Revamp of popular leisure centre receives £1million boost but faces delays of 3 months

10:00am Monday 22nd October 2012 in News By Jacqueline McMillan

Delayed: Waterside Farm set to undergo massive revamp Delayed: Waterside Farm set to undergo massive revamp

THE long-awaited revamp of a popular leisure centre will be delayed by three months and require an additional £1million of funding.

Castle Point Council was splashing out £4.1million to revitalise Waterside Farm Leisure Centre, in Somnes Avenue, Canvey to enable the Seventies-built facility to stay open another 20 years.

The massive renovation, which was scheduled to finish in May next year, includes a new open-plan glass entrance, extensive interior redecoration, redesigned changing rooms, and a new community and conference hall.

However, the official re-opening of the facility has been delayed until August after inspectors discovered that the pool roof needed to be completely replaced rather than just repaired.

Asbestos has also been discovered in areas which were previously not thought to be a risk, and this will now need to be removed and disposed of safely.

The new roof will cost an additional £600,000 and the asbestos removal £200,000, with an additional £200,000 also set aside for minor interior work.

Deputy Leader of the council, Jeffrey Stanley, said: “This is a complex piece of engineering work that will need to be completed prior to any of the other planned pool works.

“Replacing the roof now means we won’t have to close the pool again to do the works in a few years time. But it will involve an extension to the refurbishment timescale with the centre opening next summer rather than in the spring.”

Plans to make the leisure centre more self efficient by installing a 65ft wind turbine have been scrapped after the project was not deemed cost-effective.

The wind turbine, which would be a sixth of the height of those found on a wind farm, would have saved £8,000 and cut carbon emissions by an estimated 12.6 tonnes a year.

Dave Blackwell, leader of the Canvey Independent Party, believes that most residents will be pleased with the changes.

He said: “We all welcome the improvements at Waterside but it’s just a shame that it’s going to take a bit longer.

“Most people weren’t looking forward to seeing that monstrosity of the wind turbine as soon as they come onto Canvey. I would now like to see us look into having solar panels there instead as nowadays they can produce power throughout summer and winter.”

Comments (9)

11:35am Mon 22 Oct 12

Audioman says...

What a waste of money,pull it down and build some houses on the site.Far better than a leisure centre .
What a waste of money,pull it down and build some houses on the site.Far better than a leisure centre . Audioman

11:48am Mon 22 Oct 12

Aint it just the truth says...

Very nice for the people of Canvey but what about the kids from Hadleigh who have consistently missed out on the provision of facilities? Other areas including Waterside have 'teenage villages' and skate/bmx ramps and youth clubs, Hadleigh has NONE of these things so teenagers who are too old to keep locked up at home but too young to use licenced premises have nothing to do of an evening except wander round Hadleigh getting up to mischief.
Very nice for the people of Canvey but what about the kids from Hadleigh who have consistently missed out on the provision of facilities? Other areas including Waterside have 'teenage villages' and skate/bmx ramps and youth clubs, Hadleigh has NONE of these things so teenagers who are too old to keep locked up at home but too young to use licenced premises have nothing to do of an evening except wander round Hadleigh getting up to mischief. Aint it just the truth

3:27pm Mon 22 Oct 12

nicknows says...

The way this is going it would have been far cheaper and a lot quicker to have knocked the whole lot down and rebuilt.

'Asbestos has also been discovered in areas which were previously not thought to be a risk, and this will now need to be removed and disposed of safely. '

Why are they only just discovering asbestos surely this should have been found when the works order was drawn up in the first place!

'The new roof will cost an additional £600,000 and the asbestos removal £200,000, with an additional £200,000 also set aside for minor interior work.'

£200,000 for minor interior work. Thank goodness it is not major.

As to the delay of another three months this is totally unacceptable. I doubt if the facilities will be open until after the school holidays which will not only be a huge loss in income but leave 1000's of children without anything to do in the school holidays.

Just who drew the works order up in the first place 'Bob the Builder' springs to mind!!!
The way this is going it would have been far cheaper and a lot quicker to have knocked the whole lot down and rebuilt. 'Asbestos has also been discovered in areas which were previously not thought to be a risk, and this will now need to be removed and disposed of safely. ' Why are they only just discovering asbestos surely this should have been found when the works order was drawn up in the first place! 'The new roof will cost an additional £600,000 and the asbestos removal £200,000, with an additional £200,000 also set aside for minor interior work.' £200,000 for minor interior work. Thank goodness it is not major. As to the delay of another three months this is totally unacceptable. I doubt if the facilities will be open until after the school holidays which will not only be a huge loss in income but leave 1000's of children without anything to do in the school holidays. Just who drew the works order up in the first place 'Bob the Builder' springs to mind!!! nicknows

5:38pm Mon 22 Oct 12

upset says...

