To receive a briefing on the progress of the Splash Leisure Centre Project.

The DS&GOS introduced the item and read out a statement that had been provided by the Cabinet Portfolio Holder for Culture and Well-being – Cllr V Gay, which is included below for reference:

“Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen

I am sorry that I cannot be with you this morning to report on the Sheringham Leisure Facility Project. Members will know that I was asked to report to Full Council on the progress of this project and that I did so. There were no outstanding matters from that night. I would like to thank Rob Young who is with you this morning to answer any questions which you may have.

You will note from the report which appears at Item 13 (p.73) of your agenda that the timetable for the work on the new facility remains on track and that the budget is unchanged. You will know too that North Norfolk District Council is due to draw down 97% of the money promised by Sport England and that the important risks to the project - the possibility that Splash might not last until the new facility is working or that there might be delays to the date of completion - also remain unaltered.

At our last meeting, we discussed a gas main which had been found in a place where it was not expected - the cost for the relocation of which was met by the original contractor responsible (with no impact on the budget or contingency).  There has been another case of this kind, but the re-siting cost will be met from the construction contingency fund. Rob will explain to you that we are reaching a stage of the project at which calls on this particular contingency fund are likely to tail off. The client contingency fund remains untouched.

In closing, I would add that the Internal Audit Report which was agreed for this project at Full Council in the summer will soon be complete. I have not yet seen the final draft, but I do not expect that the report will contain any surprises for members.

Thank you.”

Questions and Discussion

The HECD reiterated Cllr V Gay’s comments that the budget remained unchanged. On the gas main issues, it was reported that there was a review of liability underway, but the Council would still have had to cover re-siting costs even if its location was known. Members were informed that at present, the gas main has been sleeved so that work could continue until it could be relocated, hence there had not yet been any delays or additional costs, but the full picture would be known by Christmas. The HECD reported that the original gas main had now been fully re-sited with costs covered by the contractor.

The HECD reported that regular client meetings were now taking place on site, and that further communications were in the process of being agreed, with the contractor having completed a newsletter to be distributed amongst the local community. He added that the newsletter (circulated amongst Members) would provide a good update on progress, and that there were also plans to update the website to include time-lapse footage from the site.

In reference to the cost summary in appendix A of the update, the HECD stated that from his perspective, there was no cause for concern, as any additional costs and professional fees had been covered by the contingency. Reference was made to the apparent overspend of £1890, and the HECD stated that the project was at early stage and that minor variances would be expected within the cash-flow, but there was no reason to believe such sums would not be reconciled within the budget. It was reported that if there was likely to be any projected increases, they would be reported as soon as they were known.

Cllr G Mancini-Boyle noted that approximately £504k had been spent on professional fees, and asked if there would be any further costs. The HECD replied that no further costs were expected, and that all professional fees were now included in the budget.

It was confirmed, following a question from Cllr N Housden that costs outlined in the report had been factored into the £126k contingency. He then asked whether liquidated damages would be covered in the contract, if the project were to overrun. The HECD confirmed that this was the case, with any costs to be covered by the contractor or the Council, depending on the cause for any delay, it also covered the cost to the Council’s Leisure Operator, were there to be delays which caused them financial loss. The Chairman referred to the remaining construction contingency, and asked how comfortable officers were that it would be enough to cover any remaining risks. The HECD replied that the majority of risks arise from unknown site conditions, and hopefully these were now all known.

It was confirmed, following a question from Cllr N Housden that there had not yet been any delays due to poor weather, although cold could affect concrete once the project reached that stage and that these were covered within the contract. It was stated that any delays would be reported.

The Chairman asked Committee Members to consider whether they wished to continue to receive monthly updates on the project. Cllr N Pearce suggested that there was a cautious sense of optimism about the project, but recommended that monitoring should continue for the time being.

It was proposed by Cllr N Pearce and seconded by Cllr G Mancini-Boyle that monitoring reports should continue to be received on a monthly basis for the next quarter.

RESOLVED

That monthly project monitoring reports continue for the next quarter.