Senior councillors have backed a £7 million proposal to build a new swimming pool in Brighton.
Officials are now expected to work with an external project team on a full planning application for the proposed pool at the Withdean Sports Complex.
The decision to go ahead with the five-lane 25-metre pool was made by Brighton and Hove City Council’s cabinet at Hove Town Hall yesterday (Thursday 17 July).
Labour councillor Alan Robins, the council’s cabinet member for sports, recreation and libraries, said that there was strong demand for swimming in Brighton and Hove.
Councillor Robins also said that there was a great deal of interest in the project, with more than 200 people attending an event about it and almost 1,000 responding to a survey.
The vast majority said that they would be likely or very likely to use a new pool at Withdean.
Councillor Robins said: “We know that the current demand for swimming in the city exceeds supply.
“And any closure or loss of existing facilities will result in significant pressure on the remaining facilities for use by the public and club swimming.
“As per the council plan, building a healthy city where people can thrive and also live and age well is a priority.
“Access to swimming as a multi-generational affordable activity is important to maintain the health and wellbeing of our residents as well as helping to tackle the health inequalities that exist in some of our communities.”
The Labour leader of the council Bella Sankey said that the new pool was “incredibly exciting” for Withdean which she described as a “buzzing” sports complex.
Councillor Sankey said: “It’s fantastic we’re developing such an innovative way to keep ensuring the city has the swimming provision it needs.
“Our younger people are able to learn to swim (while) we have as many facilities we can manage to finance and budget in the city.”
The Labour deputy leader of the council, Jacob Taylor, said that residents in his ward had asked him why the council was investing in the pool when finances were tight.
He said that the money paid by swimmers to use the pool would cover the cost of repaying the £6.5 million that the council intended to borrow to fund the project.
The council would also use nearly £350,000 of contributions from developers, handed over as a condition of their planning permission for other local projects.
A report to the cabinet said that the estimated cost of the project has risen from £5.8 million in January last year to almost £6.9 million.
The report said that the pool was expected to bring in revenues of £568,000 a year and – after repayments of £339,000 a year – generate a surplus of £229,000.
Councillor Taylor said: “The council is in a difficult financial position but what we can’t stop doing is investing in the future, investing in assets and facilities.
“(We’re) investing in things that might generate money in the future or save money so it is in that context that I am supportive of the business case and the overall approach.”
The cabinet vote yesterday means that the Withdean project team can push ahead and prepare the necessary planning application. Officials hope that it can be submitted soon.
Work could start as early as next January or February, subject to planning permission, and be completed in about a year.
The council is also looking to replace the King Alfred, on the seafront, and said that it was possible that Hove could temporarily be without a public swimming pool for a while.
In the meantime, feasibility work is also under way as the council aims to build a new swimming pool to cater for the east Brighton area.
What happens if the revenues don’t match the predictions? All these numbers are just figures in a spreadsheet made up of best guesses. We’ve been through this before with the i360 – and the surpluses promised didn’t arrive.
A swimming pool has more chances of success as people will visit more than once. But if it doesn’t work, will these councillors and senior staff pay the price? Unlikely. I’d like to see the risks in the financial models and best/worse case.
I also don’t understand why a private company hasn’t done this if there are such profits to be made. We know that private companies were interested in the i360 originally but pulled out when they worked out the risks. The council is gambling our money again – let’s hope they are better at it than last time!
It’s a reasonable question, and the honest answer is you can never be certain. You can make educated guesses based on research and data however, and even that data has a level of historic reliability to it.
Asking if officers and councillors would pay the difference is silly though, by that logic, are you also expecting them to take a share of all profits over predictions? No, of course not.
Many reasons why a private company hasn’t done this before, but I don’t buy the logic that because someone else hasn’t already done it, that must mean it is not worth doing. That doesn’t make sense, right?
I didn’t say that councillors or staff should make up any difference – just that there should be a price if their views were way too optimistic (as they were for the i360). How many staff have been disciplined, or demoted, or sacked for the i360 errors? I’m not aware of any and in the private sector a multi-million pound mistake would have serious impacts on your career. In B&H council that doesn’t seem to happen, just continue on until you get a gold-plated pension.
As for rewards for success, that is possible in the public sector. Bonuses are given. So if it was massively more successful, then there could be a reward for the team too.
Ah fair, when you said “will these councillors and senior staff pay the price?” – it came across as that.
For councillors, concequences are elections. And officers…well, you got me there, I don’t know if there’s performance related reviews. It sounds perfectly reasonable though.
Councillor Sankey said: “It’s fantastic we’re developing such an innovative way to keep ensuring the city has the swimming provision it needs.“ This statment suggests that Sankey doesn’t care where in the city this ‘provision’ is, for example, if the King Alfred is lost. Fascinating that the cost of this pool has already gone up by £1m since it was first announced. But make no mistake. It will take years to pay for itself. The design does not look built to last either. Plus didn’t the council claim it was facing bankruptcy last year? Does this mean it is now borrowing and trading while near-technically insolvent?
No, it doesn’t James. It means the council had to balance a very tight budget, which they successfully did.
EIther this Council has spare cash to spend or it doesn’t. They need to stop gaslighting us and be transparent. And also prioritise the boring stuff like fixing the roads and keeping schools and Libraries open as is their job as public servants.
ElaineB makes the same argument, and it’s just as flawed. Being in a positive current position but having a weak forecast can both be true at the same time.
Personal incredulity doesn’t equal gaslighting. Roads are incoming, we know there is ringfenced grants for this already; with a birth rate of 0.9 our school situation needs more intelligence than “just keep them open”.
Libraries are a much deeper question, are we protecting access to literature or is it more about protecting community spaces? And is the Library the correct paradigm?
Selfishly, I’m really looking forward to the pool at Withdean Sports Complex. I’ve always wanted there to be a pool there, and I’m glad about this. I’ll never be able to change risks, politics, decisions and budgets, but hopefully I will be able to swim at Withdean soon.
Nothing wrong with saying that you want something for the sake of just wanting it – it’s honest!
The revenue forecast is optimistic, especially for a 25m pool. There just isn’t the amount of space to support the figures. When times are hard we should be tightening our belts and I feel that we live on the edge of a great big natural swimming-pool and this waste of money could be better spent on access to the sea. (If you can push past all the drinkers and coffee stands.)
I use the King Alfred pool regularly and don’t understand why money couldn’t be invested in updating this pool. More cost efficient and in an accessible location. What is happening to King Alfred and the derelict land next to it
Because it was less cost efficient to refurbish it, according to the initial consultation reports, however, people did make their voice known, so the council is doing it anyway, even if it isn’t technically the best use of money.
The alternative is that they didn’t follow this and then get accused of not listening. So I don’t think there is much winning here – us public can be so unreasonable, lol.
Since Council has admitted a full structual survey of the King Alfred has never been done, it is sheer bunkum to suggest it wouldn’t be cost effective to restore the building.
I disagree. We know that it was already going to cost more, just based on the repairs we did know about. So logically, a full survey is going to tell us it going to cost same or more. Bunkum, it is not, James.
Well the bet on the i360 didn’t work so let us keep our fingers crossed that a bet on this swimming pool will generate revenue. I would suggest councillors should attend gamblers anonymous.
Swimming pools have good financial data behind them.