Ealing Borough Council Committee Team Manager: Town Hall Linda Zimmerman New Broadway Direct Line: 020 8825 6253 London W5 2BY Fax: 020 8825 6909 Email: zimmermal@ealing.gov.uk
Cabinet
Venue: The Liz Cantell Room, Town Hall, New Broadway, Ealing, W5 2BY Date: Tuesday, 14 March 2017 at 19:00
Members : Portfolio Councillor Bell (Leader of the Council, Policy Overview and Chair) Councillor Anand (Housing) Councillor Dheer (Community Services and Safety, and Deputy Leader) Councillor Johnson (Finance, Performance and Customer Services) Councillor Mahfouz (Transport, Environment and Leisure) Councillor Mason (Prosperity, Skills and Employment and Transformation) Councillor Rai (Children and Young People) Councillor Tailor (Health and Adult Services) Councillor Gordon (Chief Whip) (ex-officio member)
AGENDA
Open to Public and Press
0 Also Present
1 Apologies for Absence
2 Urgent Matters
Page 1 of 382 3 Matters to be Considered in Private Items 8 and 9 contain information that is exempt from disclosure by virtue of Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.
4 Declarations of Interest
5 Minutes To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 14 February 2017.
Cabinet Minutes - 14 February 2017 5 - 18
6 Appointments to Sub Committees and Outside Bodies
7 Future Ealing 19 - 36
8 Playing Pitch Strategy and Associated Outdoor Leisure 37 - 254 Projects 9 Southall Big Plan – The Green Southall 255 - 278
10 Sustainable Transport Strategy 17-18 279 - 302
11 Northolt Grange Community Centre - Future Use 303 - 324
12 Purchase of 36 Inglis Road Ealing W5 by way of NHS England 325 - 330 Capital Grant Finance 13 Broadway Living Funding Facility 331 - 336
14 Housing Regeneration Update – Approval of Council Built 337 - 344 Schemes for Shared Ownership and Outright Sale 15 Council Performance Report Q3 2016-17 345 - 366
16 ICT and Data Management Capital Funded Schemes 367 - 372
17 Approval to Award Entry to Providers on to the Children’s 0 – 373 - 382 25 Domiciliary Care Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) List
Page 2 of 382 18 Date of Next Meeting The next meeting will be held on 25 April 2017.
Paul Najsarek Chief Executive 6 March 2017
Please note that in the event of an emergency your attention is drawn to the evacuation instructions displayed on the wall by the entrance to the committee room. First Aid advice can also be found there.
Page 3 of 382
Page 4 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017
CABINET
Tuesday 14 February 2017 at 7pm Minutes
PRESENT : Councillors Bell (Chair), Anand, R Dheer, Gordon, Johnson, Mahfouz, Mason, Rai and Tailor (part)
ALSO PRESENT : In accordance with paragraph 2.6(a) of the Constitution, Councillors Malcolm and Stafford addressed the Cabinet with regard to the following items:
Item 09 - Budget Strategy 2017/18 (Councillors Malcolm and Stafford) Item 12 - Commercial Waste Service Options (Councillors Malcolm and Stafford)
1. Apologies for Absence Councillor Tailor gave apologies for lateness.
2. Urgent Matters Cabinet accepted an addendum to item 10 on the agenda, which had been circulated and published on 10 February 2017.
3. Matters to be Considered in Private Items 11, 12 and 13 contained confidential appendices but were not taken in private as it was not necessary to discuss the confidential information provided.
4. Declarations of Interest Councillor Mahfouz declared a personal interest in item 12 by virtue of him representing London Councils on the London Waste and Recycling Board.
5. Minutes Resolved: That the minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 17 January 2017 be agreed and signed as a true and correct record.
6. Appointments to Sub-Committees and Outside Bodies There were none.
7. Ealing Town Hall Development and refurbishment – Consideration of a Proposal Following the Listing of the Building as an Asset of Community Value Resolved That Cabinet: i) notes that no proposal had been received from Ealing Voice and the Council would proceed with Mastcraft as the preferred bidder.
Reasons for Decisions and Options Considered The purpose of this report was to set out the process that the Council would follow if it received a proposal from Ealing Voice for development of Ealing Town Hall. At the time of this meeting, no proposals had been received by Ealing Council with regard to Ealing Town Hall following the listing of the building as an Asset of Community Value. The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 1 Page 5 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017
8. Approval to Award Entry to Providers onto the Homecare Services Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) Resolved That Cabinet: i) authorises the Director of Adults Services to appoint Providers (detailed in Appendix 1 of the report, who meet the entry criteria) on to the Homecare Services Dynamic Purchasing System (known as the DPS) for the first round of the scheme due to commence on 1 April 2017. ii) delegates authority to the Director of Adults Services to add additional Providers on to the DPS throughout the 4-year term of the DPS in accordance with its rules and selection criteria following its establishment. iii) authorises entering into individual or block agreements with the Providers on the DPS as and when the service needs arise, within the Adults departmental budget for Homecare Services, following the specified procedures within the DPS for awarding contracts. iv) approves that in order to meet statutory need requirements, the direct award of packages of care for vulnerable adults on a spot contract basis may be necessary where suitable arrangements cannot be made via the DPS; or where crisis or emergency circumstances dictate this is not possible to do so via the DPS; and authorises the Director of Adults Services to award such spot contracts through a competitive process (where possible) or through the direct award to a provider deemed best placed to provide services required to meet a vulnerable adult’s eligible care and support needs.
Reasons for Decisions and Options Considered Ealing Council has a statutory duty to meet the care and support needs of vulnerable adults and carers in the borough based on an assessment of need and where the national eligibility criteria are met. As a result, Adults Services will source community based services to meet a range of individual care and support needs. Changes to the statutory framework for social care were introduced in April 2015 following the introduction of the Care Act 2014. In addition to the duty to meet eligible needs, the Care Act 2014 requires that Councils have strategies in place for: • promoting the general wellbeing of residents • preventing the development of ill health and social care needs • delaying people’s need for personal care services by enabling them to live independently for as long as possible. • a person-centred approach, focusing on the needs of the individual rather than the demands of the service • Take steps to support market sustainability and promote quality The DPS method was chosen as the preferred model, following a service review during the commercial strategy stage of the process. Framework and block contracts were considered at the time but did not offer suitable vehicles for the contracting of Homecare Services, as neither model allows for new providers to join the scheme during the term of the contract – resulting in an increase in the level of spot purchasing by the Council outside of its Contract Procedure Rules (CPRs), and counter to Adults Services aims to increase capacity and build a diverse and sustainable ‘managed’ local care market.
The West London Alliance (WLA) Homecare Services Framework Agreement commenced in 2014 and will expire in October 2018. This Framework Agreement was procured on a collaborative basis with a number of WLA boroughs. It comprises of 6 lots, with providers ranked according to price and quality. Despite this Framework Agreement The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 2 Page 6 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017 being in place, local capacity pressures have arisen in the homecare market that require additional actions to be taken by Ealing, especially in meeting future NHS integration and winter-readiness requirements.
Cabinet gave prior approval for the development of the DPS for Homecare Services on 24 November 2015. The DPS tender documents were advertised via the London Tenders Portal on 15 December 2016 (with the application process closing on 16 January 2017).
Cabinet were also asked to note that additional inflationary pressures pertaining to the prices of home care packages will also feature each year up to 2020 due to increasing overheads driven by higher remuneration to retain staff, annual national living wage increases, and pension reforms. The prices proposed in the DPS have been based on extensive modelling and benchmarking, and are subject to annual review. This review will inform the corporate budget setting and inflation adjustment processes.
9. Budget Strategy 2017/18 Resolved That Cabinet:
Budget Review: Revenue savings and growth proposals i) approves an additional £25.209m of centrally held growth items for 2017/18 – 2020/21 (including £20.509m for 2017/18) since 15 November 2016 Cabinet meeting (para 5.2.3 of the report) and notes the growth proposals already submitted and approved by Cabinet on 15 November 2016 (para 5.2.1 and Appendix 3a of the report). ii) notes the repurposing of corporate budgets (para 5.2.4 of the report) and notes that no further savings proposals for 2017/18 have been made since 15 November 2016 Cabinet meeting. iii) notes the allowed increases in the social care precept and the referendum limit of the council (4.2.3 and 4.4.2 of the report) and recommend to Full Council the taking of the Social Care Precept of 2% on council tax. iv) notes that the council is in a position to agree a balanced budget for 2017/18 and that any remaining budget gap following the council tax decision by Council on 21 February 2017 will be closed using reserves. v) notes the requirement for additional savings and/or income in future years as set out in para 3.1.6 of the report. vi) notes that where information comes to light which indicates that particular savings proposals have significant and important implications not set out in this report, for example relevant to the council’s equalities duties or other legal responsibilities, or where consultation is required because of the significant likely impact of proposals upon service users or providers, then those implications will be fully explored and, if necessary, a further report will be considered by Cabinet or the relevant officer or portfolio holder for finance, performance and customer services before a final decision is taken on whether or not to proceed to implementation. Where a decision is taken not to proceed with any savings proposal then alternative proposals will be brought forward for consideration. vii) authorises the director or executive director with responsibility for each proposal to The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 3 Page 7 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017 carry out any steps required in relation to those proposals, including carrying out any appropriate consultation, considering consultation outcomes and any other detailed implications before taking the final decision on whether or not to proceed to implement such a proposal, and amending any proposal prior to implementation as appropriate following consideration as above. viii) notes in relation to the authorisation given in para vii) above that where it is reasonably practicable to do so, any key decisions should be brought back to Cabinet.
Fees and Charges ix) notes that there are no changes to fees and charges which require Cabinet approval.
Budget Review: Capital x) notes the capital proposals already approved by Cabinet on 15 November 2016 and to be approved on 14 February 2017 bringing the total of all capital proposals to £30.210m (para 5.17 and Appendix 7 of the report, schemes 4, 5 and 9). Cabinet also approves the removal of the Children’s Extended Nursery Provision scheme previously agreed by Cabinet on 15 November 2016 (para 5.17 of the report). xi) notes the capital proposals to the HRA (Appendix 8 of the report, scheme 27 within HRA programme) to be considered as part of the HRA Business plan by Cabinet on 14 February 2017.
Business Rates xii) a) Makes a decision that pursuant to the Council’s powers under section 47 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988, for 2017/18, the Council will offer a discount in National Non-Domestic Rates (NNDR) of two times the cost of accreditation to the first 100 businesses in Ealing which are, or which become accredited with the Living Wage Foundation and who meet the criteria as set out in the February 2016 Cabinet report: Discretionary Discount Scheme for Businesses accredited to Living Wage Foundation (para 5.23.9 of the report). (b) Authorises the Strategic Finance Partner – Local Tax and Accounts Receivable to make determinations in relation to applications for such discounts.
xiii) Cabinet endorses and approves the following recommendations and recommends to the Council that on 21 February 2017 it:
Revenue Budget and Medium Term Financial Strategy xiv) considers and approves the revenue budget for 2017/18 as summarised in Appendix 2 of the report. xv) considers and approves the refreshed Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) for 2017/18 – 2020/21 (para 4.9.4 and Appendix 1 of the report). xvi) considers the advice of the Executive Director of Corporate Resources on the levels of reserves and robustness of estimates in setting the budget as required by Section 25 of the Local Government Act 2003 (para 5.11 of the report). xvii) notes the financial risks and pressures set out in section 4 and in particular para 4.9 of the report. The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 4 Page 8 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017 xviii) notes the total savings of £28.896m, total growth of £3.524m and £25.209m of additional centrally held growth items approved by Cabinet on 15 November 2016 and 14 February 2017 through the budget review processes for the period of the refreshed MTFS, 2017/18 – 2020/21 (para 5.2 and 5.4 and Appendices 3a and 3b of the report). xix) approves the draft Schools budget of £314.095m and agrees that any changes to the budget reasonably required as a result of the final 2017/18 DSG settlement are delegated for decision to the Executive Director of Children, Adults & Public Health following consultation with the Executive Director of Corporate Resources (see para 5.8.12 and Appendix 5 of the report). xx) notes the MTFS financial projections for 2018/19 to 2020/21 (para 4.9.4 and Appendix 1 of the report). xxi)notes that the General Fund balance is scheduled to remain the same at £15.473m for 2017/18 and notes the forecast levels of earmarked reserves (see para 5.13 and Appendix 6 of the report). xxii) approves the Parking Account 2017/18 (see para 5.6 and Appendix 4 of the report).
Capital Programme 2017/18 - 2020/21 xxiii) approves the new capital projects, totalling £30.210m and the removal of a capital project totalling £1.600m (see para 5.17 and Appendix 7 of the report). xxiv) approves the revised capital programme of £761.206m, as set out in (para 5.18 and Appendix 8 of the report). xxv) approves the use of underspends from 2016/17 to part fund new capital schemes as set out in paragraph 5.16.2 and 5.17 of the report. xxvi) a pproves the revised Capital Strategy set out in Appendix 9 of the report.
Treasury Management and Pension Fund Update based on TM Strategy xxvii) approves the Treasury Management Strategy including the associated Prudential Indicators and Annual Investment Strategy and as set out in (para 5.2 1, Appendix 10, Annexes 3 and 5 of the report). xxviii) approves the Treasury Management Policy Statement attached to Appendix 10 as Annex 1 of the report; xxix) notes the Director of Finance will implement the Treasury Management Strategy under existing officer delegated powers set out in Appendix 10 as Annex 2 of the report; xxx) approves the Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) policy and in particular notes the revision to the policy changing the MRP Option 1 (pre 2008 debt) provision from reducing balance to straight line basis to achieve a more prudent provision for debt repayment; set out in Appendix 10 as Annex 4 of the report. xxxi) notes that the Pension Fund cash (where held in house) and West London Waste Authority cash is also managed in accordance with the Treasury Management Strategy (2.9 to 2.13 of Appendix 10 of the report).
Council Tax and Business Rates
The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 5 Page 9 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017 xxxii) notes the GLA Band D precept of £280.02 for 2017/18, a 1.46% increase compared to the 2016/17 GLA precept (para 5.9 of the report); xxxiii) notes that the Executive Director of Corporate Resources calculated under delegated authority on 24 January 2017 the amount of 111,132.37 as the Council Tax Base, (the number of properties in Bands A-H in the Borough, expressed as an equivalent number of Band D units for the year 2017/18) in accordance with regulation 3 of the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) Regulations 1992 (as amended) made under Section 33(5) and 34(4) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (para 5.22.1 of the report); xxxiv) notes the collection fund position as set out in para 5.22.2 of the report; xxxv) notes the council’s share of the business rates income forecast for 2017/18 at £46.910m agreed under delegated authority by the Executive Director of Corporate Resources (see para 5.23.4 of the report).
Reasons for Decisions and Options Considered This report is the latest in a series of reports to Cabinet on developing budget proposals for 2017/18. This report updates the position since the last budget strategy report to Cabinet on 15 November 2016, and it brings together a number of significant issues for Cabinet decision. The main purpose of this report is to enable Cabinet to consider further budget proposals and make recommendations to Council for when it finalises the budget and sets the council tax on 21 February 2017.
10. Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Business Plan 2017/18 Resolved That Cabinet: i) approves the HRA 5 year capital programme for 2017/18 to 2021/22, total £379.119m. This includes: • 2016-17 capital programme slippage of £25.842m into future years. • Indicative additions on schemes to the value of £143.425m over the 5 year programme, subject to future Cabinet approval of the detailed business case ii) approves the HRA 5 year revenue budgets for 2017/18 to 2021/22 (table1 of the report) iii) notes the HRA 30 year revenue budgets for 2017/18 to 2046/47 (appendix 3 of the report) iv) notes the HRA 30 year capital programme for 2017/18 to 2046/47 (appendix 2 of the report) v) notes the HRA reserves and balances for the 5 year Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS), including the use of right to buy (RTB) capital receipts, as outlined in section 3.8 of the report. vi) notes the update to the additional borrowing headroom approved by the Secretary of State under the Governments Local Growth Fund. This permits the HRA borrowing for a programme to build new affordable homes as detailed in section 3.1.5 to 3.1.6 of the report. vii) notes the addendum to the report. viii) approves the use of 1-4-1 capital receipts to be applied for the provision of replacement social housing to 2015/16 spend against the existing ‘Improving Temporary Accommodation Capital Programme’ up to the value of £1.862m (subject to audit).
The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 6 Page 10 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017 ix) approves the use of 1-4-1 capital receipts for the provision of replacement social housing against the existing ‘Improving Temporary Accommodation Provision Capital Programme’ in the General Fund from 2016/17–2018/19 to the value of £2.075m. x) notes the change of capital financing against the currently existing approved mainstream borrowing funded programme. The total existing approved budget for ‘Improving Temporary Accommodation Provision’ from 2016/17-2018/19 of £6.916m will now be funded by 70% borrowing and 30% 1-4-1 receipts as outlined below: - 2016/17 £0.600m - 2017/18 £0.900m - 2018/19 £0.575m Total £2.075m Further information can be found in the financial implications Table 3 of the report. xi) notes that from 2016/17 onwards, in line with the HRA business plan assumptions, the HRA will receive preferential call on usage of the 1-4-1 receipts. xii) notes that the capital programme as set out in the Budget Strategy 2017/18 Cabinet report will be amended to reflect the above financing changes. xiii) notes that the HRA Business Plan as set out in the Cabinet report will be updated to reflect the above changes.
Reasons for Decisions and Options Considered This report is required in order to: • Set the 5 year capital programme 2017/18 to 2021/22; • Set the HRA 5 year MTFS; • Note the HRA 30 year business plan; • For this Cabinet to agree the 2017/18 budget and the MTFS for 2017 to 2022 and the impact on the longer term 5/30 year HRA financial model.
In order to utilise 1-4-1 capital receipts there has been a review of the existing Capital Programme and officers have identified opportunities for which it can be used retrospectively and in current plus future years. The use of 1-4-1 receipts must be for social housing which is defined as low cost rental accommodation.
So long as the accommodation falls within the legal definition, then expenditure on providing it may constitute 1-4-1 expenditure.
Under the terms of the Right to Buy Retention Agreement entered into with the DCLG in 2012/13, the Council is able to retain Right To Buy receipts from sales received on or after 1 April 2012 provided those receipts are: (i) used for the provision of social housing; (ii) the receipts are used within three years; and (iii) the retained sum does not constitute more than 30% of the total development costs of the social housing investment. The remaining 70% of costs must be match funded. The Council has spent during 2015/16 and 2016/17 approximately £6.140m of receipts to support the provision of new social and affordable rent units in the borough as set out in Table 1 of the addendum to the report . There is a constraint on the HRA, the fact that Right to Buy receipts can only be used to fund 30% of capital schemes, the remaining 70% must be match funded. The HRA is constrained in the amount of borrowing it can utilise (the borrowing “headroom”), hence the use of TA spend by the general fund will alleviate the level of expenditure and borrowing headroom limits within the use of 1-4-1 capital receipts requirements.
The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 7 Page 11 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017 11. Broadway Living, 301 Ruislip Road Approval Resolved That Cabinet: i) notes that Cabinet has previously authorised the disposal by the Council of 32 units at 301 Ruislip Road to Broadway Living by way of a long lease on the basis set out in paragraph 1.4 of the report. ii) authorises the Executive Director of Corporate Resources to negotiate and enter into funding arrangements with Broadway Living including a funding agreement to fund Broadway Living to purchase 32 homes at 301 Ruislip Road, Greenford UB6 9SE, on the basis of the proposed terms which are explained in the draft report attached at Confidential Appendix 1 of the report. iii) notes the Council will be funding Broadway Living for this purchase via: • A loan of £6.829m from the Council, which the Council will be funding through borrowing; and • Share issue from Broadway Living to the Council valued on the basis of the attributable net assets, taking into account the market value of the properties less the debt finance iv) notes the loan of £6.829m comprises of: - £6.500m for purchase of 32 units at Ruislip Road - £0.329m for associated on costs incurred by Broadway Living v) approves the capital receipt for HRA purposes, through a capital contribution to the HRA capital programme from the General Fund to the value of £6.500m.
Reasons for Decisions and Options Considered Since the Housing Commission report approved at Cabinet on April 24 2012, the council has been developing and refining its plans for regeneration and new development. The Council wishes to build more new homes over a range of tenures, including affordable and private rent, to assist in meeting the housing demand in the borough, and the commitment is to provide at least 500 new Council homes in the next 5 years. Following approval from Cabinet in October 2013, the council has incorporated a wholly owned subsidiary called Broadway Living (BL) whose objectives are to offer a complementary delivery vehicle for new council owned homes outside the Housing Revenue Account (HRA). BL is a wholly owned subsidiary of the council and the council is therefore the sole shareholder. One of the key objectives of the council is to offer a diverse range of housing tenures to meet housing demand. As part of the council’s objective to build more homes for a variety of tenures it entered into an innovative contract with Hill Partnerships (Hill’s) in March 2014. The council provided land (mainly disused sites and garage courts) and the agreement was for Hill to build out a mixture of private and affordable homes for rent, using the sales profit on the sales homes to pay for the construction of the affordable homes. Ruislip Road was one of these sites that were included in the Hill’s agreement with the council.
The development at Ruislip Road has a total of 50 homes, 18 are for open market sale by Hills and the remaining 32 are currently retained by the council. In March 2016 Cabinet authorised the disposal of the 32 homes to Broadway Living under a long lease for intermediate rent subject to Broadway Living securing funding. As Broadway Living has the majority share of the new homes, it has been agreed that Broadway Living will take responsibility for the external management and maintenance of the shared roads, car parking and landscaping areas within the development. The occupiers of the Hill’s sale homes and Broadway Living homes will be separately responsible for any services
The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 8 Page 12 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017 internally in their respective homes, for example communal cleaning. See site plan at Appendix 3 of the report.
At the March 2016 Cabinet meeting members also agreed the recommendation below: To note the principle of the Council lending Broadway Living approximately £7m on a commercial basis through prudential borrowing, to enable Broadway Living to pay the HRA a proportion of the market value of the 32 intermediate properties to be transferred; and issue shares in the company to reflect the proportion of the market value of the properties that is not covered by the cash payment. A further report will be brought back to Cabinet to approve the final terms of the funding agreement with Broadway Living. The viability of the intermediate rent homes at Ruislip Road has been assessed using the same appraisal criteria used for Eastcote Lane, Copley Close and Abbotts Road, as set out in the October 2013 and April 2016 cabinet report that approved the transfer of land for 76 homes to Broadway Living for the Copley Close development.
12. Commercial Waste Service Options Resolved That Cabinet: i) approves in principle for the council to enter into a joint venture agreement with London Business Waste and Recycling Limited to create a Special Purpose Vehicle Company (SPV) for the purpose of providing a commercial waste collection service. ii) notes that the name of the SPV will be Ealing Business Waste and Recycling Limited. iii) notes that the Executive Director of Environment and Customer Services is appointed or nominates an Ealing Council employee as Director of the Board of the SPV representing Ealing Council. iv) delegates authority to the Executive Director of Environment and Customer Services, following consultation with the Portfolio Holder to finalise, agree and sign off the following: a) The final business case b) The Joint Venture Agreement specifying the terms and conditions of the operation of the SPV c) The fulfilment contract specifying the terms and conditions of the provision of operational services by the Council to the SPV should this be required d) The brand licence agreement authorising the use of the Ealing name and logo in accordance with specified terms and conditions e) The memorandum and articles of association for the SPV f) Any necessary variations of the Contract with the Council’s current waste and recycling collection contractor v) authorises the Director of Finance to enter into a funding agreement to fund the SPV if required, subject to the business case.
Reasons for Decisions and Options Considered Businesses are required to make their own arrangements for the collection and disposal of commercial waste. They can make these arrangements through their local waste collection authority or they can use private commercial waste collection companies.
Ealing Council is a waste collection authority and has a duty to provide or arrange for the collection of commercial waste where a request for this service is received from a business located within the borough. This duty is set out in section 45 (1) (b) of the
The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 9 Page 13 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017 Environmental Protection Act, 1990. A reasonable charge can be made for providing this service.
Ealing Council operates the commercial waste collection service through the Environmental Services contract with current Contractor Amey.
The provision of commercial waste collections by waste collection authorities provides a number of benefits including: • An income stream that supports the budget. • Businesses producing low waste volumes, or that are in isolated locations of little commercial interest to private collectors, have an alternative, so discouraging fly- tipping which is a cost to the council. • Provides the means to implement measures that control when and where commercial waste is left out for collection, such as through a timed collection scheme.
Ealing Council commissioned Eunomia Research & Consulting to undertake a high level analysis of the options available to deliver best value from its commercial waste operation. The report sets out the findings of the initial stage of the analysis, looking at a broad range of options and assessing them against largely qualitative criteria in order to identify the most promising choices. The key points are summarised below and the full report is available in Confidential Appendix A of the report.
Six options for the future development of the council’s commercial waste service were identified and assessed: 1. Do nothing; 2. Enhance service within current model; 3. Revise arrangements with Amey to include additional incentives; 4. Outsource commercial waste recycling through a new contract; 5. Work with London Business Waste Recycling Ltd; and 6. Sell service.
The options were evaluated against five criteria: • Criterion 1: Feasibility • Criterion 2: Impact on overall income from commercial waste • Criterion 3: Impact on commercial waste recycling rate • Criterion 4: Impact on street cleansing and fly-tipping • Criterion 5: Implementation and ongoing costs/effort
The best option is number 5, working with London Business Waste Recycling Ltd due to scoring well particularly around increasing income from commercial waste, and introducing a range of recycling services having a positive impact on the commercial waste recycling rate.
In June 2015, LWaRB provided outline proposals to London boroughs setting out a concept for establishing a company to work with boroughs to develop commercial waste collection services for the purpose of raising income. The council expressed an interest in this concept and responded accordingly. A number of other London boroughs similarly expressed an interest.
The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 10 Page 14 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017 With a number of boroughs having expressed an interest in the concept LWaRB committed funds to set-up a new venture, London Business Waste and Recycling Limited Ltd (LBWR). LBWR has been established to undertake sales, development, marketing and administrative functions that are required to operate commercial waste collection services driven by two principal objectives: • To assist London boroughs to generate new revenues from waste services. • To promote good business waste management across London and increase recycling. The first of these objectives aligns with the council’s revenue budget strategy for raising new income. The second objective links to the council’s priority to maintain the quality and cleanliness of the public realm and supporting citizens to play an active role in enhancing their neighbourhoods by establishing a comprehensive, reliable and cost effective commercial waste collection service, so that all businesses can dispose of their waste responsibly and recycle as much as possible. This will reduce the temptation for businesses to fly-tip, increase compliance with duty of care obligations and ensure that the council is paid for collecting and disposing of waste.
LBWR is recruiting London boroughs as partner authorities. The London Boroughs of Hounslow, Lambeth and Southwark entered into a joint venture agreement with LBWR in late 2016. Other boroughs are currently undertaking a process of due diligence to determine whether these arrangements are suitable for their needs.
13. Children's Services Capital Works Approvals Resolved That Cabinet: i) notes the list of proposed High Priority Condition Works as set out in Confidential Appendix A of the report, and that further work will take place to finalise detailed schemes. ii) authorises the Assistant Director: Schools Planning & Resources to finalise the schemes set out in Confidential Appendix A of the report, and to invite and evaluate tenders for the works for these schemes. iii) for contracts with values exceeding Director authorisation, delegates authority to the Assistant Director: Schools Planning & Resources, to award contracts if suitable tenders, affordable within the £5.081m budget allocated, are received pursuant to tender exercises referred to in recommendation 1.2 in the report. iv) authorises the Assistant Director: Schools Planning & Resources to seek all necessary Planning and Statutory Approvals for the schemes described in this report.
Reasons for Decisions and Options Considered The decisions are required to enable the council to progress with capital works to schools and plans to expand schools in line with approved statutory proposals and to secure sufficient school places to meet future demand.
Under the council’s constitution Cabinet approval is required to proceed with schemes over £1m in value, Portfolio Holder approval is required in order to proceed with schemes between £0.500m and £1m, and the schemes up to £0.500m per annum fall within Director delegated powers. However, as all of the schemes are to be undertaken during the same time period it is considered better practice to obtain authority for all in this report being submitted to Cabinet rather than submitting a separate report for a smaller number of projects to Cabinet, the Portfolio holder and Director.
The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 11 Page 15 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017 14. Update on School Places and Related Capital Approvals Resolved That Cabinet: i) notes section 3.1 of the report, which sets out the updated projections in relation to demand for primary and secondary school provision across the borough and current proposals to address rising demand. ii) approves the addition £0.600m of Big Lottery New Opportunity Fund and Building Research Establishment grants for school works to the Schools Service Capital Programme. iii) authorises the Executive Director for Children, Adults and Public Health to invite and evaluate tenders, and award contracts for all necessary contracts required for the accommodation for the replacement of life-expired accommodation at Redwood College up to a value of £0.600m. iv) authorises the Executive Director for Children, Adults and Public Health to seek all necessary Planning and Statutory Approvals for the schemes described in this report; v) approves the adjustment of the budget for the Ark Byron Primary Academy to reflect the increased costs of the scheme, noting that these costs are to be met by the Education Funding Agency. vi) agrees in principle that, if the site identified for the proposed North Twyford School as described in paragraph 3.1 of the report cannot be acquired by the Education Funding Agency by agreement, the site be acquired by means of a compulsory purchase order pursuant to section 530 (1) of the Education Act 1996 if necessary and that a further report will be brought back to cabinet for approval.
Reasons for Decisions and Options Considered Under the council’s constitution Cabinet approval is required to proceed with schemes over £0.1m in value, Portfolio Holder approval is required in order to proceed with schemes between £0.500m and £1m, and the schemes up to £0.500m per annum fall within Director delegated powers. Details of the schemes and reasons for the recommendations are set out in the report.
15. Procurement of Ealing Parent Partnership Service/ Impartial Information, Advice and Support (IIAS) Resolved That Cabinet: i) authorises the Executive Director for Children, Adults and Public Health to invite and evaluate tenders for a local Impartial Information, Advice and Support (IIAS) contract for a period of three years from January 2018 with the option to extend for two 12 month periods expiring 31/12/2022, or alternatively, if the Council procures in collaboration with other Boroughs, authorises Ealing Council to act as the lead council in the procurement of a local Impartial Information, Advice and Support (IIAS) contract on behalf of itself and partner boroughs with Ealing Council entering into a contract with the provider and the other councils either having access agreements in relation to this contract or entering into individual contracts with the successful provider. ii) delegates authority to the Executive Director for Children, Adults and Public Health to award a contract to the most economically advantageous tender, following consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Children and Young People. iii) approves the council’s participation in a joint procurement and tendering exercise of the parent partnership services with neighbouring Boroughs, if following detailed review and options appraisals with the neighbouring boroughs of Brent, Harrow, and Hillingdon, it is considered to be a financially viable and beneficial to the service for Ealing. The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 12 Page 16 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017
Reasons for Decisions and Options Considered The Local Authority has a statutory duty to a provide IIAS services for children and young people aged 0-25 with additional needs in the borough as laid out in the Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) Reforms and Children and Families Act 2014. IIAS are required to be independent and provide impartial advice and information on all aspects of Education, Health and Care Plans.
The current parent partnership contract was commissioned in 2009 on a three year term with the ability to extend the contract. The contract extension facility has now been exhausted and the current contract term comes to an end in December 2017.
The Special Educational Needs Code of Practice, 0 to 25 years (January 2015) sets out the minimum standards for this statutory service: a. The provision of impartial advice, information and support to all parents/carers of children with SEN and/or disability. b. Information and advice must be free, accurate, and confidential and in formats which are accessible and responsive to the needs of users. c. To work with the Parent Carer Forum and other user groups to ensure that parents/carers and young people’s views are heard, understood and inform and influence the development of local SEN policy, practice and decision making. d. Children are consulted and their views are taken into account in decision making e. To work with schools, the Local Authority (LA), Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) and commissioning officers and others to help them develop positive relationships with parents/carers and young
The current Parent Partnership service is provided by Family Action for £158,000 per annum and is joint funded by LBE (£108,000) and Ealing CCG (£50,000). Ealing Council holds the contract and manages the contract.
Procurement Options Considered • Option 1 (a) – re commissioning service going out to tender, for one provider, on the open market– preferred option as it meets all procurement regulations and need to for service to be provided by an independent organisation to Ealing Council • Option 1 (b) – as above, but in conjunction with one or more other Council • Option 2 – decommission service and not re procure –not recommended as it is a statutory duty of the Council • Option 3 – deliver In house – Not recommended as it is a requirement of service to be independent
16. Permission to Tender for Child Health Services (health visiting and school nursing) Resolved That Cabinet: i) authorises the Executive Director, Children, Adults and Public Health to invite and evaluate tenders for a contract (which is likely to be in the region of £6 million per annum) for the provision of health visiting and school nursing services for a period of three years from October 2018 with the option to extend for a further four years (extendable at two yearly intervals). ii) delegates authority to the Executive Director, Children, Adults and Public Health, following consultation with the two relevant portfolio holders, to award the contract The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 13 Page 17 of 382 Cabinet Minutes 14 February 2017 following the evaluation of tenders on the basis that it is the most advantageous tender based on quality and cost.
Reasons for Decisions and Options Considered Local Authorities commission school nursing and health visiting services as part of their public health responsibilities. In Ealing, there are currently separate contracts for each of these two services, both of which come to an end on 30 September 2018. Both services are provided by London North West Healthcare NHS Trust. There are five nationally mandated items relating to health visiting although these are subject to national consultation and may change. Health visitors offer a universal contact to families from late pregnancy, in the new birth period, at 6 to 8 weeks, at 1 year and at two to two and a half years. In addition they provide a more intensive service to families who have particular needs as well as playing a key role in safeguarding young children. The five mandated items are under review nationally and the specification for the service may need to change to reflect any changes in the mandation. The health visiting contract in Ealing includes the delivery of a Family Nurse Partnership service. This service provides a health visiting service to vulnerable young women in conjunction with an intensive intervention from pre-birth until the child is two years old. This is a licensed programme which has been in place in Ealing for 7 years.
The school nursing service works in the Borough’s state funded schools. It delivers the following key functions: identification of health care needs at reception stage; support to schools to help them develop and deliver health care plans for targeted children; national child measurement programme; safeguarding; training for school staff; support and advise to schools and others relating to healthcare needs of school aged children.
As the contracts expire on 30 th September 2018 a procurement process is required and the following options have been considered:- Option one – dynamic purchasing system. This would not work for this service which needs to operate as a whole service and to achieve economies of scale through shared premises, management structures and skills mix. Option two – commission with other local authorities. No other local authority has been identified that are currently going out to the market for the same range of services. Option three – tender for a block contract from one provider. This is the preferred option and would provide stability and continuity to the service.
17. Date of Next meeting Resolved The next meeting of Cabinet will be held on 14 March 2017 at 7pm
Councillor Julian Bell, Chair
Date
The meeting concluded at 7:30pm having completed its business.
The minutes should be read in conjunction with the agenda for the meeting. They are subject to approval and signature at the next meeting of this Committee. 14 Page 18 of 382 Report for: ACTION
Item Number:
07
Contains Confidential NO or Exempt Information
Title Future Ealing Responsible Officer(s) Kieran Read, Director of Strategy & Engagement Author(s) Noel Hatch, Head of Strategy & Performance Portfolio(s) Julian Bell, Leader of the Council For Consideration By Cabinet Date to be Considered 14 March 2017 Implementation Date if 27 March 2017 Not Called In Affected Wards All Keywords/Index Future Ealing, Strategy, MTFS
Purpose of Report:
Future Ealing is the name for a programme of work intended to define the long term, outcome led, vision for the borough and prioritise the council’s work. The objectives of the programme are to improve outcomes for residents and in doing so to help meet the significant challenges the council faces over the next decade. This report updates Cabinet on the development work that has been done on the programme, seek agreement to the outcomes proposed and outline next steps for Cabinet approval.
1. Recommendations
It is recommended that Cabinet:
• Agree the objectives for Future Ealing set out in paragraph 4.1 and the outcomes proposed in paragraph 4.2 • Notes progress in the development of the approach • Approve next steps proposed from paragraph 4.5 - 5.3 and the timetable for implementation set out in paragraph 16
2. Reason for Decision and Options Considered
2.1 This is a report proposing Cabinet agree a programme of work - Future Ealing. The Council is well run and has managed the impact of reducing resources effectively over a number of years whilst maintaining service quality and outcomes for residents. Looking ahead the environment continues to be
1
Page 19 of 382 challenging with considerable public policy and financial uncertainty as well as changes in the borough, which create challenges and opportunities.
2.2 To manage the strategic environment effectively, it will be necessary evolve our organisational approach. Future Ealing is the name for a programme of work to deliver that goal and to ensure that the organisation is in the best possible position to support and deliver the priorities of the administration that will be returned in the 2018 election within the resources of the council.
2.3 In summary Future Ealing is about taking an outcome led approach. By agreeing the outcomes that are most important and taking a ‘one council’ approach to delivering these we can best deliver improvements for residents, operate as the most effective organisation we can be and address financial challenges.
2.4 This report outlines the context that Ealing is in, the purpose of setting out a clear outcome led approach, the priority outcomes, how the programme will be governed, and how we will need to work as an organisation to deliver on this approach. It is about changing how we work. It should be seen as a long term approach to strategic planning for the borough. Therefore it is primarily about preparing the organisation and partners to deliver in the period 2018-2022 as part of a wider 10 year vision and will of course require engagement with the returned administration on its priorities. However, where we can bring forward work earlier we will of course do so.
2.5 The alternative approach considered is to continue with the Council’s existing approaches to strategic planning. These have been effective and contributed to Ealing’s strong current position but going forward it is recommended that a refreshed organisational approach is agreed to build on that strong track record and will enable a sharper definition of key priorities, tackle root causes of the issues we face, and facilitate a ‘one council’ and ‘one public sector’ approach to delivering them.
3. Key implications
The Context
3.1 Ealing is a well-run council. The last seven years have been extremely challenging – both on local people and on our officers and members - but we have navigated them well, thinking hard about how to manage reductions in funding whilst protecting the borough and residents, including the most vulnerable. We have good local services and our recent Peer Challenge confirmed that we are in a strong position.
3.2 We know there is further change ahead. We still have to manage further losses in funding for a number of years. In fact by 2020, Ealing, like other councils will no longer receive grant from government but will need to be self-sufficient from money generated locally from Council Tax and from business rates. As highlighted in February 2017’s Budget Strategy Cabinet Report, Ealing has implemented a significant savings programme to deal with the combined impact of continuing funding, cost and inflationary pressures. Meanwhile, we experience
2
Page 20 of 382 increasing demand on particular services, such as social care and homelessness which pose considerable challenges.
3.3 The wider national and global context is also very uncertain with the impact of Brexit. The council therefore has to continue to plan for several years of financial restraint , with the uncertainties that could affect the council's financial position over the medium term, notably:
• Central government policies, including legislative change, which may require additional expenditure in areas that would not otherwise be council priorities. • Changes in interest rates. • The impact of market forces on costs, particularly with regard to major contracts, housing and the local employment market. • The raising of community expectations, leading to additional demand for services or improved services. • The growth in population, leading to additional demand for services.
3.4 However, our ambition is to make things better for Ealing is not reducing and there are opportunities too . We will continue to build on our strengths and grow new opportunities to attract new investment and business. Developments in technology offer the chance to re-shape the way we engage with residents whilst developments like Crossrail will change the ‘perceived geography’ of Ealing.
3.5 Last year’s Peer Challenge showed that Ealing is a strong well-run Council but one where services can be siloed and where there is an opportunity to reset approaches to strategic planning, resource allocation partner and staff engagement to facilitate the most effective delivery for local people.
3.6 Future Ealing is our response to those challenges . We want to use a focus on the key outcomes we want to make happen as a way of informing everything we do, setting our budget, service transformation, developing our workforce, how we use IT and how we tell our story to staff, partners, local businesses and residents. To meet that ambition will require a co-ordinated approach to organisational transformation.
4. Future Ealing Programme
Objectives
4.1 The following objectives are proposed for the Future Ealing programme:
• To provide a framework for partnership between members and officers • To motivate and drive ‘one council’ and ‘one public service’ approach to achieving outcomes • To link aspiration, delivery and organisational development
3
Page 21 of 382 • To identify the areas where we need transformation vs continuous improvement • To drive our resource allocation against priorities • To ensure we deliver a balanced budget • To help ‘tell our story’ more effectively externally • To help ‘tell our story’ more effectively internally to motivate and engage staff
Priority Outcomes
4.2 Future Ealing starts with our core purpose, improving outcomes for Ealing. Priority outcomes have been developed and are proposed as the centre of the approach. The outcomes for approval by Cabinet are:
1) A growing economy creates jobs and opportunities for Ealing residents to reduce poverty and increase incomes and skills 2) Children and young people achieve educationally and fulfil their potential 3) Children and young people grow up safe from harm 4) Residents are physically and mentally healthy, active and independent 5) Ealing has an increasing supply of quality and affordable housing 6) Crime is down and Ealing residents feel safe 7) The borough has the smallest environmental footprint possible 8) Ealing is a clean borough and a high quality place where people want to live 9) Ealing is a strong community that promotes diversity with inequality and discrimination reduced
4.3 Across these outcomes, we want to help people and communities do things for themselves. There will also be the following cross-cutting themes of work that we cover in further detail in 4.8-4.13:
Transformational Themes • Digital, data and Customer • Commercialisation and Assets • Cross Cutting and Efficiency • Children’s and Adults review • Service efficiency
4.4 The outcomes proposed have been informed by analysis of resident priorities, consultation with Cabinet and opposition parties, Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) and Health & Wellbeing Board (HWB) members, Trade Unions (TUs) and staff. We believe that they outline a vision for Ealing that is widely shared and can be used to deliver the existing administrations Corporate Plan objectives and to inform the long term planning necessary to deliver the MTFS and engage with the incoming 2018 administration on delivery of its manifesto priorities.
Delivering the approach
4.5 Outcome Delivery Plans – for each outcome we will need to develop an outcome delivery plan. There will be accountability for delivery of the plans at both Cabinet and senior officer level. Further work is required to define the approach and timescales. However, at a high level these will need to set out:
4
Page 22 of 382
• Transformation Targets – clearly defined measures on which we need to deliver improved performance and where success is critical to our financial sustainability. Each of these will be defined and measurable. They will also identify the key population groups that we need to prioritise in order to deliver. Our targets will need to be sensitive to both driving up overall performance and narrowing inequalities. It is our expectation that delivery will be supported by an agreed trajectory covering both performance and finance so that we can robustly track performance. • Projects – to deliver the expected outcomes. We expect that to deliver outcomes effectively, projects will need to embed approaches which:
o Tackle underlying problems to prevent issues before they arise through better prevention and management of demand o Enable active citizenship and empower people and communities to take action themselves o Make effective use of data and customer insight to understand issues and target and personalise interventions o Demonstrate effective commissioning, market and contract management o Collaborate across council departments and partner organisations to tackle issues so residents experience one council and one public service o Influence partners and organisations that have a stake in the borough to play their part in improving outcomes
Ealing already applies many of these techniques and has an ambitious programme of change underway ourselves and with partners. Outcome delivery plans will need to reflect existing approaches such as Brighter Futures, Better Care Fund and wider health & social care integration. By taking a more systematic organisational approach we expect to identify further opportunities for consideration by an incoming administration in 2018.
• Achieve the programme’s robust benefits within the requirements of the MTFS • Business cases – for any enabling investment required to enable delivery, within the resourcing envelope available via the MTFS
Outcome based budgeting
4.6 An important driver for the Future Ealing approach is to ensure that we focus on tackling the most complex problems. One part of that is making sure that resources across the council are aligned behind the key outcomes that we want to deliver. This will help us drive efficiency by prioritising and by tackling complex problems more effectively.
4.7 The council is reviewing its approach to budget setting and will from 2018/19 be adopting an outcomes based approach in order to ensure funding is used in the most impactful way to deliver the best outcomes for residents. This approach, which has been used by a number of local authorities as an evolution of the current service focussed budget planning process. Taking this approach is consistent with the budget principles of the current administration:
5
Page 23 of 382 • Making every effort to protect those at risk in our borough including elderly, disabled, children and young people who use our services. • Building residents’ resilience and social capital through acting as an enabling council. • Intervening in problems as early as possible to deliver the best results for residents. • Seeking solutions that make use of local people’s knowledge, enthusiasm and commitment to the borough. • Seeking to maximise employment and economic growth in the borough by being an exemplary employer and by encouraging local business growth. • Making our services and those we commission world class and focused on what matters to local people. • Making the best use of our collective resources & opportunities for external investment across the council and the borough • Continuously improving the performance and efficiency of our services
Enablers supporting the delivery of Future Ealing
4.8 In addition to a clear focus on outcomes there are a number of cross cutting themes that will be essential to our ability to meet the challenge ahead of us, which will be developed through our Modern Council strand of Future Ealing. These include how we use digital technology and how we can generate new income.
4.9 Using digital to transform the way we work and support our residents and neighbourhoods: The potential of the digital agenda to improve outcomes for residents – including the quality of their interaction with the Council – as well as deliver efficiencies makes it a powerful enabler for Future Ealing.
4.10 The challenge for the Council will be to respond in a way which designs approaches around the personalised needs of residents, optimises efficiency and gives the best possible user experience, including for residents who are less confident using digital. A Digital Strategy will be published for approval at the Council’s April 2017 Cabinet meeting and set out the organisational approach.
4.11 Generating new income and investment that make the best use of our assets through a more commercial approach : The entrepreneurial approach of councils has evolved from funding and delivering traditional support to developing a customer-focused approach that subsidises service delivery through appropriate income generation.
4.12 Cuts to Government funding means that councils increasingly need to think creatively about how to deliver services differently. A key element of this is to develop a more commercial approach which will not only reduce costs and increase income but also support better outcomes. Commercialism itself is not new to local authorities but there are always new and innovative methods that can be adopted.
4.13 Continuous improvement and efficiency – we believe that there is significant potential to drive improved outcome performance and in doing so to
6
Page 24 of 382 benefit from improved financial sustainability. Not every aspect of every outcome we want to deliver will need a cross-cutting focus or step change in performance. There will be areas that are central to our administration’s vision where our priority is to continue to deliver year on year improvement in the quality of service we provide and the efficiency with which we do it. There will also be services which we are mandated to provide, although we will need to explore what scope exists to provide those services in a different way to now. Therefore we expect that the strategic framework that will emerge from the Future Ealing programme will continue to be supported by a robust performance framework based around continuous improvement and financial efficiency.
5. Governance of the programme
5.1 The Future Ealing programme will help the organisation and partners focus on agreed outcomes through robust governance and supporting programmes of work that enable us to achieve these.
5.2 Future Ealing is about how we work as an organisation. It is core to our direction. Therefore it will be managed within our mainstream structures. Cabinet will have ultimate responsibility for agreeing the vision and outcomes and monitoring oversight and delivery against the targets we have set. Corporate Board will be the board with responsibility for developing and overseeing the Future Ealing programme. The Chief Executive is the overall sponsor of the programme, supported by the Director of Strategy and Engagement.
5.3 The Executive Director for Regeneration & Housing will act as sponsor for the delivery of the Outcome Delivery Plans. The Executive Director for Environment & Customer Services and Executive Director for Corporate Resources will be co- sponsors for the Modern Council strand including the digital, data and customer and commercialisation & assets work streams. The Executive Director for Corporate Resources will be sponsor for the Continuous Improvement & Efficiency strand. The Executive Director for Children, Adults and Public Health will sponsor work to deliver One Public Service. Further information, including sponsors and Director leads for each outcome can found in the Future Ealing Governance Appendix.
Our partners’ involvement in helping to shape the Future Ealing approach will be incremental through their involvement in a variety of work streams and cumulative through the oversight of the strategic leaders brought together through the umbrella role of the Local Strategic Partnership.
6. Financial Implications
Financial impact on the budget
Future Ealing is a central part of our strategy to manage the organisation’s finances. Any future financial implications that may arise from priorities set for the organisation in Future Ealing will be reflected in the budget setting process. The cost of the programme will be met from within the Council’s budget.
7
Page 25 of 382 7. Legal
Most of the council’s functions are carried out as a result of legal duties placed upon the council either by statute or common law. Legal implications of the various work streams will need to be considered on an ongoing basis and at an appropriately formative stage.
Proposals to stop doing something or to deliver a service to a different standard or in a different way will need to be carefully evaluated to ensure that the council continues to act in accordance with the law and does make itself vulnerable to potentially damaging or expensive challenge. In some cases consultation will be required and in others there will be equalities implications that will need to be considered and taken into account, all at an appropriately early stage.
In almost all cases it will be possible to do things differently, provided time is taken at an early stage to consider the legal implications of the changes proposed.
8. Value for Money
Through new outcome-based budgeting and performance frameworks, we will ensure that major expenditure and service change focuses on achieving the outcomes set out above.
9. Sustainability Impact Appraisal
Future Ealing will contribute positively to our sustainability objectives. The majority of sustainability objectives fit in with “The borough has the smallest environmental footprint possible” outcome. However other outcomes play a role in achieving the objectives from Ealing Council’s Sustainability Strategy. Further information can be found in the Sustainability Impact Appraisal Annex.
10. Risk Management
The performance of the economy in London and beyond will be critical to our ability to implement this strategy. London is a global city, and as such is subject to global economic trends.
The preparedness of businesses to invest, immigration policy, wages, levels of employment and the availability of finance are all factors underpinning the success of the economy in Ealing, and the ability of the partner organisations to contribute to the goals set out in the plan.
We also face the prospect of changing national policy with a new government, and the terms on which they negotiate the UK’s departure from the EU will also have an impact.
8
Page 26 of 382 Our mitigations lie in the strong underlying factors of the capital’s, and Ealing’s, economies. Regardless of the changing policy and economic context, London remains a good place to invest and do business, and Ealing in particular. We may need to adapt the means by which we achieve this strategy, or indeed adjust our expectations on how much progress we can make, but our vision is likely to remain the same.
11. Community Safety
This strategic vision plan reflects the crime and community safety priorities for the next five years, in particular through the “Crime is down and Ealing residents feel safe” outcome.
12. Links to the 6 Priorities for the Borough
Future Ealing will continue making Ealing a prosperous, safer, healthier, cleaner, fairer and accessible borough through the nine outcomes. The future administration elected in 2018 may want to update these outcomes when publishing the new Borough Plan in summer of that year.
13. Equalities, Human Rights and Community Cohesion . The contribution of our diverse communities is what makes Ealing the place it is and maintaining that diversity, sustaining cohesion and good relations, and promoting equality of opportunity is vitally important. London is part of a global economy, and we recognise there are limits to the extent to which we can affect overall economic inequality, but we believe that by focusing our efforts collectively, we can improve equality of opportunity and seek to narrow the gap in key areas. As such, we have set key equality objectives 1 for the period 2016- 20. These objectives are part of our equality duty and progress against them will be regularly monitored and reported through a range of measures. In particular, the “Ealing is a strong community that promotes diversity with inequality and discrimination reduced” outcome will ensure that this theme is central to our strategic vision.
As Future Ealing will be reflected in the budget setting process, so too will our equalities principles, to make sure that resources are aligned with the council’s priorities. We will also identify key groups of the population for whom we will prioritise our work to reduce inequalities.
Section 149 of the Equalities Act 2010 requires the council, in the exercise of its functions, to have due regard to the need to: (a) Eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by the Act; (b) Advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it; (c) Foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.
1 https://www.ealing.gov.uk/info/201068/equality_and_diversity/1160/public_sector_equality_duty/11
9
Page 27 of 382 The protected characteristics are: age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.
There will be equalities implications from many of the changes proposed and it will be important to assess these at an early stage and take them into account.
14. Staffing/Workforce and Accommodation implications
We envisage that the council will have to substantially change to the way it currently delivers services which will inevitably have implications for staff, both in specific service areas and in terms of the overall values and skills which we need. The Peer Challenge also highlighted how important it is to communicate to staff the future direction of the organisation. Therefore a through programme of staff engagement will support Future Ealing. Initial engagement sessions with the Chief Executive and Corporate Board have been scheduled to get staff feedback as have focus group sessions to engage staff for their views on the values and behaviours we will need to deliver. An ongoing communications and engagement programme for staff will be developed.
15. Property and Assets
Impacts on property and assets will be considered as work streams are developed through the programme.
16. Any other implications
These will be considered as part of the programme .
17. Consultation
The starting point for Future Ealing was to review and analyse the evidence the Council and partners had gathered over the last few years on the priorities for residents and businesses. This is reflected in the agreed strategic outcomes.
Many of the issues addressed in the strategy have been the subject of recent consultation and engagement, in particular through the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) and Health & Wellbeing Board (HWBB). Therefore, rather than consulting again on these matters, we have drawn on the feedback that people have already provided.
As outlined above resident priorities have informed the selection of the outcomes. There has also been consultation with Cabinet and LSP/HWBB members, engagement with opposition parties, Trade Unions and staff on the outcomes.
The progress of the Future Ealing programme will be scrutinised at the Overview & Scrutiny Committee later in the summer.
Achieving the goals set out in the plan will be a collaborative effort. While particular partners will have an important role to play in achieving specific outcomes, but we will also need engagement from other organisations,
10
Page 28 of 382 communities and residents in Ealing and beyond to help ensure these outcomes are achieved.
These goals are ambitious, and will require innovative approaches and ways of working. Therefore, we want to draw on the wide range of insight and experience available in the borough to achieve these outcomes.
18. Timetable for Implementation
Aims Milestone
Approval of outcomes and endorsement of Future Ealing March 2017
Approval and endorsement of Digital Strategy to support the shift to April 2017 how the council uses technology to embed the Future Ealing principles
Update of Corporate Plan 2014-18 reviewing progress in delivery, June 2017 reflecting the outcomes
Review of progress in implementing the LGA Peer Challenge July 2017 recommendations to improve the council’s capability
Scrutiny of progress by Overview & Scrutiny of Future Ealing July 2017
Review of Future Ealing by Cabinet and Budget Proposals November 2017
2018/19 Budget setting informed by Future Ealing outcomes and February 2018 budgeting approach
Borough Plan published informed by Future Ealing and the Summer 2018 manifesto priorities of the returned administration
19. Appendices
• Future Ealing Governance • Sustainability Impact Appraisal for Future Ealing
20. Background Information
Ealing Council Equality Objectives 2016-2020 https://www.ealing.gov.uk/info/201068/equality_and_diversity/1160/public_sector _equality_duty/11
Ealing Council Budget Strategy, Cabinet Report, February 2017 http://ealing.cmis.uk.com/ealing/Meetings/tabid/70/ctl/ViewMeetingPublic/mid/397 /Meeting/4921/Committee/3/Default.aspx
11
Page 29 of 382 Consultation
Name of Post held Date Date Comments consultee sent to response appear in consultee received paragraph: Internal Julian Bell Leader of the Council 06/02/17 28/02/17 Throughout Paul Najsarek Chief Executive 06/02/17 07/02/17 Throughout Executive Director for Judith Finlay 06/02/17 07/02/17 No comments Children, Adults & Health Executive Director for Pat Hayes 06/02/17 07/02/17 No comments Regeneration & Housing Executive Director for Ian O’Donnell 06/02/17 07/02/17 No comments Corporate Resources Executive Director for Keith Townsend Environment & Customer 06/02/17 07/02/17 No comments Services Director, Strategy & Kieran Read 02/02/17 06/02/17 Throughout Engagement Director, Legal & Democratic Helen Harris 06/02/17 16/02/17 Throughout Services Ross Brown Director, Finance 06/02/17 01/03/17 Throughout Finance Business Partner, Flora Osiyemi 09/02/17 15/02/17 Throughout – Consultancy Interim Head of Audit & Jeremy Welburn Investigations 06/02/17 01/03/17 Throughout
Head of Sustainability Joanne Mortensen 06/02/17 15/02/17 Throughout Programmes Moira Mercer Head of Communications 06/02/17 15/02/17 Throughout External
Report History
Decision type: Urgency item? Key decision No
Report no.: Report author and contact for queries: Noel Hatch, Head of Strategy & Performance, 020 8825 5992
12
Page 30 of 382 Future Ealing Governance
The Future Ealing programme will help the organisation and partners focus on agreed outcomes through robust governance and supporting programmes of work that enable us to achieve these.
There will be accountability for delivering the key outcomes at both Cabinet and senior officer level. Delivery against outcomes will be managed through a mixture of transformation targets and a robust continuous improvement performance regime.
Future Ealing is about how we work as an organisation. It is core to our direction. Therefore it will be managed within our mainstream structures. Cabinet will have ultimate responsibility for agreeing the vision and outcomes and monitoring oversight and delivery against the targets we have set. Corporate Board will be the board with responsibility for developing and overseeing the Future Ealing programme.
The Executive Director of Regeneration & Housing will act as sponsor for the delivery of the Outcome Delivery Plans. The Executive Director of Environment & Customer Services and Executive Director of Corporate Resources will be sponsors for the Modern Council strand including the digital strategy and commercialisation & assets work. The Executive Director of Corporate Resources will be sponsors for the Continuous Improvement & Efficiency strand.
Page 31 of 382 A programme approach will support the development of Future Ealing with named leads for key aspects of the programme, as specified below.
Outcomes Outcome Sponsors Outcome Leads
A growing economy Executive Director of Director of Regeneration & creates jobs and Corporate Resources Planning opportunities for Ealing Executive Director of residents to reduce Regeneration & Housing poverty and increase incomes and skills
Children and young Executive Director of Interim Director of people achieve Children, Adults & Health Children & Families educationally and fulfil Executive Director of their potential Regeneration & Housing
Children and young Chief Executive Interim Director of Children & Families people grow up safe from Executive Director of harm Children, Adults & Health
Residents are physically Executive Director of Director of Public Health and mentally healthy, Children, Adults & Health Director of Adults' active and independent Executive Director of Services Environment & Customer Services
Ealing has an increasing Executive Director of Acting Director of Safer supply of quality and Regeneration & Housing Communities & Housing affordable housing Executive Director of Corporate Resources
Crime is down and Ealing Executive Director of Acting Director of Safer residents feel safe Regeneration & Housing Communities & Housing Executive Director of Children, Adults & Health
The borough has the Executive Director of Interim Director of smallest environmental Environment & Customer Environment footprint possible Services Executive Director of Regeneration & Housing
Ealing is a clean borough Executive Director of Interim Director of and a high quality place Environment & Customer
Page 32 of 382 where people want to live Services Environment
Ealing is a strong Executive Director of Director of Strategy & community that promotes Children, Adults & Health Engagement diversity with inequality Executive Director of and discrimination Regeneration & Housing reduced
Strands Programmes Sponsors Leads
Modern Council Digital, data & Executive Director Director of customer of Environment & Business Customer Services Services Executive Director Director of of Corporate Customer Resources Services Interim Director of Environment
Commercialisation Executive Director Director of & assets of Environment & Business Customer Services Services Executive Director Interim Director of of Corporate Environment Resources
Continuous Cross cutting Executive Director Director of Improvement & efficiency of Corporate Finance Efficiency Resources
Children & adults Executive Director social care review of Corporate Resources Executive Director of Children, Adults & Health
Service efficiency All
Enablers Transformation tools
Strategy & Director of Engagement Strategy & Engagement
Page 33 of 382 Human Resources Assistant Director & Organisational of HR & Development Organisational Development
Finance Director of Finance
ICT Director of Business Services
Legal & Democratic Director Legal & Services Democratic Services
Page 34 of 382 Sustainability Impact Appraisal for Future Ealing
Future Ealing Draft Outcomes Ealing Council Sustainability Strategy A growing economy creates jobs • Equity and local economy - Creating local and opportunities for Ealing economies that support fair employment, residents to reduce poverty and and international fair trade increase incomes and skills
Children and young people • Health and happiness - Encouraging active, achieve educationally and fulfil sociable, meaningful lives to promote good their potential health and well-being • Culture and heritage - Reviving local identity and wisdom; supporting and participating in the arts Children and young people grow • Health and happiness - Encouraging active, up safe from harm sociable, meaningful lives to promote good health and well-being Residents are physically and • Health and happiness - Encouraging active, mentally healthy, active and sociable, meaningful lives to promote good independent health and well-being • Local, healthy and sustainable food - Choosing low impact, local, seasonal and organic diets that contribute to wellness and reduce food waste • Sustainable transport - Encouraging sustainable modes of transport and reducing the need to travel to reduce congestion, carbon emissions and air pollution Ealing has an increasing supply of • Equity and local economy - Creating local quality and affordable housing economies that support fair employment, and international fair trade Crime is down and Ealing • Health and happiness - Encouraging active, residents feel safe sociable, meaningful lives to promote good health and well-being The borough has the smallest • Energy Efficiency – moving toward zero environmental footprint possible carbon buildings - Making the council estate more energy efficient and delivering energy with renewable technologies • Waste Reduction and Material Reuse – moving toward zero waste - Reducing waste, reusing where possible, and ultimately sending zero waste to landfill • Sustainable transport - Encouraging sustainable modes of transport and reducing the need to travel to reduce congestion, carbon emissions and air pollution • Sustainable materials - Using and procuring sustainable products that have a low
Page 35 of 382 embodied energy • Water - Reducing water usage in buildings and in the products we buy; preventing flooding and pollution Ealing is a clean borough and a • Land use and wildlife – Protecting and high quality place where people expanding existing natural habitats and want to live creating new space for wildlife • Culture and heritage – Reviving local identity and wisdom: supporting and participating in the arts Ealing is a strong community that • Health and happiness - Encouraging active, promotes diversity with inequality sociable, meaningful lives to promote good and discrimination reduced health and well-being
Page 36 of 382 Report for: ACTION/INFORMATION
Item Number: 08
Contains Confidential Yes– Appendix is confidential due to information relating to or Exempt Information the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information). Title Playing Pitch Strategy and Associated Outdoor Leisure Projects Responsible Officer(s) Keith Townsend, Executive Director Environment and Customer Services Author(s) Jonathan Kirby – Assistant Director Major Projects Julia Robertson – Major Projects Portfolio(s) Councillor Bell, Policy, Community & Economic Development, Councillor Mahfouz, Transport & Environment For Consideration By Cabinet Date to be Considered 14/3/2017 Implementation Date if 27/3/2017 Not Called In Affected Wards All Keywords/Index Playing, Pitch, Sport, Club
Purpose of Report:
The purpose of this report is to recommend the adoption of the Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 – 2031 produced by Major Projects in partnership with Continuum Sport and Leisure, Sport England and National Governing Bodies of Sport; this document will be a pre-requisite to any future external funding applications to sports organisations.
The new Strategy includes a comprehensive evidence base for outdoor sports facilities and assesses the current and future need for the most popular outdoor sports facilities across Ealing. The Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 – 31 will supersede the outdoor elements of the Ealing Sports Facility Strategy 2012 – 21.
Since its inception in 2012, the Ealing Sports Facility Strategy 2012 – 21 has enabled Ealing Council to successfully invest around £100m in improving sports facilities for the benefit of local residents. The up-to-date Playing Pitch Strategy will enable Ealing Council and organisations based in Ealing to apply for further funding for outdoor sports facility improvements; it is also worth noting that without this document, Sport England and other grant giving organisations will not accept any future funding bids for outdoor facility new builds or refurbishments.
This report will also seek permission to proceed with the development of other outdoor sports sites to progress the Playing Pitch Strategy Action Plan, including granting permission to accept the Park Life funding bid of £3.2m for the Rectory Park outdoor sports facility project valued at approximately £4.975m and then for the awarding of the associated construction contract aiming to complete the build by December 2017; marketing the opportunities at Southfields Recreation Ground and developing the master plan at North Acton Playing Fields. 1
Page 37 of 382
1. Recommendations
It is recommended that Cabinet:
1.1 Approves adoption of the Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 – 2031 (and associated Action Plan) with effect from March 2017.
1.2 Delegates authority to the Executive Director Environment and Customer Services to develop feasibility studies and market opportunities consistent with the adopted Strategy and Action Plan following consultation with the Portfolio holder.
1.3 Delegates authority for the inviting and evaluating of tenders for projects resulting from the Strategy and Action Plan to the Executive Director Environment and Customer Services and Note that partner selection and any associated award of contracts and grant funding agreements will be reported to Cabinet as necessary.
1.4 Authorises the Executive Director Environment and Customer Services to make any minor amendments to the draft Strategy prior to its adoption.
1.5 Notes and agrees that the Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 – 31 supersedes the outdoor sports pitch element of the Ealing Sports Facility Strategy 2012 – 21.
1.6 Authorises the Executive Director Environment and Customer Services to submit external funding bids which support the delivery of the priorities and actions within the Strategy and Action Plan following consultation with the portfolio holder.
1.7 Notes the progress already made in the planning and delivery of new outdoor sports facility projects in Ealing which have been identified through the Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 – 2031, and authorises further funding applications to be made to secure necessary funding to deliver the improvement projects outlined in the Action Plan.
1.8 a. Authorises the Executive Director Environment and Customer Services to accept the Park Life grant for the Rectory Park outdoor sports facility project (as well as any other external funding agreed for the delivery of the project).
b. Approves an additional £4.725m for the Rectory Park scheme into the 2017/18 Capital Programme for Environmental and Customer Services, to be funded by partnership grants.
c. Authorises the award of a construction contract for the construction of a sports pavilion facilities at Rectory Park to Life Build Solutions Limited for the value of £3,407,984.00.
2
Page 38 of 382
2. Reason for Decision and Options Considered
2.1 The reason for the decision is to ensure that the Council, through its Major Projects Team and external partners, adopts a Playing Pitch Strategy for Ealing. Without an adopted strategy, the Council will lose the ability to apply to the majority of organisations for any future outdoor facility development project funding and it may well jeopardise existing funding awards.
2.2 This Strategy will supersede the outdoor element of the currently adopted Ealing Sports Facility Strategy 2012 – 21 adopted by Cabinet in February 2013.
2.3 The agreed key objectives of the Ealing Sports Facility Strategy 2012 – 2021, which have been extended to include this updated review of the outdoor sports facility elements are:
o To provide the Council and its partners with a robust document with an evidence base that can be reliably used to support spatial planning decisions and inform capital investment plans and external funding bids for new and/or enhanced playing pitch sports facilities.
o To improve public health by encouraging more people in Ealing to be more active by ensuring facilities for playing pitch sports are of the appropriate quality are both available and accessible.
o To ensure future sustainability of sport and leisure in Ealing through sports and physical activity networks, involving sports clubs and other delivery organisations
2.4 The evidence base and adoption of the aforementioned strategy has enabled Ealing to attract approximately £22.537m of external funding to improve the network of outdoor sports facilities available to borough residents. Previous schemes such as Spikes Bridge Park, Lord Halsbury Playing Fields, Pitshanger FC Sports Pavilion etc. have significantly improved opportunities for residents and helped to secure the futures of these key voluntary and charitable organisations. Recent schemes in delivery includes approximately £7.000m from the new Park Life funding stream for large developments at Gunnersbury and Rectory Parks, which have been subject to recent Cabinet reports.
2.5 The proposed Strategy covers outdoor sports facility provision across the whole borough and will provide a fifteen year plan to meet both the Council and local people’s needs in relation to Ealing’s outdoor sports pitch facilities.
2.6 The Strategy will ensure that future outdoor sports facilities are located in the most appropriate places to meet demand both now and in the future and will have a positive impact on people’s participation in sport and physical activity.
2.7 The Strategy forms a key evidence base endorsed by Sport England and recommends levels of future sports facility provision underpinning the Council’s 3
Page 39 of 382 Local Plan including the Adopted Policies Map and Development Plan Documents (DPDs), particularly: Development (or Core Strategy) DPD (April 2012), Development Sites DPD (Dec 2013), Planning for Schools DPD (May 2016) and Population projections by age group by sport to 2031.
2.8 It should be noted that the ability to deliver a number of the borough’s sports, leisure and recreational facilities has been facilitated by the adoption of such strategies and the underpinning within the previously mentioned planning policies.
2.9 Investment in a network of outdoor sports facilities will ensure that Ealing residents will have the facilities available to them to be more active, as well as benefit from associated education programmes, leisure/recreation and contributors to the public health agenda.
2.10 Cabinet approved the appointment of Middlesex FA, as the development partner for the regeneration of Rectory Park in September 2015. Since that report was approved officers and Middlesex FA have been developing the project and securing external funding applications. Planning permission was secured on the 19 th October 2016 and tenders were received on the 6th December 2016.
2.11 The Rectory Park project is at a stage when the funding envelope is being estimated at approximately £4.975m, broken down as follows:
Table 1.1. Estimated funding requirement for Rectory Park
Funding source Amount Status £m Ealing Council 0.250 Confirmed Middlesex Football Association 0.200 Confirmed (Reserves) Middlesex Football Association (Sale of 0.850 Confirmed property) Middlesex Football Association relocation 0.250 Confirmed grant from the FA Middlesex Football Association 0.100 Confirmed contribution to the Park Life hub London Marathon Charitable Trust 0.100 Confirmed Sport England: Award of advance funding 0.025 Confirmed for project development costs Park Life hub funding 3.200 Confirmed Total £4.975
2.12 Once funding had successfully been secured the Rectory Park project team completed a tender exercise to identify a preferred contractor. The Council issued tender documents via the London Procurement Portal, in line with the Council’s Contract Procedure Rules, on 31 st October 2016 with a return date of 6th December 2016. Six contractors submitted bids; Life Build Solutions Limited, Ash Contracting Limited, Brennan Limited, Lengard Limited, Priory Gate 4
Page 40 of 382 Limited and Quinn London. Following the tender returns the project team completed an evaluation exercise, see confidential appendix 3, and Life Build Solutions Limited was identified as the most viable tender providing the best average score of value for money and quality tender, see table below.
Table 1.2. Tender submission score for Rectory Park
Ash Life Lengard Priory Brennan Quinn Build Gate % % % % % % Programme 4 4 3.3 0 5 5 Risk 4.3 3 3 1 2 4.75 Quality 3 3 5 3 3 3.75 Communication 3.6 3 4.3 3 3 3 Plan Team 5 5 5 5 4 5 Resources Governing 0 5 5 3 3 5 Body knowledge Total Quality % 19.6 23 25.6 15 20 26.5 Total Price 69.9 70 67 62.4 63.5 61.6 Total Score 89.5 93 92.6 77.4 83.5 88.1
2.13 The Strategy’s associated Action Plan identifies a number of potential projects which officers would like to market test and develop feasibilities for. This includes sites such as North Acton Playing Fields and Southfields Recreation Ground.
2.14 The Council has an excellent track record of marketing its sites, as part of its Asset Transfer Process, which has been the subject of a number of Cabinet and Scrutiny report processes. Ealing has been case studied by both Sport England and the Football Association, given its success and development within this field.
2.15 The Council, following the successful delivery of projects at sites like Spikes Bridge, Lord Halsbury Playing fields and the positive media releases and as a result of our funding partners, hold a waiting list of clubs and charitable organisations that have approached the Council wishing to talk to us about sites within the borough. This waiting list shows that there is still a strong demand for sites in the borough and partners looking to invest in our sports and leisure offer.
2.16 Therefore officers would seek to market and explore these opportunities further, so that proposals can be developed, which will be brought back to Cabinet for future approval, should officers be in a position to make a recommendation.
5
Page 41 of 382
3. Key Implications
3.1 The Playing Pitch Strategy was initiated by Ealing Council in response to the following specific drivers. These were agreed with members of the Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy Steering Group in August 2015 and with Council Planning Officers at a meeting in September 2015:
3.1.1 Several current large scale projects and proposals for new and enhanced playing pitches and ancillary facilities will benefit from the adoption of the Strategy. The Council will be severely limited in its external funding opportunities, should the strategy not be adopted, as it will be a pre-requisite of many external funding bodies.
3.1.2 Public Health needs to sustain access to and grow the use of facilities for outdoor sport and active recreation.
3.1.3 The need to inform the development and implementation of planning policy and to inform the assessment of planning applications.
3.1.4 Potential changes to playing pitch supply and demand as a consequence of planned housing growth, particularly in the three Local Plan Opportunity areas of Park Royal, Southall, Northolt to Perivale, and the Council's programme for School expansions.
3.1.5 Prioritisation of any funding for sport and recreation from external agencies and local authority budgets, including from the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).
3.1.6 Major transport infrastructure projects - Crossrail, HS2 - and potential impact on accessibility of playing pitch sites in the vicinity of upgraded stations with new services and shorter journey times. New Crossrail Elizabeth Line services from 2018 (via Ealing Broadway, Acton, Hanwell, Southall and West Ealing stations) and HS2 services from new interchange close to the north east borough boundary at Old Oak Common from 2026.
3.1.7 Demand for cricket pitches (particularly for junior teams and for non-traditional forms of the game), growing pressure on existing hockey and rugby pitch supply, and the changing needs of football clubs due to the increase in junior play and the FA’s new pitch guidelines.
3.2 The Playing Pitch Strategy critically evaluates the current quantity, type, quality and distribution of outdoor sports and recreational facilities within Ealing, quantifies current and potential future demand (through engagement with local stakeholders and the use of demographic and other information), and provides clear future policy recommendations and actions (both borough wide and site specific) for protecting and enhancing existing playing pitch facilities and for providing new facilities where they are most needed.
6
Page 42 of 382 3.3 The proposed key objectives of the Strategy agreed with the Council’s partners are to provide the Council and its partners with a robust document with an evidence base that can be reliably used to support spatial planning decisions and inform capital investment plans and external funding bids for new and/or enhanced playing pitch sports facilities and to improve public health by encouraging more people in Ealing to be more active by ensuring facilities for playing pitch sports of the appropriate quality are both available and accessible.
3.4 The Playing Pitch Strategy will update the outdoor sports element of the Ealing Sports Facility Strategy 2012 – 21 and will provide a basis for the Council’s future management and planning for improvements to outdoor sports facilities and will provide a platform to engage and enable other partners to assist with this aim.
3.5 The Strategy aims to achieve a lasting uplift in the quality of all types of outdoor sports facilities including winter and summer grass pitches as well as floodlit artificial grass pitches and hard courts.
3.6 The Strategy aims to be robust, based on local needs (currently and to 2031), and deliverable. This objective is achieved by adhering to the current Sport England Playing Pitch Strategy Guidance (October 2013).
3.7 The Strategy promotes an integrated approach to provision and establishes a prioritised timescale for facility improvements throughout the period of the plan. The majority of the proposed actions are contingent on gaining additional external funding however the strategy should support access to both existing and emerging funding streams as the borough has already had significant success using this evidence base to access grant funding.
4. Financial
4.1 The funding estimate for Rectory Park is £4.975m, as shown in Table 1.1. Following an open and transparent tender, a construction contract is proposed to be awarded to Life Build Solutions Limited.
4.2 There are no specific costs associated with the adoption of the Strategy; any costs incurred thus far are predominantly related to officer time covered by existing revenue budgets and the consultant’s fee for carrying out the professional Playing Pitch Strategy process, again covered by revenue budgets from a previous financial year.
4.3 Any future project specific financial implications for the Council will be identified and reported to Cabinet for approval at the appropriate time.
4.4 Cabinet is advised of the level of investment that has supported significant enhancement of Ealing’s outdoor sports facilities in recent years. However it is recognised that the Council has significant financial pressures on future capital and the availability of future capital funding. See the following table for the details of recent projects involving a range of community partners and the associated external funding secured by the Council to date. Note: Figures for the major sports facility developments planned for Gunnersbury Park
7
Page 43 of 382 (£13.871m) is provisional, pending grant awards.
Project External Council Overall Timeframe funding funding project £m £m cost £m
Hanwell School of Boxing 0.140 0.125 0.265 Jan ‘12 Spikesbridge Sports Ground 1.185 0.870 2.055 Dec ‘12 Lord Halsbury Sports Ground 1.126 0.495 1.621 Dec ‘12 Pitshanger Park FC Ground 0.518 0.108 0.626 Apr ‘13 Boddington Gardens 1.200 0.000 1.200 Nov ‘13 Perivale Park Pavilion 0.075 0.366 0.441 Nov ‘16 Northolt High Sports Centre 0.288 0.050 0.338 Mar ‘16 Durdans Park Cricket Ground 0.537 0.096 0.633 Dec ‘16 William Perkin HS 0.834 1.418 2.252 Dec ‘16 Community Sports Hub Popefield Sports Ground 0.498 0.150 0.648 Mar ‘17 Gunnersbury Park* 11.371 2.500 13.871 Apr ‘18 Rectory Park 4.725 0.250 4.975 Dec ‘17 Total secured 22.537 6.428 28.965
* Pending confirmation of funding
4.5 Some of the schemes above are consolidated on the Capital Programme under overarching Environment and Leisure project headings. Consideration is currently being given to disaggregating the schemes under their own headings.
Approval is being sought to add £4.725m for the Rectory Park scheme into the 2017/18 Capital Programme for Environmental and Customer Services, funded by partnership grants.
5. Legal
5.1 Any future project(s) will be subject to a planning application and each planning application is assessed upon its merits against the planning policy framework.
5.2 The Council has power under section 123 of the Local Government Act 1972 to dispose of land provided it is disposed of for the best price reasonably obtainable unless the consent of the Secretary of State is otherwise obtained either by way of a general consent or otherwise. Specific provisions apply in relation to the disposal of open space
5.3 The Council followed a competitive tendering exercise for the contract for the redevelopment of the facility at Rectory Park and the construction of a sports pavilion in accordance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (as amended) and the Council’s Contract Procedure Rules as appropriate. 8
Page 44 of 382
5.4 All future procurements linked to the Strategy will be tendered in accordance with the Public Contracts Regulation 2015 (as amended) and the Council’s Contract Procedure Rules as appropriate.
6. Value for Money
6.1 The Strategy sets achievable targets for the development and/or refurbishment of the boroughs sports facilities and recognises the opportunity that the Strategy will play in setting sports facility standards and securing future planning gain and delivering value for money.
6.2 The Strategy will ensure a continued focus on the identified targets over the longer term and will manage risk by the engagement of a range of resources across a number of different partners.
6.3 Since 2012, Ealing Council has secured over £22m in external funding to help facilitate the delivery of the projects detailed in the Ealing Sports Facility Strategy 2012 – 21 and in its successor the Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-31. This represents £3.45 for every £1 spent on outdoor sports facilities or 78% external contribution towards the projects detailed in the action plan, totalling £28.965m.
6.4 Following the tender return date Ealing Council has completed extensive interrogation and evaluation exercise of the six submitted bids. The tender submitted by Life Build Solutions Ltd represented the best value for money, whilst providing a highly comprehensive method statement of how the project will be achieved, resulting in Life Build Solutions Ltd scoring the highest percentage in the evaluation exercise.
7. Sustainability Impact Appraisal
7.1 Principles of sustainability will be incorporated throughout the planning of all projects and successful bidder(s) will be encouraged to ensure best design practice options for alternative/’greener’ materials and products and quality, economical and sustainable utilities systems are used.
7.2 The borough’s outdoor sports facilities form an essential part of Ealing’s overall infrastructure and contribute to the effective functioning of the borough as a healthy and active place to live, work and visit.
8. Risk Management
9
Page 45 of 382 8.1 If the Strategy is not adopted, the Council will not make the best use of the limited resources available to improve sports facility provision and resident satisfaction.
8.2 Without an adopted Strategy, the Council will lose the ability to apply to the majority of organisations for any future outdoor facility development project funding and it may well jeopardise existing funding awards.
8.3 Not having an adopted Strategy will undermine the credibility of the Local Development Framework documents, through failing to provide the necessary evidence base needed to inform these documents.
8.4 The Council will not realise the benefits of the strategic link between economic development and the need to invest in the sporting infrastructure of the borough.
8.5 Failing to award the construction contract for the Rectory Park will result in The Council not being able to deliver the project and therefore missing out on becoming the pioneer of the FA’s Parklife scheme in London.
9. Community Safety
9.1 Regeneration of local sports facilities and sports grounds will encourage a greater number of visitors and improved security will be part of the overall aims of each project.
9.2 Providing a network of newly refurbished sporting facility will help in encouraging participation in sport, health and well-being.
9.3 The Strategy outlines the location of future facility developments, which will improve local access for residents to a wide range of sports facilities. Projects will be developed in line with Sport England and the relevant National Governing Body of Sport guidelines ensuring facilities are safe and appropriate for all users.
10. Links to the 6 Priorities for the Borough
The addition and expansion of sporting facilities across Ealing’s sports grounds will result in creating a safer, cleaner environment offering more opportunities for education, sport and leisure, and may possibly create local job opportunities in the future.
10.1 Making Ealing Safer New improved facilities with improved access will foster community engagement in sport and positive activity, helping people to be more active .
10.2 Securing Public Services The regeneration of Ealing’s sports grounds will result in creating safer, cleaner outdoor spaces offering more opportunities for education, sport and leisure, and may possibly create local job opportunities in the future 10
Page 46 of 382
10.3 Delivering Value for Money The delivery of new leisure facilities on existing sports grounds, including those to be run by voluntary sector sports clubs means the value of the asset will be increased.
11. Equalities and Human Rights and Community Cohesion
11.1 An Initial Equality Analysis Assessment has been completed and full Equality Analysis Assessments will be carried out on specific projects as and when required.
12. Staffing/Workforce and Accommodation implications
12.1 None.
13. Property and Assets
13.1 The ongoing improvement to the quality of the borough’s outdoor sports facility stock through their initial planning, design, development and maintenance is core to the Playing Pitch Strategy. The implications for any change of use, disposal and/or adoption of designated sports ground space will be assessed on a site by site basis, in consideration of the value and function of a given site both to the borough of Ealing and to its residents.
14. Any other implications:
14.1 None.
15. Consultation
15.1 The consultation process carried out as part of the development of the Strategy involved National Governing Bodies of Sports and Sport England as well as various sports clubs and sports pitch users via email, meetings, club forums and telephone conversations. Clubs completed online questionnaire surveys and where necessary follow ups were carried out via telephone calls and emails.
15.2 Each sports facility project will also carry out its own consultation process as part of resident liaison and the planning process.
11
Page 47 of 382
16. Timetable for Implementation
16.1 Once approved by Cabinet the Strategy will be implemented and projects will be delivered in line with the timescales detailed in the Strategy’s action plan.
16.2 Rectory Park procurement timetable:
Event Date Invitations to tender issued 31 st October 2016 Proposed changes to Terms and Conditions 7th November 2016 Latest date for questions concerning the 7th November 2016 interpretation of this Tender Latest date the Council will respond to all 11 th November 2016 companies with answers to all questions raised Tender return date 6th December 2016 Tender Evaluation 6th December 2016 - 20 th January 2017 Cabinet Approval 14 th March 2017
17. Appendices
Appendix 1: Playing Pitch Strategy and Action Plan 2017 – 2031 Appendix 2: Playing Pitch Strategy Equality Analysis Assessment Confidential Appendix 3: Rectory Park Tender Evaluation Report
18 Background Information
Previous Cabinet Report titled “Rectory Park”, dated 15 th September 2015.
12
Page 48 of 382 Consultation
Name of Post held Date Date Comments consultee sent to response appear in consultee received paragraph: Internal Chris Bunting Assistant Director Leisure 16/2/2017 16/2/2017 No comments Chris Welsh Parks Operations 16/2/2017 16/2/2017 No Comments Manager Ian Weake Principal Planning Officer 16/2/2017 16/2/2017 No Comments
Adam Whalley Programme & 16/7/2017 16/2/2017 No Comments Commercial Manager (Education) Jonathan Kirby Assistant Director Major 16/2/2017 3/3/2017 Throughout Projects Jackie Adams Head of Legal (Property & 16/2/2017 3/3/2017 Throughout Regulatory) Donna Creffield Lawyer, Contracts 16/2/2017 3/3/2017 Throughout Keith Townsend Executive Director 16/2/2017 3/3/2017 Throughout Environment and Customer Services Femi Ogidan Finance Business Partner 16/2/2017 3/3/2017 Throughout
External Sport England National Governing Bodies of Sport including football, rugby, cricket and tennis Local sports clubs and outdoor sports facility users
Report History
Decision type: Urgency item? Key decision No
Report no.: Report author and contact for queries: Julia Robertson [email protected] 02088257270
13
Page 49 of 382
Page 50 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
London Borough of Ealing
Playing Pitch Strategy
2017 to 2031
P a g e | 1
Page 51 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
CONTENTS
Overview 3
1: Introduction - Brief, Scope, Vision and Aims 5
2: Summary of Key Findings and Issues 13
3: Scenario Testing 28
4: Recommendations 34
5: Action Plan 41
6: Summary 52
Appendices: Assessment of Need Reports & Club Survey Findings
Appendix A Cricket Appendix B Football Appendix C Hockey Appendix D Rugby Appendix E Bowling Greens Appendix F Tennis Courts Appendix G Other Sports Appendix H Club Survey Findings
P a g e | 2
Page 52 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Overview
Five years have passed since the Ealing Sports Facility Strategy 2012 - 21 was launched and in line with Sport England’s good practise recommendations, the outdoor sports facility element has been refreshed and incorporates this Playing Pitch Strategy and Action Plan.
The agreed key objectives of the Ealing Sports Facility Strategy 2012 – 2021, which have been extended to include this updated review of the outdoor sports facility elements are:
1. To provide the Council and its partners with a robust document with an evidence base that can be reliably used to support spatial planning decisions and inform capital investment plans and external funding bids for new and/or enhanced playing pitch sports facilities.
2. To improve public health by encouraging more people in Ealing to be more active by ensuring facilities for playing pitch sports are of the appropriate quality are both available and accessible.
3. To ensure future sustainability of sport and leisure in Ealing through sports and physical activity networks, involving sports clubs and other delivery organisations
The Playing Pitch Strategy supports the Council’s overarching principles shaping the future of Ealing and most importantly outcomes relating to improved health and increased physical activity levels of Ealing residents. The relevant principles are as follows:
Enable and promote a network of accessible sports facilities across the borough maintaining and enhancing the borough's green infrastructure Develop a hierarchy of appropriate quality facilities provided by a range of organisations Work with commercial and community partners and national governing bodies to enable the development of, long term management and financial viability of outdoor sport facilities Seek to maximise opportunities which may arise to develop sports facilities as part of wider regeneration, education or place based projects Provide a robust evidence base to inform Planning policy decisions regarding the protection, enhancement and provision of outdoor sports facilities Seek to secure developer contributions and enabling development to provide funding to enable the development of sports facilities to benefit residents Identify and bid for external funding to support the development and delivery of new sports facilities across Ealing Use the benefits of sport to bring communities together to make them stronger reducing inequality and celebrating diversity Promote outdoor sports as a key enabler to healthy and active lifestyles
By delivering facility developments in line with the overarching principles, the following outcomes will be realised for Ealing residents:
More opportunities for people to be more active reducing the number of inactive people Greater participation in outdoor sports and physical activity Better, more accessible sports facilities of appropriate quality available across the borough Reduced public subsidy and better long term sustainability of outdoor sports facilities More community organisations taking managing and developing local facilities for residents More opportunities for people to be a sports volunteer for the benefit of others New regeneration or education projects will factor in future community use sports facilities enhancing local places and spaces for the enjoyment of residents. Stronger and healthier communities, reducing health inequalities Planning policy which supports and encourages people to be more active
P a g e | 3
Page 53 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
This review identifies the changes in both demand and supply of outdoor sports facilities in light of the new facilities opened as a direct consequence of the action planning associated with the Ealing Sports Facility Strategy 2012 – 21. These new facilities include new pavilions and floodlit 3G pitches in Spikes Bridge Park, Lord Halsbury Playing Fields and William Perkin High School Community Sports Hub and new pavilions at Scotch Common and Perivale Park. These projects were delivered through partnership working and successful external funding bids. The funding bids were based on the demand and supply analysis detailed in the Ealing Sports Facility Strategy. Other projects nearing completion include new pavilions and playing surfaces at Durdans Park Sports Ground and Popefield Playing Fields.
The two biggest outdoor sports facility developments will be under construction before the start of summer 2017; the new facilities at Gunnersbury Park and Rectory Park are excellent examples of projects developed with multiple funding partners based on the data gathered through the review of outdoor sports facilities which has resulted in the new Playing Pitch Strategy.
