TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL
PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
AUGUST 2010
Integrity, Innovation, Inspiration
1-2 Frecheville Court off Knowsley Street Bury BL9 0UF T 0161 764 7040 F 0161 764 7490 E [email protected] www.kkp.co.uk
Quality assurance Name Date Report origination H. Jones Feb 2010 Quality control C Fallon Feb 2010 Final approval C Fallon August 2010
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
CONTENTS GLOSSARY...... 5 PART 1: INTRODUCTION ...... 6 Study limitations...... 8 PART 2: CONTEXT...... 9 Introduction ...... 9 National context ...... 9 Regional context ...... 13 Local context...... 13 PART 3: PLAYING PITCH ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY...... 27 Playing Pitch Model (PPM) ...... 27 PART 4: GENERAL SPORTS ISSUES...... 31 Introduction ...... 31 PART 5: FOOTBALL ...... 35 Introduction ...... 35 Questionnaire results ...... 35 Current provision...... 35 Accessibility ...... 40 Leagues ...... 40 Semi professional clubs ...... 41 Development priorities and opportunities...... 42 Key issues for football...... 45 ‘Shortfall, adequacy and requirement’ ...... 59 Football summary ...... 63 PART 6: CRICKET ...... 64 Introduction ...... 64 Current provision...... 64 Development priorities and opportunities...... 66 Key Issues for cricket...... 69 ‘Shortfall, adequacy and requirement ’ ...... 73 Cricket summary ...... 75 PART 7: RUGBY ...... 76 Introduction ...... 76 Current provision...... 76 Development priorities and opportunities...... 78 Key issues for rugby ...... 80 Provision of rugby pitch sites assessed by quality and capacity...... 83 ‘Shortfall, adequacy and requirement ’ ...... 85 Rugby union summary ...... 87 PART 8: HOCKEY...... 88 Introduction ...... 88 Current provision...... 88 Club summary...... 89 Junior development...... 89 Key issues for hockey ...... 89
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 3
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 9: BOWLS ...... 91 Introduction ...... 91 Current provision...... 91 Bowls summary...... 99 PART 10: GOLF ...... 100 Current provision...... 101 Summary of club consultation for golf...... 102 Development...... 104 Key issues for golf...... 104 Golf summary...... 105 PART 11: OTHER SPORTS...... 106 11.1 Lacrosse ...... 106 Lacrosse summary...... 107 11.2 Athletics ...... 107 Athletics summary...... 109 11.3 Tennis ...... 109 Tennis summary ...... 112 11.4 Cycling ...... 113 PART 12: EDUCATION PROVISION...... 114 Introduction ...... 114 Primary schools ...... 116 Secondary schools...... 117 PART 13: INDOOR SPORTS ASSESSMENT ...... 127 Introduction ...... 127 Methodology ...... 127 Current provision...... 128 Local needs...... 129 Street survey...... 129 Tameside leisure centre survey ...... 133 Netball...... 140 Volleyball...... 142 Basketball ...... 142 Badminton...... 142 Sports halls ...... 143 Swimming pools...... 149 Health and Fitness provision...... 152 APPENDICES ...... 155 Appendix 1: Consultee list ...... 155 Appendix 2: site assessment matrix used by TMBC...... 159 Appendix 3: Towards a Level Playing Field outdoor sports facility proformas ...... 160 Appendix 4: Key characteristics of Sport England Segmentations ...... 162
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 4
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
GLOSSARY
KKP Knight Kavanagh & Page GIS Geographical Information System TMBC Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council PPM Playing Pitch Methodology LDF Local Development Framework PPG17 Planning Policy Guidance Note 17 STP Synthetic turf pitch CCPR Central Council of Physical Recreation FA Football Association ECB England Cricket Board RFU Rugby Football Union SPAA Tameside Sport & Physical Activity Alliance NGB National governing body of sport PE Physical education CIF Community Investment Fund LAA Local area agreement BSF Building Schools for the Future AP Active People Survey KPI Key performance indicator TGR Team generation rate FC Football club MFA Manchester Football Association CFA Cheshire Football Association TSFL Tameside Sunday Football League 3G Third generation turf pitch FDM Football Development Manager LCB Lancashire Cricket Board CCB Cheshire Cricket Board CC Cricket club LRFU Lancashire Rugby Football Union RFC Rugby football club EH England Hockey HLF Heritage Lottery Fund BC Bowls club GMBA Greater Manchester Crown Green Bowling Association SSP School Sports Partnership MUGA Multi use games area EA England Athletics EAC East Cheshire Harriers & Tameside Athletics Club LTA Lawn Tennis Association TDC Tennis Development Coach TC Tennis club DCSF Department for Children, Schools and Families DCMS Department for Culture, Media and Sport FE Further education
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 5
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 1: INTRODUCTION
This is the Playing Pitch Assessment Report prepared by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (KKP). It focuses on reporting the findings of the extensive research, consultation, site assessment, data analysis and GIS mapping work to deliver:
An analysis of TMBC’s qualitative site visits. A summary of consultation with a variety of stakeholders, including Tameside Borough Council (TMBC) officers, governing bodies and clubs. Supply and demand analysis using the Playing Pitch Methodology (PPM) as outlined in Towards a Level Playing Field1.
This factual report provides an audit based assessment of both quantitative and qualitative outdoor and indoor sports facilities in accordance with Planning Policy Guidance Note 17 and the Companion Guide entitled “Assessing Needs and Opportunities” published in September 2002. The specific objectives of this audit and assessment are to provide:
An audit of existing provision of different types of outdoor and indoor facilities detailing quantity, quality, accessibility and wider value to the community. An accurate assessment of supply and demand for sport facilities. A robust evidence base to enable TMBC to develop planning policies as part of the Local Development Framework (LDF) and other local development documents.
This report incorporates an assessment of outdoor and indoor sports facilities in accordance with methodologies provided by Sport England. The audit appertaining to the study was collated by TMBC and categorised as follows:
Outdoor sport/recreation (category 5). Indoor sports facility (category 9). Indoor community facility (category 10).
1 Sport England believes that to ensure that informed decisions can be made by local authorities on the future of a playing field, that all local authorities within England should have an up to date playing pitch strategy, either as a stand alone document or forming part of a wider open space strategy. This is in line with guidance contained within PPG 17, and not only seeks to ensure that an assessment of need is carried out, but also that a strategy is put in place in terms of improving accessibility and quality of pitches. Sport England has produced guidance on the undertaking of playing pitch strategies in Towards a level playing field and provided tools to help in the accompanying electronic toolkit.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 6
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
It provides a quantitative summary for the provision of sports facilities in Tameside and as such is complimentary and adds value to other sports related plans such as the Sport Development Service Action Plan or the LDF. As recommended within Towards a Level Playing Field, we have broken down the audit to provide a summary of the following facilities:
Football pitches. Cricket pitches. Rugby pitches. Hockey pitches. Athletics tracks. Bowling greens. Tennis courts. Golf courses. Sports halls/community halls. Swimming pools. Health and fitness provision.
The report is therefore structured as follows:
Part 4: General sport issues. Part 5: Football. Part 6: Cricket. Part 7: Rugby union. Part 8: Hockey. Part 9: Bowls. Part 10: Golf. Part 11: Other non pitch sports (including equestrian and cycling). Part 12: Education provision. Part 13: Indoor sports facilities.
Each section provides a quantitative summary of provision and a map showing the distribution of facilities. It also provides information about the availability of facilities to/for the local community and, the governing body of each sport and regional strategic plans (where they exist). Local league details are provided, where possible, in order to outline the competitive structure for each sport. The findings of club consultation and key issues for each sport are summarised.
The study also incorporates an assessment of open spaces considering the supply and demand issues for provision in Tameside. This can be found separately in a report called ‘Open Space Assessment’.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 7
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Study limitations
Certain limitations apply to the findings and recommendations contained within the assessment of sport and recreation facilities. These relate primarily to baseline information such as the quantitative audit, mapping and datasets and are identified as follows:
Site assessment sheets used for pitch quality assessments excluded questions regarding grass cover, length of grass, size of pitch, goal posts or presence of training areas. However, the scores were amended to reflect this. The assessment matrix used did not fully align with the assessment sheet recommended in Towards a Level Playing Field. Therefore, a method of best fit was used. Changing room quality assessments were not carried out. Therefore, playing pitch capacity in relation to the number of actual changing rooms is not assessed. It was necessary to make assumptions regarding the size of football pitches where it was not specified. The most frequent assumption was that football pitches on primary/junior school sites were junior sized. Playing pitches not assessed were assumed to be average in quality, unless consultation suggested otherwise. This was particularly true for school sites. An assumption was made by TMBC that where a private cricket site is identified, it contains one cricket pitch. The audit does not make a distinction regarding the number/type of hard court markings on school sites i.e. tennis and netball courts. The audit does not identify the size and type of facilities contained within an indoor sports facility. Therefore, KKP has used Active Places Power to further interpret and identify indoor sports facilities by type i.e. swimming pools and sports halls. Quality scores for indoor sports provision were given to a facility as a whole and not attributed to individual facilities i.e. the swimming pool or sports hall.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 8
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 2: CONTEXT
Introduction
This section of the assessment report is the Playing Pitch Assessment and covers outdoor sports facilities. It predominately focuses on reporting the findings of the extensive research, consultation, site assessment, data analysis and GIS mapping work. It does not, at this stage, incorporate provision standards or site-specific recommendations (in relation to meeting deficiencies and dealing with surpluses). Once the facts outlined in this report (including site information, number of teams etc.) have been agreed, a strategy and action plan will be developed.
