Agenda item

The Sports Centre report was introduced by M Brookes and Members were asked for any questions.

The Chairman read out the recommendations which are as follows:

·         That Committee endorse the Minimum Project Requirements as set out in paragraph 2

·         To note the governance structure, the consultation strategy and the indicative project timeline.

The Chairman said with that in mind does anyone have any questions.

Cllr Mahmood wanted to clarify if the new centre will be going on the site of the existing centre.  M Brookes confirmed that the old centre will remain open until the new site is build, so it won’t be on the exact same footprint, it will be within the same site envelope, but we are looking at moving it further down to where the 3D pitches are at the moment and utilising where the existing site is for car parking etc.  But that’s got to be developed a lot more and there is various ideas which will form part of that.

Cllr Mahmood understood that it was early days, but what we are saying we are going to do is take the building, build one next door and then knock the other one down, so in terms of built area, apart from the extra facilities we can have a very similar footprint to what we started with.  M Brookes said that was our thoughts but as the design develops we will come back and consider all the different options.

Cllr Mahmood mentioned that the construction status, demolition always comes with dust and noise and wondered if it would be worth adding that there will be a construction stage and a demolition stage which may impact the local community, so it’s something people can look at environmentally as it’s quite a nuisance for local residents.  Cllr Mahmood noted that Berkhamsted Town Council are a stakeholder who are actively involved, so hopefully the Town Councillors will have an input on the design and the local people, which is good to see.  Cllr Mahmood also added that in terms of recommendations we have been talking a lot about climate change, he can see sustainability is mentioned, and in the spirit of recent decisions, it should include sustainability including any climate change initiative which may help give us a greener building and more environmentally friendly place to have fun in.

Cllr Pringle noted the inclusion of the splash pool is considered to be an add-on, but isn’t essential to the plan and would like to say as someone who lives in Northchurch and uses Berkhamsted, it’s in incredibly high demand for children’s and babies swimming.  When her children were younger, we had to go to Hemel and if there had been a facility it would have been used more, on behalf of people living in the area, that’s something we would probably really like to be included.  However something that would be of great concern, you use the term the existing building and the envelope which will include the football pitches, there is one version of the proposal where that envelope will be extended into Lagley Meadow where astroturf and sports fields with floodlighting and I would like to raise at this point on behalf of my residents in Northchurch and also neighbouring wards in Berkhamsted, that this is likely to be met with a very high level of resistance from the local community.  Cllr Pringle wanted to set that in context, in Berkhamsted, although we are surrounded by idyllic rural settings, that isn’t actually part of the town and we actually have a very limited amount of green space for leisure, for dog walking, for recreation in our town and Lagley Meadow is somewhere I pass on a daily basis.  In the summer I see multiple families having picnics there, I see people exercising their dogs, it is a very very well used and loved space. To lose that to astroturf would completely change the nature of it.  I also imagine that such pitches, because they are right beside a busy road, would require quite high fencing, at the moment there isn’t fencing and it’s very accessible for children to walk across, it’s a well loved and liked area.  In the context where we’ve already temporarily lost our very highly valued moor to the temporary car park and the public reaction to that, she would suggest that this is something that really should be considered a non-starter.  The local people in Berkhamsted would object to having Lagley Meadow changed in any way, we need our grassy spaces, we need our free recreation areas and if there is any adaptation required to include the splash pool, perhaps consideration can be given to building up rather than building out, we could have another floor for example, I don’t know if that’s feasible within the costing, but I think the local community would much prefer that than have it spread out and take over our meadow.

Cllr England asked about the minimum project requirements that we are being asked to note, seem to me to be very much not substantial, the only one that seems to say anything, is the one which says there should be some green awareness, which obviously is very much appreciated, but the other requirements kind of go without saying and I wonder if there was any thought about making them a bit more specific.  M Brookes said there was and the report notes the stage we are at in the project, so they are not necessarily high level at this stage, but we will keep them under continuous review as the project develops and as we get further detail on some of these issues we will develop the MPR’s as well.  It’s kind of a starter at this point and will continue as we go along.

Cllr England suggested that room for population growth should be in there as the Borough will see a lot housing, if we now build a sports centre which is as big as the one now, then we are not going to match up to the needs of the community in the future.  Cllr England said that such a project requirement might call into question the site that we shouldn’t be putting it somewhere different.  M Brookes said that population growth will be something we will be looking at as we planned, whether it needs to go as an MPR is open to debate, but it’s definitely something on our radar.

