Agenda item

            The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 11th April, it had agreed to defer to its meeting in May, consideration of the above-mentioned report regarding the installation of a carousel-type attraction at the Zoo. That decision had been taken to enable further consultations to be undertaken with local Elected Members and additional information to be provided to the Committee. Accordingly, the Committee considered the undernoted report:

            “1.    Key Issues

Business Case

A review of the business case has taken place, and an estimated income to the Council of between £12,500 and £15,000 (i.e. 25% of the total gross income) would appear realistic given expected visitor numbers during the spring and summer, the capacity of the carousel and the proposed period that it will be on site.

It has proved difficult to accurately estimate the potential effect of Zoo visitors spend at the proposed carousel and any impacts on income at the Zoo shop.  It could be assumed that in the current economic climate, with a limited capacity for secondary spend, visitors may be less inclined to purchase goods at the gift shop if they have already purchased tickets for the carousel.  However, this is not proven, and the carousel might prove to be an effective test of the attractiveness and potential demand for this, or similar attractions in the future.

In order to provide a suitable electrical source for the carousel, the Belfast City Council Property Maintenance Unit have scoped the required works, which include modifications to an existing feeder pillar at the Zoo Farm, civil works to bury a new cable under the road between the Farm and the Floral hall, and the supply and installation of a new ‘Lucy Pillar’ at the proposed carousel site.  The cost of this work is estimated at £6,500, and the supplier has proposed that this cost is shared between the supplier and the Council.

The supplier has further proposed that costs for the electricity used by the carousel will be shared between the supplier and the Zoo, the cost is estimated at £1,200 per annum.

Planning Permission

In consultation with the Planning Office, as the carousel will be on site for more than 28 days it will require planning permission.  The processes involved for an application can take between 2 – 3 months and there is a cost of £820 for the application.  It is proposed that this cost is shared between the supplier and the Council.  Given the time required for such an application, it is possible that planning permission would not be granted before mid-June, i.e. half way through the proposed period that the carousel could be made available, and there would be therefore be a reduction in income of approximately 50%.

Health and Safety Considerations

The carousel has a diameter >12m (40’).  Having reviewed possible locations in the Zoo, the only suitable site is at the front of Floral Hall. This would leave 4m of the current roadway to the side of the carousel for visitor and vehicle traffic.  Health and Safety colleagues were consulted about the proposed installation.  This road is used frequently by tractors and other Zoo vehicles which would create a serious hazard with regard to vehicle and pedestrian separation. It might be possible to extend the path by covering the adjacent grass area but there would always be a pinch point at the trees and bushes.  Serious thought would need to be given to crowd control and queuing for the ride as there would potentially be a large number of people and parents watching and waiting for their children to get on and off the ride.

General

Previous consultation with Legal Services and the Procurement Unit has raised procurement of the service as an issue, and the potential for challenge.  The department has been advised that if there is an interest in providing this attraction at Belfast Zoo expressions of interest for supply of the service should also be sought.

Members should be aware that the Floral Hall is in very poor condition.  Its current dilapidated state received comment in our 2012 market research and it is the subject of regular visitor feedback.  While it would require a specific survey to properly gauge visitor reactions, it might be considered that a new attraction sited very close to the Floral Hall would assist in making the area, and hence the building, appear more attractive to visitors.  Conversely, by requiring potential carousel users to queue next to the building and by raising the profile of the building with such an eye catching attraction sited nearby, we would also encourage additional scrutiny, and potentially negative feedback.

Conclusion

Having considered all the issues in the round, the provision of this attraction is considered not to be feasible.

            2.      Resource Implications

2.1 The requirement for planning permission would reduce the time available for the carousel to be sited at the Zoo.  This would reduce the estimated income.The supplier has proposed that costs would be shared with the Council and that the Council enters into a legal agreement for a three year period.A summary of the cost implications to the Council are as follows:

Expenditure Year 1

There is currently no budget established for this expenditure.

         Income Year 1

      25% of gross income                                           £12–15,000

The projected income is based on footfall and as it is weather dependant it is not guaranteed.  This does not take into account the unknown potential impact on the Zoo shop income.

            3.      Recommendation

            3.1    The Committee is recommended, in light of the key issues raised and in particular those with regard to health and safety, that the proposal to introduce this attraction to the Zoo is not supported.”

            The Committee adopted the recommendation.