|
|
 |
| |
Sobell Leisure Centre |
SOBELL SUNK BY SWIM POOL IN SCOTLAND
£46m leisure centre revamp estimate based on Edinburgh scheme
A SECRET council report reveals how leisure chiefs based their claims it would take £46million to refurbish the Sobell Centre by comparing the job with work on a deluxe Olympic training pool in Scotland.
The Town Hall insists it is too expensive to refurbish the existing Sobell and instead Liberal Democrat council bosses plan to knock it down and build a new one.
But a leaked consultants’ report shows the crucial estimations were never based on the requirements of the Sobell.
Instead, they were rooted in the costs incurred refurbishing the Royal Commonwealth Pool in Edinburgh.
While the council insists the buildings are similar, refurbishing the Sobell would not involve bringing a 1960s swimming pool back to life.
The report – seen by the Tribune – shows consultants took the £2,500 per square metre cost of the Edinburgh pool as a guide and simply multiplied it to the size of the Sobell. After dismissing the £46million total as too expensive earlier this year, councillors decided only to consult on demolition and rebuild options.
The public was never told the figures were based on the Royal Commonwealth Pool scheme.
The warning note on the report said: “This cost must only be used for general guidance purposes. More detailed information must be developed… to ensure the accuracy of this figure in relation to the specific requirements present at the Sobell Centre.”
It goes on to suggest that as a minimum, a visual inspection, along with consultants’ reports, should be commissioned “…to enable a more accurate cost to be developed”.
The Town Hall refused to disclose this report to the Tribune last week.
The contents have outraged supporters of the refurbishment option, who now say the figures are meaningless.
They are calling for a new assessment to be drawn up based on the cheaper cost of refurbishing a dry sports centre, then adding the cost of building a new swimming pool.
Labour councillor Paul Convery said: “They’ve taken one very big number and multiplied it by another very big number and come up with a totally arbitrary number. This is a schoolboy howler of a mistake.”
Islington North MP Jeremy Corbyn said the figures were ludicrous, adding: “The council must explain why they deliberately put a completely incorrect example as their cost basis.”
Gordon Kerr, a director of England Squash, who campaigns for planning law changes to protect threatened leisure centres, said: “They’ve wasted every penny of the consultation. [Councillor] Ruth Polling must take responsibility for this as she deliberately kept refurbishment off the agenda.”
Architect Nic Bryant, of S&P Architects, confirmed the cost was based on the Edinburgh project, and that this was only a “pre-tender” estimate.
According to Mr Kerr, a refurbishment scheme could be completed for a maximum of £17million.
Mr Bryant added: “There’s a lot of variations, a lot of unknowns, so there’s a level of risk associated with the redevelopment of an existing building.
“We were planning for all eventualities. We were asked for an expert cost based on the work we were currently doing [in Edinburgh]. There wasn’t an emphasis on demolition for demolition’s sake.”
Leisure chief Cllr Polling said: “All leisure centres have similarities and differences but I don’t feel worried because the consultants are the leaders in this field. They use the industry standards. This is based on their very long-term knowledge of how leisure centres are costed both in refurb and rebuild and we’ve used their expertise.”
She added: “I’m charged with spending taxpayers’ money and we’ve a duty to be cautious and careful because all projects have risks around them.”
She said consultation “isn’t an issue that I intend to reopen”.
The report, drawn up by leisure consultants PMP, property advisers DTZ, and S&P, also revealed the development popular with the council would provide 267 homes. |
 |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
