Cessnock’s new aquatic centre was back on the agenda at this week’s Cessnock City Council meeting – and was yet again deferred.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The council deferred plans for the new pool in November in order to explore options that didn’t require a special rate variation – after it was revealed that the preferred option at the time would require a rate rise of 5.5 percent over 15 years (at an estimated cost of $39 million).
At Wednesday’s meeting, council staff recommended upgrading the current pool in the interim and building a new pool at Turner Park as the long-term strategic direction, while undertaking further work to determine the scope, design and cost of a combined indoor/outdoor facility (with a 51-metre outdoor pool and a 25-metre indoor pool) costing up to $20 million (entirely or partly funded by developer contributions).
But the council voted to seek further information, with briefings on all of the options listed in the report; a site inspection of the Cessnock local government area’s current aquatic facilities and those in neighbouring LGAs, and a briefing on possible options for shared facilities.
Labor councillor Jay Suvaal moved for the deferral, which was supported 11 votes to one.
“No matter which option we go with, a new pool is going to be a significant cost to council and we shouldn’t jump in lightly,” he said.
Independent councillor Ian Olsen, who voted against the deferral, said the people of Cessnock have waited long enough.
“The new Maitland pool went from design to opening within three years...we have been talking about this for over five years,” he said.
“Here we go again – we know what people want, but we are going to defer it again.”
When the council adopted its draft aquatic needs analysis in September 2014, it stated a centre with a 51-metre indoor pool was the preferred option.
The first issue of a draft feasibility and design report for the centre was tabled in April 2016, and revealed the ‘high-embellishment’ centre with a long-course indoor pool would cost about $48 million.
When the report returned to council in November after its public exhibition period, council recommended the medium-embellishment facility (with a 51-metre outdoor pool and a 25-metre indoor pool, costing approximately $39 million) as the preferred option.
But the newly-elected council supported Cr Suvaal’s move to investigate options that won’t require a rate rise.
“I don’t want to support something that will put people’s rates up just for one project,” he said in November.
Labor councillor Melanie Dagg – one of nine new councillors elected in September – said on Wednesday night the councillors need to be fully informed about the options in order to make a responsible decision.
The council staff’s latest preferred option includes a 51-metre outdoor pool (with a boom that would allow it to be divided into two 25-metre sections) and an outdoor aquatic area with a splash pad, plus an indoor centre with a 25-metre pool, a learn-to-swim pool and a warm water program pool and spa.
The previously-favoured 51-metre indoor pool (advocated for by the Cessnock Pool Users Group) was found to have had a lower cost recovery rate than a facility incorporating an outdoor long-course pool.
Council will exploring a number of sustainable options, short and long-term, with a view of visiting nearby facilities in the coming months to gather more information ahead of making a final decision.
The report will come back to council within the next three months.