The Council engaged Continuum Sport and Leisure Limited to lead the development and production of the Playing Pitch Strategy document following the Sport England process which has been agreed by all the main outdoor pitch sports governing bodies of sport and each authority in the country is encouraged to develop one to inform future decisions regarding the demand and supply of existing and new outdoor sports facilities in a given area. The strategy document informs an action plan which details potential facility developments based on the demand and supply analysis.
The supply side information is generated through standard facility audits used for all levels of facility from park to elite sport and carried out by experienced people; their findings are then corroborated by the relevant national governing body of that sport. The demand side information is generated from surveys of current and potential users including local sports clubs as well as team generation data provided by the relevant governing bodies of sport. The Council provides the context for the evaluation and also provides a local perspective on the overarching principles and outcomes of the strategy.
The action plan is a guide to how facilities might be developed, where and whom they might be developed by in order to meet identified demand, exploit opportunities that may arise and provide sustainable management and operational models through either engaging with voluntary or commercial partners. Each potential project has to be evaluated in light of the current situation as the strategy and action plan give a snapshot of the position at the time of writing; so factors on both the demand and supply side may have changed as well as the cost and viability of the project at the point when an individual project is being considered.
When applying for funding to develop new facilities, Sport England, National Governing Bodies of Sport and most other funding organisations, require evidence of the current demand and supply of facilities in an area to justify the proposed project. The Playing Pitch Strategy developed and agreed in partnership with these same organisations is the document which provides this essential information and is vital to the success of any funding bid.
Through the implementation of this strategy, the Council has a major role to play in providing access to sporting opportunities at a cost that is acceptable to the wider community. The Council has a role to play as a direct provider of entry level playing facilities such as free to use casual football pitches and tennis courts in parks as well as pay and play summer and winter sports pitches with appropriate changing and toilet facilities to allow clubs to play against each other.
The Council also plays an enabling role in developing better quality facilities by engaging and enabling community organisations through the asset transfer process to independently manage and operate facilities funded through partnerships with Sport England and National Governing Bodies of Sport as well as other funding organisations. At the very top level, professional sports clubs based in the borough provide facilities catering for elite sport.
P a g e | 4
Page 54 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
1 Introduction
1.1 Why has the strategy been developed?
The strategy was initiated by Ealing Council in response to the following specific drivers. These were agreed with members of the Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy Steering Group in August 2015 and with Council Planning Officers at a meeting in September 2015: o Several current large scale projects and proposals for new and enhanced playing pitches and ancillary facilities o Public health need to sustain access to and grow the use of facilities for outdoor sport and active recreation o The need to inform the development and implementation of planning policy and to inform the assessment of planning applications o Potential changes to playing pitch supply and demand as a consequence of planned housing growth, particularly in the three Local Plan Opportunity areas of Park Royal, Southall, Northolt to Perivale, and the Council's programme for School expansions o Prioritisation of any funding for sport and recreation from external agencies and local authority budgets, including from the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) o Major transport infrastructure projects - Crossrail, HS2 - and potential impact on accessibility of playing pitch sites in the vicinity of upgraded stations with new services and shorter journey times. New Crossrail Elizabeth Line services from 2018 (via Ealing Broadway, Acton, Hanwell, Southall and West Ealing stations) and HS2 services from new interchange close to the north east borough boundary at Old Oak Common from 2026 o Demand for cricket pitches (particularly for junior teams and for non-traditional forms of the game), growing pressure on existing hockey and rugby pitch supply, and the changing needs of football clubs due to the increase in junior play and the FA’s new pitch guidelines
1.2 What is the extent of the study area and rationale for not using sub-areas?
The extent of the study area is within the borough boundary of Ealing (to correspond with all local planning documents), whilst taking into account the impact of the supply of playing pitches in neighbouring boroughs - most particularly Gunnersbury Park in Brentford, Hounslow on the border with Acton - and displaced demand from residents of Hounslow to the south, Hammersmith & Fulham to the east and South Brent to the north.
It was agreed with all members of the Steering Group at a meeting on 4th August 2015 that, unlike in neighbouring Hounslow Borough which has very distinct socio economic characteristics and patterns of demand for playing pitch sports between the east and west areas of the borough, in Ealing borough the demand picture is much more mixed and, as such, there is no clear rationale to analyse the supply and demand balance of playing pitches in the borough by geographical sub-areas.
Whilst it was acknowledged that Active People Survey data shows differences in participation rates between different output areas in the borough, the pattern is quite mixed geographically with higher participating areas in the east side (Park Royal) in the central part (Ealing) as well as in the north west (Northolt). Similarly, whilst most of the lower participation areas are located towards the south west (Southall), there are also pockets of relatively low sports participation in output areas in the south east of the borough. As such, it was agreed that the demand patterns do not easily translate into definable geographic sub areas.
In addition, it was the view of the NGBs that, for the most part, members of sports clubs in Ealing borough tend to travel quite extensively both between districts within the borough and across the borough's boundaries to access their home ground.
P a g e | 5
Page 55 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
In large part these wider catchments are a consequence of the good transport links in the borough: notably three tube lines (the Central, District and Piccadilly lines); an overground rail service linking Gunnersbury with Acton; and two major east/west trunk roads (the A40 Western Avenue across the north of the borough and the A4020 Uxbridge Road linking Central Ealing to Southall to the south) and the North Circular Road (A205) running north/south from South Brent (Alperton, Stonebridge) through Park Royal to Gunnersbury.
1.3 Which sports are included?
At a project inception meeting in June 2015 it was agreed to include within the scope of this strategy: o Those sports named in the definition of a playing field within Sport England's Planning Policy Statement 'A Sporting Future for the Playing Fields of England' -i.e. “Playing pitch – a delineated area which, together with any run off area, is of 0.2 hectares or more, and which is used for association football, American football, rugby, hockey, cricket, lacrosse, rounders, baseball, softball, Australian football, Gaelic football, shinty, hurling, polo or cycle polo.” o Tennis courts o Bowling greens and croquet lawns
In the case of the minor sports listed within the Sport England playing pitch definition, where no demand has been found, this is clearly stated in Section 2.2 within the Summary of Key Findings. Within the sports in scope, the strategy includes consideration of all forms of play whether: o Club and league based (formal) play and training (including indoor nets for cricket). o Less formal programmed forms of the respective sports (e.g. turn up and play 'products' such as Rush Hockey; Mash Up, Just Play and Walking Football; T20, Last Man Stands and Cage Cricket; Touch Rugby; Tennis for Free; Bowls Roll Ups; Back to Netball) and o Un-programmed play by groups of residents, workers, students, school friends out of school
1.4 How has the strategy been developed?
The strategy aims to be robust, based on local needs (currently and to 2031), and deliverable. This objective is achieved by adhering to the following ten steps as advocated in the current Sport England Playing Pitch Strategy Guidance (October 2013):
Source: Sport England's Playing Pitch Strategy Guidance (October 2013)
P a g e | 6
Page 56 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
For the major playing pitch sports included in the scope - i.e. football, cricket, hockey, rugby - the following facility supply information has been gathered and collated in accordance with Sport England's published guidance:
Similarly, for these sports, the following demand information has been gathered and collated:
Source: Sport England's Playing Pitch Strategy Guidance (October 2013)
P a g e | 7
Page 57 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
The sources of information used to establish current pitch supply and demand and develop this strategy included: o Sport England - Towards an Active Nation Strategy 2016-21; Active Places Power audit for playing pitches in Ealing; Active People & Sports Market Segmentation data; summary findings for Ealing borough of the 2016 National Run of the Facilities Planning Model (FPM) for Artificial Grass Pitches (AGPs) o National Governing Bodies (NGBs) - national strategy documents (e.g. Football Association National Game Strategy 2015-19, England Hockey Business & Brand Strategy 2013-17, Rugby Football Union Strategic Plan 2012/13-16/17, England & Wales Cricket Board One Game Strategy 2013-17, British Tennis Strategic Plan 2015-18, Bowls England Strategic Plan 2014- 17, England Athletics Strategic Facilities Plan 2012-17, England Golf Raising Our Game Strategy 2014-17); insight data provided by county boards of NGBs (where available), searches of NGB affiliated league and club websites o Ealing Planning Service - Local Plan (Dec 2013) including the Adopted Policies Map and Development Plan Documents (DPDs), particularly: Development (or Core Strategy) DPD (April 2012), Development Sites DPD (Dec 2013), Planning for Schools DPD (May 2016) and Population projections by age group by sport to 2031; o Ealing Parks Service - consultation with Parks Manager; pitch booking records o Ealing Environment and Leisure Service - consultation with lead officer for sports development (Active Ealing) and major projects; Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy (2007); Ealing Green Spaces Strategy (2012-2022) and Ealing Sport Facilities Strategy (2012-2021) o Site visits - non-technical inspections and quality assessments using NGB templates o Consultation (via meetings, telcon, email) - with NGB lead officers, attendees at football and cricket club forum sessions, with site operators and grounds staff on site visits etc. o Questionnaire Surveys - Online club survey returns and information provided in telcons and by email. A summary of the key findings of the club consultations is included at Appendix H
On completion of the site audits, the NGB representatives for the major playing pitch sports reviewed the pitch quality ratings and the pitch carrying capacity, based on the quality assessment. It is this agreed carrying capacity rating that has been used in the site-specific needs assessments.
1.5 What is the vision for the strategy and its objectives?
The Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy is for the period to 2031 supporting the Council's Local Plan adopted in 2012 and 2013. The Playing Pitch Strategy contributes to both the overarching borough vision (as set out in the current Corporate Plan) - i.e. 'By 2018 the borough will be more prosperous, safer, healthier, cleaner, fairer and more accessible' - and, more directly, with the borough's strategic vision and themes for Sport and Physical Activity - i.e. 1. More people more active on a regular basis, particularly low participant target groups 2. Improved awareness of the sport and active leisure opportunities available 3. Ensure future sustainability of sport and leisure in Ealing through sports and physical activity networks, involving sports clubs and other delivery organisations 4. Appropriate indoor and outdoor facilities in the right place at the right price 5. Champion the wider benefits of sport and being active.
In the context of this vision and the local drivers identified in para 1.1 above, the PPS critically evaluates the current quantity, type, quality and distribution of outdoor sports and recreational facilities within the study area, quantifies current and potential future demand (through engagement with local stakeholders and the use of demographic and other information), and provides clear future policy recommendations and actions (on both borough wide and site specific bases) for protecting and enhancing existing playing pitch facilities and for providing new facilities where they are most needed. The PPS update findings for outdoor sports contained in the Ealing Sports Facility Strategy 2012 – 2021.
P a g e | 8
Page 58 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
The agreed key objectives of the strategies are:
4. To provide the Council and its partners with a robust document with an evidence base that can be reliably used to support spatial planning decisions and inform capital investment plans and external funding bids for new and/or enhanced playing pitch sports facilities.
5. To improve public health by encouraging more people in Ealing to be more active by ensuring facilities for playing pitch sports are of the appropriate quality are both available and accessible.
1.6 How has the strategy process been managed and delivered?
The development of the strategy has been managed by the Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy Steering Group comprising representatives from The England & Wales Cricket Board, Middlesex Cricket Board, The Football Association, Middlesex Football Association, England Hockey, The Rugby Football Union, Sport England, Ealing Council's Education, Parks, Planning and Active Ealing teams and CSL Ltd, the consultants appointed to co-ordinate the strategy development to the point of the recommendations and action plan.
The PPS documentation is structured as follows:
1. The Playing Pitch Strategy (this document) setting out the main findings and issues for playing pitch provision in Ealing (currently and for the future), testing out a range of potential scenarios for change, and including the recommendations, strategic policies and action plans agreed by the PPS Steering Group
2. Assessment of Need Reports for each of the major playing pitch sports (Cricket, Football, Hockey and Rugby) providing detailed facility supply and demand information and key findings for these sports in accordance with stages B/C of the Sport England guidance (Appendices A- D)
3. Assessment of Need Statements for Bowling Greens, Tennis Courts and Other Sports. These statements follow the same principles in assessing supply and demand as applied for the major playing pitch sports but are less detailed reflecting a greater reliance on secondary source data as opposed to site visit assessments and consultation surveys of clubs and stakeholders (Appendices E-G)
4. A summary of the findings of the surveys of sports clubs for the major playing pitch sports (Appendix H)
1.7 Tailoring the Approach - what makes Ealing different?
Key features of the study area that have been identified in the course of this process and taken into account in developing the strategy include: o Since 2012, levels of regular participation in sport by adults (16+) in Ealing has broadly matched the London average of 38%, according to the Active People Survey (see graph 1)
P a g e | 9
Page 59 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Graph 1: Once a week participation in sport by adults (16+) in Ealing, London, England
o Sport participation rates are highest in a central band from Gunnersbury and Brentford to the south through Ealing and West Acton up to Park Royal and in Northolt in the north west. Rates are lowest in the Southall and Greenford districts towards the south and west and in parts of Hanwell in the centre of the borough (see graph 2)
Graph 2: Once a week sport participation in sport by adults (16+) by Middle Super Output Area
o Latent demand to do more sport is lower in Ealing among the adult population (16+) than the regional average but higher than the national average (see figure 1)
P a g e | 10
Page 60 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Figure 1: Number of adults (16+) who would like to do more sport over the next 12 months
Area 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 (APS2) (APS3) (APS4) (APS5) (APS6) (APS7) (APS8) (APS9) England 53.8% 54.2% 53.6% 54.9% 55.4% 57.5% 55.9% 58.0% London 62.6% 62.3% 61.4% 62.3% 62.8% 66.8% 65.1% 65.2% Ealing 63.0% 61.2% 69.5% 62.7% 62.6% 62.9% 64.2% 60.6%
Source: Sport England Sports Market Segmentation (June 2016) o To promote sports development activity and in response to pressure of demand for its sports pitches from clubs and teams based outside the borough, Ealing Council has a priority booking policy which gives preference to Clubmark (or NGB equivalent) accredited sports clubs and to residents/Ealing based clubs and groups o Although there has been some rationalisation of playing pitch facilities in Council-owned parks and recreation grounds in recent years, in comparison with several if its neighbour local authorities, Ealing Council retains a substantial supply of playing pitches, tennis courts and bowls greens. Some park sports facilities are available for free casual use while others are maintained to a higher standard and offered for pay and play hire o Most high schools in the borough (both in the state and independent sectors) offer a good standard of indoor and outdoor sports facilities with an established tradition of community use out of hours. At, Twyford, Northolt and Elthorne high schools, community access is secured by agreement with the Council and managed and promoted by Everyone Active (SLM). Similarly, the Dormers Wells school has secured community access to its sports facilities through a management agreement with Better Leisure (GLL). Brentside High School offers secure community access, managed and promoted by Kajima Community. Featherstone High School in Southwark employs a community sports centre management team in house. The Alec Reed Academy, Drayton Manor High School and the independent St Benedict's School offer unsecured but regular community access to organised clubs and teams through hire agreements. Few high schools have good quality grass pitches but those that do (such as Brentside and Drayton Manor) allow access to local sports clubs for regular use although secured for a maximum duration of a single playing season. There is also regular but unsecured community use of the University of West London's sports ground in the borough. With support and encouragement from Active Ealing, other high schools such as the Ellen Wilkinson School for Girls are actively considering opening their sports facilities to community groups for the first time. New schools in Ealing borough, whether recently provided such as William Perkin High School (opened in 2013 and currently building a sports pavilion and AGP with grant support from Sport England and other partners) or planned as part of the borough's secondary school places expansion programme, will also offer community use of both indoor and outdoor sports facilities. At these new schools community access will be secured by means of a combination of development agreements and conditions of planning and grants from external agencies. o In the primary schools in Ealing, as in most London boroughs, community use of playing pitches is negligible reflecting the barriers of cost of opening at weekends, lack of suitable changing facilities and very limited playing capacity of the playing fields at most primary school sites in the borough. o Gunnersbury Park in Hounslow’s Brentford ward, serves sports clubs and teams from a large sub-regional Central/West London catchment area. The strategic importance of this site for sport and recreation in Ealing is widely recognised. The Council has committed in partnership with Hounslow Council to a major project to enhance and extend the outdoor sports facilities at Gunnersbury Park from 2017. When the development of new and upgraded facilities is completed, this venue will be the main site serving the Acton area of the borough. o As in the case in most London boroughs, the resident population of Ealing is growing fast. Population forecasts provided by the Council's Planning Service show borough population growth of over 30% (over 95,000 people) in the 20 years from 2011 to 2031. Figure 2, shows the spatial development vision for Ealing identifying the development areas along two east- west corridors that will be the focus for housing and employment growth - i) The Uxbridge Road/Crossrail route corridor, encompassing various town centres and the Southall Opportunity Area, and ii) The A40/Park Royal corridor linking, at its north eastern end, the Old Oak Common and Park Royal Opportunity Areas which also extends into the neighbouring
P a g e | 11
Page 61 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
boroughs of Hammersmith and Fulham and Brent. Along the route of both these development corridors, it will be important to ensure that sufficient supply of public open space and playing pitches is protected to allow for increased demand. The Gunnersbury Park project is designed to address this issue at the eastern end of the Uxbridge Road/Crossrail corridor around Acton District Centre.
Figure 2: Ealing Local Plan Development Areas
o School place demand is at an all-time high. In the short term, The Planning for Schools DPD adopted by the Council in May 2016 following an Examination in Public, identifies a need for up to a further additional 3.5 primary forms of entry (FE) by September 2016 and 19 secondary FE by September 2019. Further expansion is likely to be needed to 2031. There are three site proposals in the DPD for new or expanded secondary schools which have been identified as potentially presenting opportunities for secured access for community sport. However, at this stage, it is unclear whether this will be the case at two of the three sites under consideration:
i) Twyford High School - offers good potential for enhanced facilities for rugby in association with Wasps FC ii) Former Barclays Bank Sports Ground in Park View Road, Ealing - current proposals for outdoor sports facilities for the new school on this site are limited to a MUGA although other pitch facilities may be facilitated by other forms of enabling development iii) Former Eversheds Sports Ground in Boston Manor close to Elthorne Park and the Elthorne Sports Centre - this site has a linear playing field which is used regularly for junior football by a community club. The site is linked to proposals for a new free school academy on a nearby site.
P a g e | 12
Page 62 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
2. Summary of Key Findings and Issues
This section provides an overall summary of playing pitch supply, planned and proposed changes to supply, current and latent demand covering the following leading questions as part of the Playing Pitch Strategy methodology.
o What are the main characteristics of the current supply of and demand for provision? o Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet current demand? o Is the provision that is accessible of sufficient quality and appropriately maintained? o What are the main characteristics of the future supply and demand for provision? o Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet future demand? o What is the overall quality level?
2.1 The Main Pitch Sports
The key findings and issues for the four most popular playing pitch sports in Ealing Borough - i.e. Football, Cricket, Rugby Union and Hockey - are summarised in this section. (Key findings for Bowls, Tennis and the minority interest playing pitch sports are set out in section 2.2). For the four main pitch sports, the detailed evidence base underpinning the key findings (covering Stages B & C of the Sport England PPS guidance) are appended as follow: o Appendix A: Cricket o Appendix B: Football o Appendix C: Hockey o Appendix D: Rugby
Definitions
Throughout the document the following abbreviations are used to describe specific types of playing pitch facility that have a manufactured playing surface (i.e. a surface other than natural turf): o NTP - The abbreviation NTP stands for non-turf pitch and refers to an artificial turf sports surface designed specifically for cricket. NTP's are most commonly located at the end of a row of grass (fine turf) pitches on a maintained square. Many schools have stand-alone NTPs (i.e. without a fine turf cricket square). o FTP - This abbreviation stands for football turf pitch and is commonly referred to as a 3G (third generation) pitch. This pitch type comprises blades of polypropylene of 40mm to 65mm in length (i.e. short pile or long pile) supported by a thin base layer of sand and by an infill of rubber crumb. The 3G playing surface is laid on various types of stone base with or without a porous macadam layer and shock pad. FTPs are suitable for football to a high level of competition. Since adopting a new Artificial Grass Playing Surface Policy in June 2016 in response to player feedback, on all long pile (3G) surfaces, England Hockey accepts only lower level hockey (introductory level) when no sand based/dressed or water playing surface is available. Long pile FTPs with an engineered sub base system (of stone base, porous tarmac layer and shock pad) are accepted by the rugby governing bodies (RFU and RFL). o AGP - This abbreviation stands for artificial grass pitch and is a generic term for any type of artificial turf sports surface for football, hockey and/or rugby - whether sand filled, sand based, water based, or 3G (FTP above). Sometimes also referred to as a synthetic turf pitch (STP), the nature of the pitch sports and the level of competition that can be accommodated on an AGP depends on the detailed specification of the playing surface, the size of the playing area, run offs and any floodlighting that is provided.
P a g e | 13
Page 63 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Key Issues Summary of Findings - Main Pitch Sports Cricket What are the main characteristics of the current supply and demand for provision?
In the 2015 season, 29 adult grass cricket pitches and 7 non-turf cricket pitches were identified as maintained and available for community cricket at 20 playing field sites serving the playing needs of 22 Ealing-based clubs with 60 adult men’s sides (plus two occasional Sunday sides) and two regular women’s sides. The larger traditional clubs - Acton, Brentham, Ealing, Shepherds Bush, SKLP, Old Actonians, Osterley, Ealing Trailfinders - all have colts/junior sections. Most of these clubs report that their junior sections have developed substantially over recent seasons especially in the younger age groups.
The club-owned and club-operated grounds tend to be well maintained and with good ancillary facilities. Several of the traditional cricket clubs based in the borough have more than two Saturday sides and only one pitch at their home ground. These clubs therefore require secure access to good quality pitches suitable for ECB affiliated league play for their lower ranked sides. Currently this demand is met either by pitches on council-owned and operated sites (which tend to be either poor or standard quality), or by travelling to venues outside the borough.
There is a large amount of casual and non-club based cricket activity taking place on the pitches provided by the Council in five of its park sites but also reported on some park sites with no formal facilities, particularly in the Southall area where the Asian and Asian British populations are largest. There has been growth in the number of adult teams since the last Sports Facility review in 2012. This growth is mainly in the non-traditional area of the game (e.g. single or two team clubs playing in recently formed Asian leagues) while the traditional long established clubs are focused on sustaining existing adult team numbers.
The more ambitious and forward thinking of these traditional clubs are actively striving to improve league position and performance of their adult sides through expanding their colts sections through the age groups and introducing development sides for young adult players. As a result, none of the cricket clubs based in Ealing has current plans for growth in adult teams but several clubs have large junior sections with the intention to grow these in the next few years. To accommodate new junior teams will require more access to non-turf pitches and net systems.
Alongside growth in junior league cricket driven by development coaching in the community clubs, there has been growing demand for informal forms of the game driven by growth in the size of the Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) population in particular. This supports the needs case for the Council to retain and continue to maintain open access facilities for non-club based cricket for adults and young people.
Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet current demand?
NO. Current supply does not meet current demand for traditional forms of league, cup and friendly match play cricket by teams based in Ealing. A number of established teams are displaced from their clubs' home grounds either onto parks pitches or to pitches out of the borough.
There is also high demand at several of those Ealing Council park sites with cricket pitches (e.g. North Acton and Ealing Central playing fields) due to increased demand from single team clubs (predominantly comprising Asian/Asian-British players) playing in recently formed leagues, as well as demand for informal games from family groups and groups of friends and work colleagues. These competing types of demand for the Council facilities impacts on the pitch quality which results in more club teams travelling out of the borough to find higher quality pitches for their home games.
One Council site - Durdans Park in Southall - is temporarily closed while the cricket pitch is upgraded and an NTP installed along with a new changing pavilion (serving both cricket use of the Park and football use of pitches on King George's Field). A new junior size pitch with NTP will also be provided on completion of other sports facilities at William Perkin High School. When these pitches become available in 2018, there will still be a substantial overall shortfall.
To address this, the Council is actively working with partners on advanced proposals to provide 8 more good quality fine turf pitches (7 with NTPs on the edge of the square) at four further sites - two in the east (the Ealing/Acton area) and two in the west (the Norwood/Southall area). Should P a g e | 14
Page 64 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Cricket these project proposals be implemented in full, the 8 additional pitches should be sufficient to address forecast cricket demand for the period of this strategy. In the event that one or more fail to come forward, the needs case should be reviewed annually as part of the PPS Action Plan update and review process. The four projects for new provision included in the action plan for this PPS are: o Gunnersbury Park (2 of 4 proposed cricket pitches with NTPs allocated to LB Ealing's supply) o Popes Field (1 pitch) o Norwood Hall (2 pitches with NTPs) and o Warren Farm (3 pitches with NTPs).
Is the provision that is accessible of sufficient quality and appropriately maintained?
NO. Although the cricket pitches at most of the club-operated and trust run sites are either good or standard quality, those at the Ealing Council owned and managed sites have been rated either standard or poor.
The club consultation reported no sightscreens at North Acton and no adequate facilities for match teas.
Despite the quality of the pitches on the park sites, many remain heavily used. Generally, it is considered that high expressed demand is the main cause of the quality issues as opposed to lack of maintenance by the Council's contractors.
What are the main characteristics of the future supply and demand for provision?
Population growth - both overall and in the Asian/Asian British communities in particular - will drive an increase in the number of adult and junior teams. This projected growth of 8 adult and 8 junior teams will add to current unmet demand (evidenced by the waiting list at Ealing CC). Several clubs consulted also have plans to grow their colts sections and the reported on-going growth of junior teams from Ealing will require additional pitch supply. There are Ealing clubs using pitches outside of the borough who would like to use pitches within the borough if high quality pitches were available.
The reopening of the Durdans Park pitch (committed) along with the projects in the planning stages to reinstate former cricket supply at Gunnersbury Park (2 pitches with NTPs allocated to LBE), Popes Field (1 pitch), Norwood Hall (2 pitches with NTPs) and Warren Farm (3 pitches with NTPs), if delivered in full, will increase current accessible supply from 29 adult pitches to 38 to serve 70+ adult sides (assuming 8 new adult teams by 2031 based on forecast population growth and current team generation rates) - i.e. approximately 2 adult teams per pitch. This quantity of future supply, provided it is delivered as planned and maintained to a standard quality or above, should be sufficient to meet future demand. As stated above, the progress of these plans for new provision and their impact on the supply/demand balance should be reviewed regularly through the PPS Action Plan annual review process.
In terms of supply for junior and non-traditional forms of cricket, 7 new NTPs are included as part of the plans for new adult supply (above) plus new supply at William Perkin High School from 2017. Provided these 8 new NTPs are added to the existing supply of 9 NTPs of standard quality or above (at Dormers Wells, Ealing Cricket Club, North Acton Playing Fields (2), Old Actonians Boddington Gardens, SKLP Sports Ground, Spikes Bridge Park, Southall Recreation Ground and St Benedict's School Sports Ground), there will be 17 NTPs of standard quality or above distributed across the borough. This level of provision will be sufficient to meet forecast demand for junior and non-traditional forms of cricket for the period of the strategy. The progress of these plans for new provision and their impact on the supply/demand balance should be reviewed regularly through the PPS Action Plan annual review process.
Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet future demand?
NO. There is a deficiency currently and forecast population growth (particularly in the South Asian communities), together with the development plans of the main clubs, will put further pressure on the existing cricket pitch supply over the period of this strategy.
However, once Durdans Park pitch comes back into full cricket use), and provided the current P a g e | 15
Page 65 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Cricket plans for new or reinstated former pitches and NTPs are implemented (at Gunnersbury Park, Popes Field, Norwood Hall, Warren Farm and William Perkin High School) as including in the Action Plan at the conclusion of this PPS, there will be sufficient cricket pitch supply within Ealing to meet both current and future demand to 2031.
Implementing these projects and establishing club leases or management agreements in respect of some of these sites (e.g. Popes Field with Ealing Cricket Club) should help to ensure the new facilities are maintained to a good standard.
Also, by reducing demand from traditional club teams for the Council's existing park pay and play pitches, the quality of these pitches should improve over time. This should improve the playing experience for the growing number of Asian/Asian British cricket teams and for those wanting to play informal games of cricket. Given the demographics of the borough and cricket trends, these are the areas of cricket demand that are likely to grow the most in Ealing.
What is the overall quality level?
The overall quality level of cricket pitch provision in Ealing is mixed. The majority of the club owned and operated sites have good quality pitches and accompanying ancillary facilities. This contrasts with the council operated sites. These are rated poor to standard and some lack adequate quality changing facilities, areas suitable for refreshments/teas or the appropriate equipment such as sightscreens.
Priority sites for replacement of non-turf practice net systems in Ealing borough are Osterley Cricket Ground and the SKLP ground in Northolt.
Football What are the main characteristics of the current supply and demand for provision?
There has been significant investment in facilities for football in Ealing since the last facility review in 2010, with the addition of 3G FTPs at Lord Halsbury Playing Field, William Perkin High School (due to open 2016) and Spikes Bridge Park, a new changing pavilion at North Acton Playing Fields and committed enhancement projects at Northolt High School (AGP refurbishment), Perivale Park (new pavilion for 2016/17 season) and King George's Playing Field (football use of new changing pavilion on adjacent Durdans cricket ground).
99 grass pitches are identified as available for community football across Ealing, on 32 operational playing pitch sites. This compares to 142 identified in 2010 as part of the facility strategy. Although this appears to show a significant decrease, this is not the case. The 2010 audit included 30 pitches on school sites (11 adult, and 19 youth or mini soccer pitches) that have poor potential for community use due either to their small size or lack of changing and toilet facilities that can be accessed separately from the school buildings. In addition, the last audit included 16 pitches at Warren Farm Sports Ground. This site is currently out of use but there are advanced proposals for its reinstatement to include an element of access for community football clubs.
There is slightly less than one adult pitch for every FA/AFA registered team. By contrast, there are more than three youth teams for every available youth pitch (11v11 or 9v9). The picture is similar for mini soccer (7v7 or 5v5) with over four teams per pitch.
Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet current demand?
NO. Although the investments recently completed or committed and on site will reduce the deficiency, there remains insufficient accessible and secured football facilities to meet the current demand of football clubs and teams based in the borough.
Ealing borough is home to several large Charter Standard football clubs with large and growing numbers of mini soccer and youth football teams. Several clubs have teams that are displaced playing home fixtures and/or training on pitches in neighbour boroughs.
To meet the shortfall in supply will require delivery of the major plans currently in development for provision of 3G and grass pitches at Gunnersbury Park and Rectory Park and for community P a g e | 16
Page 66 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Football access to reinstated grass pitches at Warren Farm Sports Ground in Southall. In the event that one or more of these projects (included in the Action Plan at the conclusion of this PPS) fail to come forward, the needs case should be reassessed as part of the PPS update and review process.
Is the provision that is accessible of sufficient quality and appropriately maintained?
YES. Most of the grass pitches are of standard or good quality, and most of the FTPs are good quality, many with relatively newly laid playing surfaces. However, poor natural drainage and compaction of the ground are issues at several of the grass football pitch sites in Ealing that are rated as either poor or standard, thereby limiting the playing capacity of these pitches. These are common issues in this part of London with heavy London Clay soil. To address this on a large scale would require significant additional investment for maintenance works at the frequencies required to effectively aerate and de-compact the playing surface.
Several of the football pitches accessible to the community in the borough have been assessed as being of poor quality. The Council pitches at Southfields Recreation Ground drain poorly as do the pitches at Gurnell Leisure Centre. Investment in improving these pitches is unlikely to be cost effective. To minimise the impact of loss of these pitches for formal football use, opportunities should continue to be explored with the clubs using these pitches to relocate home games and training to alternative sites with unused grass pitch capacity or to a FTP so as to minimise the impact. In the case of Southfield Rec, the main club user (Foxes YFC) has expressed interest in relocating to the new Parklife facilities in Gunnersbury Park when these become available for hire while at Gurnell (LNER YFC a Brent based club) plan to move to the new dual use sports hub at The William Perkin School.
All of the football pitches rated as good are located on grounds that are closed to the general public for pay and play use and where ground staff with sports turf expertise are employed/contracted, or the clubs have appropriately skilled volunteer members.
Ancillary provision (changing and social facilities) on Council owned sites is improving with an improved pavilion at North Acton Playing Fields and committed investment in new pavilions in 2016 in Perivale Park and Durdans Park and serving football use of the King George's Playing Field.
However, there remain a number of sites where new or upgraded pavilions are required as a priority. These include Old Actonians Sports Ground, Gunnersbury Park and Rectory Parks. The latter two will be addressed by facility developments at these key sites provided they proceed as proposed by a range of partners including the FA and Football Foundation. The feasibility including costs and sources of funding for pavilion enhancements at Old Actonians has yet to be established.
What are the main characteristics of the future supply and demand for provision?
Future demand for football facilities is likely to grow substantially to 2031 increasing pressure on the existing and planned FTPs and grass youth and mini soccer pitches, many of which are already played at capacity. By 2031, assuming current football participation and team generation rates and the forecast population growth, there will be 11 more adult teams and 25 more junior teams requiring access to match pitches and practice facilities.
The growth plans of the borough based football clubs will also place further pressure on pitch supply. Over half (51%) of the clubs who responded to the survey have self-reported plans for new teams in the next few seasons. Club survey responses, indicate unmet demand for 12 senior teams which includes 7 women’s teams, 47 youth teams (16 girls) and 35 mini soccer teams. Nearly all of these clubs have identified a need for an increase in affordable and accessible FTP capacity within the borough to support this growth. However, conversion of this perceived unmet demand into new teams depends on these clubs engaging sufficient volunteer team managers and coaches as well as suitable pitches to play and train on.
As stated above, the Council and its partners have current advanced proposals for enhanced and new pitches which will increase supply for football at Gunnersbury Park (enhanced grass & 2 FTPs), Rectory Park (enhanced grass & 2 FTPs) and (with QPR FC) at the former Warren Farm Sports Ground in Southall. These proposals are in addition to committed and funded projects currently on site at Perivale Park (grass) and Durdans Park/King George's Playing Field (grass) P a g e | 17
Page 67 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Football and first time community access to grass pitches at Norwood Hall playing fields and a new full size pitch at William Perkin High School (FTP). Should this new supply be delivered in its entirety, current unmet demand will be addressed with a measure of spare capacity.
Is there enough accessible and secured provision to meet future demand?
NO. Over the period of the strategy to 2031, to address team generation from forecast population growth (up to 36 teams), expressed demand from clubs for team growth (up to 89 teams), and to deliver on the FA's strategy to transfer more affiliated competitive football to 3G surfaces, between one and two more FTPs may be required.
The FA's position is to wait and see on the need for further 3G FTPs in Ealing Borough once the Rectory Park and Gunnersbury Park projects are fully implemented and the William Perkin School FTP has been operational for a while. The needs case for further FTP provision in Ealing should be subject to periodic reassessment through the strategy review process and take into account progress of the major housing growth/regeneration projects that will impact on demand (e.g. North Acton / Park Royal and Old Oak Common including the potential for new 3G FTP supply in place of the existing sand pitch at Linford Christie Sports Centre).
Also of particular relevance to the future needs case will be the outcome of Hounslow Council's feasibility work at Duke's Meadow in Chiswick which the FA has identified as an opportunity site for complementary provision to the Gunnersbury Park Parklife project due to its close proximity and particularly high demand for youth football and minisoccer in this part of London.
Secondary school expansions in the central/east parts of the borough at Twyford Sports Ground and two former company sports grounds (Barclays and Eversheds) may also present opportunities to secure community out-of-hours access to school playing pitches to meet future demand. Of these, the Eversheds site would appear to offer the best potential for football subject to a site master plan and detailed feasibility.
What is the overall quality level?
In total, 60% of the grass pitch stock in Ealing is assessed as either 'Standard' (49%) or 'Poor' (11%) in many cases due to overuse but also, in some cases, due to poor natural drainage and compaction of the ground both of which are common issues in this part of London with heavy London Clay soil type. These factors limit the playing capacity at a large number of sites. With a high proportion of the pitches being maintained by volunteer club members, there is a strong case for the Middlesex FA to provide banks of grounds maintenance equipment available for clubs to loan (and training in its use) at key strategic sites (e.g. Gunnersbury and/or Rectory Park).
Hockey What are the main characteristics of the current supply and demand for provision?
There has been a significant improvement in both the supply of hockey facilities in the borough and converting latent demand since the last borough-wide review in 2010. A new pitch has been built on an independent school site and a new junior hockey club - Ealing HC - has been established (based at this site and at a second independent school nearby) delivering hockey participation for approximately 250 new young players.
Five AGPs in the borough - at Old Actonians Boddington Gardens, Alec Reed Academy, St Augustine's School, St Benedict's School and Brentside School - are full size and have either sand dressed or sand based playing surfaces (i.e. England Hockey category 2 & 3 as defined in the new policy agreed in June 2016 for hockey play on 3G surfaces). However, the Brentside School pitch is not currently marked or equipped for hockey use.
A further school AGP in the borough with a shortpile 3G surface is currently used extensively by hockey clubs - i.e. at Featherstone School in Southall. Following a period to allow for transition, as a 3G playing surface, this pitch will become no longer accepted for hockey use above introductory level.
All but one of the pitches used or suitable for hockey use are on school sites. Accordingly, the P a g e | 18
Page 68 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Hockey hockey clubs have little security of access (season by season only) and either poor or no ancillary facilities. On school sites, clubs also have little or no influence over the choice of playing surface when the schools decide to refresh their AGP.
The exception is the AGP at Old Actonians (Boddington Gardens) Sports Ground. This pitch accommodates a capacity programme of hockey on Saturdays throughout the season serving as the main home site for PHC Chiswick Hockey Club, which also uses the AGP at Linford Christie Stadium in Hammersmith & Fulham currently at risk of loss to hockey as a result of proposals to resurface as a 3G football surface. PHC Chiswick is experiencing increasing demand having recently established a junior section. On the Old Actonians pitch, there is no spare capacity for hockey. In the peak weekday evening hours hockey competes with the requirements of the host club's football and rugby teams for training slots. In this context, retention of this pitch as a hockey compliant AGP when it is resurfaced is critical to the supply for hockey in Ealing borough.
The borough also is the home based for two small adult hockey clubs - Ramgarhia and Ealing Lions - currently based on AGPs at Featherstone High School (3G) and Alec Reed Academy (sand) respectively. The supply at these sites comfortably accommodates the playing and training needs of these two clubs although the changing and social facilities are very limited and the Featherstone pitch in light of its 3G playing surface no longer has England Hockey endorsement for hockey competition or training.
Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet current demand?
NO. While in the last playing season there was just sufficient accessible secured supply to meet expressed demand, access to suitable AGPs is generally poorly secured in Ealing borough due to the heavy reliance on access to pitches on autonomous school sites.
The recent change in England Hockey's policy regarding use of 3G surfaces for hockey play above introductory levels will impact significantly on the supply/demand balance in Ealing (and across wider central west London) as currently, the 3G AGP at Featherstone School in Southall is used by two community hockey clubs, Ramgarhia HC and British Airways HC who use this pitch as a secondary site to its main site in Hillingdon.
Although some spare capacity has been identified for hockey at the sand AGPs at the Alec Reed Academy and Brentside High School, these sites currently offer no security of access to community users and, in the case of the latter, the AGP is not marked or equipped for hockey use. The playing surfaces will soon need replacement as they are ten and thirteen years old respectively. This raises the additional risk that either or both schools may decide to install 3G when they refresh the playing surface.
In addition to loss of supply of pitches for hockey competition and training at Featherstone School, there is also an imminent risk of loss of the secondary pitch used by the large PHC Chiswick Hockey Club at the Linford Christie Stadium across the borough boundary with Hammersmith and Fulham.
As a result of these changes to accessible pitch supply, there is a shortfall in current supply of at least one hockey pitch to England Hockey category 1-3 specifications (i.e. with water, sand dressed or sand based playing surface).
In planning for the future, opportunities should be pursued to deliver community hockey clubs with secure access to playing, training and ancillary facilities for longer than a single season. If possible, the secure access for the larger clubs will be to sites able to accommodate all the club's activities in one location - i.e. either double pitch sites, or two single pitch sites in close proximity, with good quality ancillary facilities.
Is the provision that is accessible of sufficient quality and appropriately maintained?
NO. The resident hockey club reports that the ancillary facilities are poor and limited at St Augustine’s School and at St Benedict’s School. With regard to hockey pitch quality, the overall quality of the sand based/dressed AGPs is considered adequate within Ealing although the pitches at Alec Reed Academy and Brentside High School (not currently marked out for hockey) will need resurfacing in the next few years. P a g e | 19
Page 69 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Hockey
Whilst outside Ealing borough, the secondary pitch of the PHC Chiswick Hockey Club at Linford Christie stadium is worn and requires resurfacing. This pitch is at risk of loss to hockey as there are current plans to convert this pitch to a 3G FTP. Loss of this pitch will have significant impact on the hockey pitch supply/demand balance in the central west London area and will impact on Ealing borough.
What are the main characteristics of the future supply and demand for provision?
The future growth in demand is likely to be driven primarily by the growth plans of Ealing Hockey Club (as new youth age group squads graduate to senior play) and the potential for growth in demand driven by the growth plans of PHC Chiswick Hockey Club which has a newly established junior section. In the short term, there is evidence of increased demand due to the GB Womens Hockey Rio Olympic Gold success. PHC Chiswick had 40 plus new adult players at their HockeyFest in September 2016. The pressure of demand from this club will be further increased as a consequence of Hammersmith and Fulham Council's plans to convert the club's home pitch at Linford Christie Stadium to a football 3G surface.
A further key issue is the recent review by England Hockey of its policy recommendations regarding hockey play on 3G surfaces resulting from player feedback. The new policy position from summer 2016 will impact on the Ramgarhia and British Airways clubs playing on 3G currently at Featherstone High School.
Modest growth in demand will result from forecast population growth. There is potential from population growth and club growth combined for up to six additional senior teams and 13 additional junior teams. This increase will exert considerable pressure on the available spare capacity at the school based hockey AGPs in the borough for peak Saturday senior fixture time as well as slots on Sundays for junior training.
As one of the current facilities has no floodlights there will also be additional pressure on midweek training slots although the planned increase in supply of football 3G pitches in Gunnersbury Park (close to Old Actonians) may result in transfer of some football and rugby training demand away from the Boddington Gardens AGP, thereby providing a little more usable capacity for hockey team training.
Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet future demand?
NO. The current accessible supply of hockey facilities in Ealing Borough will not be enough to meet future demand. Particular pressures on existing provision will result from the Ealing Hockey Club as large numbers of new juniors at this club progress through to adult hockey, over and above the current level of demand from the large PHC Chiswick club (which itself has recently established a junior section) plus continuing demand at a lower level from the two smaller clubs based in the borough (Rangarhia and Ealing Lions).
There will be a pitch deficiency in Ealing, regardless of whether the Chiswick club loses access to the pitch at Linford Christie Stadium which seems likely.
To meet future demand to 2031, at least one additional floodlit AGP suitable for league hockey play (i.e. EH category 1-3) will be required in the borough. In addition, as a consequence of the change in policy regarding hockey on 3G surfaces, following a period of transition, it is likely that further hockey pitch capacity will be needed at weekends to accommodate club use displaced from the school 3G pitch at Featherstone School.
Ideally, any new hockey AGP in the borough should be located close to an existing pitch and served by changing and social facilities and provide one or more Ealing based and Clubmark accredited hockey clubs engaged in junior development with a sustainable home base with security of tenure.
The former Barclays Bank Sports Ground (currently closed) has been identified by Ealing Hockey Club as a location where an additional hockey pitch would complement the existing (sand) pitch the club hires at St Augustine’s School. If changing facilities were provided on this site to serve both the existing pitch used by the club at St Augustine’s (which has no ancillary facilities) this P a g e | 20
Page 70 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Hockey would effectively create a two pitch home base for the Ealing Hockey Club's activities during the evenings and at weekends.
The Council is assisting the Education Funding Agency in developing proposals for a new Free School Academy on part of this site and a project is included in Ealing Council's Planning for School Development Plan Document adopted in May 2016. However, the current school facility plans for outdoor PE and play are limited to a Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) not a full size sand dressed or sand based AGP as required for hockey competition and training.
In light of the significant risks to the feasibility and deliverability of a dual use hockey AGP on the Barclays site, it will be important for stakeholders to encourage the governing bodies at the Alec Reed Academy and the Brentside Kajima High School to retain hockey compliant playing surfaces on the AGPs on their sites and, where feasible, to negotiate secure access agreements with community hockey clubs.
What is the overall quality level?
The overall pitch quality is adequate. However, the floodlit sand based pitch with limited hockey use at Alec Reed Academy and the sand based pitch with potential for hockey use at Brentside High School (subject to provision of new line markings and goals) are both over ten years old and these pitches will therefore need resurfacing shortly.
The main quality deficiency is the lack of access to changing facilities for the main borough based club - Ealing Hockey Club - at the two independent school sites it currently hires.
As identified above, subject to site master planning and detailed feasibility including securing the necessary funding, the emerging priority project is to address this community hockey need through progressing a dual use initiative comprising new changing rooms alongside a new hockey AGP and other new school accommodation on the former Barclays Bank Sports Ground.
Rugby What are the main characteristics of the current supply and demand for provision?
There has also been significant investment in facilities for rugby union in Ealing since the last borough-wide review in 2010. While the overall number of pitches available has remained unchanged at 18, the overall playing capacity of the pitch supply has been increased. This has been achieved by the conversion of two of the grass pitches at Trailfinders Sports Ground to floodlit World Rugby AGPs; by installing floodlights to two pitches at Wasps FC's Twyford Avenue Sports Ground and one grass pitch at the Trailfinders Sports Ground plus providing a new floodlit training area at the London Marathon Playing Fields in Greenford, used by West London RFC. Ancillary facilities have also been improved at several sites through a combination of private finance (Trailfinders) and Sport England and RFU investment programmes (e.g. a new modular changing pavilion in Cayton Green Park used by Northolt RFC).
Alongside this investment in supply, there has also been a steady growth in demand since the last review in the number of mini and youth teams (at both Trailfinders and Wasps). There are now 82 teams in total (of which 60 are for players from u6 to u16) compared to a total of 77 in 2010 (49 mini and juniors). The number of rugby clubs based in the borough is unchanged at six, however Hanwell RFC has been formed since the last review and trains in Ealing but plays in Hounslow.
The Rugby Premiership side Wasps completed its relocation from Acton to Coventry in 2016. Wasps FC, the voluntary club, has approaching 500 playing members and owns the freehold of its home ground in Acton. The club will find it harder to raise funds for necessary facility enhancements following the move of the professional side.
Ealing Trailfinders RC has a similar size playing membership to Wasps FC and has continued to develop since the last facility review through the patronage of the private individual who owns the site and facilities. Ealing Trailfinders RC remain as the only club in the borough that offers professional rugby (a semi pro team in the second tier Rugby Championship), a youth academy as well as a full range of junior sides from age 6 upwards. This site also became the home base of London Broncos Rugby League (first team plus u16/u19 academy) in 2016.
P a g e | 21
Page 71 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Rugby In addition to these two large clubs offering opportunities to play at most standards, there are a further five clubs that offer opportunities for adult men's regional and/or county league rugby and social rugby. One - Old Actonians - has a secure site (leased from the Council) but lacks sufficient capacity on its home ground to deliver its development plans that include starting a junior section. Two clubs - West London RFC and Hanwell RFC - have no security of access to their home facilities. Both clubs rent access on a season-by-season basis from the London Playing Fields Foundation, the latter at Boston Manor Playing Fields just outside the borough in Hounslow.
Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet current demand?
YES. Security of access to rugby grounds in the borough is good, particularly for the key development clubs, and current demand is largely met by current supply. There is enough secured supply for league rugby (senior and youth) home fixtures (played mainly on Saturday afternoons) and midweek evening training. However, at some sites, capacity for junior matches and training on Sundays is becoming an issue.
The success of the two key clubs - Ealing Trailfinders RC and Wasps FC in growing demand and participation by both boys and girls in mini and junior rugby when combined with the playing and training demands of these clubs' senior teams and the financial pressure to maximise income generation through hire of pitches either for representative matches or to other clubs (e.g. Old Actonians at Wasps and London Broncos professional rugby league at Ealing Trailfinders), means that the grass pitches are used near to capacity. This is particularly an issue at Wasps which does not currently have an AGP and also has plans for further growth.
In addition, the Old Actonians club is unable at present to meet demand for junior and mini rugby although there is an opportunity to address this using the new facilities at Gunnersbury Park which, although just outside the borough, is very close to the club's ground. Also, the recently established single team club Hanwell RFC is currently displaced to a London Playing Fields site in Hounslow for its home matches although training takes place within Ealing borough at Elthorne Park adjacent to Elthorne Leisure Centre.
Is the provision that is accessible of sufficient quality and appropriately maintained?
YES. Two thirds of pitches are considered to be maintained to a good standard and 14 of the 15 grass pitches have at least adequate drainage. The quality of pitches in Ealing is generally good but with some scope for improving the capacity of current supply by increasing quality especially at Wasps. One of the pitches at St Benedict's School used by Old Priorian drains poorly despite good maintenance by the school's ground staff. The club wish to improve the drainage of this pitch to reduce the frequency of cancellations by the school and the need to find alternative pitches to hire at short notice.
In terms of ancillary facilities, a priority is to improve the changing facilities at Old Actonians Sports Ground, particularly if mixed mini rugby is to be offered at the site in future, although this activity may be better located at the new facilities proposed for Gunnersbury Park. Other clubs with current aspirations supported by the RFU to modernise their social facilities are Wasps FC and Northolt RFC in Cayton Green Park. What are the main characteristics of the future supply and demand for provision?
In terms of future demand, considered together, given the population growth and the clubs own plans for team growth, there is a predicted increase by 2031 of 6 Senior Men’s teams, 4-5 Youth Boys’ teams, 1 Youth Girls’ team and 3 Mini/Midi teams. If this growth takes place, the total number of rugby teams in Ealing will increase from 82 at present to around 97 teams.
In terms of committed projects that will impact on future supply, the completion of the new pavilion building at Perivale Park will increase the attractiveness of the single pitch on this site for use by Ealing based rugby clubs on a shared basis with Gaelic Football (St Joseph's GFC).
The main opportunity to increase the capacity of supply to address forecast demand is on the secured club site at Wasps FC now that the Trailfinders site has two AGPs. There are current outline proposals for a rugby compliant AGP at Twyford Avenue Sports Ground for dual use by Wasps with the Twyford High School as part of contingency plans by the Council to address the need for more school places. P a g e | 22
Page 72 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Rugby
The current proposals for Gunnersbury Park will also address some rugby demand if implemented as planned. A re-instated grass rugby pitch in this park will provide overspill capacity for Old Actonians RFC at weekends and the floodlit FTP for midweek non-contact drills training. It also opens up the potential for this club to implement its growth plans including starting a junior section. However, cost of access to the Gunnersbury pitches will be a key issue in terms of the availability of these new facilities to the club.
In the event that one or more of these projects (included in the Action Plan at the conclusion of this PPS) fail to come forward, the needs case should be reassessed as part of the PPS update and review process.
Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet future demand? NO. There is little spare capacity currently at peak times at the Wasps FC club sites and, in particular, there is insufficient unused playing capacity on the existing grass pitches at Wasps FC to allow for growth, as planned by this key club.
Without further rugby compliant AGP capacity, the forecast increase in teams resulting from population growth and clubs' own development plans will place further demand on the existing grass pitch supply, most of which is already used at or near its playing capacity.
What is the overall quality level? The quality of rugby facility supply overall in Ealing Borough is generally good. As indicated above, the priority projects for future investment in quality enhancement to best sustain and grow the clubs based in Ealing are:
1. Wasps FC - Development of the Wasps FC site at Twyford Avenue Sports Ground is of particular interest to the RFU, potentially to include a rugby compliant AGP for dual use with the school adjacent which the Council has plans to expand. The RFU consider this an ideal venue to further grow the game in West London
2. Old Actonians RFC- clubhouse and changing rooms modernisation at the club's ground
6. Northolt RFC - improved social facilities at Cayton Green Park
2.2 Bowls, Tennis, Other Pitch Sports
Assessments of facility needs for Bowling Greens, Tennis Courts, and other minority interest playing pitch sports have been carried out and are detailed in the appendices (Appendices E, F and G respectively). The key supply and demand issues for these outdoor sports are summarised as follows:
Key Issues Summary of Findings - Other Outdoor Sports Bowls What are the main characteristics of the current supply and demand for provision?
Despite closure of greens in recent years in Lammas Park and Acton Park, there remains a good level of supply of bowls greens in Ealing relative to many London boroughs, with a total of eight active greens plus a further green just outside the borough boundary in Gunnersbury Park serving the Acton area.
The distribution of greens is good although, since the closure of the Acton Park green, residents in the east of the borough rely on the Gunnersbury Park facility.
Four of the nine greens are located in public parks or recreation grounds. The other club facilities are held either freehold or on long lease. Access to the supply is therefore secured.
Three greens are available for casual use (when open for use by club members) but this form of demand is now negligible.
Club membership levels are generally in decline in the borough (as the national trend) and, whilst P a g e | 23
Page 73 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Bowls all the greens are maintained to an adequate level for recreational play, the quality of several of the greens and pavilion facilities (Horsenden Hill Playing Fields, Pitshanger Park, Ealing Conservative Bowls Club) limits the appeal to new members or casual players.
Bowls participation rates in London are only around half the national level and there is a gradual decline trend both across London and nationally.
Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet current demand?
YES. It is clear that with the number of secured and accessible greens existing supply more than meets current demand bearing in mind the decline in club playing membership numbers, to below the minimum recommended by the Bowls Development Alliance to sustain a healthy club level (i.e. 40 per green) and within the Bowls England benchmark comfortable capacity for a 6 rink green (i.e. 60 playing members).
Is the provision that is accessible of sufficient quality and appropriately maintained?
NO. Although the maintenance regime is consistently applied across the Council owned greens, bare patches are evident on the greens in Pitshanger Park and Wolf Fields in Southall, also on the club maintained 4 lane green at the Ealing Conservative Bowls Club which has a very small membership and is unlikely to be sustainable in the long term.
The thriving bowls clubs in the borough (e.g. West Ealing, Springfield) are those on secure sites with access to additional skilled volunteer expertise in fine sports turf maintenance with the time and flexibility to respond to changes in weather altering the frequency/level of cut and green irrigation accordingly.
What are the main characteristics of the future supply and demand for provision?
Increased demand over the strategy period that may arise from population growth is quite small and is likely to be outweighed by the general trend of declining demand. To stem this decline a combination of the following would be required: i) Continued development activity and promotion by the clubs and partner agencies (particularly London Sport and the Bowls Development Alliance) ii) Consolidation of available resources for green maintenance on a smaller number of greens and sites while maintaining a good level of accessibility, iii) Further transfer of responsibility for aspects of greens maintenance to those clubs with good governance, together with the resources required to procure appropriate expertise.
Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet future demand?
YES. There is substantial spare capacity with most clubs based at the greens in the borough operating at lower membership levels than recommended by the Bowls Development Alliance for a healthy, sustainable 6 rink site (40 playing members) and well within Bowls England guide capacity (60 playing members).
What is the overall quality level?
The overall quality level of the greens available at the bowls clubs in the borough that maintain their own greens on secure sites is generally good with just one of four (Ealing Conservative Bowls Club) rated as poor.
The three park based public greens in the borough (and the Gunnersbury Park green) are more difficult to secure and protect from vandalism. These are all rated as standard. The main green quality issues identified are bare patches on the Park greens at Wolf Fields (Southall) and Pitshanger Park and at Ealing Conservative Bowls Club.
In terms of pavilions, the main issues are a lack of changing facilities at Islip Manor Park, although toilets are available in the adjacent play centre; a lack of toilets in the pavilion at Pitshanger Park P a g e | 24
Page 74 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Bowls and a requirement for repairs/refresh to the wooden pavilions at Pitshanger Park and Wolf Fields.
The usage of all Council greens should be monitored and the needs case for further rationalisation of supply kept under annual review.
Tennis What are the main characteristics of the current supply and demand for provision?
There are currently 170 tennis courts in Ealing borough with community access (i.e. excluding any courts in the gardens of private houses) across 35 sites, with two more dual use sites (Ellen Wilkinson School in Acton and William Perkin High School in Greenford) with 9 courts in total coming available for community use from summer 2016 and a joint project with Hounslow Council for eight floodlit pay and play courts (to replace existing derelict courts) in Gunnersbury Park due to commence in 2017. Four of these courts will be allocated to the Ealing borough supply and four to Hounslow borough.
Nearly the whole of the borough falls within a 1mile catchment of a free to access or pay and play community outdoor tennis site. The exception is the north west of the borough (the area to the west of the A312). However, tennis sites in Hillingdon and Harrow fall within a one mile catchment of residents in this area of Ealing borough.
Despite the high number of courts, there are just 3 permanent indoor courts at Ealing Lawn Tennis Club (plus a further 4 temporarily dome covered courts at The Park Club which may be lost in future). Access to the indoor court supply in the borough is only available to members and guests of these two clubs.
24 courts - 14% of the total - are available to access free of charge in public parks and recreation grounds. None of these courts are floodlit. Most do not have any ancillary facilities available on site although leaseholders who operate other facilities in parks such as Acton Park, Perivale Park and Spike's Bridge do allow use of toilets by wider park users during opening hours. In light of forecast population growth, the LTA consider it important that free to access park courts are either protected for casual play or, in the case of those park sites with only two low grade courts and no access to ancillary facilities, casual demand re-directed to alternative park sites serving the same catchment with good quality courts, upgraded where necessary (e.g. with floodlighting and ancillary facilities such as toilets and refreshments), to allow an intensification of use.
A further 51 courts - 30% of the total - are available to access on a pay and play basis either in Parks (27 courts in Lammas, Pitshanger and North Acton Playing Fields) or on dual use school sites (24 courts). Just over two thirds (69%) of these pay and play courts are floodlit permitting year round use. The remaining 95 courts – over half the total - are restricted to club members or their guests. Of these, 54 courts (including the 7 indoor courts) have lighting (55% of this type of supply).
From Sport England's Market Segmentation modelling, it is estimated that 6,298 adults (aged 16+) in Ealing currently play tennis (for at least 30 mins once in the last month) and 6,938 adults in Ealing self report as wanting to play more tennis. The primary driver of demand for tennis facilities in recent years has been the strong focus placed by the LTA, some schools and local authorities and by commercial tennis providers on mini tennis and the development of junior players. In Ealing, this tennis development activity takes place in a range of settings.
Ealing is a current priority area for the LTA. In 2015, the NGB signed up to a partnership agreement with the Council for joint development and investment in tennis facilities and programmes over the next 15 years to 2030 (i.e. the duration of this playing pitch strategy). Recent joint investment by the LTA, the British Tennis Federation, Ealing Council and Will to Win Tennis in the courts and lighting at Pitshanger Park and Lammas Park are examples of how all parties can contribute to tennis facility development.
As part of its commitment to partnership working on tennis development in Ealing borough to encourage more grass roots participation to promote public health and wellbeing as well as to further its aims to identify and develop more talented young players, the LTA has carried out an audit of park and community club sites to identify facility enhancement needs. The key findings of P a g e | 25
Page 75 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Tennis this audit - carried out in 2015 - inform the action plan at the end of this Playing Pitch Strategy.
Is there enough accessible and secured community provision to meet current demand?
YES. In terms of outdoor provision, the borough has a good level of existing supply both in terms of community clubs and pay and play facilities to meet expressed demand, although as the market segmentation data shows, there is substantial latent demand and further good quality facilities are needed to capture this potential for growth in tennis participation. Current project plans to replace derelict courts at Gunnersbury Park (with LB Hounslow) and to introduce community access to six courts at the Ellen Wilkinson School will make a substantial impact when implemented.
Is the provision that is accessible of sufficient quality and appropriately maintained?
NO. Generally, the quality and accessibility of the tennis supply is good, particularly with the recent investment in the Pitshanger Park and Lammas Park sites. However, an LTA park court audit and visits to a sample of the sites confirms the view that there remains a substantial supply of low quality, non-porous, dense macadam hard courts in other parks and on dual use school sites. Several of these sites would benefit from conversion to porous macadam (and/or the installation of floodlights) to increase their playing quality and public appeal, particularly where there is on site management (eg. at North Acton Playing Fields and in Elthorne Park) so that the upgraded courts can be actively programmed, promoted and maintained.
What are the main characteristics of the future supply and demand for provision?
With the 15 year agreement between the LTA and Ealing, it is likely that participation levels will increase on the back of the various initiatives that will be put in place particularly on park courts.
Whilst there are developments planned at Gunnersbury and good facilities at Lammas and Pitshanger parks, these venues cannot be relied on to provide this access as the existing supply is already at high capacity and the new Gunnersbury courts are forecast to reach capacity at peak times within a short time after opening. LTA research shows that most players who play in parks only travel a short distance to play, therefore a network of park courts needs to be retained throughout the borough and maintained to a playable quality.
Sustained junior tennis development activity is also likely to exacerbate the existing capacity issues at two of the largest and most successful community tennis clubs in Ealing Borough - Ealing LTC and West Middlesex LTC. Whilst the former club already has 3 indoor courts and is therefore not a current priority for further investment (e.g. in lighting to more of the outdoor courts), investment in a 3 court dome (bubble) with lighting at West Middlesex LTC would have a substantial impact on addressing unmet demand and future demand particularly for year round play.
Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet future demand?
NO. However, the commitment of Hounslow and Ealing borough councils to provide eight new all weather (porous macadam) floodlit courts with changing facilities in Gunnersbury Park plus Ellen Wilkinson Girls School in Acton opening its six unlit courts to the community at weekends will ensure that the needs for pay and play tennis will be met for the period of the strategy provided the existing network of smaller sites in other parts of the borough is maintained.
In the north west part of the borough where there are fewest accessible and secured community courts, the additional supply of dual use courts at William Perkin High School in Greenford from 2016 (3 No. floodlit) is likely to be sufficient to meet future demand from population growth provided there are no major reductions in public court supply in South Ruislip and South Harrow.
What is the overall quality level?
The audit work has identified quality issues relating to both courts and ancillary facilities at a number of park tennis sites in the borough. The focus during the strategy period should therefore be on delivering the Gunnersbury Park
P a g e | 26
Page 76 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Tennis project plus a prioritised programme of short, medium and long term planned enhancements at the sites identified in the 2015 LTA facility audit as updated in consultation with the LTA and LBE for this strategy.
Minor Pitch Sports What are the main characteristics of the current supply and demand for provision?
There is a long tradition of Gaelic sports - particularly Gaelic Football but also Camogie and Shinty - being played on playing pitches in Ealing borough with the main clubs (Tir Chonaill Gaels, St Joseph's GFC, Tara Camogie and London Camanachd) drawing players in these sports predominantly from within the Irish expatriate community from a wide catchment across London.
The large Australian and American ex-pat communities in London have also given rise to demand in the borough for Australian Rules Football (Ealing Emus, part of the West London Wildcats playing at Duke's Meadows in Hounslow borough) and American Football (The London Warriors based at Boston Manor just across the borough boundary with Hounslow).
Croquet has a following of approximately 25 regular playing members of Ealing Croquet Club who play both forms of croquet three greens in Lammas Park; the traditional long game and the newer Golf Croquet, popular with new players.
Softball is also played in the borough, mainly by corporate teams. Two west London teams playing in the London Midweek Softball League train in the borough at Blondin Park (London Coyotes and London Chargers). There is also supply of softball pitches at Trailfinders Sports Club.
Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet current demand?
YES. The largest Gaelic sports club in the borough - TCG - are in the process of negotiating a new longer lease with the Council for the facilities it uses at Berkeley Fields and is able to hire an adjacent 'overspill' pitch from the Council Parks Service as required.
Similarly, the croquet club and the Council are negotiating a lease on the three Lammas Park greens and pavilion which provides ample capacity.
Is the provision that is accessible of sufficient quality and appropriately maintained?
NO. The pavilion facilities both at Berkeley Fields (Gaelic sports) and in Lammas Park (croquet) require improvement. By securing tenure through new leases with the Council, the respective sports clubs will be eligible to apply for capital grants to raise funds for these works.
What are the main characteristics of the future supply and demand for provision?
No major changes in the picture of supply or demand for minor playing pitch sports are considered likely to take place over the period of the strategy. However, demand for Gaelic sports, Aussie Rules and American Football is subject to the size of these ex-pat communities resident in West London which can fluctuate markedly in relation to changes in the economic climate in these countries.
Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet future demand?
YES. No need for additional facility provision or major enhancement projects are identified for minor pitch sports for the period of the strategy.
What is the overall quality level?
As identified above, the pavilions used by the TCG club at Berkeley Fields and by the Ealing Croquet Club at Lammas Park are in need of upgrade subject to funding. 3. Scenario Testing P a g e | 27
Page 77 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Potential scenarios identified in the course of researching the assessments of need for the individual playing pitch sports and consultation with members of the project Steering Group are identified below together with conclusions as to the potential impact on the overall picture of supply and demand and future needs.
Potential Impact of Scenarios on Supply/Demand Balance What if the quality of sites rated as poor are improved? Cricket
Priority projects for quality enhancements identified in the previous facility review in 2012 have been implemented (e.g. at Osterley Cricket Club), are about to be completed (e.g. Durdans Park and a replacement pavilion in Perivale Park), or have been developed with partners to feasibility stage and the majority of necessary funding is secured (e.g. Popes Field, Gunnersbury Park).
Delivery of these 'new' pitches will greatly reduce overplay at the following park sites in the central and eastern parts of the borough where pitch quality is impacted by overuse: o North Acton Playing Fields - This site is a very popular ground for cricket, football and tennis plus some indoor activities in a community building on site with three leaseholders. In view of the importance of this playing field for both organised and informal community sport, the Council is shortly to commission a master plan to consider future options for quality enhancement. o Ealing Central Sports Ground - While enhancement to the cricket pitches on this site is desirable, realistically, in view of the high level of use of this site by cricket teams, this is only an option in the longer term once the new supply is in place at Gunnersbury, Popes Field and Norwood Hall. The existing pavilion will remain as it is, a substantial building with adequate changing facilities and access to refreshment services via a leaseholder onsite.
If the less advanced project proposals to reinstate former cricket pitches at Warren Farm and Norwood Hall on the west side of the borough are delivered with appropriate provision for on- going maintenance, then the quality level of cricket provision in the west of Ealing borough will also improve very substantially.
In the Northolt and Greenford northern part of the borough, there are quality issues at Islip Manor Park which has no pavilion since an arson attack and clubs have access to a WC only as key holder to a facility at the rear of a nursery building on site. As a small single pitch site with no pavilion, investment in its future as a cricket site is not justified. Rather, there is a case for re- designating this site for informal recreation only and relocating cricket club demand to either Rectory Park (once the planned new pavilion with Middlesex FA is available) or Dormers Wells High School as part of a new dual use access arrangement which this school would welcome.
Football
The Gunnersbury Park project will provide several upgraded grass football pitches (currently poor quality) and a new pavilion in addition to two new floodlit FTPs. Provided the programming policies secure access to these pitches for Ealing based clubs and groups, they will serve to relieve existing pressure of demand for good quality adult pitches in this area for match play at weekends.
At other sites with poor quality pitches - Southfields Recreation Ground, Gurnell Leisure Centre (the lower pitch) and the junior pitch adjacent to the West Ealing Bowls Club - it is not likely to be cost effective to invest in improving pitch drainage and quality.
Opportunities should be explored to relocate the football use at these sites to alternative sites with unused grass pitch capacity or to one of the planned new FTPs for the borough. Current users of Southfields Recreation Ground will be returning to the new facilities at Gunnersbury Park and the current users of the Gurnell pitches could be accommodated on the Perivale Park pitches less than 400 metres away which will be back in use with a new pavilion for the 2016/17 season. Hockey
P a g e | 28
Page 78 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Improvements to the sand based AGPs on the school sites in Northolt (Alec Reed Academy) and in Greenford (Brentside Kajima Community Academy) - to include replacement playing surfaces with hockey markings and goals - has potential to relieve pressure of demand on the existing hockey pitches at Old Actonians Boddington Gardens used by PHC Chiswick, and at the St Augustine's and St Benedict's independent schools used by Ealing HC (juniors).
Although some distance from the current playing bases of the Ramgarhia Hockey Club (Featherstone School in Southall) and PHC Chiswick, if upgraded by the schools to be suitable for competition hockey, these pitches could provide alternative sites for these two clubs in light of the decision by England Hockey not to approve the Featherstone pitch playing surface as suitable for competition or training and the likelihood that the Linford Christie pitch (used as a secondary site by PHC Chiswick) will be resurfaced by London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham as 3G.
These school pitches could also provide an alternative for Ealing HC in the event that a hockey AGP and pavilion facilities are not deliverable in association with the plans for a new Free School Academy on the former Barclays Bank Sports Ground adjacent to the pitch the club currently accessed at St Augustine's School.
Rugby
Installation of a pitch drainage system and/or de-compaction works to the poor draining pitch at St Benedict's School would impact on the Old Priorian club by reducing the number of match cancellations and rearranged fixtures at short notice. However, as a school site, investment in these pitches is not a current priority for the RFU.
Bowls
Although there are minor issues with the quality of the bowling greens at two of the parks sites (Wolf Fields in Southall and Pitshanger Park, Perivale), improvements to the quality of these greens is not likely to impact significantly on the trend of declining demand for bowling greens in public park settings.
Tennis
The impact on demand of improving poor quality outdoor courts on park and dual use sites has been clearly demonstrated in Ealing, particularly at the Lammas Park and Pitshanger Park pay and play tennis sites - where these works have been delivered in partnership with tennis specialists who programme and actively promote the facilities.
In the short term, the tennis development that will have the largest impact on supply/demand balance in the south east of the borough is the provision of eight new managed floodlit porous macadam pay and play courts and pavilion in Gunnersbury Park replacing existing derelict courts and adding four high quality courts to the supply serving the Acton area.
In the medium to long term, there is potential to impact further on community tennis demand by improving the quality of provision on other sites where there is potential for specialist management and programming of the upgraded courts - the macadam courts at North Acton Playing Fields, Elthorne Park and Southfields Recreation Ground are the priority sites for quality enhancement.
What if community use can be secured at certain sites?
There is potential to secure community outdoor sports use at the following sites which, if achieved, will make a substantial contribution to addressing unmet and future demand across the range of outdoor sports: o Ellen Wilkinson School in Acton has grass football pitches and six tennis courts which will be available for community use for the first time from 2016/17 (along with a sports hall and associated changing facilities). The school also has an old redgra football/hockey pitch which could potentially be upgraded into an AGP. o Dormers Wells High School in Southall has expressed interest in securing a club link partner for juniors to use the schools non turf cricket pitch (NTP) which is on school land rather than accessible from the existing dual use sports facilities with secured community access. P a g e | 29
Page 79 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031 o William Perkin High School in Greenford will also have a new cricket NTP secured for community use for junior cricket from 2017 as well as a 4 court sports hall and floodlit FTP. This new sports hub will accommodate club football demand at weekends from the poor quality pitches at Gurnell Leisure Centre. o The closed Warren Farm Sports Ground in Southall is subject to a proposed long lease from the Council to QPR Holdings Ltd for development and use as its training and academy ground. The lease includes provision for re-instating community use of three cricket pitches, up to eight grass football pitches and an associated changing room facility. Should this project be implemented, it will accommodate future demand for youth football in particular that will result from population growth in the Southall Opportunity Area. o The closed Barclays Bank Sports Ground in North Ealing (close to Ealing Cricket Club and one of Ealing Hockey Club's home bases at St Augustine's School) also offers potential for a dual use project as part of the Council's plans for providing new schools. Subject to site master planning and feasibility (including costs and funding), this site has potential to address current unmet and future demand for community hockey in particular, potentially in association with St Augustine's which has plans for a new sports hall and changing facilities. The closed tennis courts on this site are surplus to community requirements. o There is also potential for the Eversheds Sports Ground to maintain existing and secure new community use for youth football/minisoccer as part of plans for school expansions, again subject to detailed site masterplanning and feasibility assessment. o Finally, there is a major opportunity at Twyford High School in Acton - an existing dual use sports centre site - there is an opportunity to develop a floodlit AGP as part of school expansion plans in a partnership with Wasps FC. If provided, this facility will address overplay of the rugby club's existing grass pitches and accommodate growth in junior and youth demand. The RFU are working with the club and the Council to ascertain the feasibility of this project and the next steps.
What if some pitches are re-designated from one sport or pitch type to another?
The playing surface of the AGP at the Featherstone School in Southall has been assessed on behalf of England Hockey to be a dense carpet with a curled/texturised monofilament yarn with a rubber crumb infill. Though because of the manufacturing, contractor instalment and maintenance this pitch has playing characteristics that are suitable for hockey play it is not compliant with the NGB's policy for competitive hockey. Following a transition period, existing club play on the Featherstone pitch by Ramgarhia HC and British Airways HC will therefore need to be relocated to a higher category pitch. In addition, the proposed change of surface by LBH&F at the Linford Christie Stadium AGP to 3G will also impact on hockey pitch supply and demand balance in the central west London area including displacing a proportion of PHC Chiswick HC's training and league programme.
These re-designations will have a dual impact on the playing pitch supply/demand balance in Ealing borough. Firstly, it will substantially increase the need for more hockey compliant AGP capacity across the sub region. Second, it will increase the available supply of 3G FTPs for community football which supports the FA's position to review the impact of these and the other planned FTP developments (the Parklife projects at Gunnersbury and Rectory parks) before committing to the need for further FTP capacity in the borough beyond these projects to address forecast future demand resulting from population growth and youth football club growth.
Opportunities to deliver more capacity for club hockey in Ealing borough have been identified as follows: o Upgrade Brentside School pitch to hockey category 2 or 3 surface (subject to wishes of school) o Ensure Alec Reed Academy pitch is retained as hockey surface (to category 2 or 3) when next resurfaced and hockey is given priority in the peak hours in season (subject to wishes of school) o Barclays Bank Sports Ground - partner with EFA and new Free School Academy proposals to enhance the core education facility mix of (MUGA, changing rooms, outdoor playing space) to provide a category 2 or 3 floodlit hockey AGP and enhanced changing provision for shared school and community club use across this site and St Augustine's School with linked access (subject to EFA, planning and finance).
Islip Manor Park in Northolt - As identified above this site has no pavilion. It will therefore not be cost effective to upgrade the poor quality cricket pitch at this site to accommodate unmet demand. This site should be redesignated for informal use once the development of the pavilion P a g e | 30
Page 80 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031 and cricket pitches at Rectory Park Playing Fields is completed as proposed in partnership with Middlesex FA. This will not impact on any existing formal cricket club use at Islip Manor as hires are currently restricted by the lack of pavilion to friendly games which will be better accommodated at Rectory Park in future provided this project is implemented.
Southfields Recreation Ground and Gurnell Leisure Centre (lower pitch) - As identified above, the football pitches at these sites are of poor quality and attract no/little demand for pay and play hires (with the temporary exception that Southfields is currently providing Old Actonians with pitches pending completion of the Gunnersbury Park Parklife project). Redesignation of the pitches at these sites for informal play will have negligible impact and enable maintenance budgets to be redeployed to other sites of greater value for community sport. In the medium term Southfields Recreation Ground users will be returning to the new facilities at Gunnersbury Park and the current users of the Gurnell pitches could be accommodated on the Perivale Park pitches less than 400 metres away which will be back in use with a new pavilion for the 2016/17 season.
The planned proposals for new FTPs with secured community access at Gunnersbury Park (2), Rectory Park (2) will not impact on the existing supply of grass pitches available at these sites.
If funding is secured for a rugby compliant AGP on the Wasps site, one grass pitch will be lost as the new AGP will be located on one of the existing floodlit grass pitches. A new MUGA facility is also part of the site development plan. If this goes ahead then it will replace one grass football pitch that is currently used only by the school.
The owners of Trailfinders Sports Club have recently provided a second artificial pitch, replacing one of the three existing grass pitches on this site.
The impact of this recent investment and the planned investments, should they take place, will be to substantially increase the playing pitch capacity helping to accommodate future demand in the borough resulting from population growth.
What if a site outside the borough that caters for significant demand is no longer available?
Gunnersbury Park (in Hounslow) is the key strategic site for outdoor sports serving needs in the Acton area. The temporary unavailability of this venue pending the development of new and enhanced facilities has led to unmet demand from clubs and residents in this part of the borough.
As stated above, the Linford Christie Sports Centre hockey pitch (in LBH&F) accommodates a significant proportion of hockey demand from the PHC Chiswick club. Current proposals to re- designate this pitch as a FTP will have a major impact on this club.
A number of cricket clubs use pitches outside the borough. Although none are identified as closed (either temporarily or permanently), any loss of access to these pitches in future would impact on the supply/demand balance in Ealing. This displacement of demand and reliance on unsecured supply out of the borough, supports the needs case for the proposals to increase the supply of secured access at Gunnersbury and Rectory parks and at Warren Farm, Southall.
What if new pitches are provided on a specific site or sites?
New FTPs, cricket pitches and floodlit tennis courts will be supplied at Gunnersbury Park (along with upgrades to existing grass football pitches, a cricket pitch and a rugby pitch) under the joint proposals with LB Hounslow, the FA & Football Foundation, and a range of funding partners. This provision, when completed, will impact on current unmet and future demand in the Acton area for all five sports. Subject to pricing and programming, the FTPs have potential to alleviate over play of the rugby pitch at the Old Actonians Sports Ground by providing an all weather floodlit venue for midweek non contact drills training.
Should FTP’s, cricket pitches and a new pavilion be provided at Rectory Park Playing Fields as currently proposed in a partnership between LBE, Middlesex FA and the ECB, this site will have a major impact on the supply/demand balance for football in particular, but also cricket, in the Northolt area. It will address future demand as a result of planned housing growth on the west side of the Northolt to Perivale Development Opportunity Area.
New / reinstated pitches on closed sports grounds also have significant potential to address P a g e | 31
Page 81 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031 demand from population growth and club growth plans over the strategy period. New (or reinstated) pitches with community access may be provided over the strategy period at: o Warren Farm in Southall (subject to agreement between the Council and QPR Holdings) o Barclays Bank Sports Ground in Acton (subject to decisions on whether a new school with sports facilities is located on this site, site master plan and feasibility) o Eversheds Sports Ground in Boston Manor to the south of Elthorne Park (subject to decision on new school proposals, site master plan and feasibility)
What if there is a reduction in the maintenance budget for some sites?
Whilst the standard of maintenance of playing pitch sites in Ealing is higher than in many boroughs, there will almost certainly be increased pressure on discretionary service budgets including parks for the foreseeable future.
The London Clay soil type and overplay at a number of sites causes issues of compaction and poor grass quality/cover. Fine turf maintenance (of bowling greens and cricket squares) is already undertaken by or has been transferred to user clubs at a number of sites.
In this context, any reduction in maintenance budgets for either in-house or contractor maintenance of sports pitches and pavilions on Council owned sites will require more maintenance tasks to be undertaken by trained club volunteers simply to uphold the current levels of pitch maintenance and playing capacity. To work effectively, any further transfer of maintenance responsibilities will necessitate additional resource from the sports bodies for training more volunteers in grounds maintenance skills and, in the case of football, a bank of specialist equipment and vehicles that clubs can loan from the Middlesex FA.
As identified above, the strategy to focus formal playing pitch activity on a number of sustainable hub playing field sites in accessible locations across the borough will facilitate re-desigation of a number of formal pitches on smaller public park sites to informal recreation use which will reduce the cost of pitch maintenance on these smaller sites.
What if further sports development initiatives or new forms of the sport are introduced?
Over the period of the strategy national policy is likely to focus on providing appropriate low cost opportunities for the inactive to get active under the 'Active Nation' agenda. In the short term, this will be reflected in the investment grant programmes of Sport England from 2016 to 2020.
For the main playing pitch sports, initiatives are likely to include more targeted programming to encourage participation by inactive people by focusing on providing more opportunities for informal, less physically demanding forms of play (e.g kick abouts, walking football, touch rugby, rush hockey, tapeball cricket, French cricket). Demand for use of parks and open spaces for free to access physical activity such as group runs/jogs (e.g. Parkrun) and cycling may well increase as a result of these initiatives.
The playing pitch facility implications of these types of sports development initiatives have been assessed in the course of preparing this strategy and have informed the projects already underway and at the planning and feasibility stages and set out in the initial Action Plan at the end of this document.
More specifically, by investing in providing improved pavilions in parks (e.g. in Perivale and Durdans parks) and through supporting facility projects at secure club grounds (e.g. Popefield Sports Ground) and dual use sites (e.g. William Perkin School), capacity in parks and open spaces is 'freed up' at peak times for informal play. In addition, the business plans for major project proposals such as the Parklife scheme at Gunnersbury Park include programming of low cost informal activity as well as for more formal competition use and training.
Ealing Council's current policy of investment in a comprehensive and accessible network of high quality outdoor sports sites serving all areas of the borough aligns well with the Active Nation agenda.
What if a pitch is taken out of the supply in an area and replaced with provision elsewhere?
This scenario has been considered in the course of carrying out the detailed assessments of need P a g e | 32
Page 82 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031 for each of the main playing pitch sports (appended to this document). Three sites are identified as having playing pitches of poor quality and having little potential for cost effective enhancement. The implications of removing these pitches from the supply of formally maintained playing pitches for hire and relocation teams currently using this pitches to planned new pitch provision on nearby sites have been considered.
Specifically it was concluded that there is a case for taking out of the supply of maintained park cricket pitches for hire the low quality pitch at Islip Manor Park (which lacks ancillary pavilion or social space). However, given the shortfall in current pitch provision for cricket, this course of action would only be justified if, first, new maintained pitches and a pavilion (for both cricket and football) were provided (as currently proposed) at nearby Rectory Park. The implications would be to enhance the quality of the playing and social experience for the small number of friendly teams that currently hire the pitch in Islip Manor Park whilst freeing up capacity at Islip Manor Park in the peak weekend period for free to access informal sports and recreation activities.
Similarly, with regard to football pitches, the needs assessment concluded that two poor quality sites should be considered for removal from the supply of pitches for hire and returned to informal playing pitch sports use once alternative new provision planned in these areas become available.
Firstly, the Council's Southfields Recreation Ground drains poorly and the main user club of the pitches on this site has expressed interest in relocating to the proposed London Parklife football facilities at Gunnersbury Park nearby when these are completed. Should this relocation take place, the Southfields pitches would become available at peak weekend times for informal games meeting demand in this densely populated neighbourhood.
Second, the football pitches at Gurnell Leisure Centre lack sufficient changing rooms to accommodate home games on both pitches at the same time and the lower pitch drains very poorly due to proximity to a river where remediation works are considered unviable. Subject to further consultation with the user clubs, it is concluded that replacement of this pitch with the new outdoor facilities opening in 2016/17 at William Perkin High School (FTP and pavilion) and in Perivale Park (a new pavilion) is the optimum solution allowing the lower Gurnell pitch to return to informal use.
As with cricket, in light of the current shortfall in football pitch provision, the relocation of football teams currently playing on poor quality pitches in the borough can only take place if, first, additional capacity is provided to accommodate these teams at alternative venues in the same catchment within Ealing borough of appropriate quality.
There is a significant increase in demand in a specific part of the study area?
The existing network of outdoor sports and recreation sites when combined with current plans for new and enhanced provision is likely to be sufficient to meet demand over the period of this strategy to 2031 in the Greenford and Southall areas of anticipated residential growth.
The Park Royal Opportunity Area on the border with LB Brent is also forecast to be an area of substantial housing growth. A significant increase in demand from population growth in Park Royal will impact on the playing pitch facility supply/demand balance in the north east of the borough for all the sports but most particularly for youth football and minisoccer and cricket. The key playing pitch sites affected are North Acton Playing Fields to the south and Perivale Park/Gurnell to the west. Both these sites are already designated by Ealing Council as key outdoor sports hubs - North Acton Playing Fields for youth football and cricket plus park tennis and Perivale/Gurnell as the major outdoor sports hub for the borough with facilities for athletics, golf, tennis, football, cricket, rugby and gaelic sports. Investment has been made in both sites to improve the quality of playing surfaces and ancillary facilities (including 3G surfaces at North Acton and a new pavilion at Perivale). Further projects on these sites are set out in the Action Plan at the end of this document as priorities to meet demand growth in this part of the borough. The outdoor sports hub/FA Parklife investment plans for Gunnersbury Park to the south on the Hounslow border will also address some of the additional demand from Park Royal via the North Circular. In planning for this future growth for youth football, the roles of accessible playing pitch sites with AGPs to the north and east of Park Royal (i.e. Stonebridge Recreation Ground and Wormword Scrubs/Linford Christie Sports Centre) have also been considered.
P a g e | 33
Page 83 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
4. Recommendations
4.1 Introduction
The recommendations of this Playing Pitch Strategy for Ealing Borough are made in the context of the Borough Council's Corporate Plan, the Joint Strategic Needs Assessment and vision for a healthier and more prosperous borough.
The recommendations are also informed by The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Paragraph 74. The NPPF stipulates that existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including playing fields, should not be built on unless: o An assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or o The loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location; or o The development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which clearly outweigh the loss.
National policy is amplified by both regional and local policy. London Plan policy 3.19 recognises that sports and recreation facilities are important parts of social infrastructure, providing a range of social and health benefits for communities and neighbourhoods.
Local planning policies are contained in the Council’s Local Plan which comprises a portfolio of documents. Those documents with most significance to the delivery of recreational provision are the Development (or Core) Strategy (April 12), Development Management DPD (December 13) and Schools DPD (May 2016). A number of policies are significant to the delivery of recreational provision in the borough, and specifically to pitch based provision. The overarching policy is set out at policy 5.6 of the Development (or Core) Strategy (April 12) as follows:
Policy 5.6: Outdoor Sports and Active Recreation
The council will: o Protect and promote a network of sports grounds and other active recreation areas in the borough. Sites identified as being of strategic and local importance for outdoor sports will be protected and promoted primarily for this function. o Seek to develop a sports hub as part of this network, with a range of sports provision in the Gurnell area, and the development of several strategic ‘satellite sites’ located strategically to serve communities across the borough. o Seek to secure developer contributions to provide a key funding source for the delivery of various priority projects.
The council’s Facilities Strategy (2012) (Incorporating the Playing Pitch and Outdoor Sports Strategy (2007) and updates (2010) provides an analysis of both existing and future needs over the lifetime of the plan, identifying areas of deficiency in terms of access. At a borough wide level, this Development Strategy identifies a requirement of 8.2sqm per person of Active Recreation (Outdoor) space per person in the borough by 2021. (NB. This standard was updated based on the Council's Sports Facility Strategy 2012-2021 and superseded by Policy 7D of the Development Management DPD (December 2013) i.e. 7.3sqm per person to be accommodated within existing outdoor space for sports or new public open space provision)
The council’s Facilities Strategy sets out an action plan to promote this network, and to address deficiency in terms of physical access, quantity of provision, and in terms of quality of facilities. As a tool for alleviating deficiency, this strategy identifies a hierarchy of sites in the borough for sports and active recreation, defining sites of strategic and local importance and distinguishing between sites of single and multi-sports use, and identifies opportunities for future development/enhancement.
The strategic multi-sport multi-pitch sites comprise a number of pitches, and accommodate a range of sports, often used by a significant number of organisations and clubs. These sites will be primarily safeguarded and protected for outdoor sports related activities. Some ancillary
P a g e | 34
Page 84 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031 development on these sites may be necessary and desirable to enhance the primary active recreation function of these sites.
Key priority projects include the promotion of a ‘sports hub’ facility at Perivale Park encompassing the Perivale Athletics Field (a National Throw Centre), a new outdoor gym, a Golf Range and Junior Golf Development Centre, tennis courts, new multi-use games areas (MUGAs) and dedicated pitches for football and rugby. The centre will also link to the Gurnell Swimming Pool.
It also proposes developing smaller ‘satellite’ hub facilities at strategic sites in the borough. The following proposals have also been identified for key sports fields in the borough: o Rectory Park Playing Fields, Northolt – the establishment of a centre of football excellence in the park and the replacement of changing facilities. o Ealing Central Sports Ground, Perivale – replacement or refurbishment of the pavilion and changing rooms. o Spikes Bridge Park, Southall – the development of a new pavilion incorporating community uses and possibly replacement accommodation for the Cornucopia Centre on the edge of the park. o Warren Farm – improved changing rooms, outdoor sports areas and social facilities.
All sports grounds in the borough are currently designated and safeguarded as Community Open Space.
Further site specific projects/proposals are also identified in other policies including:
Policy 5.1: Protect and Enhance Metropolitan Green Belt (extract only) The council in seeking to enhance the network of Green Belt in the borough will promote the following proposals: o Rectory Park Playing Fields – development of play facilities and five-a-side football (NB. new football and pavilion facilities are at advanced stage of planning in partnership with Middlesex FA) o Spike’s Bridge – King George’s field: development of a district park linking with open space across the canal in Hillingdon, including the refurbishment or replacement of the sports pavilion (NB. a new pavilion is in development on adjacent cricket ground)
Policy 5.2: Protect and Enhance Metropolitan Open Land (extract only)
The council in realising the potential of the network of Metropolitan Open Land in the borough will promote the following proposals: o Acton Park – Management as public parkland and private playing fields o Hanger Hill – development of a district park, encompassing the public park, former Fox Reservoir and playing fields (St Augustines and Barclays Sports Ground) (NB. Barclays Sports Ground subsequently identified in Planning for Schools DPD 2016 as potential site for new Free School) o Refurbishment of Buildings at Lammas Park o Brent River Park - scope for more intensive outdoor recreation uses in the vicinity of Gurnell pool, subject to addressing flood risk issues; improved athletics track and sports facilities o Horsenden Hill Metropolitan Park - Refurbishment of bowling green clubhouse and changing rooms, and installation of a MUGA (NB. Upgrade to Bowls Pavilion windows and security fencing identified in Bowls Assessment of Need at Appendix E)
As identified in the supporting text to policy 5.6 set out above, policy 7D of the Council’s Development Management DPD (Dec 13) establishes a space standard of 7.3 sq. m. of space per person, calculated based on the predicted occupancy of new development.
4.2 Protect Enhance and Provide
In this existing policy context for outdoor sport and recreation in Ealing, this Playing Pitch Strategy makes the following recommendations for provision of playing pitches and the other outdoor sports facilities in scope to 2031. The recommendations are set out below under three headings: Protect, Enhance and Provide. P a g e | 35
Page 85 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Protect
1. Ealing Council has undertaken a Playing Pitch Strategy (PPS) and assessed existing and future needs for playing pitch provision across the Borough (see Appendices A to D). The firm conclusion is that there is an identified need to retain all existing sports grounds and other active recreation areas that are currently in use or temporarily closed pending completion of committed sports facility enhancement proposals to meet either current or future needs for these sports to 2031. Therefore policy 5.6 of the Local Plan and policy 7D of the Development Management DPD (December 2013) - i.e. 7.3sqm per person of Active Recreation (Outdoor) open space to be accommodated within existing outdoor space for sports or new public open space provision - should continue to be applied. Should a playing field/pitch (and/or sport facility of a type in scope) exist in Ealing borough that is not mentioned in this Planning Pitch Strategy, its omission is not an endorsement by Sport England or the relevant national governing body of that sport of its disposal.
2. An assessment of need for bowling greens has also been carried out (see Appendix E). In the short term, Bowls England and the Bowls Development Alliance should strive to reverse the decline in demand for outdoor bowling greens in public parks through development activity and promotion in liaison with the clubs and partner agencies. The usage of all Council greens should be monitored and the needs case for retaining greens kept under annual review.
3. An assessment of need for tennis courts has also been carried out (see Appendix F). The existing supply of maintained public tennis courts in parks (both free to access and pay and play) should be retained and sustainable operating models continue to be explored for the smaller sites as appropriate, for example, through agreements with nearby community clubs, coaches or specialist operators. Where park courts are of particularly low quality and are found to attract no use or interest from clubs or operators, options for their replacement at accessible strategic hub sites with ancillary facilities and through securing and promoting new public access to courts out-of-hours on high school sites should be considered. There is no needs case for the reinstatement of any tennis courts in the borough that are currently closed. Disused tennis courts in the borough should be considered for another sport or recreation use where a local need is established.
4. The Council will continue to work with strategic sports partners (Sport England, London Sport, the national governing bodies of sport for playing pitch sports), playing pitch site owners including schools, colleges and local sports clubs to seek agreements to secure access for community sport at those sports grounds and active recreation sites in the borough - including those on education sites - where long term access is currently unsecured.
5. Where playing field sites, tennis courts and/or bowling greens are in the Council's ownership, the policy of securing community access through asset transfer to community clubs and/or sports associations will continue to be applied provided that:
i. The facilities are assessed as of good quality by the relevant governing bodies of sport prior to transfer; ii. The organisation is able to demonstrate it has the capacity and resources to maintain the facilities to a good standard, meeting NGB league requirements and to deliver sports development outcomes (and this forms part of any service level agreement) and iii. Opportunities for informal play (either on the subject site or on another site in the same catchment area) are fully safeguarded.
6. As there is no surplus of playing pitches in the borough, the Council will ensure that any reduction in the number of grass pitches maintained, marked and equipped as appropriate for hire to community football teams on park and recreation ground sites will not take place unless teams hiring the pitches in question are first successfully migrated to another playing pitch site of at least equivalent quality in the same catchment area with the equivalent spare capacity in the peak time (i.e. new provision of either grass or FA accredited 3G pitches) at a cost of hire equivalent to similar facilities in the local area. Where such a relocation of match play takes place, the grass will continue to be
P a g e | 36
Page 86 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
maintained to a level that encourages continued informal play for football or other pitch sports.
7. At those AGPs in the borough with a sand dressed or sand based playing surface endorsed by England Hockey as suitable for completion and training, the Council will seek to use its influence with providers (for example through leases, management agreements or the planning process) to protect this existing hockey compliant AGP stock from change in surface to 3G.
8. The Council and its partners will continue to seek to influence the design and specification of new or replacement sports facilities on education sites in the Borough to ensure their suitability for dual (education and community) use, securing formal Community Use Agreements at each site to meet the established current and future demand.
9. The Council will seek to maintain its existing budget for playing pitch maintenance in recognition of the contribution of playing pitches to its strategic aims and priorities for public health and the environment.
10. As a condition of future planning consents for new or replacement artificial grass pitches to be used predominantly for football, the Council will ensure that these facilities are FA tested to the British Standard for Synthetic Turf Sports Surfaces (BS EN 15330-1) and are listed on the FA 3G Football Turf Pitch Register.
11. Similarly, through use of the planning development control system, the Council will ensure any artificial grass pitch development in the Borough for contact rugby is IRB / World Rugby compliant and also conforms to RFL Community Standard in light of the location of the London Broncos RFL club in the borough at the Trailfinders Sports Ground (as detailed in Appendix G) and the potential for further development of this pitch sport from this hub in future.
12. Existing free to access multi use games areas in parks and recreation grounds for informal outdoor sports use will be retained, maintained and replaced when required as available resources allow.
13. To address the growing problem of unauthorised use of pay and play football pitches in parks for team training and by coaching schools (which impacts on pitch quality for hiring teams), the Council will work with the Middlesex FA to agree sanctions for FA/AFA affiliated teams and coaching organisations and promote and apply the policy in public parks.
Enhance
1. The Council will encourage its current parks contractor to carry out an annual review of its playing pitch maintenance regimes in consultation with the Middlesex Football Association, Middlesex Cricket Board and their respective pitch advisers to secure maximum value and ensure the budget is employed as effectively as possible to meet the specific requirements of these sports towards achievement of the pitch quality standards set out at 4.3 below. In addition, advice will be sort from The FA Regional Pitch Advisor when future grass pitch maintenance contracts are prepared to ensure that they meet the FA Performance Quality Standard (PQS) and that an appropriate performance quality assurance and monitoring regime is in place.
2. The Council will work in partnership with the Middlesex Football Association (and other National Governing Bodies as appropriate) to establish one or more equipment loan banks at a strategic site or sites in the borough accessible to community sports club volunteers responsible for playing pitch maintenance and in the delivery of associated training. The enhancement plans for Gunnersbury Park and Rectory Farm should include consideration of this provision.
3. Where feasible the Council and its contractors will consider using moveable football goal post systems in public parks to take pressure off goalmouths, and to evaluate moving pitches periodically to reduce wear. The Council will work with Middlesex FA to identify a package of goalposts that need to be replaced across the borough on a site by site basis so that this can be delivered in one go.
P a g e | 37
Page 87 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
4. The Council will work with strategic sports partners (including Sport England, relevant National Governing Bodies of sport and other funders) and with local stakeholders to implement enhancement projects on priority sites for each sport identified in the Playing Pitch Strategy Action Plan set out in section 5. below and its annual revisions.
5. In accordance with Policy 7D of the Development Management Development Plan Document (December 2013), contributions towards the delivery of priority projects for enhancements to existing provision will continue to be sought under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 or the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) mechanism from all qualifying developments for Active Recreation (Outdoor) - i.e. housing/flats developments of 150+ units, major student accommodation and major commercial development. Through these mechanisms, appropriate contributions will also continue to be sought for ongoing maintenance. The priority projects are those set out in the Action Plan of the Council's adopted Playing Pitch Strategy (PPS) current at the time the planning application is submitted. The site to receive the contribution will be located within the walk to catchment area of the development site (i.e. one mile approx.) or, if no such site exists, to the next closest priority site in the PPS Action Plan.
6. Informed by the sport by sport 'Situation at Individual Sites' analysis tables in appendices A to D to this Playing Pitch Strategy, the Council will seek to ensure that spare capacity during peak hours at existing playing pitch sites is utilised before considering new grass playing pitch provision.
7. The Council will continue to liaise with community football clubs and Middlesex FA to ensure that the available playing pitch space in parks and recreation grounds are in the optimum configuration (e.g. pitch sizes and orientations and goal sizes) to align with changing trends in participation and, where possible, allow a margin of spare capacity at peak times to minimise backlogs of matches following prolonged periods of bad weather. Currently, there are between three and four affiliated youth and minisoccer teams for every small sided pitch compared to approximately one full size pitch per affiliated adult team. This should be rectified by converting some adult pitches into youth/mini soccer pitches (or over-marking adult pitches with small sided lines where the pitch carrying capacity and level of play allows) and, where possible, through the migration of youth football and mini soccer onto new FTPs.
8. The focus for enhancing rugby facility provision during the strategy period will be on delivering the planned enhancements of the club based sites, particularly those where long term access is secured either through freehold ownership or a long lease.
Provide
1. In assessing opportunities for new provision, the Council and its partners will, subject to local planning development control considerations, prioritise facility types and specifications that can accommodate high levels of use both for formal competition and training and informal games. For example, floodlit AGPs - either sand dressed (suitable for hockey and football training) or 3G (suitable for football and for rugby union & league subject to length of pile and installation of a shock pad) - non-turf cricket pitches and practice nets. Where new playing pitches are provided, appropriate arrangements will be put in place to ensure effective management and maintenance of these facilities. No investment in new provision will be considered without a business plan establishing that the ongoing asset managements costs of maintaining and refreshing the facilities are sustainable.
2. In providing new or upgraded pitches, whether grass or artificial, the Council and its partners will seek to ensure that the facilities are provided in accordance with the appropriate published technical guidance of Sport England and/or the relevant sport governing body. Consideration will be given to 'future proofing' the layout/design to allow space for future expansion if required and for moving pitches periodically to reduce wear and tear.
3. In accordance with the findings of the 2012 Sports Facilities Strategy (reflected in Local Plan Policy 5.6) and the sport-specific assessments of need carried out for this Playing Pitch Strategy (appended), the priority for new provision is to deliver a network of good
P a g e | 38
Page 88 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
quality and accessible playing pitches, outdoor sports courts and ancillary facilities throughout the borough. Key sites for outdoor sports in relation to the main population centres and development opportunity areas are identified below (along with projects completed since 2012 and planned new facilities for outdoor sport to meet identified needs):
o Northolt to Perivale: . Lord Halsbury Playing Fields - new pavilion, boxing gym and grass pitch improvements as well as a floodlit 60 x 40m FTP and free to access MUGA (opened in 2014) . Improved outdoor sports provision in Perivale Park through installation of a new pavilion (summer 2016) . Improved outdoor sports facilities in Rectory Park Playing Fields including a new sports pavilion and two floodlit FTP’s (2017/18) . William Perkin High School - new pavilion due to open in October 2016, floodlit FTP due to open summer 2016, junior cricket pitch available 2017 and 3 floodlit tennis courts available now for community use.
o Southall: . Outdoor sports facility improvements in Spikes Bridge Park including a new sports pavilion, 3 cricket nets, 2 Cricket NTPs and FTP installed in 2014 . Dormers Wells High School NTP cricket facility potentially available to a community club partner . Newly refurbished tennis courts in Southall Park . Warren Farm Sports Ground development to include new sports pavilion with changing and social space, 8 grass football pitches and 3 cricket pitches . Durdans Park new pavilion and reinstatement of cricket pitch, the pavilion will also provide changing rooms for the adjacent King Georges Playing Fields football pitches currently out of use . Norwood Hall Playing Fields will be open for community access in 2017/18, facilities will include 2 cricket wickets, 3 football pitches and a 60 x 40m floodlit FTP for use by the partner club
o Acton to Park Royal: . New indoor and outdoor sports facilities in Gunnersbury Park shared with LB Hounslow including a new sports hall/pavilion, 2 floodlit FTPs, enhanced grass pitches for football, rugby and cricket, 8 floodlit tennis courts . North Acton Playing Fields masterplan for the site to include upgrading the existing tarmacadam tennis courts and installing floodlights and expanding the current small sided FTP to a 60 x 40m floodlit FTP
4.3 Pitch Quality Standards
Pitch carrying capacity has a direct relationship with pitch quality scores. Improved quality directly affects pitch carrying capacity. Investment in quality enhancements to pitches at existing playing pitch sites with secure community access is, usually, more cost effective than investment in new provision. For example, raising the quality of a football pitch from ‘Standard’ to ‘Good’ would enable an additional game per week to be accommodated.
Sites are identified in the Action Plan below where raising the pitch standard to the 'good' standard described below would have a significant impact on overall capacity. Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy contributions in combination with contributions towards new provision and external grants are the means of funding the necessary improvement works to ensure there is sufficient capacity in the future to meet demand generated by new homes and population growth in the borough.
P a g e | 39
Page 89 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Quality Standards for Playing Pitches
Cricket: Future standard – Good (i.e. an aggregate rating of 80% or more against ECB Non- Technical Visual Quality Assessment proforma criteria and scoring mechanism for the outfield, grass wickets, changing pavilion, artificial wickets and non-turf cricket practice nets as applicable to the site)
Football: Future Standard – Good (i.e. an aggregate rating of 80% or more against FA Non- Technical Visual Quality Assessment proforma criteria and scoring mechanism for the assessment criteria and aggregate rating scores for the playing surface and maintenance programme)
Rugby Union: Future Standard – Good (M2) rating (i.e. no action needed on maintenance) and D3 rating (i.e. no action needed on pitch drainage).
AGPs: Future Standard - Good (80% or more against Sport England Non-Technical Visual Quality Assessment proforma criteria and scoring mechanism for the playing surface age, condition, markings, fencing, security, goals and posts and ancillary facilities).
P a g e | 40
Page 90 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
5. Action Plan
Aligning with the strategic policies above, this final section of the Playing Pitch Strategy sets out an action plan for delivering the new provision and facility enhancement needs identified in the sport-specific assessments of need reports in the appendices.
This PPS action plan replaces the Council's April 2016 update of the Sport Facilities Strategy 2012- 2021 action plan in respect of those outdoor sports within the scope of the PPS - i.e. playing pitch sports, tennis courts, bowling greens and croquet lawns. Consistent with the Council's existing approach, the plan considers recommended actions to address facility needs for these sports according to the following categorisation of playing pitch sites:
1. Strategic multi-sport multi-pitch playing pitch priority sites - these are key hub sites for outdoor sport serving a wide West London catchment and are shown in the plan in two sub-categories. First, the existing priority sites and second the future priority multi-sport multi-pitch sites currently on site or where the Council and partners have committed to implementation in the short term (i.e. within the next two years).
2. Multi- or dual-sport sites - these are sites that also serve more than one sport and serve a more localised catchment area predominantly within Ealing borough. The plan groups this type of site into three categories: Firstly, those sites with playing field designation that are needed but currently closed (either fully or partially); second those operational playing field sites with potential to accommodate a further sport where a need has been identified; and lastly all other multi- or dual-sport sites in the borough.
3. Sport specific sites - these are sites in the borough that serve a particular playing pitch sport and need to be retained to address the current needs of that sport, either for formal or informal play.
In each category, the sites where action is needed over the period of the strategy are listed alphabetically.
Each site-specific action has been allocated an initial priority ranking (high, medium or low) based on assessment of the potential to contribute to the vision and objectives of this Playing Pitch Strategy and the Council's public health agenda. The priority sites for action in the short term were selected on the basis of meeting most if not all of the following criteria: o Strategic location (accessibility) o Capacity (e.g. multi-pitch, existing or potential good quality rating) o Security of access (e.g. long lease, grant conditions, community use agreement) o On-site ancillary facilities with management / supervision o Potential for delivering sports development outcomes that align with Borough, Sport England, London Sport and NGB strategic aims.
The estimated time scale for implementation of each action is also identified as follows: o Short term: 1-2 years o Medium term: 3-6 years o Long term: 7 years or more
In accordance with the published guidance for the preparation of playing pitch strategies, the Council will convene and chair an annual meeting of the Playing Pitch Strategy Steering Group to review progress against this Action Plan and update the priority rankings and timescales for implementation to reflect material changes in the picture of supply and demand and changing scenarios for playing pitches, tennis courts and bowling greens/croquet lawns during the preceding 12 months.
Where capital budget sums are shown, these are indicative estimates derived from Sport England Facility Cost Guidance Sheets and Pitch Improvement Budget Cost Sheets for the Protecting Playing Fields Programme (to May 2016).
Where grounds are not in Council ownership the ability to action certain priorities may be hindered, plus all projects will be subject to the necessary planning process and funding being secured both for the initial capital development and ongoing cost of maintaining the facilities.
P a g e | 41
Page 91 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Current strategic multi-sport multi-pitch priority sites Planning Statement Strategic multi-sport, multi-pitch priority sports grounds are designated as Outdoor Sports Facilities and are primarily protected and maintained for sports use only with the presumption that the sites be developed in favour of outdoor sport to enhance existing activities and facilities. These are sites, which comprise a number of pitches, and accommodate a range of sports, often used by a significant number of organisations and clubs. Pitches as well as ancillary facilities including changing rooms, toilets, social spaces and car parking, will be either maintained or developed to a standard acceptable for local clubs to play in organised leagues with Council owned facilities being available for pay and play as well as season long bookings. The user catchment for these strategic sites, located across the borough will include the wider West London area. Future development may include the building of indoor facilities on site in order to make future outdoor sports pitch development and delivery feasible and sustainable and/or the installation of floodlit artificial surface facilities, which will allow the site to be used more often. Identifying features . Multi-sport and multi-pitch site used by a significant number of organisations and clubs . Community use of pitches available on a season long or pay and play basis . Grounds spatially distributed across the borough in order to facilitate good access to facilities . Adequate and appropriate car parking to cater for users Time scale for development: Short term = 1 – 2 years, Medium term = 3 – 6 years, Long term = 7 years plus Venue Location Existing features Timescale Action Lead & & Priority Cost (£) Actonians @ Acton Floodlit full size sand based Short term Protect AGP for hockey use when LBE & Boddington AGP, Football and Cricket & high resurface. Address drainage issues at lease Gardens pitches (upgraded 2014) and priority the far end of the site closest to the holder NT cricket pitch installed 2015. train tracks caused by rail works. Pavilion upgraded 2013 Provide ball retention netting. TBC Brentham Club Central Football & Cricket pitches Short term Improvements to cricket pavilion CLUB Ealing Bowls Green & pavilion & medium Tennis courts – 4 upgraded to priority £100k artificial grass in 2015 Clubhouse with very good changing facilities, social space and cafe. New football changing rooms provided in 2012. Ealing Central Perivale Football & Cricket pitches Medium Refurbish the pavilion with a social LBE Sports Ground Pavilion with average quality term & space and improve quality of grass TBC changing rooms medium pitches. Outdoor gym equipment (3 priority FTP on former tennis court hard stations) standing and partner operator investment in the pavilion and ancillary facilities subject to feasibility
London Playing Greenford Football, Rugby & Cricket Medium LPF to consider option to redesignate London Fields (Birkbeck pitches (upgraded 2014) term & grass pitch at south end of ground to Playing Ave, Greenford) Main pavilion with very good medium football AGP subject to review of Fields quality changing facilities and priority impact on local demand of planned TBC social space (upgraded 2014). new supply Second set of changing facilities North Acton Acton Football & Cricket pitches with Short term As final phases of site master plan: LBE & Playing Fields NTPs (installed 2014); good & medium lease quality changing rooms priority Floodlight 3 tennis courts (On The holders (enhanced 2012), public café on Ball Tennis) site plus indoor community Extend small 3G MUGA to increase £125k activity space, Outdoor gym capacity for junior football (Football (tennis) equipment (6 stn) Distance Samurai Academy) marker route (2012) Provide secure storage for cricket £500k sightscreens (AGP) Old Actonians Acton Rugby & Cricket pitches; Tennis Long term Refurbish social space in pavilion and LBE lease Sports Ground & Netball courts; Pavilion with & medium improve hard court and grass playing holder good changing facilities and priority surfaces social space used for indoor sports activities; Squash courts Perivale Park Perivale Football & Cricket pitches & 1 Short term Replace outdoor pitch changing LBE Rugby/Gaelic Football pitch with & high facility for use by cricket, gaelic Changing poor quality changing; 9 hole priority football, football & rugby pavilion Golf & pavilion & 8 lane floodlit funded Athletics Track (both upgraded Improve quality of cricket pitches (cricket) 2015); Indoor and Outdoor & on site Gyms; Distance marker route Rectory Park Northolt Football & Cricket pitches with Short term Provide new changing rooms, social LBE & limited changing facilities; & high facilities, 2 FTPs, improved grass partners P a g e | 42
Page 92 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Current strategic multi-sport multi-pitch priority sites Skate facility priority football pitches on east side of the ground and improved cricket pitches £4m (currently overused for quality capacity) Spikes Bridge Southall Football & Cricket pitches Short term Raise AGP perimeter fence above LBE & Park (upgraded 2015); Changing & high gate points to reduce unauthorised London pavilion and indoor community priority use Tigers space (Dec 2013); 400m £50k jogging track (upgraded 2014); Upgrade 2 dense macadam tennis Tennis courts & MUGAs; courts to porous macadam Distance marker routes (2) Outdoor gym equipment (4 stn Leaseholder London Tigers with 5 additional stations to be installed in 2016) Trailfinders Ealing Rugby & Cricket pitches Short term Second rugby AGP (in place of Private Sports Ground (including Rugby AGPs installed & medium existing grass pitch) installed in 2016 owner 2014 & 2016); Tennis courts; priority - No further developments known to Pavilions with excellent facilities be planned at this time including changing rooms, social spaces, stand, functions rooms, gym, treatment room
Future strategic multi-sport multi-pitch priority sites Gunnersbury Acton Poor Football, Cricket pitches, Short term Upgrade pitches (3 new cricket plus LBE/LBH Park poor Rugby pitch, no pavilion, & high 1 upgraded with NTPs, 9 football, 1 joint derelict Tennis courts, 1930s priority rugby), 2 FTPs Sports hall with project Bowling Green & Pavilion pavilion 8 new floodlit tennis courts - 50% of new facilities allocated to LBE £14m on site 2017 Norwood Hall Southall 3 Football & 2 Cricket Pitches Short term New pavilion, 2 cricket wickets, 3 LBE/ Sports Ground not in use; Derelict pavilion and & high football pitches and a 60 x 40m EH&WL redgra pitch – No community priority floodlit FTP for use by partner club College & use pending development (Southall FC) from 2017/18 partner
£1.2m William Perkin Greenford New school site on the grounds Short term New pavilion due to open in LBE & High School of the former Glaxo Smith Kline & high December 2016, floodlit FTP due to school sports ground in Greenford priority open winter 2016, 3 floodlit tennis courts available winter 2016, junior £2.2m on cricket pitch available 2017, plus site indoor sports hall with pull out cricket nets Warren Farm Southall Football & Cricket pitches with Short term New changing rooms, indoor sports LBE & Sports Ground poor quality changing facilities & high and social facilities, floodlit outdoor QPR and no social space; Disused priority sports areas, including AGP (for QPR preferred tennis & netball courts; cricket pro club and academy use only) and partner nets and field athletics facilities improved playing surfaces for cricket Heads of and football for community use. Terms
Potential multi-sport or dual-sport sites pending redevelopment currently closed Planning Statement These sports grounds are not currently in use but are designated as Outdoor Sports Facilities and are protected and maintained for sports use only with the presumption that the sites be redeveloped in favour of outdoor sport to enhance borough wide provision. Pitches as well as ancillary facilities including changing rooms, toilets, social spaces and car parking, will be developed to a standard acceptable for clubs to play in organised leagues. Future developments could include the rebuilding of pavilions and /or changing rooms to ensure the facilities meet league standards as well as reinstating winter and/or summer playing surfaces and installing floodlighting on outdoor sports areas. The user catchment of these sites maybe more localised however, the sites will have similar requirements to the strategic sites when considering future development of facilities. Identifying features pending redevelopment . Multi-sport and multi-pitch site used by a significant number of organisations and clubs . Community use of pitches available year round on a season long or pay and play basis . Grounds spatially distributed across the borough in order to facilitate good access to facilities . Adequate and appropriate car parking to cater for users Time scale for development: Short term = 1 – 2 years, Medium term = 3 – 6 years, Long term = 7 years plus
P a g e | 43
Page 93 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Potential multi-sport or dual-sport sites pending redevelopment currently closed Venue Location Existing features Timescale Action Lead & & Priority Cost (£) Popefield Sports Ealing Football and Cricket Pitches not Short term New modular pavilion with changing LBE & Ground in use (formerly schools use) & high facilities and social area, partner priority reinstatement of pitches. Preferred partner is Ealing CC, pitch works On site completed, site ready for use by March 2017 Eversheds Hanwell Grass pitches used by Real FC Medium Proposed site for new school with LBE Sports Ground for youth football and mini term & dual use sports facilities - community (closed) soccer, pavilion is closed high outdoor sport priority in this location Private priority is for increased capacity for youth owner football and mini soccer. Consider feasibility of floodlit 3G and changing School with community access as part of on site school proposals Site under consideration by Education Former Barclays Ealing Facilities not currently in use Long term Reinstate indoor and outdoor sports TBC Bank Sports include grass pitches, outdoor & high facilities for school & community use Ground swimming pool, sports hall and priority Site under consideration by Education (closed) squash courts Land adjacent Acton Former bowls green, floodlit Long term Extension to Wasps FC/ Twyford TBC to Wasps FC tennis courts and derelict & medium School - floodlit Rugby AGP to to Sports Ground building priority accommodate juniors and training (closed) activity (plus hard court MUGAs to meet need of Twyford High School) - no needs case to reinstate bowls green or tennis courts Sudbury Hill Northolt Former tennis courts, football Long term Consider options to reinstate grass TBC Playing Fields and cricket pitches (adjacent to & low pitches and provide a small pavilion (closed) access road to David Lloyd priority (would require costly ground works to Health Club) reinstate pitches) - no needs case to reinstate derelict tennis courts
Existing sites with the potential to be multi- or dual-sport playing pitch sites The following sites also accommodate more than one outdoor sport. These sites have a smaller scale of facility provision for outdoor sport than the strategic multi-sport sites and, for the most part, serve a more local catchment of borough based sports clubs as well as informal or private members use. Time scale for development: Short term = 1 – 2 years, Medium term = 3 – 6 years, Long term = 7 years plus Venue Location Existing features Timescale Action Lead & & Priority Cost (£) Blondin Park Hanwell Large informal playing field Medium Consider feasibility options for LBE & space only currently used by term & clubhouse pavilion with storage; partners softball teams in summer and medium Rugby pitch, junior running track for Ealing Eagles road running club priority shared use by running, Hanwell year round and annual Rugby Club (as alternative to Brentford Festival Perivale Park and Elthorne Waterside), Ealing softball clubs and Brentford festival organisers Lammas Park Former bowls pavilion and 3 Short term Seek lease agreement to facilitate LBE & (Croquet greens used by Ealing Croquet & medium club eligibility for grants for future partners facilities) Club priority facility improvements. If no agreement, consider change of use with partners (e.g. running club, adventure golf and/or cafe operators)
Other multi- or dual-sport playing pitch sites The following sites accommodate more than one outdoor sport. These sites have a smaller scale of facility provision for outdoor sport than the strategic multi-sport sites and, for the most part, serve a more local catchment of borough based sports clubs as well as informal or private members use. Berkeley Fields / Horsenden Hill is a notable exception as the Gaelic Sports pitches and pavilion at this site draw from a London wide catchment
P a g e | 44
Page 94 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Other multi- or dual-sport playing pitch sites
Time scale for development: Short term = 1 – 2 years, Medium term = 3 – 6 years, Long term = 7 years plus Venue Location Existing features Timescale Action Lead & & Priority Cost (£) Alec Reed Northolt Full size floodlit sand AGP with Medium Resurface pitch and replace goals Private Academy Sports changing facilities and indoor term & and nets for football and hockey owner Centre sports facilities high use (school and community clubs) priority Berkeley Fields / Greenford Football stadium and pitch Medium Upgrade floodlights to stadium LBE lease Horsenden Hill (leased to North Greenford term & pitch, perimeter site fencing and holder United) high changing rooms priority Berkeley Fields / Greenford Gaelic Football pitches and Medium Upgrade existing Gaelic Football LBE lease Horsenden Hill pavilion leased to Tir Chonaill term & pavilion and additional changing holder (Continued) Gaels (TCG) high rooms (subject to extended lease, priority planning and funding) Berkeley Fields/ Greenford Bowls green and pavilion & 3 Medium See Bowls section, consider shared LBE & ballot Box side tennis courts term & low use of pavilion between bowls and Club priority tennis Brentside High Ealing Full size floodlit sand AGP with Medium Resurface pitch and replace goals PFI School changing facilities and indoor term & and nets for football and hockey Contractor sports facilities high use (school and community clubs) priority Lammas Park Ealing 33x18m 3G FTPs x 2 for football Short term Repairs to playing surface - lifting LBE lease (tennis & and small pavilion shared with & medium in areas holder football tennis priority facilities) Lease holder Will to Win
Northolt RFC Greenford Rugby, Football & Gaelic Sports Long term Upgrade 1930s pavilion and LBE lease (Cayton Green pitches (football upgraded in & low improve internal layout holder Park) 2015 and 2016) and pavilion priority Northolt with social space and small RFC gym. New modular changing room block (2014) Park Club Acton 1 good Cricket pitch, NT Short term Planning application submitted Health (Acton CC) practice nets and club access to & low 2016 for floodlit FTP and outdoor Club changing rooms and social priority swimming pool on playing field - Owners facilities in private members' future community use to be health club; floodlit and dome confirmed covered tennis courts (for private members); unmarked playing field used for children's football courses (open to non- members) Shepherds Bush Acton Mini Soccer & Cricket pitches, Medium Replace changing rooms, LBE lease Cricket Club pavilion term & Shepherds Bush CC (SBCC) current holder Low leaseholder Priority Southfields Acton Adult and Youth Football pitches Medium Relocate formal use (Old Actonians LBE & Recreation and poor changing rooms, 3 term & & Foxes FC) to Gunnersbury Park partner Ground tennis courts, distance marker medium when pitches and pavilion £1.5m route and outdoor gym priority completed.
Consider informal use of pitches (interest from youth group) and re provision of changing rooms in new multipurpose building
See tennis section St Benedict's Perivale 4 Rugby pitches; Full size AGP Medium Establish with school feasibility of Private School (no lights) and changing rooms. term & installing floodlights to hockey AGP School Hires to Old Priorian RFC and medium to increase capacity for community Ealing Hockey Club priority training midweek for Ealing HC
Consider options to improve drainage of rugby pitches to reduce frequency of cancellations
P a g e | 45
Page 95 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Sport specific sites Planning Statement Sport specific sports grounds are designated as Outdoor Sports Facilities and are protected and maintained for sports use only with the presumption that the sites be developed in favour of outdoor sport to enhance existing activities and facilities. Playing as well as ancillary facilities will be either maintained or developed to meet the required standards laid down by the relevant national governing body of that sport. Future developments could include the rebuilding of pavilions and /or changing rooms to ensure the facilities meet league standards for a given sport. Current provision could also be enhanced by developing a site to become dual purpose e.g. a football ground might be developed to include a cricket wicket, to allow for year round use of the site. The user catchments will vary between facilities depending on the level of competition hosted at each site. Venues hosting elite level competition will tend to have a bigger catchment and greater need for ancillary facilities especially changing rooms and car parking e.g. Perivale Park Athletics Track, but adequate and appropriate car parking must be a consideration for all facilities.
Identifying features . Specific sport as its priority use with the presumption that the site will be developed in favour of that sport or an alternative complementary sport . Discontinuity of provision would cause major issues for the delivery of the specific sport Time scale for development: Short term = 1 – 2 years, Medium term = 3 – 6 years, Long term = 7 years plus Venue Location Existing features Timescale Action Lead & & Priority Cost (£) Athletics and Running - see also strategic and dual-sport sections Blondin Park Hanwell Large informal playing field Medium See existing site with potential to LBE space only currently used by term & be multi- or dual-sport playing softball teams in summer and medium pitch sites section Ealing Eagles road running club priority year round and annual Brentford Festival Perivale Park Perivale 8 lane 400m all-weather floodlit Medium Investigate options to increase LBE & Athletics Track track with 3 throws cages and 5 term & indoor training facilities and car Everyone throwing circles, indoor training high parking especially if the golf facility Active area with indoor throwing circle priority development plans progress at the outdoor gym, 300 seat stand adjacent Perivale Park Golf Course and pavilion with changing facilities and social area. Contract partner Everyone Active Weightlifting gym added 2016 Spikes Bridge Southall Jogging track installed around Medium No further plans at this time LBE Jogging track the AGP pitch in June 2014 term & high priority Bowls and Croquet - see also strategic and dual-sport sections Brentham Bowls Ealing Pavilion and 1 green, part of Not No specific bowls related CLUB Club Green multi-sports club with clubhouse applicable development planned at this time facilities Ealing Ealing Pavilion and 1 Green Not No developments planned at this CLUB Conservative applicable time Club Gunnersbury Acton Pavilion and 1 green Long term Upgrade or replacement of 1930’s LBH lease Bowls Club & low pavilion holder priority Horsenden Hill Greenford 6 lane green and pavilion Medium Consider options with North LBE & Bowls Green term & Greenford BC for renewing pavilion Club medium windows and perimeter security priority fencing Islip Manor Park Northolt 6 lane green & small storage Not No developments planned at this LBE Bowls Green shed. Use of toilet in Play applicable time Centre building Lammas Park Ealing Pavilion and 3 Greens Medium Ensure changing/toilet and social LBE & Croquet Greens term & low facilities are appropriate for use; Ealing CC priority Ealing Council and Ealing Croquet Club to establish new lease arrangement Pitshanger Park Ealing 6 lane green and pavilion Short term Consider options with user club for LBE & Bowls Green (During tennis centre opening & medium remedial work to improve grass Club times, bowlers have access to priority cover on green edges and to toilets in adjacent tennis improve external presentation of pavilion as of 2014) pavilion building Springfield Acton 6 lane green and pavilion Medium Internal refurbishment of pavilion CLUB P a g e | 46
Page 96 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Bowls Club term & low building to include provision of priority Access WC West Ealing West Pavilion and 1 Green No developments planned at this LBE lease Bowls Club Ealing Changing rooms and access time holder Green refurbished 2012 Wolf Fields Southall 6 lane green and pavilion Short term Consider options with user club for LBE Bowls Green & medium remedial work to improve grass priority cover on green edges, pavilion windows and entrance gate and perimeter fencing, repair ceiling Cricket – see also strategic and dual-sport sites sections Brentfield Greenford Pavilion & Cricket pitch Long term Ongoing playing surface and LBE lease Cricket Ground (refurbishment completed 2013 & medium pavilion improvements by lease holder priority holder Ealing CC Durdans Park Southall Derelict cricket pitch and Short term New pavilion and reinstatement of LBE pavilion, out of use since & high cricket pitch (pavilion for joint use Southall CC folded priority with football on King George's Onsite Playing Fields), new leaseholder to be Ramgarhia SSC Ealing Cricket Ealing Pavilion and 1 Cricket pitch Long term Minor playing surface and pavilion CLUB Club Ground & medium improvements priority Glaxo SK Hanwell Pavilion and Cricket pitch Not No community use, no known Private Sports Ground applicable development plans at this time owner (Hanwell) Islip Manor Park Northolt Cricket pitch, users have use of Medium No sports pitch developments LBE toilets in Play Centre building as term & planned at this time. Site has no no pavilion on site. high potential to be enhanced to meet priority requirements for league cricket or for year round formal pitch sport use. Osterley Cricket Southall 2 Cricket pitches (upgraded Short term NT practice nets need replacing and LBE lease Club Ground, 2015), fire damaged pavilion & high last phase of pavilion refurbishment holder Tentelow Lane refurbished in two phases priority (social space), leaseholder Osterley £75k (completing in 2016) CC Park Club Acton Health Club access & 1 Cricket Short term Planning application submitted Private (Acton Cricket pitch & low 2016 for a floodlit AGP and a 50m club Club Ground) Dome structure covering tennis priority outdoor pool – no community use courts for 6 months a year – available, future community use to see other multi- or dual-sport be confirmed playing pitch section Perivale Park Perivale Football & Cricket pitches & 1 Short term Replace outdoor pitch changing LBE Rugby/Gaelic Football pitch with & high facility for use by cricket, gaelic Changing poor quality changing; 9 hole priority football, football & rugby pavilion Golf & pavilion & 8 lane floodlit funded Athletics Track (both upgraded Improve quality of cricket pitches (cricket) & 2015); Indoor and Outdoor on site Gyms; Distance marker route Popefield Sports Ealing Football and Cricket Pitches not Short term New modular pavilion with LBE & Ground in use (formerly schools use) & high changing facilities and social area, partner priority reinstatement of pitches. Preferred partner is Ealing CC, pitch works On site completed, site ready for use by March 2017 Rectory Park Northolt Football & Cricket pitches with Short term Provide new changing rooms, social LBE & limited changing facilities; & high facilities, 2 FTPs, improved grass partners Skate facility priority football pitches on east side of the ground and improved cricket £4m pitches (currently overused for quality capacity) Shepherds Bush Acton Pavilion and 1 Cricket pitch Not No developments planned at this LBE lease CC Ground applicable time holder SKLP Cricket Northolt Cricket pitch, small pavilion, Short term NT practice nets need replacing, CLUB Ground NTP and NT practice nets & high medium term need for pavilion priority upgrade or new build William Perkin Hanwell New pavilion and 1 Cricket pitch Short term Pitch reinstated as part of new high LBE & High School – see strategic multi-pitch & high school development, junior use SCHOOL multi-sport sites section priority most likely and new pavilion ready for summer 2017 season
P a g e | 47
Page 97 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Football – see also strategic and dual-sport sites sections Acton Garden Acton Pavilion and 2 Football pitches Not No developments planned at this Private Village Social applicable time owner Club Berkeley Fields Greenford 2 Football or Gaelic football Short term Upgrade existing Gaelic Football LBE lease pitches & medium pavilion and additional changing holder priority rooms (subject to extended lease, planning and funding). Use of TBC additional pitch booked weekly by leaseholder Tir Chonnail Gaels through Ealing’s pitch booking service Dormers Wells Southall 2 Football pitches Not No developments planned at this LBE Leisure Centre applicable time Elthorne Sports Hanwell 33m x17m 3G MUGA Short term Repairs/resurfacing of 3G MUGA, LBE & EA Centre & Medium run under contract by Everyone priority Active Elthorne Hanwell Adult football pitches used for Long term Provide changing rooms and layout LBE Waterside / youth football and mini soccer; & medium pitches for youth football and mini Elthorne Park no changing rooms, large priority soccer. Subject to plans to relocate floodlit 4 court MUGA with 1 Elthorne School to former court 3G Eversheds Sports Ground, there is also potential for the hard courts and school pitches to accommodate rugby pitch and pavilion as home base for Hanwell RFC
Fox Reservoir Ealing Pitches for adult and youth Long term Upgrade pavilion, leaseholder Acton LBE lease Sports Ground football and mini soccer & medium and Ealing Whistlers FC holder (upgraded 2014); pavilion. priority Fields in Trust site Gurnell Playing West 2 adult and 1 youth football Short term Lower adult pitch continues to be LBE & GLL Fields Ealing pitch (enhanced in 2015) with & medium unplayable in prolonged periods of good quality changing rooms in priority wet weather despite drainage work leisure centre on site, skate and therefore teams using this park and BMX track playing pitch should be relocated to accessible sites with a current over- supply of pitches or new playing field sites and the pitch retained for informal use Hanwell Town Perivale 1 Football pitch with spectator Not No developments planned at this Private FC Ground area applicable time owner King George V Southall Football pitches out of use - no Short term Bring pitches back into use once LBE Playing Fields pavilion. Fields in Trust site & Medium new pavilion completed on Durdans priority Park £10k Lord Halsbury Northolt Adult football and mini soccer Short term Mark out additional mini soccer Lease Playing Fields pitches (upgraded 2016) and & high pitch on newly upgraded playing holder pavilion (built in 2014); priority field (drainage works completed). 60x40m FTP and MUGA. Fields Lease holder is Larkspur Rovers FC, £110k in Trust site successful grant for improved Onsite access road lighting and grounds maintenance equipment Marnham Road Greenford Space available for 3 Football Not No developments planned at this LBE Ground pitches, school use during term applicable time North Greenford Greenford Football stadium and pitch Medium Upgrade floodlights to stadium Lease United Ground term & pitch, perimeter site fencing and holder (Berkeley high changing rooms, leased to North Fields) priority Greenford United Osterley Sports Southall 5 Football Pitches and large Long term Potential for outdoor multi-sport Private Club Ground, pavilion building & low development with ancillary facilities owner - Tentelow Lane priority in a replacement purpose built leased to (adjacent to pavilion. An FTP accessible to local Osterley Cricket Ground) clubs would complement the grass Sports pitches as well as the proposed Club reinstated grass pitches at Warren Farm less than half a mile away. Cricket wickets could also be considered subject to review of needs in Southall area after Warren Farm pitches (3) come into the supply P a g e | 48
Page 98 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Perivale Park Perivale Football & Cricket pitches & 1 Short term Replace outdoor pitch changing LBE Rugby/Gaelic Football pitch with & high facility for use by cricket, gaelic Changing poor quality changing; 9 hole priority football, football & rugby pavilion Golf & pavilion & 8 lane floodlit funded Athletics Track (both upgraded Improve quality of cricket pitches (cricket) & 2015); Indoor and Outdoor on site Gyms; Distance marker route Pitshanger Ealing New pavilion (2014)alongside 3 Not No developments planned at this LBE lease Park/Scotch refurbished football pitches applicable time. Leased to Pitshanger FC holder Common (drainage works 2015) and space for junior pitches Rectory Park Northolt Football & Cricket pitches with Short term Provide new changing rooms, social LBE & limited changing facilities; & high facilities, 2 FTPs, improved grass partners Skate facility priority football pitches on east side of the ground and improved cricket £4m pitches (currently overused for quality capacity) Shamrock Acton Pitches for adult, youth football Long term No developments planned at this Network Sports & Social and mini soccer, pavilion (used & low time. Club aspiration in future for Rail - Club by children's nursery in day) priority floodlit AGP and upgraded pavilion lease to subject to review of need. SSSC Southfields Acton Adult and Youth Football pitches Medium Relocate formal use (Old Actonians LBE Recreation and poor changing rooms - See term & & Foxes FC) to Gunnersbury Park Ground also dual use section medium when pitches and pavilion priority completed and consider informal use of pitches (interest from youth group) Swift Road Southall 9v9 3G FTP and changing rooms Short term Address root damage to FTP and LBE & GLL Outdoor Sports & Medium raise perimeter fence to reduce Centre priority incidence of unauthorised use, contractor GLL University of Perivale Football pitches for adults, Medium Leased to Pitshanger FC, Need UWL & West London SG youth and mini soccer and term & floodlights to adult pitch to lease (former Thames changing rooms reopened for medium facilitate progression in NLS holder Valley Uni SG) community use in 2013 priority West Ealing BC Hanwell 1 poor quality junior football Not No developments planned at this LBE lease Ground pitch with poor quality ancillary applicable time holder facilities
Gaelic sports - see also strategic and dual-sport sites sections Northolt RFC Greenford 1 Gaelic sports pitch Long term Upgrade 1930s pavilion and LBE lease ground (Cayton & low improve internal layout holder Green) priority Lease holder Northolt RFC Tir Chonaill Greenford 3 Gaelic Football pitches & Short term Upgrade existing Gaelic Football LBE lease Gaels – Clubhouse & high pavilion and additional changing holder Berkeley Fields priority rooms (subject to extended lease, planning and funding)
Lease holder Tir Chonaill Gaels Perivale Park Perivale Football & Cricket pitches & 1 Short term Replace outdoor pitch changing LBE Rugby/Gaelic Football pitch with & high facility for use by cricket, gaelic Changing poor quality changing; 9 hole priority football, football & rugby pavilion Golf & pavilion & 8 lane floodlit funded Athletics Track (both upgraded Improve quality of cricket pitches (cricket) & 2015); Indoor and Outdoor on site Gyms; Distance marker route Hockey - see also strategic, potential strategic and dual-sport sites sections Barclays Bank Ealing Facilities not in use include Medium Proposed site for new school with LBE Sports Ground grass pitches, outdoor term & community sports facilities - (closed site) swimming pool, sports hall and high priority in this location is for a £800k squash courts priority floodlit AGP suitable for league hockey linking to existing facilities at St Augustine's School including provision of changing rooms for both pitches St Augustine's Ealing Floodlit AGP hired to Ealing Medium School submitted planning Private School Hockey Club term & application for new sports centre school high with changing rooms - consider priority potential for community access
P a g e | 49
Page 99 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
St Benedict's Perivale 4 Rugby pitches; Full size AGP Medium Establish with school feasibility of Private School (no lights) and changing rooms. term & installing floodlights to hockey AGP School Hires to Old Priorian RFC and medium to increase capacity for community Ealing Hockey Club priority training midweek for Ealing HC See dual-sports sites section Old Actonians Acton Floodlit full size sand based Short term Protect AGP for hockey use when LBE & @ Boddington AGP, Football and Cricket & high resurface. lease Gardens pitches (upgraded 2014) and priority holder NT cricket pitch installed 2015. Pavilion upgraded 2013 TBC Alec Reed Northolt Full size floodlit sand AGP with Medium Resurface pitch and replace goals Private Academy Sports changing facilities and indoor term & and nets for football and hockey owner Centre sports facilities high use (school and community clubs) priority TBC Brentside High Ealing Full size floodlit sand AGP with Medium Resurface pitch and replace goals PFI School changing facilities and indoor term & and nets for football and hockey Contractor sports facilities high use (school and community clubs) priority Rugby – see also strategic and dual-sport sites sections London Playing Greenford 1 rugby pitch and floodlit Not No rugby facility actions LPFF Fields training area applicable (Greenford) Northolt RFC Greenford 1 rugby pitch, option for a Long term Upgrade 1930s pavilion and LBE lease ground (Cayton second to be marked out & low improve internal layout holder Green) priority Acton 1 rugby pitch Long term Refurbish social space and LBE lease Old Actonians & medium changing rooms in pavilion holder Sports Ground priority Perivale Park Perivale Football & Cricket pitches & 1 Not No rugby facility actions now that LBE Rugby/Gaelic Football pitch with applicable new pavilion completed Changing new changing (replaced 2016); pavilion 9 hole Golf & pavilion & 8 lane funded floodlit Athletics Track (both (cricket) & upgraded 2015); Indoor and on site Outdoor Gyms; Distance marker route Perivale 3 rugby pitches Medium Consider options to improve Private St Benedicts term & drainage of rugby pitches to reduce school School medium frequency of cancellations priority Trailfinders Ealing Grass pitches and floodlit AGPs Not No rugby facility actions now Private Sports Ground (2 No.) applicable second AGP is completed owner Wasps FC Acton Rugby pitches and pavilion Short term Floodlit Rugby AGP to meet CLUB Sports Ground including changing rooms, & medium demand for pitch space on Sundays (Twyford meeting room and small gym priority to accommodate juniors and Avenue) training activity (plus hard court MUGAs to meet need of Twyford High School) Tennis – see also strategic and dual-sport sites sections
Free to use park sites Acton Park Acton 2 courts Long term Convert to porous macadam and LBE & medium install floodlights priority £68k Berkeley Fields Greenford 3 courts - fencing replaced Long term Convert to porous macadam LBE 2014 & low priority £49.5k Churchfields Hanwell 3 courts (1 block of 2, 1 single Long term Consider feasibility options for LBE Recreation court) - poor condition, tree & low change of use to small sided Ground root damage priority football (addressing shortfall for £77k mini soccer) and partner tennis investment in modular pavilion with toilets and refreshments Elthorne Park Hanwell 3 courts - repainted and fence Short term Install floodlights and provide small LBE & mended in 2016 & medium modular building with toilets – 2 partner priority courts operated under license, one £140.5k court free use
P a g e | 50
Page 100 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Perivale Park Perivale 2 courts Long term Floodlight 2 courts LBE & low £24k priority Ravenor Park Greenford 2 courts - fencing replaced Long term Convert to porous macadam LBE 2014 & low £49.5k priority Southall Park 2 courts – resurfaced and Not No developments planned at this LBE fencing replaced 2016 applicable time Southfields Acton 3 courts Medium Resurface Courts, installing LBE Recreation term & low floodlights and small modular Ground priority building with toilets/cafe (possibly £140k linked to youth centre proposal) (tennis) and tender to tennis operator subject to detailed feasibility Spikes Bridge Southall 2 courts Long term Convert to porous macadam LBE Park & low £49.5k priority Wolf Fields Park Southall 2 courts Long term Consider court resurfacing and LBE & low fencing replacement £49.5k priority Park pay and play sites under lease Gunnersbury Acton Site currently closed for Opening See future multi-sport multi-pitch LBE & LBH Park redevelopment 2018 section – funding secured for 8 floodlit courts Lammas Park Ealing 12 courts, 7 with floodlights - 2 Long term Rebuild 5 porous macadam courts LBE lease courts resurfaced 2016 & low holder priority £93.5k North Acton Acton Lodge and 5 courts Short term Re provide 4 porous macadam LBE lease Playing Fields & medium courts with floodlights, see also holder priority strategic sites section £124.5k Pitshanger Park Ealing Lodge and 8 courts, 4 with Not No developments planned at this LBE lease floodlights, refurbishment works applicable time holder completed 2014 Dual use sports centre sites Alec Reed Northolt 4 courts with floodlights Not No developments planned at this Private Academy CSC applicable time owner Brentside CSC Hanwell 3 courts with floodlights Not No developments planned at this PFI applicable time contractor Dormers Wells Southall 4 courts with floodlights Not No developments planned at this PFI Leisure Centre applicable time contractor Elthorne Sports Hanwell 2 courts with floodlights Not No developments planned at this LBE Centre applicable time Featherstone Southall 2 courts (MUGA) with Long term Resurfacing School School SC floodlights & low £49.5k priority Greenford Greenford 2 courts with floodlights Long term Repainting PFI School SC & low £6.5k priority Reynolds SC Acton 4 courts with floodlights Long term Repainting PFI & low £6.5k priority Swift Road Southall 1 court with floodlights Not No developments planned at this LBE Outdoor SC applicable time Twyford Sports Acton 3 courts with floodlights Not No developments planned at this LBE Centre applicable time Club sites Brentham LTC Ealing Pavilion and 11 courts, 4 with Not No developments planned at this CLUB floodlights applicable time Ealing LTC Ealing Pavilion and 15 courts, floodlit Short term Convert two grass courts to year CLUB and indoor courts (court & medium round playing surface (LTA loan resurfacing 2014) priority application approved) £49.5k Greenford LTC Greenford Pavilion and 3 floodlit courts Long term Court repaint CLUB & low £5k priority Gunnersbury Acton Pavilion and 6 courts, 4 with Medium Resurface two artificial grass courts CLUB Triangle LTC floodlights term & low priority £68k
P a g e | 51
Page 101 of 382 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 - 2031
Old Actonians Acton Pavilion and 3 courts, 2 with Long term Resurface 1 court LBE lease LTC floodlights & low holder priority £24k St Columbas Acton Pavilion and 4 courts Short term Establish feasibility/planning for CLUB LTC & medium floodlights to two courts to develop priority year round play. If not, use new £24k courts at Gunnersbury Park when completed St Johns LTC Ealing 2 courts Not No developments planned at this CLUB applicable time West Middlesex West Pavilion and 9 courts, 5 with Short term Floodlight two more courts to CLUB LTC Ealing floodlights, clay courts installed & low increase year round capacity in £24k 2014 priority response to member demand Health Club sites with tennis courts David Lloyd Sudbury 6 courts with floodlights Not No developments planned at this LBE lease Hill applicable time holder GSK Sports Hanwell 3 courts Not No developments planned at this Private Ground applicable time owner The Park Club Acton 17 courts, 7 with floodlights and Not No developments planned at this Private 4 indoor applicable time owner Trailfinders Ealing 4 courts with floodlights Not No developments planned at this Private Sports Ground applicable time owner V Tennis Acton 12 courts with floodlights Not No developments planned at this Private applicable time owner
6. Summary
This Playing Pitch Strategy provides the evidence base of playing pitch community infrastructure priorities in Ealing Borough to 2031 to inform future Local Plan preparation and review, and the decision making process. It will guide strategic planning and investment decisions relating to playing pitches in the borough during this period.
A Steering Group of key partner agencies and stakeholders has governed the PPS development process. These agencies, along with local sports clubs and community sport partners, will work together to implement the Strategy.
Ealing Council is committed to ensuring that there are accessible, high quality and well-used playing pitches in the borough in accordance with its environment objective to maintain and enhance the borough's green infrastructure, and its health objective to increase the number of people with active lifestyles.
The Council is supportive of working with partners to protect and attract investment to improve playing pitch facilities across the borough and this strategy provides the blueprint for this work up to 2031.
P a g e | 52
Page 102 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Appendix A: Cricket - Assessment of Needs (Stages B & C)
The findings of the assessment of supply of cricket facilities in the London Borough of Ealing is summarised in this section. Nine of the thirteen (69%) affiliated cricket clubs based in the borough and Middlesex Cricket have contributed to the assessment of need through online survey returns, a cricket club forum, and meetings on site visits or by email/phone.
1. Cricket Supply (Step 1)
Cricket Pitches in the London Borough of Ealing
In the 2015 season, 29 adult grass cricket pitches and 7 non-turf cricket pitches were identified as maintained and available for community cricket at 20 playing field sites in the London Borough of Ealing. The sites currently operational for community cricket comprise:
Twelve club grounds - i.e. grounds with access restricted to club members and guests. These are in diverse ownership including sites owned by community cricket clubs (e.g. Ealing Cricket Club), by community organisations with cricket sections (e.g. Brentham Club, SKLP Sports & Community Centre, Spike's Bridge Park run by London Tigers), by the private sector (e.g. The Park Club home ground of Acton Cricket Club), by playing field charities (e.g. London Playing Fields in Greenford), by an individual (Trailfinders Sports Club) and by Ealing Council (e.g. Brentfield Cricket Ground leased to Ealing Cricket Club, two sites in Acton leased to Old Actonians Sports Association, Shepherd's Bush Cricket Club Ground leased to Virgin and sub-let to the club, and Osterley Cricket Ground in Tentelow Lane Southall leased to Osterley Cricket Club). Responsibility for maintenance at these sites lies with the club, sports association or private owner i.e. not with the borough council.
Five Ealing council operated sites - with open public access, Ealing Central Sports Ground, Islip Manor Park, North Acton Playing Fields, Perivale Park and Rectory Park. A grounds maintenance contractor (currently Amey) maintains the pitches at these open sites on behalf of the borough council.
Three school sites - with restricted access i.e. Drayton Manor High School (an academy school in Hanwell), St Benedict's High School (an independent school in Perivale Lane, Greenford) and Durston House School playing field in Swyncombe Avenue on the Hounslow border where community use is limited to occasional hires by the Ealing-based Northfields Cricket Club for friendly Sunday fixtures. Responsibility for maintenance of these pitches lies with the schools.
In addition to these sites available and in regular community use in 2015, a further two cricket pitches have no current community use: Dormers Wells High School has a non-turf pitch. Currently, there are no community hires of this facility. However, the school has expressed interest in securing a club link partner. The Glaxo Smith Kline Company Sports Ground in Swyncombe Avenue (W5 4DR) at the southern edge of the borough on the boundary with Hounslow has no availability for use by community teams. The cricket pitch serves as the home ground for GSK corporate cricket teams playing friendly short forms of the game midweek evenings and at weekends.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 1
Page 103 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Junior Pitches
In general, the clubs with junior sections set aside one strip on the main square for junior matches requiring shorter dimensions and/or use of the non- turf pitches available on their grounds.
The Old Actonians pitch at Boddington Gardens has several strips at the end of the square suitable for junior use. At most sites, Kwik cricket is generally played on temporary pitches set up on a mown strip in the outfield (or several strips around the outfield in the event of Kwik cricket tournaments and festivals).
Closed Sites
One site and pitch has been removed from the supply since the last facility strategy was undertaken. This pitch was removed due to a perceived lack of demand from low bookings and a recommendation that council provided pitch supply is concentrated at multi-pitch sites with suitable ancillary facilities: o Longfield Playing Field – This single pitch site without changing provision has failed to attract club or team interest in hires for two seasons and was therefore taken out of the Council’s stock of maintained cricket facilities. It is located quite close to the cricket provision at Ealing Central Sports Ground, Perivale Park, Trailfinders Sports Ground and St Benedict’s School.
Non-Turf Pitches (NTPs)
In the younger age groups (U10 to U13), some hardball match play takes place on non-turf pitches (NTPs). NTPs are also used for training and adult play (e.g. occasional teams T20 games). NTPs are currently provided at the following nine sites across the borough, with new NTPs with community access planned for enhancements at both Durdan's Park and William Perkin High Schools: Brentfield Cricket Ground (Poor quality) Dormers Wells High School (Good quality - no current community use) Ealing Cricket Club (Standard quality, separate from main square so two games can be run concurrently) North Acton Playing Fields x 2 (Installed in 2014) Old Actonians at Boddington Gardens (Good quality) SKLP Sports Ground (Standard quality) Spikes Bridge Park (Good - installed in 2015) Southall Recreation Ground (Good - installed in 2014, used extensively for informal use and by local schools) St Benedict's School Sports Ground, Greenford (Good quality)
There is also a very poor quality NTP at Northolt High School that has no history of community use.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 2
Page 104 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Non-Turf Practice Nets
Most of the cricket club home grounds in the borough have functioning outdoor practice net systems.
Figure 1 – Outdoor net locations and quality
Location Number Quality Brentham Club 2 Good Ealing Cricket Club 5 Good Old Actonians Association (Gunnersbury) 5 Good Old Actonians at Boddington Gardens 2 Adequate Osterley Cricket Club 2 Very Poor (need replacing) Park Club (Acton) 3 Good Shepherds Bush Cricket club 3 Adequate SKLP Sports Ground 2 Poor (need replacing) Spikes Bridge Park 3 Good St Benedicts School Playing Fields 5 Good Trailfinders Sports Club 3 Adequate
None of the open access sites in the borough now offer non-turf cricket practice net systems. The costs of maintaining and inspecting nets systems on open access sites and ensuring their safe use on unsupervised sites are considered to be the main reasons for the lack of these facilities.
Indoor Practice Nets
A number of the clubs consulted commented that Indoor Practice nets were hard to access especially within Ealing with the Lords Cricket School in St John's Wood and the Middlesex Indoor School in Finchley the nearest high quality provision although hire charges at these facilities can act as a deterrent to use by some community clubs. St Benedict's (independent) School has two indoor nets in its sports hall but there is no community access. Cricket nets are available at almost all sports halls in Ealing, however indoor sports hall space is in high demand across the borough so the main constraint is competing programming demands for year round activities such as badminton and basketball, whereas demand for indoor cricket nets is generally limited to peak evening or weekend slots from January to March. It is understood that Harrow Cricket Club, from outside the borough, hire nets in the sports hall at William Perkin High School on Sundays.
Facilities for Non-Traditional Forms of Cricket
The strategic aim of Middlesex Cricket is to sustainably grow cricket participation in the county. In furtherance of this aim, Middlesex Cricket encourages the provision of suitable facilities in accessible locations for playing non-traditional forms of cricket ranging from non-turf pitches (NTPs) for organised cup and league games of Last Man Stands (games of 75 minutes approx. for teams of 8 players) down to hard-court Multi Use Games Areas (MUGAs) for www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 3
Page 105 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
informal games of Cage Cricket using a softball or 'tapeball' (a tennis ball wrapped in tape). The Council has responded positively to this trend since the last assessment of pitch needs in 2010 by installing MUGAs that are heavily used for Cage Cricket in Southall Park and Southall Recreation Ground.
Within the London Borough of Ealing, Last Man Stands (LMS) competitions often take place on the NTP at Old Actonians and North Acton Playing Fields. In addition there are a number of non-traditional midweek leagues taking place at several Council grounds including North Acton Playing Fields, Ealing Central, Perivale Park and Rectory Park.
Cricket is particularly popular within the large and growing South Asian communities resident in the borough, located primarily in Southall and across the Northolt border into the Harrow area. A growing number of informal (un-constituted) teams play short forms of the game in competitive leagues such as the Tamil ETCL Premier Leagues, established in 2010 and organising games on Sundays throughout the summer mainly on public pitches.
Kay Plus Cricket Club and Southall Lankians Cricket Club - both with two men's league teams currently - are the main examples identified in the borough of this new type of club that operates on a less formal basis than the traditional cricket club model. These clubs do not own or lease a home ground and clubhouse facility and play home fixtures where they are able to hire a suitable pitch and changing rooms on a season-by-season block booked basis or weekly pay and play basis. Both these clubs hire facilities for their home fixtures (on a Saturday and Sunday respectively) from the Council at North Acton Playing Fields.
Ownership and Security of Access
Cricket pitches within Ealing fall into one of five different categories of ownership. Overall, the cricket clubs in Ealing borough benefit from good security of access on their home grounds: o Cricket sites in Local Authority ownership available to hire - Over one third of the pitches where community cricket takes place in Ealing are council-owned and open access, in that they are not fenced off and therefore available for use during the park/recreation ground opening hours, although casual use of the grass cricket pitches on these sites is actively discouraged by the Council to safeguard the quality of the ground for formal use. These pitches are available to hire on a pre-booked pay and play basis. Bookings can be made from February for the ensuing cricket season. The Council operates a priority booking system with preference given to those clubs that are based in borough and have ECB Clubmark quality- assured status. o Cricket sites in Local Authority ownership leased to a club - Seven pitches are owned by the Council but leased to a cricket club who is responsible for grounds maintenance (including one let to the Virgin Group and sublet to the Shepherd's Bush Cricket Club). These grounds provide good security of access for the long-term. o Club owned sites - Five single pitch sites are club-owned affording excellent security of access.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 4
Page 106 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
o School owned sites - Four pitches across two sites are controlled by schools - Drayton Manor and St Benedict's. There is also an NTP at Dormers Wells High School currently unused by the community. Phoenicians Cricket Club has an excellent relationship with Drayton Manor High School as the club has a number of ex-pupils as members. The independent St Benedict's School is one of the strongest cricket schools in the country with a strong focus on cricket development and excellence for its pupils and occasional games involving former pupils (Old Priorians). The school permits only occasional use of its facilities in Greenford by community clubs so as to maintain availability and quality for school teams. No regular seasonal hire agreements are in place. o Other ownership - The London Playing Fields Foundation (LPFF) own the remaining three pitches. Birkbeck College Cricket Club has an ongoing agreement with LPFF for usage of these pitches for home games for its two Saturday sides competing in the Middlesex Championship.
At Risk Sites
None of the existing cricket sites in use in Ealing are identified as at risk of losing cricket pitches in the short to medium term. The main risk is of a fall in demand for the poorer quality council pitches in the event of further erosion of quality due to over-use, lack of appropriate maintenance and repair or a combination of the two. To an extent this is already evident with some of the traditional community clubs choosing to use pitches outside the borough rather than council pitches within Ealing for their home league fixtures.
The greatest risk to achieving a good supply/demand balance of secured and accessible cricket facilities in Ealing is failure to deliver any of the major projects currently in the planning stages to reinstate former cricket pitches to a high quality and return these to regular community use. These are detailed below. Without re-instatement of these pitches there is a shortfall of supply as evidenced throughout this assessment. It should also be noted that security of community access to the cricket pitches at the Trailfinders Sports Ground is subject to the continued commitment and support of the landowner. This presents an element of risk in the long term.
Sites for Planned New Supply
As indicated above, there are currently six significant community cricket development projects in Ealing at advanced stages of planning and feasibility assessment as follows: o Popefield Playing Fields – Previously Ealing Mead County School playing fields this single pitch site is being re-instated together with new modular changing facilities in conjunction with Ealing Cricket Club. It is planned for two of the club's Saturday sides to regularly use this ground. o Gunnersbury Park – The redevelopment of Gunnersbury Park will bring the equivalent of two additional pitches into the Ealing supply (of 3 new pitches and one existing refurbished pitch proposed as part of the project) along with access for borough clubs and teams to new shared changing and social facilities. Although the park is just outside the borough boundary, the project is planned jointly with Hounslow Council. The programme of use will be agreed by the two boroughs under advice from Middlesex Cricket to ensure women’s cricket is given priority use. Given the park’s location, the facilities will be very accessible to residents in the south east of the borough.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 5
Page 107 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
o Norwood Hall Grounds – These grounds are owned by Ealing Council jointly with Ealing, Hammersmith & West London College. A development project is due to commence in 2016 to build a new pavilion (replacing a derelict building) to enable community (pay and play) use of the two cricket pitches at this site. o Durdans Park Cricket Ground – Ealing Council own this site, the former home ground of Southall Cricket Club, now no longer in existence. The council is installing a new pavilion, making pitch improvements for use in 2018 and installing a non-turf pitch for use in 2017. The changing rooms in this pavilion will be available for use both by cricket teams and football teams using King Georges Playing Field adjacent to Durdans Park. o Warren Farm Sports Ground – There are proposals for reinstatement of three of the original six pitches available for community use should a current project proposal for this Council owned site proceed with QPR Holdings Limited who wish to develop football training ground and academy facilities on the site. o William Perkin High School - A new junior cricket facility is planned as part of a joint project between Ealing Council, The Twyford Church of England Academies Trust, the Football Foundation, The London Marathon Charitable Trust and Sport England to develop a multi-sport hub for school and community use in North Greenford at the new William Perkin High School which opened in 2013. Works to provide a floodlit AGP and new pavilion started in 2016. This site also has indoor cricket nets available to clubs to hire in the sports hall. A junior size cricket pitch at WPHS with a non-turf strip is likely to be available for 2018.
Pitch Quality
The table below shows the quality of pitches within the borough based on their operation.
Figure 2 – Pitch quality and operation Rating Council operated Club operated School operated Other (Trust) Total Good - 8 3 - 11 Standard 9 2 1 3 15 Poor 3 1 - - 4 Total 12 11 4 3 30
The council operated pitches are clearly a lower quality than club and school maintained pitches. In theory, there is scope to increase the playing capacity of the existing supply by improving the quality of the council run sites although, in practice, it is wear due to heavy demand and use of these pitches (as opposed to lack of maintenance) that impacts on the quality of the parks pitches. Details on individual sites can be found in Figure 6.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 6
Page 108 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Distribution of Cricket Sites
Map 1 shows the distribution of cricket sites across Ealing borough. This shows that, provided the above projects are delivered as planned, residents from all parts of the borough will be within a reasonable journey time of a cricket pitch, either a community club pitch (restricted to club members and guests) or a park based pitch available on a play and play basis.
Map 1 - Ealing Cricket Site Distribution
Cricket
Existing pitches
Map 1 Name Address Postcode Key 1 Brentham Club 38a Meadvale Rd, Ealing W5 1NP 2 Brentfield Cricket Ground Greenford Road, Southall UB1 3EB 3 Dormers Wells High School Dormers Wells Lane, Southall UB1 3HZ 4 Drayton Manor High School Playing Fields Greenford Avenue W7 1JJ 5 Durston House - Swyncombe Avenue Field Swyncombe Avenue W5 4DR 6 Ealing Central Sports Ground Horsenden Lane South UB6 8AP 7 Ealing Cricket Club Corfton Road, Ealing W5 2HS 8 GSK Sports Ground Swyncombe Avenue W5 4DR 9 Islip Manor Park Eastcote Lane, Northolt UB5 5RG 10 London Playing Fields (Greenford) Birkbeck Avenue, Greenford UB6 8LS 11 North Acton Playing Fields Noel Road, Acton W3 0JE 12 Old Actonians Sports Ground Gunnersbury Drive, Ealing, W5 4LL 13 Old Actonians @ Boddington Gardens Boddington Gardens W3 9AP 14 Osterley Cricket Club Tentelow Lane, Southall UB2 4LW www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 7
Page 109 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
15 Park Club (Acton) East Acton Lane, W3 7HB 16 Perivale Park Hicks Avenue, Perivale UB6 8TJ 17 Rectory Park Ruislip Road, Northolt UB5 5NR 18 Shepherds Bush Cricket Club Bromyard Avenue, East Acton Lane W3 7BP 19 SKLP Sports Ground India Gardens, West End Road, Northolt UB5 6RE 20 Spikes Bridge Park Off West Avenue, Southall UB1 2AR 21 St Benedicts School Playing Fields Perivale Lane UB6 8TL 22 Trailfinders Sports Club Vallis Way, West Ealing W13 0DD
Sites for planned new supply
23 Durdans Park Cricket Ground Adrienne Avenue, Southall UB1 2QW 24 Gunnersbury Park Popes Lane, Acton W3 8LQ 25 Norwood Hall Sports Ground Norwood Green Road, Southall UB2 4LA 26 Popefield Playing Fields Gunnersbury Avenue, Ealing W5 4YG 27 Warren Farm Sports Ground Windmill Lane, Southall UB2 4NE 28 William Perkin High School Old Field Lane North, Greenford UB6 8QD
Cricket supply of relevance in neighbouring local authorities
A number of Ealing based clubs currently access cricket pitches outside of the borough. This is due to a lack of supply of high quality pitches within Ealing outside of the club- operated grounds. The following large league clubs based in Ealing regularly play home fixtures outside the borough:
o Brentham Club – 3rd team play at Harrow Cricket Club (LB Harrow).
o Ealing Cricket Club – 3rd team play at Harrow School (LB Harrow) and 4th and 5th team currently play at Heston (LB Hounslow) although plan to move to Popefield once this project is complete and the pitch has bedded in ready for match play in 2017.
o Shepherds Bush Cricket Club – 3rd and 4th teams play at King’s House School in Chiswick (LB Hounslow).
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 8
Page 110 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
2. Cricket Demand (step 2)
Findings relating to cricket pitch demand in Ealing borough are summarised below.
Cricket Clubs and Teams
Between the 22 Ealing-based clubs identified in the consultation, there are currently a total of 60 adult men’s sides (plus two occasional Sunday sides) plus two regular women’s sides. The larger traditional clubs - Acton, Brentham, Ealing, Shepherds Bush, SKLP, Old Actonians, Osterley, Ealing Trailfinders - all have colts/junior sections. Most of these clubs report that their junior sections have developed substantially over recent seasons especially in the younger age groups. Where possible, the clubs use their outfield and NTPs to cater for this demand.
In addition, demand for junior and youth cricket in the borough has been further promoted since the last review in 2010 by the cricket development activities of the council and its partners, including London Tigers using the newly provided facilities at Spike's Bridge Park.
Since the last review the number of new clubs and teams playing in South Asian leagues in the Southall and Harrow areas has also increased, placing additional demand on park pitches - particularly on Sundays.
Figure 3- Open Age Cricket Expressed Demand
Ealing based cricket clubs and teams 2015 leagues Home ground Other grounds used Acton CC Middlesex County League (1st, 2nd, 3rd) Acton Cricket Club North Acton Playing Fields- 3rd 4 Sat league teams Middlesex 1987 Cricket League (4th) and 4th teams 1 sometimes 2 Sun teams 6 Colts sides (u9 to u15) Birkbeck College CC Middlesex Championship Birkbeck College Cricket Club 2 Sat league teams (London Marathon Fields) Brentham CC Middlesex County League (1st, 3rd) Brentham CC Harrow Cricket Club- 3rd 5 Sat league teams Middlesex Championship (2nd, 4th, 5th) Ealing Central Sports Ground- 2 Sun teams 4th and 5th teams 1Development team (u21) 6 Colts sides (u10 to u17) Ealing CC (including Ealing Hanwellions) Middlesex County Cricket League Ealing CC (1st and 2nd) Brentfields (6th and 7th teams) - 7 Sat league teams (2 at Hanwell) Former Hanwell Cricket Club 1 women's team Middlesex Women's Cricket ground, Greenford Road, 1 Development team (u21) Championship adjacent to West Middlesex Golf 11 Colts sites (u8 to u17) Middlesex Championship Div 2 (Ealing Harrow School (3rd) 3 Girls sides (u11 to u15) Hanwellions) Heston (4th and 5th) www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 9
Page 111 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Ealing based cricket clubs and teams 2015 leagues Home ground Other grounds used Ealing Trailfinders CC Middlesex Championship Trailfinders Sports Club Ealing Central 3 Sat league teams Middlesex 1987 League 6 Colts sides (u7 to u13) Kay Plus North Acton Playing Fields 2 Sat league teams London Tigers / Southall Cricket Club Middlesex Colts League plus teams Spikes Bridge Park 1 Sat league team from juniors to seniors playing in the 1 Development team Victoria Park Community Cricket Various Colts League, North East London League and Last Man Stands League. The club also manages the UK Bangladesh Cricket team and, with Capital Kids Cricket, an annual London Sixes International event enabling cricketers from community level to play against international standard players. Northfields Cricket Club Swyncombe Avenue Playing 1 Sun friendly team Fields, Durston House School, (Ealing/Hounslow boundary) Old Actonians CC Old Actonians Sports Club 4 Sat league teams 1/2 Sun teams 1 women's team Middlesex Women's Cricket 8 Colts sides Championship 5 Girls sides (u10 to u17) Osterley CC Middlesex League Osterley Cricket Club (1st and Ealing Central (3rd and 4th) 4 Sat league teams Middlesex Championship 2nd) 2 Sun teams 1987 Middlesex 2 Development teams (u21, u19) 5 Colts sides (u11 to u17) Perivale Phoenicians CC Middlesex Championship (1st, 2nd) Drayton Manor (1st and 2nd) Ealing Central (3rd and 4th) 4 Sat league teams 1987 Middlesex (3rd, 4th) 1 Sun team Various Colts (u9 to u17) Ramgarhia CC Not in leagues currently - pending Durdans Park (closed since 2011 1 Sun team development of Durdans Park ground and currently subject to upgrade www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 10
Page 112 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Ealing based cricket clubs and teams 2015 leagues Home ground Other grounds used Colts coaching (closed since 2011) - grass pitches project) available from 2018 Shepherds Bush CC Middlesex County Cricket league (1st, Shepherds Bush Cricket Club King’s House School (3rd and 4 Sat league teams 2nd, 3rd). (1st and 2nd) 4th) 1 Sun team Middlesex 1987 league (4th) 5 Colts (u10 to u15) 1 Girls side Shree Kutch Leva Patel (SKLP) Middlesex Championship SKLP Sport Ground (1st and 2nd) North Acton Playing Fields (3rd) Community CC 3 Sat league teams 1 Sun team 3 Colts sides (u10, u13, u15) Southall Lankians CC ETCL Premier League North Acton Playing Fields 2 Sun T20 league teams Baladia Youth Club Middlesex Premier Cricket League SKLP Sport Ground 1 Sun team Diu Community of Southall CC Middlesex Premier Cricket League 1 Sun team Diu Daredevils CC Middlesex Premier Cricket League Ealing Central Sports Ground North Acton Playing Fields (2rd) 2 Sun teams (1st) Friends United CC Middlesex Premier Cricket League London Marathon Fields, Jalaram Sports Ground (2nd) 2 Sun teams Birkbeck College (1st) In LB Harrow Lankians CC Middlesex Premier Cricket League Osterley Cricket Ground 1 Sun team Shivam CC Middlesex Premier Cricket League North Acton Playing Fields 1 Sun team Zahira CC Middlesex Premier Cricket League London Marathon Fields, 1 Sun team Birkbeck College
Active People Survey
Active People Survey 9 Quarter 2 (Oct 2014 - Oct 2015) shows that 0.41% of adults (16+) in England play cricket for at least 30 minutes once a week (up from 0.39% in the previous 12-month period). In the London region, participation is higher than the national average at 0.48%. Comparable data at county and borough level is not available due to insufficient sample size.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 11
Page 113 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Figure 4: Once a week Cricket participation in England and London from 2005/06 - 2015
Source: Sport England (March 2016)
If cricket participation in Ealing were at the London average, this would indicate around 1,300 adults (16+) living in the borough play cricket (out of an adult population of approximately 270,000). If all of these adults played club cricket, with 62 adult teams (60 men, 2 women), this would indicate an average of 21 players/club team but we know from bookings information and park staff reports that there is also adult participation in the borough outside of the club environment (i.e. informal games in family groups and among groups of friends and work colleagues in parks).
Market Segmentation
Analysis of Sport England Sports Market Segmentation data for the London Borough of Ealing identifies that the main adult Sports Market Groups that currently play cricket in Ealing, in order of population size, are:
Ben (Competitive Male Urbanites), aged 18-25, graduate professional Jamie (Sports Team Lads), aged 18-25, vocational student
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 12
Page 114 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Tim (Settling Down Males), aged 26-45, professional
These groups (especially Ben and Jamie) are overrepresented as a percentage of the Ealing population compared to national figures, suggesting that Cricket participation in Ealing could be greater than expected for its population, placing an increased demand on the supply.
Latent Adult Demand
Latent demand is greatest in the same Groups (although not in the same order of population size) and also extends to other Groups, particularly to Kev (Pub League Team Mates), aged 36-45, vocational job.
To capitalise on this latent demand through engaging lapsed players and new participants in the younger adult age groups (e.g. Jamie and Ben), The ECB is working on growing shorter, less formal forms of the game - for example Easy Cricket fun sessions and Last Man Stands 20/20 eight a side games. These forms of the game are well suited to non-turf pitches and open access park or recreation ground settings where there is no need to commit to becoming a member of a club. The clubs within Ealing have also acknowledged that to maintain interest in a changing society they may have to adapt the form of the game they play to be shorter and in some cases have begun to do so.
Casual Cricket Demand
Demand for less organised forms of casual play - using free to use net systems and non-turf facilities in public parks, as well as hard-surface areas such as MUGAs, streets, footpaths and hard standing areas on housing estates - is a growing feature of cricket demand nationally, particularly among teenagers and young adults in the Black, Black/British, Asian and Asian/British minority ethnic (BME) communities.
The Asian/Asian British group accounts for the largest proportion of the non-white population in Ealing. At 30% (2011 ONS Census) it is a considerable percentage of the population.
This would suggest a case for the Council to retain and continue to maintain existing facilities for informal forms of cricket in the borough (NTPs) and consider the case for increasing the supply of pitches available for pay and play for competitive league fixtures outside the traditional English cricket club and ECB league model as well as other informal cricket games for family groups and groups of friends. This demand trend supports the Council's current advanced plans with Hounslow Council for pay and play pitches in Gunnersbury Park.
Displaced Demand
In the consultations carried out, some exported displaced demand was identified - i.e. teams from clubs based in Ealing using grounds in neighbouring boroughs for home fixtures. o Brentham Club – 3rd team play at Harrow Cricket Club (Harrow).
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 13
Page 115 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
o Ealing Cricket Club – 3rd team play at Harrow School (Harrow) and 4th and 5th team currently play at Heston (Hounslow) although plan to move to Popefield once complete. o Shepherds Bush Cricket Club – 3rd and 4th teams play at King’s House School (Hounslow) o Friends United Cricket Club - 2nd team play in Harrow.
Until 2010, the Ealing Three Bridges Cricket Club was based in the borough (originally on the site of what is now Ealing Hospital). Since 2010, the club's two Saturday sides (and one Sunday side) have been based at the Harrow Recreation Grounds in Roxborough Road Harrow playing in the Middlesex Championship divisions.
Trends in Demand for Team Cricket
Over the last three seasons, the number of clubs and adult teams based in Ealing has remained quite stable.
The main demand trend has been seen in the junior sections where most growth has been seen in the primary school age groups. Several clubs have established junior sections and the larger junior clubs, especially Ealing CC, have a long waiting list indicating an unmet demand.
The growth plans of the clubs in forthcoming seasons reflect the growth trend in the younger age groups with most clubs expecting to increase the size of their junior section especially at U10 and below. No club has reported any future plans to expand their senior section.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 14
Page 116 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
3. The situation at individual cricket sites (Step 4)
The grass cricket pitches were assessed in the first two weeks of the 2015 season. These assessments were reviewed in discussion with representatives of the ECB and Middlesex Cricket and ratings for each agreed as a basis for comparison of the amount of play each site can accommodate (its carrying capacity) against the amount of play that takes place.
Carrying capacity is a measure of the number of match equivalent sessions per season for community use each pitch can take without adversely affecting its quality and use.
It was agreed with the ECB representative to adopt the following pitch carrying capacities according to each quality rating to be consistent with the approach adopted in similar assessments in other boroughs:
Figure 5: Cricket Pitch Carrying Capacity
Pitch Quality Rating Match equivalent sessions per grass wicket per season Good 5 Standard 3 Poor 1
Figure 6 below summarised the situation at each cricket site with regard to:
1. Pitch supply (including the quality ratings) and conclusions reached as to the amount of play a site can accommodate (i.e. its carrying capacity for community use); 2. The amount of play that takes place at each site (i.e. the expressed demand) adjusted to reflect any casual or education use in addition to club use for matches and training; 3. The comparison (shown as a RAG rating) as to whether, for each pitch type it contains, a site is:
o RED - Being overplayed (current use exceeds the carrying capacity) o AMBER - Being played to the level the site can sustain, or o GREEN - Potentially able to accommodate some additional play (current use falls significantly below the carrying capacity)
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 15
Page 117 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Figure 6: Situation at individual sites
Site Pitch Rating No. Pitch Est. Use 2015 RAG Comments/ Assumptions Wkt Cap. Brentham Club Good (5) 10 50 2016 est: 38 Adult games GWR Amalgamated last year (used to play at and 24 colts games Trailfinders). At capacity for colts training on scheduled. Total 62 outfield and weekend fixtures. Dormers Wells High Standard (3) 1 NT No current community use - school has School expressed interest in a club link in future Drayton Manor High Not visited 2 Phoenicians CC home ground School Playing Fields pitches 2 pitches. Ealing Central Standard (3) 10 117 111 From 2015 bookings data: Sports Ground Standard (3) 9 Old Actonian ladies Standard (3) 10 Perivale Pheonicians - weekly Standard (3) 10 Osterley - weekly Hayes - weekly (LB Hillingdon) Elite CC (LB Harrow), Young Puthorharis (LB Hounslow), Ealing Trailfinders, Ealing Cricket Club (Hanwellians) etc. various bookings. Quality reported as having decreased. Some spare slots on Sundays. Ealing Cricket Club Good (5) 19 95 Est: Adult 53, Colts 60 Also use Brentfields and will use Popefields Lane 1 NT Total 113 in future Brentfield Cricket Poor (1) 8 8 20 Used by Ealing Cricket club 6th and 7th sides Ground 1 NT (Ealing Hanwellions) and colts. Islip Manor Park Poor (1) 8 8 25 From 2015 bookings data. London Playing Standard (3) 10 69 Birkbeck College: 20 Used by two teams for home league games. Fields (Greenford)/ Standard (3) 6 Friends United: 20 Club have commented pitch quality has Birkbeck College Standard (3) 7 Zahira:20 deteriorated recently and therefore site visit Ground Total 60 'good' rating downgraded to 'standard'. North Acton Playing Standard (3) 5 45 Total: 154 (including From 2015 bookings data. Fields 1 NT midweek use). Acton CC: 20 Acton CC 3rd and 4th- weekly on Saturdays. Standard (3) 5 Kay Plus Cricket Club: 20 Some Saturday capacity but pitch overused due Standard (3) 5 to Sunday and mid-week demand as follows: 1 NT West London B, SKLPCC, Southall Lankians, Dui Daredevils, West London Tam A - regularly on Sundays. www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 16
Page 118 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Site Pitch Rating No. Pitch Est. Use 2015 RAG Comments/ Assumptions Wkt Cap. Regular Last Man Stands games - midweek. Lack of sightscreen storage provision and tea facilities a problem for Kay Plus (sightscreen issue prevented promotion). Old Actonians Good (5) 11+ 55 + 46 (inc Ladies) Potential redevelopment of changing/bar. Association 2 Junior 10 44 colts split between two grounds (below) Old Actonians @ Good (5) 6 30 18 (3rd and 4th) Used by 3rd and 4th teams. NT used by schools Boddington Gardens 1NT 44 colts (split between two and Last Man Stands leagues. grounds (above) some on NT Osterley Cricket Standard (3) 10 30 30 (including U19) 3rd and 4ths at Ealing Central. Pitch was out of Club use in 2015 whilst improvement works were undertaken. A new grass square along with pavilion improvement works (4 new changing rooms) were completed and back in use for the start of the 2016 season. Park Club (Acton) Good (5) 13 65 2 adult Saturday teams est: At capacity with no additional capacity at 20 fixtures weekends. 2 Sunday: 15 fixtures 3 colts teams in leagues + friendlies: 24 colt games Estimated total: 55 Perivale Park Poor (1) 10 20 68 From 2015 bookings data. Some weekend Poor (1) 10 capacity if pitches were higher standard. Rectory Park Standard (3) 8 48 Total use 62 with some From 2015 bookings data. Standard (3) 8 occasional weekend slots but overused for quality. Shepherds Bush Good (5) 14 70 20 adult - Saturday 3rd and 4ths play at Kings House School Grounds Cricket Club 15 adult - Sunday in Chiswick (LB Hounslow) Colts - 20 est. No spare capacity at weekends. Estimated total: 55 SKLP Sports Ground Good (5) 10 50 20 adult - Saturday At capacity at weekends 1 NT 10 adult - Sunday 3rd team play at North Acton PF on Saturdays. Total use: 30 Club consider sufficient demand from clubs and schools in the area to justify provision of a www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 17
Page 119 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Site Pitch Rating No. Pitch Est. Use 2015 RAG Comments/ Assumptions Wkt Cap. second grass pitch and upgrade/extension to the poor quality pavilion. Spikes Bridge Park Standard (3) 9 27 10 adult - Saturday Some issues reported by Tigers of playing 1 NT Extensive youth cricket quality of this newly installed pitch in first development season - remedial works may be needed. London cricket events St Benedicts School Good (5) 8 80 10 (Ealing club) Some spare capacity for community use. Playing Fields Good (5) 8 Extensive school use -teams Ealing CC using occasionally and coaching academy Trailfinders Sports Good (5) 13 65 20 adult - Saturday 3rd team for 2016, where will it play? Club 20 Colts Total 40
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 18
Page 120 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
4. The current and future pictures of provision for cricket (Step 5)
Current
Overall, the assessment of facility needs shows that there is an insufficient number of fine-turf and non-turf cricket pitches in the borough to meet current demand from Ealing based clubs, other non-club based teams and residents wanting informal opportunities.
There are two main deficiencies in terms of quantity. The first is a lack of adequate practice and junior facilities at some grounds. This includes adequate space for junior practice that is not on the main pitch and mobile net cages for use by the home club or permanent non-turf net systems. This is compounded by a lack of high quality pitches for senior use within the borough resulting in some teams using pitches outside of the borough.
There is also an under-supply of indoor practice nets in the borough with some difficulty of access.
The quality of pitch supply is good apart from council operated pitches where it is generally poor to standard although this is due more to heavy demand and use than to lack of maintenance by the Council's contractors. The other main quality issues identified where there is greater potential for resolution are:
1. Unofficial use and occasional acts of vandalism to the pitches at the open access park sites that make up the council’s pay and play provision (e.g. Ealing Central Sports Ground, Islip Manor Park, Rectory Park, North Acton Playing Fields and Perivale Park).
2. Lack of adequate ancillary changing, refreshment facilities and sightscreens at some grounds (notably pay and play facilities).
Security of ground access for club cricket, and the quality of squares and pavilions on the Council owned open access sites, has benefited from the Council's policy in recent years of negotiating leases and/or community asset transfers with established clubs with proven commitment to development activity. This has seen the quality of pitches previously owned and operated by the London Borough of Ealing but now leased to cricket clubs to have improved. In the main, these leased pitches are now better quality than the remaining council pitches.
The large number of pitches that are currently out of use for development (five pitches) has had a significant impact on the remaining council sites - i.e. the quality of the parks pitches has deteriorated due to heavy demand and use and lack of alternative supply. As a result, the parks pitches are generally regarded as quite poor quality by user clubs.
Future
By 2031, assuming current cricket participation and team generation rates and the forecast population growth takes place, there will be approximately eight more adult teams and at least eight more junior teams in Ealing requiring access to match pitches and practice facilities. There is also likely to be a continued growth of informal forms of the game from the increased population.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 19
Page 121 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Figure 7 - Population projections and cricket team generation rates
Age Group Current Future Pop change in No. Cricket Team Generation Rate Potential change in population in population in age group teams 2015 cricket team no's age group (MYE age group – 2014) (2031) Open Age Men 98,595 114,434 15,839 51 1,933 +8.2 (18-55) Open Age Women 95,198 103,461 8,263 2 47,599 +0.2 (18-55) Junior Boys 24,663 28,580 3,917 44 561 +7 (7-18) Junior Girls 23,366 26,278 2,912 9 2,596 +1 (7-18) Sources: LBE Strategic Planning Team. Current Population from ONS (2014 Mid Year Estimate); Projections derived from GLA 2014 Round Populations Projections.
As regards women and girl's cricket, because current team generation rates are at a very low level, the projections show negligible growth resulting from population change. It is to be hoped and expected that team growth for women and girls will take place through implementation of club development plans (with support from Middlesex Cricket) and continuing cricket development activities of the Council and its partner clubs). At the current quite low levels of participation by women and girls, there is substantial latent demand.
It is apparent from the figures above that future growth in demand as a result of current forecasts for population change is an issue for cricket pitch supply in Ealing. This issue is compounded by the current unmet demand expressed by the existing community clubs for junior teams for both boys and girls and by the fact they currently play some of their senior cricket outside of the borough.
Club feedback has indicated that one high quality pitch can support three senior teams (if one team is playing on a Sunday) so the growth of eight teams should require an addition of approximately three pitches. The junior growth will add to this demand but much of this demand could be met through dual use of additional senior provision.
Potential effect of demand trends (how pitch sports are played) – National trends show a reduction in interest in taking part in sports that demand a commitment to regular attendance, in favour of a more casual involvement. This national picture is not fully reflected locally in Ealing where the number of adult league teams has remained fairly stable over the last few seasons, although there has been a couple of clubs reporting one fewer team and club mergers. There are now 43 teams playing on a Saturday compared to 35 teams reported in 2010.
Based on annual Player Survey returns and feedback from affiliated clubs, league organisers and area cricket development groups, the ECB report an upward demand for shorter and non-traditional forms of the game, particularly among young people and BAME communities. This includes various
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 20
Page 122 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
forms of the game played in the street or using footpaths for wickets, variations of 'cage cricket' played on fenced multi-use games areas), Kwik cricket for younger children, and shorter, more inclusive versions of cricket (e.g. Last Man Stands, T20).
In response to this trend, as resources allow, consideration should also be given to the feasibility of providing further NTPs and MUGA/Cage Cricket facilities on open access sites.
Particular sites where demand is likely to increase or decrease and potential effect – Ealing Cricket Club has experienced continued increasing demand over several seasons especially from junior players. They currently have a large waiting list and despite the new facility at Popefield may not be able to meet this demand. The Brentham Club and Old Actonians sites are also experiencing increasing demand beyond the playing capacity of these grounds.
Potential effect of changes in supply – The most significant changes in supply in the short term will be the reopening of the three cricket sites currently temporarily closed for enhancement works at Osterley Sports Ground (re-opened in 2016), at Durdans Park (due to be ready for play in 2018), and Warren Farm. The completed project at Osterley has improved the playing capacity for Osterley Cricket Club. When completed, the Durdans Park project with Ramgarhia Cricket Club and the Warren Farm project with QPR Holdings will help to alleviate some overplay on the existing pay and play parks pitches in the borough.
In the short to medium term, implementation of current project proposals to enhance and bring back into community use cricket pitches at Gunnersbury Park (2 pitches), Popefield Playing Fields (1 pitch) and Norwood Hall (2 pitches) will have a major impact on the balance of cricket supply and demand in the borough. Provided the pitches at these sites are of a high quality with good associated ancillary facilities this will enable displaced teams from Ealing based clubs to return to the borough.
Securing community access to the existing junior non-turf pitch and good quality ancillary facilities at Dormers Wells High School and, from 2017, at William Perkin High School will also serve to address reporting growth in demand from the larger clubs for suitable facilities for junior boys and girls cricket development.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 21
Page 123 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
5. Key findings and issues for cricket (Step 6)
Figure 8 - Cricket key findings and issues
Cricket
The main In the 2015 season, 29 adult grass cricket pitches and 7 non-turf cricket pitches were identified as maintained and available for characteristics of community cricket at 20 playing field sites serving the playing needs of 22 Ealing-based clubs with 60 adult men’s sides (plus the current supply two occasional Sunday sides) and two regular women’s sides. The larger traditional clubs - Acton, Brentham, Ealing, Shepherds of and demand for Bush, SKLP, Old Actonians, Osterley, Ealing Trailfinders - all have colts/junior sections. Most of these clubs report that their provision junior sections have developed substantially over recent seasons especially in the younger age groups.
The club-owned and club-operated grounds tend to be well maintained and with good ancillary facilities. Several of the traditional cricket clubs based in the borough have more than two Saturday sides and only one pitch at their home ground. These clubs therefore require secure access to good quality pitches suitable for ECB affiliated league play for their lower ranked sides. Currently this demand is met either by pitches on council-owned and operated sites (which tend to be either poor or standard quality), or by travelling to venues outside the borough.
There is a large amount of casual and non-club based cricket activity taking place on the pitches provided by the Council in five of its park sites but also reported on some park sites with no formal facilities, particularly in the Southall area where the Asian and Asian British populations are largest. There has been growth in the number of adult teams since the last Sports Facility review in 2012. This growth is mainly in the non-traditional area of the game (e.g. single or two team clubs playing in recently formed Asian leagues) while the traditional long established clubs are focused on sustaining existing adult team numbers.
The more ambitious and forward thinking of these traditional clubs are actively striving to improve league position and performance of their adult sides through expanding their colts sections through the age groups and introducing development sides for young adult players. As a result, none of the cricket clubs based in Ealing has current plans for growth in adult teams but several clubs have large junior sections with the intention to grow these in the next few years. To accommodate new junior teams will require more access to non-turf pitches and net systems.
Alongside growth in junior league cricket driven by development coaching in the community clubs, there has been growing demand for informal forms of the game driven by growth in the size of the Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) population in particular. This supports the needs case for the Council to retain and continue to maintain open access facilities for non-club based cricket for adults and young people.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 22
Page 124 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Cricket NO. Current supply does not meet current demand for traditional forms of league, cup and friendly match play cricket by teams Is there enough based in Ealing. A number of established teams are displaced from their clubs' home grounds either onto parks pitches or to accessible and pitches out of the borough. secured community use provision to There is also high demand at several of those Ealing Council park sites with cricket pitches (e.g. North Acton and Ealing Central meet current playing fields) due to increased demand from single team clubs (predominantly comprising Asian/Asian-British players) playing demand? in recently formed leagues, as well as demand for informal games from family groups and groups of friends and work colleagues. These competing types of demand for the Council facilities impacts on the pitch quality which results in more club teams travelling out of the borough to find higher quality pitches for their home games.
One Council site - Durdans Park in Southall - is temporarily closed while the cricket pitch is upgraded and an NTP installed along with a new changing pavilion (serving both cricket use of the Park and football use of pitches on King George's Field). A new junior size pitch with NTP will also be provided on completion of other sports facilities at William Perkin High School. When these pitches become available in 2018, there will still be a substantial overall shortfall.
To address this, the Council is actively working with partners on advanced proposals to provide 8 more good quality fine turf pitches (7 with NTPs on the edge of the square) at four further sites - two in the east (the Ealing/Acton area) and two in the west (the Norwood/Southall area). Should these project proposals be implemented in full, the 8 additional pitches should be sufficient to address forecast cricket demand for the period of this strategy. In the event that one or more fail to come forward, the needs case should be reviewed annually as part of the PPS Action Plan update and review process. The four projects for new provision included in the action plan for this PPS are: o Gunnersbury Park (2 of 4 proposed cricket pitches with NTPs allocated to LB Ealing's supply) o Popes Field (1 pitch) o Norwood Hall (2 pitches with NTPs) and o Warren Farm (3 pitches with NTPs)
Is the provision that NO. Although the cricket pitches at most of the club-operated and trust run sites are either good or standard quality, those at is accessible of the Ealing Council owned and managed sites have been rated either standard or poor. sufficient quality and appropriately The club consultation reported no sightscreens at North Acton and no adequate facilities for match teas. maintained? Despite the quality of the pitches on the park sites, many remain heavily used. Generally, it is considered that high expressed demand is the main cause of the quality issues as opposed to lack of maintenance by the Council's contractors.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 23
Page 125 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
What are the main Population growth - both overall and in the Asian/Asian British communities in particular - will drive an increase in the number characteristics of of adult and junior teams. This projected growth of 8 adult and 8 junior teams will add to current unmet demand (evidenced by the future supply the waiting list at Ealing CC). Several clubs consulted also have plans to grow their colts sections and the reported on-going and demand for growth of junior teams from Ealing will require additional pitch supply. There are Ealing clubs using pitches outside of the provision? borough who would like to use pitches within the borough if high quality pitches were available.
The reopening of the Durdans Park pitch (committed) along with the projects in the planning stages to reinstate former cricket supply at Gunnersbury Park (2 pitches with NTPs allocated to LBE), Popefield Playing Fields (1 pitch), Norwood Hall (2 pitches with NTPs) and Warren Farm (3 pitches with NTPs), if delivered in full, will increase current accessible supply from 29 adult pitches to 38 to serve 70+ adult sides (assuming 8 new adult teams by 2031 based on forecast population growth and current team generation rates) - i.e. approximately 2 adult teams per pitch. This quantity of future supply, provided it is delivered as planned and maintained to a standard quality or above, should be sufficient to meet future demand. As stated above, the progress of these plans for new provision and their impact on the supply/demand balance should be reviewed regularly through the PPS Action Plan annual review process.
In terms of supply for junior and non-traditional forms of cricket, 7 new NTPs are included as part of the plans for new adult supply (above) plus new supply at William Perkin High School from 2017. Provided these 8 new NTPs are added to the existing supply of 9 NTPs of standard quality or above (at Dormers Wells, Ealing Cricket Club, North Acton Playing Fields (2), Old Actonians Boddington Gardens, SKLP Sports Ground, Spikes Bridge Park, Southall Recreation Ground and St Benedict's School Sports Ground), there will be 17 NTPs of standard quality or above distributed across the borough. This level of provision will be sufficient to meet forecast demand for junior and non-traditional forms of cricket for the period of the strategy. The progress of these plans for new provision and their impact on the supply/demand balance should be reviewed regularly through the PPS Action Plan annual review process.
Is there enough NO. There is a deficiency currently and forecast population growth (particularly in the South Asian communities), together with accessible and the development plans of the main clubs, will put further pressure on the existing cricket pitch supply over the period of this secured community strategy. use provision to meet future However, once Durdans Park pitch comes back into full cricket use), and provided the current plans for new or reinstated demand? former pitches and NTPs are implemented (at Gunnersbury Park, Popes Field, Norwood Hall, Warren Farm and William Perkin High School) as including in the Action Plan at the conclusion of this PPS, there will be sufficient cricket pitch supply within Ealing to meet both current and future demand to 2031.
Implementing these projects and establishing club leases or management agreements in respect of some of these sites (e.g. www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 24
Page 126 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix A - CRICKET Assessment of Needs
Popes Field with Ealing Cricket Club) should help to ensure the new facilities are maintained to a good standard.
Also, by reducing demand from traditional club teams for the Council's existing park pay and play pitches, the quality of these pitches should improve over time. This should improve the playing experience for the growing number of Asian/Asian British cricket teams and for those wanting to play informal games of cricket. Given the demographics of the borough and cricket trends, these are the areas of cricket demand that are likely to grow the most in Ealing.
What is the overall The overall quality level of cricket pitch provision in Ealing is mixed. The majority of the club owned and operated sites have quality level? good quality pitches and accompanying ancillary facilities. This contrasts with the council operated sites. These are rated poor to standard and some lack adequate quality changing facilities, areas suitable for refreshments/teas or the appropriate equipment such as sightscreens.
Priority sites for replacement of non-turf practice net systems in Ealing borough are Osterley Cricket Ground and the SKLP ground in Northolt.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 25
Page 127 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Appendix B: Football - Assessment of Needs (Stages B & C)
The findings of the assessment of football facilities in the London Borough of Ealing are summarised in this appendix to the Playing Pitch Strategy. 63% of the FA affiliated football clubs based in the borough (representing 75% of teams) have contributed to this assessment either by submitting an online club survey return, attending a Club Forum session or by telephone.
1. Football Supply (Step 2)
The findings of the assessment of supply of football facilities in the London Borough of Ealing are summarised in this section.
Grass Football Pitches in the London Borough of Ealing
96 grass pitches are identified as available for community football across Ealing, on 33 operational playing pitch sites. This compares to 142 identified in 2010 as part of the facility strategy. Although this looks like a significant decrease this included 30 pitches on school sites (11 adult and 19 youth or mini soccer pitches) not available for community use. In addition, Warren Farm Sports Ground accounted for 17 pitches in 2010. This site is not in use.
Figure 1 below shows the number of pitches compared with the number of FA registered teams by age group (in the 2015/16 season). This comparison indicates that there is slightly less than one adult pitch for every registered team. By contrast, there are more than three youth teams for every available youth pitch (11v11 or 9v9). The picture is similar for mini soccer (7v7 or 5v5) with over four teams per pitch. This imbalance in pitch supply by pitch type is addressed later in the report. It is less of an issue for mini soccer than it is for youth football as a mini soccer pitch has capacity to accommodate more match equivalent sessions per week than a youth football pitch.
Figure 1: Pitch size / team comparison
Pitch Supply Teams playing in Ealing* Adult 51 53% 94 33% Youth 11v11 & 9v9 27 28% 91 32%
Mini 7v7 & 5v5 18 19% 97 34%
Total 96 282 Source: Middlesex FA Team data
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 1
Page 128 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Council owned Pitches for Hire: There are 13 sites owned by the London Borough of Ealing with a total of 37 pitches currently available for hire. The pitches on one of these sites (Perivale Park) are unmarked and junior clubs use the field mainly for training as there are no changing facilities available. For the 2016/17 season the formal pitches have been reinstated and made available for hire supported by a new pavilion with changing. Similarly, at Norwood Hall (a jointly owned playing field by LBE and Ealing, Hammersmith & West London College managed by LBE) there are few current hires due to the wooden pavilion being derelict. The Council and College have advanced proposals to replace this pavilion and enhance the playing pitches for both football and cricket. The large Council-owned Warren Farm Sports Ground in Southall, formerly marked out as 17 football pitches for hire, is currently closed. This key football site is subject to a proposal by Queens Park Rangers FC (the professional club based in Hammersmith & Fulham) for reinstatement as a club training ground / academy to include grass pitches for community hire. The pitches at King George’s Playing Field have been out of use for several seasons pending development of the new changing facilities at the adjacent Durdans Park Cricket Ground. Given the imbalance of provision between adult and youth pitches and the number of adult and youth teams, consideration should be given to marking a number of these reinstated pitches for mini soccer (5v5 and 7v7) and youth pitches (9v9 and youth 11v11) and providing the appropriate size goals.
Council owned Pitches with leases or management agreements: Ten playing field sites owned by the London Borough of Ealing are leased to other organisations (or occupied by sports clubs under the terms of management agreements) as follows:
Three sites are leased to football clubs who are now responsible for the maintenance of the pitches - i.e. o Fox Hill Nature Reserve/Hangar Hill Park Playing Field to Acton Whistlers FC; o Lord Halsbury Memorial Playing Field to Larkspur Rovers FC; and o Berkeley Fields to North Greenford United FC.
Seven sites with facilities for football are leased to multi-sport and sport & social clubs - i.e. o The Old Actonians Sports Ground Gunnersbury Drive (off Pope's Lane) o the former Liverpool Victoria Sports Ground in Boddington Gardens to the Old Actonians Sports Association; o a playing field in Horn Lane Acton to Shamrock Sports & Social Club; o Spike's Bridge Park in Southall to London Tigers; o a small playing field and clubhouse hired by Junior Bees FC to West Ealing Bowls Club; o Cayton Park with football pitches for hire to Northolt Rugby Club; o and a playing field adjacent to the Council's former Bromyard Leisure Centre site (now a Virgin Active Club) to Shepherd's Bush Cricket Club.
Football Pitches on Education Sites: Ealing based community football clubs currently hire pitches at weekends in season on three existing and former school sites in Ealing borough - i.e. Celtic FC junior teams at Brentside High School, FC Real teams at the privately owned former Eversheds Sports Ground in Wyke Gardens, Hanwell which is no longer a school site and is identified in the Council's plans for school expansions to meet demand for new school places. London Japanese Juniors (LJJ FC) are based at the independent London Bunga Yochien School in Acton. Pitches at William Perkin High School in Greenford will also
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 2
Page 129 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
be available for community hire from 2016/17. Ellen Wilkinson High School for Girls in Acton has also expressed interest for the first time in opening its sports facilities (grass pitches, sports hall, redgra and tennis courts) to community users. The clubs using school sites have little security of access to these pitches as continued access from one season to the next depends on the consent of the schools' management (head teacher, board of governors and/or governing trust). Whilst none of these education providers has indicated any intention to stop allowing access in future, without agreements in place for longer than a single season, security of access for football clubs at these sites must be considered a risk. In addition, Pitshanger Dynamo FC, play home matches at Step 7 in the National League System at the University of West London Sports Ground in Argyle Road. The club has secured access to this site through a lease agreement with the university.
As stated above, a further 19 youth or mini soccer pitches and 11 adult pitches (or space to accommodate this number of pitches) on playing fields at other school sites across the borough are not currently available for community use. Most of these sites are primary schools and are able to offer little or no access to ancillary facilities. Arranging future access to these pitches at weekends at reasonable cost while safeguarding the security of the schools' buildings will be difficult to achieve in most cases.
Football pitches on privately owned sites: Seven playing field sites in the borough with grass football pitches are privately owned and used by community clubs as follows: o The Osterley Sports & Social Club ground in Tentelow Lane in Southall is leased from a Gurdwara and the football facilities are hired to several clubs in the National League System including FC Assyria (part of the Ealing Assyrian Society), Kensington Dragons (based in LB Kensington & Chelsea) and CB Hounslow United (based in LB Hounslow) o The Brentham Club and Acton Garden Village Sports Club (sport and social clubs) own the home sites of their respective football club sections. o The Park Club is a commercial sports and fitness club owned by the Hogarth Group. The club occupies the former Acton Sports Association sports ground and continues to be the home base for Old Vaughanians FC (single adult football pitch) and Acton Cricket Club. o The London Marathon Playing Field in Birkbeck Avenue in Greenford has six adult pitches and is used by a range of Ealing based football clubs. This key site is held by the London Playing Field Foundation on a long lease from the City Parochial Foundation. o London Tigers FC entered into a partnership with the London Playing Fields Association in 2011 to use a grass stadium pitch on Western Avenue known locally as Avenue Park as the home ground for its first team o the stadium pitch at Reynolds Field in Greenford, formerly a Council site now sold to Hanwell Town FC
Facilities for Informal Football
The London Borough of Ealing has a current policy of providing free to access facilities for informal games of football at six sites where pitches are marked and, on some sites, goalposts provided i.e.: o Bixley Field o Blondin Park o Churchfield Recreation Grounds o Cuckoo Park (linked to Hanwell Community Centre) o Drayton Green o Jubilee Gardens
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 3
Page 130 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
A further site - Berrymede Open Space adjacent to Berrymede Junior School - has been out of use for several years. There are proposals within the latest phases of the South Acton Estate Regeneration Master Plan to upgrade this open space to include an area for informal games of football.
There is a significant problem of affiliated league football teams running organised training sessions on some of these informal sites where posts are provided as well as on the Council's maintained pay and play pitches where teams use the pitches for midweek and weekend training without booking and paying the hire charge. There is a need for a policy in the Playing Pitch Strategy aimed at addressing this abuse which reduces the quality of the playing experience for those teams that legitimately book the pay and play pitches and for recreational users of the informal pitches.
Commercial Soccer Centres
There are currently no commercial soccer centres located in the borough. However, there is extensive provision in neighbour boroughs readily accessible from all parts of Ealing borough. The nearest centres, each with up to ten 3G floodlit pitches for small-sided games (5v5 or 7v7) are the Goals centres at Gillette Corner in Hounslow, Alperton in Brent, Ruislip and Hayes in Hillingdon. A number of these sites are used by Ealing based football clubs for training.
Closed and Former Football Sites
In addition to the park and sports ground sites where football pitches are temporarily out of use but will be coming back into use shortly - i.e. Gunnersbury Park (new sports hub project to be delivered jointly with Hounslow borough), Warren Farm (proposed transfer to QPR Holdings Ltd to develop new football facilities), King George's Playing Field (new pavilion on Durdans Park adjacent) - the following Council-owned sites that provided formal football pitches at the time of the last review in 2010, no longer have marked and maintained football pitches: o Acton Park – A single junior pitch was previously marked and available for pay and play hire from the Council. A multi-use games area and football/basketball court remains available for informal use. This park is one of several venues across Central and West London regularly hired by the Little Foxes children's sports coaching organisation for football sessions on Saturday mornings. o Islip Manor Park – A single junior pitch was also previously marked and available for pay and play hire from the Council in this park but was closed due to lack of changing facilities. A basketball/football area remains available for informal use. o Lammas Park – A single junior pitch was previously marked and available for pay and play hire. Two small-sided 3G AGPs have been provided in this park and are available to hire (managed on behalf of the Council by Will to Win Tennis Ltd.) o Southall Recreation Ground - Three adult pitches were previously available for pay and play hire at this recreation ground. These pitches are no longer maintained and marked. A key playing field site that has been closed since the late 1990s is the former Barclays Bank Sports Ground in Park View Road, Ealing which was sold and closed in 2000. This site was used by several community football clubs (and Ealing Cricket Club) prior to closure. This site is identified in the Council's plans for school expansions to meet demand for new school places.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 4
Page 131 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Quality
The table below illustrates the standard of all of the pitches that were assessed as part of this playing pitch strategy - i.e. 83 of 99 (84% of the total). A number of sites were not assessed due to a lack of access or because they were initially out of scope (listed as having no community use).
Figure 2 – Ealing football pitch quality Number Percentage Good 33 40% Standard 41 49% Poor 9 11% Total 83
Only 10% of pitches in the borough that have been assessed are of poor quality. Half the stock of grass football pitches accessible for community use in Ealing are rated as ‘standard’ with 40% rated ‘good’.
Poor natural drainage and compaction of the ground are issues at a high proportion of the football pitch sites. These are common issues in this part of London with heavy London Clay and few local authorities or their contractors have the resources necessary to carry out drilling at the frequencies required to aerate the ground and de-compact the playing surface.
All of the football pitches rated good are located on club, school or university grounds that are both closed to the general public and where professional ground staff with specialist sports turf expertise are either employed/contracted, or the clubs have appropriately skilled volunteer club members.
Un-booked use of formal pitches by teams
Unauthorised use of the maintained pay and play pitches in Ealing's parks as well as of pitches in parks intended for informal recreational use is a growing problem for the Council's Parks Service. There have been a number of complaints made by clubs that regularly hire Council pitches that pitches are being used by clubs and schools without booking. A number of clubs take advantage of these sites especially for early and late season training when there is sufficient daylight on weekday evenings. This is especially a problem at North Acton Playing Fields and leads to reduced pitch quality for those that do book and pay for using the pitch. A policy is required to support the Council's Park Guard Service to address this abuse whether it is by FA/AFA affiliated football teams, private soccer schools or independent schools.
Proposed New Grass Pitches
Figure 3 shows the net increase in secured and accessible grass football pitches in Ealing borough and available for use by Ealing based clubs and teams should the current proposals for upgrading and reinstating closed pitches and providing new pitches proceed at the following sites:
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 5
Page 132 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Figure 3 - New football pitches from current site development proposals
Site Number of existing Number of proposed football Net increase on Number of additional pitches maintained football pitches with community access current available available for Ealing clubs / teams pitches by 2019 supply by 2019 Perivale Park 0 (formerly 3) 3 3 3 (pitches reinstated for 2016/17 season with new modular changing pavilion) King George's 0 (formerly 3) 3 3 3 (pitches reinstated for 2016/17 PF season with access to new changing facilities on adjacent site) Rectory Park Capacity for 8 but 4 marked 6 (+upgrade of existing small- -2 grass (+2x3G) -2 (outweighed by capacity of 2x3G out regularly sided pitches to 2x3G) pitches replacing 2 small grass pitches) Warren Farm 0 (formerly 17) 8 (shared access +2x3G pro club 8 8 (shared with QPR pro club) only) Gunnersbury 2 (formerly 9) 9 (+2x3G) 7 (+2x3G) 4.5 (+ 1x3G allocated to Ealing supply) Total 10 grass (formerly 32) 29 grass (+6x3G) 19 grass (+4x3G) 16.5 grass (+3x3G)
Artificial Grass Pitches (AGPs) in Ealing
In total, there are 14 sites in Ealing with pitches with a total of 16 artificial grass surfaces suitable for football (i.e. either 3G preferred football surface or a sand based or sand filled playing surface), as summarised in figure 4. There are also sand-based AGPs at two independent school sites in the borough - St Augustine's Priory and St Benedict's School. These pitches are used extensively by Ealing Hockey Club and although the Brentham Football Club trains on the St Augustine's Priory AGP, these pitches are not generally available for football in the peak community hours and are therefore excluded. Also excluded from the analysis is a small sand based pitch at the Girls Day School Trust's Notting Hill & Ealing High School. This pitch is used for tennis (marked with four courts) with no (or minimal) community use. The five sites marked by an asterisk are on the FA register (or shortly to be added when upgrade works are completed) as suitable for affiliated league match play (either adult or youth as indicated).
Figure 4 - Artificial grass football pitches in Ealing
AGP Type AGP sites in Ealing Total Full Size 3G - Floodlit o Spike's Bridge Park* 4 o Featherstone Sports Centre, Southall (Shortpile 3G currently used for hockey & football although competition hockey use no longer endorsed by England Hockey) www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 6
Page 133 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
AGP Type AGP sites in Ealing Total o Trailfinders (World Rugby accredited with some football use) o William Perkin High School* (replacing 5v5 with full size plus pavilion, opening 2016) Full Size Sand - Floodlit o Old Actonians (Boddington Gardens) Sports Ground 3 o Brentside School (Kajima Community) o Alec Reed Academy 9v9 3G - Floodlit o Swift Road Outdoor Sports Centre* 2 o Northolt High School (replacement 3G surface re-opened in April 2016)* 7v7 3G - Floodlit o Lord Halsbury Playing Fields* 1 5v5 3G - Floodlit o Lammas Park x2 (Will to Win) 5 o Pitshanger Park x1 (Will to Win) o Elthorne Sports Centre x 1 (Everyone Active SLM) o North Acton Playing Field x 1 (Football Samurai Academy) 5v5 Sand - Floodlit o Trailfinders Sports Club (marked as four tennis courts) 1 Total 14 sites 16 AGPs
* The FA Register of 3G Pitches http://3g.thefa.me.uk/?countyfa=Middlesex lists four FA approved 3G pitches for affiliated league match play in Ealing for the 2015/16 season. These are the full size pitch at Spike's Bridge Park, the medium size pitches suitable for affiliated youth league match play at Swift Road Outdoor Sports Centre in Southall and at Northolt High School, and the pitch accredited for 7v7 and 5v5 mini soccer matches at Lord Halsbury Playing Fields in Northolt. The new full size AGP at William Perkin High School will be registered with the FA for the 2016/17 season.
The nearest alternative full size 3G FTPs in neighbour boroughs that fall within an approximate two mile catchment radius of Ealing borough are as follows: o LB Hillingdon (to west) - Hayes & Yeading FC; RAF Northolt (close to Rectory Park); Brunel University Sports Centre; o LB Brent (to north east) - Hyde Hillside (Stonebridge Recreation Ground); Capital City Academy, Vale Farm Leisure Centre; Hendon FC (Silver Jubilee Park, Kingsbury) o LB Harrow (to north) - Whitmore High School (Watford FC link), Harrow School, The Hive Centre x2 (Edgware, Barnet FC link) o LB Hounslow (to south) - King's House School (Chiswick) o LB Hammersmith & Fulham (to east) - Westway Sports Centre
AGPs at risk
None of the existing AGPs in Ealing are identified as at risk of closure at the present time.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 7
Page 134 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Proposed New AGPs
In addition to the new 3G pitch at William Perkin High School to be completed for the 2016/17 season, Figure 5 below summarises proposals for further new AGPs in Ealing borough, and the current status of these proposals:
Figure 5 - AGP project proposals in Ealing
AGP Type 3G AGP project proposals in the East Sub Area Full Size 3G - Floodlit Gunnersbury Park Sports Hub - A £14m joint project between LB Hounslow and LB Ealing with planning consent and the (FA compliant) majority of the funding secured. This project will provide two FA compliant full size floodlit 3G pitches, one of which will be allocated for the purposes of the PPS exercise for use by Hounslow based clubs and groups and the other to Ealing clubs and groups. Committed project - start on site in 2016 Rectory Park Northolt - A £4m joint project between LB Ealing and Middlesex FA (MFA) with planning consent and the majority of the funding secured. This project will provide a new football and cricket pavilion to replace temporary portacabins used since the original pavilion was destroyed by arson. The new pavilion will be procured by LB Ealing and leased to MFA for 125 years. Two 3G floodlit pitches are included in the project to increase the playing capacity and quality for community clubs. Warren Farm Sports Ground - A proposal by QPR Holdings Ltd to purchase and reinstate this large Council-owned former pay and play sports ground currently closed to the public. A legal agreement is drafted that provides for one full size floodlit 3G pitch and an indoor 3G training pitch. These pitches will have negligible community access (9-10pm on weekdays) and will be used by QPR for training and academy activities. Once these new facilities are completed, the QPR Academy will relocate from Cranford Community College in west Hounslow, releasing the Covered AirDome 3G at this site for community club use in peak hours. The main benefit of the Warren Farm project for Ealing community football clubs will be access at weekends to eight high quality grass pitches and pavilion facilities. Full Size 3G - Floodlit Wasps FC/Twyford High School - The Council has proposals for schools expansion in this area. Interest has been (World Rugby expressed by both the High School and the rugby club in enhanced sports facility provision on the Wasps FC site to include a compliant) floodlit 3G pitch primarily for rugby to enhance the overall playing capacity of the pitches on this site and new ancillary provision. This project, should it proceed, will have minimal impact on the available supply for community football.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 8
Page 135 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Distribution of Football Supply
Map 1 shows the distribution of football sites across Ealing borough. This shows that, provided the above projects are delivered as planned, residents from all parts of the borough will be within a reasonable journey time of a football pitch, either a community club pitch (restricted to club members and guests) or a park based pitch available on a play and play basis.
Map 1 - Distribution of grass football pitches in Ealing
Ealing - Grass Football pitches
Map 1 Facility Name Address Postcode Key
Existing pitch sites 1 Acton Gardens Village Social Club Alwyn Gardens, off Noel Road, Acton W3 0JH 2 Berkeley Fields Playing Pitches Horsenden Lane North, Greenford UB6 7PH 3 Brentham Club Meadvale Road, Ealing W5 1NP 4 Brentside High School Greenford Avenue, Hanwell W7 1JJ 5 Dormers Wells Leisure Centre pitches Dormers Wells Lane, Southall, UB1 3HZ 6 Ealing Central Sports Ground Horsenden Lane South, Perivale, UB6 7NU 7 Elthorne Waterside Pitches Westlea Road, Hanwell W2 7AH 8 Fox Reservoir Playing Fields Hillcrest Road, Ealing W5 2JL 9 Glaxo Smith Kline Sports Ground Swyncombe Avenue W5 4DR
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 9
Page 136 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
10 Gurnell Leisure Centre Ruislip Road East West Ealing W13 0AL 11 Hanwell Town FC Perivale Lane. Perivale Middlesex UB6 8UT 12 London Playing Fields (Greenford) Birkbeck Avenue, Greenford UB6 8LS 13 London Playing Fields (Greenford) - London Western Avenue, Greenford UB6 8GA Tigers 14 Lord Halsbury Playing Fields Priors Farm Lane, North Holt UB5 5TD 15 North Acton Playing Fields Noel Road, Acton London W3 0JF 16 North Greenford United FC Berkeley Fields, Berkeley Avenue, UB6 0NX Greenford 17 Northolt Rugby Football Club Cayton Road, Greenford, UB8 9BJ 18 Old Actonians Association Gunnersbury Drive, Ealing W5 4LL 19 Old Actonians @ Boddington Gardens Boddintons, Garden Acton, London W3 9AP 20 Osterley Sports Ground Tentelow Lane, Southall Middlesex UB2 4LW 21 Park Club East Acton Lane, W3 7HB 22 Perivale Park Leaver Gardens, Greenford, UB6 8TJ 23 Pitshanger Park (Scotch Common) Scotch Common, West Ealing W13 8DL 24 Queens Drive Playing Fields (Japanese Queens Drive, Acton W3 0HT school) 25 Rectory Park Parkfield Drive (off church road), Northolt UB5 5NR 26 Shamrock Sports & Social Club Horn Lane, Acton London W3 0BP 27 Shepherds Bush Cricket Club Bromyard Avenue, Acton W3 7AU 28 Southfields Recreation Ground Southfield Road, Acton, W4 5LD 29 Spikes Bridge Park West Avenue, Southall UB1 2AR 30 Thames Valley Uni Sports Ground Argyle Road, West Ealing, W13 0DA 31 Trailfinders Sports Club Vallis Way, West Ealing W13 0DD 32 Wasps FC Ground Sports Ground Twyford Avenue, W3 9QA 33 West Ealing Bowls Club Mervyn Road, West Acton W13 9UN
Informal use pitches with goal posts only 34 Bixley Field Bixley Close, Southall UB2 4EL 35 Blondin Park Blondin Avenue, Hanwell W5 4UL 36 Churchfield Recreation Ground Manor Court Road, Hanwell W7 3BE 37 Cuckoo Park Little John Road, Hanwell W7 1PD 38 Drayton Green Drayton Green Road W13 0DU 39 Jubilee Park Jubilee Gardens, Southall UB1 2TJ
Sites for planned new supply 40 Former Eversheds Sports Ground Wyke Gardens, Hanwell W7 2AF 41 Gunnersbury Park Popes Lane, Acton W3 8LQ 42 King George's Playing Fields Lady Margaret Road, Southall UB1 2PZ 43 Norwood Hall Sports Ground Norwood Green Road, Southall UB2 4LA 44 Popefield Playing Fields Gunnersbury Avenue, Ealing W5 4YG 45 Warren Farm Sports Ground Windmill Lane, Southall, UB2 4NE 46 William Perkin High School Old Field Lane North, Greenford UB6 8QD
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 10
Page 137 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Map 2 below shows the distribution of existing and planned AGPs across Ealing borough. Once the committed AGP projects identified in figure 5 above in Acton and Northolt are implemented, the supply of AGPs will be broadly evenly distributed with no one area outside the catchment area of a football facility.
Map 2 - Distribution of AGP football pitches in Ealing
Artificial Grass sports pitches Map 2 Key Site Location
Artificial Grass Pitches suitable for football - in use (Map 1) 1 Featherstone High School Montague Waye, Southall 2 Lord Halsbury Playing Fields Priors Farm Lane, Northolt 3 Northolt High School/Sports Centre Eastcote Lane, Northolt 4 Spikes Bridge Park Off West Avenue, Southall 5 Swift Road Outdoor Sports Centre Swift Road, Southall 6 William Perkin High School Old Field Lane North, Greenford Small sided 5 v 5 pitches 7 Elthorne Sports Centre Bengarth Road, Hanwell 8 Lammas Park Culmington Road, Ealing 9 Pitshanger Park Pitshanger Lane 10 The Green - free access, not fenced Acton Sites for planned new supply 11 Gunnersbury Park Popes Lane, Acton 12 Rectory Park Ruislip Road, Northolt 13 North Acton Playing Fields Noel Road, Acton
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 11
Page 138 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
3. Football Demand (Step 3)
The findings relating to football pitch demand in Ealing are summarised in this section of the report.
Clubs and Teams
In the 2015/16 season, Ealing had a total of 64 affiliated clubs with a total of 282 teams all of which play in the borough. Of the 282 teams operating in Ealing, 94 (33%) are adult teams 91 (32%) are youth teams (all formats) and 97 (34%) are mini football teams.
72% of Youth and Mini football teams play in a club that has achieved a Charter Standard Award as compared to a national average of 81%.
The number of registered teams playing in the borough increased by 53 teams compared with the previous season: o An increase of 8 adult teams o An increase of 45 youth and mini football teams
Active People Survey
Active People Survey 9 (Oct 2014 - Oct 2015) shows that 4.76% of adults (16+) in London currently play football (either in a club team or informally) for at least 30 minutes once a week. This London Region participation rate is higher than the average of 4.17% for England.
The sample size in Ealing borough since APS2 in 2007/08 was too small to provide a statistically significant participation figure. However, based on the results in the first two annual APS surveys when results were significant it appears that adult (16+) weekly football participation is higher than the London average at between 5.1% and 5.9% of the adult (16+) resident population.
Assuming overall adult football participation in Ealing borough remains above 5%, this would indicate around 13,500 adults (aged 16+) living in the borough play football (out of an adult population of approximately 270,000). Much of this participation will take place outside of the traditional clubs.
The Middlesex FA data indicates that there are approximately 160 adult and 16+ youth teams currently playing regularly in the borough. Assuming an average of 15 adult players per team squad this equates to 2,400 adults playing regular affiliated league football. Comparing this total to the overall Active People Survey finding of 13,500 adults playing football each week suggests there may be a further 11,000+ adult residents who regularly play small sided games and informal games of football (for example using the commercial soccer centres, school AGPs and informal facilities in parks), or who represent latent demand.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 12
Page 139 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Source: Sport England (March 2016)
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 13
Page 140 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Market Segmentation
Analysis of Sport England Sports Market Segmentation data for the London Borough of Ealing identifies that the main adult Sports Market Groups participating in all forms of football in the borough, in order of population size, are: Jamie (Sports Team Lads), aged 18-25, vocational student Ben (Competitive Male Urbanites), aged 18-25, graduate professional Tim (Settling Down Males), aged 26-45, professional Kev (Pub League Team Mates), aged 36-45, vocational job
Latent Adult Demand
As shown in the graph below, latent demand is greatest in the same Groups (in the same order of population size).
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 14
Page 141 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Expressed Demand
Expressed demand in the borough for all levels and types of football is summarised in this section. Sources of demand information include FA databases, club and league websites, club survey returns and information gathered from site visits and meetings.
Open Age Men's Football - One club based in Ealing plays at 'Step 4' in the National League System (NLS) and therefore needs to comply with the FA's Step 4 Minimum Ground Grading Guidelines to maintain their league status. Two clubs plays at ‘Steps 5-6’ and a further three at ‘Step 7’. If any of these clubs are promoted their promotion depends on having access to a ground of sufficient quality.
Figure 6: Senior Adult Football League Clubs
Senior football clubs League Home ground Other grounds used NLS Step 7 FC Assyria Middlesex County Premier Division Osterley Sports Club (First Cayton Green Park (Northolt RFC) team) Kensington Dragons Middlesex County Premier Division Osterley Sports Club (First Linford Christie Outdoor Sports Centre, team) White City, LBH&F (Reserves) Pitshanger Dynamo Middlesex County Premier Division University of West London Train in Hillingdon Sports Ground (Argyle Road) NLS Step 5-6 North Greenford United Combined Counties Premier Berkeley Fields London Tigers Southall FC Spartan South Midlands Premier London Playing Fields, Avenue Osterley Sports Club Reserves: Middlesex County Premier Park, Western Avenue, (Reserves) Division Greenford (First Team) NLS Step 4 Hanwell Town Southern League Division 1 Central Reynolds Fields (First Team)
Other adult clubs based in the borough and playing within the FA affiliated leagues below the NLS that have been identified are:
Figure 7: Men's Adult League Clubs
Other adult men's league clubs League Home ground Other grounds used AFC Isleworth Chiswick and District Sunday Osterley Sports Ground Armenian Youth Association West Middlesex Sunday North Acton Playing Fields
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 15
Page 142 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Other adult men's league clubs League Home ground Other grounds used Brentham Middlesex County League Brentham Sports Club Ground Brook House Boys Middlesex County League Osterley Sports Club Club Assyria Middlesex County League London Marathon Playing Fields Duke Rangers Chiswick and District Sunday Osterley Sports Club FC Deportivo Galicia Reserves Middlesex County Senior Reserves Osterley Sports Club First team play in NLS at Silver Jubilee Park in Kingsbury, Brent FC Irish Of London Harrow Sunday Challenge London Marathon Playing Fields Greenford Celtic FC Middlesex County League Horn Lane, Shamrock Sports & Social Club Harrow Rangers Middlesex County League London Marathon Playing Fields Headstone Manor Harrow Sunday Challenge London Marathon Playing Fields Heathrow Flyers Middlesex County League Osterley Sports Club Heston Bombers Middlesex County League Osterley Sports Club Larkspur Rovers Middlesex County League Lord Halsbury Playing Fields Harrow Sunday Challenge Newton City Chiswick and District Sunday Perivale Park Northolt Manor Middlesex County League Ealing Central Northolt Saints S&S (Sunday) Harrow Sunday Challenge Ealing Central Sports Ground Old Actonians Southern Amateur League Old Actonians Gunnersbury Park Old Greenfordians Middlesex County League Dormers Wells Leisure Centre Paddington Elite FC Middlesex County League Lord Halsbury Playing Fields Popeye FC Middlesex County League London Marathon Playing Fields University of West London BUCS Trailfinders Sports Club
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 16
Page 143 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Figure 8: Youth and Mini Soccer Clubs
Youth & Minisoccer Football 2015/16 league Home ground Other grounds used clubs (teams) Acton Ealing Whistlers (16) Harrow Youth League Fox Wood Nature Reserve Elthorne Park North Acton Playing Fields Alperton Park Actual Soccer (6) Harrow Youth League Fox Wood Nature Reserve AGV Youth (2) Alwyn Gardens Brentham Colts FC (6) Harrow Youth League Brentham Club ltd Ealing Central Celtic (13) Harrow Youth League Brent Field (Brentside High Schools PF) Challenger Youth FC (1) Harrow Youth League London Marathon Playing Fields Coaches First (6) Dormers Wells Leisure Centre FC Real (8) Harrow Youth League Eversheds Sports Ground Burlington Danes Academy West Middlesex and Hayes Youth (White City, LBH&F) Football Samurai Academy (6) Harrow Youth League North Acton Playing Fields
Foxes (13) Harrow Youth League Shepherds Bush Cricket Club West Middlesex and Hayes Youth Greenford Celtic FC (11) Harrow Youth League Horn Lane/ Shamrock Club Perivale Park Hanwell Town Youth FC (18) Harrow Youth League Reynolds Playing Fields Junior Bees FC (8) Surrey Youth League West Ealing Bowls Club Goals Football Centre, Gillette Corner, Osterley Kensington Dragons (6) Harrow Youth League Kensington Memorial Park London Marathon Playing Fields Linford Christie/Wormwood Scrubs Larkspur Rovers Youth FC (16) Harrow Youth League Lord Halsbury Playing Fields London Japanese Juniors (LJJ) Queens Drive Playing Fields Frontiers (6) London Eagles (10) Harrow Youth League Rectory Park North Greenford United (18) (1) Harrow Youth League Berkeley Fields
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 17
Page 144 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Youth & Minisoccer Football 2015/16 league Home ground Other grounds used clubs (teams) North Greenford United Youth (2) Allied Counties Youth League Berkeley Fields Harrow Youth League Old Actonians (16) Harrow Youth League Old Actonians Gunnersbury Park West Middlesex and Hayes Youth Pitshanger FC (25) Harrow Youth League Pitshanger Park University of West London Sports Ground
Women and Girls Football - Women and girls football in Ealing has developed with three clubs in the borough now running exclusively female teams. These are listed below together with QPR FC. QPR support a women's team and age group girl's teams recruited from across West London. These teams are currently based out of Ealing but are likely to provide more opportunities for girls and women in Ealing should the club's proposals to relocate its training ground and academy to Warren Farm Sports Ground come to fruition.
Figure 9: Clubs with Women & Girl's Teams
Women and girls teams Leagues Home ground Other grounds used Larkspur Rovers (2) Capital Girls League Lords Halsbury Playing Fields Old Actonian Girls (3) (3A) FA Women's Premier League Old Actonians Sports Ground (First Train on 3G at Old Actonians Capital Girls League Team play at North Greenford (Boddington Gardens) Ground - adults United's Berkeley Fields ground as Thurs, u12-u16 Mons. need access to a floodlit stadium Minis train on grass at main pitch) Gunnersbury Drive ground or in Gunnersbury Park on Sat mornings. U9s play in a central league in Barnet u12s & u14s play home games at various sites including Southfields Playing Fields in LBH&F QPR Women & Girls (5) FA Women's Premier League Honeycroft (Uxbridge) - to London & South East Ladies League relocate to Warren Farm Surrey County Girls League University of West London (1A) BUCS University of West London Sports Ground
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 18
Page 145 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Disability Football - Opportunities to play disability football are provided on a sub-regional (West London) basis. The main opportunities accessible to disabled people in Ealing are provided in Hounslow by Brentford FC Community Sports Trust (Deaf Football) and QPR in the Community Trust (Learning Disability Football).
Soccer Schools
Demand for playing space for children's football coaching is substantial in Ealing borough, whether from commercial soccer schools or coaching schools organised by local community football clubs. Examples include Little Foxes Club (operating across West and Central London and on areas in Acton Park and Pitshanger Park in Ealing borough), Acton Park Club soccer school, All Stars Soccer (Brentside High School), Conquest Football Academy (Beavers Sports Lodge and Redlees Park) and Football Samurai Academy (on the former grass tennis courts now a 5v5 3G pitch on North Acton Playing Fields). Clubs with soccer schools include Hanwell Town (school based at Trailfinders Sports Club) and Ealing Whistlers (school based at Fox Wood Nature Reserve). Operators of the Council's park and leisure centre based outdoor football pitches - GLL, Everyone Active and Will to Win - also run frequent soccer courses (e.g. at Elthorne, Swift Road and Lammas Park).
Casual Demand
Casual football play among groups of children and adults, using free to use open access grass and non-turf facilities in public parks continues to be a major feature of football demand.
As identified in the supply section of the report, Ealing Council provides for this demand by maintaining to a basic standard a number of designated informal pitches as well as open areas of grass in parks and open spaces some equipped with small goals, open access MUGAs or single sets of small size goalposts. Where these informal play facilities are provided in parks alongside formal pitches designated for match play, they help to reduce wear of the formal pitches. However, these pitches are subject to abuse from unauthorised use by organised teams and soccer schools for training and coaching.
Unmet Demand
Figure 10 summarises the self-reported plans of clubs for growing the number of teams they run to meet perceived unmet demand. This information is drawn from the club consultation survey and phone calls carried out with the clubs and therefore only includes those teams which have completed a survey online or via the phone. Conversion of this perceived unmet demand into new teams will depend on these clubs engaging sufficient volunteer team managers and coaches as well as suitable pitches to play on.
It is apparent from the consultation with clubs and the number that are planning for growth, that clubs consider there is unmet demand in the borough for mini and youth football in particular. There is also unmet demand for more girls' teams to cater for the progression from mixed mini football.
Over half the clubs who responded to the survey have self-reported plans for new teams in the next few seasons. Club survey responses, indicate unmet demand for 12 senior teams which includes 5 women’s teams, 47 youth teams (16 girls) and 35 mini football teams. Eight of these clubs have identified a need for an increase in affordable and accessible 3G provision within the borough to support this growth.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 19
Page 146 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
For match play and training for all age groups there is a need to secure more FA compliant floodlit 3G pitches (with agreed usage programmes) on managed sites with good quality changing and social facilities. This will have the benefit of reducing reliance on open access park pitches where it is difficult to maintain pitch quality and cleanliness (from dog fouling) and to sustain ancillary facilities. There is evidence from parks booking records that demand for parks pitches is falling.
Figure 10: Ealing football clubs - self-reported team growth plans
Club Adult Men Adult women Youth boys Youth Girls Mini Soccer Total Old Greenfordians - - - - 2 2 Old Actonians Ladies FC - 1 - 1 1 3 Ibis Eagles AFC 1 - 1 - - 2 Junior Bees FC 1 - 2 1 1 5 Foxes FC 1 - 4 4 6 15 FC Real 1 - 3 - 4 8 University of West 1 1 - - - 2 London North Greenford Utd - 1 - 1 - 2 London Eagles - - - - 5 5 Celtic FC - - 5 - - 5 Acton Ealing Whistlers - - 2 - - 2 Hanwell Town - - 1 - 1 2 Larkspur Rovers 2 1 2 2 5 12 Southall FC - 1 7 7 8 23 Football Samurai - - 3 - 1 4 Academy Brentham Colts - - 1 - 1 2 Total 7 5 31 16 35 94
Displaced Demand
The research and consultation shows that as far as match play is concerned, there is minimal displaced demand of adult football - i.e. adult teams of clubs based in Ealing having to travel outside the borough to find pitches to play home fixtures. At youth and mini soccer level there is displacement. An example is Acton Whistlers Youth FC. Some of the mini soccer or youth sides at this club are displaced to pitches in Alperton Park Brent for home games. At the same time, there is a modest amount of imported mini soccer demand at sites in Ealing - e.g. Brentford FC's Junior Bees training on poor quality pitches leased by the Council to West Acton Bowls Club.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 20
Page 147 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
The position is different with regard to team winter training. A number of teams travel out of the borough to secure access to midweek evening training slots on floodlit artificial grass pitches as detailed earlier in this report. These include FC Real (Burlington Danes Academy 3G in Shepherd's Bush), Pitshanger Dynamo (a 3G in Hillingdon borough) and Kensington Dragons (the sand AGP at Linford Christie Sports Centre in White City). In some cases this is because the AGPs just outside the borough and more accessible than provision within the borough. The Sport England Facilities Planning Model (FPM) analysis detailed later in this report identifies a moderate level of displaced demand for football AGPs at 67% of total AGP demand. However, this finding is not borne out by the consultation. The club survey returns suggest that, overall, displaced demand for Ealing based teams to access training facilities is not a major feature of the picture of football facility demand in Ealing borough.
4. The situation at individual football sites (Step 4)
Grass Pitch Sites
The grass football pitches were assessed in November of the 2015 season. The FA have reviewed the assessments and agreed the quality ratings as a basis for comparison of the amount of play each site can accommodate (i.e. 'carrying capacity') against the amount of play that takes place. Carrying capacity is a measure of the number of match equivalent sessions per season for community use each pitch can take without adversely affecting its quality and use. The following pitch carrying capacities have been used consistent with the approach adopted in similar assessments across the country.
Figure 11: Grass Football Pitch Carrying Capacity
Agreed Pitch Quality Adult Football Youth Football Mini Soccer Rating (9v9, 11v11) (5v5, 7v7) Number of match equivalent sessions a week Good 3 4 6 Standard 2 2 4 Poor 1 1 2
Figure 12 summarises the situation at each football site with regard to:
1. Pitch supply (including the quality ratings) and conclusions reached as to the amount of play a site can accommodate (i.e. its carrying capacity for community use); 2. The amount of play that takes place at each site (i.e. the expressed demand where known) adjusted to reflect any casual or education use in addition to club use for matches and training; 3. The comparison (shown as a RAG rating) as to whether, for each pitch type it contains, a site is: . RED - Being overplayed (current use exceeds the carrying capacity) . AMBER - Being played to the level the site can sustain (current use matches the carrying capacity), or www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 21
Page 148 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
. GREEN - Potentially able to accommodate some additional play (current use falls below the carrying capacity)
Figure 12: The Situation at Individual Sites
Site Pitch Rating No.* Ancillary Security of Cap. Est. RAG Assumptions/Comments and Quality access MES Use ALWYN GARDENS Standard 1 Y Standard AGV Club 6 3 AGV Youth: 2 x U16 and 1 x U8 team. 1 training (Acton Garden 1 M own session/week Village/AGV) BERKELEY FIELDS Good - new 1A Good social Stadium 3 At Stadium pitch site (and clubhouse) leased to /HORSENDEN HILL drainage areas - pitch leased Cap. North Greenford United FC (used by 1st team, system changing to NGUFC Reserves, u18s, u16s) and Old Actonians Ladies installed to areas poor Other 1st. Plus training. NGUFC shares car park with Tir stadium to standard pitches to Chonnail Gaels Club. TCG leases 3 pitches (and pitch 2015 TCG Gaelic pavilion) for Gaelic sports across two linked Football playing fields. A section of the playing field furthest from NGUFC is possible overspill space for junior football pitches but club consider season hire too expensive. Floodlights need attention to NGUFC pitch (14yrs old). Aspire to upgrade changing. Site boundary fence needs attention. BRENTHAM SPORTS Good 2 A Good Brentham 22 13 The club currently runs a men's team, a vet's CLUB Good 1 Y Club own team and a large colts section. The men's team Good 2 M play on Pitch 1 on Saturday afternoons in the Middlesex County League and the vet's use this pitch on Sundays. The colts use the other grass pitches (of various sizes) on the other side of the site (on the cricket outfield). The club chairman reported that Pitch 1 is usually used for a maximum 2-3 matches per week and is not used for training during the season. The pitches are maintained by 2 club grounds staff. The club seeks additional space to accommodate growing colts section. Currently most training is off-site at St Augustine's Priory School sand filled AGP. www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 22
Page 149 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Site Pitch Rating No.* Ancillary Security of Cap. Est. RAG Assumptions/Comments and Quality access MES Use Pitch side changing pavilion with home and away dressing rooms (including toilets and showers and a main clubhouse a short walk from the pitch with additional changing and toilets (including for officials), plus bar and cafe. BRENTSIDE HIGH Standard 2A Standard Academy 4 At Celtic 1995 FC indicate they play on these SCHOOL PLAYING (Kajima) cap. pitches (13 teams) FIELDS DORMERS WELLS Standard 2 A Standard LBE pay & 4 At Coaches First (6 teams); Old Greenfordians (1 LEISURE CENTRE play cap. team); Yacstar Ealing (1 team; Putney Athletic (GLL) Newton City FC EALING CENTRAL Standard 5 A Standard LBE pay & 10 5 Hanwell United (1 team); Northolt Saints S&S (1 SPORTS GROUND (not DDA - play team Sunday); AFC Hanwell; Pitshanger FC; 2 storey) Bentham Colts; St Pauls FC; Abbey FC There are issues with pitch drainage at this site. Pitch run offs in one corner near children's play area are under-size ELTHORNE Standard 2 A None LBE pay & 4 2 Hanwell Town Youth FC; QPR supporters team. WATERSIDE/ play Major pitch drainage improvement works were ELTHORNE PARK carried out lack of changing facilities on site limits demand. EVERSHEDS SPORTS Standard 2Y Standard Privately 12 6 FC Real home ground (8 teams) up to U15 (no GROUND 2M owned - club security of tenure - Planning for Schools DPD (WYKE GARDENS) has no potential school expansion site. security of FC Real train in Shepherds Bush at Burlington tenure Danes Academy. FOX RESERVOIR Standard 2 A Standard LBE lease to 10 At Acton Ealing Whistlers U7-U11 (5 teams) train; PLAYING FIELDS Standard 1 Y Acton Ealing cap. Actual Soccer (5 teams U14 and below); (Hangar Hill Park/ Fox Standard 1 M Whistlers FC Greenford Celtics Wood) Recent drainage works funded by Foundation. GURNELL LEISURE Poor 2A Standard - LBE pay & 3 At Paddington Elite FC (1 team); CENTRE (low lying 1Y only one play Cap. Harrow FC adult pitch set for two (GLL) LNER Youth FC (Brent based club) - moving to floods) pitches William Perkin High School) Lower pitch near river often unplayable - need to www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 23
Page 150 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Site Pitch Rating No.* Ancillary Security of Cap. Est. RAG Assumptions/Comments and Quality access MES Use take out of use. HANWELL TOWN Good 1 A Standard - Private 13 12 Hanwell Town Youth FC (18 teams); Southall (2 FOOTBALL CLUB Good 1 Y 160 seats owner lease teams); Hanwell Town (Reynolds Fields) Good 1 M + covered Hanwell Drainage issues as close to river and high water standing Town FC table. Changing pavilion has limitations and showing signs of wear and tear from heavy use. Club has long term aspiration to replace with larger facility KING GEORGE'S (3A) NEW LBE pay & TEMPORARILY CLOSED TO P&P HIRES PENDING PLAYING FIELD 2016/17 play PROVISION OF NEW SHARED PAVILION (FOOTBALL & CRICKET) LONDON PLAYING Good 6A Good London 18 10 Challenger Youth (1 team); Club Assyria; FC FIELDS Playing Irish Of London (2 teams); Harrow Rangers; (Birkbeck Avenue, Fields Headstone Manor; Nastaran; Popeye FC; Ealing Greenford) Foundation Town FC; AFC Hanwell, London Tigers 1st team. Full time ground staff maintains to high quality. LMPF aspire to convert one pitch to 3G in future to increase capacity and sustainability. LONDON PLAYING Good 1 A London London Tigers FC first team games in Middlesex FIELDS, AVENUE Tigers FC Premier League. PARK (Western partnership Avenue, Greenford) with LPFF LORD HALSBURY Standard 2 A Good LBE lease 6 At Larkspur Rovers (16 junior and 2 senior teams) PLAYING FIELD Standard 1 Y Larkspur cap. Paddington Elite Rovers FC At capacity and additional demand for junior/mini football. Club aspires to mark an additional pitch out next year once ground works to resolve drainage issues have been completed. NORTH ACTON Standard 2 A New in LBE pay & 6 At Football Samurai Academy (4 adult, 2 youth PLAYING FIELD Standard 1 Y 2014 play cap. teams); Armenian Youth Association (2 teams); Abbey FC; Old Danes; Brentham Colts; North Acton FC. Significant unauthorised use and some drainage issues on both the adult pitch nearest the pavilion and the junior 11v11 pitch in goalmouths and centre circle. www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 24
Page 151 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Site Pitch Rating No.* Ancillary Security of Cap. Est. RAG Assumptions/Comments and Quality access MES Use NORTHOLT RUGBY Standard 1 A Good Northolt RFC 6 2 FC Assyria - various teams. Pitches unmarked on FOOTBALL CLUB Standard 2 M (funded by hire to visit. The natural drainage is adequate. Grounds (CAYTON PARK) RFU) football club maintenance machinery is hired/borrowed by the rugby club as required. An older changing pavilion is still in use along with a newer changing block art funded by the RFU with good facilities (including officials changing and disabled toilet). The club has an aspiration to reconfigure the existing clubhouse interior to move the kitchen away from the bar area. NORWOOD HALL Standard 1 A Derelict LBE pay & 6 Few Demand limited by lack of usable pavilion. GROUNDS 2 Y wood play hires Interest from Southall FC for user agreement pavilion linked to proposal for pavilion and 60x40m 3G OLD ACTONIANS Good 1 A Poor LBE lease 7 At Old Actonians FC Girls (5 teams); Mini soccer SPORTS GROUND, Standard 1 M Actonians cap. U7-U10 (Saturday am); 2 Adult teams (Sunday GUNNERSBURY DRIVE am); U16 (Sat pm) ; U12/U14 play in Southall. Girls first team play at North Greenford Utd (Berkeley Field Stadium). 2-3 matches per pitch each week. Some issues with foxes damaging the pitch surface. The changing pavilion is old, poorly laid out and structurally unsound. The club are fund raising to replace the existing changing block with modern changing facilities, a new bar, sports hall, within the existing footprint. This would allow the existing bar/kitchen building to be demolished with space for additional pitches. OLD ACTIONIANS Standard 1 A Good - new LBE lease 4 At Drainage issues at the far end of the site closest SPORTS GROUND, Standard 1 Y 2013. Old cap. to the train tracks caused by compaction from BODDINGTON Nursery Actonians heavy plant on site for adjacent rail works. GARDENS weekdays Boundary fence to tracks too low. Club in discussions with Council regarding installing netting to prevent balls going over. OSTERLEY SPORTS Good 3 A Standard - Private 19 15 Brook House Boys; Heston Bombers; Heathrow GROUND Good 2 Y part owner lease Flyers; Kensington Dragons (3 teams); AFC www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 25
Page 152 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Site Pitch Rating No.* Ancillary Security of Cap. Est. RAG Assumptions/Comments and Quality access MES Use destroyed Osterley Isleworth; Duke Rangers; FC Deportivo Galicia Sports Club (2 teams); CB Hounslow (NLS teams); Kilburn; Southall Reserves. OSC has full time grounds staff. Plan to replace part of clubhouse 2016/17. PARK CLUB, ACTON Good 1 A Good - Hogarth 3 1 Old Vaughanians. Park Club proposal for floodlit minor leak Group - legal 3G MUGA on grass field used for soccer school to officials agreement (portable goals and cones) plus training for Old room Vaughanians PERIVALE PARK (3 A) NEW LBE pay & TEMPORARILY CLOSED TO P&P HIRES PENDING 2017/18 play COMPLETION OF NEW PAVILION FOR 2017/18 PITSHANGER PARK Standard 1 A Good - new LBE pay & 12 At Pitshanger FC (25 teams) play across this site (SCOTCH COMMON) Standard 2 Y 2015. play cap. and The Uni of West London site adjacent in Standard 2 M Community Argyle Road. Also a Soccer School based here. cafe, studio (Will to Win Pipe & Slit drainage installed in 2015 running to Foundation manage 3G) adjacent allotment site. Pitches come back into & SE funds use in 2016. LONDON BUNKA Standard 4 Y Standard SCHOOL 8 6 London Japanese Junior (LJJ) Frontiers (Juniors YOCHIEN SCHOOL and 1 senior) (ACTON) Poor linear pitch layout due to site configuration RECTORY PARK Standard 6 A Poor - LBE pay & 8 At London Eagles (12 teams u15-u6 Sun am) Standard 2 Y Portacabins play cap. Southall Park; Ying Wah FC. No showers Some drainage issues on the pitches closest to Distance to Northolt Golf Club. Basic changing facilities pitches portacabins without showers (located some distance from the football pitches) PROPOSAL FOR UPGRADE AS FOOTBALL HUB WITH 3G & ASSET TRANSFER TO MIDDLESEX FA. LONDON EAGLES AND CELTIC FC MAIN CLUBS INTERESTED IN HOME BASE AT SITE. SHAMROCK SPORTS Good 2 A Good - Network Rail 16 14 Greenford Celtic FC (11 juniors and senior team) AND SOCIAL CLUB Good 1 Y children's lease to Willesdon Workingmen's Club; South Acton (HORN LANE ACTON) Good 1 M nursery Shamrock Plus Gaelic Football use. daytime SSC SSSC have full time grounds staff. Site is securely fenced to prevent unauthorised use. SSSC long term plan to upgrade the changing www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 26
Page 153 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Site Pitch Rating No.* Ancillary Security of Cap. Est. RAG Assumptions/Comments and Quality access MES Use facilities and install a 3G pitch to allow all teams that currently use the facility to train on site. SHEPHERDS BUSH Standard 1 M Standard - LBE lease to 4 4 SB United FC (2 teams); Foxes FC CRICKET CLUB cricket SBCC Changing rooms need replacing in medium term. pavilion SOUTHFIELDS Poor 1 A Poor - 4 LBE pay & 1 1 SB United FC RECREATION Poor 1 Y small play 1 2 Foxes FC - interested in relocating to better GROUND changing quality pitches at Gunnersbury Park Sports Hub rooms when completed UNIVERSITY OF WEST Good 1 A Standard - University 19 17 Pitshanger (Youth) FC: U18 train Sat am; play LONDON (former Good 1Y pitch side own and Sunday am (1 in 3 weeks); U17A train Sat am; Thames Valley Uni) Good 2 M changing lease to play Sunday (1 in 2 weeks); U17B play Sunday SPORTS GROUND pavilion Pitshanger am (1 in 3 weeks); Pitshanger Dynamo FC (ARGYLE ROAD) FC (Middlesex League home games) The site has a perimeter fence and gate access controlled by the university and club PITSHANGER NEED FLOODLIGHTS AT SITE OR RELOCATION TO SECURE PROMOTION IN NLS. TRAILFINDERS Good 1 A Good Trailfinders 1 - 1 - University of West London teams - Weds pm SPORTS CLUB over- RFC hire to foot Weds Pitch is marked out across two rugby pitches so laid Uni of WL ball At not usable at weekends. cap. TSC has full time ground staff. WASPS FC (TWYFORD Standard 1 A Good Wasps FC / 2 2 Pitch is used only by two local schools (Twyford SCHOOL) SCHOOL At and St Vincents) for PE lessons and school cap. games. Maintained by full time grounds staff on the site. Poor drainage on the pitch and reported as used by schools to its playing capacity. WEST EALING BOWLS Poor 1 Y Poor LBE lease 5 4 Junior Bees FC based in Hounslow (8 teams u6- CLUB Poor 2M WEBC who u16) plus two disabled teams. Up to 12 teams sublet play at the site on a Sunday and train on a Saturday. U14 and U16 train at Goals Gillette Corner (Osterley) on Wed eve. Ground is maintained by two volunteers and is sub-let on a yearly basis from Ealing bowls club who hold head lease with LBE. Poorly draining site with www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 27
Page 154 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Site Pitch Rating No.* Ancillary Security of Cap. Est. RAG Assumptions/Comments and Quality access MES Use inadequate pavilion. WILLIAM PERKIN Standard 1 A NEW - SCHOOL 2 Community use from 16/17 using new pavilion. HIGH SCHOOL 2016/17 Grass pitch currently part of construction site.
* A = Adult/Senior; Y = Youth (either 9v9 or 11v11); M = Mini (either 7v7 or 5v5)
Conclusions - grass pitches
Whilst a number of playing field sites in the borough are being played to capacity, these are all sites that are the home ground for youth/mini soccer football clubs with multiple teams. Most of these sites are outside the Council's direct control as they are already leased to a community football club - e.g. Pitshanger Park (Pitshanger FC), Berkeley Fields (North Greenford FC), Lord Halsbury Playing Field (Larkspur Rovers), Fox Reservoir Playing Fields (Acton Whistlers) and Old Actonians (Gunnersbury Drive and Boddington Gardens).
Of the sites in the Council's direct control, booking records show that most pay and play pitches have some spare capacity for adult football. A notable exception is North Acton Playing Fields where demand remains high reflecting the reasonable quality of the pitches and the provision of new pavilion facilities. Southfields Recreation Ground pitches are also overplayed. However, it would seem this is due to the poor quality of the pitches at this site. At Southfields Recreation Ground and at the other two sites with poor quality pitches (notably Gurnell Leisure Centre), relocation of organised football use would seem more cost effective than investing the substantial sums required to enhance the pitch quality (and ancillary facilities where necessary) at these sites. Options should be explored with the user clubs in the short to medium term to relocate either to one of the football sites temporarily closed pending enhancement or to one of the sites where new provision is proposed (e.g. Gunnersbury Park, William Perkin School).
In relation to the current picture of provision, given the grass pitches coming back into the supply as a result of the committed projects at Gunnersbury Park, Perivale Park and King George's Playing Field there would seem to be sufficient provision to meet demand for adult football.
The priority for the strategy will therefore be to address the unmet demand of the youth football clubs. Given the FA strategic drive towards transfer of junior and youth league play and training on to 3G pitches, the solution will be seeking to ensure greater affordable access to sustainable 3G pitches that meet the FA standard requirements to accommodate affiliated youth league play. This should be achievable at all the proposed new 3G floodlit pitch sites as a lot of work has been done by Ealing Council and Middlesex FA to ensure that a strategic approach to allocating clubs to new facilities results in local clubs with a need for 3G pitch access are accommodated. Pitch usage programmes have been submitted as part of funding bids which reflect this proposed usage by local clubs and these clubs have been kept informed of progress and future pitch hire prices at an early stage.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 28
Page 155 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Artificial Grass Pitch Sites
Known existing use of AGPs by site in Ealing is summarised in the table below.
Figure 13: AGPs - Situation at Individual Sites
AGP Surface & Age & Ancillary Charges Capacity Estimated Use RAG Comments Size Quality facilities (Pk Hrs/wk) 1. Sites with 3G playing surfaces ELTHORNE SPORTS 3G 2010 None £46.50/hr 34 At capacity Hanwell Town FC teams training CENTRE (SLM) Small Standard Informal use 33x17 School use for PE and informal games. Some holes appearing in surface and issue of unauthorised use. FEATHERSTONE Short pile 2004 Standard £96/hr 10 At capacity Main weekend use hockey. Some hires SPORTS CENTRE 3G (2011 (school) discount on weekday evenings for football - half (SOUTHALL) 98x61 surface) for block pitch £60/hr, quarter pitch £42/hr with Standard bookings discounts for block bookings LORD HALSBURY 3G 2013 Good Larkspur 34 At capacity Larkspur Rovers Youth FC- 22 training PLAYING FIELD Medium Good (FF & SE Rovers - sessions a week (9v9 or funded) no rates Paddington Elite 1 session/week 2x7v7) provided Northolt Saints NORTHOLT HIGH 3G 2002 NEW 2016 To be 34 Re-opened in FF Funded upgrade re-opened 2016 SPORTS CENTRE Youth (2016 agreed 2016 Previous users: Northolt Eagles, 11v11 surface) Northalla Tigers, Pinner Utd, Ruislip size Town. WILL TO WIN 3G 2013 Small - £55/hr p 34 Only 1-2 Small size of pitches limit demand from PITSHANGER PARK 30x18 Standard shared £45/hr op bookings per club teams for training tennis -10% 6+ evening SPIKES BRIDGE 3G 2014 Good No rates 32 - Close to London Tigers - home pitch for 7 teams PARK Full Standard provided planning capacity in for matches and training linking to consent to season - some London Tigers, Southall FC 1st 2130 w/end slots (semipro). Pitshanger Dynamo 1 training/week. Some minor issues - e.g. stones from access path taken onto pitch on footwear and low fence causing unauthorised use.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 29
Page 156 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
AGP Surface & Age & Ancillary Charges Capacity Estimated Use RAG Comments Size Quality facilities (Pk Hrs/wk) SWIFT ROAD 3G 2009 Good No rates 34 Close to Old Actonians ladies, Southall Youth, OUTDOOR SPORTS Youth 9v9 Standard provided capacity in Challenger Youth, Hanwell Chargers CENTRE (GLL) size season - some Root damage issue and low fence w/end slots leading to unauthorised use TRAILFINDERS 3G rugby 2001 Good No rates 34 Very limited University of West London play on main SPORTS CLUB Full + (2014 provided availability of pitch (train at Brentford Goals). 5v5 (4 x surface) 34 main pitch - tennis ct) rugby use Spare capacity on MUGA pitch WILLIAM PERKIN 3G NEW IN NEW IN To be 34 Opening in North Greenford Utd interest in training HIGH SCHOOL Full 2016 2016 agreed 2016/17 here when pitch opens. WILL TO WIN 3G x 2 2010 Small - £60/hr p 34 Spare slots Spartans Youth, AEW Youth, Actonians LAMMAS PARK 33x18 Standard shared £40/hr op Junior Tournaments (£10/player) tennis -10% 6+ Walking Football (£4/hr session) Surface lifting in places. NORTH ACTON 3G 2015 Good - £55/hr p 34 At capacity Converted by club - former grass tennis PLAYING FIELD 5v5 Good meeting £45/hr op London Japanese children focus - close Football Samurai room to London Bunka Yochien School Academy (FSA) Harrow Youth League fixtures of FSA Saturday and Sunday in season Age groups squad training every weekday evening. Parents football Saturday in summer FSA in discussions with Council concerning aspiration to expand size of pitch to 60x40 to increase capacity for league play.
AGP Surface & Age & Ancillary Charges Capacity Estimated Use RAG Comments Size Quality facilities (Pk Hrs/wk) 2. Sites with sand based or filled playing surfaces ALEC REED Sand 2006 Standard £114/hr 16 15 - a few Hockey - 1.5 hrs/wk (training) and 2.0 ACADEMY SPORTS Full Standard (school) (£103.50 slots available hrs/every 2 weeks (home match) CENTRE 100x60 block) in season London Eagles FC train (11 session/wk) incl lights Southall FC 1/wk. Ageing surface. Patch repairs. Goals/nets need replacing. www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 30
Page 157 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
BRENTSIDE HIGH Sand 2003 Standard £80/hr 16 14 Celtic SCHOOL (KAJIMA) Full Standard (school) full pitch AGC U16 1/week 124x82 Hanwell Town FC teams training All Stars Soccer & Multi Sport courses - Saturday mornings Pitch surface needs replacing soon OLD ACTONIANS Sand 2007 - Good Actonians 34 At capacity Old Actonians Ladies FC U12-U16 SPORTS GROUND Full Standard - no rates training Monday evening (BODDINGTON Club use provided Adults training Thursday evening GARDENS) since Reported full. 2013
The FA Strategy & 3G Pitches
The FA Chairman's England Commission Report (Oct 2014) highlighted that grassroots facilities in English football are inferior to those found in other European Countries. This is especially true in terms of the number of artificial grass pitches identified as crucial in technical skills development. The Commission's objectives are to: o Reduce football’s reliance on local authority subsidies o Build significantly more AGPs o Build sustainable models to make this change happen.
The report recommends a number of 'Parklife' football hubs centred on new, high quality accessible AGPs that, in the first instance, are to be built in England’s major cities. Specifically the report highlights the following projected outcomes in relation to 3G AGPs:
By 2020 there will be: 1. A 50% increase in the total number of full size, publicly accessible 3G AGPs in England overall, to over 1000. 2. Over 50% of all mini soccer and youth football matches (about 3,750 per week) being played on the best quality AGPs.
Through accommodating more football on 3G pitches and reducing the reliance of community clubs on lower quality park pitches and single pitch sites, the FA aims to improve the quality of coaching and player development, support the sustainability of community football clubs and grow participation. The FA’s long-term ambition is to provide every affiliated team in England the opportunity to train once per week on a floodlit 3G surface, together with priority access for every Charter Standard Community Club through a partnership agreement.
The existing supply of AGPs in Ealing borough is low relative to most London boroughs. In part, this is due largely to the fact there are no multi pitch commercial soccer sites located in the borough (although there are several in neighbouring boroughs that are used by Ealing based clubs as training www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 31
Page 158 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
sites). In contrast, neighbouring Hounslow borough has three soccer centres within its boundary. Whilst these commercial facilities are used in the main for informal games and adult 5 and 6 a side leagues, they do accommodate some midweek training for FA affiliated club teams. With one full size (Spikes Bridge) and three 9 v 9 (Lord Halsbury, Swift Road and Northolt High School) compliant 3G pitches in the borough it is clear that more FA compliant AGPs are required in Ealing (as in most London boroughs) if the FA is to achieve its objectives. The Gunnersbury Park joint project with LB Hounslow to be implemented in 2016/17 will be one of the first of the new 'Parklife' city football hubs to be built in the country.
FA Standards Approach to 3G AGP Assessments of Need
The FA has developed a carrying capacity standard for full size football (3G surface) floodlit AGPs. Based on national research into the patterns of AGP usage and the number of training slots available per pitch type per hour (from 5pm-10pm Monday to Friday and 9am-5pm Saturday & Sundays), the FA estimates a full size AGP provides 42 community club team training/game slots a week, plus other types of use (i.e. pay and play and commercial leagues). This level of club team use equates to approximately 38% of the 3G pitch capacity during these times. Figure 14 below shows the current provision including the re-surfaced pitch at Northolt High School (reopened March 2016) and the new larger pitch at William Perkin High School (due to re-open in 2016/17) and deficiency in Ealing borough based on application of this standard.
Figure 14: Floodlit Accessible 3G AGP Provision in Ealing borough and FA Standard
Full Size Pro 60x40m or Smaller than Commercial Total team Affiliated Additional No. Full Pitches Club larger 60x40m 5v5 sites training teams training Size Pitches Pitches slots slots Pitches (not full) required required Current 2 - Spike's Bridge 0 3 - Lord Halsbury; 4 - Lammas Park (2); 0 supply*: Park; William Swift Road Pitshanger Park; Perkin High Outdoor Sports Elthorne Sports School (from Centre; Northolt Centre 2016) High School Team 84 0 84 52 0 220 282 act. 62 1.5 capacity 2015/16 Proposed 5 - current plus 1 - 3 - no change 4 - no change 0 supply** Gunnersbury (1); Wrn Rectory Park (2) Farm Team 210 0 84 52 0 346 412 est. 66 1.5 capacity 2031*** * The 3G pitches in the borough at Trailfinders (rugby 3G) and Featherstone School (short pile 3G) are excluded as they currently offer very limited access for club football ** Includes current advanced projects with community football as primary sports use (see Figure 5). *** Estimate of teams by 2031 assumes an additional 130 teams resulting from population growth and the self-reported team growth plans of existing clubs in consultation (see Figure 10 and Figure 15) www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 32
Page 159 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Based on the FA standard, the conclusion is that between one and two (1.5) further full-size accessible floodlit 3G artificial grass pitches are required based on current demand.
The Gunnersbury Park Sports Hub ('Parklife') project will provide the equivalent of one 3G pitch for Ealing teams (two 3Gs are proposed of which one will be part of LB Hounslow supply and the other allocated to LB Ealing's pitch supply). This project will address the current demand for more team training slots for Ealing based football clubs in the Acton area (e.g. Old Actonians) as well as unmet and latent demand in this part of the borough for quality facilities for less formal forms of community football. The other current Parklife project with Middlesex FA at Rectory Park (which now includes funding for two 3G pitches) will address similar community and club needs in the Northolt area in the north west of Ealing borough (e.g. London Eagles).
In planning for the future, should the expressed team growth plans of the Ealing based clubs take place (i.e. an additional 94 teams) in addition to team generation from forecast population growth in the borough (i.e. an additional 36 teams), a further one to two (1.5) full size floodlit 3G pitches will be needed over the period of this strategy based on the FA standard of 42 teams per pitch (see Figure 14 above).
Sport England Facilities Planning Model Approach to AGP Assessments of Need
In March 2016, Sport England provided a summary analysis of Artificial Grass Pitch (AGP) provision in the borough using data on supply and demand for AGPs from Sport England’s National Facilities Audit Dataset as at January 2016. In considering demand, rather than the FA approach based on competitive teams, the FPM takes into account the size and profile of the borough population in relation to nationally researched football participation data by age and gender. The FPM supply data also uses different assumptions to the FA approach. The FPM includes full size sand based AGPs but excludes from the supply data small-sided pitches on the grounds that their size limits the type and amount of use they can offer. Those AGPs without floodlighting are also excluded as they have limited availability in the evening peak period.
The summary football FPM findings are: o There are 7 AGPs in Ealing that meet the Sport England FPM criteria for football (i.e. large floodlit sand and 3G pitches combined) – Alec Reed Academy, Brentside High School, Northolt High School, Spikes Bridge Park, Featherstone High School, Swift Road and Old Actonians (Boddington Gardens) o Satisfied demand is fairly high at 79%, although 67% of demand exported to other areas o Unmet demand is fairly low at 21% o Used capacity of the existing AGPs in the available hours in the peak period is high (100%)
Looking to the future, the FPM report states that the case for additional AGP provision needs to consider the following factors: o Whether the existing level of exports is acceptable o The contribution the small-sided sand based AGPs make to meeting demand o Changes to supply in neighbouring local authorities o Forecast population growth
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 33
Page 160 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
o The impact of the FA's strategy to: a) Move all football usage to 3G surfaces (as opposed to sand based surfaces, and b) Gradually shift general football usage for training and matches on 3G pitches (as opposed to grass pitches).
It should also be noted that the FPM takes no account of the growth plans of the clubs playing in the borough and, at a used capacity of 100%, it is apparent that the seven AGPs that meet the FPM supply criteria have no spare capacity at peak hours to allow for growth.
The FPM report concludes there is not enough combined (i.e. 3G and sand based) AGP capacity to meet existing football demand and the existing AGPs are at capacity with a fairly high level of exported demand. The overall finding of the FPM is a need for two additional AGPs in Ealing to meet unmet football demand from Ealing borough residents. This finding is supported by the FA standard based analysis above and endorsed by the FA and Ealing Council through the consultation (check and challenge) process.
Conclusions - football AGPs
Taking into account the findings of the club consultation, analysis of how the existing AGPs (full size and small sided) are used, the FA team training standard for 3G pitches and the Facilities Planning Model (FPM) data, it is apparent there is a need to secure more FA compliant floodlit 3G pitches (with agreed programmes of use) on managed, multi-sport sites with good quality changing and social facilities. This will have the benefit of reducing reliance on open access park grass pitches where it is difficult to maintain quality and sustain ancillary facilities. It will also reduce the reliance on travel to facilities in neighbouring authorities.
To meet current informal demand from Ealing residents and formal demand from Ealing based clubs, there is a need for one to two additional accessible floodlit full sized 3G pitches.
The proposed new pitch to be included in Ealing's supply at the Gunnersbury Park Sports Hub will go a considerable way to addressing this current need in the south east side of the borough.
The north-west area around Northolt is currently deficient in football 3G pitches. However, this deficiency has been addressed with the re-opening of the newly resurfaced AGP at Northolt High School (this pitch is included in the supply assumptions above) and through delivery of the funded plans for two new full size 3G pitches and ancillary facilities in Rectory Park in partnership with Middlesex FA.
With delivery of the Gunnersbury Park and Rectory Park projects, the current priority need for football 3Gs in Ealing borough will be addressed.
Over the period of the strategy to 2031, to address team generation from forecast population growth (up to 37 teams), expressed demand from clubs for team growth (up to 94 teams), and to deliver on the FA's strategy to transfer more affiliated competitive football to 3G surfaces, up to two more 3G pitches may be required. The actual number required will depend on whether new supply is provided in neighbour boroughs close to the Ealing boundary and the actual team growth that takes place as a result of club development and population change.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 34
Page 161 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
The FA's position is to wait and see on the need for further 3G FTPs in Ealing Borough once the Rectory Park and Gunnersbury Park projects are fully implemented and to periodically review the need through the strategy review process. The needs case for additional 3G FTP provision in the borough will need to take into account progress of the major housing growth/regeneration projects that will impact on demand (e.g. North Acton / Park Royal and Old Oak Common including the potential for new 3G FTP supply in place of the existing sand pitch at Linford Christie Sports Centre). Also of particular relevance to the future needs case will be the outcome of Hounslow Council's feasibility work at Duke's Meadow in Chiswick which the FA has identified as an opportunity site for complementary provision to the Gunnersbury Park Parklife project due to its close proximity and high demand in this part of London.
The Barclays Bank Sports Ground, currently closed, is a potential opportunity site relating to future population growth in the Park Royal Opportunity Area and also serving unmet demand in south Brent. However, the opportunity for future 3G FTP provision with community access on this site will need to take into account the need for additional school places in this part of the borough and balanced against the needs of the other playing pitch sports in the borough, particularly hockey for which 3G playing surfaces are no longer suitable.
Similarly, the opportunities for community football relating to school expansion proposals at Twyford High School need to be balanced against the priority needs of community rugby in this location, in particular Wasps FC.
The former Eversheds Sports Ground in Boston Manor is a further site included in current plans for school place expansion. The grass pitches at this site have been in regular recent use for community youth football (by FC Real) and have also been the subject of investment in drainage improvements by the Football Foundation. Should the master plan for on this site to accommodate school expansion impact on the future availability of these pitches, community access to a 3G FTP on the site will need to be considered similar to other secondary school sites in the borough.
5. The current and future pictures of provision for football (Step 5)
Current
The overall supply of grass pitches in Ealing largely meets current demand for traditional forms of adult league football. The reinstatement of grass pitches to the borough's pay and play supply - at Gunnersbury Park, Perivale Park and King George's Playing Field - will be sufficient to address the current need for adult grass pitches in the borough.
However, there is an evident shortage of youth pitches within the borough and the survey returns from clubs indicate substantial unmet demand, with plans to increase by 47 youth teams (boys and girls) in the next three years. Youth football team growth on this scale will necessitate more access to suitable pitches, particularly on Saturday and Sunday mornings.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 35
Page 162 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
While some of this demand will be accommodated particularly among the older youth age groups on adult pitches, more accessible and affordable 3G provision suitable for FA affiliated league play at weekends is needed. The new 3G pitch coming into the Ealing borough supply at the Gunnersbury Park Parklife Sports Hub will contribute capacity for both adult and youth football for residents and teams in the south east of the borough.
The current under-supply of football AGP capacity in the north west side of the borough will be addressed by the newly refurbished 3G pitch at Northolt High School and implementation of the Parklife project at Rectory Park in partnership with Middlesex FA.
In terms of demand from Ealing residents to play forms of football outside the traditional club and league structure, although the borough has substantially fewer small sided 3G pitches than neighbouring Hounslow, it offers a good level of supply of marked open access pitches in the boroughs parks and open spaces that can be accessed at peak weekend times at no cost. This supply will be enhanced in an area of need with the implementation of proposals to re-open Berrymede Open Space on the South Acton Estate.
Future
Potential effect of population change - Future population growth figures have been calculated for the period of this strategy against the primary age groups for football participation. The table below shows the forecast population change.
Figure 15: Population projections and football team generation rates
Age Group No. football Current Future Current Team Pop change in Potential change in teams 2015 population in population in Generation Rate age group football team no's age group (MYE age group – 2014) (2031) Adult male 68 80,859 93,695 1,189 13,106 +11 Adult female 4 77,048 82,135 19,262 5,087 +0.3 Youth boys 111 7,853 9,394 71 1,541 +22 Youth girls 8 7,395 8,711 924 1,316 +1.4 Mini soccer 95 18,289 18,672 193 383 +2 Sources: Sources: LBE Strategic Planning Team. Current Population from ONS (2014 Mid-Year Estimate); Projections derived from GLA 2014 Round Populations Projections.
By 2031, assuming current football participation and team generation rates and the forecast population growth takes place, there will be approximately 11 more regular adult teams, 23 more youth teams and 2 more mini soccer teams in the borough requiring access to match pitches and practice facilities.
With regards to women and girl's football, because current team generation rates are at a very low level, the projections show negligible growth resulting from population change. It is to be hoped and expected that team growth for women and girls will take place through clubs implementing their development plans (with support from the County FA) as, at the current low levels of participation, there is a very high level of latent demand. www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 36
Page 163 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Increasing the capacity of locally accessible 3G AGPs should assist this football development aim and has been specifically mentioned by clubs with women and girl’s teams.
