The Head of Community Development introduced  a report summarising four options for Swanley Whiteoak Leisure Centre and outlining the impact of each option.  The Centre was built in the 1960s and it was now expected that major costs for repairs to the existing centre would be necessary over the next ten years.  The existing asset maintenance budget would not be sufficient to address these needs.  The report noted that the Centre was an important local facility and that it was necessary to consider options for its future.

Members noted the summary of the full Equalities Impact Assessment that had been undertaken.

Following detailed discussions Members agreed that, in light of the current economic climate, it was unlikely that Option One (do nothing) would be economically feasible in the future.

Options two (invest in the existing building) and three (replace the existing building on the same or a different site) were considered to be the most viable options and should be investigated further.  Members agreed that it was important to consider how these options could be pursued without the Council incurring further debt.

The Portfolio Holder for Finance and Value for Money highlighted that the current building was not fit-for-purpose.  In order to compare like-for-like costs for options two and three, costs associated with option two would also have to include the cost of making the existing building fit-for-purpose.

A visiting Member who was also a ward member concurred that options two and three appeared to be the most viable options and highlighted that the community need for a leisure centre had been proven.  The Member stressed the need for local councillors to be consulted on any further proposed options.  The Chairman agreed that it was essential that all local stakeholders were included in any consultation process.

Another visiting Member who was also a local ward member stressed the need for the new facilities to be flexible in meeting future needs and consumer demands.  If the building were flexible it was possible that the commercial possibilities for the Centre could be extended.

Another visiting Member highlighted the importance of considering the financial implications of any decisions that were taken that would incur additional expenditure.  The Member acknowledged that whilst the Council was currently incurring expenditure on on-going asset maintenance issues on a building that was not fit-for-purpose, it was also important to safeguard the local authority from additional future expenditure and suggested that option four (close the leisure centre) should not be dismissed if options two and three were found not to be financially viable.

It was agreed that Officers should be asked to investigate and explore all possibilities surrounding options two and three, consult with all stakeholders and report back to Members.  It was envisaged that this process would take between three and six months.  The Chairman requested that Officers narrow down the list of potential sites for a new leisure centre from the twelve that were currently listed as the investigation undertaken by Officers should give a clear understanding of the most viable sites.

Resolved: That Officers be asked to investigate and explore all possibilities surrounding Options Two (invest in the existing building) and Three(replace the existing building on the same or a different site), consulting with all stakeholders and report back to Members as soon as practicable.