APPENDIX 1
Select Commission 3
24 March 2015
Minute Extract – Discussion of Water Meadows Play Development
The Chair introduced the item by explaining that a proposed Water Meadows Play
Development had been referred to Select Commission 3 at the Council meeting on
10 March 2015.
The Managing Director presented a report (attached) explaining the background of
the proposal:
1) On 31 October 2013, the Head of Regeneration, Leisure and Marketing took a
Delegated Decision to rationalise health suite provision at the Council’s leisure
centres and cease provision at Water Meadows Swimming and Fitness Complex.
The rationalisation case included the potential for an alternative (and more
sustainable) use of the health suite area in line with the strategic vision for the
Complex.
2) A proposal was later received from Mansfield District Leisure Trust (MDLT) and
Serco Leisure (the Trust’s Managing Agent) for the development of a soft play area
and café at Water Meadows in August 2014. The Portfolio Holder for Environment
took a Delegated Decision on 12 September 2014 and recommended the proposed
development to Council.
3) At Council on 23 September 2014, the proposal was not approved. Members were
concerned about the urgent remedial work identified for Meden Sports Centre
around the same time, believing that the Council should ensure Meden Sports
Centre was fit for purpose before investing resources in other leisure facilities.
4) Meden Sports Centre was reopened on 5 January 2015 with the remedial works
completed. As a result, the Water Meadows Play Development proposals were
revisited and the Portfolio Holder for Environment took a Delegated Decision on 27
February 2015 recommending the following to Council:
“That Mansfield District Council supports the play area and café development at
Water Meadows Swimming and Fitness Complex and provides funding from the
Leisure Management Reserve as identified in the Exempt Appendix to match the
Mansfield District Leisure Trust funding; and that the 2015/16 capital programme is
amended accordingly.”
5) Council considered the proposals on 10 March 2015 but members voiced further
concerns:
a) Members wanted to know the reasons for putting another café and play area in
the Water Meadows Complex when the last one couldn’t finance itself and was
closed down as a result.
b) Members wanted to know the exact costs associated with the new development
now and in the future.
c) Members wanted to know the reasons for entering into a contractual arrangement
with Serco (with a significant financial amount to be committed) when Serco
appeared to be anxious to pull out of the leisure services sector completely.
6) In light of these concerns, members put forward a motion to delay approval of the
proposals and refer them to Select Commission 3 for scrutiny. This was so Select
Commission 3 could review the appropriateness and viability of the proposals.
The Managing Director explained that Select Commission 3 must now review the
appropriateness and viability of the proposals by bearing in mind all of the attached
information (including the proposal report by Mansfield District Leisure Trust and
Serco).
The Head of Regeneration, Leisure and Marketing addressed concern a) by
explaining that the current aim was to create a large, interconnected ‘family area’
with Water Meadows and Titchfield Park included, and developing a new play and
café area at Water Meadows – which had received very positive feedback from
users during consultation – was an important part of achieving this. In addition,
Titchfield Park was not nearly as well-developed when the old play and café facilities
existed at Water Meadows, so the same relationship wouldn’t have been feasible.
The Leisure Trust had also completed a feasibility study to find out exactly what the
new development would require.
The Head of Regeneration, Leisure and Marketing further addressed concern a) by
explaining that the old Water Meadows café area was situated right next to one of
the swimming pools to try and create an ‘on the beach’ experience. However, the
close proximity made the café area hot and uncomfortable – which resulted in people
not using it and the café being unable to pay for itself. The newly proposed play and
café development would have its own dedicated area in the Complex (in the nowdefunct old health suite) and wouldn’t be situated next to a pool, and the play area in
particular would take advantage of a projected population increase for the under-10s.
The Managing Director added to the point about the old café by explaining that a
Delegated Decision was taken to close it by the Corporate Director for Housing,
Property and Operational Services (as the role was called then) on 27 May 2010.