National context
Consideration of the national context is paramount. The following section outlines planning policy pertaining to the study.
Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) 17
PPG17 defines outdoor sports facilities as those ‘with either natural or artificial surfaces’, and includes both public and privately owned facilities. It therefore includes:
Sports pitches. Synthetic turf pitches (STPs). School and educational institution playing fields.
PPG17 recognises the value of outdoor sports facilities along with other open spaces in delivering government targets concerned with raising levels of physical activity through:
Supporting an urban renaissance. Supporting rural renewal. Promotion of social inclusion and community cohesion. (Enhancing) health and well being. Promoting more sustainable development.
Assessing Needs & Opportunities: A Companion Guide to PPG 17
The Companion Guide states that the long term outcomes of a PPG17 study include:
Networks of accessible high quality open spaces, sport and recreation facilities, in both urban and rural areas, which meet the needs of residents and visitors and which are fit for purpose and economically and environmentally sustainable. An appropriate balance between new provision and the enhancement of existing provision. Clarity and reasonable certainty for developers and landowners in relation to the requirements and expectations of local planning authorities in respect of open space, sport and recreation provision.
In order to deliver these outcomes, each local authority needs to identify local needs and opportunities and develop and apply provision standards in a way, which is equitable to both developers and local communities.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 9
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
The Companion Guide outlines a five-step approach to deliver the aims:
Step 1: Identifying local needs. Step 2: Auditing local provision. Step 3: Setting provision standards. Step 4: Applying provision standards. Step 5: Drafting policies.
Towards a Level Playing Field
The aims and objectives outlined in Planning Policy Guidance 17 (PPG 17) and the Companion Guide are reiterated in the Sport England Playing Pitch Strategy Methodology, ‘Towards a Level Playing Field’ (February 2003).
It should be noted that ‘Towards a Level Playing Field’ only deals with the assessment of playing pitch provision and does not cover assessments for other outdoor sports facilities. However, the principles and basic methodology can be applied to the assessment of other sports.
Sport England strongly recommends that each local authority has an up to date playing pitch assessment and strategy (which follows). The benefits of having a playing pitch strategy are identified as follows:
Corporate and strategic It ensures a strategic approach to playing pitch provision. It provides robust evidence for capital funding for sports pitch improvement (to support applications to agencies such as the Football Foundation, Heritage Lottery Fund, Sport England and the New Opportunities Fund). It helps deliver Government policies. It helps demonstrate the value of leisure services. It improves understanding of the quality and standard of sports pitches and associated changing (and other ancillary) facilities and the extent to which they encourage and enable more people to take part and enjoy pitch sports. It can assist in bringing specific sites back into active use and as a framework to assess sports club requests for improved sites and facilities. It can guide sports pitch provision and improvements through the Building Schools for the Future and Primary Capital programmes and regeneration schemes. Operational It can result in more efficient use of resources. Quality of provision can be enhanced. Sports development It helps identify where community use of school sports pitches is most needed. It provides better information to residents and other users of sports pitches. It promotes sports development and can help unlock latent demand.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 10
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Planning It is one of the basic tools for implementing PPG17, particularly in relation to establishing a local standard for sport pitch provision. It allows the presentation of a coherent, up to date assessment and strategy to Sport England in its role as statutory consultee – when the planning authority is faced with development proposals that affect sports pitches. It provides a basis for establishing the requirement for new pitches or improvements to the quality of existing pitch sites that arise from new housing developments and the use of Section 106 Agreements. It is one of the best tools to justify protection of pitches in the face of rising development pressure on pitch sites for alternative uses, particularly with respect to new housing in order to meet targets. It provides an important evidence base, which is part of a holistic approach to open space improvement and protection to support the Local Development Framework including local authorities’ emerging core strategies. It establishes a policy framework against which to justify existing or new recreation allocations for sports pitches/other leisure activities.
The approach and guidance outlined in ‘Towards A Level Playing Field’ are fully endorsed by Sport England and the Central Council for Physical Recreation (CCPR) as the appropriate methodology to provide detailed local assessments of playing pitch requirements and, as such, have been used in this study. Details of the methodology are outlined later in this document.
