THE sale of York's Barbican Centre - intended to fund the construction of a pool and refurbishment of two others - may leave a shortfall of more than £2 million.
Council chiefs have revealed that while the Barbican's privatisation will raise just over £10 million, the total cost of building a new Kent Street pool and fitness suite, and revamping the Yearsley and Edmund Wilson pools could come to £12.4 million.
A report to Tuesday's executive meeting says that as things stand, if the Kent Street and Yearsley pool schemes go ahead in that order, it would leave only £700,000 for the Edmund Wilson project.
The report, by leisure boss Charlie Croft, says officers will continue to investigate the possibility of finding more affordable ways of addressing the pools' modernisation needs.
He warns of a number of risks if the works are postponed, with problems of poor access and air handling equipment that is in poor condition, with much beyond maintenance. He says numerous components and distribution systems have reached the end of their useful life, with water treatment systems particularly vulnerable.
At Yearsley, he identifies three possible refurbishment options which would extend the life of the pool for 25 years.
He suggests the Kent Street complex would include a 25- metre five-lane pool which would accommodate school swimming, a 150sq metre gymnasium and a 90sq metre crche.
He says consideration should also be given to a toddler pool to provide an attraction to families.
Meanwhile, councillors have also been given an update on the legal challenge being mounted by the Save Our Barbican (SOB) campaign to the authority's decision to grant planning permission for the Barbican redevelopment scheme. The authority has warned previously that the challenge could delay the pool schemes.
Mr Croft said the council had critically re-examined its planning procedure and was not willing to rescind the permission. It believed it had a "robust case" and was confident of winning any legal challenge.
He said the next step for the protest group, which has received legal aid, would be to make an application to the courts for a judicial review. Lawyers had advised that the courts were taking 21 days to decide whether to accept or refuse an application. If refused, SOB would then have seven days to renew the application in front of a judge.
If permission was granted, there would be a 35-day wait for a substantive hearing.
He said the "best-case scenario" would be for the judicial review period to be over by the end of December, but this would rely on the courts having the resources to handle the legal challenge.
Updated: 10:08 Wednesday, November 03, 2004
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article