It is apparent from the figures above that future growth in demand as a result of current forecasts for population change is a major issue for pitch supply in Ealing. Demand generated by population growth in the borough is likely to exacerbate unmet and latent demand expressed in the growth plans of the existing community clubs.
Potential effect of demand trends (how pitch sports are played) – Among adults, national trends show a reduction in interest in taking part in sports that demand a commitment to regular attendance, in favour of a more casual involvement. This national picture is not reflected locally in Ealing where recently club affiliation numbers have remained stable from information provided by the FA.
At the same time, demand for informal forms of football is growing. Locally in Ealing, this is seen by the growth in bookings of the small sided 5v5 3G AGPs (e.g. at Lammas Park and Elthorne Sports Centre) for regular weekly games between groups of friends or work mates.
Local football clubs report in the survey returns that mini soccer and younger youth age groups continue to show a growth trend but that this growth is hard to sustain through the older youth age groups from age 15yrs when exams and other interests tend to impact.
Particular sites where demand is likely to increase or decrease and potential effect - The following sites risk experiencing decreases in demand for league football due to quality issues. The potential effect is to place additional demand on better quality pitches elsewhere and to increase incidence of displaced demand out of the borough.
Figure 16: Risk Sites Site/Club Use Issues - key factors Possible Solutions West Ealing Bowls Club Junior Bees (Hounslow Poor quality of pitches and lack of suitable o Consider feasibility of increasing based) pavilion facility capacity by enhancing pitch quality and new pavilion o Consider GM Equipment Bank option to support clubs to improve pitch quality o Relocation of use to alternative sites with enhanced or new provision Southfield Recreation SB United Poor quality of pitches and high demand for o Consider feasibility of increasing Ground, Acton Foxes FC mini soccer and youth football and informal capacity by enhancing pitch quality play as close to Acton Town Centre. Little o Consider GM Equipment Bank option to Foxes soccer school and linked Foxes FC mini support clubs to improve pitch quality and youth teams growing across several sites o Allocation of match play slots at new 3G in West London and pitches at Gunnersbury Park (close by to west)
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 37
Page 164 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Site/Club Use Issues - key factors Possible Solutions Gurnell Leisure Centre Paddington Elite FC Lower pitch near river often unplayable - o Consider feasibility of increasing Harrow FC need to take out of use for formal hired use capacity by enhancing pitch quality and return to informal use o Allocation of slots for match play at new 3G and pitch at William Perkin High School
The table below identifies key football sites where demand is likely to increase or has greatest potential to support increased demand. These sites are identified as where community access is secured and each site meets at least one of the following criteria: Only pitch supply available for community football in the area A multi pitch site or potential for such Already accommodates a high level of community football activity The club based at the site or using the site regularly has identified growth plans The site has potential to accommodate significantly more match equivalent sessions with appropriate enhancement.
An increase in demand will place pressure on pitch maintenance regimes to maintain quality and will support the case for enhanced pitch quality and/or new floodlit 3G pitches to increase capacity at some of these sites.
Figure 17: Key Sites
Site Main Club Users Issues - key factors Possible Solutions Brentham Sports Brentham The club seeks additional space to Accommodate growth on proposed new accommodate growing colts section. pitches Currently most training is off-site at St Augustine's Priory School sand AGP. Ealing Central Sports Ground Various - Hanwell United; There are issues with pitch drainage at Pitch enhancement works Northolt Saints S&S; AFC this site. Pitch run offs in one corner Hanwell; Pitshanger FC; near children's play area are under-size Bentham Colts; St Pauls FC; Abbey FC Berkeley Fields North Greenford United A section of the playing field furthest Consider options for extending pitches, from NGUFC is possible overspill space improving site security and reviewing for junior football pitches but club charges with NGUFC and TCG consider season hire too expensive. Floodlights need attention (14yrs old). Club grant application for floodlight renewal Site boundary fence needs attention. Rectory Park London Eagles Poor pavilion - no showers, too far Parklife project with Middlesex FA for pitch www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 38
Page 165 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Site Main Club Users Issues - key factors Possible Solutions FC Celtic from pitches works, 3G (x2) and Pavilion Gunnersbury Park Various - Bees United, CS Pitches poor quality, changing room Gunnersbury Park Parklife Sports Hub Rangers, Hanwell FC etc derelict project (programmed to start 2016/17) Warren Farm Sports Ground - Closed QPR proposal Lord Halsbury Playing Field Larkspur Rovers Pitch drainage. At capacity Pitch improvement works. New pitch on site Eversheds FC Real Narrow site, no capacity for growth School expansion project. Community use of 3G if grass pitches impacted. Pitshanger Park/Uni Pitshanger FC Club need floodlit pitch to progress in Consider feasibility with University of West Westminster NLS London Hanwell Town/ Reynolds Hanwell Town FC Drainage issues as close to river and Consider feasibility of pitch and pavilion Fields high water table. Changing pavilion has enhancement projects limitations. Club has long term aspiration to replace with larger facility
Osterley Sports Club FC Assyria; Kensington Clubhouse limitations Plan to replace part of clubhouse 2016/17. Dragons Old Actonians Poor pavilion. New pavilion Pitches played to capacity. Allocation of slots at new 3G and pitches at Displacement of girls team. Gunnersbury Park (adjacent) North Acton Playing Field Various - Football Samurai At capacity. Unofficial play Expand user agreement with FSA and Academy; Armenian Youth consider option to extend 3G MUGA to Association; Abbey FC; Old 60x40m Danes; Brentham Colts; North Acton FC
Potential effect of changes in supply – The main recent changes in supply that are still to have an impact on the supply/demand balance for football in Ealing are the refurbishment of the Northolt High School 3G AGP, provision of a full size 3G and pavilion at William Perkin High School, and the provision of new changing pavilions in Perivale Park and King George's Playing Field.
The proposed change in the short term that is likely to have the greatest impact on football supply/demand balance in the borough is the development of the Gunnersbury Park Parklife Sports Hub due to commence in 2016/17. The provision of a further 3G pitch and reinstatement of 4.5 grass pitches to Ealing borough's pitch supply has the potential to make a significant contribution to meeting demand for team training and games for teams based in the south of the borough. However, the booking policies and procedures adopted will need to be framed appropriately to ensure Ealing based teams and clubs secure an equitable share of the use of the new facilities. Without priority booking rights and/or differential changing for Ealing based clubs, the location and accessibility of the Park from most parts of Central West London is likely to result in substantial imported demand from outside the borough. www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 39
Page 166 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
The advanced proposals at Rectory Park in Northolt with Middlesex FA for improved grass pitches, two new 3G pitches and changing facilities will also go a considerable way to addressing the deficiency in provision for league youth football and mini-soccer in particular in the north west of the borough.
The proposals of QPR Holdings for purchase and reinstatement of the closed Warren Farm Sports Ground as a training ground and academy site for its professional club with community access to grass pitches secured under terms of an agreement with the Council will also increase the available supply of good quality grass pitches in the Southall area in the south west of the borough and help to address future demand for growth of youth football in particular.
Finally, the school expansion projects proposed for sites at Twyford High School and at the former Barclays Bank and Eversheds company sports grounds each offer some potential to enhance community provision for playing pitch sports in the central part of the borough, subject to site master planning and feasibility. Of these, the latter has the greatest potential for football given its recent community club use (by FC Real) and Football Foundation investment in pitch improvement works.
5. Key findings and issues for football (Step 6)
Figure 17: Football key findings and issues
Football The main characteristics of the There has been significant investment in facilities for football in Ealing since the last facility review in 2010, current supply of and demand for with the addition of 3G pitches at Lord Halsbury Playing Field, William Perkin High School (due to open summer provision 2016) and Spikes Bridge Park, a new changing pavilion at North Acton Playing Fields and enhancement projects on site at Northolt High School (AGP refurbishment), Perivale Park (new pavilion for 2016/17 season) and King George's Playing Field (use of new pavilion on adjacent Durdans Park cricket ground).
99 grass pitches are identified as available for community football across Ealing, on 32 operational playing pitch sites. This compares to 142 identified in 2010 as part of the facility strategy. Although this appears to show a significant decrease, this is not the case. The 2010 audit included 30 pitches on school sites (11 adult, and 19 youth or mini soccer pitches) that have poor potential for community use due either to their small size or lack of changing and toilet facilities that can be accessed separately from the school buildings. In addition, the last audit included 16 pitches at Warren Farm Sports Ground. This site is currently out of use but there are advanced proposals for its reinstatement to include an element of access for community football clubs.
There is slightly less than one adult pitch for every FA/AFA registered team. By contrast, there are more than three youth teams for every available youth pitch (11v11 or 9v9). The picture is similar for mini soccer (7v7 or 5v5) with over four teams per pitch.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 40
Page 167 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
Is there enough accessible and NO. Although the investments recently completed or committed and on site will reduce the deficiency, there secured community use provision remains insufficient accessible and secured football facilities to meet the current demand of football clubs and to meet current demand? teams based in the borough.
Ealing borough is home to several large Charter Standard football clubs with large and growing numbers of mini soccer and youth football teams. Several clubs have teams that are displaced playing home fixtures and/or training on pitches in neighbour boroughs.
To meet the shortfall in supply will require delivery of the major plans currently in development for provision of 3G and grass pitches at Gunnersbury Park and Rectory Park and for community access to reinstated grass pitches at Warren Farm Sports Ground in Southall. In the event that one or more of these projects (included in the Action Plan at the conclusion of this PPS) fail to come forward, the needs case should be reassessed as part of the PPS update and review process.
Is the provision that is accessible of sufficient quality and YES. Most of the grass pitches are of standard or good quality, and most of the FTPs are good quality, many appropriately maintained? with relatively newly laid playing surfaces. However, poor natural drainage and compaction of the ground are issues at several of the grass football pitch sites in Ealing that are rated as either poor or standard, thereby limiting the playing capacity of these pitches. These are common issues in this part of London with heavy London Clay soil. To address this on a large scale would require significant additional investment for maintenance works at the frequencies required to effectively aerate and de-compact the playing surface.
Several of the football pitches accessible to the community in the borough have been assessed as being of poor quality. The Council pitches at Southfields Recreation Ground drain poorly as do the pitches at Gurnell Leisure Centre. Investment in improving these pitches is unlikely to be cost effective. To minimise the impact of loss of these pitches for formal football use, opportunities should continue to be explored with the clubs using these pitches to relocate home games and training to alternative sites with unused grass pitch capacity or to a FTP so as to minimise the impact. In the case of Southfield Rec, the main club user (Foxes YFC) has expressed interest in relocating to the new Parklife facilities in Gunnersbury Park when these become available for hire while at Gurnell (LNER YFC a Brent based club) plan to move to the new dual use sports hub at The William Perkin School.
All of the football pitches rated as good are located on grounds that are closed to the general public for pay and play use and where ground staff with sports turf expertise are employed/contracted, or the clubs have appropriately skilled volunteer members.
Ancillary provision (changing and social facilities) on Council owned sites is improving with an improved
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 41
Page 168 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
pavilion at North Acton Playing Fields and committed investment in new pavilions in 2016 in Perivale Park and Durdans Park and serving football use of the King George's Playing Field.
However, there remain a number of sites where new or upgraded pavilions are required as a priority. These include Old Actonians Sports Ground, Gunnersbury Park and Rectory Parks. The latter two will be addressed by facility developments at these key sites provided they procede as proposed by a range of partners including the FA and Football Foundation. The feasibility including costs and sources of funding for pavilion enhancements at Old Actonians has yet to be established.
What are the main characteristics Future demand for football facilities is likely to grow substantially to 2031 increasing pressure on the existing of the future supply and demand and planned FTPs and grass youth and mini soccer pitches, many of which are already played at capacity. By for provision? 2031, assuming current football participation and team generation rates and the forecast population growth, there will be 11 more adult teams and 25 more junior teams requiring access to match pitches and practice facilities.
The growth plans of the borough based football clubs will also place further pressure on pitch supply. Over half (51%) of the clubs who responded to the survey have self-reported plans for new teams in the next few seasons. Club survey responses, indicate unmet demand for 12 senior teams which includes 7 women’s teams, 47 youth teams (16 girls) and 35 mini soccer teams. Nearly all of these clubs have identified a need for an increase in affordable and accessible FTP capacity within the borough to support this growth. However, conversion of this perceived unmet demand into new teams depends on these clubs engaging sufficient volunteer team managers and coaches as well as suitable pitches to play and train on.
As stated above, the Council and its partners have current advanced proposals for enhanced and new pitches which will increase supply for football at Gunnersbury Park (enhanced grass & 2 FTPs), Rectory Park (enhanced grass & 2 FTPs) and (with QPR FC) at the former Warren Farm Sports Ground in Southall. These proposals are in addition to committed and funded projects currently on site at Perivale Park (grass) and Durdans Park/King George's Playing Field (grass) and first time community access to grass pitches at Norwood Hall playing fields and a new full size pitch at William Perkin High School (FTP). Should this new supply be delivered in its entirety, current unmet demand will be addressed with a measure of spare capacity.
Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision NO. Over the period of the strategy to 2031, to address team generation from forecast population growth (up to meet future demand? to 36 teams), expressed demand from clubs for team growth (up to 89 teams), and to deliver on the FA's strategy to transfer more affiliated competitive football to 3G surfaces, between one and two more FTPs may be required.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 42
Page 169 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix B - FOOTBALL Assessment of Needs
The FA's position is to wait and see on the need for further 3G FTPs in Ealing Borough once the Rectory Park and Gunnersbury Park projects are fully implemented and the William Perkin School FTP has been operational for a while. The needs case for further FTP provision in Ealing should be subject to periodic reassessment through the strategy review process and take into account progress of the major housing growth/regeneration projects that will impact on demand (e.g. North Acton / Park Royal and Old Oak Common including the potential for new 3G FTP supply in place of the existing sand pitch at Linford Christie Sports Centre).
Also of particular relevance to the future needs case will be the outcome of Hounslow Council's feasibility work at Duke's Meadow in Chiswick which the FA has identified as an opportunity site for complementary provision to the Gunnersbury Park Parklife project due to its close proximity and particularly high demand for youth football and minisoccer in this part of London.
Secondary school expansions in the central/east parts of the borough at Twyford Sports Ground and two former company sports grounds (Barclays and Eversheds) may also present opportunities to secure community out-of-hours access to school playing pitches to meet future demand. Of these, the Eversheds site would appear to offer the best potential for football subject to a site master plan and detailed feasibility.
What is the overall quality level? In total, 60% of the grass pitch stock in Ealing is assessed as either 'Standard' (49%) or 'Poor' (11%) in many cases due to overuse but also, in some cases, due to poor natural drainage and compaction of the ground both of which are common issues in this part of London with heavy London Clay soil type. These factors limit the playing capacity at a large number of sites. With a high proportion of the pitches being maintained by volunteer club members, there is a strong case for the Middlesex FA to provide banks of grounds maintenance equipment available for clubs to loan (and training in its use) at key strategic sites (e.g. Gunnersbury and/or Rectory Park).
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 43
Page 170 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
Appendix C: Hockey - Assessment of Needs (Stages B & C)
The findings of the assessment of supply of hockey facilities in the London Borough of Ealing are summarised in this section.
There are four hockey clubs currently playing in the borough who currently use three full size sand artificial grass pitches and two hybrid (sand and rubber crumb filled artificial grass) 3G pitches at sites within the borough. The two largest clubs playing in the borough – Ealing Hockey Club (focused on junior development) and PHC Chiswick Hockey Club (a successful men's and women's hockey club with a newly formed junior section) - have both contributed to the assessment via an online survey and account for approximately 90% of players at clubs playing in Ealing.
1. Hockey Supply (Step 2)
Hockey pitches in Ealing
Ealing has five artificial grass pitches (AGPs) currently available and used for community hockey of which four have playing surfaces compliant with England Hockey's 2016 policy on playing surfaces: o Alec Reed Academy, Northolt – A sand dressed floodlit AGP on a school site used mainly for Football. Ealing Lions Hockey Club (a single men's team club) train weekly and play a match approximately fortnightly. o Featherstone High School Sports Centre, Southall – A floodlit shortpile 3G AGP (underfilled with rubber crumb) on a school site used by Ramgarhia Hockey Club and British Airways Hockey Club (BAHC). The latter is displaced demand from BAHC's home base at Hartington in the London Borough of Hillingdon. As a consequence of England Hockey's revised policy (June 2016) regarding hockey play on 3G surfaces based on feedback from players, although the hockey playing characteristics of this AGP are reasonable, this pitch is no longer considered compliant for hockey use above introductory level of play. Following a period of transition, and provided suitable alternative venues can be identified and secured, these two clubs will need to secure alternative pitches for their home league games and training. o Old Actonians (Boddington Gardens) – A sand filled floodlit AGP that is reported as full by the main hockey user PHC Chiswick (a large hockey club now based at this site and formerly based at the Quinton Hogg Sports Ground in Hounslow). Although the predominant weekday evening use of this pitch is for football, there is substantial hockey usage especially on a Saturday by PHC Chiswick with excellent ancillary facilities available. Onsite parking can be an issue. This venue is also a hockey Junior Development Centre (JDC) and Junior Academy Centre (JAC) for the development of young players. Teams from the PHC Chiswick club also make extensive use of the sand filled AGP at the Linford Christie Sports Centre in White City for home matches. This pitch in Hammersmith & Fulham borough is the subject of a current proposal for conversion to a football 3G surface. o St Augustine’s Priory Girls School, Hangar Hill – This floodlit pitch is sand filled and used by Ealing Hockey Club as the main community club user. There are no changing or other ancillary facilities available at this pitch. A small number of football clubs also use this pitch for midweek evening training in season.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 1
Page 171 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
o St Benedict’s School, Perivale – A sand dressed AGP without floodlights used by the school for hockey, netball and tennis. This pitch is also used at weekends by Ealing Hockey Club for junior coaching. Although there is no current league hockey played on this pitch, as an England Hockey Category 2 facility, it is suitable for competition hockey and training.
There is a sixth site that is available for community use and potentially suitable for hockey use at Brentside High School This sand based pitch is larger than a standard hockey pitch at 124x82m, has a worn playing surface installed in 2003 and no hockey pitch markings or goals at present. The pitch is marked out and equipped as one large football pitch and over-marked across the pitch as three 7v7 football pitches. Club and group bookings are managed by Kajima Community.
There are also small sand based artificial grass pitches at Notting Hill & Ealing High School and at Ealing Trailfinders Sports Club Ground. Community use of these pitches is primarily for other sports (football and tennis) but they are a usable resource for informal games of hockey or hockey teaching/coaching if required.
Hockey Pitches in neighbouring boroughs
The main AGP site of relevance in neighbour boroughs of relevance to this strategy is the sand based AGP at the Linford Christie Sports Centre & Stadium in White City (LBHF). The PHC Chiswick Hockey Club continues to run some of its activity at this site, since relocating its home base some years ago from the Quinton Hogg Sports Ground in Hounslow. More recently the club has used the Ealing Council owned site leased to Old Actonians in Boddington Gardens in Acton; PHC Chiswick club now considers the Old Actonians (Boddington Gardens) site to be its home base. This club draws the majority of its junior membership from within Ealing having run funded activities to help develop a new junior section. As at most of the large London based clubs, PHC Chiswick's adult players travel more widely across central and west London and the White City location is convenient for some adults for training, particularly those working in Central London. The playing surface of the Linford Christie pitch is worn and, in consultation, the club rates the pitch as ‘poor’. Hammersmith & Fulham Council is considering options for the future of the sports facilities at this site to make the operation more sustainable. The feasibility plans include an option for conversion of the AGP to a football 3G surface. Should this option be selected, this will have substantial implications for the PHC Chiswick club in that a number of match and training slots will need to be relocated to alternative hockey pitches in west London.
There are also two large hockey clubs - Richmond Hockey Club and Barnes Hockey Club - both based relatively close to Acton in Chiswick in Hounslow borough. Both these clubs have wide appeal and are likely to include Ealing residents within their memberships. Generally, hockey players (and parents of junior players) are prepared to travel some distance to access good quality facilities, coaching and standards of match play.
Ownership, Operation, Quality and Access
Four of the five pitches currently used for community hockey in Ealing borough are on school sites. This results in a lack of security for the hockey clubs with hire agreements operating on an annual basis and often in competition with football usage. All have been assessed as being of ‘standard’ quality. Access to a hockey AGP on a Saturday is problematic for senior match play for many of the larger hockey clubs in west London running multiple teams in
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 2
Page 172 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
both men's and ladies leagues. Both the main clubs playing on Ealing hockey pitches - PHC Chiswick club and Ealing Hockey Club - also report capacity issues on Sundays at the AGPs they use in Ealing borough for junior hockey.
At Risk Sites
At the time of this strategy, none of the Ealing sand based/sand dressed AGPs are identified as at risk in the short term of either closure or conversion to 3G football use. There is the possibility in the medium to long term that the older pitch in hockey use at Alec Reed Academy will become unsuitable for hockey use through degradation or, when refurbished, if it is replaced with a 3G pitch. Similarly the old sand based pitch at Brentside High School, although not marked or equipped for hockey use currently, runs the risk of loss of potential future use for hockey should it be resurfaced as 3G to maximise its income generation potential from bookings for football.
Conversion of these pitches to 3G should be actively resisted in the context of the identified imminent risk of 3G conversion of the pitch currently used by PHC Chiswick Hockey Club at Linford Christie Stadium and the recent policy decision of England Hockey in response to player feedback to cease to approve hockey play above introductory level on 3G surfaces. will no longer be sanctioned by England Hockey from 2016/17. However, the influence of the Council and community hockey stakeholders is limited in this regard as both pitches in question are operated by private organisations on school sites not governed by the Council.
Proposed New Supply
There are currently no advanced plans for new AGPs in the borough that are suitable for hockey.
In common with other hockey clubs in this part of London, both PHC Chiswick and Ealing Hockey Club aspire to secure a permanent home site with two co-located pitches. The only potential opportunity identified in consultation is the former Barclays Bank Sports Ground site (currently closed) adjacent to St Augustine’s Priory School. Ealing Hockey Club has identified this site as a location where an additional hockey pitch would complement the existing sand pitch it hires at St Augustine’s Girls School. If changing facilities were also provided to serve both the existing pitch used by the club at St Augustine’s (which currently has no ancillary facilities available to the club) and the new school pitch, this would effectively create a two-pitch home base for Ealing Hockey Club's activities during the evenings and at weekends provided that suitable access could be provided between the two pitches.
The new supply would, potentially, also provide the playing pitch and changing facilities required to serve the PE and outdoor play needs of a new Free School Academy. The Council is assisting the Education Funding Agency in developing proposals for a new school on part of the former Barclays Bank Sports Ground site in negotiation with the landowner. This project is included in Ealing Council's Planning for School Development Plan Document adopted in April 2016. However, there are a number of constraints on the potential of this proposal to meet community club hockey needs. The current proposals for outdoor sports accommodation for the school is limited to a MUGA. In addition, should a full AGP for dual use prove feasible in planning and financing terms, there remains a high risk that the school will have a preference for a 3G playing surface due to its suitability for a range of sports. Under England Hockey's revised policy, 3G playing surfaces are no longer compliant for competition hockey and training.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 3
Page 173 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
Distribution of Hockey AGP Sites
Map 1 shows the distribution of hockey AGP sites across Ealing Borough. This demonstrates the hockey AGP sites are reasonably well distributed across the borough. The areas with least hockey compliant AGP supply are in the southwest (now that the Featherstone School pitch used extensively for club hockey is non-compliant under England Hockey's policy for use of 3G playing surfaces) and the northeast towards White City. In this part of the borough the population is forecast to grow substantially if the proposals for the major new housing development at Park Royal/Old Oak Common go ahead. Loss of the hockey AGP to football 3G at Linford Christie Stadium will increase the shortfall in this part of the borough should Hammersmith & Fulham Council's current proposals to convert this pitch to 3G proceed.
Map 1 - Distribution of Hockey AGPs
Map 1 Key Artificial Grass Pitches suitable for hockey (Map 3) 1 Actonians @ Boddington Gardens Carbery Avenue, Acton W3 9AB 2 Alec Reed Academy Bengarth Road, Northolt UB5 5LQ 3 Brentside High School Greenford Road, West Ealing W7 1JJ 4 Notting Hill & Ealing High School Cleveland Road, Ealing W13 8AX 5 St Augustines Priory School Hillcrest Road, Ealing W5 2JL 6 St Benedicts Playing Fields Perivale Lane UB6 8TL
Possible future Artificial Grass Pitches suitable for hockey 7 Former Barclays Bank Sports Ground Park View Road, Ealing W5 2JA
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 4
Page 174 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
2. Hockey Demand (Step 3)
Findings relating to hockey pitch demand in Ealing are summarised below.
Clubs and Teams
There are three hockey clubs that are fully based in the borough - Ealing Hockey Club, Ealing Lions Hockey Club and Ramgarhia Hockey Club. In addition, PHC Chiswick Hockey Club considers their home base now to be in Ealing borough at Old Actonians (Boddington Gardens) Sports Ground, although, historically based in Hounslow and currently using a pitch in White City as a secondary site. PHC Chiswick is by far the largest hockey club playing in Ealing borough with just over 200 members. The club has recently started a junior section and had 40 plus new adult players at their HockeyFest in September 2016. The other two clubs playing adult hockey based in Ealing borough are much smaller: Ealing Lions Hockey Club consists of a single senior male side. Ramgarhia Hockey Club has two senior male sides and a few junior players.
The senior teams of these clubs play in regional leagues, mainly in Middlesex. PHC Chiswick Ladies 1st team plays in a Southern League against teams from across London and the South East.
The majority of junior hockey players in Ealing borough currently belong to Ealing Hockey Club recently established and run by the founders of Total Hockey (an official coaching agency of England Hockey) as a community interest company. Ealing Hockey Club has no senior teams at present but is fast growing with 250 juniors across all junior age groups to u16. The club aspires to run senior teams in future. To keep up with growing demand and provide more competitive hockey opportunities for developing junior players, the club is liaising with Ealing Lions concerning possible migration of some juniors to the Lions at the Alec Reed Academy in future seasons.
In their responses to the online consultation survey, both PHC Chiswick and Ealing Hockey Club stated they were dissatisfied overall with the provision of hockey facilities in Ealing borough and cited the main reason as the shortfall of pitches to meet the needs of clubs at peak times and poor ancillary facilities at some pitches.
Club Players - Demand Trend
Player affiliation data by age from England Hockey in recent seasons suggests demand for adult hockey is stable whilst there is a large increase in demand in the borough for junior hockey. Ealing Hockey Club/Total Hockey CIC is driving this player growth. While a proportion of these new players will stop playing and/or move away from the area, growth at this level will, inevitably, result in growth in demand for pitches for adult league play and training in the period of this strategy: o 2013/14: Total 320; 244 senior; 76 junior o 2014/15: Total 463; 252 senior; 211 junior o 2015/16: Total 549; 244 senior; 351 junior
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 5
Page 175 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
Displaced Demand
There are two large clubs based outside of the borough that are predicted to draw significant demand from Ealing - Richmond HC and Barnes HC. Both clubs are based in Chiswick in the London Borough of Hounslow to the south east of the London Borough of Ealing: o Richmond HC – One of the largest, fastest growing clubs in England based at The University of Westminster (Quinton Hogg) Sports Ground where there are two co-located hockey AGPs. Richmond HC has waiting lists for its junior sections and some members are thought to travel from Ealing. o Barnes HC – Based close to Richmond HC at Dukes Meadow Sports Ground. Barnes HC is also expected to draw some of its members from Ealing.
Some demand is also imported. As well as adult players in PHC Chiswick teams living outside Ealing, there is imported demand at Featherstone School from Hillingdon (British Airways HC) and at St Augustine's Priory School from Hampstead & Westminster Hockey Club.
Active People Survey Active People Survey 9 (Oct 2014 - Oct 2015) shows that 0.20% of adults (16+) in England play hockey for at least 30 minutes once a week. Comparable data at regional and borough level is not available due to insufficient sample size.
Figure 1 – Active People survey Hockey participation 2006-2015
Source: Sport England (March 2016)
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 6
Page 176 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
If hockey participation in Ealing were at the national average, this would indicate around 540 adults (aged 16+) living in the borough play hockey out of an adult population of approximately 270,000 (Current Population from ONS (2014 Mid-Year Estimate).
With the current total adult playing membership of the Ealing based clubs standing at 244, this suggests that approximately half of current demand for hockey within Ealing borough is exported out of the borough. The club consultation showed that the two largest clubs believe there is significant growth potential within the borough. The potential for future team growth is explored later in the report. To achieve this growth both clubs have identified a need for additional access to AGPs suitable for hockey in the peak hours.
Market Segmentation
Analysis of Sport England Sports Market Segmentation data for Ealing identifies that the main adult Sports Market Groups that currently play hockey in Ealing, in order of population size, are: o Ben (Competitive Male Urbanites), aged 18-25, graduate professional o Chloe (Fitness Class Friends), aged 18-25, graduate professional o Tim (Settling Down Males), aged 26-45, professional o Jamie (Sports Team Lads), aged 18-25, vocational professional
Latent Adult Demand
Latent demand is highest in three female groups and Jamie: o Chloe (Fitness Class Friends), aged 18-25, graduate professional o Jamie (Sports Team Lads), aged 18-25, vocational professional o Leanne (Supportive Singles), aged 18-25, student/part-time vocational o Helena (Career Focussed Females), aged 26-45, full-time professional
More opportunities for informal adult hockey - i.e. Back to Hockey and small sided games of Rush Hockey - have potential to covert some of this existing latent demand. Currently, there is little opportunity for informal adult hockey within Ealing borough as Ealing Hockey Club is focused on juniors only and there is no spare peak hour capacity on the AGP at Boddington Gardens to enable the PHC Chiswick Hockey Club to offer these types of programme. The Ramgarhia Club is not currently targeting membership growth, aiming to maintain their current teams only at present. As stated above, Ealing Lions are focusing their potential development on juniors in a possible joint arrangement with Ealing HC.
'Single System' Hockey Development Activity Venues
The Old Actonians (Boddington Gardens) AGP is used as a venue for coaching talented 13-17yr olds. England Hockey designates this venue as both a Junior Development Centre (JDC) and a Junior Academy Centre (JAC). Talented young players are signposted to such venues that form the base of the governing body's ‘Single System’ that at its peak has international representation. This activity places additional demand on this pitch within Ealing borough.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 7
Page 177 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
3. The situation at individual hockey sites (Step 4)
The pitches were quality-assessed during the first half of the 2015 season. The assessments and ratings were reviewed by representatives of England Hockey and agreed.
Carrying capacity for hockey is a measure of the number of hours a week in the peak period (evenings and weekends) that the AGPs suitable for hockey use are available for community hockey use - i.e. total community hours available less hours allocated to other sports (e.g. football, touch rugby, lacrosse, tennis). For each site, this is shown in the column headed ' Total Community Hr/Wk peak period'.
The Red Amber Green (RAG) rating refers to whether, in the peak period in a typical week in the main hockey season, there is considered to be: o Unused capacity for hockey - Green o The available peak slots for hockey are used close to capacity - Amber, or o The available peak slots for hockey are used close to capacity - Red.
Figure 2: Situation at individual sites
Pitch Surface Age and Ancillary Hire Security Total Community use Comments and size quality facilities charges of access community (estimated hr/wk peak
hr/wk period) peak
period1 RAG Alec Reed Sand 2006 Changing Floodlit: Club rents 16 Ealing Lions HC - 1 men’s High demand for Academy, dressed- Standard available £114/hr or from team football during Northolt Full size within £103.50/hr School community hours school block Training 8.30pm-10pm (Tues) (London Eagles booking Matches 2 hours every 2 programme 11 sessions weeks a week). Non floodlit: £96.50/hr or 3.5hrs a week maximum Lack of secured access £88/hr block for longer than a term booking for the hockey club.
1 Peak period is Sport England FPM parameter (Mon-Thurs 5-9pm; Fri 5-7pm; Sat/Sun 9am-5pm)
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 8
Page 178 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
Pitch Surface Age and Ancillary Hire Security Total Community use Comments and size quality facilities charges of access community (estimated hr/wk peak
hr/wk period) peak
period1 RAG Brentside Sand 2003 Changing £80/hr N/A 16 No hockey use currently - Some football use High School, filled Standard available closes at 9pm mainly weekday Hanwell Large within evenings and Saturday 124x82m school mornings - Hanwell FC, 3x7v7 Celtic FC. football Spare capacity but term long security only. No hockey lines or goals. Featherstone 3G 2003 In dual Full floodlit: Club rents 10 Ramgarhia HC (Southall) - 2 Spare capacity but lack High School 98.4x61m Refurbish use sports £96/hr from men’s teams of secured access for Sports 2011 centre Half floodlit: School 2 hrs/week match longer than a term for Centre, Good £60/hr Weds 8-10pm training the hockey clubs. Southall Qtr floodlit: (2hrs/week) £42/hr British Airways Hockey Club Surface is no longer Discount for (Hartington, Hillingdon) compliant with EH policy block 2hrs/wk for hockey competition bookings Total: 6 hrs/wk and training.
Old Sand 2007 Changing Seasonal Club rents 10 PHC Chiswick HC - 6 men’s Overspill hockey use Actonians filled Standard available charge from Old teams, 6 ladies teams playing from Linford Christie (Boddington Actonians Sat pm, a mixed u18 team Stadium (unsecured Gardens) Full size Sports playing friendlies Sat am. 85 access at both sites). Acton Club who adult male and 110 adult Club has insufficient have female players (over- overall capacity across lease site subscribed). Club recently the two sites for hockey from LBE started a junior section (17 match demand on boys and 29 girls currently) Saturday. and plans to develop mixed youth friendly teams as well as Hockey capacity at this a further men's team to site is limited to circa replace one recently lost. 10hrs/wk due to Players live in 2-5m. competing demand from
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 9
Page 179 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
Pitch Surface Age and Ancillary Hire Security Total Community use Comments and size quality facilities charges of access community (estimated hr/wk peak
hr/wk period) peak
period1 RAG Max 4 home games each Sat other sports, mainly (approx. 7 hours), Training football club training but Tues & Weds 8pm-10pm at also rugby non-contact both sites. Total: 11-12hrs/wk drills. St Sand Built 1998 No on site Seasonal Club rents 10 Ealing HC - 20+ junior teams. Main issues are: lack of Augustine's based Upgraded changing charge from Age group sides (boys, girls, associated ancillary Priory Girls 100x60m 2014 available School mixed) from u6-u14 plus u16s facilities that the club School, for club (boys, girls) play Sun am, plus can use, and security of Hanger Hill Standard members u18 girls play Sat am. 200 access at present female, 54 male. Club plans to grow both youth boys (+3 Ealing HC, like PHC sides), youth girls (+6 sides) Chiswick aspires to and start up senior women and secure access to a home men's sides. Players in 2-5m. base with changing and 5hrs/wk approx - w/end social facilities and 2 co- 1.5 hrs/wk - training located pitches in West Total 6.5hrs/wk London, ideally in Ealing. Hampstead & Westminster HC - Overspill site (imported demand) from home base at Paddinton Rec which has one shortpile 3G pitch and one water based hockey pitch. Up to 3 hrs a week - Sat pm St Benedict's Sand 2011 Yes Seasonal Club rents 10 Ealing HC Some spare capacity but School, dressed charge from 5hrs/wk approx w/end unsecured access and Perivale 100x60m Standard School no floodlights. Also used for tennis and netball
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 10
Page 180 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
Sport England Facilities Planning Model (FPM) Approach to Hockey AGP Needs Assessment
In March 2016, Ealing commissioned from Sport England an analysis of Artificial Grass Pitch (AGP) provision in the borough using data on supply and demand for AGPs from Sport England’s National Facilities Audit Dataset as of January 2016.
The FPM excludes from the supply data small-sided pitches on the grounds that their size limits the type and amount of use they can offer. Those without floodlighting are also excluded as they have limited availability in the evening peak period.
The 2016 run of the FPM also predated the decision of England Hockey in June 2016 to update its policy regarding hockey play on 3G pitches.
A further significant weakness of the 2016 FPM conclusions with regard to AGPs in Ealing is inaccuracies in the supply data included in the national run. Sport England’s FPM analysis assumes only three of the five floodlit AGPs currently used for hockey in Ealing (i.e. the sand pitches at Alec Reed Academy, Brentside High School and the 3G at Featherstone School which subsequently became non-compliant for hockey under England Hockey's revised policy). It is not clear why the floodlit sand based pitches available and currently used by hockey clubs at Boddington Gardens (Old Actonians) and St Augustine's Priory Girls School are excluded from the model or the pitch without floodlights at St Benedict's Priory School.
The summary conclusions of the FPM analysis for combined (i.e. hockey and football) AGPs in Ealing borough are:
Satisfied demand is fairly high at 79%, although 88% of demand exported to other areas There is fairly low unmet demand (21%) Used capacity of the peak hours available for hockey use at the existing three pitches assuming in the model run is high (100%) Local share is significantly below average (64) There are not enough combined AGPs to meet existing demand and the existing AGPs are at capacity. There is a need for half an additional AGP to meet unmet demand. This figure would be increased if less demand were exported to other areas.
The FPM analysis shows a shortfall of AGP provision in Ealing equivalent to about 0.5 AGPs given the limited supply and estimated demand, subject to check and challenge with Council officers and England Hockey. The analysis goes on to state that, given the availability of other AGPs in adjacent local authorities within the travel catchment of Ealing residents, a high proportion of demand can actually be met. It means that Ealing is reliant on access to AGPs outside the borough to meet its needs.
As discussed with the Council's Sports Development lead and the England Hockey Relationship Manager, this conclusion needs to be considered in the context of the two floodlit pitches currently accessed for hockey that are excluded from the FPM analysis. Another key factor is England Hockey Board's decision in June 2016 to cease to endorse most levels of hockey play on 3G pitches. Effectively, this policy change removes the Featherstone School pitch from the hockey pitch supply in Ealing - impacting on the Ramgarhia, British Airways and Ealing hockey clubs - and increases the shortfall to between one and two hockey compliant AGPs. In determining the supply/demand balance and overall picture of facility provision in Ealing borough for hockey, the wider sub-regional position also needs to be taken into account including the likely loss of a hockey AGP that has extensive club use currently in White City at The Linford Christie Stadium.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 11
Page 181 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
4. The current and future pictures of provision for hockey (Step 5)
Current
This needs assessment for hockey evidences that there is substantial imported displacement of adult teams to Ealing pitches from other boroughs in west London - for example the British Airways Hockey Club using the non-compliant Featherstone School pitch and Hampstead & Westminster Hockey Club teams using the pitch at St Augustine's Priory School. At the same time, some adult teams from the PHC Chiswick club - which now considers its home base to be in Ealing since moving into the Old Actonians (Boddington Gardens) site - needs to continue to access pitch time in Hammersmith & Fulham to accommodate its match play and training needs. This pitch (at Linford Christie Stadium) is at risk of conversion to a 3G football surface. The Boddington Gardens pitch use programme is full (see Figure 2) and currently does not provide PHC Chiswick with any option to expand into during the summer on Saturdays and therefore there is no spare playing capacity available on this pitch to accommodate growth.
The assessment also evidences that whilst there has been rapid growth in demand for junior hockey at Ealing Hockey Club (stimulated by England Hockey's associated coaching company Total Hockey), to date, this growth has been adequately accommodated by the pitches available for hire at weekends at the two independent schools with artificial pitches in Ealing borough i.e. St Augustine's Priory School in Hanger Hill (sand based) and St Benedict's School in Perivale (sand dressed). The main current facility deficiency for hockey in Ealing borough is the lack of ancillary facilities at the two sites used by Ealing Hockey Club, especially at St Augustine’s School.
Although the 2016 Facilities Planning Model (FPM) analysis indicates a small current shortfall in provision of hockey AGPs in Ealing to address current modelled demand, this finding needs to be treated with caution due to the exclusion from the supply assumptions two of the AGPs in Ealing that are currently in regular use for community hockey (i.e. Old Actonians @ Boddington Gardens and St Augustine's Girls School) and the unlit pitch at St Benedict's School which also accommodates some junior hockey coaching. Also, the FPM analysis takes no account of the removal from the NGB compliant supply for hockey competition and training of the 3G pitch currently used for club hockey at Featherstone School as a consequence of England Hockey's policy change announced in the summer 2016, nor the risk of loss to hockey of the sand based pitch just outside the borough at Linford Christie Stadium.
Overall, the conclusion of the assessment of need is that following this policy change, there is a shortfall of one hockey AGP to meet current expressed demand, assuming the continued availability of the Linford Christie pitch in White City to accommodate PHC Chiswick HC's 'overspill' from Old Actonians (Boddington Gardens). However, as stated above, there is a high risk that this pitch will be lost to the hockey supply which will put further pressure of demand on the current usable supply of pitches in Ealing.
While the aspiration of both PHC Chiswick (based in both Ealing and Hammersmith & Fulham) and Ealing Hockey Club/Total Hockey (based across two sites in Ealing) to each secure access to a 2-pitch site is acknowledged, there is currently spare capacity for hockey at both the sand AGPs at St Benedict's School and the Alec Reed Academy although the latter location is some distance from the clubs' current bases. The Brentside High School pitch also has potential for hockey use although it would require upgrading with line markings and goals if it is to accommodate league hockey in future.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 12
Page 182 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
A further constraint on achieving this re-distribution of demand is the fact that access to these school based pitches is at the behest of the private operators of these facilities.
In common with most local authority areas, in Ealing, the hockey pitch supply is mainly located on school sites where clubs are generally limited to securing access for a term or season only and where ancillary facilities are limited. Therefore, in planning for the future, opportunities should be pursued to deliver community hockey clubs with secure access to playing, training and ancillary facilities for longer than a single season. If possible, the larger clubs will seek to secure access to sites able to accommodate all their activities in one location - i.e. either double pitch sites, or two single pitch sites in close proximity, with good quality ancillary facilities.
Future
Planned growth - In consultation with England Hockey, it is understood that the two smaller hockey clubs in Ealing borough – Ealing Lions and Ramgarhia – are focused on sustaining their current player base and have no immediate plans to grow team numbers, although the Lions are in preliminary discussions with Ealing Hockey Club/TotalHockey about introducing a player progression link for developing junior players wanting to progress to play team hockey. The growth plans reported by Ealing Hockey Club and PHC Chiswick Hockey Club combined are for a further 15 teams as follows: o Senior Men's – 2 teams o Senior Women’s – 2 teams o Youth Boys - 4 teams o Youth Girls – 7 teams
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 13
Page 183 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
Planned growth of hockey teams
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 Youth Girls Youth Boys Senior Men's Senior Women's
Therefore the largest area of growth within the two main clubs is planned to be in youth girls teams. Combined with youth boys, this accounts for more than two thirds of the total planned team growth over the next three years.
This growth is mainly at Ealing Hockey Club stimulated by the Total Hockey junior coaching school, a community interest company with professional coaching staff. The success of Total Hockey in recruiting new young players to its coaching sessions and courses since setting up in Ealing in 2012/13, has led to a club of around 200 members, up from 71 in the club's first year (2013/14) and 179 in 2014/15. Migration of some of Ealing Hockey Clubs growth to Ealing Lions would seem a good solution in view of the spare capacity available at the Alec Reed Academy pitch where the Lions are based but this would be decided by the school.
Potential effect of population change - Future population growth figures have been calculated for the period of this strategy against the primary age groups for hockey participation. The table below shows the forecast population change and its impact on hockey team numbers.
By 2031, assuming current hockey participation and team generation rates and the forecast population growth takes place, there will be no more than four more teams (adult and junior combined) requiring access to match pitches and training facilities (see Figure 3 below).
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 14
Page 184 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
Figure 3: Population projections and hockey team generation rates
Age Group No. hockey Current Future Current Team Pop change in Potential change in teams 2015 population in population in Generation Rate age group hockey team no's age group age group (MYE – 2014) (2031) Senior Men 8 102,558 119,253 12,820 16,695 +1.3 (16-55) Senior Women 7 98,912 107,824 14,130 8,912 +0.6 (16-55) Junior Boys 3 9,848 11,744 3,283 1,896 +0.6 (11-15)
Junior Girls 7 9,273 10,923 1,325 1,650 +1.2 (11-15) Sources: LBE Strategic Planning Team. Current Population from ONS (2014 Mid-Year Estimate); Projections derived from GLA 2014 Round Populations Projections.
It is suggested from the figures above that future growth in demand as a result of current forecasts for population change is not a major issue for hockey pitch supply in Ealing. However, if the team growth plans of Ealing Hockey Club and PHC Chiswick Hockey Club are added to the population projections, there will be a growth of approximately six senior teams and 13 junior teams. This would represent an almost doubling of the number of teams in the borough and therefore significantly increases the demand on hockey pitches in the borough.
Potential effect of demand trends (how pitch sports are played) – National trends show a reduction in interest in taking part in sports that demand a commitment to regular attendance, in favour of a more casual involvement.
This national picture is not reflected locally in Ealing (or in the west London sub-region) as far as hockey demand is concerned. The largest club playing in the borough – PHC Chiswick - has started a junior section and has seen a small increase in senior members. Ealing Hockey Club (established in 2012 by the Total Hockey coaching organisation) has experienced a large increase in its junior membership (from 0-250 in four years) and expects this to continue as the older junior age groups graduate to new senior teams and the club starts to play adult and junior league hockey within the next three to five years. The success of the GB women's hockey team at the Rio Olympics in 2016 has potential to attract more girls into the game and encourage more women back into hockey.
Particular sports clubs and sites where demand is likely to increase or decrease and potential effect – The two independent school pitches used by Ealing HC are likely to experience increase in demand for use, particularly at weekends, linked to the further development of Ealing Hockey Club stimulated by Total Hockey's junior coaching activities. The AGP at Old Actonians (Boddington Gardens site) is already at capacity and PHC Chiswick Hockey Club will therefore need to secure slots at a further pitch in west London to accommodate their plans for growth.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 15
Page 185 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
Should this major club lose its slots at Linford Christie Stadium, then it will need to secure at least the equivalent number of hours of use it currently has at another pitch in west London.
Potential effect of changes in supply – The main committed plan for change in Ealing borough's AGP supply is the joint project with Hounslow Council for a major new sports hub at Gunnersbury Park close to the Old Actonians club Boddington Gardens site. Although the plans do not include hockey facilities, they will bring into Ealing Council's supply a further 3G pitch (one of two new 3G pitches included in the overall project). This new, additional supply may relieve some of the pressure of current demand for the Boddington Gardens pitch for football and rugby training thereby releasing additional capacity for hockey club use (by PHC Chiswick HC).
Loss of the Linford Christie AGP through conversion to football 3G as planned, will impact very significantly on PHC Chiswick Hockey Club. Such a change in supply will require a cross borough approach to securing alternative suitable pitch access to sustain this club's existing hockey teams and accommodate the club's plans for growth.
Over time, the change in England Hockey's 3G policy will have a significant effect on the supply/demand balance in Ealing borough assuming the two clubs currently playing on the shortpile 3G pitch at Featherstone School look to find alternative pitches at peak times to play affiliated league fixtures and to train.
In planning how best to address the effective reduction in hockey pitch supply and growing demand in this part of London, it will be important for Ealing Borough officers to continue to work closely with England Hockey and Hounslow Borough, and to include in future discussions officers from the other key central west London boroughs of Richmond and Hammersmith & Fulham.
5. Key findings and issues for hockey (Step 6)
Figure 4: Key findings and issues
Hockey The main There has been a significant improvement in both the supply of hockey facilities in the borough and converting latent demand characteristics of since the last borough-wide review in 2010. A new pitch has been built on an independent school site and a new junior hockey the current supply club - Ealing HC - has been established (based at this site and at a second independent school nearby) delivering hockey of and demand for participation for approximately 250 new young players. provision Five AGPs in the borough - at Old Actonians Boddington Gardens, Alec Reed Academy, St Augustine's School, St Benedict's School and Brentside School - are full size and have either sand dressed or sand based playing surfaces (i.e. England Hockey category 2 & 3 as defined in the new policy agreed in June 2016 for hockey play on 3G surfaces). However, the Brentside School pitch is not currently marked or equipped for hockey use.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 16
Page 186 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
Hockey
A further school AGP in the borough with a shortpile 3G surface is currently used extensively by hockey clubs - i.e. at Featherstone School in Southall. Following a period to allow for transition, as a 3G playing surface, this pitch will become no longer accepted for hockey use above introductory level.
All but one of the pitches used or suitable for hockey use are on school sites. Accordingly, the hockey clubs have little security of access (season by season only) and either poor or no ancillary facilities. On school sites, clubs also have little or no influence over the choice of playing surface when the schools decide to refresh their AGP.
The exception is the AGP at Old Actonians (Boddington Gardens) Sports Ground. This pitch accommodates a capacity programme of hockey on Saturdays throughout the season serving as the main home site for PHC Chiswick Hockey Club, which also uses the AGP at Linford Christie Stadium in Hammersmith & Fulham currently at risk of loss to hockey as a result of proposals to resurface as a 3G football surface. PHC Chiswick is experiencing increasing demand having recently established a junior section. On the Old Actonians pitch, there is no spare capacity for hockey. In the peak weekday evening hours hockey competes with the requirements of the host club's football and rugby teams for training slots. In this context, retention of this pitch as a hockey compliant AGP when it is resurfaced is critical to the supply for hockey in Ealing borough.
The borough also is the home based for two small adult hockey clubs - Ramgarhia and Ealing Lions - currently based on AGPs at Featherstone High School (3G) and Alec Reed Academy (sand) respectively. The supply at these sites comfortably accommodates the playing and training needs of these two clubs although the changing and social facilities are very limited and the Featherstone pitch in light of its 3G playing surface no longer has England Hockey endorsement for hockey competition or training.
Is there enough accessible and NO. While in the last playing season there was just sufficient accessible secured supply to meet expressed demand, access to secured community suitable AGPs is generally poorly secured in Ealing borough due to the heavily reliance on access to pitches on autonomous use provision to school sites. meet current demand? The recent change in England Hockey's policy regarding use of 3G surfaces for hockey play above introductory levels will impact significantly on the supply/demand balance in Ealing (and across wider central west London) as currently, the 3G AGP at Featherstone School in Southall is used by two community hockey clubs, Ramgarhia HC and British Airways HC who use this pitch as a secondary site to its main site in Hillingdon.
Although some spare capacity has been identified for hockey at the sand AGPs at the Alec Reed Academy and Brentside High School, these sites currently offer no security of access to community users and, in the case of the latter, the AGP is not marked or equipped for hockey use. The playing surfaces will soon need replacement as they are ten and thirteen years old
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 17
Page 187 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
Hockey respectively. This raises the additional risk that either or both schools may decide to install 3G when they refresh the playing surface.
In addition to loss of supply of pitches for hockey competition and training at Featherstone School, there is also an imminent risk of loss of the secondary pitch used by the large PHC Chiswick Hockey Club at the Linford Christie Stadium across the borough boundary with Hammersmith and Fulham.
As a result of these changes to accessible pitch supply, there is a shortfall in current supply of at least one hockey pitch to England Hockey category 1-3 specifications (i.e. with water, sand dressed or sand based playing surface).
In planning for the future, opportunities should be pursued to deliver community hockey clubs with secure access to playing, training and ancillary facilities for longer than a single season. If possible, the secure access for the larger clubs will be to sites able to accommodate all the club's activities in one location - i.e. either double pitch sites, or two single pitch sites in close proximity, with good quality ancillary facilities.
Is the provision that is accessible of NO. The resident hockey club reports that the ancillary facilities are poor and limited at St Augustine’s School and at St sufficient quality Benedict’s School. With regard to hockey pitch quality, the overall quality of the sand based/dressed AGPs is considered and appropriately adequate within Ealing although the pitches at Alec Reed Academy and Brentside High School (not currently marked out for maintained? hockey) will need resurfacing in the next few years.
Whilst outside Ealing borough, the secondary pitch of the PHC Chiswick Hockey Club at Linford Christie stadium is worn and requires resurfacing. This pitch is at risk of loss to hockey as there are current plans to convert this pitch to a 3G FTP. Loss of this pitch will have significant impact on the hockey pitch supply/demand balance in the central west London area and will impact on Ealing borough.
What are the main The future growth in demand is likely to be driven primarily by the growth plans of Ealing Hockey Club (as new youth age group characteristics of squads graduate to senior play) and the potential for growth in demand driven by the growth plans of PHC Chiswick Hockey the future supply Club which has a newly established junior section. In the short term, there is evidence of increased demand due to the GB and demand for Womens Hockey Rio Olympic success. PHC Chiswick had 40 plus new adult players at their HockeyFest in September 2016. The provision? pressure of demand from this club will be further increased as a consequence of Hammersmith and Fulham Council's plans to convert the club's home pitch at Linford Christie Stadium to a football 3G surface.
A further key issue is the recent review by England Hockey of its policy recommendations regarding hockey play on 3G surfaces
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 18
Page 188 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
Hockey resulting from player feedback. The new policy position from summer 2016 will impact on the Ramgarhia and British Airways clubs playing on 3G currently at Featherstone High School.
Modest growth in demand will result from forecast population growth. There is potential from population growth and club growth combined for up to six additional senior teams and 13 additional junior teams. This increase will exert considerable pressure on the available spare capacity at the school based hockey AGPs in the borough for peak Saturday senior fixture time as well as slots on Sundays for junior training.
As one of the current facilities has no floodlights there will also be additional pressure on midweek training slots although the planned increase in supply of football 3G pitches in Gunnersbury Park (close to Old Actonians) may result in transfer of some football and rugby training demand away from the Boddington Gardens AGP, thereby providing a little more usable capacity for hockey team training.
Is there enough accessible and NO. The current accessible supply of hockey facilities in Ealing Borough will not be enough to meet future demand. Particular secured community pressures on existing provision will result from the Ealing Hockey Club as large numbers of new juniors at this club progress use provision to through to adult hockey, over and above the current level of demand from the large PHC Chiswick club (which itself has recently meet future established a junior section) plus continuing demand at a lower level from the two smaller clubs based in the borough demand? (Rangarhia and Ealing Lions).
There will be a pitch deficiency in Ealing, regardless of whether the Chiswick club loses access to the pitch at Linford Christie Stadium which seems likely.
To meet future demand to 2031, at least one additional floodlit AGP suitable for league hockey play (i.e. EH category 1-3) will be required in the borough. In addition, as a consequence of the change in policy regarding hockey on 3G surfaces, following a period of transition, it is likely that further hockey pitch capacity will be needed at weekends to accommodate club use displaced from the school 3G pitch at Featherstone School.
Ideally, any new hockey AGP in the borough should be located close to an existing pitch and served by changing and social facilities and provide one or more Ealing based and Clubmark accredited hockey clubs engaged in junior development with a sustainable home base with security of tenure.
The former Barclays Bank Sports Ground (currently closed) has been identified by Ealing Hockey Club as a location where an additional hockey pitch would complement the existing (sand) pitch the club hires at St Augustine’s School. If changing facilities were provided on this site to serve both the existing pitch used by the club at St Augustine’s (which has no ancillary facilities) this would effectively create a two pitch home base for the Ealing Hockey Club's activities during the evenings and at weekends.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 19
Page 189 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix C - HOCKEY Assessment of Needs
Hockey
The Council is assisting the Education Funding Agency in developing proposals for a new Free School Academy on part of this site and a project is included in Ealing Council's Planning for School Development Plan Document adopted in May 2016. However, the current school facility plans for outdoor PE and play are limited to a Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) not a full size sand dressed or sand based AGP as required for hockey competition and training.
In light of the significant risks to the feasibility and deliverability of a dual use hockey AGP on the Barclays site, it will be important for stakeholders to encourage the governing bodies at the Alec Reed Academy and the Brentside Kajima High School to retain hockey compliant playing surfaces on the AGPs on their sites and, where feasible, to negotiate secure access agreements with community hockey clubs.
What is the overall The overall pitch quality is adequate. However, the floodlit sand based pitch with limited hockey use at Alec Reed Academy and quality level? the sand based pitch with potential for hockey use at Brentside High School (subject to provision of new line markings and goals) are both over ten years old and these pitches will therefore need resurfacing shortly.
The main quality deficiency is the lack of access to changing facilities for the main borough based club - Ealing Hockey Club - at the two independent school sites it currently hires.
As identified above, subject to site master planning and detailed feasibility including securing the necessary funding, the emerging priority project is to address this community hockey need through progressing a dual use initiative comprising new changing rooms alongside a new hockey AGP and other new school accommodation on the former Barclays Bank Sports Ground.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 20
Page 190 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
Appendix D: Rugby - Assessment of Needs (Stages B & C)
The findings of the assessment of needs for rugby facilities in The London Borough of Ealing are summarised below.
Four of the six rugby clubs based in the borough have contributed to the assessment by means of the online club survey and their views have been fed into the individual sites ratings as well as the overall borough wide picture. Site visits have been made to the home grounds used by the other two clubs – Old Priorians and Northolt RFC – that did not complete the club questionnaire and facility supply and demand issues for these clubs have been identified in consultation with the RFU Regional Facilities Manager.
1. Rugby Pitch Supply (Step 2)
There are six rugby clubs based in the borough – Ealing Trailfinders, Wasps FC, Old Actonians RFC, West London RFC, Old Priorians RFC and Northolt RFC. In addition, a recently formed club, Hanwell RFC, draws its players from Hanwell, Northfields and Brentford area and trains on the grass pitches alongside Elthorne Leisure Centre but, at present, plays its home matches at Boston Manor Playing Fields just across the borough boundary in Hounslow.
Rugby pitches in The London Borough of Ealing
In the 2015/16 season, the London Borough of Ealing has a total of 15 adult size grass rugby pitches marked out with posts in situ (three of which are floodlit), one dedicated mini pitch, two World Rugby compliant floodlit artificial grass pitches (AGP) on one site, and one dedicated floodlit training area available for community rugby use across six sites. o Twyford Avenue Sports Ground, Acton – Over one third of all pitch supply (six adult pitches) is located on this site in the freehold ownership of Wasps FC, one of the two largest community rugby clubs based in the London Borough of Ealing. Two of the six pitches are floodlit during certain hours (resulting from funding support from the RFU) and the site is used heavily by the club’s four men’s senior teams and large junior section, and two senior women's teams. o Ealing Trailfinders Sports Club Ground, West Ealing - This privately owned sports ground (Trailfinders Ltd) leased to the Ealing Trailfinders Rugby Club, has two adult grass pitches (one floodlit), a mini rugby pitch, two floodlit artificial grass pitches (AGP) to World Rugby standard (one registered in 2014 and the second, new pitch, in autumn 2016, a small (60x30m approx) floodlit sand based AGP pitch built in 2001 advertised for hire for small sided games of football and hockey, plus four floodlit tennis courts, a cricket pitch and three softball pitches. The largest community rugby club in the borough with a semi-professional side playing in the Rugby Championship, Ealing Trailfinders use the facilities heavily with four senior men’s teams and a large junior section. On occasion, the club arranges for additional playing capacity for mini rugby festivals on the Hathaway Primary School playing field adjacent to the site.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 1
Page 191 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
o St Benedict’s School Playing Fields, Perivale Lane – This school site has four adult pitches that are used throughout the week by the school and by the St Benedict’s School Old Boys club– Old Priorian RFC – at weekends. Old Priorian is an open community club and currently runs two senior men’s teams plus a Veterans team and an ‘occasionals’ team. o Old Actonians Sports Club Ground, Gunnersbury Drive, Off Pope's Lane, Ealing – This council owned site is leased to Old Actonians Sports Club. The site has one adult rugby pitch in addition to two football pitches (of differing sizes). There are low-grade training lights along one side of the rugby pitch. o Cayton Green Park, Greenford - This council owned site is leased to Northolt RFC. There is one adult pitch with the space for another adult pitch to be marked out. o London Marathon Playing Fields, Birkbeck Ave, Greenford – This site is hired annually by West London RFC. There is one adult pitch and a 60x40m training area with floodlights provided with grant support from the RFU. o Perivale Park - The Council maintains a single pitch with rugby posts at Perivale Park. This pitch has no current rugby use but is used regularly in summer by Gaelic Football teams. A new sports pavilion and football pitches are in development at this park site. There are no current plans to remove the rugby/Gaelic football pitch.
Mini/Midi pitches
There is one dedicated pitch in the borough for small-sided games of rugby on the Trailfinders Sports Ground. The two clubs with mini and youth rugby sides - Wasps and Ealing Trailfinders - use temporary markings and cones on their adult pitches and utilise the grass areas around these pitches for mini teams (5 to 9 a side) and midi teams (12 or 13 aside). On occasion, Ealing Trailfinders RFC arrange to access the adjacent Hathaway Primary School playing field on Sunday mornings to provide additional capacity (e.g. for festivals). Wasps FC has four senior teams that play regularly with six adult pitches so it is assumed that a number of their pitches are used almost exclusively for Mini/Midi use with temporary markings.
Rugby AGPs in the borough
There are two Rugby compliant and floodlit AGPs in the London Borough of Ealing at Trailfinders Sports Ground. These pitches were privately funded and are World Rugby compliant (subject to satisfactory test certification for new second pitch completed in autumn 2016).
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 2
Page 192 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
Ownership and Security of Access
The senior club in the borough with a professional arm – Trailfinders – hires its site from an individual landowner who has personally financed the development of the facilities at the sports ground. The other main club - Wasps FC – own the freehold of the Twyford Avenue Sports Ground. Old Actonians and Northolt RFC have security of access through leases with Ealing Council on their home grounds. Old Priorian RFC is secure through their former pupil link with St Benedict’s School. West London RFC has less security of access than the other clubs being reliant on a season by season hire agreement with The London Playing Fields Foundation. Hanwell RFC currently plays its home matches at Boston Manor Playing Fields just across the boundary in Hounslow borough and has a season-by-season hire agreement with the site owner, London Playing Fields Foundation. The club is actively seeking to secure a suitable home ground in the borough in the Hanwell and Northfields area. Perivale Park may present an opportunity now that a new pavilion is being provided. However, this site is approximately four miles to the north of the club's current base.
Pitch Quality – Maintenance & Drainage
Maintenance of rugby pitches in the London Borough of Ealing is generally the responsibility of the host club. The larger sites have full time ground staff and as can be seen in Figure 1 below the majority of sites in Ealing are well maintained and have adequate or better drainage.
Figure 1 – Pitch Maintenance & Drainage Ratings from Site Visits
Maintenance Number of pitches Poor Adequate Good Total (M0) (M1) (M2) Natural Inadequate (D0) 0 0 1 1
Natural Adequate (D1) 0 6 2 8 Pipe Drained (D2) 0 0 3 3
Drainage Pipe and Slit Drained (D3) 0 0 3 3 Total 0 6 9 Figure 1: Table showing the quality of pitches assessed in the London Borough of Ealing
Three quarters of pitches are considered to be maintained to a ‘Good’ standard and 14 of the 15 grass pitches have at least adequate drainage. The quality of pitches in the London Borough of Ealing is generally good with some scope for improving the capacity of current supply by increasing quality. This would be the case at Wasps FC where five of the six pitches rated M1 are located and if an increase in supply is required here this could be achieved through improved maintenance. Details on individual sites can be found in Figure 5.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 3
Page 193 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
Former Pitches
A Council pitch in Gunnersbury Park -a ground just outside the borough boundary- was previously used by Old Actonians when both its teams had home fixtures on the same day but concerns over pricing have led this club to hire a pitch from Wasps FC at Twyford Avenue Sports Ground when a second pitch is required. This pitch will come back into the supply once a major joint project by Ealing and Hounslow Councils to upgrade the sports facilities in Gunnersbury Park is completed (see proposed new supply below).
At Risk Sites
None of these sites are identified as at risk of loss of rugby pitches in the short to medium term. It is noted that reliance of the Ealing Trailfinders Rugby Club on the continued commitment and support of an individual private owner presents an element of risk in the long term.
Proposed New Supply
The only committed project currently for new rugby provision is a project for the upgrade of Gunnersbury Park close to the Old Actonians Sports Ground. Although this major sports ground is located mainly in the London Borough of Hounslow, the sports project is a joint venture by both Councils. As far as rugby facilities are concerned, the project plans include re-provision of an adult grass rugby pitch available for hire. There will also be two floodlit 3G AGPs to FA specifications. The Old Actonians RFC are keen to secure midweek evening training time (for non-contact drills) on one of these new football AGPs at affordable rates. This will augment the limited facilities for evening training on the club's home site.
Other project proposals as yet uncommitted that have been identified in the consultation are: o Twyford Sports Ground - There is interest from Wasps FC and Twyford High School in developing a World Rugby compliant floodlit 3G artificial pitch for shared use. This project is in the early planning stages and funding is not secured. However, the provision of an AGP to help sustain and support the development of this major club (including the further development of women and girls rugby) is a high priority for the RFU. Wasps FC is also exploring funding options for an upgrade to the pavilion on site which includes squash courts and a café and is in need of modernisation. o Old Actonians Sports Ground - Old Actonians has aspirations to improve the ancillary clubhouse facilities including changing rooms at this site the club leases from Ealing Council. This project will benefit the rugby section of the sports association as well as the football and cricket sections. o Cayton Green Park - Northolt RFC has aspirations to upgrade its clubhouse (a 1930's building) with poor internal layout. Changing provision available to the club is good as a result of the recent provision of a modular changing pavilion part funded by the RFU and shared by the club with football clubs.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 4
Page 194 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
o Trailfinders Sports Ground - Further development of the facilities at this key site may result from a new three year agreement between the owners of Trailfinders Sports Club and the London Broncos Rugby League Club to base all London Broncos home matches and training at this site from 2016. The Broncos have three teams - first team, u16s and a u19s Academy. Trailfinders Sports Club currently has pitch-side seating for 1,020 and space for a further 2,000 standing spectators. Should the Broncos gain promotion to the Super League, there is potential at the 18 acre Trailfinders Sports Ground to expand the spectator capacity. The recent completion of a second rugby compliant AGP on this site in place of a grass pitch for use for both rugby league and rugby union reduces the risk of over-play of the remaining grass pitches and increases the playing capacity of the site for rugby (union and league) as well as for football. o St Benedict's School - Old Priorian RFC is in early discussions with the school concerning the options to improve the quality of the pitches and their drainage in order to reduce the number of occasions when the school cancels club fixtures in order to project the quality of the pitches (for use by the school). The club is also keen to secure floodlighting to the existing sand based AGP at the school to use for midweek non-contact drills training. The club currently train off site on the floodlit AGP managed by Kajima at Brentside School. Change of surface of the St Benedict's School AGP to World Rugby compliant 3G is not an option for the future as the school play hockey on the pitch and hire it extensively at weekends to Ealing Hockey Club.
Rugby Supply in Neighbouring Boroughs
The following rugby clubs have home grounds close to the Ealing borough boundary and are therefore very accessible to Ealing Borough residents: o Barnes RFC and Richmond RFC – To the east and south in LB Richmond. o Ruislip RFC, Hayes RFC and Old Abbotstonians – To the north and west in LB Hillingdon. o Grasshoppers RFC – To the South in the LB Hounslow.
All of these clubs are expected to have Ealing residents as members as they are close to the borough boundary and also provide a wide range of rugby opportunities.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 5
Page 195 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
Distribution of Rugby Sites
Map 1 shows the distribution of grass rugby pitch sites across Ealing Borough. It is evident that there is a gap in provision for rugby in the south west of the borough around Southall. For many residents in this part of the borough, rugby club facilities in Hillingdon and Hounslow boroughs are equally as accessible as the clubs in Ealing.
Map 1 - Ealing Rugby Site Distribution
Ealing - Rugby facilities
Existing grass rugby pitches
Map 1 Site Address Postcode Key 1 London Playing Fields (Greenford) Birkbeck Avenue, Greenford UB6 8LS 2 Northolt RFC Cayton Road, Greenford, UB6 8BJ 3 Old Actonians RFC Gunnersbury Drive, Ealing, W5 4LL 4 Perivale Park Leaver Gardens, Greenford, UB6 8TJ 5 St Benedicts School Perivale Lane UB6 8TL 6 Trailfinders Sports Ground Vallis Way, West Ealing W13 0DD 7 Wasps FC Twyford Avenue, Acton W3 9QA Sites for planned new supply 8 Gunnersbury Park Popes Lane, Acton W3 8LQ
Map 2 shows the location of the existing rugby compliant AGP at Trailfinders Sports Ground (where the owners are considering conversion of a grass pitch to provide a second AGP suitable for rugby union and rugby league) and the location of Wasps FC where there are emerging proposals for a rugby AGP.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 6
Page 196 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
Map 2 - Distribution of AGP rugby pitches in Ealing
Map 2 Key Artificial Grass Pitches suitable for rugby (Map 2) 1 Trailfinders Sports Club Vallis Way, West Ealing 2 Trailfinders Sports Club (completed autumn 2016) Vallis Way, West Ealing
Sites for planned new supply 3 Wasps FC Twyford Avenue, Acton
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 7
Page 197 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
3. Rugby Pitch Demand (Step 3)
Findings relating to rugby pitch demand in The London Borough of Ealing are summarised below.
Clubs and Teams
Between the six Ealing based clubs (plus Hanwell RFC who currently play home games in Hounslow borough), there are a total of 17 adult men’s sides (including two vets teams and an ‘occasionals’ team) plus two women’s teams (both at Wasps FC). In addition both the senior clubs – Wasps and Trailfinders – have u23 sides, the latter as part of a rugby academy set up for youth players from age 15 up. This adult expressed demand for rugby in Ealing borough (22 teams in all) is detailed in Figure 2 below.
Currently, just Wasps and Trailfinders have junior sections. At both clubs the junior sections have developed substantially over recent seasons with both clubs now running three sides in each year groups from u6 to u13, two sides in each year group from u14 to u16 and a single u18 side. All the mini and youth sides train and play home fixtures at the clubs’ grounds. At Trailfinders, most of this play takes place on the AGP on Sunday mornings.
Figure 2: Table of senior rugby club information
Ealing based rugby clubs and senior teams 2015 leagues Home ground Other grounds used Ealing Trailfinders Championship (1st –professional) Trailfinders Sports Ground, Hathaway Primary School o 4 Men’s teams Zoo Sports Shield 2 (1st – amateur) West Ealing playing field (on occasion) o Academy (15-23yrs) Middlesex Merit League 2 (2nd) o 1 Vets team Middlesex Merit League 5 (3rd) Surrey Veterans League (Vets) Northolt RFC Middlesex Merit League 2 Cayton Green Park, N/A o 1 Men’s team Greenford Old Actonians RFC London North West 3 (1st) Old Actonians Sports Club Twyford Avenue Sports o 2 Men’s teams Middlesex Merit League 3 (2nd) Ground, Ealing Ground, Acton (Previously Gunnersbury Park) Old Priorian RFC London North 1 (1st) St Benedict’s School Playing London Marathon Playing o 3 Men’s Teams Middlesex Merit League 1 (2nd) Fields, Perivale Lane Fields, Greenford Middlesex Merit League 4 (3rd) Wasps FC London North West 3 (1st) Twyford Avenue Sports N/A o 2 Men’s teams Middlesex Merit League 3 (2nd) Ground, Acton o Occasional team o U23s Women’s Premiership (1st) o 2 Ladies team Women’s Championship South (2nd)
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 8
Page 198 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
Ealing based rugby clubs and senior teams 2015 leagues Home ground Other grounds used West London RFC Herts/Middlesex 2 (1st) London Marathon Playing N/A o 2 Men’s teams Middlesex Merit League 4 (2nd) Fields, Greenford o 1 Social Vets team Hanwell RFC Middlesex Merit Table Boston Manor Playing Fields Train on grass pitches o 1 Men's team (LB Hounslow) alongside Elthorne Leisure Centre and summer touch rugby in Elthorne Park
Active People Survey
Active People Survey 9 (Oct 2014 - Sep 2015) showed that 0.44% of adults (16+) in England played rugby for at least 30 minutes once a week. The data for London shows a lower participation rate of 0.32%. Comparable data at a borough level is not available due to insufficient sample size.
If rugby participation in the London Borough of Ealing were at the London average, this would indicate around 860 adults (aged 16+) living in the borough play rugby (out of an adult population for rugby participation of approximately 270,000). With 22 teams operating in the borough (including the academy) this would leave each team with approximately 39 players if rugby participation is 100% club based and contained within Ealing. Whilst these calculations are only approximate they lend support to the conclusion that there is some displacement of demand –out of the borough – and this is likely to be to the clubs listed on page 6.
Imported and Displaced Demand
The clubs surveyed reported no imported demand, to rugby pitches in the borough and none of the four clubs that responded to the club survey identified the need to use pitches outside of the borough. Wasps (in Acton) and Trailfinders (in Perivale/Greenford) are quite centrally located some distance from the borough boundary. However, the newly established Hanwell RFC - serving the Hanwell, Northfields and Brentford area - is currently displaced for its home matches to Boston Manor Playing Fields just across the borough boundary with Hounslow. From the Active People Survey findings above it is likely that some of the rugby demand within Ealing is met by clubs outside of the borough. This is despite the high quality facilities and standard of league play available at the clubs within Ealing.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 9
Page 199 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
Figure 3: Once a week Rugby participation in England and London from 2005/06 - 2015
Source: Sport England (March 2016)
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 10
Page 200 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
Market Segmentation
Analysis of Sport England Sports Market Segmentation data for the London Borough of Ealing identifies the main adult Sports Market Groups that currently play rugby, in order of population size: o Ben (Competitive Male Urbanites), aged 18-25, graduate professional o Jamie (Sports Team Lads), aged 18-25, vocational student o Tim (Settling Down Males), aged 26-45, professional
These are also groups that are overrepresented in the borough compared to national data. As these groups have the greatest tendency to play rugby, this data suggests that rugby participation in Ealing may well exceed the national average. If this is the case it lends further support that some of the demand from Ealing residents is met by clubs outside of the borough.
Latent Demand
Latent demand to play rugby is also apparent; the same three Groups indicated potential for further growth if the necessary club and facility infrastructure and capacity is available. A further Group - Kev (Pub League Team Mates, aged 36 to 45, vocational job– although much smaller as a proportion of the total borough population than the three main Groups above, shows high latent demand relative to current participation.
Casual Demand
Wasp FC has hosted a variety of initiatives in recent seasons in partnership with RFU development officers aimed at encouraging returning players and introducing newcomers to the game of rugby, both male and female. These include: o An annual 'Find Rugby Now' festival involving social and competitive 7 a side teams and mixed touch rugby and men’s rugby 10s teams o Touch rugby evenings aimed at parents of mini and junior club players o An annual adult Tag Rugby Festival for both men and women.
Trailfinders Sports Club has also programmed a series of weekly summer touch rugby sessions at the club in recent seasons attracting 20+ players and run a Satellite club with Elthorne Park High School and recent Sportivate projects for young people.
Hanwell Rugby Club has also run free summer touch rugby sessions in Elthorne Park on Tuesday evenings in association with a coaching organisation.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 11
Page 201 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
4. The situation at individual sites for rugby (Step 4)
The pitches were assessed during November in the 2015/16 season. These assessments were reviewed in discussion with the RFU and ratings for each agreed as a basis for comparison of the amount of play each site could accommodate (its carrying capacity) against the amount of play that takes place.
Carrying capacity is a measure of the number of match equivalent sessions per season for community use each pitch can take without adversely affecting its quality and use.
It was agreed with the RFU representative to adopt the following pitch carrying capacities according to each quality rating to be consistent with the approach adopted in similar assessments across the country:
Figure 4: Rugby Pitch Carrying Capacity
Maintenance Match Equivalent Sessions a week Poor Adequate Good (M0) (M1) (M2)
e Natural Inadequate (D0) 0.5 1.5 2 Natural Adequate (D1) 1.5 3 3 Pipe Drained (D2) 1.75 2.5 3.25
Drainag Pipe and Slit Drained (D3) 2 3 3.5
Figure 5 below summarises the situation at each rugby site with regard to:
1. Pitch supply (including the quality ratings) and conclusions reached as to the amount of play a site can accommodate (i.e. its carrying capacity for community use); 2. The amount of play that takes place at each site (i.e. the expressed demand) adjusted to reflect any casual or education use in addition to club use for matches and training; 3. The comparison (shown as a RAG rating) as to whether, for each pitch type it contains, a site is: . RED - Being overplayed (current use exceeds the carrying capacity) . AMBER - Being played to the level the site can sustain (current use matches the carrying capacity), or . GREEN - Potentially able to accommodate some additional play (current use falls below the carrying capacity)
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 12
Page 202 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
Figure 5: The Situation at Individual Sites
The main characteristics of the current rugby facility supply and demand balance at each site are summarised as follows:
Site Pitch No. Ancillary Security of Cap. MES per Est. RAG Home club and Rating1 facilities access week Use comments Twyford Avenue Sports 1 x 6 (2 floodlit Changing Club own freehold. 18 17 Wasps FC Ground, Acton (Twyford M2/D1 during certain rated as (1x3+5x3) Some use by Old High School) hours) ‘Good’. Actonians 5 x Pavilion No spare capacity to M1/D1 considered allow for growth plans ‘tired’. Trailfinders Sports 1 x 2 (1 floodlit) Good Privately owned. Grass - 9.5 Grass Trailfinders Ground, West Ealing M2/D2 plus Club hires from (1x3.25+1x3) >6.25 Over marking of two 1 midi company. pitches with one football 1 x pitch (Hanwell Town). M2/D1 2 x AGP (3G, Rugby compliant AGP floodlit, World built in 2014 and new Rugby) second AGP completed 2016 has relieved 1 MUGA previous overplay on (sand, floodlit) grass pitches London Broncos RFL Uni of West London 2 private schools St Benedict's School 1 x 4 TBC School owned. 12.5 7.25 Old Priorian Playing Fields, Perivale M2/D0 Club hires but (1x2+3x3.5) Lane fixtures often St Benedict’s School 3 x cancelled to Estimated usage at 5 (Independent School M2/D3 protect pitch. MES association) Old Actonians Sports M2/D2 1 Old and Leased to Old 3.25 4 Old Actonians Club Ground, poorly laid Actionians Sports (1x3.25) Gunnersbury Drive, Off out. Needs Club by LBE Pope's Lane, Ealing replacing. Cayton Green Park, M1/D1 1 One old Leased to Northolt 3 2 Northolt RFC Greenford changing RFC by LBE (1x3) Space for two pitches.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 13
Page 203 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
Site Pitch No. Ancillary Security of Cap. MES per Est. RAG Home club and Rating1 facilities access week Use comments block- poor. One newer fit for purpose- good. London Marathon M2/D3 1 plus a Recently Annual rental 3.5 2 West London RFC Playing Fields, Birkbeck 60x40m upgraded agreement (1x3.5) Ave, Greenford floodlit clubhouse. (West London RFC Old Priorian occasional training area Good. rents pitches from use when St Benedict’s LPF - £10,000 pa School pitch being approx.) protected. Perivale Park, M1/D1 1 New shared Council owned - 3 1 Current use limited to Stockdove Way, sports no current rugby (1x3) Gaelic Football. Potential Greenford pavilion use. Used for home base for Hanwell under Gaelic Football RFC when new pavilion construction mainly in summer completed although 4 miles approx from Elthorne training base Total 49.50 43.75
1 Based on mean quality scores from non-technical assessments conducted in 2015 and categorised in agreement with RFU representatives.
5. The current and future pictures of provision for rugby (Step 5)
Current
Overall, there are sufficient rugby pitches in Ealing to meet current demand. Trailfinders Sports Ground has the greatest demand; the Club has between 400 and 500 playing members and to address the growing imbalance between pitch supply and demand has, since 2014, provided two floodlit AGPs at this site. Wasps FC have a similar size of playing membership and also cater for women's rugby. However, this club no access to an onsite AGP at present and, over recent seasons, with RFU support, has sought to alleviate its supply/demand imbalance by providing floodlights to two of the pitches.
Old Actonians, although a much small club than Wasps and Trailfinders, have an undersupply of rugby pitches on site and due to the demands of the football and cricket sections there is no space to provide further pitches on site. As such, the club has to hire a second pitch elsewhere in the borough on occasions and is constrained from developing a junior section despite reported expressed demand from adult members. In addition, the new Hanwell
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 14
Page 204 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
RFC, although a small single team club at present, is displaced to Boston Manor Playing Fields in Hounslow Borough and is actively seeking to secure a suitable home base in Ealing borough.
The quality of supply is good with the standard of maintenance being, overall, very good. Improvements to drainage at those sites reliant on natural drainage should be a consideration (e.g. the pitches at St Benedict's School used by Old Priorian to reduce cancellations).
If a World Rugby compliant AGP were provided in partnership with Twyford School on land at Wasps FC, this would alleviate existing pressure of demand on the grass pitches at Wasps FC and provide capacity for further growth.
Future Planned growth - The clubs within Ealing have plans to increase the number of teams as follows in future. In consultation with the RFU, it is understood that the two clubs that did not respond to the survey – Old Priorian and Northolt – are focused on sustaining their current player base and have no plans to grow team numbers in the next three seasons. The growth plans reported by the respondent clubs are for a further seven teams as follows: o Senior Men's – 4 teams o Youth Boys - 2 teams o Youth Girls – 1 team
Potential effect of population change - Future population growth figures have been calculated for the period of this strategy against the primary age groups for rugby participation in each sub-area. Figure 6 below shows the forecast population change.
Figure 6: Potential population change and rugby team generation rates Current population Future population in Team Potential Population Change in Current Age Group in age group (MYE age group within the generation change in Age Group teams – 2014) area (2031) rate teams Senior Men (19-45) 74,831 86,752 +15.93% (11,921) 15 4,989 +2.4 Senior Women (19-45) 71,387 75,662 2 35,694 +0.12 +5.99% (4,275) Youth boys (13-18) 11,986 14,241 14 856 +2.6 +18.81% (2,255) Youth girls (13-18) 11,190 13,005 2 5,595 +0.3 +16.22% (1,815) Mini/Midi (7-12) Mixed 24,853 27,613 28 888 +3.1 +11.11% (2,760)
Sources: LBE Strategic Planning Team. Current Population from ONS (2014 Mid Year Estimate); Projections derived from GLA 2014 Round Populations Projections.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 15
Page 205 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
By 2031, assuming current rugby participation and team generation rates and the forecast population growth takes place; the figures above suggest growth in all of the male age groups. Wasps FC has also commented they expect to see a growth in Women’s Rugby which is not shown above due to the current small number of women's teams.
Team growth in the borough will also be driven by club development initiatives implemented in partnership with partners (e.g. RFU Community Coaches) and not by population growth alone.
Considered together, given the population growth and the club plans for team growth, there is a predicted increase by 2031 of 6 Senior Men’s teams, 4- 5 Youth Boys’ teams, 1 Youth Girls’ team and 3 Mini/Midi teams.
Potential effect of demand trends (how pitch sports are played) – National trends show a reduction in interest in taking part in sports that demand a commitment to regular attendance, in favour of a more casual involvement.
This national picture is not reflected locally in Ealing as far as demand for the traditional 15 a-side game is concerned. All clubs are reporting stable or growing numbers of adult teams. Wasps FC is also reporting growth in numbers of junior players and interest in women's rugby. This growth in the traditional forms of the game locally in the borough is happening alongside small but growing demand for adult touch and tag forms of the game.
Particular sports clubs and sites where demand is likely to increase or decrease and potential effect – Wasps FC is predicting the largest growth in demand and this will put increasing pressure on their pitches. West London RFC is planning some growth that could be accommodated at their current location. Both of these have the potential to have a knock-on impact on other clubs who use these grounds as an overspill including Old Actonians who are planning to grow their club using a combination of this overspill capacity and the planned new provision in Gunnersbury Park, provided this is made available at affordable rates.
Potential effect of changes in supply – An additional Rugby compliant AGP in the borough would have a significant impact on the current supply and demand of pitches, especially if this were to be provided at Wasps FC. The proposals to re-provide a grass pitch and two football AGPs at Gunnersbury Park will also serve to address the current match play and training needs of Old Actonians RFC and have potential to facilitate the growth plans of this club (a junior section) provided the facilities are made available to the club at affordable rates. Bringing the second pitch into use at Cayton Green Park will accommodate a small amount of additional demand but would not be sufficient or in the right location to resolve current pitch supply and capacity issues for Wasps or Old Actonians.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 16
Page 206 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
6. Key findings and issues for rugby (Step 6)
Figure 7: Key findings and issues
Rugby
The main There has also been significant investment in facilities for rugby union in Ealing since the last borough-wide review in 2010. While characteristics the overall number of pitches available has remained unchanged at 18, the overall playing capacity of the pitch supply has been of the current increased. This has been achieved by the conversion of two of the grass pitches at Trailfinders Sports Ground to floodlit World supply of and Rugby AGPs; by installing floodlights to two pitches at Wasps FC's Twyford Avenue Sports Ground and one grass pitch at the demand for Trailfinders Sports Ground plus providing a new floodlit training area at the London Marathon Playing Fields in Greenford, used by provision West London RFC. Ancillary facilities have also been improved at several sites through a combination of private finance (Trailfinders) and Sport England and RFU investment programmes (e.g. a new modular changing pavilion in Cayton Green Park used by Northolt RFC).
Alongside this investment in supply, there has also been a steady growth in demand since the last review in the number of mini and youth teams (at both Trailfinders and Wasps). There are now 82 teams in total (of which 60 are for players from u6 to u16) compared to a total of 77 in 2010 (49 mini and juniors). The number of rugby clubs based in the borough is unchanged at six, however Hanwell RFC has been formed since the last review and trains in Ealing but plays in Hounslow.
The Rugby Premiership side Wasps completed its relocation from Acton to Coventry in 2016. Wasps FC, the voluntary club, has approaching 500 playing members and owns the freehold of its home ground in Acton. The club will find it harder to raise funds for necessary facility enhancements following the move of the professional side.
Ealing Trailfinders RC has a similar size playing membership to Wasps FC and has continued to develop since the last facility review through the patronage of the private individual who owns the site and facilities. Ealing Trailfinders RC remain as the only club in the borough that offers professional rugby (a semi pro team in the second tier Rugby Championship), a youth academy as well as a full range of junior sides from age 6 upwards. This site also became the home base of London Broncos Rugby League (first team plus u16/u19 academy) in 2016.
In addition to these two large clubs offering opportunities to play at most standards, there are a further five clubs that offer opportunities for adult men's regional and/or county league rugby and social rugby. One - Old Actonians - has a secure site (leased from the Council) but lacks sufficient capacity on its home ground to deliver its development plans that include starting a junior section. Two clubs - West London RFC and Hanwell RFC - have no security of access to their home facilities. Both clubs rent access on a season-by-season basis from the London Playing Fields Foundation, the latter at Boston Manor Playing Fields just outside the borough in Hounslow.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 17
Page 207 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
Rugby
Is there enough YES. Security of access to rugby grounds in the borough is good, particularly for the key development clubs, and current demand accessible and is largely met by current supply. There is enough secured supply for league rugby (senior and youth) home fixtures (played mainly secured on Saturday afternoons) and midweek evening training. However, at some sites, capacity for junior matches and training on community use Sundays is becoming an issue. provision to meet current The success of the two key clubs - Ealing Trailfinders RC and Wasps FC in growing demand and participation by both boys and girls demand? in mini and junior rugby when combined with the playing and training demands of these clubs' senior teams and the financial pressure to maximise income generation through hire of pitches either for representative matches or to other clubs (e.g. Old Actonians at Wasps and London Broncos professional rugby league at Ealing Trailfinders), means that the grass pitches are used near to capacity. This is particularly an issue at Wasps which does not currently have an AGP and also has plans for further growth.
In addition, the Old Actonians club is unable at present to meet demand for junior and mini rugby although there is an opportunity to address this using the new facilities at Gunnersbury Park which, although just outside the borough, is very close to the club's ground. Also, the recently established single team club Hanwell RFC is currently displaced to a London Playing Fields site in Hounslow for its home matches although training takes place within Ealing borough at Elthorne Park adjacent to Elthorne Leisure Centre.
