Issue - meetings

To consider a report by the Leisure Centres General Manager.

Consideration was given to a report by the General Manager, One Leisure ( a copy of which is appended in the Annex to the Minute Book) outlining proposals to re-model the St Ives Leisure Centre. Executive Councillors were advised that the proposals were intended to reduce the Centre’s net operating costs and to increase admissions and participation levels to meet both Government and Council health agenda targets.

The Cabinet were acquainted with details of the four options for the future of the Centre and the rationale, financial implications and potential income level of each.

Particular reference was drawn to the proposed closure of the rifle range which had not been incorporated into the remodelling proposals. Members were advised that the area produced a minimal amount of income and that the Rifle and Pistol Club were not in a position to make a significant contribution to the cost of providing a smaller facility within the development.  Furthermore, Executive Councillors were advised that alternative target shooting sports clubs were being run in Yaxley and Cambridge.

Having received the deliberations of the Overview and Scrutiny Panels (Economic Well Being and Social Well Being) and in thanking them for their input, the Cabinet

RESOLVED

(a)  that option B for the redevelopment of One Leisure St Ives be supported and the Leisure Centres General Manager requested to issue tenders in respect of this; and

(b)  that following the final tender evaluation a further report be submitted to the Cabinet including an assessment of the business case and the social impact of the proposal.

To consider a report by the Leisure Centres General Manager.

(Councillor T D Sanderson, Executive Councillor for Healthy and Active Lifestyles was in attendance for this item).

The Panel considered a report by the General Manager, One Leisure (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book) outlining proposals to re-model the St Ivo Leisure Centre. Members noted that the proposals were intended to reduce the Centre’s net operating costs and to increase admissions and participation levels to meet both Government and Council health agenda targets. The Panel were then acquainted with details of four options for the future of the Centre and the rationale and anticipated demand for them.

In reviewing the contents of the report, Members commented on the timing of the proposal given that the Council was currently seeking to achieve significant savings over the course of the next few years. In response, the Head of Financial Services drew attention to the financial information contained within the report including the anticipated rate of return and payback period. Members were advised that the proposals were expected to turn the Centre's annual operating deficit into a significant profit within a three year period and would also contribute to the Council's budget reduction plan. Details of the expected financial contribution from specific elements of the proposal were tabled for information (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book).

Arising from the report the Panel raised a number of questions relating to the rate of return which had been achieved from the re-development of One Leisure St Neots, whether any investment should be undertaken if proposals to establish a Leisure Trust were to be pursued and the methods used to predict compound growth. Following a question about the component activities within each of the four proposals, the General Manager agreed to circulate the rationale behind the packaging of activities and the cost of individual elements within the schemes. Members were also informed that there was some degree of interdependency between some of the components.

Councillor M F Shellens stated that he supported the re-development but expressed concerns about its timing in the current economic climate. He suggested that it might be appropriate to delay the project to enable consideration to be given to possible changes in the future income forecasts. Members then queried the level of admissions that would be required for the project to break-even. It was suggested that this information should be included within the report prior to its submission to the Cabinet. It was further suggested that following receipt of tenders for the redevelopment a review should be undertaken of the building costs and economic conditions.

Other matters that were discussed included the efficiency and reliability of the heating and ventilation equipment within the existing facility and the timescale for their replacement, the activities of private sector operators within the District, the current capacity of the Burgess Hall and the potential for income to be disrupted during the construction process. Members also queried whether consideration had been given to the use of solar power, grey  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9

To consider a report by the General Manager, One Leisure on development proposals for One Leisure St Ives – “TO FOLLOW”.

20 Minutes.

In light of the proposed redevelopment of One Leisure St Ives and the consequential closure of the rifle range and associated facilities, Mr T Smith, Honorary Secretary of St Ives Rifle and Pistol Club addressed the Panel on the impact of the proposals on the Club.  Mr Smith outlined the history of the Club, which had been established in 1942.  The Club had been based at the St Ives Outdoor Centre.  It owned its own armoury and equipment and had moved to the present site in 1974 when, with the aid of a Sports Council grant, the specialised facilities required by the Club had been incorporated into the leisure centre.

Mr Smith explained that the club consisted of 62 members, two of whom were disabled. Although the possibility of moving to a new site had been investigated, no alternative facilities had been found.  Mr Smith brought to the attention of the Panel the Club’s recent involvement in providing target shooting taster sessions in association with the leisure centre, which had been oversubscribed.  He pointed out that, in addition to the disabled, the Club catered for several youth groups. This gave young people the opportunity to take part in the sport in a safe and secure environment. The Club had received many letters of support from national bodies and had been in contact with Sport England regarding the potential loss of the facility.  In closing Mr Smith requested the Panel to consider the cost of providing a reduced range area within the redevelopment of the Centre.

Following questions from the Panel, Mr Smith confirmed that the Club would be prepared to give up half the current range site if alternative plans could be made to remodel the area.  In discussing the existence of the stair lift in the facility, Mr Smith informed Members that the range had been recognised as requiring disabled access and the stair lift had been installed and maintained by the Leisure Centre.  Members of the Panel enquired whether youth groups would be able to access alternative clubs in the area and were informed that this would require them travelling to Cambridge or Yaxley where the firearms facilities were not of the same standard.  With regard to the Club’s search for alternative premises, Members suggested that the Police might be approached, whose range had been open to external clubs in the past, but had been closed to them for security reasons.

The Chairman thanked Mr Smith for attending the meeting.