Decision details

16.1

The Executive Director, Resources submitted a report seeking approval by the City Council to the proposed solution to provide the Oasis Academy at the Olympic Legacy Park (OLP) with an indoor sports facility.

16.2

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:-  

(a)

approves the selection of Sheffield City Trust (SCT) as preferred provider of the indoor sports provision for the Oasis Academy, through an expansion of the English Institute of Sport (EISS) facility; 

(b)

notes that approval will be sought  through the Council Capital Approval process for the requisite funding from the Schools Capital allocation;

(c)

delegates authority to the Executive Director of Resources, in consultation with the Executive Director of Place and Executive Director of People Services,  to agree an appropriate level of grant funding with SCT in line with the figures in the report;

(d)

approves the provision of a loan to SCT to secure the funding of the EISS Expansion in line with the figures in the report;

(e)

delegates authority to the Chief Property Officer, in consultation with the Executive Director of Resources and the Executive Director of Place, to acquire a sub- lease (or other appropriate legal interest) with SCT to secure the continued rights of use of the facility for the Oasis Academy; and

(f)

If within one month of the date of this decision Park Community Arena Ltd. (PCA) have:-

(i)

secured an offer of Finance from the bank;

(ii)

resolved the issue of securing a legal basis for the school free access to the facilities for the full term of the lease;

(iii)

can confirm delivery of the project and school access for September 2019;

(iv)

have agreed a State Aid compliant rate of interest and repayment terms for any loan with the Council; and

(v)

have reprofiled the business plan to take account of the above costs;

Delegates authority to the Executive Director, Resources, in consultation with the Cabinet Members for Finance and Culture, Parks and Leisure to consider re-evaluating the options in the report.

16.3

Reasons for Decision

16.3.1

There is a strong financial, social and sporting case for opting for the EISS extension. As detailed in Part 2 of the report,  the risk adjusted cost to the Council of providing the necessary school sports facility is £0.7m with the EISS option, compared to £1.7m for Council build option (Option 2) and  £2m for the Park Community Arena Ltd (PCA) option. 

16.3.2

Whilst the Council build option would give the most direct control over the facility it would not provide the aspirational attributes of the EISS expansion. 

16.3.3

Further, the PCA Option has not been recommended given that, to date, the proposal does not have a confirmed funding solution in place and Cabinet agreed last year that this option be given a deadline to secure funding and that passed many months ago. There is also no agreed legal solution that would secure the Academy access to the sports facility under this option.

16.3.4

The EISS option has far more certainty of delivery within the expected timescales and financial envelope as it will not be reliant on an extensive external funding process or securing significant new sources of income. The EISS option is therefore lower risk for the Council in both capital cost, timely delivery and long term sustainability.

16.3.5

Expanding  the EISS also has strategic fit  for the Council with SCT in terms of the additional opportunities it affords the Trust to operate its assets and offering an opportunity to review the Council’s strategic partnership with SCT on EISS.

16.3.6

It should also be noted that if the EISS option is supported by Cabinet, then the proposed plot for the PCA option on the OLP site could be available for alternative development and therefore provide an additional financial receipt to the Council that allows it to recover the costs incurred in remediating the OLP site. An alternative development on this plot, in addition to the EISS expansion, might also offer a net increase in overall economic and/or social benefits to the Council.  

16.3.7

The Sheffield Sharks Basketball Team currently play their matches at EISS and the Council has asked that talks take place between SCT and the Sharks to prepare for the possible consequences of decisions that arise from this report. Both parties have confirmed that positive discussions are underway and both the Council and SCT recognises the contribution the Sharks make both to the elite game and the development of basketball in the community. Therefore, if Cabinet supports the EISS extension option, then SCT will work with the Sharks both in terms of their match days and explore options for working together on a wider basketball development programme in the City.

16.3.8

For these reasons it is proposed that the EISS expansion option is the preferred delivery route.

16.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

16.4.1

The Council considered a list of options for the delivery of sports hall capacity for the Oasis Academy:

1.    Guaranteed use within the arena proposed to be constructed on the Olympic Legacy Park by Park Community Arena Ltd. (PCA) to house the Sheffield Sharks Basketball team.

2.    The Council to build a new stand-alone sports hall to meet the Academy requirements.

3.    Incorporate an indoor sports hall within the stadium proposals on the Olympic Legacy Park.

4.    Extend the EISS.

5.    The Council to build a new indoor arena to accommodate the PCA operations.

16.4.2

Some of the above options were evaluated on the basis of broad desk-top estimates of relative costs without the engagement with the third party delivery party. Others have been evaluated on more comprehensive cost/business plans and associated dialogue. 

16.4.3

Option 3 was discounted from further consideration as it was not aligned with the developer’s proposals and timescales on the site; option 2 would be costly and fail to meet the aspirations being sought by the Olympic Legacy Park project; and option 5 was rejected because it exceeded the Council’s statutory obligations in relation to school provision and placed the Council in a potentially high risk situation.

16.4.4

The Council has further evaluated the remaining two options, including receiving comparable business plans for each. Details are included in Part 2 of the report.

16.5

Any Interest Declared or Dispensation Granted

None

16.6

Reason for Exemption if Public/Press Excluded During Consideration

None

16.7

Respective Director Responsible for Implementation

Eugene Walker, Executive Director, Resources

16.8

Relevant Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee If Decision Called In

Children, Young People and Family Support