Cllr Freedman mentioned to the Portfolio Holder that he was very glad that this is being presented as an early ideas stage, however he is aware that there are some quite advanced proposals out there, he didn’t know how official they are, but there is certainly enough there that get people worried.  The first issue is that we are talking about consulting a lot of people including Berkhamsted Town Council and some of the groups, can you give us some assurances that feedback from those groups will be taken on board and will affect the proposals.  We do have some negative history in the area of people being consulted on something when proposals are almost finalised and they haven’t been able to make any changes.  Cllr Griffiths said that obviously we will take into account the responses, otherwise it’s a total waste of Council Tax money to do it if you don’t take any heed of it.  You can sometimes have the effect that because people don’t get want they want, they think it hasn’t been taken on board, there’s been quite a few consultations we have done by this Council and it’s changed everything around, in Housing we pulled the whole project from the feedback on the consultation, so I don’t agree that it’s a done deal when we go out to consultation as from a personal point of view that’s a total waste of people’s money, also you are between the devil and the deep blue sea, you have to consult with something, you can’t consult with a blank piece of paper.  If at this stage we were saying it’s going to be this, this and this, then we would be getting criticism that you’ve already decided, so it will develop as consultations are had and meetings like this, but equally when we go to consultation, although it may look like we have an idea, we have to consult on something. 

Cllr Freedman wanted to suggest health impact assessments, which are part of what County are doing with their planning processes, this is primarily involved in community health, perhaps even before it’s required, we might want to target this as being one of the first buildings that we make a fuss about the health impact assessment that goes through on a building project, it just seems a very good way to flagship it. 

Cllr Freedman commented that he really appreciated that the environmental note is down there as an objective and he would like to flesh out a bit more information, assuming that the structure is going to be anywhere similar to the current structure, there is a huge amount of flat roof that everybody, well a huge amount of Berkhamsted residents keep asking why isn’t that covered in solar panels, obviously the reason why is that we don’t know how long that building is going to last, so any new building that goes up there, I tell you in advance if there is an area of roof space that doesn’t have a solar panel on it, I’ll be asking you why and that building footprint could be an energy generating asset.  The other thing to push back is astroturf, is a layer of plastic, great we can have some pitches, we want the facilities there, but I think there will be a lot of kickback if it’s astroturf, I think we have to look at different things, so possibly put no astroturf in the deliverables, but I’m quite keen to see energy generation asset as one of the key deliverables. 

Cllr Griffiths said that it may be possible to use the roof for a netball or basketball court, so we didn’t have to put them down on the ground.  You might imagine going over the side with football and certainly not golf.  People are going to come up with other ideas and that’s why it should be open and perhaps fluid at this stage, but I agree with you, we have to utilise the roof, it can’t just be a roof with nothing going on.

M Brookes added that we will be doing a full sustainability assessment looking at all the options, getting the appropriate consultants on board who have worked on these projects and there is quite a few examples now of high level sports centres, we are trying to copy them and lead by example.

Cllr Freedman confirmed he was very and curious to know who we have consulted with to get the list of provisions that have been considered within the space and in particular because the ones that has been seen has a much smaller pool, a lot of floorspace given over to other things like a spa.  Berkhamsted is not short of spas so why would the Council be prioritising a spa, he didn’t think there was anyone who was short of going to a spa facility.  I surprises me that we have prioritised that over things like the swimming pool.

M Brookes said that we haven’t prioritised anything at the moment, all we’ve really done is some block planning to see what we can fit on the site, we are working to blank canvas entirely on this.  A spa is option, it’s something we’ll look at, whether there is a business case for it and a market for it in the area, but at this stage nothing is really set down, these are just thoughts and we will develop them as we go through the consultation process.

Cllr Adeleke mentioned the internal project project board that has been set up and asked who this body is made of and how much the current employees involvement will they have with the project, also what is the guarantee that there will not be a repeat of what happened in Hemel Hempstead of these people losing their jobs.  M Brookes confirmed the project board is led by Cllr Andrew Williams and Cllr Banks, from a Portfolio Holder perspective, to cover off the two aspects in terms of sports development as well as the contractual services in terms of management of the facility and then there is a mix of officers from across the Council, all the disciplines including Matt’s team, from a sports development perspective, so we have a broad range of officers and Councillors on that Board.  In terms of the Everyone Active who currently run the Sports Centre, there will have to be a renegotiation of the contract, to look at their continued running and how long that goes on for that site and we will be looking at the terms for that, but again it’s very early stage.  In terms of staffing, we are not expecting there to be any real changes, the size of the facility is relatively similar to what we have at the moment.  Everyone Active have now been on board for 18 months so they have made a lot of the changes they needed to make operationally so we are not expecting there to be any massive changes as a result of this. 