Why ask Dave Blackwell to quote?
It's a Tory council that the INDIES are always complaining about so get them to take the glory, dont always look for a negative angle in any positive Tory effort.
Why ask Dave Blackwell to quote? It's a Tory council that the INDIES are always complaining about so get them to take the glory, dont always look for a negative angle in any positive Tory effort. upset

6:29pm Mon 22 Oct 12

John T Pharro says...

Whether it would have been cheaper to demolish and start again I don't know, but your third paragraph about just discovering the asbestos is spot on. Surely it was up to the contractors to have checked this before submitting their bid.
Surely a contract like this must have gone out to tender and it is tough if they ultimately find problems that cost more should be down to them to pick up the bill.
This has shades of Sadler's Farm a contract with no penalise for failing to complete on time.
Whether it would have been cheaper to demolish and start again I don't know, but your third paragraph about just discovering the asbestos is spot on. Surely it was up to the contractors to have checked this before submitting their bid. Surely a contract like this must have gone out to tender and it is tough if they ultimately find problems that cost more should be down to them to pick up the bill. This has shades of Sadler's Farm a contract with no penalise for failing to complete on time. John T Pharro

6:30pm Mon 22 Oct 12

John T Pharro says...

John T Pharro wrote:
Whether it would have been cheaper to demolish and start again I don't know, but your third paragraph about just discovering the asbestos is spot on. Surely it was up to the contractors to have checked this before submitting their bid.
Surely a contract like this must have gone out to tender and it is tough if they ultimately find problems that cost more should be down to them to pick up the bill.
This has shades of Sadler's Farm a contract with no penalise for failing to complete on time.
This was a response to nicknows.
[quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: Whether it would have been cheaper to demolish and start again I don't know, but your third paragraph about just discovering the asbestos is spot on. Surely it was up to the contractors to have checked this before submitting their bid. Surely a contract like this must have gone out to tender and it is tough if they ultimately find problems that cost more should be down to them to pick up the bill. This has shades of Sadler's Farm a contract with no penalise for failing to complete on time.[/p][/quote]This was a response to nicknows. John T Pharro

7:22pm Mon 22 Oct 12

upset says...

John T Pharro wrote:
Whether it would have been cheaper to demolish and start again I don't know, but your third paragraph about just discovering the asbestos is spot on. Surely it was up to the contractors to have checked this before submitting their bid.
Surely a contract like this must have gone out to tender and it is tough if they ultimately find problems that cost more should be down to them to pick up the bill.
This has shades of Sadler's Farm a contract with no penalise for failing to complete on time.
I could not have agreed with you more on the last para, have you past out John!!!
[quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: Whether it would have been cheaper to demolish and start again I don't know, but your third paragraph about just discovering the asbestos is spot on. Surely it was up to the contractors to have checked this before submitting their bid. Surely a contract like this must have gone out to tender and it is tough if they ultimately find problems that cost more should be down to them to pick up the bill. This has shades of Sadler's Farm a contract with no penalise for failing to complete on time.[/p][/quote]I could not have agreed with you more on the last para, have you past out John!!! upset

11:38am Tue 23 Oct 12

Curbishly says...

" Surely a contract like this must have gone out to tender and it is tough if they ultimately find problems that cost more should be down to them to pick up the bill".

So the company goes bankrupt and cannot complete the job. Meaning someone else will have to be brought in and that will take ...How Long?

You're not very bright are you.
" Surely a contract like this must have gone out to tender and it is tough if they ultimately find problems that cost more should be down to them to pick up the bill". So the company goes bankrupt and cannot complete the job. Meaning someone else will have to be brought in and that will take ...How Long? You're not very bright are you. Curbishly

3:50pm Tue 23 Oct 12

Aint it just the truth says...

Curbishly wrote:
" Surely a contract like this must have gone out to tender and it is tough if they ultimately find problems that cost more should be down to them to pick up the bill". So the company goes bankrupt and cannot complete the job. Meaning someone else will have to be brought in and that will take ...How Long? You're not very bright are you.
Excuses excuses.
[quote][p][bold]Curbishly[/bold] wrote: " Surely a contract like this must have gone out to tender and it is tough if they ultimately find problems that cost more should be down to them to pick up the bill". So the company goes bankrupt and cannot complete the job. Meaning someone else will have to be brought in and that will take ...How Long? You're not very bright are you.[/p][/quote]Excuses excuses. Aint it just the truth

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree