Strong opposition to council's hotel plan ahead of key meeting

Dozens of residents contacted us via social media to voice their opposition to the scheme after we reported on it last week and some borough councillors also say there would be better alternative uses for the building.

Members of the council’s cabinet will be asked to back the proposals in principle tomorrow as a more cost-effective way of utilising the underused Parkside building.

The authority says more staff work from home meaning there is far less office space required and further vacant areas have been created since Leicestershire County Council withdrew its employees 14 months ago.

The idea has been mooted by the council to address a perceived shortage of hotel beds in the town and to attract more visitors and tourists to stay over and stimulate both the daytime and night time economies.

One of the councillors against the plan is Peter Faulkner, who posted on our Facebook page: “As soon as I read the email I received from the leader of the council I wrote back suggesting that any space should be used to home our homeless or converted to help reduce the council house waiting list.”

Councillor Simon Lumley shared an email with us which he had sent to colleagues in which he wrote: “Whilst I remain fully against a hotel here for the reasons given on my last email, I think one option we should explore is selling Parkside up to its entirety and converting them for rental or sale apartments, perhaps premium or luxury, for a higher margin revenue.

“Then, we look into having a small base at Phoenix House.”

A report to go before tomorrow’s meeting outlines some of the other potential alternative uses the council had considered for its offices.

One was to create a shared space with other public sector organisations on a commercial rent basis although no interest was detected from other parties on this.

A second idea was to convert the building into small office suites but this was not thought to be financially viable and there is already a substantial facility to do this at Pera Business Park.

The other proposal examined was for conversion into residential apartments but this was thought to be unviable due to the high cost of doing it and the lower sale and rental vale for the private sector due to low level demand for such accommodation.

If the plan goes ahead, the office block would be split into east and west wings, with the council offices and all current occupiers accommodated in the prominent east part adjacent to Burton Road

The layout of the ground floor would be revised to accommodate a smaller reception, with the civic suites, the Registrar and DWP retained.

Layout of the upper storeys would be changed to house meeting rooms, 90 desks for the council’s use and 10 for probation and police officers.

An extension to the building would be created on the west end with conversion work as well to create the hotel with separate entrance and reception.

The report states that the council would need to borrow the money to extend and adapt the offices with the cost of servicing the loan offset by any income received through a lease with the hotel operator and savings generated by consolidating council operations into a smaller office footprint.

The report adds: “The 65-bed hotel in the town centre is likely to create new jobs for 16 local people including managerial, housekeeping, reception and ancillary staff.

"It is assumed that no bar or restaurant facilities would be accommodated in the proposed development to encourage the customers to spend time and money in the local shops and restaurants in the town centre.

"The customer numbers are likely to be in excess of 28,000 per year contributing to approximately £400,000 per year to expenditure in the town and total £2million per year in the wider local economy.”

Internal surveys show the council currently has 222 desks for staff and it only needs 90.

It will also cost the council £1million to maintain the building over the next 10 years so further income is needed.

Many readers contacted us via Facebook to question whether the planned hotel would be viable due to low visitor numbers to the town.

Darren Woodcock posted: “Can’t see the need for a hotel. Ask hoteliers today if they are 100% utilised ! Therefore, no need for another one in this town.”

And Kevv Wright commented: “Where are they going to find that many people wanting to stay over?”

Others felt there were better uses for the council office building, such as Simon Tinsley, who posted: “Maybe a larger doctors surgery with better facilities and a 24/7 minor injury clinic.”

Carol Wade commented: “How about a new shopping centre, wouldn’t this be more use to the economy of the town than a hotel.”

While Stewart Codd posted on our Twitter page: “How about turning it into another doctors surgery and NHS dentist, this is needed much more than a hotel.”

It is anticipated that a business case will need to be drawn up and negotiations carried out with potential hotel operators if the principle is approved by councillors before a final decision is taken on whether to go ahead in March 2024.