Cllr Adeleke asked again how much involvement have the staff got with the current plan.  M Brookes said we’ve already met to look at this indicative facility mix, just to get some thoughts to see if there were major omissions, but as the project develops and as we go through the stakeholder consultation, we will continually referring back to the project board who will  monitor and agree key deliverables.  It’s very early stages, we’ve only had one meeting so far, but as time goes on it will be much more frequent.

The Chairman clarified that Cllr Adeleke wanted to know is that it’s not that long ago we had a similar situation with the Hemel site and one of the main concerns there was that there wasn’t enough expertise within the Council, obviously we have recruited a new member of staff but I don’t think this young lady wants to actually do everything, so the question you were directing is, given all the staff that they are there day in day out, that know the facilities, they know the users, how much involvement are they going to have in terms of ensuring there is enough expertise or have you got other people covering that.  M Brookes advised that we will have sports consultants, but we need to procure them as we are still at the feasibility stage at the moment.  We have an internal team, we have Victoria who manages the contract with Everyone Active, Everyone Active will be a stakeholder, so we will be talking to them throughout the process to make sure the facility meets up with what they think, the current user demand, so we are getting everybody we feel who has the relevant experience to take this forward. 

Cllr Adeleke said in layman’s language he is talking about the shopfloor workers.  V Coady said they wouldn’t necessarily be involved at this early stage in the consultation, this is for contract managers.  Cllr Adeleke confirmed he was not talking about their involvement in the Board, that is clear, I’m talking about what happens to their jobs in 2023.  V Coady said that there is a TUPE process but the view at the moment, again very early stages, is that they would just stop working in one leisure centre and move into the new facility.  The leisure centre will  be equal sized or possibly bigger depending on how the consultation develops, so there is not any anticipation at the moment that any staff would change in numbers.

The Chairman raised a declaration of interest as she is Chairman of Dacorum Sports Trust, they are not listed as a stakeholder but I do notice there is a TBC so declaring it in case they do become one at a future stage.

 Cllr Barry asked about Everyone Active keeping the contract because it links to accessibility and inclusivity obviously we want everyone to be able to use these sports facilities, it’s currently £43 per month and for a lot of people that is something to back away at, and was wondering if that sort of thing considered inclusivity, obviously I know it needs to make money, I’m not saying that, but if we want people, younger people as well, although I did read we had very low number of young people on average with the rest of the county, if we want people to be using these facilities, there needs to be an incentive and that costs more than a phone contract for some people.  Cllr Barry added that in terms of toilets and things if being gender neutral, could be a consideration for accessibility.  M Brookes said yes on both points, there is a balance with the pricing that has to be struck and it’s something we look at and any variation to the existing contract.  One of the project requirements is to create an environment which is inclusive and accessible to all users so that will be something we will consider as part of the plans.

Cllr England queried how strategic has this decision and process been, particularly with the loss of Lagley Meadows, we’ve been hearing in the discussions that we’ve had about the strategy and action plan, that actually sports and activity very much includes the green spaces and now here we are talking about possibly losing one, and secondly if we are hiring in sports consultants to advise the Council on what we should be doing around sports provision, does that not strike you as a little bit odd, this is really directed to the Communities Portfolio Holder, a little bit odd considering when we had a relationship with the DST we were getting all that in for the bargain.  M Brookes replied that Lagley Meadows is something we need to consider, but we are looking at all options for the site, but there’s no plans to redevelop Lagley Meadow.  We are going to look at all the options for the site to make sure we don’t miss anything off and all options will be before the public and stakeholders to look at and we’ll take on board any feedback.  In terms of the sports consultants, we use them to help with some of the stakeholder consultation to make sure we go out and talk to all the clubs, get all the feedback from the users that we need to hear from, so they do have an important role to play and give us that additional capacity to go out and make sure we are meeting everybody and getting all the comments we need to.  That does help us to develop the strategy, this matter has already been to Cabinet in terms of the options for the site and this was certainly the preferred option because it gives a site for the next 40 years and one that can be flexible enough to adapt to all the different user demands.  I think we have been quite strategic but we still have to keep developing that and making sure we take on board all the comments.

