County Durham Open Space, Sport and Recreation Needs Assessment

Area Profile: East Durham Rural Corridor

CONTENTS

Page (s)

1.0 Sub Area Map 3

2.0 Description of Sub Area 4

3.0 Local consultation findings 5 - 14

4.0 Quantity of provision 15 - 17

5.0 Access to facilities 18 - 22

6.0 Quality of facilities 23 - 24

7.0 Analysis and Recommendations 25 - 26

1.0 Sub Area Map

2.0 Description of East Durham Rural Corridor Area Action Partnership

Population 23,971

Location & Demographics

The East Durham Rural area is a diverse part of Durham, with traditional mining settlements such as the Trimdons and Fishburn and the historic village of Sedgefield. Sedgefield Village is noted for the Parish Church of St. Edmund, a grade one listed building dating from the 13th Century; Hardwick Park Estate and its National Hunt Racecourse. It has been the focus of a major housing development on the former Winterton hospital site, which also hosts NETPark, one of the fastest growing science, engineering and technology parks in the UK.

The AAP area contains the following town and parish councils; Cassop-Cum-Quarrington, Coxhoe, and Kelloe, Sedgefield, Fishburn, Trimdon, Bradbury and Mordon.

In this area there is a strong sense of community spirit and pride, along with ongoing regeneration and renewal initiatives and active partnership working, leading to local improvements. However in common with many parts of County Durham there are a lot of issues that need to be tackled.

The East Durham Rural Corridor contains the following parishes: Cassop Colliery, Bowburn, Thorpe Latches, Butterwick, Quarrington Hill, Trimdon Colliery, Foxton, Mordon, Old Cassop, Kelloe, Old Quarrington, Bradbury, Garmondsway, Coxhoe, Fishburn, Trimdon, Embleton, Elstob, Sedgefield, Trimdon Grange, Shotton, Town Kelloe

More information can be found at http://www.durham.gov.uk/PDFApproved/EastDurhamRuralCorridorAAPProfile.pdf And http://www.durham.gov.uk/PDFApproved/Profile_East_Durham_Rural.pdf

3.0 Local Consultation Findings

The following is a summary the main local findings of relevance from local consultations which are described in full in the Needs Assessment Report (Appendix 1 to the Main Report).

3.1 Detailed comments from web survey

Postcode Comment I have a 1 and 4 year old and don't drive and live in a small village. Whilst there are facilities I can access by bus and I would say there are plenty of walks and wildlife trails in the area, it would be useful if there were more sporting clubs/activities on ac tually in the village or clubs I can take my 4 year old to such as dancing or gymnastics. There are some TS29 6PX on in the community centre but would be nice if there were more. TS21 4HE More public rights of way across farmland/ public rights of way clearly marked.

3.2 Best Value Survey by Action Area Partnerships

The results of the 2006/7 Best Value User Satisfaction Surveys for parks and open spaces in each of the districts have been disaggregated to AAP level as shown below.

Significant AAP % Very/fairly satisfied Rest of County Difference Bishop Auckland and Shildon 54.4 59.1 No Chester le Street 63.8 57.8 Yes Consett 59.0 58.5 No Crook Willington and Tow Law 56.6 58.6 No Durham City 59.6 57.9 No Easington 51.9 60.9 Yes East Durham rural corridor 62.3 58.3 No Ferryhill and Chilton 54.0 58.9 No Mid Durham rural west 59.3 58.5 No Newton Aycliffe 72.6 59.6 Yes

Significant AAP % Very/fairly satisfied Rest of County Difference Spennymoor 74.3 58.1 Yes Stanley 42.4 59.6 Yes Teesdale 65.6 58.4 Yes Weardale 71.0 58.5 Yes

3.3 Summary of Relevant Findings from the Open Space, Sport and Recreation Study

The Action Area falls into two former local authority areas- Sedgefield and Durham City. The main findings of relevance for the Sedgefield PPG17 study in relation to Sedgefield village and Trimdon in particular are as follows.

The Citizen's Panel meeting suggested: • The Cricket Club in Sedgefield Village is very popular. • Leisure Centres don’t have enough variety and flexibility (including in Sedgefield settlement). • Not enough cycleways. Also not enough linkages between towns. • Provision and maintenance of open space in Trimdon is felt to be poor.

A comment received through the Community Clubs survey suggested that there was “no investment in Sedgefield”.

The survey of local schools suggested a need to improve the pitch at Sedgefield Hardwick Primary School (problems with moles, but cost is an issue).

A survey of pitch sports clubs highlighted a concern over the deteriorating condition of the all weather pitch at the Community College, and the lack of availability of ancillary equipment.

Young people through the Trimdon Village Mobile project were provided with disposable cameras and asked to record aspects of open space/recreational/play in their areas that they found good, and those that they thought were poor. Following this the groups met to look at the photographs and identify the strengths and weaknesses of provision and to suggest some possible ideas for improvement. The results of this project are summarised below:

Strengths *Lots of open space in village – surrounded by open fields and access to pond. *Good football pitches *Millennium Green – seating and play/teenage facilities. Well maintained, good planting and fairly clean.

Weaknesses and “Room for *Astro in poor state of repair Improvement” *Allotment area surrounds need improvement *More things to do needed on Millennium Green *Access to pond area could be improved. Priorities *Improved Park facilities – bigger/better shelters/seating areas *More young people’s involvement *More bins *New astro-turf pitch *Bike tracks – cycles and motorbikes *Pitch drainage *More planting – bulbs, shrubs etc

The findings of the City of Durham Open Spaces Study of relevance to this Action Area/Sub Area are as follows.

In a meeting attended by Clerks and Councillors for Parish Councils, Coxhoe/Kelloe/Quarrington Partnerships amongst others the importance of accessible, appropriate and quality play facilities was emphasised. Balancing development against other considerations can be achieved in certain circumstances although the community benefits need to be carefully and clearly articulated.

In addition a consultation meeting was arranged with the Kelloe Village Partnership and the following points were made:

• The Partnership had worked with other local organisation to develop new recreational opportunities for children from the

Village. • A new play area, MUGA, wildlife area and a marked out grass pitch had been provided as a result of a joint working between the Community Partnership, the Parish Council, Sure Start and the local school. • The village allotments were well used and proactively managed by the Parish Council and were considered to be a model which others responsible for allotments could follow. • The Welfare Ground provided a range of good quality sports facilities (bowls, cricket and football) well used by the residents. • There was an agreement that small scale developments would add value to the Village but that there would need to be a mix of housing tenure including affordable housing. • There was scope for general environmental improvements in the Village to raise the quality of life for residents.

3.4 Summary of Relevant Findings from the Play Strategy

The Action Area falls into two former local authority areas- Sedgefield and Durham City.

3.4.1 Main Conclusions

The following were general findings from the Sedgefield Play Strategy , and therefore have relevance to this Action Area/sub area:

• 71% of children and young people said that there was not enough play spaces locally. The lack of facilities and activities in for young people in general, across the whole borough has been highlighted as a widespread need. • The main reason for children/young people to visit their most used space is to provide informal opportunities to meet and play games with friends. Findings highlight the importance of providing informal open spaces for children to meet near their homes that are not necessarily designated play or sports facilities. • Age appropriate play facilities have been highlighted as an area that needs improvement. Facilities for the over 8’s have been indicated as a specific need. • The need for all facilities to be accessible and not restricted by bad design or unconsidered street furniture has been highlighted as a key issue for facilities to be inclusive. • Some existing play facilities have been identified as ‘old hat’ and boring and therefore are being underused. This has been highlighted most prominently in areas that are considered disadvantaged and rural as local children need locally accessible free play provision.

• Pro active engagement and involvement of children and young people and hard to reach groups needs to increase to ensure that these groups voices are heard and to ensure that provision is developed to meet their needs. • The main issue highlighted by Play and Youth Organisations was the lack of facilities for teenagers such as skateboard areas and BMX sites. • 70% of town and parish councils felt that the needs of young people were not being adequately met and that new/improved play areas, sports pitches and other play/youth facilities would help.

The strategy includes a gap analysis for play spaces highlighting specific needs across five sub-areas within the borough as well as noting a number of borough-wide issues. These should be taken note of in relation to the current PPG17 assessment.

The following were general findings from the Durham City Play Strategy , and therefore have relevance to this Action Area/sub area:

Main Conclusions:

• Children prefer to play outside, unsupervised with their friends. • They value open space and play areas but they have concerns about the quality and range of the current fixed play equipment and the limited age range it caters for. • Play areas need to be more exciting and cater for all age groups. • There is a feeling that parks and play areas should be better cleaned and maintained (issues with broken glass, litter, dog fouling, vandalism and graffiti). • Children and Young People prefer local provision within easy reach of their homes. Transport is an issue for some of the more isolated communities. • Younger children feel intimidated by older youths who either ‘hang about’ the play areas drinking or play football etc. Also teenagers tend to monopolise the BMX and skatepark areas so younger children don’t feel they are able to use these facilities. • Older children don’t tend to want the younger children hanging around. They also just want somewhere to ‘hang out’ with their friends. • There is a fear of traffic around housing estates. • There are issues with cars parked in streets and on the pavement which prevents opportunities for play. • Complaints from neighbours when they play ‘around the doors’ is an issue as are ‘No Ball Games’ signs on open spaces.

• Children and young people value open space areas for playing football / cricket etc near to their homes but would like to see better quality facilities provided for such activities within parks. • There was some experience of police harassment and lack of tolerance by adults generally.

Consultation with Parents and Carers

The Play Partnership carried out a consultation exercise with parents and carers during May 2007. Some key findings from parents and carers were that:

• They have a fear of stranger danger / children’s personal safety and therefore many prefer supervised play opportunities. • They would welcome seeing more imaginative, safer, better maintained playgrounds within easy walking distance of their homes. • There is a perception that Durham is poorly equipped with outdoor play areas i.e. limited play areas with very limited and unimaginative equipment. • Litter (bottles / cans) and dog fouling was cited as a reason for not allowing their children to use open space / park areas. • Fear of intimidation and bullying of younger children by older children was also cited as a reason for not allowing their children to go to the park. • They value the organised, local, supervised activities especially during the summer holidays and would like to see more after- school clubs and activities at local community centres (especially for the younger children).

3.5 Town Council Survey findings of Relevance

3.5.1 Survey Findings

Quantity and Quality of Recreational Facilities Town Councils were asked to comment about the quantity and quality of a range of facilities and the following table highlights the issues of concern (marked with an X) (no X entered indicates no perceived problem).

Town Council Bowls Facilities Cycleways Shortageof WildlifeAreas Not Enough Not Rugby Pitches Not Enough Not Cricket Pitches Poor Quality Poor Playing Pitches Not Enough Not FootballPitches Not Enough Not Areas Teenagers For Not Enough Not Informal OpenSpace Not Enough Not Children's Play Areas Poor Quality Poor Children's Play Areas Not Enough Not Tennis/ Netball/Mugas Poor Quality/ Poor Inadequate Changing Shortage Footpaths/ Of Bridleways/ Poor Quality Poor Tennis/ Netball/Mugas Not Enough Not BowlingGreens/Short-Mat Shortage Indoor Of Halls Suitable For Sport Sedgefield X X X X X X X X X

Local Issues

Specific comments were received from Sedgefield Town Council, as follows:

• Football pitches are often requested, STC does not have any official football pitches, currently all at the Community College • We currently have plans to build a rugby pitch adjacent to the cricket field • The town council does not have designated pitches anywhere, just a playing field • Currently building a MUGA facility at new Community College, development of sports facility at cricket field would be of great benefit • It is essential to provide a bowls facility as it is very necessary, possibly at cricket field • The only changing facilities are at the cricket club and community college, we have no other facilities • We only have 3 children’s play areas within the town, there is a need for additional ones • No teenage facilities, this was identified in the town plan, there is a need for a facility

To recap, Sedgefield does not have a designated sports facility. Currently developing a rugby pitch adjacent to the cricket field on Station Road with a possibility of also including outdoor bowls green. There is DCC land there which would be ideal for providing a proper sports complex.

The town council have provided a sports hall at the Community College, this is being demolished as part of BSF1. Essential that this facility is provided under new regime.

3.6 Action Area Partnership Board Members Survey (main priorities identified)

• Activities for young people (54 votes) • Support for voluntary community sector (29 votes) • Community spirit and aspirations (27 votes) • Sustainable transport (26 votes) • Traffic issues (21 votes) • Educational attainment (20 votes) • Environment improvements (20 votes) • Crime and community safety (16 votes) • Healthy lifestyles (16 votes) • Street cleanliness (11 votes)

3.7 Main consultation findings from the Playing Pitch Study

The Action Area falls into two former local authority areas- Sedgefield and Durham City. Playing pitch studies were produced for both authorities. The main findings of relevance are as follows.

3.7.1 Sedgefield Borough (in relation principally to Sedgefield village and the Trimdons)

For football the key issues highlighted through consultation were:

• refusing teams entry into their leagues due to pitch availability and quality (mainly junior teams) • latent junior demand could be a significant Borough wide characteristic • evidence of teams being turned away at some community schools because of over demand, and likewise for some local council pitches • lack of access to schools pitches in general • some dissatisfaction pitch and facility quality • high 'running costs' may be suppressing demand

As part of the Sedgefield Borough PPG17 study a survey of pitch sports clubs was conducted The information, together with responses received from the other surveys can be used to validate the conclusions in relation to issues contained in the 2003 report. This survey suggests some issues that are generally consistent with the outcome of the playing pitch study consultation and these include:-

• Maintenance quality and consistency across the Borough; • Pitch availability; • Training provision; • Passporting youth activity levels into other age groups; and, • Developing and maintaining a dialogue with the Clubs.

3.7.2 For the part of former Durham City

For football the key issues highlighted through consultation were:

• better training facilities/pitches • often low quality changing facilities • dog fouling • vandalism • lack of a central venue for mini soccer • a generally adequate level of provision in terms of adult pitch supply

For cricket the key issues highlighted through consultation were:

• better practice facilities • better quality wickets • improved changing and other ancillary facilities • dog fouling and vandalism on some sites • need to promote junior participation

The above have relevance to the Action Area/sub area.