Is the provision YES. Two thirds of pitches are considered to be maintained to a good standard and 14 of the 15 grass pitches have at least that is adequate drainage. The quality of pitches in Ealing is generally good but with some scope for improving the capacity of current accessible of supply by increasing quality especially at Wasps. One of the pitches at St Benedict's School used by Old Priorian drains poorly sufficient despite good maintenance by the school's ground staff. The club wish to improve the drainage of this pitch to reduce the frequency quality and of cancellations by the school and the need to find alternative pitches to hire at short notice. appropriately maintained? In terms of ancillary facilities, a priority is to improve the changing facilities at Old Actonians Sports Ground, particularly if mixed mini rugby is to be offered at the site in future, although this activity may be better located at the new facilities proposed for Gunnersbury Park. Other clubs with current aspirations supported by the RFU to modernise their social facilities are Wasps FC and Northolt RFC in Cayton Green Park.
What are the In terms of future demand, considered together, given the population growth and the clubs own plans for team growth, there is a main predicted increase by 2031 of 6 Senior Men’s teams, 4-5 Youth Boys’ teams, 1 Youth Girls’ team and 3 Mini/Midi teams. If this characteristics growth takes place, the total number of rugby teams in Ealing will increase from 82 at present to around 97 teams. of the future supply and In terms of committed projects that will impact on future supply, the completion of the new pavilion building at Perivale Park will demand for increase the attractiveness of the single pitch on this site for use by Ealing based rugby clubs on a shared basis with Gaelic Football provision? (St Joseph's GFC).
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 18
Page 208 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix D - RUGBY Assessment of Needs
Rugby
The main opportunity to increase the capacity of supply to address forecast demand is on the secured club site at Wasps FC now that the Trailfinders site has two AGPs. There are current outline proposals for a rugby compliant AGP at Twyford Avenue Sports Ground for dual use by Wasps with the Twyford High School as part of contingency plans by the Council to address the need for more school places.
The current proposals for Gunnersbury Park will also address some rugby demand if implemented as planned. A re-instated grass rugby pitch in this park will provide overspill capacity for Old Actonians RFC at weekends and the floodlit FTP for midweek non- contact drills training. It also opens up the potential for this club to implement its growth plans including starting a junior section. However, cost of access to the Gunnersbury pitches will be a key issue in terms of the availability of these new facilities to the club.
In the event that one or more of these projects (included in the Action Plan at the conclusion of this PPS) fail to come forward, the needs case should be reassessed as part of the PPS update and review process.
Is there enough accessible and NO. There is little spare capacity currently at peak times at the Wasps FC club sites and, in particular, there is insufficient unused secured playing capacity on the existing grass pitches at Wasps FC to allow for growth, as planned by this key club. community use provision to Without further rugby compliant AGP capacity, the forecast increase in teams resulting from population growth and clubs' own meet future development plans will place further demand on the existing grass pitch supply, most of which is already used at or near its playing demand? capacity.
What is the The quality of rugby facility supply overall in Ealing Borough is generally good. As indicated above, the priority projects for future overall quality investment in quality enhancement to best sustain and grow the clubs based in Ealing are: level? 1. Wasps FC - Development of the Wasps FC site at Twyford Avenue Sports Ground is of particular interest to the RFU, potentially to include a rugby compliant AGP for dual use with the school adjacent which the Council has plans to expand. The RFU consider this an ideal venue to further grow the game in West London
2. Old Actonians RFC- clubhouse and changing rooms modernisation at the club's ground
3. Northolt RFC - improved social facilities at Cayton Green Park
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 19
Page 209 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
Appendix E: Bowls & Croquet - Assessment of Needs
The findings of the assessment of supply of facilities for bowls and croquet in the London Borough of Ealing are summarised in this section.
There are now seven bowls clubs currently playing in the borough who, between them, currently use a total of six standard size (6 lane) bowling greens and one small (4 lane) green at sites within the borough. There is one further 6 lane green in Islip Manor Park that no longer has club use (since 2012) but continues to be available for casual bowls. Lammas Park - located quite close to the West Ealing Bowls Club - used to have three public greens with pay and play access. Usage declined to a point where the Council decided it was no longer viable to continue to maintain this facility for bowls. The Council is negotiating terms of a lease on these good quality greens and a pavilion that needs attention with Ealing Croquet Club to expand their activities. Lammas Park is one of only two dedicated croquet club venues in West London. A further public bowls green was taken out by the Council in Acton Park following the demise of the Acton Bowls Club in February 2015.
Six of the seven bowls clubs in Ealing have contributed to the assessment either via an online survey or interview on the site visits. A further club - Gunnersbury Bowls Club - has also engaged in the consultation. This club draws its members from Ealing borough predominantly and considers itself to be an Ealing based club although its location within Gunnersbury Park is just over the borough border in Hounslow.
1. Bowls & Croquet Supply
Bowling Greens in Ealing
The eight operational bowling greens in Ealing borough are summarised below: o The Brentham Club, 38a Meadvale Road, Brentham Garden Suburbs, Ealing, W5 1NP – A good quality 6 lane green with pavilion and on site car parking owned and maintained by a well-supported sports and social club which also has tennis, cricket, football and bridge sections. This is a successful club with a stable membership. No casual (non member) bowling is available other than as the guest of member. o Ealing Conservative Bowls Club, 1 Craven Road, Ealing, W5 2UA – A small 4 lane green and wooden pavilion to the rear of Ealing Broadway, owned and maintained by the club. The club is barely sustainable with only 17 playing and 10 social members at the time of our site visit. There is no on site car parking. The quality of the small green is poor. It suffers from shading from surrounding tall buildings. No casual (non member) bowling is available other than as the guest of member. o Horsenden Hill Recreation Ground, Horsenden Lane North, Greenford UB6 0PR – A 6 lane green and pavilion owned and maintained by the Council. North Greenford Bowls Club has its playing base here but no lease. The membership is stable but small at 19 and therefore only able to offer friendly bowls (no league play) currently. Club members buy annual season tickets from the Council. Casual bowling is available but take up is
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 1
Page 210 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
negligible. The club considers the green to be maintained to a good quality and, aside from a need for some replacement fencing and pavilion windows; the Council maintains the facilities to a good standard. o Islip Manor Park, Eastcote Lane North, Northolt, UB5 5RJ – Formerly the home green of Northolt Bowls Club, since the club folded in 2012, the Council has managed casual bowls sessions on this popular 6 lane green in summer, as of 2016 a group of volunteers has committed to running these sessions in the future. Improvement works were undertaken to the greenside shelter in 2015. Bowlers attending the sessions access toilets in a Play Centre close by on this site. This is the only bowls green in the Northolt area. o Pitshanger Park, Perivale Gardens, W13 8DH – A 6 lane green and wooden pavilion owned and maintained by the Council. Pitshanger Park Bowls Club has its playing base here but no lease. Club members buy annual season tickets from the Council. Casual bowling is available but take up is negligible. The club rate the facilities as 'adequate' and consider that, to halt a decline in membership (currently standing at 30 approx.) and the number of visiting teams prepared to play at this venue, there is a need for improvements to the green which is very worn in parts with bare patches close to the perimeter, provision of toilets (to remove reliance on access to cafe toilets some distance away), and more regular repainting of the exterior of the building where some of the wood to the door surrounds etc. is beginning to rot. o Springfield Bowls Club, Western Gardens, Ealing, W5 3RS - A standard 6 lane green with pavilion and on site car parking held on long lease and maintained by the club. Good quality green and stable membership of circa 110 (including social members) and a number of young players. The club has a large pavilion which was reroofed and insulated at the club's expense in 2009 following a decision by a tribunal to fix the rent at £5,400 per annum until the next review date (2029). The freehold owners aspire to develop the site for housing. The pavilion needs a refresh with new, carpeting, fire doors and access toilet. o Wolf Fields, Norwood Green, Southall, UB2 5RJ - A 6 lane green and pavilion owned by the Council. Two clubs - Featherstone BC and Southall BC merged in 2016 to form Featherstone and Southall BC (with 29 members currently). The club has its playing base here but no lease. Club members buy annual season tickets from the Council. Casual bowling is available but take up is negligible. In consultation, the club rate the green as good quality although suffering from too much shade from overhanging trees and occasional trespass by children scaling the fence and playing football on the green. From our site visit, there are localised areas near to the edges of the green with poor grass cover. The condition of the wooden pavilion is rated by the Featherstone club as 'acceptable' although from our visit it was evident that some repairs are required (e.g. to the ceiling) and externally the building would benefit from a refresh and replacement of the boarded up windows and rusted perimeter fence and entrance gate. This is the only remaining green in the Southall area in the south west of the borough. o West Ealing Bowls Club, Mervyn Road, Northfields W13 9UW - This club is the most successful in the borough in terms of playing performance with both men and women regularly reaching national level competition finals. The 6 lane green with pavilion was leased to the bowls club by the Council for 125 years in the 1990s. Along with the Springfield and Brentham clubs, the West Ealing club has a large and stable membership (currently 110 members of whom approximately 60 are regular players). No casual (non member) bowling is available other than as the guest of member. The Council funded some upgrade works to the changing rooms to make them accessible for disabled users in 2013. Historically, this club, which was formed in 1923, operated two greens on the site. The land where the second green was situated is served by a second small wooden pavilion and, since 2005, has been sub let to Brentford FC Junior 'Bees' as a junior football training pitch.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 2
Page 211 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
Croquet Lawns in Ealing o Lammas Park, Culmington Road, Ealing W13 - The facilities comprise three greens used regularly for playing croquet with a two storey pavilion in average condition. Ealing Croquet Club originally used two greens but took over use of the third when the bowls club on the site folded. Use of the third green has allowed the club to train and play matches at the same time, as well as offer beginner sessions to new members. It has also allowed the club to play both forms of croquet, the traditional long game and the newer Golf Croquet, popular with new players. The Club and Council are currently negotiating a lease on this facility which will mean the Club, as of 2017, will contribute to the grounds maintenance costs of the site. The lease will also provide the Club with security of tenure which will allow it to apply for grant funding for future facility enhancements. If the Club is unable to meet the terms of the lease then the Council will investigate alternative uses of one or more of the greens as well as additional use of the pavilion.
Supply in neighbouring boroughs
Generally, outdoor bowls clubs in London tend to have small catchment areas with many players living within walking distance or a short bus or tube ride from the green. There are some exceptions in that a minority of players will travel to clubs outside their local area that can offer higher levels of competition. This is not the case in Ealing as the West Ealing Bowls Club offers opportunities for both men and women to play at the highest levels of competition and is within walking distance of Northfields underground station. Two other clubs in the borough - Springfield and Brentham - also offer competition opportunities to a good county league standard for both men and women and can be accessed from most parts of the borough.
The only outdoor clubs identified in the neighbouring boroughs to Ealing that impacts on the supply/demand balance in Ealing is the Gunnersbury Bowls Club in Gunnersbury Park, just over the borough boundary with Hounslow. This club, with 28 playing members currently, is in the process of agreeing a new lease with Hounslow Council. The green is maintained by club volunteers and is rated by the club as 'good'. However, the pavilion dates back to the 1930s and, in the view of the club, is in an 'unacceptable' condition which acts as a deterrent to attracting new members.
The only other community croquet facility in West London is located in Hammersmith & Fulham borough at the Hurlingham Club, a private members club.
Indoor Bowls
In terms of indoor bowls, there is no facility located in Ealing borough. However, there are accessible clubs and indoor centres available in neighbouring boroughs as follows: o Hounslow IBC, Sutton Lane (Heathrow area) o Richmond IBC o Herga IBC in Harrow o Jack Hi IBC in Hayes, Hillingdon
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 3
Page 212 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
Distribution of greens and indoor centres
The greens are reasonably well distributed across the borough as shown in Map 1 although, since the closure of the Acton club, provision on the east side is limited to the green just outside the borough boundary in Gunnersbury Park: o North - Northolt (Islip Manor Park), North Greenford (Horsenden Hill), Pitshanger Park o West - Wolf Fields, Southall o Central - Springfield, Brentham, Ealing Conservative Club o South - West Ealing
The locations of the indoor clubs and centres in neighbouring boroughs to Ealing are shown in Map 2.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 4
Page 213 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
Map 1 - Distribution of Bowls Greens and Croquet Lawns in Ealing borough
Ealing - Bowls facilities
Existing facilities
Map No. Site Address Postcode 1 Brentham 38a Meadvale Road, Ealing, W5 1NP 2 Ealing Conservative BC 1 Craven Road, Ealing, W5 2UA 3 Gunnersbury Park (LB Hounslow) Popes Lane, Acton W3 8LQ 4 Horsenden Hill Playing Fields Horsenden Lane North, Greenford UB6 0PR 5 Islip Manor Park Eastcote Lane North, Northolt UB5 5RJ 6 Pitshanger Park Perivale Gardens off Bellevue Road, Ealing, W13 8DH 7 Springfield (Acton) Between 25/27 Western Gardens, Ealing, W5 3RS 8 Wolf Fields Thorncliffe Road, Norwood Green, Southall UB2 5RJ 9 West Ealing BC Mervyn Road, off Haslemer Avenue, W13 9UW
Ealing - Croquet facilities 1 Lammas Park Lammas Park, Ealing, W13 9NJ
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 5
Page 214 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
Map 2 - Indoor Bowls Club/Centre locations in neighbour boroughs
Active Places Power (May 2016)
Greens at risk
The following greens are perceived to be at some risk of loss in the medium term: o Islip Manor Park, Northolt – Demand is for casual rather than club use on this site but if this demand were to fall away then the future of the green would need to be revaluated. o Pitshanger Park - Club has a declining membership, the green is of quite low quality and the pavilion lacks toilet facilities. o Horsenden Hill - membership of North Greenford club needs to grow substantially and introduce more opportunities for league play if the club is to sustain itself in the long term. o Ealing Conservative BC - Very small membership, with a poor quality green. This site has high potential value for development (subject to planning) and is owned freehold by members.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 6
Page 215 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
3. Bowls & Croquet Demand
There are currently seven bowls clubs based in Ealing (plus the Gunnersbury Bowls Club based just outside the borough boundary). Together these clubs have a total active membership of approximately 200-225 players from April to October, plus sizeable social memberships in the cases of the main West Ealing and Springfield clubs. The size of membership ranges from just 17 and 19 players in the smallest clubs (Ealing Conservative Bowls Club and North Greenford ) to around 110 (of whom 60 are regular players) at the two largest clubs (West Ealing and Springfield).
All of the clubs - with the exception of North Greenford - offer members and guests a combination of inter club leagues and knockout competitions, internal competitions and friendly 'roll-up' games.
Three greens in the public parks - Horsenden Hill, Pitshanger Park and Wolf Fields - offer low cost casual pay and play access alongside annual season tickets for club members. From the club survey returns it is evident that casual use is negligible at each of these greens.
Overall, in line with national trends, despite some development support from London Sport (on behalf of the Bowls Development Alliance), several of the bowls clubs in Ealing have declining memberships. At the same time, take up of casual bowling by non-members has also fallen over the last ten years.
In this context, the greens available provide more than ample capacity to meet the current demands of existing clubs, members and teams in Ealing- based bowls clubs.
The Ealing Croquet Club has around 25 regular playing members currently using the three lawns in Lammas Park, W13.
Active People Survey - Bowls
Active People Survey 9 (Oct 2014 - Oct 2015) shows that just 0.21% of adults (16+) in the London Region played bowls for at least 30 minutes once a week. Whilst the sample size for the borough is too small to be statistically significant, the bowls participation trend has clearly been downward over the last ten years in the borough, London region and nationally. No APS figures are available for croquet.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 7
Page 216 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
Source: Sport England (May 2016)
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 8
Page 217 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
Market Segmentation - Bowls
Analysis of Sport England’s Sports Market Segmentation data for Ealing Borough identifies that the main adult Sports Market Groups that currently play bowls in Ealing, in order of population size, are: Elsie & Arnold (Retirement Home Singles) - aged 66+ retired singles or widowers Frank (Twilight Years Gents) - aged 66+ retired with some pension provision Ralph & Phyllis (Comfortable Retired Couples) - 66+ enjoying active lifestyles Roger & Joy (Early Retirement Couples) - aged 56 to 65, free time couples
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 9
Page 218 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
Latent Demand - Bowls
The following table shows the Groups in Ealing that want to play bowls (either to start, resume or play more often) i.e. self-reported latent demand. Latent demand is greatest among the four already high-participating Groups plus Terry - Local Old Boys - generally inactive older men with low incomes. More club open days, friendly roll ups, local promotions and incentives for existing members to introduce friends and neighbours to the sport have potential to covert some of this existing latent demand.
Source: Sport England (May 2016)
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 10
Page 219 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
Displaced demand - Bowls
The only displaced demand identified for outdoor bowls in Ealing is exported just across the borough boundary to the Gunnersbury Bowls Club in Gunnersbury Park in the LB of Hounslow.
All demand for indoor bowls is exported to the indoor centres in neighbouring local authorities, mainly to centres in Hounslow (south) and Hayes (west).
4. The situation at individual sites
Figure 1: Bowls Supply and Demand Audit Summary by Site
Site/Green Owner Management & Green Pavilion Club and use Access /condition /condition Brentham Sports Club - Sports & Social Club 6 rink - Good Brentham BC - full programme of inter club and internal Club, Ealing freehold Good competitions and friendly roll ups. 40+ players Ealing Conservative Private Club 4 rink - Standard Members purchased freehold from the Conservative & Bowls Club, Ealing members - Poor Unionist Party in 1933 - limited programme. 19 players freehold Horsenden Hill LBE LBE maintains 6 rink - Standard - new North Greenford BC - limited programme of friendly Playing Fields, Club manages use Good windows and competition and roll ups. 19 players. Casual play Greenford fencing available. Islip Manor Park, LBE LBE maintains and 6 rink - None - shelter No club. Council run summer sessions only. Northolt manages use Standard only Pitshanger Park, LBE LBE maintains 6 rink - Poor - No toilets. Pitshanger Park BC - full programme of inter club and Perivale Club manages use Standard External painting, internal competitions and friendly roll ups. 30 players. Bare patches rot Casual play available. Springfield Bowls Club - long Club 6 rink - Good - some Full programme of inter club and internal competitions Club, Ealing lease. Good internal upgrade and friendly roll ups plus event days. 60+ players Owned and access WC privately Wolf Fields, LBE LBE maintains 6 rink - Standard - ceiling, Featherstone & Southall BC. Full programme of inter Southall Club manages use Standard perimeter fence club and internal competitions and friendly roll ups. 50+ Bare patches and gate, windows players. Casual play available. West Ealing Bowls Club - long Club 6 rink - Good Full programme of inter club and internal competitions Club, Mervyn Road lease LBE Good and friendly roll ups plus event days. 60+ players
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 11
Page 220 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
5. The current and future pictures of provision
Current
Overall, there are sufficient bowls greens in Ealing to meet current demand for seven borough based clubs (plus Gunnersbury Bowls Club in Gunnersbury Park) and expressed and latent demand for casual bowls.
The distribution of greens across the borough is reasonably good although residents in the east of the borough in the Acton area have to travel to Gunnersbury Park just outside the borough boundary to access a green.
The quality of supply is generally adequate for the level of league competition played.
A case can be made for some rationalisation of clubs and greens to consolidate and improve the quality of a smaller number of venues in an effort to slow and reverse the trend of falling participation. An option for further consideration with the clubs involved and detailed financial feasibility assessment is an invest-to-save project in an artificial surface for pay and play at one of the parks sites, however this surface is often not popular with league bowlers and is an ideal surface to attract misuse from youngsters playing football.
Future
Potential effect of population change - Future population growth figures have been calculated for the period of this strategy against the primary age groups for participation in bowls.
Figure 2: Potential population change in primary bowls age groups
Sport and Age Groups 2011 Population 2031 Population Population Change
All adults (16+) 321,643 269,572 +52,071 (+19%) Bowls primary age group (45-84) 151,062 108,926 +42,136 (+39%) Sources: Neighbourhood Statistics 2011 Census; LBE Planning Population Projections for Local Plan
By 2031, assuming current bowls participation (latest London average Active People Survey rate of 0.21%) and the forecast population growth takes place, there will be approximately 100 additional adults requiring access to bowls rinks.
This modest level of increase in demand resulting from population change can comfortably be accommodated by existing facilities based on the England Bowls capacity standard of approximately 60 players per 6 lane green.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 12
Page 221 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
Potential effect of demand trends (how pitch sports are played) – The national trend of gradual decline in demand for bowls facilities is reflected across London. Whilst one or two of the most proactive clubs with good quality greens and ancillary facilities report stable playing membership numbers - e.g. West Ealing and Springfield, most clubs in the borough are experiencing a gradual decline. The effect of this trend over the period of this strategy will be to make it increasingly difficult to justify maintaining all the existing provision in parks for the numbers of people regularly playing the game.
Particular clubs and sites where demand is likely to increase or decrease and potential effect - The lack of regular play at park greens is already an issue at the green in Islip Manor Park in Northolt where there is no club but two popular weekly sessions run by volunteers. The membership of the North Greenford club at Horsenden Hill must also be a concern with regard to the long-term sustainability of the club unless there is significant growth in the next few seasons. At this site and Pitshanger Park, where membership levels are declining, the trend can only continue without investment of time and financial resources in both bowls development and promotional activities alongside physical enhancements to the greens and pavilion facilities to make them more welcoming.
The West Ealing, Springfield and Brentham clubs have large playing memberships and benefit from good quality greens and ancillary facilities. These clubs and sites have potential to sustain demand. However, in the medium term, these clubs are likely to require more support (from the Council, London Sport and the Bowls Development Alliance) if they are to buck the national trend and continue to thrive. In particular, support is needed with promotion and development activities to attract more young members and to train more volunteers in green keeping so as to maintain the greens to the standard required to sustain competition to district and county standards. The Ealing Conservative Bowls Club is not sustainable in the medium to long term as there is no development activity to attract new players and the facilities are very limited with little potential for enhancement on a constrained site.
Potential effect of changes in supply – Should the Islip Manor Park green be removed from the supply, residents of Northolt would need to travel either south to access an alternative green in Ealing or north to clubs and sites in South Ruislip and South Harrow. Rationalisation of supply with more sharing of greens by clubs (and/or club mergers) has potential to stem the trend of declining demand but only if the resources currently allocated to greens maintenance continue to be made available and used to improve the standard of the reduced number of greens. It should also be noted that there is always a risk that failing clubs will decide to fold rather than move or amalgamate. Any such consolidation of bowls facility provision (e.g. Pitshanger Park BC which has issues with its green and pavilion moving to share the superior green at Horsenden Hill with North Greenford Bowls Club) needs to consider distribution of the remaining greens so that residents across the borough enjoy good accessibility to a good standard of green.
In this regard, maintaining provision in Gunnersbury Park (in partnership with Hounslow Council) is important to serving bowls demand from the Acton area in the east of the borough. Should the Council decide to convert a park green in to artificial turf, with appropriate development activity and marketing, it might stimulate pay and play and junior bowls development. However, the feasibility of such a change in supply would need to be assessed in terms of impact on current club use and options for relocation and club-share (if required), capital cost and availability of grants, and a lifecycle cost analysis to compare with current annual maintenance costs.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 13
Page 222 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
6. Key findings and issues (Step 6)
Figure 3: Key findings and issues
Bowls The main characteristics of Despite loss of greens in recent years in Lammas Park (now used for croquet) and Acton Park, there remains a the current supply of and good level of supply of bowls greens in Ealing relative to many London boroughs, with a total of eight active greens demand for provision plus a further green just outside the borough boundary in Gunnersbury Park. The distribution of greens is good although since the closure of the Acton Park green, residents in the east of the borough rely on the Gunnersbury Park facility. Four of the nine greens are located in public parks or recreation grounds. The other club facilities are held either freehold or on long lease. Access to the supply is therefore secured. Three greens are available for casual use when open for use by club members but this form of demand is now negligible. Club membership levels are generally in decline in the borough (as the national trend) and, whilst all the greens are maintained to an adequate level for recreational play, the quality of several of the greens and pavilion facilities (Horsenden Hill Playing Fields, Pitshanger Park, Ealing Conservative Bowls Club) limits the appeal to new members or casual players. Bowls participation rates in London are only around half the national level and there is a gradual decline trend both across London and nationally. Is there enough accessible YES. It is clear that with the number of secured and accessible greens and with club playing membership numbers and secured community use in most cases, below the minimum recommended by the Bowls Development Alliance to sustain a healthy club level provision to meet current (i.e. 40 per green) and within the Bowls England benchmark comfortable capacity for a 6 lane green (i.e. 60 playing demand? members), existing supply more than meets current demand. With regard to croquet, secured community use will depend upon Ealing Council and Ealing Croquet Club successfully establishing a new lease arrangement for the facilities in Lammas Park. Is the provision that is NO. Although the maintenance regime is consistently applied across the Council owned greens, bare patches are accessible of sufficient evident on the greens in Pitshanger Park and Wolf Fields in Southall, also on the club maintained 4 lane green at quality and appropriately the Ealing Conservative Bowls Club. Generally, the more successful bowls clubs (e.g. West Ealing, Springfield) are maintained? those with access to additional skilled volunteer expertise in fine sports turf maintenance with the time and flexibility to respond to changes in weather and alter the frequency/level of cut and green irrigation accordingly. What are the main Increased demand over the strategy period that may arise from population growth is quite small and is likely to be characteristics of the future outweighed by the general trend of declining demand. To stem this decline is likely to require a combination of: supply and demand for i) Continued development activity and promotion by the clubs and partner agencies (particularly London Sport and provision? the Bowls Development Alliance) ii) Consolidation of available resources for green maintenance on a smaller number of greens and sites while maintaining a good level of accessibility, and iii) Further transfer of responsibility for aspects of greens maintenance to those clubs with good governance, together with the resources required to procure appropriate expertise.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 14
Page 223 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix E - BOWLS & CROQUET Assessment of Needs
Is there enough accessible YES. There is substantial spare capacity with most clubs based at the greens in the borough operating at lower and secured community use memberships than recommended by the Bowls Development Alliance for a healthy, sustainable 6 lane site (40 provision to meet future playing members) and well within Bowls England guide capacity (60 playing members). demand? What is the overall quality The overall quality level of the greens available at the bowls clubs in the borough that maintain their own greens on level? secure sites is generally good with just one of four (Ealing Conservative Bowls Club) rated as poor.
The three park based public greens in the borough (and the Gunnersbury Park green) are more difficult to secure and protect from vandalism. These are all rated as standard. The main green quality issues identified are bare patches on the Park greens at Wolf Fields (Southall) and Pitshanger Park and at Ealing Conservative Bowls Club.
In terms of pavilions, the main issues are a lack of changing facilities at Islip Manor Park, although toilets are available in the adjacent play centre; a lack of toilets in the pavilion at Pitshanger Park and a requirement for repairs/refresh to the wooden pavilions at Pitshanger Park and Wolf Fields.
At Lammas Park, the Council and Ealing Croquet Club need to ensure changing/toilet and social facilities are appropriate for use.
The usage of all Council greens should be monitored and the needs case for further rationalisation of supply kept under annual review.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 15
Page 224 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix F - TENNIS Assessment of Needs
Appendix F: Tennis - Assessment of Needs
Detailed audit assessments of the supply and demand for tennis facilities in Ealing borough were carried out in both 2007 and 2010. More recently, in 2015, the LTA conducted an audit of the majority of the public park courts across the borough identifying enhancement priorities at these sites. The findings of these assessments are summarised below, together with a commentary on recent and proposed changes to the picture of supply and demand that may impact on the conclusions for the period of this new Playing Pitch Strategy to 2030.
1. Tennis Supply
2007 PPS The 2007 Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy assessment identified just over 100 tennis courts in Ealing, in both public and private ownership offering community access. A similar number of courts are identified currently on the Sport England Active Places database. The study concluded that no new courts were needed as no latent demand was identified through consultation with clubs but it was important to retain public courts to make the sport accessible to the wider community. There was considered to be a gap in provision in the north of the borough. Consultation showed that in order for clubs to progress towards achieving county accredited status and develop player rankings, floodlit courts were needed to provide all round year play at St. Columba's Tennis Club, Old Actonians Tennis Club and Greenford Tennis Club. Since 2007 floodlighting has been installed to courts at both Old Actonians and Greenford Tennis Club but not at St Columba's Tennis Club. (NB. The four courts on the St Columba's club site are close to housing. The LTA advise that whilst the club is actively seeking LTA funding support for court lighting, there may be potential for the club to run winter sessions under lights on new courts proposed in Gunnersbury Park nearby, subject to the operating model for these courts).
2010 Sports Strategy The 2010 Ealing Sports Facilities Strategy identified a much larger supply of courts than in the 2007 study - over 170 in total, plus a further 8 Multi Use Games Areas (MUGAs) that have tennis court markings (but no permanent nets) - as detailed in the following tables and location map.
Free to access courts - Figure 1 shows free to use tennis courts situated in public parks and the number of courts both currently and in 2010. The 2010 assessment found that these courts to be of varying quality, however a subsequent refurbishment programme resulted in improved playing surfaces and fencing around the majority of courts. This improvement programme also resulted in a change of use for some tennis courts; at sites where there was more than one court, a number of multi use games areas were installed increasing the range of activities available at each site. Usage of this stock of park courts in winter is limited, as none are floodlit and the MUGA courts are not equipped with nets. Reductions in the number of dedicated tennis courts since 2010 applied at the following sites: o Southall Recreation Ground (reduced from 3 dedicated courts to 0 courts with development of cage cricket facilities) o Spikes Bridge Park (reduced from 3 to 2 courts with development of MUGA facilities) o Westcott Park Estate (the single court on Cuckoo Park managed by the Council as part of the Hanwell Community Centre is no longer maintained and has fallen out of use)
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 1
Page 225 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix F - TENNIS Assessment of Needs
Figure 1: Free to access tennis courts available in Ealing in 2016 (and 2010)
Map Site No. Location Courts Floodlit 1 Acton Park 2 No 2 Berkeley Fields (Horsenden Hill side) 3 No 3 Churchfields Recreation Ground 3 No 4 Elthorne Park 3 No 5 Perivale Park 2 No 6 Ravenor Park 2 No 7 Southall Recreation Ground - courts converted to cage 0 (3) No cricket 17 Southall Park 2 No 8 Southfields Recreation Ground 3 No 9 Spikes Bridge Park 2 (3) No 10 Westcott Park Estate (Cuckoo Park) 0 (1) No 11 Wolf Fields 2 No Total (10 current sites) 24 (29)
Pay & Play Courts on School Sites - Figure 2 shows the tennis courts located at dual use sports centres, available to use by schools during the day and the community at all other times. These courts are not dedicated for tennis as they are also marked and used for a number of other sports including netball and football. Although these courts are available to book during the sports centre opening hours (for an hourly fee of between £7.70 to £8.50 for adults), in practice there is negligible community use of these courts for community tennis. As of summer 2016, in addition to the courts listed in the table below there is also community tennis activity planned at Ellen Wilkinson High School in Acton (6 courts) and William Perkin High School in Greenford (3 floodlit courts).
Figure 2: Dual use (school & community) tennis courts in Ealing in 2016 (and 2010)
Map Site No. Location (operator) Courts Floodlit Not shown Alec Reed Academy Community Sports Centre (school) 4 (MUGA) No 12 Dormers Wells Leisure Centre (Better Leisure, GLL) 4 Yes 13 Elthorne Sports Centre (Everyone Active, SLM) 2 (4) Yes 14 Featherstone Sports Centre (school) 2 Yes 15 Greenford Sports Centre (Everyone Active, SLM) 2 Yes 16 Twyford Sports Centre (Everyone Active, SLM) 3 Yes Not shown Brentside High School, Greenford (Kajima Community) 3 Yes Not shown Reynolds Sports Centre, Acton (Everyone Active, SLM) 4 Yes Total (8 current sites) 24 (26)
Community Tennis Club Sites - The tennis facilities in Figure 3 below are either privately owned or leased from the Council and operated by constituted not- for-profit community sports clubs. Courts and ancillary facilities at local tennis clubs range from good to very good, with the exception of the two grass courts owned by St John with St James Church which have no changing rooms or toilets on site.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 2
Page 226 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix F - TENNIS Assessment of Needs
Figure 3: Club tennis courts in Ealing (on own sites or leased from Council) in 2016 (and 2010)
Map Site No. Location Courts Floodlit 22 Brentham Sports Club (Tennis section) 11 (12) - 4 astro Tiger Turf surface in 2015; 6 Yes - 4 grass; 1 porous macadam 23 Ealing LTC 15 - 3 indoor; 8 grass; 3 clay; 1 astro Yes – 3 indoor 24 Greenford TC 3 - porous macadam Yes - 3 25 Gunnersbury Triangle LTC 6 - astro Yes - 4 (2) 26 Old Actonians TC 3 - astro Yes - 2 27 St Columba's TC 4 - astro No 28 St John's LTC (summer only £30 adults) 2 - grass No 29 West Middlesex LTC 9 - 3 clay; 6 porous macadam Yes - 5 Total (8 current sites) 53 (54) – 21 floodlit inc. 3 indoor
Leased Park Courts with Pay & Play Access - The following tennis facilities are owned by the Council and operated by a third party through a lease arrangement. These leased sites are located in public parks and have limited ancillary facilities but do have access to toilets and changing areas and refreshment facilities. Recent improvements have been made to the playing surfaces at both sites and floodlights provided to some courts. Will to Win Tennis, who lease both sites, offer year round tennis activities on both a play and play and member (smartcard) basis for regular players. A joint project with Hounslow Council due to commence in 2017 is due to provide eight further floodlit pay and play courts (to replace existing derelict courts) in Gunnersbury Park.
Figure 4: Pay & Play Tennis courts in Ealing with third party operator in 2016 (and 2010)
Map Site No. Location and Operator Courts Floodlit 30 Lammas Park (Will to Win Ltd since 2000) 14 (12) - 6 dense macadam; 5 new porous Yes - 7 (No) macadam; 3 astro (shared use with football) 31 North Acton Playing Fields (Since 2014 Football Samurai 5 (12) – currently 5 dense macadam No Academy (FSA) have operated a football MUGA on former grass tennis courts plus 2 hard tennis courts). On The Ball Tennis Ltd manage 3 hard courts on annual membership basis) 32 Pitshanger Park (Will to Win Ltd since 2013) 8 (10) - porous macadam Yes - 4 (No) Total (3 current sites) 27 (34) – 11 floodlit
Private Health & Fitness Club Members Courts - Finally, the following tennis facilities are located within private members only health and fitness clubs. The 6 hard courts at the former Barclays Bank Sports Ground, previously operated through a private management arrangement, are now closed and in poor condition. This site is identified in the Council's Planning for Schools Development Plan Document as a potential location for a new high school with dual use sports facilities. In this context, the need for these courts in the period of this strategy is considered later in this report.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 3
Page 227 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix F - TENNIS Assessment of Needs
Figure 5: Commercial health clubs with tennis courts in 2016 (and 2010)
Map Site No. Location Courts Floodlit 33 David Lloyd Club (Sudbury Hill) 6 (6)- porous macadam Yes - 6 34 GSK Tennis Club 3 (3) No 35 The Park Club (formerly Acton TC now subsumed into 17 (18) - 4 astro covered dome; 7 astro; 2 grass; Yes – 11 inc. 4 indoor private members' health and fitness club) 4 porous macadam; plus 4 mini courts) 36 Trailfinders Sports Club 4 (8) - porous macadam (also used for netball) Yes - 4 37 Virgin Active West London 12 (12) - astro Yes - 12 38 Former Barclays Bank Sports Ground 0 (6 dense macadam) No Total (6 current sites) 42 (53) -33 floodlit inc. 4 indoor
Distribution
Catchment mapping analysis in 2010 showed that nearly the whole of the borough fell within a 1mile catchment of a free to access or pay and play community outdoor tennis site. The exception was a small area north of the A40 and west of the A312. However, tennis sites in Hillingdon and Harrow fall within a one mile catchment of residents in this area of Ealing borough. Two of the closest to Ealing are Queensmead Sports Centre in South Ruislip (four good quality floodlit public courts operated by Better Leisure/GLL) and Harrow Town Tennis Club south of Rayners Lane (four courts, 2 floodlit).
Community indoor courts are far less evenly distributed across the borough. Whilst there are three indoor community club courts at Ealing Tennis Club and four airhall covered courts in winter at the private members Park Club (both on the east side of the borough), most residents currently have poor access to community indoor courts relative to the residents of most West London boroughs.
There is a strategic case for providing more community indoor courts should there be a feasible, sustainable opportunity at one of borough's main hub or satellite sites (e.g. as a future phase of the Gunnersbury Park sports hub project with Hounslow Council serving the south of the borough).
Similarly, access to floodlit courts (which, together with community indoor courts, enable year round play) is poor in certain areas of the borough, most particularly north of the A40. The new floodlit courts at William Perkin High School will be the only community club accessible courts available (aside from at the commercial David Lloyd club in Sudbury) from Northolt in the west through to Perivale and Park Royal in the east. This supply issue in the north will need to be addressed as population grows along this corridor and in the Park Royal Opportunity Area in the north east in particular. Planned new floodlit facilities in North Acton Playing Fields will help meet this need.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 4
Page 228 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix F - TENNIS Assessment of Needs
Tennis
Map Address Postcode Key Existing free to use park courts 1 Acton Park The Vale, Acton W3 2 Berkeley Fields Horsenden Lane North, Greenford UB6 7QH 3 Churchfields Recreation Ground Manor Court Road, Hanwell W7 4 Elthorne Park Boston Road, Hanwell W7 2AD 5 Perivale Park Hicks Avenue, Perivale UB6 8TJ 6 Ravenor Park Ruislip Road, Greenford UB6 7 Southall Park Boyd Avenue, Southall UB2 5PJ 8 Southfields Recreation Ground Southfield Road, Acton W4 5LD 9 Spikes Bridge Park Cranleigh Gardens, Southall UB1 2AS 10 Wolf Fields Thorncliffe Road, Southall UB2 5RJ
Existing Council owned leased/licensed park sites
11 Lammas Park Lammas Park, Culmington Road, W13 9QD 12 North Acton Playing Fields Park Lodge, Noel Road, Acton W3 0JF 13 Pitshanger Park Woodbury Park Road, Ealing, W13 8DJ
Existing Sports Centre courts 14 Alec Reed Academy Community Sports Bengarth Road, Northolt UB5 5LQ Centre 15 Brentside Community Sports Centre Greenford Avenue, Hanwell W7 1JJ 16 Dormers Wells Leisure Centre Dormers Wells Lane, Southall UB1 3HX 17 Elthorne Sports Centre Westlea Road, off Boston Road, Hanwell W7 2AD www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 5
Page 229 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix F - TENNIS Assessment of Needs
18 Featherstone Sports Centre Montague Waye, Southall UB2 5HF 19 Greenford Sports Centre Lady Margaret Road, Southall UB1 2GU 20 Reynolds Sports Centre Gunnersbury Lane, Acton W3 8EY 21 Swift Road Outdoor Sports Centre Swift Road, Southall UB2 4RP 22 Twyford Sports Centre Twyford Crescent, Acton W3 9PP
Existing Tennis clubs 23 Brentham TC 38a Meadvale Rd, Ealing, W5 1NP 24 Ealing LTC Daniel Road (Off Creffield Road), Ealing, W5 3RY 25 Greenford TC 76 Ravenor Park Road, Greenford, UB6 9QY Middlesex. 26 Gunnersbury Triangle LTC Rear of Princes Avenue, Triangle Way, W3 8LN Acton, 27 Old Actonians TC Gunnersbury Drive,, Ealing, W5 4LL 28 St Columba's TC Carbery Avenue, Acton, London W3 9AL 29 St John's LTC Rathgar Avenue, Ealing, W13 30 West Middlesex LTC Berners Drive, Drayton Bridge Road, West W13 0JS Ealing
Existing Private Health and Fitness Clubs with tennis courts 31 David Lloyd Tennis Club (Sudbury Hill) Greenford Rd, Sudbury Hill, UB6 0HX 32 GSK Tennis Club Swyncombe Avenue, W5 4DR 33 The Park Club East Acton Lane, W3 7HB 34 Trailfinders Sports Club Castlebar, Vallis Way, W13 0DD 35 V Tennis 36 Bromyard Avenue, Acton, W3 7AU
Sites for planned new supply 36 Gunnersbury Park Popes Lane, Acton W3 8LQ
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 6
Page 230 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix F - TENNIS Assessment of Needs
Summary
In summary, in terms of supply, there are currently 170 tennis courts in Ealing borough with community access (i.e. excluding any courts in the gardens of private houses) across 35 sites, with two more dual use sites (Ellen Wilkinson School in Acton and William Perkin High School in Greenford) with 9 courts in total coming available for community use from summer 2016 and a joint project with Hounslow Council for eight floodlit pay and play courts (to replace existing derelict courts) in Gunnersbury Park due to commence in 2017.
Nearly the whole of the borough falls within a 1mile catchment of a free to access or pay and play community outdoor tennis site. The exception is the north west of the borough west of the A312. Tennis sites in Hillingdon and Harrow fall within a one mile catchment of residents in this area of Ealing borough.
Despite the high number of courts, there are just 3 permanent indoor courts at Ealing Lawn Tennis Club (plus a further 4 temporarily dome covered courts at The Park Club which may be lost in future). Access to the indoor court supply in the borough is only available to members and guests of these two clubs.
24 courts - 14% of the total are available to access free of charge in public parks and recreation grounds. None of these courts are floodlit. Most do not have any ancillary facilities available on site although those park courts operated by leaseholders in Acton Park, Perivale Park and Spike's Bridge allow use of toilets during opening hours. In light of forecast population growth, the LTA consider it important that the remaining free to access park courts are either protected for casual play or, in the case of those park sites with only two low grade courts and no access to ancillary facilities, casual demand re-directed to alternative park sites serving the same catchment with good quality courts, upgraded where necessary (e.g. with floodlighting and ancillary facilities such as toilets and refreshments), to allow an intensification of use.
A further 51 courts - 30% of the total - are available to access on a pay and play basis either in Parks (27 courts in Lammas, Pitshanger and North Acton Playing Fields) or on dual use school sites (24 courts). Just over two thirds (69%) of these pay and play courts are floodlit permitting year round use.
The remaining 95 courts – over half the total - are restricted to club members or their guests. Of these, 54 courts (including the 7 indoor courts) have lighting (55% of this type of supply).
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 7
Page 231 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix F - TENNIS Assessment of Needs
3. Tennis Demand
In terms of adult (16+) demand for tennis, as illustrated in the graph below, the trend in London and nationally is generally one of modest growth over the last four years following a period of decline between 2009 and 2011. In 2015, the proportion of the adult (16+) population of London self reporting as playing tennis on average for 30 minutes once a week in season was 1.59% just marginally above the first Active People Survey finding for this measure in 2014/15 of 1.55%. Adult tennis participation in London is approximately half a percentage point higher in London than the national average of 1.02%.
The sample size at borough level for weekly tennis participation was too small to be significant. However, using Sport England's Market Segmentation modelling, it is estimated that 6,298 adults (aged 16+) in Ealing currently play tennis (for at least 30 mins once in the last month) and 6,938 adults in Ealing self report as wanting to play more tennis. Applying the latest Active People Survey result for weekly tennis participation (1x30mins/week) for the London Region (i.e. 1.59%) to Ealing borough, indicates that two thirds of the current adult players (i.e. 4,300 approx.) are likely to play on average at least once a week.
A recent LTA commissioned YouGov survey indicated that two thirds of tennis players use park courts. The LTA has calculated that approximately 4,100 players can be accommodated by the available free to use and paid for courts during the peak period assuming 26 peak hours of use per court 6 - 9pm Monday to Thursday and 9am - 4pm weekends with an average of 3 players per court. This figure includes 50% of the courts (4) to be built as part of the new 8 court floodlit facility in Gunnersbury Park but does not factor in the additional capacity floodlit courts provide at park sites.
However, in light of large scale population growth forecast for the borough it is vital that the quality and distribution of Ealing's stock of park courts is kept under review in order to meet existing and future demand. As well as the quality of the courts and geographical distribution of the court locations it will also be important to ensure activity programmes and booking systems are in place in appropriate locations to encourage development activity and to satisfy the needs of existing and new players.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 8
Page 232 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix F - TENNIS Assessment of Needs
Forecast population growth will result in some increase in tennis demand but at the current adult (16+) participation rates (i.e. between 1% and 2%), it is evident that this will not be a major factor.
The primary driver of demand for tennis facilities in recent years has been the strong focus placed by the LTA, some schools and local authorities and by commercial tennis providers on mini tennis and the development of junior players. In Ealing, this tennis development activity takes place in a range of settings including: o Free introduction to tennis sessions on park courts (Elthorne Park) delivered by specialist Cattaway Tennis Ltd supported by the council and charity Tennis for Free o Mini tennis coaching courses at dual use centres (e.g. at Dormers Wells Leisure Centre delivered by Better Leisure - GLL)
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 9
Page 233 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix F - TENNIS Assessment of Needs o Tennis for All coaching courses including some free junior sessions on the public courts in Lammas Park and Pitshanger Park delivered by specialist tennis facility operator (Will to Win Tennis Ltd) o Coaching of junior club members on club courts by club coaches o Individual and group coaching sessions and courses delivered on club courts by coaches employed by commercial club operators (i.e. Virgin Active, David Lloyd), by specialist tennis coaching organisations (e.g. Will to Win and Tots to Juniors running courses at Brentside High School and Trailfinders Sports Club) and by self-employed coaches.
Consultation
In light of extensive recent consultation by the Council and the LTA with tennis clubs and operators in the borough, it was agreed in scoping the consultation for this strategy, that further consultation with clubs and operators would not be undertaken and the assessment would be informed by insight and audit material provided by the Council's Active Ealing Team, Middlesex LTA and the London and South East LTA Regional Team.
Ealing is a current priority area for the LTA. In 2015, the NGB signed up to a partnership agreement with the Council for joint development and investment in tennis facilities and programmes over the next 15 years to 2030 (i.e. the duration of this playing pitch strategy). Recent joint investment by the LTA, the British Tennis Federation, Ealing Council and Will to Win Tennis in the courts and lighting at Pitshanger Park and Lammas Park are examples of how all parties can contribute to tennis facility development.
As part of its commitment to partnership working on tennis development in Ealing borough to encourage more grass roots participation to promote public health and wellbeing as well as to further its aims to identify and develop more talented young players, the LTA has carried out an audit of park and community club sites to identify facility enhancement needs. The key findings of this audit - carried out in 2015 - are summarised in the table below and inform the action plan at the end of this Playing Pitch Strategy.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 10
Page 234 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix F - TENNIS Assessment of Needs
Figure 6 - Facility enhancement needs by park and club site in LTA audit 2015 (updated 2016)
Site Potential enhancements pending operational Priority/ Est. Cost Est. Cost Est. Cost Total Est. Cost (£)1 decisions plus planning permission and Timescale Courts (£) Lighting (£) Building (£) funding being secured Free to use Park courts Acton Park Convert 2 dense macadam courts to porous Medium/ 44,000 24,000 68,000 macadam and install floodlights. Long term Berkeley Convert 3 dense macadam to porous macadam Low/ 49,500 49,500 Fields Long term Churchfields Rebuild 3 porous macadam courts or consider Low/ 77,000 77,000 Recreation change of use due to current quality and location Long term Ground, Brent (mature trees damaging the court surface) Lodge Park Elthorne Park 3 courts resurfaced with new fencing in 2016 Medium/ 49,500 36,000 55,000 140,500 Install floodlights and small modular building with medium toilets term Perivale Park Floodlight 2 courts Low/ 24,000 24,000 Long term Spikes Bridge Convert 2 dense macadam to porous macadam Medium/ 49,500 49,500 Park Long term Ravenor Park Convert 2 dense macadam to porous macadam Low/ 49,500 49,500 Long term Southall Park Pavilion no longer exists, courts resurfaced and NA fence replaced in 2016 Southfields Pierce and resurface 3 courts, add floodlights to Medium/ 49,500 36,000 55,000 140,500 Recreation three courts and either small modular building next Long term Ground to the courts or refurbish existing building Wolf Fields Convert 2 dense macadam to porous macadam Low/ 49,500 49,500 Park Long term Dual use sports centres Dormers Courts resurfaced and fenced prior to school PFI NA Wells Leisure agreement starting 2015 Centre Featherstone Pierce and resurface 2 macadam courts. Low/ 33,000 33,000 School Sports Long term Centre Greenford Repaint Low/ 6,500 6,500 Sports Centre Long term Reynolds Repaint Low/ 6,500 6,500 Sports Centre Long term Twyford Short term plan to re provide in new location NA
1 No costs are included for the replacement of court fencing. The estimates are exclusive of Fees, Contingencies and VAT. www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 11
Page 235 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix F - TENNIS Assessment of Needs
Site Potential enhancements pending operational Priority/ Est. Cost Est. Cost Est. Cost Total Est. Cost (£)1 decisions plus planning permission and Timescale Courts (£) Lighting (£) Building (£) funding being secured Sports Centre Council owned leased sites Lammas Park Rebuild 5 porous macadam courts. Low/ 93,500 93,500 Long term North Acton Rebuild and floodlight 4 macadam courts Medium/ 75,000 49,500 124,500 Playing Fields Short term Pitshanger Recently rebuilt courts and pavilion opened 2015 NA Park Club sites Ealing Lawn LTA loan application approved to convert 2 grass Medium/ 49,500 49,500 Tennis Club courts to a year round surface to increase capacity Short term Gunnersbury Resurface 2 Artificial Grass Courts. Low/ 44,000 24,000 68,000 Triangle Long term Greenford Repaint 3 porous macadam courts Low/ 5,000 5,000 Lawn Tennis Long term Club Old Actonians Resurface 1 artificial grass court Low/ 22,000 22,000 Long term St Columbus Floodlighting - or winter programme on 4 floodlit Medium/ 24,000 24,000 TC courts allocated to Ealing supply from 2017 at Short term Gunnersbury Park West Air Hall or additional court floodlights to increase Medium/ 24,000 (lights) Middlesex LTC capacity and winter play Short term TOTAL £770,000 £218,000 £110,000 £1.1m to £1.3m
In consultation, the LTA's Facilities Project Manager for London has confirmed the NGB's view that Ealing borough has capacity issues at two of its largest and most successful community tennis club sites - Ealing LTC and West Middlesex LTC - and while the former already has 3 indoor courts and is therefore not a current priority for further capital projects, investment in further court lighting or an air hall at the West Middlesex club would have a substantial impact on addressing unmet demand particularly for year round play (although planning and funding would need to be secured).
Overall, the supply of indoor courts with community access for year round tennis is quite low (3 indoor courts and 4 covered courts in winter on two club sites). If the opportunity were to arise in the future to secure funding for supply of indoor courts for pay and play use at a strategic site in the borough or close to its borders (e.g. Gunnersbury Park), then these indoor courts would be well used by tennis players from across this part of Central West London.
In terms of outdoor provision, the LTA view is that the borough has sufficient existing provision to meet current and short to medium term needs, both in terms of community clubs and pay and play facilities, particularly when the joint project with Hounslow Council for eight floodlit pay and play courts (to replace existing derelict courts) in Gunnersbury Park is taken into account which will add 4 high quality 4 floodlit courts to Ealing borough's pay and play park tennis court supply, plus further increases to the stock of community accessible outdoor courts from summer 2016 at the Ellen Wilkinson School in Acton and the William Perkin High School in Greenford.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 12
Page 236 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix F - TENNIS Assessment of Needs
In the case of pay and play facilities, the borough has a very good quantity of facility supply across its leased park facilities with Will to Win and the dual use school sites including a high number of floodlit pay and play courts relative to most London boroughs. Generally, the quality and accessibility of this supply is also good particularly with the recent investment in the Pitshanger and Lammas park sites. The North Acton Playing Fields courts leased to FC Samurai are an exception and, in their current quality, only suitable for informal use at present. Although a strategic gap in provision is evident in the north west of the borough around Northolt, residents are well served by pay and play sites within a one mile catchment located in the neighbouring boroughs (Hillingdon and Harrow).
Lastly, the LTA consider it important to maintain a network of free to access park courts in the borough to provide opportunities for individuals to try tennis, for children and young people to develop their skills and for friends and families to play for fun.
3. Key findings
The LTA recognise that maintaining free park courts to a reasonable standard is a challenge for local authorities and recommends further consideration to be given to the options for sustaining this type of provision in the long term either on existing or new sites. Similar to grass pitch sports, outdoor tennis court usage is heavily impacted on by the weather and to a lesser extent the ancillary facilities available court side such as toilets and refreshments. By introducing floodlights to certain park venues playing capacity and opportunities to play are both increased; summer months are still the most popular for tennis activity but floodlighting does meet the limited demand for activity during the winter months. By floodlighting strategically important sites in the borough demand for park courts could be moved away from average quality one or two court sites with no facilities to purpose built good quality floodlit sites which will provide year round playing opportunities.
Given the committed project to provide 8 new floodlit courts with a new sports pavilion just across the borough border with Hounslow borough in Gunnersbury Park (adding 4 pay and play courts to the Ealing borough supply), and new community access to 6 courts at Ellen Wilkinson School in Acton and three floodlit courts at William Perkin HS in summer 2016, there is no needs case to reinstate the 6 closed courts at the former Barclays Bank Sports Ground. A management plan for the planned Gunnersbury Park courts will need to be finalised with Hounslow Council, the LTA and the preferred operator (when selected) to include detailed arrangements for court programming and utilisation, pricing structure and booking policies and procedures and facility maintenance (including a sinking fund).
No further additional tennis courts will be required to 2031 to accommodate demand from forecast population growth provided there are no major reductions in supply in South Ruislip and South Harrow serving the north west of Ealing borough. However, current plans to increase the number of floodlit courts over the period of the strategy will need to be delivered in order to address the lack of availability to the north of the A40 particularly in view of the proposals for substantial new housing development along this development corridor (particularly in the Northolt to Perivale and Park Royal Opportunity Areas).
The focus during the strategy period should therefore be on delivering the Gunnersbury Park project plus a prioritised programme of short, medium and long term planned enhancements at the sites identified in the 2015 LTA facility audit which has been updated and summarised in the table above.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 13
Page 237 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix G - OTHER PITCH SPORTS Assessment of Needs
Appendix G: Other Playing Pitch Sports - Assessment of Needs
1. Gaelic Sports
There is a long tradition of Gaelic sports being played on playing pitches in Ealing borough with the main clubs drawing players (male, female and juniors) predominantly from within the Irish expatriate community from a wide catchment across London.
Gaelic Football: Gaelic football pitches are provided on two sites in the borough: o Perivale Park, Leaver Gardens, Greenford - this site is the home base of St Josephs GFC (formed in Hanwell in 1947) who currently use the changing facilities adjacent to the athletics track and train on Tuesday and Thursday evenings from 7.30pm. Ealing Council operates this public park site and is providing a new pavilion in this park opening in 2016. This site is also used on some Sundays by the London Camanachd club for Shinty tournaments and training (see below). The pitch is also marked for rugby union although there has been no hires for rugby in recent seasons. o Berkeley Fields Playing Pitches, Horsenden Lane, North Greenford - home of Tir Chonaill Gaels (TCG), formed in 1962 and running teams for men, women and youths (both boys and girls), who have a clubhouse and lease pitches from Ealing Borough Council on this site and share car parking with North Greenford United FC whose stadium is on the adjacent site. This site is also now used on occasions by the Tara Camogie Club (see below) based at Northolt Rugby Club
Hurling (men): No current supply or unmet demand has been identified. The nearest provision for these sports for Ealing residents is Kilburn Gaels Hurling Club and St Gabriels Hurling Club London which are located in Borough of Brent.
Camogie (women): Tara Camogie Club has an agreement with Tir Chonaill Gaels (TCG) to use the Berkeley Fields Playing Pitches and pavilion facilities in season. The club has both junior and senior sections and celebrates its 30th Anniversary with 15 and 7 a side tournaments at this site in 2016. Occasional use is made of a pitch and recently upgraded pavilion at Northolt Rugby Club in Cayton Green Park.
Shinty: London Camanachd (founded in 1894 and reconstituted in 2005) is the only shinty club in London and one of just three clubs in England. The club hold tournaments and training sessions on Sundays at the Perivale Park GAA ground in Greenford (as well as on Garratt Green in Earlsfield in Wandsworth borough).
Previous assessments of facility supply and demand for Gaelic sports in the borough (in 2007 and 2010) identified a need to improve and extend changing facilities for Gaelic football at the Berkeley Fields site owned by the Council which has only two changing rooms to serve adult and junior teams, both male and female. The site offers potential to be developed as a hub site for Gaelic sports and to facilitate this, the Council and TCG are negotiating a new longer lease on the pavilion and the main playing area as well as an additional building which currently houses 4 poor quality changing rooms. Funding for the upgrade to the existing pavilion and additional changing room building has still to be secured.
The club regularly uses a further pitch on an adjacent section of the playing fields and will continue to hire this pitch in the future rather than include it in the lease demise.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 1
Page 238 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix G - OTHER PITCH SPORTS Assessment of Needs
Demand for Gaelic sports and membership of clubs in London has recovered in recent years as the trend towards London Irish expatriates returning to Ireland (in response to the 'Celtic Tiger' period of rapid economic growth) has come to an end and the number of Irish people settling in West London has begun to grow again.
2. Australian Football League
Ealing Emus (a social side and part of the West London Wildcats club) play and train in Hounslow at Duke's Meadows in Chiswick (in Hounslow borough). On occasion, the team has also played at Trailfinders Sports Clubs in the borough.
3. Softball
Trailfinders Sports Club has three softball squares available to hire. However, no regular demand for use of these pitches has been identified. One park site in the borough - Blondin Park in Northfields - is regularly used for softball team training in summer (by London Softball League teams the Coyotes and the Chargers). The latter train in the park on Sundays in summer from 11am to 1pm). Both teams play midweek league games at Boston Manor Playing Fields in Hounslow and the GSK Company Sports Ground in Swyncombe Avenue respectively. Both clubs compete in a mixed softball league with games held on midweek evenings throughout May to August.
If warranted by demand over the period of the strategy and/or the pitches at Trailfinders Sports Club are removed, there is an opportunity to mark softball pitches in future in Rectory Park, subject to delivery of the proposed upgraded pavilion facilities to be provided on this site in a partnership between the Council and Middlesex FA.
4. Rugby Football League
The professional RFL club - London Broncos - trains and plays its home fixtures for its 1st XIII, u19 and u16 teams at Trailfinders Sports Club in Vallis Way, W13. The Trailfinders Sports Club has recently provided a second rugby compliant floodlit AGP (completed autumn 2016) and now fully addresses the facility needs of the Broncos club in the RFL summer season complementing the winter use of the excellent quality playing pitches, spectator and ancillary facilities on this privately owned sports ground by Trailfinders RFC for rugby union. The Broncos RFL club, which attracts players from across the capital, moved to this site from The Hive in Barnet at the start of the 2016 summer season and has signed an initial three year deal with a view to a long term ground sharing arrangement.
5. American Football
The London Warriors were formed in 2007 and are based at Boston Manor just across the borough boundary with Hounslow. They currently play in the BAFA National Leagues Premiership and have youth, women and senior teams drawing from a wide catchment area across West London including Ealing borough.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 2
Page 239 of 382 The London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031 Appendix G - OTHER PITCH SPORTS Assessment of Needs
Key Findings
Over the period of the strategy to 2031, the facility priority for the above playing pitch sports in Ealing is to address demand for Gaelic sports by finalising the extension to the TCG lease at Berkeley Field and to support the club in its efforts to secure grant funding for enhancement to the existing pavilion and changing room buildings on the site.
No needs for additional facility provision or other significant facility enhancement projects are identified for these minor pitch sports for the period of the strategy.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk P a g e | 3
Page 240 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031
Appendix H - Club Consultation Summary
Introduction
Clubs within the London Borough of Ealing were invited to contribute to the playing pitch strategy in a variety of ways. All clubs were sent a link to an online survey and football and hockey clubs within the borough were invited to provide feedback at club forum sessions. Those clubs that did not respond to the online survey were contacted by telephone and given the opportunity to complete the survey electronically or over the phone. In addition, during sites visits representatives from clubs were able to contribute both to the individual site visit and also more broadly to the playing pitch strategy.
Table 1: Respective response rates from Ealing based clubs
Sport Cricket Football Hockey Rugby Survey response rate 69% 63%* 50%*2 67% *Representing 75% of teams *2Representing 90% of registered players
In each of the four sports the major clubs responded to the survey or subsequent contact. The smaller often one team clubs were much less likely to respond and therefore in each of the cases the response rate by players represented is much higher than the figures in the table above.
Cricket
Overall satisfaction
Graph 1: Overall satisfaction with Cricket facilities
Overall sa sfac on with Cricket facili es in LBE Sa sfied 0%
Unsa sfied 100%
A lack of satisfaction at pitch quality - outside of club maintained pitches - is the major cause of satisfaction. This also extends to the associated facilities for teas and sightscreens which are considered unsatisfactory by some clubs within Ealing on some park sites.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk Page | 1
Page 241 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031
Appendix H - Club Consultation Summary
Growth
Cricket clubs with the London Borough of Ealing have not reported any significant growth plans. Although junior cricket demand remains strong, this does not necessarily translate to specific growth plans for team numbers. In adult cricket clubs are reporting maintaining team numbers is the priority.
Football
Overall satisfaction
Graph 2: Overall satisfaction with Football facilities
Overall sa sfac on with Football facili es in LBE
Unsa sfied Sa sfied 50% 50%
There is a 50/50 split between clubs who are satisfied and unsatisfied with the overall provision of football facilities within LBE. There are four key areas for this dissatisfaction shown in Graph 3.
Graph 3: Reasons given for dissatisfaction with facilities
Reason for disa sfac on with facili es 7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 Not enough 3G facili es Inadaquate changing/ Poor pitch quality Insufficiaent pitches and of ancillary facili es the correct sizes
www.continuumleisure.co.uk Page | 2
Page 242 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031
Appendix H - Club Consultation Summary
The number one reason for dissatisfaction with football facilities within LBE is a lack of 3G facilities. Poor pitch quality and inadequate or poor changing/ancillary facilities are the next most cited reasons for dissatisfaction.
Growth
Clubs were asked to comment on the growth of teams within their club over the last three years and their planned growth in the next three years. The next set of graphs illustrates their responses and how mini and youth football is where the majority of growth has occurred and continues to be planned for by clubs within LBE.
Graph 4: Reported change in team numbers over the last three years Change in teams over the last three years 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Adult: Youth (U11 - U16 yrs): Mini (U7 - U10 yrs ):
Adult: Youth (U11 - U16 yrs): Mini (U7 - U10 yrs ):
Increased Decreased Stayed the same
Graph 5: Planned growth in teams
Do you have plans to increase teams in the next 1-5 years?
No 33%
Yes 67%
www.continuumleisure.co.uk Page | 3
Page 243 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031
Appendix H - Club Consultation Summary
Graph 6: Planned growth in teams by age and gender Planned growth of football teams 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 35 31 16 7 5
Mini Soccer Youth boys Youth Girls Adult Men Adult women
Of the total planned growth of 94 teams over two-thirds (66) is planned to be mini soccer and youth boys teams.
Hockey
Overall satisfaction
Graph 7: Overall satisfaction with Hockey facilities
Overall sa sfac on with Hockey facili es in LBE Sa sfied 0%
Unsa sfied 100%
No clubs with LBE reported that they were satisfied with the overall hockey pitch provision within the borough. They cited that there were insufficient pitches within the borough to meet the needs at peak times and poor ancillary facilities at some pitches.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk Page | 4
Page 244 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031
Appendix H - Club Consultation Summary
Growth
Graph 8: Planned hockey team growth by age and gender
Planned growth of hockey teams 8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 Youth Girls Youth Boys Senior Men's Senior Women's
The majority of team growth within Ealing is planned to be in youth girls teams and combined with youth boys this accounts for more than two thirds of the total planned team growth over the next three years.
Rugby
Overall satisfaction
This question is not included in the template survey provided as part of the Sport England PPS Guidance.
Growth
Graph 9: Planned rugby team growth by age and gender
Planned growth of rugby teams 5
4
3
2
1
0 Senior Men's Youth Boys Youth Girls
www.continuumleisure.co.uk Page | 5
Page 245 of 382 London Borough of Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy 2017-2031
Appendix H - Club Consultation Summary
Of the 7 new teams planned over 50% (4) of the total planned growth in rugby teams in the London Borough of Ealing is for senior men’s teams. This contrasts with the other major team sports within the borough where most of the team growth is predicted to be in junior teams.
www.continuumleisure.co.uk Page | 6
Page 246 of 382 2015-16 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment Check List (please do not attach this page to your final EAA)
Before you start:
• Please read through the EAA Guidance here . If you have any questions relating to the guidance please contact Tristan Hardman – Dodd in the Policy team; • Start collecting all relevant information/data relating to the potential impact of your proposal; in particular that relates to the people who will be affected; • Start your EAA as soon as possible.
Overview:
• EAAs are an important tool for decision makers. They provide them with key information to be able to make informed decisions; • Ultimately the decision makers can decide what decision they take, however, it is vital that they understand the implications of a particular decision and that we can demonstrate that they were aware of the implications. Your job is to provide them with relevant and well informed information for them to consider; • EAAs provide a means in which to summarise the needs of the people who will be affected by your proposal and then explain the likely impact of the proposal upon them and how we might mitigate any negative impacts; • A poorly written EAA or one lacking clear and precise information puts the Council at risk of legal challenge and damaging our reputation with the community; • There are three key components to an EAA:
Data: o You need to develop as clear a picture as possible of your proposal both before and after its implementation (please include all relevant data in section 1); o You need to create a firm evidence base from which to make the assessment. It is important that you help decision makers understand the needs of the people affected by it; o You need to collect specific data (where possible on the protected groups 1). Impact: o You need to include a clear indication of the overall impact of your proposal; o You need to highlight any specific impacts where possible on protected groups; o You need to provide key information to reflect the reality of the impact of the proposal; o You need to provide decision makers with as clear a picture as possible of impact. Mitigation: o You need to provide a clear indication of what can be done to mitigate any adverse impact upon those people affected; o You need to be as open as honest as possible (if no mitigation is possible, please state this); o You need to outline specific mitigation for protected groups (where possible).
• EAAs are an important element for demonstrating our compliance with the legal obligations under Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 set out in Appendix 1 but the 3 main duties are to: o Eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under this Act; o Advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it;; o Foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it. • If once you have read the guidance you are still unsure or would like some support in completing your EAA please contact your directorate equality lead – see below. If you believe your proposal could have a significant impact on one or more of the protected groups please contact Tristan Hardman-Dodd as soon as possible; • Please make sure that once you have completed this form it is signed off by your Service Director.
Corporate Resources: Anna Flashman Children’s Services: Cheryl Cain Adult Services: Adenike Tilleray Housing and Regen: Gill Tennet Environment and Customer Services: Anita Hamilton Human Resources: Thelma McKay Policy: Tristan Hardman-Dodd
1 AGE, DISABILITY, GENDER REASSIGNMENT, RACE, RELIGION & BELIEF, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, PREGNANCY & MATERNITY, MARRIAGE & CIVIL PARTNERSHIP
Page 247 of 382 2015-16 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
1. Proposal Summary Information
EAA Title Playing Pitch Strategy Please describe Policy/Strategy your proposal? Is it HR Related? No ☐ Corporate Cabinet Report Decision Purpose
1. What is the Policy/Strategy looking to achieve? Who will be affected?
(i.e. Please provide an overview of the aims, objectives and desired outcomes of what you are proposing. Who currently uses the service that will be affected by your proposal? Who will be affected by any changes? What are their current needs? Please add your data here.)
The strategy was initiated by Ealing Council in response to the following specific drivers. These were agreed with members of the Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy Steering Group in August 2015 and with Council Planning Officers at a meeting in September 2015: o Several current large scale projects and proposals for new and enhanced playing pitches and ancillary facilities o Public health need to sustain access to and grow the use of facilities for outdoor sport and active recreation o The need to inform the development and implementation of planning policy and to inform the assessment of planning applications o Potential changes to playing pitch supply and demand as a consequence of planned housing growth, particularly in the three Local Plan Opportunity areas of Park Royal, Southall, Northolt to Perivale, and the Council's programme for School expansions o Prioritisation of any funding for sport and recreation from external agencies and local authority budgets, including from the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) o Major transport infrastructure projects - Crossrail, HS2 - and potential impact on accessibility of playing pitch sites in the vicinity of upgraded stations with new services and shorter journey times. New Crossrail Elizabeth Line services from 2018 (via Ealing Broadway, Acton, Hanwell, Southall and West Ealing stations) and HS2 services from new interchange close to the north east borough boundary at Old Oak Common from 2026 o Demand for cricket pitches (particularly for junior teams and for non-traditional forms of the game), growing pressure on existing hockey and rugby pitch supply, and the changing needs of football clubs due to the increase in junior play and the FA’s new pitch guidelines
The Ealing Playing Pitch Strategy is for the period to 2031 supporting the Council's Local Plan adopted in 2012 and 2013. The Playing Pitch Strategy contributes to both the overarching borough vision (as set out in the current Corporate Plan) - i.e. 'By 2018 the borough will be more prosperous, safer, healthier, cleaner, fairer and more accessible' - and, more directly, with the borough's strategic vision and themes for Sport and Physical Activity - i.e. 1. More people more active on a regular basis, particularly low participant target groups 2. Improved awareness of the sport and active leisure opportunities available 3. Ensure future sustainability of sport and leisure in Ealing through sports and physical activity networks, involving sports clubs and other delivery organisations
Page 248 of 382 2015-16 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
4. Appropriate indoor and outdoor facilities in the right place at the right price 5. Champion the wider benefits of sport and being active.
In the context of this vision and the local drivers identified in the above paragraph, the PPS critically evaluates the current quantity, type, quality and distribution of outdoor sports and recreational facilities within the study area, quantifies current and potential future demand (through engagement with local stakeholders and the use of demographic and other information), and provides clear future policy recommendations and actions (on both borough wide and site specific bases) for protecting and enhancing existing playing pitch facilities and for providing new facilities where they are most needed. The PPS update findings for outdoor sports contained in the Ealing Sports Facility Strategy 2012 – 2021.
The agreed key objectives of the strategies are:
1. To provide the Council and its partners with a robust document with an evidence base that can be reliably used to support spatial planning decisions and inform capital investment plans and external funding bids for new and/or enhanced playing pitch sports facilities.
2. To improve public health by encouraging more people in Ealing to be more active by ensuring facilities for playing pitch sports are of the appropriate quality are both available and accessible.
2. What will the impact of you r proposal be? (i.e. Please provide a before and after picture of the service that will be affected by your proposal e.g. how does it currently operate and then how it will operate after your proposal has been implemented. Where possible please be clear on the number of people or size of the community affected )
The Playing Pitch Strategy determines the following with regard to outdoor sports facilities in Ealing: o What are the main characteristics of the current supply of and demand for provision? o Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet current demand? o Is the provision that is accessible of sufficient quality and appropriately maintained? o What are the main characteristics of the future supply and demand for provision? o Is there enough accessible and secured community use provision to meet future demand? o What is the overall quality level?
2. Impact on Groups having a Protected Characteristic
AGE: A person of a particular age or being within an age group. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please identify any differential impact on different age groups. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
There is no differential impact on this group as any potential future projects delivered as a result of this strategy will improve access for people of all ages as any new facility will have to be compliant with current legislation.
Alternatives and mitigating actio ns which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
Page 249 of 382 2015-16 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
DISABILITY: A person has a disability if s/he has a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day to day activities 2. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please identify any differential impact on people with different types of disabilities. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
There is no differential impact on this group as any potential future projects delivered as a result of this strategy will improve access for people of all abilities as any new facility will have to be compliant with current legislation.
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
GENDER REASSIGNMENT: This is the process of transitioning from one sex to another. This includes persons who consider themselves to be trans, transgender and transsexual. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
There is no differential impact on this group as any potential future projects delivered as a result of this strategy will improve access for people of all backgrounds as any new facility will have to be compliant with current legislation.
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
RACE: A group of people defined by their colour, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origins or race. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please identify any differential impact on people from different ethnic backgrounds. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
2 Due regard to meeting the needs of people with disabilities involves taking steps to take account of their disabilities and may involve making reasonable adjustments and prioritizing certain groups of disabled people on the basis that they are particularly affected by the proposal.
Page 250 of 382 2015-16 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
There is no differential impact on this group as any potential future projects delivered as a result of this strategy will improve access for people of all backgrounds as any new facility will have to be compliant with current legislation.
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce nega tive effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
RELIGION & BELIEF: Religion means any religion. Belief includes religious and philosophical beliefs including lack of belief (for example, Atheism). Generally, a belief should affect a person’s life choices or the way you live for it to be included. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please identify any differential impact on people with different religious beliefs. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
There is no differential impact on this group as any potential future projects delivered as a result of this strategy will improve access for people of all backgrounds as any new facility will have to be compliant with current legislation.
Alternatives and mitigating actions which h ave been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
SEX: Someone being a man or a woman. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please note if there is no differential impact on a persons gender, please state this )
There is no differential impact on this group as any potential future projects delivered as a result of this strategy will improve access for people of either gender as any new facility will have to be compliant with current legislation.
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
Page 251 of 382 2015-16 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
SEXUAL ORIENTATION: A person’s sexual attraction towards his or her own sex, the opposite sex or to both sexes. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
There is no differential impact on this group as any potential future projects delivered as a result of this strategy will improve access for people of all backgrounds as any new facility will have to be compliant with current legislation.
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
PREGNANCY & MATERNITY: Description: Pregnancy: Being pregnant. Maternity: The period after giving birth - linked to maternity leave in the employment context. In the non-work context, protection against maternity discrimination is for 26 weeks after giving birth, including as a result of breastfeeding. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
There is no differential impact on this group as any potential future projects delivered as a result of this strategy will improve access for everyone as any new facility will have to be compliant with current legislation.
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
MARRIAGE & CIVIL PARTNERSHIP: Marriage: A union between a man and a woman. or of the same sex, which is legally recognised in the UK as a marriage Civil partnership: Civil partners must be treated the same as married couples on a range of legal matters. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combinat ion of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
There is no differential impact on this group as any potential future projects delivered as a result of this strategy will improve access for everyone as any new facility will have to be compliant with current legislation.
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect:
Page 252 of 382 2015-16 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
3. Human Rights 3 4a. Does your proposal impact on Human Rights as defined by the Human Rights Act 1998?
No ☐ 4b. Does your proposal impact on the rights of children as defined by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child?
No ☐ 4c. Does your proposal impact on the rights of persons with disabilities as defin ed by the UN Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities?
No ☐ (If yes, please describe the effect and any mitigating action you have considered.)
4. Conclusion (Please provide a brief overview/summary of your analysis in light of the protected characteristics. Please describe the overall impact of your proposal where possible and mitigating actions undertaken by other areas of the Council or by local partners)
The Strategy identifies potential future sports facility development projects; if and when any of these projects are implemented further Cabinet reports and EIA’s will be completed specific to the project. Any new facility will be compliant with current legislation and will be informed by the relevant national governing body of sport guidance on the most appropriate facility type and design. All users will benefit from improved sports facilities provided.
4a. What evidence, data sources and intelligence did you use to assess the potential impact/effect of your proposal? Please note the systems/processes you used to collect the data that has helped inform your proposal. Please list the file paths and/or relevant web links to the information you have described. (Please list all sources here: i.e. local consultation, residents survey, census etc.)
To be recognised and agreed by Sport England, the Playing Pitch Strategy must be developed using Sport England’s guidance toolkit https://www.sportengland.org/facilities-planning/planning-for-sport/planning-tools-and- guidance/playing-pitch-strategy-guidance/ the methodology used is also detailed in the strategy document
5. Action Planning: (What are the next steps for the proposal please list i.e. what it comes into effect, when migrating actions 4 will take place, how you will measure impact etc.) Action Outcomes Success Timescales/ Lead Officer Measures Milestones (Contact Details)
Additional Comments:
3 For further guidance please refer to the Human Rights & URNC Guidance on the Council Equalities web page . 4 Linked to the protected characteristics above
Page 253 of 382 2015-16 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
The Strategy will be adopted by Cabinet 14 th February 2017 (to be confirmed) and will come into effect after the call in period at the beginning of March 2017. There are no mitigating actions identified and projects will be developed in accordance with the action plan included in the Strategy document. The Lead Officer will be determined for each individual project as projects are identified.
6. Sign off: (All EAA’s must be signed off once completed)
Completing Officer Sign Off: Service Director Sign Off: HR related proposal (Signed off by directorate HR officer) Signed: Signed: Signed:
Name (Block Capitals): Name (Block Capitals): Name (Block Capitals): Julia Robertson Jonathan Kirby
Date: 24.01.17 Date: 27.01.17 Date:
For EA’s relating to Cabinet decisions: received by Committee Section for publication by (date):
Appendix 1: Legal obligations under Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010:
• As a public authority we must have due regard to the need to: a) Eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under this Act; b) Advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it; c) Foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it. • The protected characteristics are: AGE, DISABILITY, GENDER REASSIGNMENT, RACE, RELIGION & BELIEF, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, PREGNANCY & MATERNITY, MARRIAGE & CIVIL PARTNERSHIP • Having due regard to advancing equality of opportunity between those who share a protected characteristic and those who do not, involves considering the need to: a) Remove or minimising disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic b) Take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant characteristic that are different from the needs of the persons who do not share it. c) Encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low. • Having due regard to fostering good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not, involves showing that you are tackling prejudice and promoting understanding. Complying with the duties may involve treating some people more favourably than others; but this should not be taken as permitting conduct that would be otherwise prohibited under the Act.
Page 254 of 382 Report for: ACTION
Item Number: 09
Contains Confidential or Exempt Information YES (Part) Appendix 1 is exempt from disclosure pursuant to paragraph 10.4.3 of the Access to Information Rules Title Southall Big Plan – The Green, Southall Responsible Officer(s) Keith Townsend, Executive Director of Environment and Customer Services Lucy Taylor, Director of Planning and Regeneration Author(s) Eleanor Young, Strategic Regeneration Adviser Portfolio(s) Cllr Julian Bell, Regeneration Cllr Bassam Mahfouz, Transport For Consideration By Cabinet Date to be Considered 14 March 2017 Implementation Date if 27 March 2017 Not Called In Affected Wards Southall Green Keywords/Index Southall Big Plan, the Green Southall
Purpose of Report:
This report aims to inform Cabinet of proposals to redevelop land in the Green including Council land (Featherstone Terrace Car Park) for a residential-led mixed-use development with replacement car parking that will enhance the district town centre at Southall Green.
Featherstone Terrace Car Park is an opportunity for the Council to use its asset in Southall to stimulate development and regeneration and to create an income/capital receipt from an asset. This is part of the commercialisation of assets work taking place in the Council.
Officers in Regeneration and Environment and Customer Services have been considering a number of options to bring forward development on the car park. This report sets out the options that have been considered ranging from do nothing, development of the car park alone and more comprehensive redevelopment.
The recommendation is to partner (through a contract) with a neighbouring landowner and then to select a developer who is capable of bringing forward a large development across the Council car park and the surrounding sites. Ideally the larger site would include some other land that is not in the ownership of the Council or the other landowner, in order to create a better development, and therefore the Council will consider using CPO powers if necessary (subject to an agreed CPO strategy and proper
1
Page 255 of 382 indemnity arrangements being secured from a suitable developer) to complete the land assembly process and enable the delivery of a scheme.
Some soft market testing has been undertaken with a number of developers and there is significant interest in a development opportunity that includes Featherstone Terrace Car Park and some surrounding land.
1. Recommendations
It is recommended that Cabinet agrees the following recommendations:
1.1 Notes the current proposals outlined in section 2.4 below for the redevelopment of sites at the Green Southall (as shown outlined in bold on Map 1 of Appendix 2).
1.2 Agrees the proposals in principle including the disposal of Featherstone Terrace Car Park and the adjacent car park leased to the Dominion centre.
1.3 Authorises the Executive Director of Housing and Regeneration following consultation with the Executive Director of Environment and Customer Services, the Leader and Director of Legal & Democratic Services to agree a Memorandum of Understanding with Ealing Gateway Limited and agree a joint brief for the redevelopment of the area.
1.4 Authorises the Executive Director of Housing and Regeneration following consultation with the Executive Director of Environment and Customer Services, the Leader and Director of Legal & Democratic Services to seek a development partner to deliver the brief for the redevelopment of the area.
1.5 Approve the £0.100m Southall the Green Development budget into the 2017/18 Regeneration and Housing Capital Programme to be funded from mainstream borrowing and recouped through future capital receipts.
1.6 Agrees in principle that once a developer partner has been appointed and where reasonable negotiated agreements cannot be reached with affected owners and occupiers to enable the implementation of a planning consented scheme, a Compulsory Purchase Order should be made, in accordance with an agreed CPO strategy, should this be required and subject to a suitable indemnity being in place for the selected bidder.
1.7 Notes that a report will be brought back to Cabinet with a recommendation to select a developer for a proposed development scheme.
2. Reason for Decision and Options Considered
2.1 The area shown outlined in red in Map 1 in Appendix 2 is part of a wider area identified for ‘mixed use development appropriate to the town centre’ with the retention of specified existing industrial estates and retention of the Dominion Centre in the Council’s Development Sites Development Plan Document (DPD)
2
Page 256 of 382 adopted in December 2013 (SOU8) as shown as Map 2 in Appendix 2. SOU8 of the DPD confirms that the consolidation and intensification of the wider site would allow retention of the locally important industrial uses and would support the introduction of new uses to support the vitality and viability of the neighbourhood centre.
2.2 The site allocated as SOU8 is also within the GLA Housing Zone for Southall and includes Featherstone Terrace Car Park. Featherstone Terrace Car Park is an important local facility but is not currently being fully utilised. Officers believe that the development site SOU8 is, as a whole, too big and too complex to support delivery in a single phase by one developer. It therefore makes sense to break the DPD site SOU8 down into more manageable areas, as long as the development of each area does not preclude or prejudice future development of other areas and taken overall can be seen to comprise a cohesive master plan.
2.3 As a result officers are of the view that a full masterplan of the SOU8 site is urgently required. In the meantime however, officers have been working with the GLA to prepare some outline capacity work, which confirms that it would make sense to bring the sites within SOU8 forward in sub-phases, where it would be expected that the earliest phases would be on the white / town centre land (shown on Map 1 in Appendix 2) and the later phases might be on the land currently protected for industrial use (also shown in map 1). The suggested phasing is set out in the map in Map 4 of Appendix 2.
2.4 Council officers have been in discussions with a local landowner/developer (Ealing Gateway Limited) with regard to the potential redevelopment of the area in Map 1 in Appendix 2 and have considered a range of options prior to preparing this report which are summarised in table 1 below, with more details in the following paragraphs. A decision is now being sought to enable officers to take this project forward to the next stage.
Table 1 – summary of option analysis
Option Implications Recommendation 1. Do nothing Continued revenue income from Does not meet corporate Featherstone Terrace Car Park. objectives. Do not No change or piecemeal change pursue. to Southall Green. Does not meet our corporate priorities for a safer, cleaner, more prosperous and more accessible borough. Does not maximise revenue income. Does not contribute to housing provision. 2. Dispose of car Site is isolated in poor surrounds. Do not dispose in park in isolation Does not take advantage of isolation – would not potential marriage value with achieve value for money frontage sites or allow for objective nor allow for re- improved links to rail station. Loss provision of parking. of public parking.
3
Page 257 of 382 3. Offer to dispose No evidence to suggest existing Not recommended. of the car park to local land owners have active Council would lose an adjacent development capability – land control of opportunity landowner for likely to be held for speculative and fail to capture future redevelopment of purposes. uplift in value; no the two sites evidence that this would speed up regeneration in the The Green town centre. 4. Dispose of car Ensures sites currently under Recommended to seek a park to a option go to same developer and development partner to developer partner enhances opportunity for carry out comprehensive as part of a wider increased connection to nearby development of our car redevelopment of Crossrail station, allows for park and adjoining sites. adjoining sites reprovision of car parking spaces, Offer to back up land with CPO support allows for significant place assembly with CPO if for full land making and change to take place, needed. Supports our assembly if supports planning aspiration for corporate aspirations for required. comprehensive development in a cleaner, safer, more SOU8. prosperous borough.
3 Option 1 – Do nothing
3.1 Officers considered this option first. Parking provision is a key issue in Southall and the Council recently created new parking provision in Southall Broadway in response to local demand. However, research into use of the Featherstone Terrace Car Park demonstrates that it is rarely full or even half full. The times when it is busy are predominantly weekends in the Summer period, when the adjacent banqueting suite is in use. There is no charge for parking in the evenings. Should the banqueting suite close as is proposed as part of the redevelopment, then demand for car parking in Featherstone Terrace would likely be reduced.
3.2 Although the area has been inspected and passed as an exemplary safe environment, and the Council has undertaken recent works to tidy the boundary of the car park and improve lighting, the surrounding environment of the car park remains poor and inactive, with limited overlooking. This provides a disincentive to users who fear that their car is not secure in the current location. The current configuration of the space invites the perception of anti- social behaviour and therefore goes against the Southall Big Plan’s objective of reducing fear of anti-social behaviour. There are notices in place at the entrance to the car park warning of car crime and describing the area as a ‘car crime hotspot’. In addition the car park does not provide close access to local shops and facilities. Officers have also observed that numerous cars are parked in ad hoc places on and off street in unrestricted zones to avoid paying to park in the Council’s car park.
3.3 Appendix 3 contains information about current and typical usage of the car park and photographs of the environment. It therefore seems clear that
4
Page 258 of 382 despite areas of parking demand in Southall, good use is not being made of this particular provision and as a result the Council’s use of its asset is not being optimised.
3.4 The land is not being used intensively, nor is it maximising revenue to the Council and we have therefore explored whether we could re-provide parking while also allowing for opportunities to redevelop the space for other uses, including housing, which would both allow for better use of land, increased revenues to the Council and improvements to the general environment of the area. The financial implications of each option are set out in Confidential Appendix 1.
4 Option 2 – dispose of the car park site in isolation
4.1 Officers have also considered the disposal of the site in isolation. The Council received an unsolicited offer from a developer in 2015 (Wilmott Dixon / Be Here). That developer’s scheme design assumptions are considered to be very optimistic by the Council’s planning team. Developing a scheme on the council car park in isolation would fail to realise the opportunity to secure a broader cohesive master plan.
4.2 In addition, it is not recommended that the car park be disposed of in isolation as this would make it more difficult to achieve meaningful redevelopment of the two small adjacent sites (i.e. the Coach park and the Dominion Centre car park) in urban design and regeneration terms. It would also not achieve the objectives of the Ealing local plan ‘sites development plan document’ which identifies The Green as suitable for comprehensive redevelopment.
4.3 If the Cabinet was minded to consider disposing of the site in isolation it would be advisable to invite competitive bids on the open market.
4.4 The Council’s property adviser (Lambert Smith Hampton) has provided advice to the Council confirming that in their view the proposal “would not represent the best route forward for the site and we would recommend that the Council continues to explore alternative delivery options”. As a result officers have not carried out any marketing or soft market testing of the disposal of the car park in isolation.
4.5 Moreover, as a general principle, officers do not consider it to be in the long term interests of the Council to dispose of the site now for speculative purposes. This is to prevent land owners ‘turning’ sites for a profit without delivering any new housing for Ealing.
4.6 Officers believe that it is in Ealing Council’s best interest both as a landowner and in the interests of the proper planning of the area to agree only to dispose of the car park to developers capable of bringing forward schemes that would have a long term revenue income to the Council and genuinely deliver the wider redevelopment of the area consistent with SOU8.
5
Page 259 of 382 4.7 Lastly if the site is disposed of in isolation then the opportunity to re-provide parking would be limited to a reduced number of spaces situated in a covered car park, a solution not favoured by the Council’s planning team, nor by parking services. Advice on financial implications is set out in Confidential Appendix 1.
5 Option 3 – Dispose of our site to an adjacent landowner to the north, south, east or west
5.1 The next option considered is for the Council to dispose of the car park to an adjacent landowner for a wider redevelopment consistent with the allocation in SOU8. Officers have already ruled out a ‘stand-alone’ disposal (Option 2 above) and to secure the wider area regeneration they have considered a number of options with regard to other landowners of adjacent sites.