The reasons for the closure on the decision notice were:
• The location is on poolside in a hot and humid environment and at the furthest point
from the entrance to the facility
• The performance of the café is poor and has been over budget for a number of
years despite efforts to address this
• There are a number of maintenance issues to be rectified should the café remain
open
• A survey of customers concluded that 75% used the facility only some of the
time/infrequently, and 65% felt the provision of a café was fairly unimportant/not
important at all
• The vending service within the facility has been enhanced
The Head of Regeneration, Leisure and Marketing addressed concern b) by referring
members to the attached exempt financial information, including: financial
projections for the proposed development, the investment requirements, a
competitor analysis and a business assumption. Members were also advised that the
Council’s contribution to the development would be funded from the Leisure
Management Reserve.
Members enquired if the chief objective of the proposed facilities was to make
money. The Head of Regeneration, Leisure and Marketing explained that while the
development’s ability to generate money would be important from the Capital
Investment Programme’s point of view, it was also important to enhance the
experience at Water Meadows and realise the ‘family area’ concept alongside
Titchfield Park.
Members enquired how profits following the development would be shared. The
Head of Regeneration, Leisure and Marketing explained that profits would be shared
three ways between the Council, the Leisure Trust and the Managing Agent (Serco).
The Head of Regeneration, Leisure and Marketing addressed concern c) by
explaining that although Serco Group Plc was in the process of selling Serco Leisure
Operating Ltd, Serco Leisure would find a private equity business to take it over and
its leisure delivery would continue. Essentially, Mansfield District Council’s 10 year
contract with Serco Leisure Operating Ltd would remain as normal regardless of any
changes made by Serco Group Plc.
Members referred to the exempt information and enquired why the Managing Agent
(Serco Leisure) didn’t appear to have the confidence to invest the same amount into
the development as the Leisure Trust and the Council. The Head of Regeneration,
Leisure and Marketing explained that Serco Leisure wouldn’t have sought out
funding to build the development if they didn’t have confidence in its ability to repay
any money invested.
Members enquired why Water Meadows had been identified for the development
instead of other leisure centres in the District. The Head of Regeneration, Leisure
and Marketing explained that in addition to the aforementioned points about linking
Water Meadows and Titchfield Park, Water Meadows was deemed the most familyfocused facility and therefore the most appropriate for the development.
Members referred to a series of recent reports by Disability Nottinghamshire which
had audited disability access at some of the District’s leisure facilities: Water
Meadows, Rebecca Adlington Swimming Centre, Oak Tree Leisure Centre and River
Maun Recreation Centre. Members felt that the money from the Leisure
Management Reserve should be prioritised for bringing disability access at these
facilities up to speed (to the standards identified by Disability Nottinghamshire)
before using it for the proposed Water Meadows development. The Head of
Regeneration, Leisure and Marketing explained that a fund put aside for
maintenance works identified at leisure facilities would leave a sum of £50,000 that
could be used for disability access improvements, meaning that the Water Meadows
development would still come from the Leisure Management Reserve. The
Managing Director added to this by explaining that the Council could prioritise
resources from other sources towards improving disability access at leisure facilities
if the £50,000 sum wasn’t enough.
The Head of Regeneration, Leisure and Marketing informed members that a costing
plan for bringing disability access up to speed at the centres audited by Disability
Nottinghamshire would be produced.
Members noted the answers given for the concerns raised, but still felt that finding
money for disability access improvements (in line with the Disability Nottinghamshire
audit report) should be prioritised ahead of providing a contribution for the
development, regardless of whether funds for disability access could be found from
other sources.
Members agreed that Select Commission 3 should meet again and revisit the review
once a costing plan for disability access had been produced and a site visit to Water
Meadows had been arranged. This would mean that the review would not be
completed before the next Council meeting on 14 April 2015.
The Head of Regeneration, Leisure and Marketing was thanked for attending and
contributing.
AGREED – That Select Commission 3 meets again and revisits the review once a
costing plan for disability access (for all of the centres in Disability Nottinghamshire’s
audit report) has been produced and a site visit to Water Meadows has been
arranged.