Cllr Banks added that from what she’s seen of the paper presented this evening and from briefings that she’s had, Berkhamsted Sports Centre at the moment is an old building, it doesn’t really meet a lot of the modern idea around sports facilities.  There will be some upheaval, because you can’t make omelettes without cracking eggs and she is really pleased to note Cllr Mahmood’s supporting comments around our concern about the environment and the impact on climate change, just to make sure that our buildings are efficient and give back, whether it be through energy efficient systems or solar panels to give back.  Cllr Banks understood that in the sporting community it’s something that is being really well received at the moment as a pen picture of what could happen and interestingly, noting your comments about residents views, she knew that the feedback from sporting community she has had is they are looking for as much astroturf as they can find, so that they can participate in sports activities around the year and not be subject to the seasons, so there’s a balance that needs to be struck and she absolutely accepts that, but this is a good first paper and welcome the discussion that we’ve had.

Cllr England wanted to point out that according to the action plan that’s also on the agenda tonight, we don’t have the results of the Watford and Three Rivers District Council led survey into indoor facilities, we have the outdoor facilities part, or at least that’s been completed, although we haven’t seen it yet, but the indoor part of things is said to be delayed for some time and that seems to imply it’s going to be like a long time, which basically means we will build a whole new sports centre without having done the survey to establish what kind of indoor facilities we need in that sports centre, so I think we need to stop and think about that.  Cllr England said his final question would be is he correct in thinking that the funding to build this sports centre is going to come from housing development or has he got that wrong.  M Brookes said that the funding hasn’t been firmly established yet, as to where it’s paid for, the full budget is yet to be considered.  Cllr Griffiths said it was fair to say that any housing on there would not cover the cost of this, it’s going to fall on the general fund. 

Cllr England asked for an answer on the survey question.  Cllr Banks said that he comment would be that’s exactly why this is an early paper and that will be part of the consultation process and didn’t think it would delay, we will seek advice and guidance from it.  M Brookes said that Knight, Kavanagh and Page, who are the appointed consultants did an early study, which I believe is the one that they are working on updating, have advised based on that study, but acknowledge obviously what’s developing, so we can take to Council the advice we are given on that.

Cllr England queried if they are doing a survey on the whole area in Watford and Three Rivers and Dacorum, the purpose of that is to decide strategically what kind of facilities we need, then we’d be mad to do this sports centre before we got that.  M Brookes confirmed that before we come out of the ground on this project, it’ll probably be 18 months to 2 years, so he didn’t know the exact timing for the study but I imagine it’s going to be a long time before that and as I said I think it’s the same consultants as well and we’ll certainly seek some clarification and get that feedback.

Cllr England said it would be good to go to Cabinet before that.  Cllr Griffiths confirmed if they are able to feedback in before we go to anything definite because the consultation itself might throw all sorts of things in, this is a very indicative general timetable, which is saying looking at development and design business plan after the consultation, September to December, but the consultation might throw up a lot, which basically says nobody likes it, nobody likes what’s been suggested, in which case September to December has just been blown out of the water, because you are effectively a whole year behind.  M Brookes clarified that the report to Cabinet is seeking the funding to carry out further studies and site investigations and the start of the stakeholder consultation.  Cllr Griffiths said that the consultation isn’t planned until October 2021 to July 2023 and even with the best intention we all know that will slip.

Cllr Freedman asked for confirmation following Cllr Adeleke’s question with regards to Everyone Active, so it sounds like there’s no way that anybody else would be running this for us, it sounds like your comment on TUPE of staff, you mentioned earlier we would need to renegotiate, what would happen is there any contingency on what would happen if we don’t reach an acceptable renegotiation.  M Brookes said if the re-negotiation breaks down we would have to find a new provider, so we’d have to re-procure for that site, that’s to stand alone outside of the existing contract.  As I say we haven’t opened those discussions formally, we are a long way off reaching that stage.

Cllr Freedman said would it be a right of refusal, we’d go to Everyone Active first and we’d only go to anybody else if we were unable to get satisfactory renegotiation.  M Brookes advised we are in a ten year contract for providing leisure facilities across Hemel and Berkhamsted, but in the original contract this was always contemplated as an option of a new centre, but it was on the basis that it would have to be re-negotiated at that time, in relation to Berkhamsted.  If we didn’t reach an agreement, the fall back would be that we would have to go out and re-procure.