5.2 The Council’s land sits within a wider collection of sites, including sites between the car park and the Green to the East, the working men’s club and associated neighbours to the South and the Featherstone and Dominion Industrial Estates to the West. There are developers and interested parties acting in all those locations currently. In addition there is land to the North, in SOU8, currently owned and occupied in active industrial use and protected for employment use in the local plan (the TRS land).
5.3 The potential landowners and sites considered are as follows:
5.3.1 Disposal to owners immediately to the north. Officers have had discussions with the main land owner TRS. The TRS land is in active industrial use and is protected for industrial use. While this land would potentially allow for access from the Council’s land to the new Crossrail station in the fullness of time, it is not a short term solution. TRS has made no formal offer to the Council for its land but in any case, officers do not consider that disposal here would have a meaningful impact either on TRS’ ability to bring forward their own site in future (subject to planning) nor on facilitating change in the short term to help improve Southall Green town centre.
5.3.2 Disposal to owners immediately to the west. Officers have had discussions with the main land owner to the West, the Maina and Dominion Industrial Estates. While these owners do have aspirations to redevelop their sites, the land is currently in active industrial use and is protected for future industrial use. In addition there is no short term prospect of change bearing in mind the land use policy position (the Maina business operates in logistics and distribution not large scale development). There appears to be a tentative discussion taking place between this owner and Wilmott Dixon / Be Here (as a potential development partner) but details are very sketchy. Lastly a disposal of the various business related sites to the west would not facilitate the link between the centre of SOU8 and the car park to the new Crossrail station so not achieve the first improvement to connectivity required in SOU8.
6
Page 260 of 382 5.3.3 Disposal to owners immediately to the south. In the South there is no single or main property owner and the site includes heritage assets and very small business units. While this site is no doubt suitable for redevelopment and could benefit from comprehensive assembly within an overall masterplan, it would not give the possibility of access between Ealing Council’s site and the new Crossrail station and is unlikely to be realisable in the short term.
5.3.4 Disposal to owners immediately to the East. The sites that lie between the car park and the Green are in multiple ownerships currently. The Council has been approached by a property company (Ealing Gateway Limited) which has acquired a number of options to assemble the sites. Ealing Gateway Limited has a track record of land assembly and brokerage, but generally secures development and a land payment - through another party, such as a market led developer or social landlord. Officers do not consider that sale to Ealing Gateway Limited would guarantee that development would come forward. Nevertheless the opportunity to market the sites in tandem is one that requires consideration (see option 4 below) to ensure a comprehensive scheme. These lands to the East are considered the most likely short term prospect for redevelopment in part due to their planning status and in part due to the work undertaken to date to assemble a comprehensive parcel of land.
5.4 On reviewing these options officers do not consider it to be in the long term interests of the Council or the area to dispose of the car park site now on a speculative basis This is partly to reduce the risk of land owners ‘turning’ sites for a profit without delivering any new housing for Ealing.
5.5 It is considered that it is in Ealing Council’s best interest both as a landowner and in the interests of the proper planning of the area to agree only to dispose of the car park on a conditional basis to developers capable of bringing forward specific schemes that would have a long term revenue income to the Council and genuinely deliver the wider redevelopment of the area consistent with SOU8.
5.5 Given the issues identified in redeveloping the whole of SOU8 as one site in one phase (as outlined above) officers consider that an initial short / medium term phase including land in the Council’s ownership (Featherstone Terrace car park) is a sensible place to start. This is because:
- It is the land currently available within SOU8 for mixed use redevelopment in planning policy terms, i.e. most of the rest of the site is protected for employment use only. - Although it is complex to assemble some sites are already owned or under option to a developer who wishes to sell them on. Other owners have indicated they would not resist sale for redevelopment at the right price but are not currently under option. - Many local businesses already operating there are operating in a sub-optimal way, and have indicated a wish to sell (for the right price). - Some land parcels are underused or derelict.
7
Page 261 of 382 - Ealing Council’s regeneration team has surveyed SOU8 and found low job density in the Eastern part of the site and higher job density in the protected industrial areas. - Redeveloping this part of the site closest to the Town Centre will provide direct access to bus routes and the new Crossrail station. Currently the Council’s own site is cut off.
5.6 Lastly, officers have ruled out the Council trying to ‘go it alone’ because:
- We lack resources (human and cash) to manage the process - The Council’s site relative to the overall size of SOU8 is not significant - If we don’t partner with the land assembly undertaken to date we will find it more difficult to build a robust case to justify CPO when many of the sites are currently in operational use - The complexity of the number of interests requiring assembly - Owners and interested parties on adjacent sites tell us they want to bring forward development on sites in their ownerships. - The problem of creating potential ‘ransom strips’ in land currently under option and / or owned by Ealing Gateway.
Therefore, while this remains an option for the Council to consider it is not recommended by officers.
6 Option 4 – dispose of the car park site in conjunction with adjoining sites to a developer partner supported by the exercise of CPO powers if required
6.1 Officers consider that an option that results in the comprehensive redevelopment of at least part of SOU8 to be preferable to options 1 to 3 above.
6.2 The Council could in principle seek to redevelop SOU8 itself with the possibility of using its CPO powers to secure all the sites. Officer do not however recommend for the reasons set out in paragraph 5.6 above.
6.3 Given the issues and difficulties identified in redeveloping the whole of SOU8 as one site in one phase (as outlined above) officers consider that delivery of a single phase in the short / medium term as shown in Map 1 on Appendix 2 and including the land in the Council’s ownership (Featherstone Terrace Car Park) is a sensible place to start for the reasons set out in paragraph 5.5 above.
6.4 Although some of the land within the phase identified for the first stage of comprehensive development are currently in separate a company (Ealing Gateway Limited) has been working to secure options on most of these parcels of land and has secured options on a significant portion of the sites (see map 3 in Appendix 2).
8
Page 262 of 382 6.4 Therefore, rather than ‘going it alone’ to seek a development partner, Ealing Council has the option to go to the market in conjunction with Ealing Gateway. Ealing Gateway is not a development company itself, rather it acts as a conduit to the market for sites in fractured ownerships. Ealing Gateway is keen to work with the Council and has agreed in principle draft ‘heads of terms’ for how a joint disposal would work.
6.5 Officers therefore recommend that the Council works with Ealing Gateway to seek a developer partner who could deliver a comprehensive scheme for the phase identified. The Council can support the redevelopment with a CPO if needed, once the selected developer partner has worked to make reasonable offers to the affected land owners to secure the sites by agreement and once the selected developer partner has provided an indemnity to the council in respect of the acquisition costs.
7 Reprovision of car parking
7.1 While disposal and redevelopment of the car park as part of a wider redevelopment of a first phase within SOU8 might involve some loss of off- street parking in the area, as part of a wider scheme there is opportunity to re- provide an optimum number of spaces. Based on current usage levels this is considered to between 90 and 100 spaces in total (set against 140 currently being provided). Data on current usage is set out in Appendix 3. The average number of spaces occupied each day in Featherstone Terrace between the hours of 10am and 4pm ranges between 26 and 53. Averages over the same period of time at weekends vary between 9 and 86. The usage of the car park peaks at 140 but only occasionally. Despite the fact that the peak usage is connected to use of the associated banqueting suite (which is likely to close through redevelopment), officers feel that ongoing provision in excess of the daily average should be made available to support Southall Green including nearby shops, cafes and visitors to the library and other local facilities.
7.2 Officers also believe spaces are more likely to be occupied with greater intensity following redevelopment due to the revitalisation of the area. Officers also consider that there is a danger of continuing to provide all day spaces here due to the risk of park and ride for the new Crossrail station so spaces should be provided that encourage short / medium term stays for shopping and leisure visits.
7.3 In the longer term, as SOU8 changes, opportunities can be taken to provide further on street public car parking in the area, to bring the total number of spaces back to the number currently provided, but not regularly being used (140) or even to increase the overall number of spaces available for public parking should demand at the time justify that.
7.4 In addition to public parking – both off-street and on-street – parking for new residents will be incorporated into any residential development at standards that are consistent with planning policy. This will be a relatively low parking standard consistent with the proximity to the Crossrail station and other sites nearby in the current planning pipeline.
9
Page 263 of 382 7.5 The proposals also include land currently leased to the Council from the Indian Workers Association as part of the Dominion Centre lease, which is laid out as a car park. These 20 parking spaces are currently provided free of charge, which are regularly partly occupied. There are in addition a further 20 spaces laid out behind locked gates which are not occupied.
8 Findings from soft marketing testing
8.1 During September 2016, officers carried out a ‘soft market testing’ process for the land in the recommended Phase 1 of the scheme (see map 1 in Appendix 2). The exercise was led by Savills (acting on behalf of Ealing Gateway) and supported by LSH (acting on behalf of Ealing Council). As part of the process, officers and their advisers spoke to four major development and housing companies, all of whom expressed a keen interest in the scheme and gave advice on build costs and sales values which broadly informed and supported our valuation scenarios. While it is not currently possible to predict the exact land valuation a range of options are set out in Confidential Appendix 1. As and when officers bring a future recommendation for disposal these options will have been fully explored also having regard to the Council’s duty to obtain best consideration on disposal of its land having regard to a number of factors.
8.2 The Council’s own initial valuation work, provided by LSH shows that while a comprehensive scheme at the Green is a viable proposition, it quickly becomes unattractive to developers if factors such as land cost, complexity and uncertainty become significant.
8.3 The soft market test did reveal a strong and genuine interest from serious London wide developers and housing associations to bring forward a scheme. Officers are therefore keen to avoid further speculation and formally proceed to secure a development partner, with a track record of building schemes to get involved and bring the matter to fruition.
8.4 Having taken advice from LSH and our in house procurement team, officers believe the best way forward is to conduct an open market process to ensure the Council can be confident that it has achieved ‘best consideration’ from the land and has not prevented against any potentially interested party which may also have an interest in adjoining land from being considered for selection as the council’s developer partner
9. Key Implications
9.1 The main implications from this proposal are financial, environmental, impact on parking and provision of new housing. In addition to the regeneration and parking impacts considered above, the other impacts are set out in the following paragraphs. It should be noted that the site has the potential to support the provision of up to 100 homes taken alone and up to 500 on the basis of a comprehensive development with those sites to the East of the Council’s land.
10
Page 264 of 382 10. Financial Implications
Financial impact on the budget
10.1 The Council needs to make provision up front for a budget of £0.100m in 2017/18 to support the marketing and procurement process for the site. This funding will be provided from the capital budget to be funded from mainstream borrowing and will be repaid from future proceeds of the disposal. In principle the Council will be seeking to dispose on a long leasehold basis and to retain control of future parking revenue income.
2017/18 2018/19 Total £m £m £m Regeneration and Housing Capital Programme Funding required: Southall the Green 0.100 (0.100) - disposal
Funded by: Mainstream borrowing 0.100 - 0.100 Capital receipt - (0.100) (0.100)
10.2 Details of the financial implications and potential capital receipt/income for the land under the range of options discussed in this report are set out in the Confidential Appendix 1 but for commercial reasons this is not shared in the public domain.
10.3 This project gives us the opportunity to make better use of our existing capital assets to secure long term revenue and/or capital funding to the Council and to support growth in the borough and in line with the Council’s corporate approach to commercialisation.
10.4 Income from the site through parking revenue is currently £0.110m per year. The parking revenue budget will be adjusted accordingly to reflect any changes in income generated from car parking. Disposing of the land through a long leasehold could enable a ground rent to be paid to provide at least an equivalent income for current car parking and/or generate additional income for the Council.
11. Legal
11.1.1 The most appropriate enabling powers for compulsory purchase of any of the sites within the proposed redevelopment area that that cannot be acquired by agreement are those contained in section 226(1)(a) of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990. Section 226 enables the Council to acquire compulsorily
11
Page 265 of 382 any land in their area if it considers that the acquisition will facilitate the carrying out of a development, re-development or improvement on, or in relation to, the land. The Council must also consider that the proposal will help to promote or improve the economic, social or environmental well-being of the area. The CPO may also seek to acquire new rights in order to facilitate the construction or operation of the development.
11.2 Guidance on the exercise of CPO powers (issued in October 2015) confirms that compulsory purchase orders should only be made where there is a compelling case in the public interest. Members will need to be satisfied that this case outweighs the impact of compulsory acquisition on existing owners and occupiers and to have regard to the effect of a CPO on their human rights. In particular members will need to be satisfied that the proposed interference with those rights is lawful, proportionate and in the public interest. Those affected by any Order will have an opportunity to object and to have their objection considered. Compensation is also available under a compensation code and any disputes over compensation are determined by a statutory tribunal.
11.3 With regard to the car park already in the Council’s ownership, under section122 of the Local Government Act 1972 the Council has the power to appropriate land for any purpose which is no longer required for the purpose for which is held.
11.4 The Council has the power to dispose of property which is held for planning purposes under section 233 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990. This is subject to an obligation to obtain the best consideration that can reasonably be obtained (except for leases of seven years or less) unless the Secretary of State’s consent is obtained for the disposal.
11.5 Under section 203 of the Housing and Planning Act 2106 the Council may override easements and other third party rights in specified circumstances where land is held for planning purposed although the beneficiaries of any rights overridden may claim compensation but cannot seek an injunction to delay or terminate the development.
11.6 The possible exercise of the Council’s CPO powers and appropriation for planning purposes prior to any disposal of the car park as part of the redevelopment will be the subject of a further report to Cabinet at the appropriate time.
12 Value For Money
12.1 An analysis of the value for money of the asset in current use is set out in confidential appendix 1. The conclusion is that the asset value is not currently being optimised. Further advice on the value for money of disposing of the site for redevelopment will be forthcoming after the completion of the marketing process.
12
Page 266 of 382 13 Sustainability Impact Appraisal
13.1 Optimising the use of land to create sustainable communities linked to accessible locations is a key plank of the Ealing local development plan and the London Plan. Any proposals for redevelopment will be expected to comply with the policies set out in those documents to support sustainable travel, sustainable design and construction and minimise the carbon impacts of the scheme.
14 Risk Management
14.1 The main risk of this proposal is that we may spend a modest amount of revenue and project management time going through the marketing process to find that we are unable to secure a bidder and recoup these costs. However, this is considered to be modest given that we have already carried out a soft market testing exercise.
15 Community Safety
15.1 Southall has experienced significant problems with anti-social behaviour and the perception of anti-social behaviour. A comprehensive scheme to develop the Green town centre will contribute to bringing more social activities to the town centre and drive out anti-social behaviour in addition to creating more activity and over-looking which will make the area safer.
16 Links to the 6 Priorities for the Borough
16.1 The council’s six priorities for the borough are to make Ealing:
• prosperous
This proposal aims to stimulate investment in new home construction. There will be an impact on some businesses currently operating in the area. The proposal will aim to provide new business space so as to create opportunities for at least the same number of jobs as will be displaced through the scheme. The new residents arising from the new housing should increase spending in existing local shops and facilities.
• safer
The environment in the Green town centre is currently degraded, lacks overlooking and passive surveillance and has a perception of anti-social behaviour. A comprehensive place making led scheme would address some of these issues.
• healthier
No impact.
• cleaner
13
Page 267 of 382 This proposal would support a cleaner Southall environment. In addition by creating new routes through to the new Crossrail station will encourage residents from surrounding streets to use public transport rather than relying on their cars all the time.
• fairer
Any scheme for new housing would be expected to deliver a proportion of affordable housing in line with the Council’s local development plan and the London Plan.
• accessible
This proposal would significantly enhance the accessibility through the site and to the new Crossrail station. New public realm would be designed to a standard to support inclusive environments for all, including disabled people, thus increasing accessibility
17 Equalities, Human Rights and Community Cohesion
17.1 It is not considered at this stage that an EQIA is required because the proposals are in line with the Southall Big Plan and the Southall Opportunity Area Planning Framework, which were themselves subject to EQIA.
18 Staffing/Workforce and Accommodation implications:
18.1 None. The project can be managed within the Regeneration and Housing Directorate.
19 Property and Assets
19.1 The property discussed in this report is not on the planned list of disposals. However the site provides an opportunity to optimise the value of this capital asset to the Council and it has been considered due to external enquiries and interest from several quarters as described in detail in this report.
20 Any other implications: None.
21 Consultation This project has not been considered by a scrutiny panel of the Council. A draft SPD for Southall the Green has been published for public consultation which closed in November 2016. The Green SPD will be discussed and adopted at Full Council if appropriate in due course.
14
Page 268 of 382 22 Timetable for Implementation
March 2017 Cabinet Decision and call in period Enter into Memorandum of Understanding with Ealing May 2017 Gateway Limited June 2017 Call for tenders to find developer partner Appointment of developer partner / publication of CPO December 2017 if required Summer 2018 Submission of planning application 2018 Resolution of planning application 2019 Start on site for development 2021 First new housing completions
23 Appendices Confidential Appendix 1 – Financial implications Appendix 2 – Maps and plans of the affected area Appendix 3 – Use of Featherstone Terrace Carpark 24 Background Information Southall Opportunity Area Planning Framework, July 2014 Southall the Green draft SPD, October 2016
Consultation
Name of Post held Date Date Comments consultee sent to response appear in consultee received paragraph: Internal Pat Hayes Executive Director 3 January 17 11 January Throughout report Cllr Julian Bell Leader / 23 Feb 17 Cabinet Member for Regeneration Cllr Bassam Cabinet Member for 23 Feb 17 Mahfouz Transport Keith Townsend Executive Director 3 January 17 11 January Throughout report
Lucy Taylor Director for planning and December 11 January Throughout report regeneration 2016 Gina Cole Assistant Director Parking December December Parking provision 2016 16 section 7 Mark McIntosh Parking Services December December Parking provision 2016 16 section 7 and appendix 3 Jackie Adams Legal Adviser December December Legal paras and 2016 16 throughout report Samuel Cuthbert Planning policy December 2016
15
Page 269 of 382 Flora Osiyemi Finance Business Partner 30/01/16 09/02/17 Throughout report – Consultancy 16/02/17 & Confidential 23/02/17 02/03/17 Appendix 1
External Neil Parlett LSH December December Throughout report 2016 16
Report History
Decision type: Urgency item? Key decision No
Report no.: Report author and contact for queries: Eleanor Young, Strategic Regeneration Adviser 07765 896758
16
Page 270 of 382 Southall the Green Cabinet Report March 2017
Appendix 2 – maps and plans
Map 1 – sites being recommended for a comprehensive redevelopment including location of Council car park at Featherstone Terrace and extent of land to be marketed to a developer
Page 271 of 382 Map 2 – SOU8 planning policies as set out in the Ealing local plan proposals map
Page 272 of 382 Map 3 – illustrative masterplan for phase 1; used for modelling and viability purposes
Page 273 of 382 Map 4 – GLA suggested approach to phasing
Page 274 of 382 Southall Green Cabinet Report March 2017
Appendix 3 – Car park condition and usage
This appendix contains more detail on the current use and condition of Featherstone Terrace car park.
Featherstone Terrace Carpark Southall - usage
DAYS 08:00 08:30 09:00 09:30 10:00 10:30 11:00 11:30 12:00 12:30 13:00 13:30 14:00 14:30 15:00 15:30 16:00 16:30 17:00 17:30
Monday 20 21 22 23 26 29 32 36 38 40 41 43 46 46 45 44 44 44 43
Average Tuesday 20 21 23 24 27 29 32 36 38 40 42 44 46 46 44 43 43 42 40 Vehicle Wednesday 20 21 22 24 27 29 32 36 40 43 45 48 52 52 50 48 47 47 46 Parked with Thursday 20 21 22 24 27 30 33 37 40 43 46 49 50 50 50 48 47 47 46 adjustment for permit Friday 21 22 24 26 28 31 35 41 45 47 48 50 52 53 53 50 49 48 47 data Saturday 6 8 10 13 19 26 37 47 55 60 65 69 72 74 76 78 78 77 75
Sunday 4 5 6 7 9 12 19 27 36 45 53 59 69 76 82 85 86 86 81
Time 08.00 08.30 09.00 09.30 10.00 10.30 11.00 11.30 12.00 12.30 13.00 13.30 14.00 14.30 15.00 15.30 16.00 16.30 17.00 17.30 18.00 Monday 3 4 5 7 10 13 18 23 25 27 28 30 34 34 32 31 31 31 30 29 15 Tuesday 3 5 6 8 11 14 17 21 24 26 28 31 33 33 31 30 29 28 26 26 13 Average Wednesday 3 5 6 8 11 13 17 22 26 30 32 36 40 40 38 36 35 34 33 32 18 Vehicle Thursday 3 5 6 8 11 14 19 23 27 30 33 37 38 39 38 36 34 34 33 32 18 Parked (days) Friday 4 5 7 10 12 15 20 27 31 34 35 37 39 41 40 37 35 34 33 31 16 Saturday 3 5 8 12 18 26 38 50 58 64 70 75 79 81 83 86 85 84 82 81 51 Sunday 1 2 3 4 7 11 18 28 39 49 59 65 77 85 92 96 97 96 90 85 53
Daily average 3 4 6 8 11 15 21 28 33 37 41 44 49 50 51 50 49 49 47 45 26
Data from 1 November 2015 to 31 October 2016 Data excludes blue badge holders and season tickets (currently 21) 133 general spaces and 7 blue badge spaces available
Page 275 of 382
Page 276 of 382 Featherstone Terrace Carpark Southall - condition
The following pictures show the average daily usage of the car park in November 2016.
Page 277 of 382 Photos from Monday 14 November 2016 – 4pm
Photos from weekend 26 th /27 th November 2016 – all photos taken early afternoon
Page 278 of 382 Report for: ACTION
Item Number: 10
Contains Confidential NO or Exempt Information Title Sustainable Transport Strategy 2017-18 Responsible Officer Lucy Taylor, Director, Regeneration and Planning Author(s) Russell Roberts, Principal Transport Planner Portfolio(s) Cllr Bassam Mahfouz, Cabinet Member for Transport and Environment For Consideration By Cabinet Date to be Considered 14 March 2017 Implementation Date if 27 March 2017 Not Called In Affected Wards All Keywords/Index Air Quality, Crossrail, Cycling, Local Implementation Plan (LIP), Public Health, Public Realm/Placemaking, Road Safety, s106 allocations, Sustainable Transport/Smarter Travel, School Travel, Traffic, Walking
Purpose of Report: This report sets out the Council’s Sustainable Transport Strategy and seeks approval for three programmes of transport projects for 2017/18 including: Local Implementation Plan (LIP) and other TfL grant funded programmes to be delivered during 2017/18, Transport projects programme funded by s106 contributions. School safety schemes funded by schools expansion programme.
1. Recommendations
It is recommended that Cabinet
i) Approves the LIP and other TfL grant funded projects and programmes (including the Local Transport Funding allocation as summarised in section 3 and as shown in Appendix A.
Page 279 of 382
ii) Delegates authority to the Executive Director, Regeneration and Housing to take the necessary steps to implement the schemes identified in the LIP programme and also those schemes funded through s106 monies as set out in Appendix B and the school expansion schemes as set out in Appendix C following consultation with the Executive Director of Environment and Customer Services and the Portfolio Holder for Transport and Environment, subject to relevant detailed design and approvals and the outcome of any statutory consultation that may be required. iii) Notes approved TfL grant funding for 17/18 of £3.893m and;
Authorises addition of the capital elements of the schemes totalling £2.796m to add to the Highways Capital Programme (Environment and Customer Services), to be funded by TfL grant. Allocation of funding for TfL revenue expenditure of £1.097m to Built Environment (Housing and Regeneration)
iv) Notes received s106 funding of £1.044m as per January 2017 s106 Cabinet report and authorises addition of capital budget £0.797m to the Highways s106 Works Capital Programme (Environment and Customer Services) Allocation of funding for s106 revenue expenditure of £0.247m to Built Environment (Housing and Regeneration)
v) Delegates authority to the Executive Director, Regeneration and Housing, following consultation with the Executive Director of Environment and Customer Services and the Portfolio Holder for Transport and Environment, to amend the S106 and schools expansion programmes within available funding as necessary should the scope of any of the proposed projects change during design development and consultation, or delivery be delayed.
2. Reason for Decision
2.1 The Ealing Local Implementation Plan (LIP) 2014-17 sets out the transport strategy for Ealing Council and provides the rationale for the Council spending decisions. The Council’s transport priorities are to encourage sustainable travel for social (including health), environmental (including air quality) and economic (regeneration) reasons and the LIP reflects this policy direction.
2.2 The LIP and other TfL grant funded programmes for 2017/18 are allocated on an interim basis whilst a new Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS) is being prepared by Mayor of London Sadiq Khan and TfL. The Mayor has given initial indications of his priorities in the ‘City for all Londoners’ document published in November 2016. These priorities include air quality, public health and the public realm/placemaking and these have been taken into account when producing the 2017/18 programme. A new draft MTS is expected to be published in spring 2017.
2.3 A replacement LIP document for the 2018-21 period will be prepared and be
Page 280 of 382
subject to public and stakeholder consultation plus is expected to be put before Cabinet for formal approval by early 2018.
2.4 The LIP objectives support the Council’s Corporate Plan and cover the areas of: road safety, healthy and sustainable travel, traffic flow, accessibility, principal road condition plus air quality. Transport schemes will be identified and designed to make significant improvements to the way people and goods move around the borough, whatever method of transport is used. In particular, evidence from projects completed in Ealing and elsewhere demonstrates that investment in transport can make a strategic difference in terms of regeneration, public health and air quality, achieving positive rates of return within a few years.
2.5 The LIP covers several of the statutory duties that the council is required to fulfil, including road safety and road network management (covering asset liability), plus areas such as planning, public health, equality, crime and disorder. These are detailed in section 5. Legal below.
2.6 The LIP is required to be consistent with the Mayor’s Transport Strategy together with other emerging strategic transport initiatives across London and will implement these at the local level. Ealing is also the lead borough in the West Trans Sub-Regional Partnership of six boroughs.
3. Key Implications
3.1 Ealing Council wants to create an efficient and effective local transport network. A good transport network will reduce traffic congestion and provide people with better sustainable transport options (walking, cycling and public transport) for short trips. This will help the local economy in Ealing by creating a vibrant place which encourages local visitors and trade, plus reducing delivery and other costs of traffic delays.
3.2 Ealing is aiming to create an enhanced transport network that will:
Boost the local economy Improve transport accessibility Enhance the local environment Ameliorate air quality, and Enhance road safety standards
3.3 Various studies have shown that investment in the local transport network boosts town centre viability. Estimates suggest that if all other drivers of growth were to increase by 10% and transport infrastructure were to stay constant, then realised growth in income would be just 9%, i.e. 1% point less than it otherwise would have been. Studies of particular projects or types of transport improvement point to positive impacts on a wide range of economic variables including city size and employment. The increases in land values associated with urban transport projects are well established. Within Ealing, a number of recent projects have demonstrated the value of transport investment. For example, on Southall Boulevard, local businesses reported increases in trading figures following the recent Southall Broadway
Page 281 of 382
Boulevard scheme investment.
3.4 Transport investment can play a key role in enhancing the local environment. This includes repaving and resurfacing or roads and pavements, enhancing the quality of the public realm and placemaking by reducing street clutter, providing more trees, using high quality street furniture and materials. This enhances the look and feel of an area and creates a better balanced environment for all users. Additional measures can also be utilised, such as narrowing roads to reduce speeds, removing guard rail, putting in more pedestrian and cycling facilities and creating greater spaces for people to enjoy.
3.5 Transport related emissions in Ealing have been declining in recent years (the average NO2 concentration across four borough monitoring stations have fallen from 61.1 to milligrams per cubic metre in 2010 to 47.4 in 2014 - transport accounts for around half of these figures) and the Council has been working with key partners to reduce both the sources of emission (e.g. working with TfL buses to use greener fleets such as the introduction of Hybrid Buses) and in combating road side pollution e.g. successfully bids to the Mayor’s Air Quality Fund to fund measures to reduce localised transport related air quality hotspots such as Haven Green.
3.6 Ealing achieved one of the biggest reductions in Killed and Seriously Injured (KSI) road casualties of all London boroughs with a 32% reduction for 2005- 2009 to 2012 and reached the lowest casualty level in 2015. This compares favourably to casualty reduction averages across Greater London. The LB Ealing LIP 2014-17 set a challenging target to further reduce fatalities and serious injuries on the roads by 40% to 2016 compared to the 2005-2009 average. This had been exceeded by 52% by 2015 exceeding the more challenging target of a 50% casualty reduction set in 2015. These achievements have been achieved concurrently with investment in road safety measures and better design of our transport network.
3.7 A more efficient and better designed transport network also reduces the Council’s liabilities. This can relate to reduced running costs on lighting, maintenance and repairs as well as reduced claims from road casualties caused by a deteriorating network.
3.8 This report provides updates the LIP 2014-17 report to Cabinet on 22 October 2013, and supplements the previous Sustainable Transport Strategy 2016-17 report to Cabinet on 22 March 2016. It covers the proposed transport infrastructure improvement schemes that have been identified following completion of Corridors and Neighbourhoods (CANs) feasibility studies, but also includes proposed projects under the Smarter Travel programme plus s106 schemes.
3.9 In order to obtain best value for money from transport funding, and to achieve improvements for the economy, the environment and public health, the schemes that emerge from studies aim to achieve the best balance of outcomes for all users, with an emphasis on sustainable transport modes as these have been demonstrated to show the greatest returns on investment. For example, a TfL town centre study in 2013 looking at the contribution
Page 282 of 382
made by transport users to the economic health and viability of town centres across London revealed that pedestrians and bus users spend more per week in town centres than those using a car, with average spend per week by mode being: walking £86, bus £73 and car £62.
3.10 The LIP feasibility studies have set out to identify a wide-range of key improvement schemes that will deliver solutions to address the specific transport and environment issues. In addition, the studies identified opportunities to deliver many improvements, including pedestrian facilities, cycling routes, local shopping parades and the quality of the public realm. The key schemes identified are listed in Appendix A.
3.11 The Corridors and Neighbourhoods (CANs) terminology for describing transport projects has been specified by TfL and is defined as follows: Corridors – linear, movement transport corridors of significant flows across all transport modes, can include town centres and tend to be larger projects, Neighbourhoods – cover a collection of streets normally in residential or sometimes industrial areas, and tend to be smaller projects Supporting measures – normally small-scale infrastructure or non- infrastructure projects, Programmes and campaigns focussing on behaviour change designed using best practice to promote cycling, walking and public transport use including utilising the physical measures introduced as part of the CANs projects in particular. Major Schemes - are designated as large, multi-year schemes over £1m in value and have their own separate, funding category.
3.12 The key capital schemes are subject to further detailed design and approval by Transport Planning in conjunction with other teams, including Highways and Parking Services.
3.13 It should be noted that in some cases, the available CANs funding spans more than one financial year, giving the Council more flexibility to develop and deliver complex and/or larger scale solutions. This report focuses on the 2017/18 projects but makes reference to the multi-year funded schemes where relevant for forward planning purposes. Further details of schemes continuing into future years will be given in Cabinet reports in forthcoming years.
3.14 Further details and locations of the CANs projects are given in Appendix A.
3.15 A further breakdown of the Supporting Measures programme that covers projects for home, workplace and school travel planning, travel awareness, education, training, publicity and Direct Support for Cycling (DSC), are also shown in Appendix A. Some recent example projects in this funding programme are: - The Play Streets initiative (community-led street events), has grown in popularity from one active event in September 2013 to 25 active events currently. - School travel initiatives to promote walking, cycling and scooting continue to reduce travelling to school by car, which is now at a six year low at 16% of
Page 283 of 382
students. The Ealing school age population is rising for example with 24% more children currently aged 5 years than currently aged 10 years. - Ealing’s DSC is one of the largest cycle training programmes in London. In 2015/16 there were 1,745 children (up from 1,176 in 2015/16) and 286 adults who received cycle training plus there were 99 Dr Bike sessions held. - The DSC programme won the ‘Achievement in Cycling Award’ at the National Transport Awards 2012 and the DSC ‘Bike Bus’ project run in summer 2016 has been shortlisted for the London Transport Awards 2017.
3.16 Cycle training complements infrastructure such as cycle lanes and cycle parking plus can increase levels of cycling. The 2014 Bikeability School Travel Survey Report shows that 21% of cycle trained children frequently cycled compared to 15% of untrained children. Cycle training also provides safety benefits, trained children feel more equipped to cycle on the road (23%) compared to untrained children (11%) and trained children are less likely to cycle on the footway (21%) compared to untrained children (27%), 2014 Bikeability School Travel Survey Report. There is considerable unmet demand from children who want to cycle but whose parents will not let them due to road safety concerns. School travel surveys state that around 19% of children want to cycle to school but only 3% actually do so. Many adults who want to cycle also have the same concerns. DSC gives people the skills so they can ride safely on roads and maintain their cycle, this training also complements physical measures, such as cycle lanes that the Council is building.
3.17 Whilst cycling mode share in Ealing has grown from 1.6% in 2009 to 2.6% in 2015, there has been no further growth in cycling mode share since 2015. This would appear to indicate that in order to achieve the next step change in cycle growth, greater interventions are required to grow the proportion of cycle journeys, most notably in the form of more segregated and semi- segregated cycle routes in the Borough. This is currently being investigated by the Council’s Cycling Commission which is due to report in summer 2017. In terms of daily trips, the 2015 figure is estimated to represent around 16,000 cycle trips a day compared to under 7,000 cycle trips per day in 2009 in Ealing.
3.18 The £100,000 discretionary funding for the Local Transport Fund is to be used to contribute towards the development and delivery of projects. These include the West London Bus Corridor improvements, Ruislip Road East Quietway, seed funds to develop additional funding bids, other small-scale transport improvements arising from transport studies (such as electric vehicles) and providing contingency support in case of unexpected costs for projects. This funding is listed in Appendix A.
3.21 Funding for other TfL improvement programmes has also been secured to broaden the scope and scale of projects that Ealing can deliver. The details are shown in Appendix A but in summary they include the following:
Mayors Air Quality Fund – projects to tackle air quality hotspots Crossrail Complementary Funding – funding to support development, design and delivery of access, movement and public realm projects in the vicinity of Crossrail stations
Page 284 of 382
3.22 The Borough Cycle Programme funding stream has been discontinued by TfL for the 2017/18 financial year. However, in continuing support of cycling initiatives, officers have allocated £0.109m to a dedicated ‘Cycle Intervention’ project. This is funded from the £2.997m allocated to the Corridors, Neighbourhoods and Supporting Measures programme (see paragraph 4.2 and Appendix A).
3.23 Ealing’s Bus Stop Accessibility programme is now complete with all 700+ bus stops in LB Ealing now wheelchair accessible. Therefore no further funding is required for this programme.
3.27 Current transport projects funded by s106 planning obligations are summarised in Appendix B. Where appropriate, these projects will also be integrated with schemes detailed in the LIP and the road maintenance programme to provide economies of scale and value for money.
3.28 School safety schemes funded by the Council’s school expansion programme are summarised in Appendix C. Where appropriate, these projects will also be integrated with schemes detailed in the LIP and the road and bridge maintenance programme to provide economies of scale and value for money.
4. Financial
4.1 The following summary table sets out the funding for both capital and revenue expenditure anticipated for transport projects in 2017/18.
Table 1
Existing Approved Budgets Additional Budget Total Transport Funding 2017/18 £m Requested 2017/18 £m 17/18 Sub Sub Revenue Capital Revenue Capital total total LIP/TfL grant 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.097 2.796 3.893 3.893 Funding Transport s106 contributions 0.273 1.593 1.866 0.247 0.797 1.044 2.910 Funding School Safety Schemes funded by Schools - 0.340 0.340 - - - 0.340 Expansion Programme TfL Crossrail Complementary - 2.403 2.403 - - - 2.403 Measures (CCM) funding Total 0.273 4.336 4.609 1.344 3.593 4.937 9.546
4.2 Following the annual spending submission to TfL, TfL have approved £3.893m of funding for the LIP and other TfL programmes in 2017/18 (further detail on project allocations in Table 2 and 3).
Page 285 of 382
4.3 In addition to the LIP programme other transport schemes are funded through s106 planning obligations. A list of current existing s106 funded schemes is set out in Appendix B (Total funding £3.064m). The s106 monies received by the Council was outlined in the January 2017 s106 Cabinet report, and Appendix B attached shows s106 monies that have already been received and agreed (Total funding £1.044m). It is intended that these schemes be integrated with the LIP programme to provide economies of scale and value for money and Cabinet are requested through this report to approve the addition of £0.797m s106 funded expenditure to the capital programme.
4.4 Further funding of £0.340m is available from the Education Department in connection with the schools expansion programme to implement safety and sustainable travel schemes in the vicinity of new and expanded schools as set out in appendix C. This funding is already included in the capital programme and the transport contributions have been confirmed. It is intended that these schemes will be integrated with the LIP and s106 programmes where relevant to provide economies of scale and value for money.
4.5 The Crossrail Complementary Measures (CCM) proposals to improve station access are being progressed as TfL have confirmed that funding will be available to develop schemes at the five Crossrail stations in LB Ealing. The level of funding for 2017/18 has been bid at £2.403m to reflect the current Crossrail delivery timetable. A separate report on the CCM allocation was reported to Cabinet on 21 April 2015, and addition of the scheme to the Capital Programme was approved.
4.6 Table 2 below shows requests to add budgets to capital programmes in E&CS Highways with associated funding sources
Request for additions to capital programme Table 2
Additional Budget requested 17/18 Directorate Funding Programme £m Environment & Customer Services, Highways Corridors and Neighbourhoods 2.025 Environment & Customer Services, Highways Principal Road Maintenance 0.771 Environment & Customer Services, Highways Highways S106 Works 0.797 Sub total 3.593 Funded by Grant (TfL) 2.796 s106 0.797 Total 3.593
Page 286 of 382
Table 3 notes revenue allocations against TfL and s106 spend against Built Environment
Transport Projects revenue expenditure Table 3
17/18 Revenue Directorate Programme £m LIP/ TfL Built Environment All Corridors Future Feasibility 0.080 Grant Cycling Interventions 0.109 Supporting Measures 0.783 Local Transport Fund 0.100 Mayor’s Air Quality Fund- Ealing 0.015 Mayor’s Air Quality Fund- West Trans 0.010 Sub total 1.097 s106 Built Environment Programme Detail in Appendix B 0.247 Total Revenue 1.344
4.3 Notwithstanding the funding allocations above, TfL LIP Guidance allows boroughs to move up to 20% allocation between projects in the Corridors, Neighbourhoods and Supporting Measures programmes. This provides a greater degree of flexibility to meet local priorities and changing circumstances. This flexibility has been applied in developing the proposed programme for 2017/18.
4.7 The Local Transport Funding allocation of £0.100m is discretionary and may be used on transport projects as defined by the Council, see section 3.18 above.
4.8 Some projects in Appendix A include proposals to add, alter or remove traffic management measures such as bus lanes, yellow box junctions plus waiting and loading restrictions which may have revenue implications. Any such revenue implications are not relevant to any traffic management decisions which will be made having regard to the duties set out in paragraph 13.1 below.
5. Legal
5.1 Under s159 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999, TfL may give financial assistance to the Council where they consider it would be conducive to the provision of safe, integrated, efficient and economic transport facilities or service to, from or within Greater London.
5.2 The Council has the power to implement the schemes set out in the programme pursuant to various statutes including the Highways Act 1980, the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the Local Government Act 1972.
5.3 In exercising powers under the Traffic Regulation Act 1984, section 122 of the
Page 287 of 382
Act imposes a duty on the Council to have regard (so far as practicable) to securing the ‘expeditious, convenient and safe movement of vehicular and other traffic (including pedestrians) and the provision of suitable and adequate parking facilities on and off the highway’. The Council must also have regard to such matters as the desirability of securing and maintaining reasonable access to premises and the effect on the amenities of any locality affected. Any final decision to implement any scheme needs to take account of the considerations set out above and the outcome of public consultation. Any changes to parking restrictions will be subject to Traffic Management Order changes as per the Traffic Management Act 2004 and the Local Authorities Traffic Order (Procedure) England and Wales.
5.4 Money paid to the Council pursuant to a s106 obligation can only be applied for the purposes set out in the relevant agreement.
6. Value For Money
6.1 Transport projects utilise cross-team working across the Council whenever practical to deliver benefits by pooling budgets and professional expertise as well as economies of scale for delivery. Recent examples of this include the Transport Planning Service working on the Regeneration, Parking and Highways teams for Southall Broadway Boulevard/Southall Great Streets, the Housing team with estates cycle parking, with Public Health for the Year of Walking and Active Ealing to install cycle parking at sports and leisure centres.
6.2 Transport projects are designed to improve road safety. The installation of pedestrian crossing facilities at the Lido junction in West Ealing as part of the Corridor 4 project has resulted in the saving of one road casualty each year. When translated into monetarised benefits (using figures from the Department for Transport) this equates to £74,712 every year in road safety benefits alone.
6.3 The impacts of the recently completed transport schemes of Ealing Broadway Interchange and Southall Broadway Boulevard have been evaluated by TfL using the Health Economic Assessment Tool (HEAT). The HEAT analysis looks at changes in mortality and general health reflected by changes in the physical activity of the local population. This analysis found that the monetised health benefits alone delivered by Ealing Broadway Interchange scheme from increased walking and cycling are £268,000 each year. Whilst for Southall Broadway Boulevard the monetised health benefits alone delivered from increased walking and cycling are £1,112,000 each year.
6.4 The cost of congestion has been estimated to be £5.4bn across London or £2,765 per household annually in 2013 according to research by INRIX (traffic data provider) and the Centre for Economics and Business Research. This equates to £335,885,915 per year in Ealing. Transport schemes aim to reduce congestion by smoothing the traffic flow. Recent examples of this are the removal of traffic lights and replacement with mini-roundabouts as part of the Corridor 1a Acton Town Centre scheme and the replacement of signal controlled crossings with informal crossings in the Southall Broadway
Page 288 of 382
Boulevard scheme, which has halved journey times in certain sections of the town centre.
6.5 Approved Council contractors will carry out the work associated with each of the transport schemes where applicable. Where the skills do not exist the Council will procure these by competitive tender in accordance with its policy.
6.6 While less quantifiable, the regeneration impact of improved transport provision, can be significant. These will complement regeneration projects in the borough and also the improved accessibility provided by Crossrail. Examples proposed include the Ealing Mini-Holland/Uxbridge Road improvements (Corridor 1d), Southall Broadway Boulevard (Corridor 1b) and the Crossrail Complementary Measures programme. Ealing has been relatively successful in attracting investment in recent years, but one of the greatest challenges it faces is in improving poor public realm/transport infrastructure to help create a ‘sense of place’. This will help to create more attractive/vibrant areas to live and work in, and ensure further investment comes to the borough.
6.7 Schemes will be assessed by officers from the Transport Planning Service in conjunction with Highways and Parking Services to ensure that their impacts are contained within existing revenue budgets.
7. Risk Management
7.1 The main risks to the programmes arise from; formal objections received at the statutory consultation stage that cannot be justifiably overturned; delays preventing implementation during the time frame of available funding, and unforeseen problems on site. Processes are in place to minimise the impact of any such eventualities, but non-delivery of schemes may result in loss of funding. However, the funding flexibility described above, and the authority in the recommendation provides mitigation to accommodate programme changes.
7.2 Regarding the Smarter Travel projects, there is a risk that the Council may be criticised for using its funds on individual travel behaviour change projects such as Direct Support for Cycling and Travel Awareness schemes. Notwithstanding the fact that the funding for these projects is ring-fenced, and that it is Council policy to promote sustainable modes of travel, this risk will be minimised by ensuring that scheme benefits are accessible to all, by ensuring a robust business case is in place, and by keeping the Marketing and Communications Unit informed as necessary.
7.3 TfL grant funding for 2018/19 and beyond had not been confirmed at the time of writing. Therefore there is a risk to projects that would be implemented during this period. However, TfL funding levels are currently under discussion and officers expect confirmation later this year.
8. Community Safety
8.1 The Mayor’s Transport Strategy includes “ensuring the safety and security of
Page 289 of 382
Londoners” as one of its six overarching ‘thematic’ goals. The Council’s LIP Objective 1 is to “Improve road safety and reduce road danger on the borough transport network for all users, including pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists”, along with a series of planned interventions to achieve this. The schemes in Appendix A are a part of the planned interventions that would improve safety in the community.
8.2 In addition, the Council has a statutory duty to investigate road traffic collisions and work to prevent future accidents. Advice from TfL is that incorporating safety schemes within our CAN schemes will satisfy this requirement.
9. Links to the six Priorities for the Borough
9.1 A safer borough
The arrangements for funding of transport schemes allows the Council to ensure that road safety and community safety is investigated and addressed as part of every scheme.
9.2 A healthier borough
The programme includes projects on walking and cycling, which will have particular health outcome benefits, especially for people using these modes.
9.3 An accessible borough
Transport links throughout the Borough will be targeted for improvement, particularly sustainable modes (walking, cycling and public transport) and orbital journeys. This will help people access jobs and services more effectively.
9.4 A cleaner borough
The programme will aim to minimise increases in traffic volumes by supporting and promoting the growth of sustainable modes. This will help to manage emissions of carbon and other pollutants. Improving the quality of the street environment is a key component of schemes to encourage walking and cycling.
9.5 A prosperous borough
Transport links throughout the Borough will be targeted for improvement, particularly sustainable modes and orbital journeys. This will help local businesses and people access jobs and markets more effectively.
The focus on sustainable modes will not substantially increase wear on carriageways and footways, therefore maintaining an adequate lifespan of these Council assets before replacement is required.
Page 290 of 382
10. Equalities, Human Rights and Community Cohesion
10.1 In light of the legislative elements in the 2010 Equalities Act, an assessment has been undertaken of the Equalities Impact Assessment (EQIA), which was approved for the Local Implementation Plan previously. This document covers all of the Council's transport policies to 2031. Reference: Chapter 7 Local Implementation Plan. The recommended actions are not expected to have a significant impact on equalities and community cohesion.
11. Staffing/Workforce and Accommodation implications:
11.1 There are no staffing/workforce or accommodation issues as the design and works involved are to be carried out by existing in-house resources, or consultants and contractors employed by the Council.
12. Property and Assets
12.1 The Council receives funding for the maintenance of carriageways, footways and bridges through the LIP, in addition to Council funds allocated for this purpose (to be reported to Cabinet in the Infrastructure Renewal Programme report also to be considered at this meeting). Where required by the projects, transport funding will be used to alter enforcement infrastructure to suit any changes to traffic management measures.
13. Any other implications:
13.1 The introduction of some schemes may have minor dis-benefits. For example some schemes may reduce the amount of on-street parking capacity if new pedestrian crossings are implemented, or impacts on bus journey times, whereas others may require adjustment to the balance between the traffic movement and safety for pedestrians if “green-man” signals are introduced at a busy signalised junction. In such cases, a multi- criteria impact assessment will be used to analyse the net benefits of the scheme prior to making final decisions to implement taking into account the Council’s duties under the Traffic Regulation Act 1984 where appropriate. The multi-criteria assessment includes; traffic, pedestrian and cycle flows, bus delays, waiting and loading issues, road safety and access for those with reduced mobility. The assessment is a technical decision that needs to balance different interests and is to be made by officers from the Transport Planning Service in conjunction with Highways and Parking Services.
14. Consultation
14.1 There are three stages of consultation for infrastructure schemes of the type described in this report. These are:
(i) Consultation with Ward Councilors regarding initial scheme proposals;
(ii) Consultation with residents and businesses in the vicinity of the scheme by way of posted consultation document and/or letter drop;
Page 291 of 382
(iii) Statutory advertising of any necessary Traffic Management Orders, using on-street notice boards, the London Gazette and the local newspaper, prior to implementing a scheme. Any formal objection received at the statutory consultation stage that cannot be justifiably overturned could delay the implementation of the scheme.
14.2 In addition, the emergency services and bus operators are consulted where appropriate during scheme development.
15. Timetable for Implementation
15.1 The schemes listed in Appendix A are at varying stages of development across their respective project lifecycles. Some are at relatively early concept stages whereas others have already been designed and are merely awaiting funds for construction. The outline timetable below shows overlaps between life-cycle stages, reflecting that some schemes will be implemented sooner than others.
15.2 The outline timetable describes typical milestones for schemes that are funded to the end of the 2017/18 financial year. Where schemes extend beyond one financial year, the date of each project lifecycle will be increased accordingly reflecting the size and complexity of each project.
Outline timetable - typical milestones for schemes funded in 2017/18
Project Lifecycle Date Range Cabinet approval April 2017 Preliminary design May – August 2017 Consultation June – October 2017 Design August – December 2017 Works commencement on site November 2017 Works completion March 2018
15.3 The proposed programme is indicative and may vary subject to:
problems that may be identified at the preliminary design stage requiring additional study to obtain scheme approvals; issues raised by Members or the public at consultation stage which may require design changes; unresolvable objections being received at the statutory consultation stage; approvals by other boroughs on cross Borough schemes; approvals required by TfL where relevant; and alterations to programme through mutual agreement with TfL.
Page 292 of 382
16. Appendices
Appendix A – Corridors, Neighbourhoods, Smarter Travel Programme
Principal Road Maintenance and Major Scheme
Appendix B – s106 Funded Transport Projects Summary
Appendix C – School Safety Schemes
17. Background Information
Local Implementation Plan 2011-2014 - Cabinet 7 June 2011
Local Implementation Plan 2014-2017 – Cabinet 22 October 2013
Crossrail Complementary Measures Funding – Cabinet 21 April 2015
Sustainable Transport Strategy 2016-17 – Cabinet 22 March 2016
Section 106 Allocations (funding received by Ealing) – Cabinet 17 January
2017
Relevant s106 Agreements
‘City for all Londoners’ –Mayor of London, November 2016
Page 293 of 382
18 Report Consultation
Name of Department Date sent Response Comments consultee to consultee received appear in report from para: consultee Councillor Portfolio Holder for Transport 09/02/17 Mahfouz and Environment Lucy Taylor Director of Regeneration and 09/02/17 Planning Jackie Adams Head of Legal (Property & 09/02/17 Regulatory) Rahima Jahan Senior Finance Business 09/02/17 22/02/17 Sections Ali Advisor 1. & 4. Shahid Iqbal/ Assistant Director of 09/02/17 24/02/17 3.18 & Tony Singh Highways/ Team Manager – Appendix A Scheme Design and Implementation Gina Cole Assistant Director Parking 09/02/17 Services Jackie Chin Director of Public Health 09/02/17 Henry Kennedy- Head of Regeneration 09/02/17 Skipton Joanne Sustainability Programme 09/02/17 Mortensen Manager
Report History Decision type: Urgency item? Key decision No
Authorised by Cabinet Date report Report deadline: Date report sent: member: drafted:
Page 294 of 382 Transport - 2017/18 - LIP Programme- Appendix A
Package Name & Location Key Scheme Proposals Allocation travel
2017/18 Safety
Carbon
emissions
Objective1 Objective2 Objective3 Objective4 Objective5 Objective6 Objective7 Objective8
£ Sustainable
Accessibility
Qualityof Life
HealthyTravel
RoadCondition Smoothertraffic Corridors & Implementation of Corridors & Neighbourhoods physical schemes focussing on completion of schemes that have already 2,025,000 Neighbourhoods Schemes commenced. Measures include: streetscape/urban realm improvements and measures to support walking, cycling, road safety, bus users and smoothing the traffic flow.
Locations: Corridor 1c Hanwell/West Ealing Corridor 1d Ealing Broadway (including completion of Ealing Mini-Holland) Corridor 3 Acton north-south Corridor 4 West Ealing/Northfields Corridor 5 Southall South Rd/King St Corridor 8 Greenford Town Centre (including Ruislip Road East Quietway implementation) Corridor 11 Mandeville Rd, Northolt (including route 140 West London Bus Corridor) Corridor 12 Tentelow Lane access & Windmill Lane, Southall Corridor 13 Whitton Avenue (including Sudbury Village Major Scheme completion) Neighbourhood 26 Greenford Rd, Sudbury Hill (including Sudbury Village Major Scheme completion) Neighbourhood 27 Greenford Ave, Hanwell Neighbourhood 28 Northolt West End All Corridors Future Prepartation work for future projects, including data & analysis, borough wide studies, future Corridor and Neighbourhood 80,000 Feasibility schemes, studies and monitoring
Cycle Interventions To include: Brompton Bike Hire, cycle parking (Bike hangars & Sheffield stands) plus cycle routes signage review and update. 109,000
Supporting Measures -Transport Supporting Measures Staff Costs 783,000 -School Travel Plans Process -Travel Awareness (TA) -Ealing Council Travel Plan -Direct Support for Cycling (DSC) -Bike Week -WestTrans contribution -Air Quality Monitoring -Borough 20mph Corridors Neighbourhoods and Supporting Measures Total 2,997,000 Local Transport Fund Supplementary, flexible funding to be used towards a variety of transport improvements that have arisen from transport studies. 100,000 These include the West London Bus Corridor improvements, Ruislip Road East Quietway, seed funds to develop additional funding bids (such as electric vehicles), other small-scale transport improvements arising from transport studies and providing contingency support in case of unexpected costs for projects.
Local Transport Fund Total 100,000 PRN Maintenance Funding 771,000 Carriageway and footway maintenance of principal roads in the borough, prioritised according to condition rating. Also includes bridge assessment studies and strengthing works.
Principal Road Maintenance Totals 771,000 Ealing Mayor's Air Quality Park Royal Air Quality Exemplar -reduce commercial diesel vehicle trips by encouraging businesses to jointly procure waste 15,000 Fund collective services. WestTrans Mayor's Air WestTrans Air Quality Programme – Furthering Engagement with Key Trip Generators across the West London sub region 10,000 Quality Fund
Discretionary Funding Totals 25,000 Crossrail Complementary Design and Implementation funding to support integration of five Crossrail stations (Southall, Hanwell, West Ealing, Ealing 2,403,000 Funding Broadway and Acton Main Line) into the local urban realm and community.
Crossrail Commentary Measures Total 2,403,000 TOTAL 6,296,000
Page 295 of 382
Page 296 of 382 Transport Deliverables - 2017/18 - s106 Funded Projects Summary - Appendix B
S106 Ref Site Name & Location Amount Available £
A27 Bromyard House, Acton, W3 111,324
A52 BBC Depot, Kendal Avenue, W3 30,000
A56 41-159 Bromyard Avenue, Acton 164,342
A67 48 Lynton Road, Acton 1,288
A77 Napier House, 1-20 Sir Alexander Close, Acton, W3 21,503
A86 South Acton Estate - Phase 2 45,000
A94 Acton Town Hall High Street, W3 20,000
A95 Former Acton Park School 90,000
E43 Gosai Cinema, Northfield Avenue, Ealing, W13 15,000
E58 Westel House, 32/38 Uxbridge Road, Ealing W5 61,340
E61 79-89- Uxbridge Road, W5 1,105
E62 22/24 Uxbridge Road, Ealing, W5 66,534
E73 Ealing Cinema, New Broadway, Ealing, W5 56,891
E80 The Town House, Broadway W5 61,012
E81 77 Uxbridge Road, Ealing, W5 1,307
E90 48 THE MALL EALING, W5 10,144
E92A Green Man Lane - Phase 1 4,294
E92B Green Man Lane - NEW Deed Of Variation 45,894
E102 Notting Hill & Ealing High School, W13 30,625
E108 81 - 85 Madeley Road, W5 68,214
E118 ARCADIA CENTRE 1-8 THE BROADWAY, W5 40,912
E119 67-75 The Broadway, West Ealing 21,285
E120 83 The Avenue, W13 25,577
E122 Manor Works, Manor Road, W13 26,665
G15 1109/1115 Greenford Road, Greenford, UB6 25,275
G16 Taylor Woodrow Site, UB6 109,526
G27 Tesco Dot Com, 40 Auriol Drive, Greenford, UB6 5,272
G30 37 GREENFORD ROAD WHITE HART PUBLIC HOUSE 5,554
Page 297 of 382 Transport Deliverables - 2017/18 - s106 Funded Projects Summary - Appendix B
S106 Ref Site Name & Location Amount Available £
G33 Unit 11A Westway Cross, Greenford 30,000
G35 Unit 15 Westway Cross, Greenford 5,000
G36 Allen Court Ridding Lane, Greenford 5,180
G39 82-100 Horsenden Lane North, Greenford. 36,966
G42 301-303 Ruislip Road, Greenford 35,000
H9 1-35 Cambridge Yard, Hanwell W7 3UP (ELTHORNE Residential) 114,557
H16 Hanwell Locks, St Margaret's Road, W7 46,452
H19 79 - 101 Uxbridge Road, W7 10,631
H20 Heath Lodge, Church Road, W7 28,107
H21 4-14 Shakespeare Road, Hanwell, W7 5,233
N12 Steeplechase Court , Haydock Ave. Northolt 12,106
N14 Eastcote Lane North, Northolt 10,000
N18 Rectory Park Estate, Northolt 6,000
N21 Plough Inn, Mandeville Road, Northolt 22,252
PE5 Former Hoover Building Building No. 7 Western Avenue Perivale (2014) 30,000
PE7 Nuffield Arms, Alperton Lane, PERIVALE 20,071
PE9 Hoover Building One, Perivale 18,160 PP/20014/ Refurbishment and expansion of the Poplars Hostel, Northolt 25,000 658 PR28 GUINESS SITE, NW10 80,474
PR46 Warehouse Chandos Road/St Leonard's Road, NW10 20,748
PR54 Former BBC Costume Store, Acton, W3 176,139
PR55 1 Victoria Road, Acton 132,694
PR57 Atlas House, Atlas Road, Park Royal 16,734 138,481 PR58 Nash House, Old Oak Lane, NW10 35,654 PR58 Nash House, Old Oak Lane, NW10
PR59 Portal Way, Acton, W3 87,635
PR60 628 Western Avenue (Hotel, Office) 205,224
PR62 Concord Road, Acton 6,000
Page 298 of 382 Transport Deliverables - 2017/18 - s106 Funded Projects Summary - Appendix B
S106 Ref Site Name & Location Amount Available £
PR65 Land off Trinity Way, Acton, W3 7HT 95,039
S39 Norwood Yard, Poplar Avenue, Southall 11,574
S45 Former SALISBURY DEPOT, SALISBURY RD, Southall 60,110
S46 Former Featherstone Primary School, Featherstone Rd, Southall 50,000
S48 Unit 97 G Western Ind Estate, Southall 33,018
S50A Southall gasworks - Highway Works unilateral 85,000
S50B Southall gasworks - Bus contribution 61,000
S53 75 HIGH STREET, SOUTHALL 42,708
S60 PLOT 6, DEAN WAY, GREAT WESTERN INDUSTRIAL EST, SOUTHALL 18,000
S65 Albert Dane Centre Western Road Southall 20,439
S68 96 SOUTH ROAD SOUTHALL 10,000
S70 3 Collett Way, Southall 22,482
S72 Unit A1, Bridge Road Industrial Estate, Southall 3,000
S74 HAVELOCK Estate Phase 1 25,523
Total s106 monies received 3,064,274
Page 299 of 382
Page 300 of 382 Transport - 2017/18 Deliverables - School Safety Schemes - Appendix C
School Proposed Measures Funding £
Ark Bryon Primary Introduce school road safety measures, parking controls, 90,000 School pedestrian crossing and cycling improvements.
Beaconsfield Primary Review of local traffic calming measures, introduction of school 50,000 School safety zone and parking controls.
Berrymede Infant School road safety measures and parking controls. 3,000 School
Brentside High Local road safety improvements, parking controls/Controlled 60,000 School Parking Zone and sustainable travel initiatives.
Elthorne Park High School road safety improvements, school safety zone , parking 55,000 School controls and cycle training.
Holy Family Primary School road safety and pedestrian access measures. 35,000 School
Horsenden Primary School road safety measures and parking controls. 10,000 School
St Mark's Primary School road safety, pedestrian and cycle access measures. 5,000 School
The Study Centre, School road safety and pedestrian access measures. 10,000 Compton Close
West Twyford Introduction of parking controls and School Safety Zone. 15,000 Primary School
Wood End Academy School road safety, pedestrian and cycle access measures. 6,500 and Infant School
TOTAL 339,500
Page 301 of 382 Page 302 of 382 Report for: ACTION/INFORMATION
Item Number: 11
Contains Confidential No or Exempt Information
Title Northolt Grange Community Centre – Future Use Responsible Officer(s) Keith Townsend, Executive Director Environment and Customer Services Author(s) Jonathan Kirby – Assistant Director Major Projects
Portfolio(s) Councillor Ranjit Dheer, Safety, Culture and Community Services and Deputy Leader For Consideration By Cabinet Date to be Considered 14th March 2017 Implementation Date if 27th March 2017 Not Called In Affected Wards Northolt West End Keywords/Index Community Centres, efficiency, budget, lease, Northolt Grange
Purpose of Report:
Authority is sought for the Executive Director Environment and Customer Services to market the site under a long lease.
It is proposed that the Council will market the Centre on the open market. The opportunity will be widely advertised, with an adequate timeframe being allowed for proposals to be submitted
1. Recommendations
It is recommended that the Cabinet:
1.1 Delegates authority to the Executive Director of Environment and Customer Services to market the site on the open market for disposal by way of a long lease on the basis outlined in paragraph 2.13 and 2.14 below
1.2 Notes the hard work and long service committed to the running of Northolt Grange Community Centre, by the current Association and thanks them for their dedication
1.3 Notes that a report will be brought back to Cabinet for decision after the marketing exercise has been completed
1
Page 303 of 382 2. Reason for Decision and Options Considered
2.1 Cabinet agreed in November 2014 (as part of the MTFS), a saving within the community centre service, which aims to remove the subsidy from the community centre provision including directly run sites. A list of the affected centres is set out in para 2.2 below. The service has a 3 year saving target, profiled in such a way as to mitigate the impact of the reduction in subsidy, and to allow the Community Associations responsible for the leased sites to work with the Council on proposals to mitigate this reduction in subsidy.
2.2 Affected Centres:
West Acton Community Centre Northfields Community Centre Perivale Community Centre Greenford Community Centre Northolt Village Community Centre Islip Manor Community Centre Northolt Grange Community Centre Viking Community Centre Hanwell Community Centre Dominion Community Centre
2.3 The saving of £0.302m, and its associated profiling, was indicated in a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document, which summarised discussions with the Community Associations, and was presented to Scrutiny Panel 2 in July 2015. For ease the table is shown below. It should be noted that the £0.302m subsidy relates to staffing support provided to the Community Associations. The Council has achieved its 2016/17 saving target, via a reduction in staffing support, following completion of the November 2015 staff consultation process.
Table 1.1 Total 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 £m £m £m £m Savings delivered (0.074) (0.074) - - Savings to be delivered (0.228) - (0.114) (0.114) Budget post savings 0.302 0.228 0.114 - * The profiling in the table above is indicative, but the overall target is consistent with the Medium Term Financial Plan.
2.4 In terms of moving to a zero subsidy position by 2017/18, the following measures were identified and discussed with community associations as part of the ongoing consultation:
reducing, and eventually removing, staff provided by the Council (this forms the majority of the subsidy); reducing other costs currently covered by the Council, such as grounds maintenance; Increasing the rent paid by Community Associations.
2
Page 304 of 382
2.5 The objective is to make community centre operations self-sustaining by 2017/18, so that each centre has long-term security, is no longer reliant on a Council subsidy, and can afford an increase in rent. The main ways for community centres to become self-sustaining are:
increased income generation; a range of cost saving measures; Energy efficiency measures, capital improvements Longer leases. Governance and Operational Structures
2.6 Most community associations are currently on a one year rolling lease, and have security of tenure under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. The ’rolling’ leases can present problems for community associations as without longer (fixed term) leases it can be difficult to bid for external funding to support their activities and sustain their work. The Community Associations Forum, as well as individual community associations, continues to press the Council for longer leases.
2.7 The current leases date from circa 1980, in most cases, and the current rent of each community centre does not fully reflect a true market value position, The annual rents are currently very low (£0.001m to £0.003m). The new rents reflecting the current market value are likely to be much higher, between £0.010 – 0.030m, for the current usage and occupiers
Table 1.2 – Market Value Rents and current rent
Community Centre Market Value Current Rent (MRV) Rent Greenford £25,000 £1,872 Northfields £18,000 £1,152 Northolt Grange £18,000 £900 Northolt Village £18,000 £696 Perivale £30,000 £3,540 Islip Manor £15,000 £540 Viking £15,000 £500 West Acton £15,000 £1,080
2.8 During the consultation and Scrutiny process, representatives of the Northolt Grange Community Centre Association Management Committee stated that they would face significant challenges as a result of the removal of the subsidy. Officers met with the Association and talked through a range of scenarios which informed the Association’s Committee Meeting that took place in February 2016.
2.9 The Association Management Committee met during February 2016 and subsequently confirmed that they would be giving notice to the Council terminating their lease. The reasons given included a decrease in the number of Association trustees. Formal notice to terminate the lease was given to the Council in September 2016 resulting in the Association ceasing operation from 31st March 2017.
3
Page 305 of 382 2.10 The majority of the groups who used Northolt Grange Community Centre have now already relocated including to Viking Community Centre, which is within the same Ward and has helped to make Viking a more sustainable Community Centre going forward. Other groups have relocated to the neighbouring school, thereby making use of the wider community facilities in the area.
2.11 Two groups remain that have relocation needs. Of these, one may merge with another group. We will work with this group to explore options. The other remaining group has been exploring other community facilities. They have been given support to help with their re-location, which we will continue to do.
2.12 An opportunity had arisen with regard to Northolt Grange Community Centre site being used to support a 2 year project led by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). However it has recently been decided that the project will no longer be delivered from the Northolt Grange Community Centre site, due to the overall financial viability of the project. Officers will continue to work with the DWP in exploring other potential venues within the Northolt Area.
2.13 Authority is sought to market the Northolt Grange Community Centre for an appropriate use which will respond to the needs of the community in Northolt by a tenant who will
Work in partnership with the Council to develop a comprehensive community programme opportunities for all parts of Ealing’s diverse community.
Demonstrate a sound and financially viable business model to ensure the future use of the facility
Access external funding, if necessary, through partnership working
Develop useful links and networks for the benefit of the wider community (sports and education sector, businesses etc)
Create and establish a facility and activities for the benefit of the community and in doing so increase the centres participation
Ensure that year round activities are available for the community
Promote community well being
2.14 The Council proposes to grant a lease of up to 25 years, however we will be informed by the marketing process, with regards to this length of lease, and should a viable offer require a longer term, this will be reported back to cabinet as part of any future recommendation, as indicated in 1.3
2.15 The Council expects the successful organisation to allocate its own resources if necessary, for the running of the facility, making applications for funding (if required) and develop the Community Programme at the site.
4
Page 306 of 382 3. Key Implications
3.1 The Northolt Grange Community Centre premises will be available for other users on the basis outlined in paragraph 2.13 above, should a viable proposal be submitted and accepted by the council
3.2 The council envisages a 25 year lease being offered, however this will be informed by the marketing process and will be reported back to cabinet as part of any recommendation to enter into an agreement with the successful bidder.
3.3 The majority of users have relocated to other community facilities and support will be given to the remaining group to find alternative accommodation
4. Financial
4.1 An MTFS savings target of £0.302 relating to cessation of subsidy for leased and directly-run Council sites was agreed by Cabinet in December 2014. The proposal to market the Northolt Grange site on a long lease forms part of the strategy to discontinue the subsidy.
4.2 All community associations are currently on a one year rolling lease. One of the main ways for community centres to become self-sustaining is through the granting of long leases in order to achieve market value rents. The current rent for the Northolt Grange site is £0.001m per annum compared to a market value of £0.018m.
4.3The saving has been currently profiled up until 2017/18, as per the table below.
Total 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 £m £m £m £m Savings delivered (0.074) (0.074) - - Savings to be delivered (0.228) - (0.114) (0.114) Budget post savings 0.302 0.228 0.114 -
* The profiling in the table above is indicative, but the overall target is consistent with the Medium Term Financial Plan.
5. Legal
5.1 The Council has the power under section 123 of the Local Government Act to dispose of land in any manner it wishes. This is subject to the need the consent of the Secretary of State for any disposal which is not for best consideration whether by way of express consent or general consent where, as here, any lease proposed is for more than 7 years.
6. Value For Money
Ealing’s leased community centres currently operate with a level of subsidy. In addition, the low level of the current rent charged means that the Council may not be getting value for money from its assets. Although it may be that the Council 5
Page 307 of 382 does not receive proposals where that the full market rent is offered, the Council will nevertheless be seeking a rent that significantly higher than that paid under the existing lease.
6.1 The Council’s experience with Greenford Community Centre has demonstrated that a successful community operating model can deliver both an improved programme and greater financial sustainability and an increased return for the Council on its community assets.
7. Sustainability Impact Appraisal
7.1 There are no sustainability impacts arising from this report, at this stage. Any future benefits relating from capital improvements will be reported
8. Risk Management
8.1 The in-going tenant will be expected to provide a full risk register as part of their mobilisation to take over the running of Northolt Grange Community Centre.
9. Community Safety
9.1 There are no implications for community safety arising from this report.
10. Links to the 6 Priorities for the Borough
10.1 Proposed changes to the community centre operation will help the Council to achieve all of its priorities by ensuring that community centres are sustainable and are delivering services to meet residents’ needs.
11. Equalities, Human Rights and Community Cohesion
11.1 An Equalities Impact Assessment has been carried out.
12. Staffing/Workforce and Accommodation implications
13. None
14. Property and Assets
14.1 It is envisaged that a long lease of up to 25 years will be given to the in-going tenant. This will be informed by the marketing process and reported back to cabinet
15. Any other implications:
15.1 There are no other implications.
6
Page 308 of 382 16. Consultation
16.1 To date there have been a number of consultation events and Scrutiny Panel meetings and 1-2-1’s held with the Associations including Northolt Grange Community Association, as part of the community Centre Strategy Development.
16.2 Communication has taken place via letters sent to user groups by the current Association commencing February 2016 so that users have been informed throughout the process
17. Timetable for Implementation
Mid-March 2017 – Marketing process begins
April 2017 - basic refurbishment of Northolt Grange Community Centre commences
End April 2017 - Deadline for Proposals to be submitted
Mid May 2017 – Notification of successful tenant
Mid May 2017 – instruct legal to draft the lease effective from date compatible with the completion of refurbishment works June 2017 - new tenant commence use of Northolt Grange Community Centre
18. Appendices None
19. Background Information
Cabinet report December 2014 Scrutiny Panel 2 report July 2015 Scrutiny Panel 2 update – September 2015 Scrutiny Panel 2 report – November 2015
Consultation
Name of Post held Date Date Comments consultee sent to response appear in consultee received paragraph: Internal Keith Townsend Executive Director, 09/02/17 09/02/17 throughout Environment and Customer Services Jackie Adams Head of Legal (Property & 09/02/17 09/02/17 throughout Regulatory)
Ross Brown Director of Finance 09/02/17 14/02/17 throughout
Femi Ogidan Finance Business Partner 09/02/17 14/02/17 throughout
7
Page 309 of 382
External
Report History
Decision type: Urgency item? Key decision No
Report no.: Report author and contact for queries: Jonathan Kirby, Assistant Director Major Projects, [email protected]
8
Page 310 of 382 2016-17 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
1. Proposal Summary Information
EAA Title Northolt Grange Community Centre Please describe your Is it an Initiative/Function/Policy/Project/Scheme (Pick one) proposal? Policy Decision Is it HR Related? Yes ☐ No x☐ Corporate Purpose Cabinet Report Decision/Officer Decision//Full Council Decision (Pick one) Cabinet Report Decision
1. What is the Initiative/Function/Policy/Project/Scheme (pick one) looking to achieve? Who will be affected? Policy Decision
(i.e. Please provide an overview of the aims, objectives and desired outcomes of what you are proposing. Who currently uses the service that will be affected by your proposal? Who will be affected by any changes? What are their current needs? Please add your data here.)
The Council set outs its strategy on the future use of community centres in December 2014 at which time a full EAA was completed.
The current aims are:
to establish the future use of the Northolt Grange Community Centre to relocate groups affected by the decision of the trustees of Northolt Grange Community Association to cease the operational management of the Northolt Grange Community Centre from 31st March 2017. to remove the subsidy from Community Centres with a 3 year savings target as part of the MTFS agreed by Cabinet in November 2014
Objectives:
to market the NGCC on the open market to grant a lease for the use of the site up to 25 years or as informed by the marketing process Support NGCC user groups to find alternative accommodation by advising on other available accommodation
Desired outcomes: to identify a use by an ingoing tenant that will respond to the needs of the community in Northolt
to establish that any ingoing tenant can demonstrate a sound and financially viable business model to ensure the future use of the facility
That existing user groups have found alternative accommodation
Current use and those affected:
Northolt Grange Community Centre is currently one of the boroughs 10 Community Centres. At the time the decision was made by the NGCA trustees to cease operational management of NGCC the following regular user groups/activities had relocation needs:
Page 311 of 382 2016-17 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
Al Madina Islamic Welfare Association – relocating to Viking Community Centre
Jesus Restoration Society Limited – relocation accommodation not currently found Nuture World - After School/Holiday Club – relocated St Raphael’s Catholic Primary School Sound Steps Music Class – relocated to local accommodation Pre-School Provision – relocated Viking Community Centre StayActive4Life - funding envisaged to end November 2016 however the group still meet
2. What will the impact of you proposal be?
With the exception of the two remaining groups, all other groups requiring relocation have now found alternative accommodation. This includes to Viking Community Centre and to the adjoining school both located in the same Ward demonstrating that in identifying venues with suitable capacity, account has been taken of the described action from the 2014/15 Full Equalities Assessment that, should a site close, consideration will be given to appropriate alternative accommodation, which will include consideration of accessibility and travel requirements.
The two remaining group still seeking to identify relocation are the Jesus Restoration Centre Ltd and the Stay Active4Life Group. JRCL are a registered charity and a religious organisation that currently meet at NGCC each Friday evening and during daytime Sunday on a weekly basis. The Stay Active4Life Group meet each Wednesday morning.
It is understood that JRCL meeting in Northolt have a membership that requires a seating capacity of between 150 – 500 persons that potentially includes all protected groups. From the completion of Ealing Council’s asset interest form it is known that they require accommodation of between 1700 – 3500 sqm with kitchen and car parking facilities.
They are looking for suitable accommodation with the Boroughs of Ealing, Hounslow, Hillingdon, Harrow and Slough. As part of their relocation needs they are also looking to purchase accommodation and they are in contact with the Council’s Managing Agents regarding this. Currently no suitable premises have been identified. Other venues contacted in the area are either unavailable or unsuitable at this time.
Funding for The Stay Active4Life group has ended but the Trustees of NGCA have allowed the class to continue until March 2017. Should the group wish to continue past this date officers will provide support to the group appropriate to their future needs.
2. Impact on Groups having a Protected Characteristic
AGE: A person of a particular age or being within an age group. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data
Page 312 of 382 2016-17 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please identify any differential impact on different age groups. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
Closure of the Community Centre – Impact - both positive and negative
Age targeted activities meeting at Northolt Grange Community Centre:
Tiny Tots Pre-School provision – relocated at Viking Community Centre Nuture World Kids Club (After school and holiday provision) – relocated at the adjoining St Raphael’s Catholic Primary School StayActive4Life – target group 50+ - funding for activity envisaged to end November 2016 however trustees agreed to subsidise cost of course until March 2017
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
Closure of the Community Centre
StayActive4Life – support will be provided as necessary and as appropriate to future needs.
Group re-locations and appropriate alternative accommodation have taken place and will continue to take place with consideration of accessibility and travel requirements.
Future use
Officers will continue to look for other appropriate use of the site that will respond to the needs of the community in Northolt and a tenant who will create and establish a facility and activities so as to increase the Centre’s participation An updated EAA will be carried out at that time as part of the on-going process
DISABILITY: A person has a disability if s/he has a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long term adverse effect on their ability to carry out normal day to day activities1. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please identify any differential impact on people with different types of disabilities. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
Closure of the Centre – the impact is Neutral
1 Due regard to meeting the needs of people with disabilities involves taking steps to take account of their disabilities and may involve making reasonable adjustments and prioritizing certain groups of disabled people on the basis that they are particularly affected by the proposal.
Page 313 of 382 2016-17 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
There are no groups/activities taking place at Northolt Grange Community Centre that specifically support people with disabilities.
However group meetings/activities taking place may be attended by those within the definition of this characteristic.
A DDA assessment has previously been carried out. Should any further works be highlighted during the course of the process consideration will be given to the requirement.
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
Closure of the Community Centre
Group re-locations and appropriate alternative accommodation have taken place and will continue to take place with consideration of accessibility and travel requirements.
Future use
Officers will continue to look for other appropriate use of the site that will respond to the needs of the community in Northolt and a tenant who will create and establish a facility and activities so as to increase the Centre’s participation An updated EAA will be carried out at that time as part of the on-going process
GENDER REASSIGNMENT: This is the process of transitioning from one sex to another. This includes persons who consider themselves to be trans, transgender and transsexual. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
Closure of the Community Centre – The impact is neutral
There are no groups or activities taking place at Northolt Grange Community Centre that specifically support people undergoing gender reassignment and/or people who consider themselves to be trans, transgender and transsexual.
However groups/activities taking place may be attended by those within the definition of this characteristic.
Page 314 of 382 2016-17 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
Closure of Community Centre
Group re-locations and appropriate alternative accommodation have taken place and will continue to take place with consideration of accessibility and travel requirements.
Future Use
Officers will continue to look for other appropriate use of the site that will respond to the needs of the community in Northolt and a tenant who will create and establish a facility and activities so as to increase the Centre’s participation An updated EAA will be carried out at that time as part of the on-going process
RACE: A group of people defined by their colour, nationality (including citizenship), ethnic or national origins or race. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please identify any differential impact on people from different ethnic backgrounds. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
Closure of Community Centre – the impact is neutral
There are no groups/activities taking place that have a specific focus on race and ethnicity.
However group meetings/activities held may be attended by those within the definition of this protected characteristic.
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
Closure of Community Centre
Group re-locations and appropriate alternative accommodation have taken place and will continue to take place with consideration of accessibility and travel requirements.
Future Use
Officers will continue to look for other appropriate use of the site that will respond to the needs of the community in Northolt and a tenant who will create and establish a facility and activities so as to increase the Centre’s participation
Page 315 of 382 2016-17 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
An updated EAA will be carried out at that time as part of the on-going process
RELIGION & BELIEF: Religion means any religion. Belief includes religious and philosophical beliefs including lack of belief (for example, Atheism). Generally, a belief should affect a person’s life choices or the way you live for it to be included. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please identify any differential impact on people with different religious beliefs. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
Closure of Community Centre – Positive and negative
Two groups/activities have been meeting at Northolt Grange Community Centre whose activities have a specific focus on Religion and Belief. These are identified as:
Al Medina Mosque and Islamic Welfare Association – re-locating to Viking Community Centre Jesus Restoration Society Ltd – re-location needs currently not met
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
Closure of Community Centre
Al Medina Mosque and Islamic Welfare Association – relocating to Viking Community Centre end March 2017
Jesus Restoration Society Ltd
As part of their relocation needs JRSL are looking to identify accommodation in the boroughs of Ealing, Hounslow, Harrow, Hillingdon and Slough. Council Officers are in contact with the group organiser and their requirements have been added to the Council’s Asset disposal register in order to assist them with this outcome. Currently no suitable premises have been identified from the support given. Other venues contacted in the local area are either unavailable or unsuitable at this time. Council officers will continue to provide support to assist with relocation in the borough of Ealing but identifying a suitable location may prove challenging.
Future Use
Officers will continue to look for other appropriate use of the site that will respond to the needs of the community in Northolt and a tenant who will create and establish a facility and activities so as to increase the Centre’s participation
An updated EAA will be carried out at that time as part of the on-going process
Page 316 of 382 2016-17 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
SEX: Someone being a man or a woman. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please note if there is no differential impact on a persons gender, please state this )
Closure of Community Centre – the impact is neutral
There are no groups/activities taking place that are specifically focused on specific sexes.
However group meetings/activities held may be attended by those within the definition of this protected characteristic.
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
Closure of Community Centre
Group re-locations and appropriate alternative accommodation have taken place and will continue to take place with consideration of accessibility and travel requirements.
Future use
Officers will continue to look for other appropriate use of the site that will respond to the needs of the community in Northolt and a tenant who will create and establish a facility and activities so as to increase the Centre’s participation
An updated EAA will be carried out at that time as part of the on-going process
SEXUAL ORIENTATION: A person’s sexual attraction towards his or her own sex, the opposite sex or to both sexes. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
Closure of Community Centre – the impact is neutral
There are no groups/activities taking place that are specifically focused on sexual orientation.
However group meetings/activities held may be attended by those within the definition of this protected characteristic.
Page 317 of 382 2016-17 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
Closure of Community Centre
Group re-locations and appropriate alternative accommodation have taken place and will continue to take place with consideration of accessibility and travel requirements.
Future Use
Officers will continue to look for other appropriate use of the site that will respond to the needs of the community in Northolt and a tenant who will create and establish a facility and activities so as to increase the Centre’s participation
An updated EAA will be carried out at that time as part of the on-going process
PREGNANCY & MATERNITY: Description: Pregnancy: Being pregnant. Maternity: The period after giving birth - linked to maternity leave in the employment context. In the non-work context, protection against maternity discrimination is for 26 weeks after giving birth, including as a result of breastfeeding. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
Closure of Community Centre – the impact is neutral
Group re-locations and appropriate alternative accommodation have taken place and will continue to take place with consideration of accessibility and travel requirements.
However group meetings/activities held may be attended by those within the definition of this protected characteristic.
Appropriate baby changing facilities will be incorporated into any refurbishment of site.
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
Page 318 of 382 2016-17 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
Closure of Community Centre
Group re-locations and appropriate alternative accommodation have taken place and will continue to take place with consideration of accessibility and travel requirements.
Future Use
Officers will continue to look for other appropriate use of the site that will respond to the needs of the community in Northolt and a tenant who will create and establish a facility and activities so as to increase the Centre’s participation.
An updated EAA will be carried out at that time as part of the on-going process
MARRIAGE & CIVIL PARTNERSHIP: Marriage: A union between a man and a woman. or of the same sex, which is legally recognised in the UK as a marriage Civil partnership: Civil partners must be treated the same as married couples on a range of legal matters. State whether the impact is positive, negative, a combination of both, or neutral: Describe the Impact (Please be as specific and clear as possible when describing the impact and include any local data i.e. service usage. If this is lacking please include regional or national data or research. Please note if there is no differential impact on people with this characteristic, please state this )
Closure of Community Centre – the impact is neutral
There are no groups/activities taking place that specifically support married people and those in civil partnerships.
However group meetings/activities held may be attended by those within the definition of this protected characteristic.
Alternatives and mitigating actions which have been considered in order to reduce negative effect: Describe the Mitigating Action (Please describe ‘any’ actions you will take to limit the impact of your proposal on this group. Please be open and forthright, decision makers need to be provided with as clear a picture as possible.)
Closure of Community Centre
Group re-locations and appropriate alternative accommodation have taken place and will continue to take place with consideration of accessibility and travel requirements.
Future Use
Officers will continue to look for other appropriate use of the site that will respond to the needs of the community in Northolt and a tenant who will create and establish a facility and activities so as to increase the Centre’s participation. Appropriate baby changing facilities will be incorporated into
Page 319 of 382 2016-17 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
any refurbishment of site.
An updated EAA will be carried out at that time as part of the on-going process
3. Human Rights2 4a. Does your proposal impact on Human Rights as defined by the Human Rights Act 1998?
Yes ☐ No ☒ 4b. Does your proposal impact on the rights of children as defined by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child?
Yes ☐ No ☐x 4c. Does your proposal impact on the rights of persons with disabilities as defined by the UN Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities?
Yes ☐ No ☐x (If yes, please describe the effect and any mitigating action you have considered.)
4. Conclusion (Please provide a brief overview/summary of your analysis in light of the protected characteristics. Please describe the overall impact of your proposal where possible and mitigating actions undertaken by other areas of the Council or by local partners)
With the exception of the two groups activities identified, the re-location requirements of regular groups/activities taking place at Northolt Grange Community Centre have been met.
As the new tenant will be required to:
Work in partnership with the Council to develop an comprehensive community programme of opportunities for all parts of Ealing’s diverse community Demonstrate a sound and financially viable business model to ensure the future use of the facility Access external funding if necessary Develop useful links and networks for the benefit of the wider community Increase the Centre’s participation Ensure that year round activities are available for the community Promote community wellbeing Enter into new lease arrangements
The Community Centre site will offer increased opportunities for all parts of Ealing’s diverse community and will be self-sustaining so that the centre has long-term security
The Community Centre will undergo basic refurbishment in accordance with the site Condition Survey and the Opportunity to consult with any ingoing tenant. This may offer opportunities through partnership funding to
2 For further guidance please refer to the Human Rights & URNC Guidance on the Council Equalities web page.
Page 320 of 382 2016-17 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment identify further opportunities for site that will provide additional benefits to the amenity and the local community.
4a. What evidence, data sources and intelligence did you use to assess the potential impact/effect of your proposal? Please note the systems/processes you used to collect the data that has helped inform your proposal. Please list the file paths and/or relevant web links to the information you have described. (Please list all sources here: i.e. local consultation, residents survey, census etc.)
Consultation has taken place with the Community Association as to the groups/activities affected by the potential and subsequent decision to close the centre.
The Trustees of the Community Association have worked with the Council to ensure that group/activity organisers were kept full informed of the timeline for NGCA to hand back the building to Ealing Council and extended their intended handover date to provide additional time for accommodation to be identified and moves to take place. Council Officers have worked with the Association throughout this process.
To date there have been a number of consultation events and Scrutiny Panel meetings and 1-2-1’s held with the Associations including Northolt Grange Community Association, as part of the Council’s Community Centre Strategy. Cabinet Report dated December 2014, Scrutiny Panel 2 report July 2015, Scrutiny Panel 2 update – September 2015 and Scrutiny Panel 2 report – November 2015 can be found at: http://ealing.cmis.uk.com/ealing/Committees/tabid/62/ctl/ViewCMIS_CommitteeDetails/mid/381/id/108/Default.aspx
5. Action Planning: (What are the next steps for the proposal please list i.e. what it comes into effect, when migrating actions3 will take place, how you will measure impact etc.) Action Outcomes Success Timescales/ Lead Officer Measures Milestones (Contact Details) Support Groups advised Jesus 31st March Claire Maddison remaining of Restoration 2017 [email protected] groups/activities accommodation Society Ltd 020 8825 6742 yet to find as available and relocated alternative suitable Active4Life accommodation participants agree future Marketing Expressions of Suitable tenant April/May 2017 Claire Maddison process begins interest received identified [email protected] 020 8825 6742 Notification of Instruct legal to New tenant June 2017 Claire Maddison successful tenant draft lease effect commences [email protected] from date use of Northolt 020 8825 6742 compatible with Grange completion of Community refurbishment Centre works
3 Linked to the protected characteristics above
Page 321 of 382 2016-17 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
Additional Comments:
6. Sign off: (All EAA’s must be signed off once completed)
Completing Officer Sign Off: Service Director Sign Off: HR related proposal (Signed off by directorate HR officer) Signed: Signed: Signed:
Name (Block Capitals): Name (Block Capitals): Name (Block Capitals):
Date: Date: Date:
For EA’s relating to Cabinet decisions: received by Committee Section for publication by (date):
Appendix 1: Legal obligations under Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010:
As a public authority we must have due regard to the need to: a) Eliminate discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct that is prohibited by or under this Act; b) Advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it; c) Foster good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it. The protected characteristics are: AGE, DISABILITY, GENDER REASSIGNMENT, RACE, RELIGION & BELIEF, SEX, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, PREGNANCY & MATERNITY, MARRIAGE & CIVIL PARTNERSHIP Having due regard to advancing equality of opportunity between those who share a protected characteristic and those who do not, involves considering the need to: a) Remove or minimising disadvantages suffered by persons who share a relevant protected characteristic that are connected to that characteristic b) Take steps to meet the needs of persons who share a relevant characteristic that are different from the needs of the persons who do not share it. c) Encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low. Having due regard to fostering good relations between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not, involves showing that you are tackling prejudice and promoting understanding. Complying with the duties may involve treating some people more favourably than others; but this should not be taken as permitting conduct that would be otherwise prohibited under the Act.
