvious place was where the other sports and leisure facilities were already concentrated on Braywick Park. The council had built into the conceptual design the capacity for those on foot, on two wheels, on shuttle buses and in their cars to easily access the new leisure centre. The initial design had been amended to incorporate issues raised by the swimming club and by a representative of those less physically able, increasing the capacity of the changing facilities.  The conceptual design also built in the risk of uncertain ground conditions. Initial tests had shown this was not an issue but 1% contingency had been included just in case.

Councillor Saunders highlighted that the governance of the project was already in place and the Programme Team comprised of the external experts, the responsible officers and the strategic and tactical leadership of Councillor S. Rayner, actively supported by himself.  The council had a responsibility to invest in the cultural and leisure facilities envisioned in the Area Action Plan, providing a collection of spaces which responded to users’ needs.

Councillor S. Rayner concluded that the proposal was a vision for the future of residents. A number of issues had been looked at, for example the council had consulted with SMILE to develop the scheme. An Olympic-size pool had been considered but Sport England had indicated it would not be supportive. Local clubs were happy with a competition size pool which they currently did not have. The council was working with Legacy Leisure to develop proposals on the operation of the new centre, however Legacy Leisure had not yet been confirmed as partners under contract. 

It was proposed by Councillor S. Rayner, seconded by Councillor Saunders and:

RESOLVED UANNIMOUSLY: That Councilnotes the report and:

i)       Approves a capital budget of £30,881,000 for the re-provision of the Magnet Leisure Centre at Braywick Park based on the cost plan, Appendix 1 (Part II).