4.0 Quantity of provision

The table below shows provision against the County Durham standards for the AAP. The existing provision of open space is shown on the map on the following page. Further maps showing provision for each ward within the AAP are available and are held in a separate appendix. An analysis of findings are made in section 7.

Supply of open space (hectares) Semi- Amenity Natural Parks & Outdoor Sport Open Green WARD Gardens Space Play Space Space Space Allotments East Durham Rural Corridor (Total) 33.41 4.89 1.59 24.28 112.38 -11.21 Wingate -5.84 19.71 -0.55 4.67 27.27 3.29 Sedgefield 46.25 -3.80 -0.66 2.69 12.95 -4.29 Fishburn and Old Trimdon -4.17 -2.61 0.22 1.16 6.75 0.11 New Trimdon and Trimdon Grange -0.23 8.55 0.02 0.77 10.32 0.56 Stanhope 11.73 -3.39 0.59 3.06 -3.39 -1.40 Cassop-cum-Quarrington * -3.66 -1.23 2.46 12.78 60.44 -1.24 Coxhoe -4.25 6.44 -0.37 8.99 61.66 -4.55

5.0 Access to facilities

The following maps show the existing provision and access to different types of open space across the County. Further analysis has been made using the GIS toolkit developed as part of this study, which allows access to be analysed at a more local level (e.g. ward). The following maps have been used to ‘flag up’ access issues, and the ward maps should be used to determine issues. An analysis of findings are made in section 7.

6.0 Quality of open space

The quality of open space within this AAP varies as much as it does across the whole County, and therefore the recommendations and observations made in part 1 of the study report should be referred to. A number of specific observations follow.

• There are a number of good quality parks and gardens in this area, including Coxhoe Park which has a green flag. • A number of amenity spaces have been improved with formal planting and creation of long grass areas. There is still an opportunity to further this in other areas of amenity space in the area. • There are some large areas of semi-natural greenspace which are good quality and a valuable community facility. • Some play areas have been improved with new equipment, but more consideration needs to be given to incorporating new facilities into the existing landscape. • There are a number of good quality sports facilities, including some privately managed facilities which are available to the community.

Simple enhancement of amenity space Good play facilities at Bowburn Park New play area – access and design and issue?

Provision for young people Good sports facilities Green Flag Park

7.0 Analysis and Recommendations

This section includes an analysis of the main issues related to quality, quantity and access to open space within the East Durham Rural Corridor AAP. It should be considered in context with the wider findings of the study, outlined in part 1 of the report. The analysis and recommendations are considered by typology.

Allotments

• There is an under supply of allotments across the AAP, with only three wards having sufficient provision. • A number of the wards within this AAP do not meet the access standard for allotments. • As expected, the quality of existing provision varies greatly. • It is recommended that additional allotments are required within this AAP in localised areas of deficiency.

Amenity Open Space

• Overall, there is a sufficient supply of amenity open space across the AAP. • Access to amenity open space is generally good with all the major settlements meeting the standard. • Quality varies greatly from some very poor areas of grass in some areas to some good examples where wildflower meadows have been created, and formal planting introduced.

Parks & Gardens

• Overall, there is a sufficient supply, however, supply is focused in two wards with five wards having an under supply. • There are gaps in access in some of the settlement areas. • Those parks that do exist are generally of good quality, including the green flag park at Coxhoe Park. • The localised lack of provision to parks and gardens is to some extent met by provision of outdoor sport space in some areas – see below.

Outdoor Sport Space

• Overall there is sufficient quantity of outdoor sport space within the AAP. However, there is localised under provision, with 4 wards falling below the standard. Fishburn and Old Trimdon and Cassop-cum-Quarrington have an under supply of sport space and parks and gardens. These areas should be the priority for seeking new provision. • Access to sport space generally meets the required standard, there are some and local gaps, however, there are also private and education spaces in some of these areas. • Quality of provision is generally good, with localised need for improvements.

Play Space

• Overall, there is sufficient provision of play space within the AAP, with only 3 wards falling below the standard. • Access to play space is generally good, with only a few local deficiencies. • The quality of play areas varies greatly, with some having enjoyed recent investment, and some in need of total refurbishment or replacement. • The priority for play in this AAP is to improve existing provision, and it is suggested that localised shortfalls in quantity could be met through increasing the size and quality of existing facilities. • There may be need for new facilities where development occurs, particularly where there is an existing shortfall in quantity and access.

Semi-natural greenspace

• Overall, this AAP has sufficient provision of semi-natural greenspace with only one ward falling below the required standard. • Access is good in most of the area except Sedgefield which falls below the standard. • A number of areas have had wildflower meadows created in areas of amenity space, and this should be considered further, particularly in the Sedgefield area where there is under provision.