Page 322 of 382 2016-17 Full Equalities Analysis Assessment
Page 323 of 382
Page 324 of 382 Report for: ACTION
Item Number: 12
Contains Confidential NO or Exempt Information
Title Purchase of 36 Inglis Road, W5 by way of NHS Capital Grant Payment Responsible Officer(s) Stephen Day Director Adult Services Author(s) Jeremy Mulcaire Sector Manager Integrated Mental health Services Portfolio(s) Cllr Hitesh Tailor For Consideration By Cabinet Date to be Considered 14 March 2017 Implementation Date if 27 March 2017 Not Called In Affected Wards Ealing Common Keywords/Index Inglis Road, Capital Grant
Purpose of Report:
To seek approval for the acquisition of 36 Inglis Road by the Council subject to funding of the purchase price being met by grant funding from NHS England.
1. Recommendations
It is recommended that Cabinet:
1.1 Approve (in principle) the proposal for the Council to acquire the freehold of 36, Inglis Road, Ealing, W5, by way of a capital grant regional funding payment agreement from NHS England and to purchase the site.
1.2 Delegate authority to the Director Adult Services to take the necessary steps to acquire the freehold and enter into any necessary agreements to facilitate the acquisition following consultation with the Executive Director of Corporate Resources and subject to confirmation of the availability of funding for SDLT and legal costs.
2. Reason for Decision and Options Considered
36, Inglis Road, Ealing, W5 is a detached residential property.
1
Page 325 of 382
The freehold of 36 Inglis Road is in effect owned by the Department of Health (albeit that the registered owner is the London Strategic Health Authority).
The Council was granted a lease dated 14 May 1981 by Ealing Hammersmith and Hounslow Area Health Authority (Teaching) for a term of 10 years from 14 May 1981 and thereafter the lease has continued from year to year and will do so until it is terminated. The rent is £1 per annum. Either party can now terminate the lease on six months written notice after expiry of the initial ten year term.
The property operates as a supported independent living unit for up to 6 residents. In recent years the Council has undertaken considerable capital refurbishment of the property to ensure it meets decent living standards and provides maximum opportunity for independent living.
The Council has recently received been advised by NHS Property Services confirming that the Department of Health have made a decision with regard to their operational properties that they are either leased at a market rent or transferred to an appropriate body. It is recognised that there would be difficulties in imposing a market rent on the Council and NHS England are willing, in principle to make grant funding available to the Council to enable the Council to acquire the freehold of the property at no cost to the Council (other than payment of the parties’ legal costs etc.).
The draft grant agreement proposed sets out the terms on which the acquisition of the freehold would be funded and, in summary, they are as follows:-
1. The Council pays our own and NHS England and the Department of Heath’s costs relating to the grant and sale.
2. The Council accepts the terms of the proposed grant agreement the key terms of which are:
a) NHS England will pay the Council £1.500m to fund the acquisition of the property b) There is an obligation to repay the grant if the money is not used for the acquisition c) The property will only be able to be used for ‘Authorised Purposes’ which are defined as the use of the property by the ‘Occupiers’ as accommodation. Occupiers are defined as persons with learning disabilities or mental health issues or such other needs as agreed with NHS England d) The Council will be responsible for all maintenance, repairs and insurance e) The Council may not demolish or extend the property without consent f) The Council is to pay all outgoings of the property
2
Page 326 of 382 g) The Council may not lease or let the property (apart from to Occupiers) without consent h) The Council must minimise voids at the property i) The Council must allow reasonable access and provide records of maintenance, etc j) The Council must repay the grant sum in the event that it disposes of the Property, don’t use it for the authorised purposed for more than 6 months or are in breach of the agreement k) The Council agrees to a restriction on the title
3. The Council accepts that the capital value of the property is £1.5m
4. The Council achieves completion of the transaction by 31st March 2017
5. The Council has grant recipient status under sections 256 and 257 of the NHS Act 2006
3. Key Implications
Based on the property valuations completed by GVA during 2016, NHS property Services have been instructed by the Department of Health and NHS England to deal with a portfolio of operational properties owned by the Department of Health and occupied by people with learning disabilities. This property forms part of that portfolio.
The Department of Health have decided that the current situation is not sustainable, and by not later than 31st March 2017 the Department of Health require either that property ownership is transferred to an appropriate body, or a market rent is charged.
Any proposal to move to a market rent arrangement for the Council would adversely impact upon the revenue costs to the Council of providing this service from this site.
Recognising the difficulties which moving to a market rent would present, in co- operation with the Department of Health, NHS England have agreed in principle in release Section 256/257 capital grant regional funding in 2016/17 to enable purchase of the Department of Health property interest by a suitable recipient body.
4. Financial Implications
4.1 The Council will be provided with grant funding of £1.500m to acquire the property by NHS England. The grant is repayable if is the money is not used for the acquisition of the property.
4.2 If we were to accept NHS England’s offer to purchase the freehold, we would need to pay Stamp Duty Land Tax (SLDT) of £0.094m. There are no budgets for
3
Page 327 of 382 these costs at present. It is therefore proposed that approval be given for the acquisition subject to confirmation of the availability of funding for these costs which will need to be met by the Council.
4.3 On completion of the purchase the Council will have to pay Stamp Duty Land Tax. Assuming there is no VAT liability, SDLT liability of £0.094m must be made within 30 days of completion.
4.4 In addition to the SLDT payment, the Council will have to pay the costs (i.e. sales and legal costs) of the parties in relation to the grant and sale. The total costs are around £0.100m.
5. Legal
The Council has the power to acquire land by agreement for the purposes of any of its functions or for the benefit of, improvement or development of the area.
6. Value For Money Given the level of grant funding available it is consider that overall the proposal represents a value for money for the Council. In particular the Council should benefit from the appreciation in value of the property in future years. It will also secure an asset for the benefit of the service.
7. Sustainability Impact Appraisal
It is a requirement of the council’s Use of Resources assessment process that you include in this section details of the impact that your report proposals will have on sustainability objectives.
8. Risk Management
There are no identified potential risks associated with this proposal.
9. Community Safety
None
10. Links to the 6 Priorities for the Borough The grant funding will enable the Council to acquire the freehold of the property and thereby secure the future use of the property as supported independent living accommodation, enabling the Council’s priorities in respect of being fair and accessible to be delivered.
11. Equalities, Human Rights and Community Cohesion
The grant funding will enable the Council to acquire the freehold of the property and thereby secure the future use of the property to accommodate those with mental health issues or learning disabilities.
4
Page 328 of 382
12. Staffing/Workforce and Accommodation implications
The maintenance and upkeep of the property is contained within existing arrangements.
13. Property and Assets
Then acquisition of this property will add considerable value to the Councils property portfolio.
14. Any other implications
None
15. Consultation
No consultation with regard to this proposal is necessary
16. Timetable for Implementation
Under the terms of the grant proposal the purchase must complete by 31 st March 2017.
17. Appendices
None
18. Background Information
None
5
Page 329 of 382 Consultation
Name of Post held Date Date Comments consultee sent to response appear in consultee received paragraph: Internal Stephen Day Director Adult Services 16 02 2017 Jackie Adams Head of Legal Services – 16 02 2017 23/02/2017 5. Legal & Planning & Property Throughout
Cllr Hitesh Tailor 16 02 2017 Portfolio Holder Flora Osiyemi Finance Business Partner 22/02/2017 23/02/2017 4. Financial & – Consultancy Throughout External
Report History
Decision type: Urgency item? EITHER: Key decision No OR Non-key decision OR For information (delete as applicable)
Report no.: Report author and contact for queries: Jeremy Mulcaire Sector Manager Integrated Mental health Services - Ext. 7428
6
Page 330 of 382 Report for: ACTION/INFORMATION
Item Number: 13
Contains Confidential 0BNo or Exempt Information
1BTitle Broadway Living funding facility
2BResponsible Officer(s) Pat Hayes
3B Author(s) Dave Baptiste Portfolio(s) Housing
4BFor Consideration By Cabinet th 5BDate to be Considered 14 March 2017 th 6BImplementation Date if 27 March 2017 Not Called In
7B Affected Wards All
8BKeywords/Index Broadway Living, new homes, funding proposals
Purpose of Report: This report seeks Cabinet approval to carry out further and detailed work in relation to a proposed loan facility to the council’s wholly owned subsidiary Broadway Living to build new homes in Ealing
1. Recommendations That Cabinet:
1.1. Authorise officers to investigate the principle and viability of a development funding facility with Broadway Living to provide funding of £165m to implement proposals under development within the Broadway Living business plan, and report back to Cabinet as soon as possible with options for the way forward
2. Reason for Decision and Options Considered 2.1. Since the Housing Commission report approved at Cabinet on April 24th 2012, the Council has been developing and refining its plans for regeneration and new development. The Council wishes to build more new homes over a range of tenures, including affordable and private rent, to assist in meeting the housing demand in the borough, and the commitment is to provide at least 500 new Council homes in the next five years. 2.2. Following approval from Cabinet in October 2013, the Council has incorporated a wholly owned subsidiary called Broadway Living (BL) whose objectives are to offer a complementary delivery vehicle for new Council owned homes outside the Housing Revenue Account (HRA). BL is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the
1
Page 331 of 382 Council and the Council is the sole shareholder. One of the key objectives of the Council is to offer a diverse range of housing tenures to meet housing demand. 2.3. The council have a track record of developing homes for affordable rented housing since 2010 and have built some 300 homes to date. These initial schemes have been funded through a combination of grant and borrowing from the housing revenue account (HRA). Borrowing restrictions imposed on the (HRA) have the effect of limiting the available funding for investment in the existing housing stock and the development of new homes.
Ealing’s development programme is increasingly integrated and brings together schemes funded through the HRA and General Fund to support the council’s ambition to build more good quality homes at different price points suitable for Ealing residents. Broadway Living was set up as a delivery vehicle and forms an important part of the council’s role as enabler and deliverer of high quality housing and services.
Broadway Living helps to support Ealing Council’s regeneration and growth objectives and its residential and mixed-use schemes in a variety of ways by taking the role as lead developer, seeking joint venture partners for major regeneration schemes, or contribute to private schemes as a joint venture partner – for example by investing in a private developer’s Section 106 intermediate rent housing obligations.
Two successful schemes in partnership with the Council have already been developed supported by investment from the council’s general fund - 10 new homes for market rent at Eastcote Lane, and 32 homes for intermediate rent at Ruislip Road.
Broadway Living is currently working to produce a business plan of the proposed development programme and this will be a key consideration when the cabinet considers the case for further funding. The Broadway Living business plan will include:
• the renewal of Copley and High Lane Estates - involving refurbishing 550 homes and building c.280 new homes, of which Broadway Living will own a proportion for market rent, discount market rent and sale, helping to subsidise the development of affordable housing.
• Broadway Living having a key role in the redevelopment of the Council’s existing HQ building Perceval House at Ealing Broadway. It is likely to involve a partnership with a private developer and include around 200 new homes for affordable rent. • Broadway Living partnering with private developers to deliver discount market rent units as the affordable housing component in a market rented scheme helping to fulfil their S106 obligations.
2
Page 332 of 382 • The Council seeking all opportunities to create new homes alongside Broadway Living across a wide range of schemes.
2.4. A further report will be brought to Cabinet at the earliest opportunity setting out the council’s loan requirements and the due diligence necessary for council to consider lending to Broadway Living. This report will include analysis of the wider implications for the council of the loan proposal.
2.5. In conclusion the Council established Broadway Living, using powers created in the Localism Act of 2011, to optimise the potential of its property portfolio and help retain and build its assets in the longer term in line with the Council’s strategic objectives. Since 2014 Broadway Living has demonstrated its ability to deliver schemes and it is now appropriate to investigate in detail the viability and wider implications of proposals for the next stage of Broadway Living work.
3. Key Implications
3.1. The new extended Business Plan currently being finalised for Broadway Living is based on the creation of c.760 additional new homes for sale, for market and intermediate rent, and generate income to support other Council services over the next 30 years and beyond. The Business Plan together with the Business Plan Cashflow will be provided in the next Cabinet report.
3.2. The new Business Plan will set out the business case for proposals across an initial eight sites. It will include the governance arrangements for Broadway Living, the strategic policy, demographic and market context, the nature of the product the company intends to offer and the way in which the Broadway Living brand will exemplify the values considered desirable for the Council and the borough to be associated with.
3.3. The Plan will seek to demonstrate how Broadway Living’s activities will: • create 760 much-needed additional homes for borough residents across a variety of tenures, • help the Council achieve core objectives for the borough • make the most of the Council’s portfolio of property assets • create a substantial alternative development offer to augment the market • provide enhanced flexibility in how the income streams can be used • create potential opportunities to engage with other sources of finance and for the Council to use its covenant creatively • help the borough capture regenerative impacts of the Elizabeth Line
3.4. A development funding facility of up to £165m would support the implementation of Broadway Living’s Business Plan over the next five years. The facility would be a commercial arrangement between the Council and its subsidiary Broadway Living. It is important that officers now investigate and report back to Cabinet on the implications for the council and its budgets of the Broadway Living business plan proposals, in order for Cabinet to be able to reach an informed decision on the way forward.
3
Page 333 of 382
4. Financial
Financial implications and considerations of any proposed loan facility arrangements with Broadway Living will be set out in full in the next report
5. Legal There are no legal implications arising from this report.
Legal implications of any proposed loan facility arrangements with Broadway Living will be set out in full in the next report.
6. Value For Money Implications are set out within the report.
7. Sustainability Impact Appraisal No implications.
8. Risk Management Identify any potential risks associated with the options and the proposed course of action; if none, say so. Please keep to one paragraph.
9. Community Safety No implications.
10. Links to the six Priorities for the Borough
The council’s six priorities for the borough are to make Ealing:
• prosperous • safer • healthier • cleaner • fairer • accessible
These priorities are underpinned by four key strategies:
• Growth, employment and skills • Health, well-being and independence • Housing quality, affordability and supply • Place and public realm
Broadway Living’s activity sits primarily within the ‘Housing, quality, affordability and supply’ strategic theme - although its activity will also cut across the other three strategic areas. The Council’s Housing and Homelessness Strategy, sets out the Council’s vision for housing.
4
Page 334 of 382
Ealing Council’s vision for housing; ‘Ensure the borough has an affordable, good quality housing stock to meet the housing needs and aspirations of our residents, ensuring Ealing is a thriving place to live and work’
The strategy also acknowledges the cross-cutting impact of good quality housing for local people and the opportunity for the council to lead on improving quality of life outcomes through being a developer and landlord.
‘Housing is the foundation of stable and vibrant communities and is a requisite for basic wellbeing. Poor housing or lack of a home has consistently been proven to have a detrimental impact on employment, crime, education and health and hence impacts directly on the delivery of other local public services. It is also a significant economic driver, helping to support economic growth. Similarly, there are numerous non- housing factors which can have a direct impact on levels of housing need and homelessness, affecting our resident’s quality of life and ability to live independently.’ Housing & Homelessness Strategy 2014-2019
11. Equalities, Human Rights and Community Cohesion .No implications.
12. Staffing/Workforce and Accommodation implications: None.
13. Property and Assets Most are in HRA, others are Perceval House. Is there still a property disposal list? No implications at this stage. Full implications will be set out in later reports, in relation to any specific sites proposed for development.
14. Any other implications: None.
15. Consultation None required at this stage.
16. Timetable for Implementation An indicative timetable will be set out within the next Cabinet report.
5
Page 335 of 382 17. Background Information
Cabinet Meeting 24 April 2012 - Item 14 - Ealing Housing Commission - Final Report Cabinet Meeting 22 October 2013 - Item 18 - Housing Development Delivery Options Cabinet Meeting 22 July 2014 - Item 20 - Broadway Living - Eastcote Lane Cabinet Meeting 25 November 2014 - Item 08- Broadway Living Cabinet Meeting 16 December 2014 - Item 13 Broadway Living - Funding Agreement Copley Close and Eastcote Lane Cabinet Meeting 14 February 2017 - Item 11 - Broadway Living - 301 Ruislip Road - Approval
Consultation (Mandatory)
Name of Post held Date Date Comments consultee sent to response appear in consultee received paragraph: Internal Pat Hayes Executive Director 23/02/2017 Helen Harris Director, Legal Services 23/02/2017 24/02/2017 para 5. Legal Ross Brown Director, Finance 23/02/2017 27/02/2017 Para 4. Financial e.g. Julian Bell Leader / 27/02/2017 Cabinet Member for:
External
Report History
Decision type: 9BUrgency item? Key decision No
.
Report no.: Report author and contact for queries First and surname, job title Dave Baptiste – Head of Housing Development
6
Page 336 of 382 Report for: ACTION
Item Number: 14
Contains Confidential No or Exempt Information Title Housing Regeneration Update – Approval of Council Built Schemes for Shared Ownership & Outright Sale Responsible Officer(s) Pat Hayes Executive Director Regeneration & Housing, [email protected] Author(s) Dave Baptiste, Head of Housing Development [email protected] ext. 6858 Mike Kirk [email protected] ext. 7522 Portfolio(s) Councillor Jasbir Anand – Housing For Consideration By Cabinet Date to be Considered 14 th March 2017 Implementation Date if 27 th March 2017 Not Called In Affected Wards All Keywords/Index Regeneration, Shared Ownership, Outright Sales
Purpose of Report:
To seek Cabinet authority to approve the sales of homes for shared ownership and outright sale in mixed tenure developments undertaken by the Council’s New Build Team listed within this report
1.0 Cabinet is asked to:
1.1 Approve the sale of units listed in paragraph 2.4 of this Report,
1.2 Delegates a uthority to the Executive Director of Regeneration and Housing following consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing and Executive Director for Corporate Resources to market and dispose of the individual units on the open market.
2.0 Background to Current Report and actions being proposed
2.1 Cabinet received a comprehensive report at its meeting held on 23 rd July 2013 and approved proposals to increase the supply of new rented housing in the borough on Council owned sites by cross subsidy
Housing Regeneration Update – 14 th March 2017 Page 1
Page 337 of 382 through shared ownership and outright sale of other new units. Four dispersed sites, and part of the regeneration of the Copley Estate were identified as possible locations. A further report to Cabinet on 21 st July 2015 identified two further opportunities for sale including the Golf Links Estate, Southall. All these projects have been led by the Council’s New Build Housing Team.
2.2 In addition, a number of schemes have been reported to Cabinet of regeneration opportunities where the sale of private units will cross subsidise the provision of rented housing, to be led by developers working in partnership with the Council. These include relatively small scale initiatives, such as the Small Sites programme led by Hill last reported to Cabinet March 2016, and major initiatives such as the regeneration of High Lane reported to Cabinet in October 2016.
2.3 This report seeks Cabinet approval to sell units in mixed tenure schemes led by the Council which have already agreed as listed in paragraph 2.4 below.
2.4 Current Schemes
2.4.1 Gordon Road & Adelaide Wharf, Southall: Tender let and on site; Adelaide Wharf comprises a block of 20 apartments and it is intended to sell these units for either shared ownership or outright sale. Estimated completion date is June 2018.
2.4.2 Lovell Road, Mt Pleasant Estate, Southall: on site with practical completion March 2017. Cabinet advised of the proposal to sell 9 flats for shared ownership.
2.4.3 Windmill Lane, Greenford: Sale of 6 flats for shared ownership and 3 houses for outright sale. Completion by March 2017.
2.4.4 Mansell Road, Greenford. Two 2 bed houses proposed for outright sale
2.4.5 Doncaster Drive, Northolt: On site with 10 flats for shared ownership and 4 flats for outright sale, and estimated completion November 2018
2.4.6 West End Gardens, Northolt: On site with four flats for outright sale with estimated November 2018 completion date.
2.4.7 Peterhead Court, Golf Links Estate, Southall: Eighteen units for shared ownership sale and 10 private units for either market rent or sale. These are being constructed on the current phase of the Golf Links Regeneration, and are due for completion in by September 2018.
Housing Regeneration Update – 14 th March 2017 Page 2
Page 338 of 382 2.4.8 Copley Estate, phase 2, Hanwell. On site with 13 units for shared ownership and 20 units for outright sale. Estimated completion November 2017.
2.5 Given the speed with which the Council will need to act once the properties are marketed the recommendation is to delegate authority to the Executive Director of Regeneration and Housing to market the above units on the open market and dispose of them at a price certified by a valuer to be at a price equal to its market value. . Officers will provide updates on the progress of the sales in the regular Cabinet update reports
2.6 With the rise of property prices it should be noted that some outright sales are now likely to achieve over £500,000. The three private house sales in Windmill Lane will be an example of this. 2.7 In future tender reports for schemes including proposed open market sales will now contain a similar recommendation for a Cabinet delegation for the marketing and selling of units.
Key Implications
3.0 Financial Considerations
The Council built scheme for Windmill Lane as included in paragraph 2.4.3 was set up for the provision of six shared ownership flats and three houses for outright sales. This will help cross-subsidise the Council built programme by using the disposal of the nine properties to generate capital receipts to support the costs. The report seeks authority to sell the three outright sales; the authority to sell the shared ownerships already went to a separate Cabinet.
3.1 The current year 2016/17 Capital Programme for this scheme is funded entirely by borrowings. The HRA Business Plan assumed a capital receipt received in 2017/18 of £2.000m which will be reinvested into the Councils New Build Scheme.
3.2 Revised sales prices for the properties have resulted in an increased capital receipt of £2.480m, which comprises of
- 3 outright sales of £1.695m - 6 Shared Ownership sales of £0.785m
The Council New Build sales programme has sought to maximise the income for outright sales and balance the income for shared ownership sales between affordability for first time buyers and income maximisation.
The table below shows the Windmill Lane Build scheme which was funded through borrowing with a capital receipt from sales generate in
Housing Regeneration Update – 14 th March 2017 Page 3
Page 339 of 382 2017/18. The table shows both the capital receipt assumed in the current Business Plan and the revised capital receipt amount.
The unapplied capital receipts will be reinvested into the New Build Capital Programme.
Windmill Lane 2016/17 2017/18 £m £m Expenditure (A) 2.401 0.150 Funding:(Current) Borrowing 2.401 Capital Receipts 2.000 Grants 0.090 Total (B) 2.401 2.090 Unapplied Capital Receipts (B-A) 1.940
Funding :(Revised) Borrowing 2.401 Capital Receipts 2.480 Grants 0.090 Total (C) 2.401 2.570 Unapplied Capital Receipts (C-A) 2.420
3.3 The bidding round for the current 2016-2021 Affordable Homes Programme includes grant funding for shared ownership of up to £0.028m per unit. The Council will give careful consideration to bidding for shared ownership funds under this programme to ensure this grant benefits shared ownership purchasers
4.0 Legal Implications
4.1 Section 2(1) of the Local Authorities (Land) Act 1963 provides that a local authority may, for the benefit or improvement of their area, erect any building and construct or carry out works on land.
4.2 Section 9 of the Housing Act 1985 provides that a local housing authority may provide housing accommodation by erecting houses on land acquired by them for the purposes of providing housing accommodation
4.3 Section 32(1) of the 1985 Act gives the Council the power to dispose of in any manner land held by them for the purposes of providing housing accommodation. This power is subject to consent by the relevant Secretary of State.
4.4 The Secretary of State has issued the General Housing Consents 2013. Paragraph A.3.1.1 of the Consents provides that a local authority
Housing Regeneration Update – 14 th March 2017 Page 4
Page 340 of 382 may dispose of land (including land on which houses or flats have been built) for a consideration equal to its market value provided that the land is not subject to a secure or introductory tenancy and provided that the disposal is not to a company in which the Council has an interest.
Value for Money
4.3 Income from sales provides vital income into the Housing Capital Programme, and each scheme is marketed using specialist advice to ensure value for money is obtained.
Procurement 4.4 European Union Regulations relate to the appointment of the contractors to build units for sale or the appointment of marketing specialists to sell these homes above specified levels, The schemes listed in 2.4 above currently comply with those regulations.
5.0 Sustainability
5.1 All of the sale schemes comply with relevant requirements relating to carbon reductions and energy consumption and are being constructed to London Plan standards, Secure by Design, and for new schemes the accessibility criteria set out in the updated Building Regulations in Part M.
6.0 Risk Management
6.1 As with all new build schemes, contracts for the building of homes for sale will be let under JCT Design & Build to control construction risk and will incorporate finishes that make them attractive for sale.
6.2 The sale of units will be undertaken by specialists to obtain best values and who will undertake appropriate financial checks.
7.0 Links to the 6 Priorities for the Borough
7.1 Safer Each development is designed to improve community safety, and where possible meet “Secure by Design”
7.2 Healthier The provision of homes for shared ownership sale is to make sale properties available to residents, and others who cannot afford outright sale by selling on an part rent part buy basis and will promote the improvement in public health through the provision of good quality housing
Housing Regeneration Update – 14 th March 2017 Page 5
Page 341 of 382
7.3 Cleaner The incorporation of energy efficient and carbon reduction measures in new homes will lead to a cleaner environment.
7.4 Fairer The sale of new homes will be advertised widely using appropriate agents to ensure the sales process is open and transparent.
7.5 Accessible The development of new homes will meet London Plan standards in terms of accessibility.
7.6 Prosperous The incorporation of homes for sale in mixed tenure developments which will also include homes for rent will help improve the general prosperity of the Borough.
8.0 Equalities, Human Rights and Community Cohesion
8.1. Under the Human Rights Act 1998 all public authorities must act in accordance with the Convention on Human Rights and the Council will in particular, ensure the allocation of homes fairly. The selling of homes for both shared ownership and outright sale does not contravene this Act
9.0 Staffing/Workforce and Accommodation implications:
9.1 The schemes referred to in the report are part of a wider programme overseen Housing New Build section of the Directorate of Regeneration & Housing and are contained within existing resources.
10.0 Property and Assets
10.1 Sales cross-subsidise the affordable rent programme and so make best use of the Council’s property and assets held in the Housing Revenue Account.
11.0 Any other implications:
11.1 None foreseen.
12.0 Background Information Cabinet Report Housing Regeneration Update 23 rd July 2013 & Appendix 1 New Build Schemes Cabinet Report 20 th January 2015 Approval of Works Tender for Lovell Road Cabinet Report 24 th March 2015 Approval of Works Tender including Windmill Lane Cabinet Report 24 th November 2015 Approval of Works Tender for Gordon Road and Adelaide Wharf Cabinet Report Housing Regeneration Update 23 rd July 2015
Housing Regeneration Update – 14 th March 2017 Page 6
Page 342 of 382 Cabinet Report 17 th May 2016 Approval of Works Tender for Peterhead Court
Consultation
Name of Department Date sent Date Comments consultee to response appear in consultee received report para: from consultee
Internal Pat Hayes Executive Director 23/2/17 Housing and Regeneration Jackie Adams Head of Legal (Property and 09/02/17 Regulatory)
Hannah Finance Business Partner 09/02/17 Katakwe
Councillor Cabinet Member for Housing 23/2/17 Jasbir Anand
Report History
Decision type: Urgency item? Key – yes No
Authorised by Cabinet Date report Report deadline: Date report sent: member: drafted:
Report No: Dave Baptiste Mike Kirk Head of Housing Development Ext 6858 Ext 7522
Housing Regeneration Update – 14 th March 2017 Page 7
Page 343 of 382
Page 344 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17
Report for: INFORMATION
Item Number:
15
Contains Confidential NO or Exempt Information Title Council Quarter 3 Performance Report 2016/17 Responsible Officer(s) Kieran Read Director of Strategy & Engagement 020 8825 6395 Email: [email protected] Author(s) Rowena Steward Research and Performance Officer 0208 825 8983 Email: [email protected]
Rajiv Ahlawat Research and Performance Manager 0208 825 6380 Email: [email protected] Portfolio(s) Cllr. Yvonne Johnson (Finance, performance and customer services) For Consideration By Cabinet Date to be Considered 14 March 2017 Implementation Date if N/A – Information only Not Called In Affected Wards N/A Keywords/Index Key Indicators, Priorities, Performance, Corporate Plan Purpose of Report: This report provides a summary of how the 2016/17 set of performance indicators have performed in the third quarter of the year i.e. from October to December. These indicators sit within the Corporate Plan and performance against them demonstrates progress against the Council’s priorities.
1. Recommendations
That Cabinet: i) Notes the contents of the report; ii) Notes the progress made against the Corporate Plan performance indicators.
2. Reason for Decision and Options Considered The purpose of this report is to provide the Cabinet with a summary of the Quarter 3 2016/17 performance against key indicators set out within the Corporate Plan. The report describes performance against key targets for operational delivery and service
Page 1 of 21 Page 345 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17 improvement, as well as the direction of travel of comparable performance indicators since Quarter 3 2015/16.
3. Summary of Quarter 3 2016/17 Performance
3.1 Introduction
A set of 58 Performance Indicators (PIs) have been agreed for regular monitoring and reporting to Cabinet and Corporate Board in 2016/17. These performance indicators have been selected from the former National Indicator Set (NIS) as well as local service indicators, helping the Council to monitor and manage service delivery, quality and value for money.
3.2 Performance against Targets in Quarter 3 2016/17
Out of the total 58 performance indicators, the performance of 56 indicators can be compared against their targets this quarter. Performance of the remaining two indicators cannot be compared as ‘Local 62 - cycling mode share’ is reported annually in February/ March and data is not yet available for ‘ASCOF 2B1 - Older people at home 91 days after leaving hospital into reablement’.
At the end of Quarter 3 2016/17, 35 (62%) out of the total 56 indicators either met their targets or were within tolerance, whereas 21 (38%) did not achieve their targeted performance. When broken down by the organisations that lead on the measures, 32 (65%) of the 49 Council-led measures1 achieved their targets or performed within tolerance, whereas 17 measures (35%) did not.
Figure 1: Performance against target* in Q3 2016/17
Green Amber Red
59% 55%
38% 35%
7% 6% 31 4 21 29 3 17 All indicators Council-led indicators
*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding
3.3 Direction of Travel of Performance in Quarter 3 2016/17
Out of the total 58 performance indicators in 2016/17, the direction of travel of performance from 2015/16 to 2016/17 cannot be compared for five indicators as they were either new PIs for this year (so do not have an existing baseline) or the
1 The Council leads on 51 of the total 58 measures. The Met Police lead on the 6 crime measures and Ealing CCG leads on the non-elective admissions measure (Local 69).
Page 2 of 21 Page 346 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17 performance data is currently unavailable due to being time-lagged or reported annually; hence the direction of travel can be calculated only for 53 PIs at this stage.
At the end of Quarter 3 2016/17, 30 (56%) indicators had either improved on Quarter 3 2015/16 performance or remained the same, whereas 23 (45%) measures had seen a worsening of performance levels. When broken down by the organisations leading on the measures, 26 (57%) of the Council-led measures had remained the same or improved on the corresponding quarter’s performance last year, while 20 (43%) had experienced a decline since then.
Figure 2: Direction of travel of performance*: Q3 2015/16 vs. Q3 2016/17
Performance Up Performance Unchanged Performance Down
47% 46% 43% 43%
9% 11%
25 5 23 21 5 20 All indicators Council-led indicators
*Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding
3.4 Highlights against Corporate Plan Priorities
The following sections present key performance highlights during the third quarter of 2016/17, organised by the Corporate Plan Priorities. Full details of performance against all the indicators are shown in Table 3 of this report.
A Prosperous Borough
Some of the key performance highlights under this priority are discussed below.
(Local 63, 64, 65 & 66) Educational attainment
Updated 2016 figures for the educational attainment measures have become available this quarter following their validation by the Department for Education (DfE)2.
54.4% pupils achieved the expected standard in Reading, Writing and Maths at Key Stage 2 (Local 63), missing the national top quartile target of 58%. This is also lower than the London average (59%), although better than the national average (53%). The gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers at KS2 (Local 64) was 15.7% points, better than the top quartile target of 20% points, London average of 17% points, and nationally 22% points.
2 It should be noted that one Ealing school is requesting DfE for an amendment to their data due to an admin error, so the final KS2 figures may change very slightly, though this won’t impact the RAG status.
Page 3 of 21 Page 347 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17
The proportion of pupils achieving a grade A*-C in English and Maths GCSEs at Key Stage 4 was 65%, meeting the national top quartile target (65%) and exceeding the national average (63%), although falling slightly behind the London average (66.4%). In Ealing the gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers at KS4 was 19.6% points, worse than targeted level (18% points) by 1.6% points, similar to the London average (19.4% points) but significantly better than the national figure (27.5% points).
Table 1: Educational attainment performance 2016
Indicator Perf. Target Local 63 - Achievement of the expected standard in Reading, 54.4% 58.0% Writing and Maths at Key Stage 2 Local 64 - Achievement gap between disadvantaged pupils and 15.7 pts. 20.0 pts. their peers at Key Stage 2 Local 65 - Achievement of a grade A*-C in English and Maths 65.0% 65.0% GCSEs by the end of Key Stage 4 Local 66 - Achievement gap between disadvantaged pupils and 19.6 pts. 18.0 pts. their peers at Key Stage 4
(Local 61a,b&c) Percentage of Ealing state funded schools rated good or outstanding – Primary/ Secondary/ Special
Ealing’s 14 secondary schools (Local 61b) and six special needs schools (Local 61c) remained rated good or outstanding at the end of the third quarter. At the primary level, 62 out of 65 schools (95.4%) in the borough were rated good or outstanding, an improvement on Quarter 2 performance (61 schools) resulting from Our Lady of Visitation primary school being rated ‘good’ after its inspection in November. The total number of schools for the purpose of this measure also reduced by one as Hathaway school became an academy.
(NI 117) 16 to 18 year olds who are not in education, employment or training (NEET)
The proportion of 16 to 18 year old NEETs continued to perform well this quarter with 2.4% of 16 to 18 year olds not in education, employment or training, maintaining performance at the same level as in Quarter 2 and well within the targeted level of 3.5%.
Figure 3: 16 to 18 year old NEETs in Ealing, since Q1 2014/15
Actual Target 4.1% 3.9% 3.3% 3.2% 3.2% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.1% 3.5% 2.8% 2.4% 2.4%
Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 14/15 14/15 14/15 14/15 15/16 15/16 15/16 15/16 16/17 16/17 16/17
Page 4 of 21 Page 348 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17
(Local 14 and Local 17) Satisfaction of tenants with estate management/ quality of repair
Satisfaction of tenants with estate management was 94% in Quarter 3, against a target of 93%, an improvement of four percentage points on Quarter 2 performance (90%). Satisfaction of tenants with the quality of repairs also performed well this quarter, with levels at 92%, achieving the targeted outturn (92%).
(Local 23a and Local 23c) Number of out-of-work residents supported to gain work and number of accredited qualifications achieved by out of work residents
During Quarter 3, there were 158 Ealing residents supported to gain work, exceeding the target of 145. This also means that year to date performance is now 459, out- performing the year to date target of 395 and suggesting that the measure is on track to achieve the end of year target of 500.
Figure 4: Ealing residents supported to gain work; since Q1 2015/16 Actual Target 172 158 137 135 129 114 150 145 135 81 100 87 93 74
Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 15/16 15/16 15/16 15/16 16/17 16/17 16/17
This quarter also saw 211 residents achieve accredited qualifications against a targeted outturn of 135, an improvement on Quarter 3 performance for the corresponding period last year (121 against a target of 147). The measure currently falls short of its year to date target (657 against a target of 812), largely due to performance in Quarters 1 and 2 missing the targeted outturns. 313 residents will need to achieve accredited qualifications in Quarter 4 if the indicator is to meet the year end target of 970.
Figure 5: Accredited qualifications achieved by out of work residents; since Q1 2015/16
Actual Target 381 360 317 238 261 214 211 185 214 196 121 147 154 135
Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 15/16 15/16 15/16 15/16 16/17 16/17 16/17
Page 5 of 21 Page 349 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17
(Local 67) Number of households living in temporary accommodation and (Local 54) Number of households in Bed and Breakfast (B&B) accommodation
At the end of Quarter 3 2016/17 there were 2,293 households living in temporary accommodation in Ealing, higher than the target (2,127) and an increase of 34 households from the end of Quarter 2 (2,259).
Figure 6: Households living in temporary accommodation; since Q1 2015/16
Actual Target
2,201 2,239 2,281 2,254 2,316 2,259 2,293
2,270 2,129 2,219 2,127 2,024 1,915
Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 15/16 15/16 15/16 15/16 16/17 16/17 16/17
The number of households in Bed and Breakfast (B&B) accommodation also increased during the quarter, from 324 in Quarter 2 to 368 by the end of Quarter 3; an increase of 13.6%. The Quarter 3 figure was more than double the quarterly target of 170 households; meaning that 198 households more than anticipated were living in B&Bs.
Figure 7: Households in Bed and Breakfast accommodation since Q1 2015/16
Actual Target 368 338 324 256 261 274 215
Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 15/16 15/16 15/16 15/16 16/17 16/17 16/17
This increase in both households in temporary accommodation as well as in B&Bs is mainly due to the sustained impact of welfare reform measures, and a lack of affordable supply in the private sector and loss of existing long term leases. There has been a substantial rise in the number of homeless approaches, from 684 in the first quarter this year to 1,062 in the third. The Council provides help and advice to residents affected by welfare reform in order to ensure they remain able to maintain their existing tenancies. At the same time measures are being taken to increase the supply of homes through modular homes, acquiring hostels, and purchasing more units. These measures should be able to provide up to 264 additional units by October 2017, substantially helping to reduce the number of households living in temporary accommodation.
Page 6 of 21 Page 350 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17
A Safer Borough
Some key performance highlights under this priority are discussed below.
Crime Indicators
Table 2 shows the Quarter 3 2016/17 performance of the six crime indicators, against their quarterly targets and for the corresponding quarter in 2015/16.
Table 2: Performance against target on crime indicators; Q3 2016/17 Q3 Q3 Q3 Change Crime Indicator 2015/16 2016/17* 2016/17 Q3 2015/16 to Perf Perf Target Q3 2016/17 Local 30 – Theft from Person 169 156 148 ▼ -7.7% Local 36 – Robbery of Personal property 155 160 150 ▲ 3.2% Local 37 – Motor Vehicle Crime 740 824 675 ▲ 11.4% Local 38 – Violent Crime with Injury 735 675 815 ▼ -8.2% Local 57 – All burglaries 737 681 676 ▼ -7.6% Local 58 – Criminal Damage 646 574 586 ▼ -11.1% *Colour coding denotes performance against target (green = target met; amber = target not met but within 4% tolerance; red = target not met by greater than 4% tolerance))
Four out of the six crime measures did not meet their Quarter 3 targets; of these, Motor Vehicle Crime exceeded its target by 149 incidents, while the others missed their respective targets by 10 or fewer incidents. Violent Crime with Injury and Criminal Damage both performed within their targeted outturns. However, looking at year on year performance only Motor Vehicle Crime (11.4%) and Robbery of Personal Property (3.2%) experienced increased levels of crime between Quarter 3 2015/16 and Quarter 3 2016/17. The other four measures all saw decreases in year on year levels, the biggest of which being Criminal Damage which was down by -11.1%.
(NI 111) First time entrants (FTE) to the Youth Justice System aged 10-17 per 100,000
Quarter 3 performance shows that there were 113 first time entrants per 100,000 young people aged 10-17 into the Youth Justice System, missing the quarterly target of 85 per 100,000. This is an increase on both Quarter 2 performance (74 per 100,000) and Quarter 3 2015/16 performance (72 per 100,000). However, the year-to- date position (225 per 100,000) shows that the measure is performing within the Quarter 3 year-to-date target of 255 per 100,000 and should be on track to meet the year-end target of 340 per 100,000.
(NI 45) Young Offenders’ engagement in suitable education, training or employment (ETE)
87.5% of young offenders in Ealing (28 out of 32 young people) were engaged in suitable education, training and employment at the end of Quarter 3. This was below
Page 7 of 21 Page 351 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17 the targeted outturn (90.0%) but is an improvement of more than three percentage points on Quarter 2 performance (84.2%).
Engagement in this area is becoming progressively more challenging, largely due to the number of young people who refuse to engage in ETE opportunities. Robust systems and processes are in place to identify and engage with all young people early on in the Criminal Justice process, particularly those who are NEET, to identify and provide meaningful opportunities for them.
(NI 62) Stability of placements of looked after children: Proportion of placement moves
The proportion of looked after children with three or more moves was 8.8% during Quarter 3, narrowly missing the quarterly target (8.3%). However, performance this quarter was at the same level as that experienced in 2015/16 Quarter 3.
Figure 8: Looked after children with three+ moves; since Q1 2015/16
Actual Target 14.2%
8.8% 11.0% 8.8% 9.5% 6.1% 8.3% 4.8% 5.5% 2.7% 1.9% 4.8%
1.0% 1.0% Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 15/16 15/16 15/16 15/16 16/17 16/17 16/17
(Local 48) Percentage of Children & Family Assessments (CFA) completed within 45 working days of commencement
85.2% of children and family assessments were completed within 45 working days of commencement during Quarter 3, falling short of the targeted outturn of 91.0%. This is an improvement on Quarter 2 (83.9%) but a decline on Quarter 3 2015/16 performance (90.5%).
A Healthier Borough
Some of the performance highlights under this priority are discussed below.
(ASCOF 1C) Proportion of clients receiving self-directed support
The proportion of clients receiving self-directed support during Quarter 3 was 88.0%, outperforming both the targeted level (86.0%) and performance for the corresponding period last year (86.6%). The 2015/16 national comparator, published by NHS Digital (formerly HSCIC), shows that 86.9% of clients in England were receiving self-directed
Page 8 of 21 Page 352 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17 support; suggesting that Ealing is broadly in line with national comparators for this measure.
Figure 9: Clients receiving self-directed support; since Q1 2015/16 Actual Target 87.7% 88.0% 88.0% 85.8% 86.6% 86.8% 84.5% 86.0% 84.0% 85.0%
67.0% 67.0% 67.0% 67.0%
Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 15/16 15/16 15/16 15/16 16/17 16/17 16/17
(Local 69) Non-elective admissions (per 100,000 population)
The rate of non-elective admissions was 2,457 per 100,000 during Quarter 3, well within the targeted rate of 2,672 per 100,000. This was a considerable improvement on Quarter 2 performance when there were 2,607 per 100,000 admissions, missing the quarterly target of 2,538 per 100,000. Year to date performance is also doing well at the end of Quarter 3 with 7,681 per 100,000 admissions, against a target of 8,657 per 100,000.
(Local 40 and 41) Percentage of eligible people who have been offered and received an NHS healthcheck in the year
The percentage of eligible people offered an NHS healthcheck continued to perform strongly in Quarter 3 with levels at 22.1%, exceeding both the quarterly target of 15.0%, by more than seven percentage points, and the year-end target of 20.0% by two percentage points. The percentage of eligible people who received an NHS healthcheck did not perform so well during Quarter 3, with performance levels at 58.1% against a target of 65.0%
(Local 56) Successful completions of alcohol treatment as a percentage of all in treatment
36.1% of all alcohol treatments resulted in successful completions during Quarter 2 (latest available), against a target of 43%.
The Recovery Intervention Service in Ealing (RISE) has developed an alcohol action plan to improve performance, with a key aim of identifying problem drinkers at an earlier stage before their behaviours become entrenched. This group of drinkers with hazardous levels of drinking could potentially achieve positive treatment outcomes quicker and therefore help improve performance.
Page 9 of 21 Page 353 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17
The criminal justice team have started a weekly group in the Community Rehabilitation Company’s (CRC) programme to target probation users drinking at harmful levels, who were not subject to treatment orders and therefore previously unknown to RISE.
The restructure of the GP shared care work will be launching redesigned clinics across 11 sites from April with a stronger focus on harmful and hazardous drinkers. GPs across Ealing will be able to refer patients, and RISE are currently working with the CCG and GP networks on advertising these clinics and the referral process, whilst simultaneously raising awareness of the treatment offer particularly around alcohol.
RISE are also in the process of opening a new purpose-built site at the Saluja Clinic in Southall. This will provide a treatment hub but will also offer the potential to deliver more abstinence based work from a primary care setting, providing more flexibility and an anonymous space which will attract a wider user group. This will help mitigate against the loss of the abstinence site at EACH, which previously provided this safer space for residents further on in their recovery.
The Local Authority transformation project designed to enhance the partnership response to help resistant drinkers is now in the recruitment phase. Under this project two social workers will support the RISE work in Ealing hospital and within the community, increasing the capacity to achieve positive outcomes for the most entrenched users.
(NI 123) Smoking quitters (rate per 100,000 16+ population)
The rate of smoking quitters was 88 per 100,000 of the 16+ population during Quarter 2 (latest available), falling short of the 130 per 100,000 target. This also represents a decline in performance from Quarter 1 (122), mirroring the trend for the same period last year but with lower performance levels.
Relatively low performance levels are normally anticipated during the early quarters of each year due to a lag in smoking cessation activity being recorded. It is expected that levels will have caught up by year end, when an accurate picture of the whole year is available.
Figure 10: Smoking quitters (per 100,000 16+ population); since Q1 2015/16
Actual Target 215
173 177 174 151 151 130 130 137 130 122 88
Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 15/16 15/16 15/16 15/16 16/17 16/17
Page 10 of 21 Page 354 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17
A Cleaner Borough
Some of the performance indicators under this priority are discussed below.
(NI 192) Percentage of household waste sent for reuse, recycling and composting
The percentage of household waste sent for reuse, recycling and composting continued to perform strongly this quarter with an outturn of 50.4%. This far exceeded the targeted outturn of 45.3%, highlighting the positive impact of changes made to the refuse and recycling service last summer. The year-to-date performance at the end of the third quarter remains strong at 51.0% against a target of 46.6%, and the indicator is on track to exceed the target of 47.0% for the year 2016/17.
(Local 60a & b) Street Cleansing – Percentage of Grade A streets - First time & post rectification
84.8% of streets were cleaned to Grade A standard first time in Quarter 3, missing the targeted outturn by five percentage points (90.0%). This seems to mirror the trend seen in previous years for Quarter 3 performance to be lower than that for earlier quarters. This dip in performance can be attributed to the annual leaf-fall during the autumn period, which means more resources are focused on safety cleaning for the streets with the highest leaf fall.
Figure 11: Percentage of streets cleaned to Grade A standard (first time); since Q1 2014/15
Actual Target 91.8% 91.0% 91.1% 89.0% 86.9% 90.0% 85.5% 84.9% 83.2% 84.8% 77.2% 71.3%
Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 14/15 14/15 14/15 14/15 15/16 15/16 15/16 15/16 16/17 16/17 16/17
The percentage of streets cleaned to Grade A standard post rectification also decreased this quarter, with 90.5% of streets against a targeted level of 95.0%. This again may be attributed to the autumnal leaf-fall, leading to a reprioritisation of street cleaning resources in order to ensure the borough's streets are kept safe for pedestrians and free from flooding.
Page 11 of 21 Page 355 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17
Figure 12: Percentage of streets cleaned to Grade A standard (post rectification); since Q1 2014/15
Actual Target 99.8% 98.3% 97.6% 97.5% 99.5% 96.0% 96.5% 95.3% 95.0% 87.6% 90.5%
78.0%
Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 14/15 14/15 14/15 14/15 15/16 15/16 15/16 15/16 16/17 16/17 16/17
A Fairer Borough
Some of the indicators of performance under this priority are discussed below.
(Local 3 & 4) Telephone & Face to Face Customer Waiting Time
The average telephone waiting time was 28 seconds during Quarter 3, meeting the target of 28 seconds. This was an improvement on Quarter 2 performance (31 seconds) and substantially better than the 2015/16 Quarter 3 performance (34 seconds).
The average face to face waiting time indicator performed strongly this quarter, with an average of 5 minutes; half the targeted average of 10 minutes and an improvement on Quarter 2’s performance of 8 minutes. This is the shortest face to face waiting time reported to date.
(Local 19) Percentage of period's rent loss through voids and (Local 47) rent collected as a proportion of rent owed
Both measures performed well during Quarter 3; with rent lost through voids at 0.67% (against a target of 1.00%), an improvement on Quarter 2 performance (0.96%); and 99.35% of rent collected as a proportion of rent owed (against a target of 97.53%), a small decline from Quarter 2 (99.41%).
(Local 52 & 53) Processing times for Housing Benefit/ Council Tax Support New claims and Change of Circumstances
Processing times for new housing benefit and council tax support claims (Local 52) took an average of 18.4 days in Quarter 3, falling slightly short of the target (17.3 days) but demonstrating an improvement on Quarter 2 performance (20.4 days).
Ongoing issues with software suppliers have led to high numbers of new claims not being received on time, contributing to the performance delays experienced this quarter; investigation into this has been treated as a priority. The introduction of the new benefit cap in November and testing of the Automated Transfers to Local
Page 12 of 21 Page 356 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17
Authority Systems (ATLAS) meant that resources were redeployed away from processing of new claims during October, resulting in a negative impact on the Quarter 3 performance of this indicator.
Figure 13: Processing times for Housing Benefit/ Council Tax Support New claims; since Q1 2015/16 27.7 Actual Target 22.3 20.5 20.4 19.0 18.4 17.3 18.0 17.3 15.6 15.8 16.7 13.8 13.5
Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 15/16 15/16 15/16 15/16 16/17 16/17 16/17
Processing times for changes of circumstance to housing benefit and council tax support claims were longer this quarter, with an average of 14.9 days against a target of 11.7 days. This represents an increase on Quarter 2 performance of 5.7 days and is the longest average processing time since Quarter 3 2014/15 (16.9 days).
However, the year to date performance was still quite strong in Quarter 3 with an average of 9.9 days to process changes of circumstance, against a year to date target of 13.2 days. Therefore despite an increase in processing times this quarter the measure is still on track to achieve the year-end target of 12.0 days.
Figure 14: Processing times for Housing Benefit/ Council Tax Support Change of Circumstances; since Q1 2015/16 Actual Target 16.0 14.8 14.9 14.0 14.0 13.7 14.3 11.7 11.8 12.0 9.0 9.2 8.0 5.9
Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 15/16 15/16 15/16 15/16 16/17 16/17 16/17
Page 13 of 21 Page 357 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17 Table 3: Key Performance Indicators
Performance against target Direction of travel (DoT) Red Performance is below target Up Performance Improved Amber Performance is below target but within tolerance Down Performance Declined Green Performance is above target Same Performance unchanged N/A Data not available/ comparable for this measure N/A Data not available for this measure Denotes not applicable (e.g. no monthly data for a quarterly PI) N/C Measure not comparable for DoT
Qtr 3 DoT 16/17 Qtr 3 Year- Year Qtr 3 Year Qtr 3 Qtr 3 Perf 2015/16 to-date Toleranc End 2016/ End Lead Code Indicator Title Freq 2015/16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 2016/17 against to Perf e Type 2015/16 17 2016/17 Agency Perf. Perf Qtr 3 Qtr 3 2016/ Perf. Target Target 16/17 2016/ 17 target 17 A Prosperous Borough Achievement of the Local 54.4% expected standard in Bigger is 63 Annual Red N/A (Summ 58.0% Council Reading, Writing and Better (NEW) er 16) Maths at Key Stage 2 Achievement gap Local 15.7% between disadvantaged Smaller 64 Annual Green N/A (Summ 20.0% Council pupils and their peers at is Better (NEW) er 16) Key Stage 2 Achievement of a grade Local 65.0% A*-C in English and Bigger is 65 Annual 63.8% Green Up (Summ 65.0% Council Maths GCSEs by the end Better (NEW) er 16) of Key Stage 4 Achievement gap Local 19.6% between disadvantaged Smaller 66 Annual 19.6% Red Same (Summ 18.0% Council pupils and their peers at is Better (NEW) er 16) Key Stage 4 Percentage of Ealing Local state funded schools Bigger is Quarterly 89.4% 90.9% 95.4% 92.5% Green Up 95.4% 92.5% Council 61a rated good or outstanding Better - Primary Percentage of Ealing Local state funded schools Bigger is Quarterly 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Green Same 100.0% 100.0% Council 61b rated good or outstanding Better - Secondary
Page 14 of 21 Page 358 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17 Qtr 3 DoT 16/17 Qtr 3 Year- Year Qtr 3 Year Qtr 3 Qtr 3 Perf 2015/16 to-date Toleranc End 2016/ End Lead Code Indicator Title Freq 2015/16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 2016/17 against to Perf e Type 2015/16 17 2016/17 Agency Perf. Perf Qtr 3 Qtr 3 2016/ Perf. Target Target 16/17 2016/ 17 target 17 Percentage of Ealing Local state funded schools Bigger is Quarterly 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Green Same 100.0% 100.0% Council 61c rated good or outstanding Better - Special Percentage of 16 to 18 year olds not in Smaller NI 117 Monthly 3.2% 3.2% 2.8% 2.4% 2.4% 2.4% 3.5% Green Up 2.4% 3.5% Council education, employment is Better or training (NEET) Number of out of work Local Bigger is residents supported to Quarterly 467 137 158 145 Green Up 459 500 Council 23a Better gain work Number of accredited Local Bigger is qualifications achieved by Quarterly 954 121 211 135 Green Up 657 970 Council 23c Better out of work residents Number of affordable Bigger is NI 155 Quarterly 128 31 20 96 Red Down 20 152 Council homes delivered (gross) Better Number of households Local Smaller living in Temporary Monthly 2,254 2,281 2,308 2,303 2,293 2,293 2,127 Red Down 2293 2,254 Council 67 is Better Accommodation Local Number of Households in Smaller Monthly 274 261 360 376 368 368 170 Red Down 368 137 Council 54 B&B accommodation is Better Local Satisfaction of tenants Bigger is Quarterly 96% 96% 94% 93% Green Down 94% 93% Council 14 with estate management Better Local Satisfaction of tenants Bigger is Quarterly 93% 96% 95% 92% Green Down 94% 92% Council 17 with quality of repairs Better Processing of 'Other' Bigger is NI 157c planning applications Monthly 92.1% 88.9% 94.3% 93.2% 98.0% 95.3% 92.0% Green Up 94% 92.0% Council Better within 8 weeks A Safer Borough First time entrants to the Youth Justice System Smaller NI 111 Quarterly 355 72 113 85 Red Down 225 340 Council aged 10-17 (Rate per is Better 100,000)
Page 15 of 21 Page 359 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17 Qtr 3 DoT 16/17 Qtr 3 Year- Year Qtr 3 Year Qtr 3 Qtr 3 Perf 2015/16 to-date Toleranc End 2016/ End Lead Code Indicator Title Freq 2015/16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 2016/17 against to Perf e Type 2015/16 17 2016/17 Agency Perf. Perf Qtr 3 Qtr 3 2016/ Perf. Target Target 16/17 2016/ 17 target 17 Young offenders engagement in suitable Bigger is NI 45 Quarterly 86.6% 90.5% 87.5% 90.0% Amber Down 78.6% 90.0% Council education, employment Better or training Young People who have Local committed serious youth Smaller 6.7% 0% 3% 0% Quarterly 16.7% Green Up 13.0% Council 39 violence, who have re- is Better (Qtr 2) (Qtr 2) (Qtr 2) (Qtr 2) offended in the year Stability of placements of looked after children: Smaller NI 62 Monthly 14.2% 8.8% 7.1% 8.1% 8.8% 8.8% 8.3% Red Same 8.8% 10.0% Council Proportion of placement is Better moves Looked after children cases which were Bigger is NI 66 Monthly 97.5% 94.6% 97.4% 97.2% 96.3% 96.3% 99.2% Amber Up 96.3% 99.2% Council reviewed within required Better timescales Percentage of child protection cases which Bigger is NI 67 Monthly 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Green Same 100% 100% Council were reviewed within Better required timescales Percentage of Ealing Children & Family Local Assessments (CFA) Bigger is Monthly 90.9% 90.5% 88.1% 84.3% 85.2% 85.2% 91.0% Red Down 85.2% 91.0% Council 48 completed within 45 Better working days of commencement Local Incidents of theft from Smaller Monthly 611 169 51 53 52 156 148 Red Up 498 585 MPS 30 person is Better Local Incidents of robbery of Smaller Monthly 623 155 55 55 50 160 150 Red Down 484 607 MPS 36 personal property is Better Local Incidents of motor vehicle Smaller Monthly 2,928 740 279 246 299 824 675 Red Down 2,390 2,721 MPS 37 crimes is Better Local Incidents of violent crime Smaller Monthly 2,903 735 228 195 252 675 815 Green Up 2,165 3,239 MPS 38 with injury is Better Local Smaller Incidents of all burglaries Monthly 2,477 737 224 208 249 681 676 Amber Up 1,892 2,326 MPS 57 is Better
Page 16 of 21 Page 360 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17 Qtr 3 DoT 16/17 Qtr 3 Year- Year Qtr 3 Year Qtr 3 Qtr 3 Perf 2015/16 to-date Toleranc End 2016/ End Lead Code Indicator Title Freq 2015/16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 2016/17 against to Perf e Type 2015/16 17 2016/17 Agency Perf. Perf Qtr 3 Qtr 3 2016/ Perf. Target Target 16/17 2016/ 17 target 17 Local Incidents of criminal Smaller Monthly 2,501 646 176 189 209 574 586 Green Up 1,989 2,378 MPS 58 damage is Better Number of people killed Local Smaller 17 18 17 or seriously injured (KSI) Quarterly 71 Green N/A 71 Council 68 is Better (Qtr 1) (Qtr 1) (Qtr 1) on Ealing roads A Healthier Borough Proportion of clients ASCOF Bigger is receiving self-directed Monthly 86.8% 86.6% 88.1% 88.1% 88.0% 88.0% 86.0% Green Up 88.0% 87.0% Council 1C Better support Admissions into ASCOF permanent residential Smaller Monthly 6.3 4.9 5.9 7.7 7.7 7.7 9.8 Green Down 13.0 Council 2A 1 care (aged 18-64) per is Better 7.7 100,000 population Admissions into ASCOF permanent residential Smaller Monthly 447.9 341.6 247.5 292.1 321.8 321.8 408.0 Green Up 544.0 Council 2A 2 Care (aged 65+) per is Better 321.8 100,000 population Older people at home 91 ASCOF Bigger is days after leaving Quarterly 93.9% 95.2% N/A 93.0% N/A N/A N/A 93.0% Council 2B 1 Better hospital into reablement Delayed transfers of care ASCOF Smaller NHS (whole system) per Monthly 11.7 8.4 7.2 8.6 9.9 9.9 8.8 Red Down 9.9 11.7 2C 1 is Better Ealing 100,000 population Delayed transfers of care ASCOF Smaller (social services) per Monthly 4.9 3.1 3.9 4.7 5.5 5.5 3.7 Red Down 5.5 4.9 Council 2C 2 is Better 100,000 population Local Smaller Sickness Absence (Days) Monthly 7.79 7.47 7.94 7.56 8.18 8.18 7.65 Red Down 8.18 7.6 Council 07 is Better % of eligible people who Local have been offered an Bigger is Quarterly 22.4% 17.5% 22.1% 15.0% Green Up 22.1% 20.0% Council 40 NHS Health Check in the Better year % of eligible people that Local Bigger is have received an NHS Quarterly 70.3% 66.2% 58.1% 65.0% Red Down 58.1% 65.0% Council 41 Better Health Check in the year
Page 17 of 21 Page 361 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17 Qtr 3 DoT 16/17 Qtr 3 Year- Year Qtr 3 Year Qtr 3 Qtr 3 Perf 2015/16 to-date Toleranc End 2016/ End Lead Code Indicator Title Freq 2015/16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 2016/17 against to Perf e Type 2015/16 17 2016/17 Agency Perf. Perf Qtr 3 Qtr 3 2016/ Perf. Target Target 16/17 2016/ 17 target 17 Smoking Quitters Bigger is 137 88 130 210 NI 123 (Rate per 100,000 16+ Quarterly 656 Red Down 538 Council Better (Qtr2) (Qtr2) (Qtr2) (Qtr2) population) Successful completions Local of alcohol treatment as a Bigger is 49.7% 36.1% 43.0% 36.1% Quarterly 41.4% Red Down 43.0% Council 56 proportion of all in Better (Qtr2) (Qtr2) (Qtr2) (Qtr2) treatment Local Non elective admissions Smaller Monthly 10496 2660 838 808 811 2457 2672 Green Up 7681 10399 Council 69 (per 100,000) is Better Local Percentage of journeys Bigger is Annual 2.6% 0.0% 3.00% Council 62 undertaken by cycle Better
A Cleaner Borough Street cleansing Local Bigger is performance Monthly 86.1% 83.2% 91.2% 72.5% 84.5% 84.8% 90.0% Red Up 88.2% 90.0% Council 60a Better (% Grade A) First time Street cleansing Local performance Bigger is Monthly 98.3% 97.5% 95.6% 83.7% 88.3% 90.5% 95.0% Red Down 93.7% 95.0% Council 60b (% Grade A) Post Better rectification Percentage of household Bigger is NI 192 waste sent for reuse, Monthly 45.4% 43.3% 51.5% 52.1% 46.6% 50.4% 45.3% Green Up 51.0% 47.0% Council Better recycling and composting Improved street and 4% 8% 6% environmental Smaller 4 NI 195a 5% (Tranche 8% (Tranche (Tranch Amber Down 7% 6% Council cleanliness (levels of is Better monthly 2) 2) e 2) litter) Improved street and 7% 3% 8% environmental Smaller 4 NI 195b 4% (Tranche 3% (Tranche (Tranch Green Up 4% 8% Council cleanliness (levels of is Better monthly 2) 2) e 2) detritus) Improved street and 2% 0% 3% environmental Smaller 4 NI 195c 2% (Tranche 0% (Tranche (Tranch Green Up 1% 3% Council cleanliness (levels of is Better monthly 2) 2) e 2) graffiti)
Page 18 of 21 Page 362 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17 Qtr 3 DoT 16/17 Qtr 3 Year- Year Qtr 3 Year Qtr 3 Qtr 3 Perf 2015/16 to-date Toleranc End 2016/ End Lead Code Indicator Title Freq 2015/16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 2016/17 against to Perf e Type 2015/16 17 2016/17 Agency Perf. Perf Qtr 3 Qtr 3 2016/ Perf. Target Target 16/17 2016/ 17 target 17 Improved street and 1% 2% 2% environmental Smaller 4 NI 195d 1% (Tranche 2% (Tranche (Tranch Green Down 2% 2% Council cleanliness (levels of fly is Better monthly 2) 2) e 2) posting) A Fairer Borough Local Average waiting times on Smaller Monthly 35 34 34 28 21 28 28 Green Up 33 30 Council 03 telephone (seconds) is Better Local Average waiting times Smaller Monthly 6 6 7 4 4 5 10 Green Up 7 10 Council 04 face-to-face (minutes) is Better Percentage of complaints Local Bigger is responded to within Monthly 93.3% 91.8% 95.1% 99.0% 99.0% 97.5% 95.0% Green Up 96.2% 95.0% Council 06 Better published targets Local Percentage of period's Smaller Monthly 1.26% 1.18% 1.06% 0.69% 0.67% 0.67% 1.00% Green Up 0.67% 1.00% Council 19 rent loss through voids is Better Local Percentage of invoices Bigger is Monthly 77.68% 92.02% 87.31% 87.34% 91.17% 88.67% 88.50% Green Down 88.71% 88.50% Council 22 paid within timescales Better Local Rent collected as a Bigger is Monthly 99.31% 97.85% 99.92% 99.27% 99.35% 99.35% 97.53% Green Up 99.35% 97.65% Council 47 proportion of rent owed Better Average time (days) taken to process new Local Smaller claims for Housing Monthly 19.2 13.8 20.6 18.2 15.6 18.4 17.3 Red Down 18.2 17.5 Council 52 is Better Benefit and Council Tax Support Average time (days) taken to process change Local Smaller in circumstances claims Monthly 10.8 14.0 12.0 15.6 17.8 14.9 11.7 Red Down 9.9 12.0 Council 53 is Better for Housing Benefit and Council Tax support
Page 19 of 21 Page 363 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17 4. Financial Delivering Value for Money for local residents cuts across the Council’s six priorities for 2014/18. Financial performance over the past year has been strong helping services to support the achievement of the Council’s Corporate Plan. Through effective planning and robust financial management during the year the Council is on track to deliver a balanced budget and has delivered a council tax level as low as possible through a further council tax freeze for 2016/17.
There are no direct financial implications arising from this report. Where appropriate, improvement actions to any ‘red’ performance indicators identified in this report will be delivered within existing budgets.
5. Legal There are no direct legal implications as part of this report.
6. Value for Money Having clear objectives and measurable targets assists the Council to ensure that all activity is focused on delivery, makes managers accountable for that delivery and increases effectiveness.
7. Sustainability Impact Appraisal None.
8. Risk Management There is a clear link between managing performance and risk management. Performance indicators are used to regularly monitor the performance of services – this information is used to highlight trends in performance and enable the early identification of any potential issues. Through this regular monitoring of information by both members and senior officers, informed decisions can be taken regarding any mitigating actions that need to be taken.
9. Community Safety There are no direct community safety implications as part of this report. However, A Safer Borough is one of the 6 priority themes within the Corporate Plan 2014/18 and is measured as part of our performance information.
10. Links to the 6 Priorities for the Borough The performance information considered in this report is set out to demonstrate the Council’s performance under each of the Council’s Priorities
11. Equalities, Human Rights and Community Cohesion None.
12. Staffing/Workforce and Accommodation implications: None.
13. Property and Assets None.
Page 20 of 21 Page 364 of 382 Council Performance Report Quarter 3 2016/17
14. Any other implications: None.
15. Consultation None. This report is for information only.
16. Timetable for Implementation Implementation is dependent on specific action plans for improving performance in key areas.
17. Appendices None
18. Background Information Ealing Corporate Plan 2014-2018 Quarterly Performance reports Monthly Performance Monitor
Consultation
Name of consultee Post held Date Date Comments sent to response appear in consultee received paragraph: Internal Flora Osiyemi Finance Business 09/02/2017 15/02/2017 Partner - Consultancy Corporate Board 16/02/2017 22/02/2017 Cllr. Yvonne Cabinet Member for Johnson Finance, performance and customer services Cabinet Members External
Report History
Decision type: Urgency item?
For information
Report no.: Report authors and contact for queries: Rajiv Ahlawat – extn 6380 Rowena Steward – extn 8983
Page 21 of 21 Page 365 of 382
Page 366 of 382 Report for: ACTION/INFORMATION
Item Number: 16
Contains Confidential No or Exempt Information Title ICT & Data Management Capital Funded Schemes 2017/18 Responsible Officer(s) Mike Ibbitson, Director of Business Services Author(s) Edward Axe, Head of ICT & Data Management Portfolio(s) Councillor Yvonne Johnson Finance, Performance & Customer Services For Consideration By Cabinet Date to be Considered 14th March 2017 Implementation Date if (Day after Call-In expiration date, or most appropriate date Not Called In after Call-In expiration date) Affected Wards None Keywords/Index ICT Procurement
Purpose of Report:
To seek approval for the Director of Business Services Group to implement a unified capital programme using budget previously agreed. The total value of capital works is £1.993m.
1. Recommendations
1.1 It is recommended that Cabinet:
1.1.1 Authorises the Director of Business Services Group to make a direct call off from the Cabinet Office Public Services Agreement framework for a new Microsoft Enterprise Agreement for a period of 3 years at an annual cost of £556,000 per annum
1.1.2 Notes and agrees to the upgrade and expansion of the GCSX Servers 2012 to comply with government requirements using the Microsoft Enterprise Agreement where necessary.
1.1.3 Notes and agrees the requirement to upgrade Business Objects or replace Business Objects with Microsoft Power BI following an assessment of the options available. The option chosen will be authorised by way of an officer decision.
1
Page 367 of 382
2 Reason for Decision and Options Considered
2.1 The budget approval process for 2017/18 to 2020/21 allocated ICT the budget to proceed with the capital programme for 2017/18. Cabinet approval is required with regard to the Microsoft Enterprise Agreement so that the programme can start in April 2017.
3 Key Implications
3.1 Microsoft Enterprise Agreement
The existing Microsoft Enterprise Agreement (EA) that provides licencing for all of the Council’s Standard Microsoft products will be expiring in August 2017. The previous cost was £1.545m over three years.
We now need to purchase a further EA with three years lifespan using the Cabinet Office Public Services Agreement for Microsoft pricing which is the minimum cost option.
The number of individual staff using devices connected to Microsoft services has increased from 3,500 to 3,750 with a resultant increase in licencing costs to £1.668m over 3 years.
3.2 GCSX Servers 2012 & Expansion
The Government Secure Communications Exchange (GCSX) servers provide connection to a secure network, called PSN that allows Local Authorities to use hosted services and to share data with Central Government. Its use is core to various areas of the Councils business and a part of ensuring we can do business in areas like Revenues and Benefits. Ealing’s GCSX set up is assessed on an annual basis and not keeping the environment up to date can be regarded by the Cabinet Office as reason to terminate the connection.
The intention is to upgrade the environment to Windows 2012, or the latest available appropriate version at the time. This work needs to be completed before the current version expires support and/or we meet anticipated security requirements. The work will therefore start in April 2017.
3.3 Business Objects Upgrade or Replacement
Ealing’s current Business Intelligence reporting capability is Business Objects. There are estimated to be in the region of 300 reports run over the course of a month that are regarded as business critical to services Council-wide. These reports are complicated, integrated within back-office systems and embedded deeply within many business processes.
2
Page 368 of 382 The current solution for Business Objects is out of support which means if it fails we cannot be certain of getting supplier support to fix it. ICT therefore need to undertake an evaluation of the most cost effective solution and implement this. The solution will either be an upgrade of Business objects or the procurement and implementation of an alternative product, such as Microsoft Power BI, which is emerging as a leading solution in this field.
The development of our capacity for data intelligence and analytics is a central part of the forthcoming Digital Strategy.
ICT have successfully bid for funding on behalf of the departments across the Council to undertake this evaluation and implementation.
4 Financial
The capital programme for 2017/18 onwards is as below, all bids have been funded via the budget approval process.
New Bids – Capital Programme Profile 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 TOTAL Bid Name £m £m £m £m £m Microsoft Enterprise 0.556 0.556 0.556 0.000 1.668 Agreement GCSX Servers 2012 & 0.075 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.075 Expansion Business Objects 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.250 Upgrade or Replacement CAPITAL BID TOTAL 0.881 0.556 0.556 0.000 1.993
5 Legal
5.1. Procurement will be carried out in accordance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (as amended) and the Council’s Contract Procedure Rules and the rules of the framework or dynamic purchasing system.
6 Value For Money
6.1. A key part of implementation of the Capital Programme is to ensure that Value for Money is achieved. Procurement will be through the appropriate framework arrangements and in the case of Microsoft, who are the sole supplier, ICT has been able to negotiate price reductions.
7 Sustainability Impact Appraisal
7.1 Delivery of these projects will enhance the Council’s existing assets and create service improvements that will enable the Council to become more efficient.
3
Page 369 of 382 8 Risk Management
8.1 Microsoft Enterprise Agreement
The Microsoft Enterprise agreement is core to the Council business and is central to the Councils ICT strategy. Without it, all Microsoft 365 Services will cease and the Council will be unable to operate as currently. ICT would need to find another way of providing core services.
8.2 GCSX Servers 2012 & Expansion
The GCSX environment supports the connection to central government providing business critical applications for: • Housing Benefits processing • Tell Us Once • Blue Badges
Without it, these services would either be unable to function or have their efficiency severely impacted by its unavailability.
8.3 Business Objects Upgrade or Replacement
Business Object is essential for day to day management, and without the upgrade there is the potential for failure of software and consequential possible loss of data.
9. Community Safety
9.1 A resilient and effective ICT service underpins the provision of all council services related to community safety.
10. Links to the 6 Priorities for the Borough
10.1 The council’s six priorities for the borough are to make Ealing:
• prosperous • safer • healthier • cleaner • fairer • accessible
A robust, efficient ICT function supports the business in delivering its service objectives which in turn support the Council priorities.
11. Equalities, Human Rights and Community Cohesion
11.1 An Equality Impact Assessment screening has been completed for the Capital Programme.
4
Page 370 of 382
12. Staffing/Workforce and Accommodation implications
12.1. There are no staffing or accommodation implications.
13. Property and Assets If the report does not involve property, please state that there are no property implications.
13.1 The capital programme takes into account the upcoming move from Perceval House and supports the increased need for flexible and mobile working.
14. Any other implications:
None.
15. Consultation
15.1 The contract for the new Microsoft Enterprise Agreement will be awarded in consultation with the Portfolio Holder.
16. Timetable for Implementation
16.1 The capital programme will commence on 1 April 2017, with the Microsoft EA renewal in September 2017.
17. Appendices
None
18. Background Information
None
5
Page 371 of 382
Consultation (Mandatory)
Name of Post held Date Date Comments consultee sent to response appear in consultee received paragraph: Internal Ian O’Donnell Executive Director Feb 2017 Mike Ibbitson Director, BSG Jan 2017 Jan 2017 Femi Ogidan Finance Business Partner 12.02.2017 14.02.2017 Yvonne Johnson Leader / Cabinet Member for Finance, Performance & Customer Services Chuhr Nijjar Senior Contracts Lawyer Feb 2017 Feb 2017 External
Report History
Decision type: Urgency item? For information General
Report no.: Edward Axe, Head of ICT and Data Management
6
Page 372 of 382 Report for: ACTION
Item Number:
Contains Confidential or NO Exempt Information
Title Approval to award entry to Providers onto Children’s 0-25 Domiciliary Care DPS list Responsible Officer(s) Chris Hogan, Director of Children Services Author(s) Danielle Grant-Vest, Children’s Commissioning Portfolio(s) Cllr Binda Rai (Children’s Services) For Consideration By Cabinet Date to be Considered 14 th March 2017 Implementation Date if 27 th March 2017 Not Called In Affected Wards All Keywords/Index Procurement, Domiciliary Care, Children, SEN
Purpose of Report:
This report seeks approval for the Director of Children Services to award entry to Providers who have successfully completed the Children’s Domiciliary Care 0-25 Dynamic Purchasing System
This report is a follow-up to the report approved by Cabinet in June 2016 authorising
• Council Officers to undertake a procurement exercise for a Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) for Children’s Domiciliary Care service for Children and young people aged 0-25 range using an adapted restricted procedure under the Public Contracts Regulation 2015 and • Authority to award contracts from the Dynamic Purchasing System to the Director of Children and Families and to add providers to the 0-25 Domiciliary Care services DPS once established in accordance with its rules and selection criteria.
1. Recommendations
It is recommended that Cabinet:
1.1 Authorises the Director of Children to appoint Providers (detailed in Appendix 1 who met the entry criteria of the DPS) onto the Children and young people aged 0-25 DPS for the first round of the scheme due to commence on 1 st April 2017, for a term of three (3) years with the option to extend for a further two (2) years.
1.2 Authorises the Director of Children to enter into individual or block placement agreements with the Providers on the DPS as and when needs arise for care placements within the Children with Disabilities service and provided that the placements are made within the Children with Disabilities budget, in accordance with the specified procedures within the DPS for awarding contracts.
Page 1 of 10
Page 373 of 382 1.3 Authorises the Director of Children to enter into individual or block placement agreements with the Providers on the DPS as and when needs arise for care placements within Children Services (other than Children with Disabilities service) and provided that the placements are made within the Children Services budget, in accordance with the specified procedures within the DPS for awarding contracts
2. Reason for Decision and Options Considered
2.1 Ealing Council has a statutory responsibility to provide social care services to children and young people with additional needs based on an assessment of need.
2.2 Cabinet gave delegated authority to the Director of Children and Director of Adult Services to award call off contracts from the DPS. .
2.3 This current report seeks Cabinet approval to authorise the Director of Children to enter into individual or block placement agreements with the Providers as and when the service needs arise within the departmental budgets. The authorisation is being sought to meet the business needs of Children Services and the requirement to make call offs from the DPS at short notice. Adult Services will not be making any call offs from the DPS.
2.4 It was proposed and agreed that that the Children’s Domiciliary Care approved list was recommissioned for children and young people aged 0-25 by the establishment of a DPS.
2.5 A DPS was recommended as the preferred procurement method, as it will: • Help develop the market • Provide the benefit of adding qualified providers to the DPS at an agreed and competitive price. • The new DPS system intends to prevent the use of higher unit costs arising from Spot Purchasing of services.
2.6 In 2015-16, 142 children and young people aged 0-18 were supported providing a total of 77,000 hours. Of the 142 young people provided with domiciliary care services, 56 were for new young people and packages were purchased from the Council’s existing approved list or spot purchased if the providers on the approved list were unable to provide the services.
2.7 Ealing Council procured an approved list of 5 providers in 2014 for a term of three (3) years with an option to extend for a further two (2) years.
2.8 The current children’s domiciliary care approved list fails to fully meet the needs for the provision of the services with 1/3 of all referrals not being taken on by providers on the approved list and the Council has resorted to spot purchasing such services. The current approved list providers are unable to provide a sufficient level of service because of: • Capacity within their own organisation, and not having available staff. • Level of need of the child/young person is very high – staff unable to meet need, training of staff needed to meet need is not available.
2.9 Current providers on the approved list charge between £12.96 and £20.50 per hour, a maximum price was submitted by providers and agreed at the time the providers applied to join the approved list.
2.10 Spot purchase packages are more expensive than the approved list providers, they are not held to an agreed maximum price. The spot purchase price range from £18.00 to £24.50 per hour.
Page 2 of 10
Page 374 of 382 2.11 The DPS provides good value for money and enables the Council to meet its statutory responsibility.
2.12 The DPS specification was developed into two lots to meet the differing need and experience to meet the needs of children and young people
• LOT 1 Basic home care and community support and/ or • LOT 2 Support for children with complex needs and challenging behaviour
3. Key Implications
3.1 The procurement of a DPS for Children’s Domiciliary Care services will allow the Council to continue to meet care needs of children and young people aged 0-25 and to develop, manage and sustain a comprehensive approved list of providers thus reducing the need to spot purchase.
3.2 A DPS will address the current issue of capacity from current providers as it will allow new providers to join the DPS throughout the life of the DPS.
4. Financial
4.1 The budget allocation for domiciliary care placements in 2016/17 within the Children with Disabilities service is £0.985m.
4.2 The table below shows the maximum and minimum hourly unit cost rates comparison between the existing domiciliary care framework that was procured, spot purchasing and those projected under the new DPS.
Existing Approved Dynamic Purchasing List Spot System (Closed List for old Purchasing packages) LOT 1 LOT2 £ per hour £ per hour £ per hour Minimum Cost 12.96 18.00 £14.35 £15:51 Maximum Cost 20.50 24.50 £14.35 £20.50
4.3 As referenced in paragraph 2.6 the DPS is expected to reduce the need for spot purchasing of packages with the ability to add qualified providers to the DPS as compared to the current fixed framework agreement. It is therefore this significant reduction in spot purchasing that is expected to drive cost reductions.
4.4 Cost pressures anticipated upon domiciliary unit costs are possible from increases in the National Living Wage, problems with providers recruiting and retaining staff and the increase in the number of children with complex needs requiring providers recruit more skilled and, therefore, more expensive staff.
4.5 The DPS framework is scheduled to run for three financial years from April 2017 with an option of an additional two years. The costs of placements will be met from the
Page 3 of 10
Page 375 of 382 Children’s Services budget and the allocation made for domiciliary care within the ESCAN service area.
4.6 Dependent upon demand and cost pressures that may increase unit costs under the DPS the service will need to ensure appropriate levels of budget resources are allocated to domiciliary care budgets. The Children’s Services budget will also be subject to the council’s annual budget setting process. These costs and budgets are also monitored as part of the council’s budget monitoring process.
5. Legal
5.1 The Council has statutory functions under the Children Act 1989, the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 and the Care Act 2014 which create powers and duties to make provisions to meet the needs of disabled children and young adults and their carers. This may include, in appropriate cases, domestic or domiciliary care.
5.2 Assessments of children’s needs are generally undertaken pursuant to Part III of the Children Act 1989 and in particular s17 however services which could be provided under that Act or the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970 are usually provided under the latter Act. The Local Authority is required to provide services designed to minimize the effect on a child of his/her disability and to give the opportunity to lead a life that was as normal as possible (para 6 of schedule 2 Children Act 1989).
5.3 Para 8 of schedule 2, Children Act 1989, enables the Council to make ‘home help’ services available to families of children in need. The Chronically Sick & Disabled Persons Act 1970 may require the local authority to provide ‘practical assistance’ within the home where it is satisfied that it is necessary to meet the needs of a disabled person.
5.4 The Care Act 2014, which came into effect in April 2015, requires the Council to undertake a child’s needs assessment in circumstances where the child is likely to have needs for care and support after becoming 18 and at a time it would be of a significant benefit to the child.
5.5 S.5 of the Care Act 2014 places a new general duty on the Council to promote the efficient and effective operation of a market in services for meeting care and support needs in its area. This is commonly known as ‘market shaping’ and ‘commissioning’. The Council must facilitate a local market that offers a diverse range of high quality and appropriate services. The proposals in this paper align with the Council’s general duty.
5.6 The Care Act 2014 also imposes a statutory duty on the Council to assess and meet any eligible needs of carers. S.10(3) of the 2014 Act defines a carer as ‘an adult who provides or intends to provide care for another adult’. S.63(6) of the 2014 Act defines a young carers as ‘a person who is under 18 who provides or intends to provide care for an adult’. Both definitions exclude situations where the carer is providing care under or by virtue of a contract or as voluntary work.
5.7 The duty to assess applies irrespective of the level of expected need. The duty to provide support for an identified need is determined by the eligibility criteria in regulation 3 of the Care and Support (Eligibility Criteria) Regulations 2014. This criterion reflects the approach applied to the eligibility of individual’s with care and support needs. The Page 4 of 10
Page 376 of 382 focus of the eligibility is on the impact of a carer’s need for support on their own wellbeing.
5.8 It is important to note that the duty of the Council to carers is determined by the ordinary residence of the person cared for rather than that of the carer. For example, if a carer lives in Norwich but the cared for person lives within the Borough, the legal duty to assess and determine eligible needs will rest upon the Council. Equally, it is important to direct those who live within the Borough but are caring for others who are not ordinarily resident within Ealing to the appropriate authority.
5.9 The DPS will enable the Council to call off contracts for Domiciliary Care services to meet its statutory duties and to ensure that the services best meet needs of service users.
5.10 The DPS will be procured in accordance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (as amended) and the Council’s Contract Procedure Rules.
5.11 The call offs from the DPS will be made in accordance with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (as amended) which require that all providers in a lot on the DPS are invited to take part in the mini competition and that the contract shall be awarded to the tenderer that submitted the best tender on the basis of the award criteria set out in the invitation to tender. The Light Touch Regime under the PCR 2015 which covers social and care services provides a number of flexibilities when awarding contracts including taking into account the following considerations ;
• The need to ensure quality, continuity, accessibility, affordability, availability and comprehensiveness of the services; • The specific needs of different categories of users, including disadvantaged and vulnerable groups; • The involvement and empowerment of users; and • Innovation
The Call Off rules have been devised taking into account these considerations to permit the Council to make call offs in amongst other thighs emergencies and to take into account the choice of service users
5.12 The Council’s Contract Procedure Rules also recognise that at times exceptions may be required. The CPR permits such exceptions to be granted in certain circumstances by the Executive Director of Corporate Resources or his authorised deputy.
6. Value for Money
6.1 Domiciliary Care services are provided based on the results of an assessment of need and reviewed on an ongoing basis.
6.2 All providers are required to be registered with the CQC (Care Quality Commission).
6.3 A fixed price range will be submitted by providers on application to join the DPS and agreed at start of the contract. Once the DPS has been established, all individual packages will be open to competitive tenders through a mini competition involving all approved providers and contracts will be awarded to providers on the basis of the award criteria set out in the invitation to tender.
Page 5 of 10
Page 377 of 382
7. Sustainability Impact Appraisal
Not applicable
8. Risk Management
8.1 As indicated above, the future demand for domiciliary care services will remain with a predicted increase of children and young people with challenging needs which is currently not met by the Council’s existing approved list.
8.2 To ensure service user needs are met, the Council will work with providers through user engagement, provider forums and development of specialist training made available to providers.
8.3 Recruitment and retention of staff is one of the key challenges faced by providers. The DPS will allow for the hourly charge to reviewed and agreed in line with National Living Wage and the London Living Wage.
9. Community Safety
Not applicable
10. Links to the 6 Priorities for the Borough
The procurement of Domiciliary Care services will provide care to children and young people with additional needs, supporting healthy and safe lives to children and young people and their families which link to the following priorities.
• safer • healthier • fairer • accessible
11. Equalities, Human Rights and Community Cohesion
A full Equalities Analysis Assessment (EAA) has been completed. The EAA will be made available on the Council website
12. Staffing/Workforce and Accommodation implications:
None
13. Property and Assets No Property Implications
Page 6 of 10
Page 378 of 382
14. Any other implications:
N/A
15. Consultation
• All current Domiciliary Care packages are reviewed and monitored by Social Workers. • Services and support for children with additional needs is considered under Ealing Service for Children with Disabilities Team. • Current providers both those on approved list and spot purchase providers on service delivery, challenges and future domiciliary care provision.
• Commercial and Procurement Unit
16. Timetable for Implementation
• The first round of the DPS will commence on the 1 st April 2017 for an initial term of 4- years.
17. Appendices
• Appendix 1- Providers applying to join the first round of the DPS.
18. Background Information
Consultation (Mandatory)
Name of Date Date response Comments appear consultee sent to received in paragraph: Post held consultee Internal Judith Finlay Executive Director
Children’s, Adults, and Public
Health
Andrew Reeve Finance Business Partner 09/2/2017 15/2/2017
Chris Hogan Interim Director of Children and Families
Cllr Rai Cabinet Member for: Children
Stephen Day Director of Adults Services
Page 7 of 10
Page 379 of 382 Courage Lawyer, Legal Contracts Emovon 09/02/17
Report History Decision type: Urgency item? Key decision No
Report no.: Danielle Grant-Vest: Children’s Commissioning [email protected] , 02088257238
Page 8 of 10
Page 380 of 382 Appendix 1: Providers applying to join the first round of the DPS – Go Live 1 st April 2017
• A total of 26 applications have been received at the end of Round 1 of the DPS. • The table below details the names of providers that have applied under each LOT. • 23 passed and 3 failed for reasons outlined in the table.
LOT2 Support for children with LOT1 Basic complex home care and needs and community challenging Provider QQ Results support behaviour Complete
Active Assistance - Commercial (Passed) y Complete
AHS Franchise Partners Ltd - Operations team (Passed) y Complete
Allfor Care - Care Manager y (Passed) y Complete
Allied Healthcare Group Ltd - Contracts y (Passed) y Amber Home Carers Ltd - Home Care Complete Y
Services (Passed) Y Complete
CAREMARK EALING - CAREMARK EALING y (Passed) y` Complete
Carers Trust Thames - HQ y (Passed) y
Complete (Failed) Only in process
Clarriots southwark - Domiciliary care of registering with CQC Missing PS and FoT
David Palfreman Associates - Business Complete Development ASIAN Peoples Disabilty y (Passed)
Alliance y Complete
De Vere Care - Contracts y (Passed) y Elite Specialist Care Limited - TENDER Complete Y
OPPORTUNITY MANAGER (Passed) Y Complete
Enterprise Care Support Ltd - care service y (Passed) Complete
Excelcare - Bid Department y (Passed) y Complete
h g care services - contracts y (Passed) y
Page 9 of 10
Page 381 of 382 Complete
Interserve Healthcare Ltd - Contracts (Passed) y Complete
Jays Homecare LTD - Director y (Passed) y Complete
Metro Homecare Ltd - Home Care Services y (Passed) y Complete
Oasis Care & Training Agency - Head Office y (Passed) y
Complete
Phoenix Healthcare & Recruitment - General (Passed) y
Priory Nursing & Homecare Ltd - Domiciliary Complete y care (Passed) y Complete
PULSE Healthcare Limited - Bid Team (Passed) y Complete (Failed)
Revive Care Service - Nursing Insufficent reference y Complete
Special People - Special People y (Passed) y
STAR NURSING AND CARE SERVICES - Complete
Procurement (Passed)
Complete
Support Direct Ltd - Management y (Passed) y
Page 10 of 10
Page 382 of 382