WYCHAVON District Council has said it needs time to get proposals for Droitwich Leisure Centre’s future right in a way which leaves a major impact on the authority’s CO2 footprint.
The current centre is more than 40 years old and no longer meets modern energy efficiency standards, with the building’s layout not fit for purpose in meeting users’ needs.
Last June a feasibility study into replacing the leisure centre was approved.
The development brief was to provide a fit-for-purpose leisure centre which supported the council’s net-zero carbon objectives, with the design team evaluating five sustainability options.
It was hoped the feasibility study would be complete early this year for consideration, but there has been further work required to ensure all the needed information was available for the council’s executive board to make an informed decision.
These have included a review of the potential for a refurbishment of the current centre and further sensitivity analysis on whole-of-life costs.
At an executive board meeting last Wednesday, members voted officers should bring a detailed options report to a future meeting.
At the meeting, Coun Martin King said: “Several options have already been rejected as they do not have any long-term impact on CO2, and officers and advisors are looking at the different available options.
“Given what has happened in the last six months with energy costs the question of whole-of-life costings on this building has become all the more important.
“It would be a false economy to build something that left us saddled with a massive bill for running it for the next 30 to 40 years.
“Hopefully when this comes back, probably early on in the life of the next council, we can talk about not just what we will be spending over the next few years but the next four decades.”
Coun Charles Tucker said after reading the report he felt the council had been ‘rather blind’ concerning embodied carbon as only two of the five sustainability options mentioned it.
“It’s all very well to be building something that will be using much less energy than current buildings but if you don’t take into account the embodied carbon in the potential construction and demolition you aren’t taking a proper view of the net-carbon savings.”
Coun King insisted from his discussions with officers, he knew embodied carbon had been an issue of consideration.