Cllr Hollinghurst wanted to remind officers of the value of ground source heating.  Any building that is surrounded by playing fields or grassy areas of any sort or even a flower garden can provide heat from ground source.  Three Rivers House, the background heating there is almost entirely derived from the WWI memorial garden opposite, there is plenty of scope in Berkhamsted for ground source heating and it’s especially useful if you have a swimming pool because the low level background heating can be provided in major part by the ground source.  However if you go and wrap the whole of the surroundings in sheets of plastic, like plastic football grounds that is going to insulate the earth, you’ll lose the suns heat, so ground source please, but bear in mind if you put astroturf around it won’t work.  The other thing is the lights, I strongly believe that we should minimise our artificial lights during times of natural darkness, I would hope that we would not allow lighting after 10oclock at the absolute maximum.  People from Tring have historically used that sports centre and will continue to do so because the facilities in Tring are going to be limited by the schools use, and would like Tring Town Council to be a consultee.  The final point on the matter of housing and it’s contribution towards this project, surely Cllr England had been referring to CIL rather than houses on the site, because with the huge amounts of building that’s going to take place within the Borough, that will generate a lot of CIL and some of that quite justifiably could be used to finance at least part of this project.  M Brookes said the ground source heating will be considered as part of the environment considerations and we will be procuring some environmental consultants who will look at all the options, we’re not saying we are committing to it, but we will consider all the options.  Lights after 10pm, that will be a planning matter when we get to that stage, we are some way off that at the moment and Tring Town Council as consultee will be fine, we can include them in some form.  Also CIL contribution we will speak to the planning team to see if there is any possibility of that route.

Cllr Griffiths mentioned with CIL, are you wanting to put in the Town Council’s or Borough Council’s because there is no other CIL money that the Council get.  Cllr Hollinghurst said he was sure Parish and Town Council’s will in the future be only to willing to contribute to projects which they consider would benefit their people.

Cllr Stevens said that he was here this evening because of the interest that we are going to have on this project.  The report we have in front of us, just wanted to highlight that until we have seen this paper, the Town Council has not been involved in any scoping exercise or discussions prior to this document.  We have had a private meeting to be told what is coming down the track, the Town Council was issued with some documents which we showed at a Full Council meeting in November on a strictly confidential basis, so in terms of scoping we are coming at this very late in the scheme, although it might be at an embryo state and didn’t want Members to believe that we have been involved in getting to this stage in previous discussions. 

Cllr Stevens mentioned page 9 paragraph 4.2 where it’s referred to utilising the adjacent Lagley Meadow as part of the 3G pitch, we will have some concerns about this.  Some years ago when the Borough undertook an assessment on open spaces in Berkhamsted and the Borough, Berkhamsted was found to be about 70 hectares short of land for public open space.  We are planning to build a huge number of new houses in this area and over the years we have not seen anybody come through with plans to add to our public open space and yet we are contemplating building over what is a very popular open space which has got residential properties admittedly adjacent to it.  The prospect of having a 3G pitch there is totally wrong.  The next thing we are talking about is having high level floodlighting etc like we have in the other major 3G pitches.  Consequently I suspect where you’ve come forward with this idea, the battle we are going to have will be enormous and consequently I’m delighted to know that you will be consulting with us and I can tell you this item is on our agenda at Full Council on Monday and the Borough Council will be receiving a letter from us immediately afterwards.

M Brookes confirmed that the report makes clear you will be part of the full stakeholder consultation, so we will be inviting you to a formal meeting to sit down and discuss the opportunities for the sites.  We hope to get those initial invites out in the next couple of weeks.

Cllr Pringle asked if the accessible facilities and inclusivity would include facilities that allow toileting and changing, both wet changing and dry changing, for adults who need to use a hoist because she is aware there is a particular case where there are adults who cannot access in a dignified because they need to be changed by other adults, which involves at the moment lying on the floor in a non-private situation, so if we can aim for the absolute highest facilities in terms of that, I think the community would be very grateful.  Cllr Pringle added that another thing we could do in terms of environmental is to collect the rainwater from the roof and use it for flushing toilets and irrigating, hopefully there will be some flower beds and things like that around to make it look pleasant. 

Cllr Mahmood commented that it is a sports centre and it’s very important we consult existing users, people that don’t use it would like to see a lot of meadow and green land, but if you are a sports person you want to use a 3G pitch or something similar, it’s important that the sports people of Berkhamsted have the same facilities that we have elsewhere in the Borough, it’s a balance and important that we consult with existing users.  I’m a strong advocate for climate change but one thing we don’t want to do is, if we are building a hospital we want the best facility, if we’re building a sports centre we want a state of the art sports facility for the people of Berkhamsted.  If they need a 3G pitch it’s important that we compensate in other ways environmentally, I’m very anti-plastic but it’s in everything we have from the pen to the car, we need to minimise it but equally we want good facilities for the people of Berkhamsted to use, it’s no use providing a sports centre that ticks all the green credentials but does not serve its purpose, it will become another white elephant. 

The Chairman confirmed that the report had been noted and there have been a number of points for consideration to take back.