CAMBRIDGE COMMUNITY STADIUM FEASIBILITY STUDY A FINAL REPORT BY PMP APRIL 2008 CONTENTS Section Page ES.Executive summary...........................................................................................................i 1. Introduction and approach ................................................................................................ 1 2. Potential stadium partners ................................................................................................ 7 3. Site evaluation ................................................................................................................ 22 4. Supporting and enabling development ........................................................................... 56 5. Business planning - a financial overview ........................................................................ 78 6. Conclusions and next steps ............................................................................................ 95 APPENDICES A. Strategic review B. Detailed site evaluations C. List of consultees EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive summary Introduction and study context ES.1 PMP was commissioned in December 2007 by a public sector steering group to undertake a feasibility study in relation to a community stadium for Cambridge. ES.2 The requirement for a community stadium was previously identified in the Cambridge Sub-Regional Sports Facilities Strategy. It is believed that a community stadium would benefit the City by meeting the requirements of one or more of its major sports clubs and by providing supporting facilities which can generate wider benefits for local, sub-regional and regional communities. However, a vision for a community stadium that meets the needs of clubs and can act as a hub for the community has not previously been explored in detail. ES.3 The term ‘community stadium’ is typically used to reflect a stadium facility that delivers amenities and services to local communities beyond its core operations. This can encompass many different services and provisions. ES.4 The principles behind a community stadium reflect an aspiration to be at the centre of the local community, through, for example, the provision of sports participation and other community accessible activities and/ or local business engagement opportunities. A community stadium aims to be accessible to the communities it serves throughout the day and evening, on weekdays and weekends. This is markedly different from the typical sports stadium, which beyond its core operation, often provides very little community benefit. ES.5 The overarching aims for the study have been to identify the extent of the opportunity for a community stadium in Cambridge, what this might look like and which sites would be suitable for locating such a facility. More detailed objectives for the study have been to: • consider examples of existing community stadium facilities and identify areas of best practice amongst them • refine a vision for the stadium and identify the facilities it could offer to the community • identify critical success factors for the stadium development • identify potential locations for the scheme and provide a robust evaluation of key sites • develop high level financial projections for the stadium, including capital and revenue costs and potential funding streams. ES.6 In order to meet these objectives, our work to identify the feasibility of a community stadium has involved the following key elements: • consulting key stakeholders including a range of local public sector organisations and the City’s major clubs to establish interest in the scheme and identify potential partners to lead its delivery • undertaking an evaluation of a large number of sites to identify a shortlist of three site options for further consideration by partners Cambridge Community Stadium Page i A Report by PMP EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • undertaking an assessment of potential options for supporting and enabling development, reflecting the constraints and strengths of the short listed sites • developing high level business planning assumptions for the different site scenarios to identify the likely financial implications of the different potential schemes. Key findings ES.7 The key findings of this report relate to the following areas: • suitable club partners for the scheme • suitable sites to be considered in more detail • financial implications of delivering the community stadium. ES.8 These findings and key recommendations emerging from the study are summarised below. Club partners ES.9 At this stage it is believed that Cambridge United FC, Cambridge RUFC and Cambridge City FC are the most likely club partners for the scheme. Histon FC should also be considered in the future but do not have a pressing need to be included in the scheme or capital to invest in a stadium development. The rationale for continued discussion with Cambridge United FC, Cambridge RUFC and Cambridge City FC is summarised below. Cambridge United FC (CUFC) ES.10 CUFC is the only club in the area which has the scale of requirements to justify a 10,000 seat community stadium. It is recommended that it is engaged as a lead club partner to enable the delivery of the community stadium scheme. The club has stated its support for the concept of the community stadium and is likely to be able to contribute a significant capital sum to the scheme. The size of this sum will be subject to negotiations with Churchmanor Estates PLC. This organisation is a sister organisation of Bideawhile and leases the current ground to the club. Churchmanor has identified that it would re-provide a stadium for the club if it vacates its current site. Churchmanor also owns the ‘Milton’ site which is one of the three short listed sites from our site appraisal. Cambridge Rugby Union FC (CRUFC) ES.11 It is recommended that CRUFC is considered as a partner in the scheme alongside CUFC. This reflects that the clubs would be expected to work well together to maximise partnership opportunities and that no competitive tensions have been identified between the clubs. The current barrier to this combination is that CRUFC do not have a pressing need to leave their current ground. The key driver for the club to move would be promotion to National League 1 and the subsequent need to increase revenues to compete financially in that league as well as provide 2,500 seats to meet league regulations. CRUFC expect to be able to contribute capital to the scheme, but the scale of this investment requires further exploration based on the existing covenant with King’s College around the sale of its current site. The current understanding is that King’s College would re-provide the club’s existing facilities if it were to sell its current ground but the likely terms of any sale need further investigation with the club and the College. Overall, the club is interested in the stadium principle but can not fully commit to it at this stage. Cambridge Community Stadium Page ii A Report by PMP EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Cambridge City FC (CCFC) ES.12 The second potential partner club that could be part of the scheme alongside CUFC is CCFC. The lease on its current ground runs out in 2010 so it has an urgent need to locate to a new ground. However, CCFC, despite being only one league below CUFC, achieve much smaller attendances and would be expected to contribute less to the stadium in terms of match receipts and supplementary spend. There are also some tensions between the clubs which may make negotiating a partnership agreement more difficult than with other potential partners, although these are not insurmountable. However, CCFC does expect to be able to contribute a capital sum to the scheme as a result of the sale of their existing site1. ES.13 Therefore the success of a partnership between CUFC and CCFC is likely to depend on the structure of the financial package that can be agreed (in light of any further funding from grants or public sector partners). In headline terms, if CUFC was able to work with Churchmanor to part or fully deliver the scheme itself, then it would most likely need a clear financial driver to partner with CCFC. Subject to a decision to progress with the stadium project, further engagement with all potential club partners will be necessary to address these funding and partnership issues. Development sites ES.14 Study conclusions in relation to our appraisal of suitable sites in the Cambridge sub- region reflect that there are three sites which have been short listed for further consideration for a community stadium site. These options provide different propositions for delivering the scheme and all of these sites have specific strengths and potential barriers to delivery. Of the three short listed sites there is no clear favourite at this stage. This reflects that there are potential barriers to delivery on all three sites and further work is required by project partners to identify whether these barriers can be overcome. The benefits of, and potential barriers to, the delivery of the three short listed sites are listed below. Milton site ES.15 This site is located adjacent to Milton and is accessible as a result of its position close to a Park & Ride site, the ring road and A10. It is owned by Churchmanor Estates PLC which is willing to develop the land for use as a stadium in the near future as it has an interest in CUFC’s current Abbey Stadium site. ES.16 The key barrier to development of this site is its location within the Green Belt and restrictions on development at present. Churchmanor