National Game Strategy (2007-2012)
The Football Association’s (FA) National Game Strategy provides a strategic framework that sets out the key priorities, expenditure proposals and targets for the national game over the six year period.
The main issues facing grassroots football are identified as:
Growth and retention (young players). Growth and retention (adult players). Football for All. Raising standards and behaviour. Player development. Running the game. Football work force. Facilities. Partnerships and investment. Promotion.
The National Game Strategy reinforces the urgent need to provide affordable, new and improved facilities in schools, clubs and on local authority sites.
Over 75% of football is played on public sector facilities rather than in private members’ clubs. The leisure budgets of most local authorities have been reduced over recent years as priorities have been in other sectors. This has resulted in decaying facilities that do not serve the community and act as a disincentive to play football. The loss of playing fields has also been well documented and adds to the pressure on the remaining facilities to cope with the demand, especially in inner city and urban areas.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 11
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
The growth of the commercial sector in developing custom built 5-a-side facilities has changed the overall environment. High quality, modern facilities provided by Powerleague, Goals, JJB (now DW) and playfootball.net for example, have added new opportunities to participate and prompted a significant growth in the number of 5-a-side teams in recent years.
Building Partnerships: Cricket's strategic plan 2005-2009 - from playground to test arena
In 2008 England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) announced a £30million investment in facilities and in club cricket, the most significant injection of funding ever in cricket in England and Wales. The whole of the ECB development team, at a national, regional and county level is committed to making a difference to the game at all levels and building strong partnerships within and outside the game.
Building Partnerships is the England and Wales Cricket Board’s blueprint for cricket’s continued success and development over a four-year period (which is currently due for renewal).
Building Partnerships, which maintains the ECB’s theme of ‘From playground to Test arena’, is built on four key pillars:
Effective leadership and governance. Vibrant domestic game. Enthusing participation and following especially among young people. Successful England teams.
2005/06 - 2012/13 RFU Strategic Plan
The Rugby Football Union (RFU) Management Board has set out eight key themes to be incorporated in the strategic plan review process. These eight themes are as follows:
1. The appropriateness of the ‘seamless game’; 2. The development of English Qualified Players; 3. The roles and responsibilities of county boards and clubs in the game; 4. Development of unified structures and programmes for the game; 5. Develop IT systems to measure performance; 6. Maintain the ethos and culture of the game; 7. Ensure a ‘growth game’; 8. Take a leading role in the development of the game worldwide.
Community Rugby’s role is to promote and develop the game within the community by encouraging and supporting all those who want to participate by playing, coaching, refereeing, administrating or spectating.
The RFU Strategic Plan seeks to ensure that priorities are focused upon that will enable the Community game to grow, generate lifelong participation and create sustainable rugby clubs.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 12
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Regional context
New Generation (2005 – 2009)
This document highlights the key aims for the Greater Manchester Sport, including Tameside. The vision was to “create a generation of physically active people”. The success of the Strategy will be achieved through five themes:
Identifying, brokering and strengthening strategic links between organisations which may use sport and physical activity to meet some or all of their objectives. Improving/expanding the sport and physical activity infrastructure - clubs, links with education, the provision of and access to facilities, the appropriate deployment of NGB plans and related work with other agencies to achieve this. Improving the workforce to increase the number, quality and effectiveness of coaches, teachers, volunteers and professional staff needed to work with, support and motivate individuals as they engage in sport and physical activity. Marketing and communication - improving the methods and effectiveness of communicating information between partner agencies, and improving the marketing and communication of opportunities and successes to target audiences. Improving impact measurement to generate evidence, identify the strengths and weaknesses of existing work and the present infrastructure, and to enable intelligent decisions to be made based on appropriate data and evidence.
Long term success to reach both the internally designed outcomes, and ultimately the government’s intended targets for physical activity levels in the whole population by 2020 will only be achieved if young people grow up with the physical activity /sport habit. The Strategy is designed to support a cultural change in the way future generations will grow up so that they are more likely to see sport and physical activity as a natural and essential part of their lives. As the single system for sport in Greater Manchester is developed, the reach and impact of this strategy will extend to meet the needs of all people to ensure they stay active and motivate others to do so.
Local context
Sports Development
TMBC Sports Development Team operates 14 sports specific development groups, including cricket, girls’ football and cycling. The groups vary in size but all meet monthly and are attended by representatives from schools, local clubs, the schools association and the development officers from both the relevant governing bodies. Each group has developed an action plan which centres on the following areas (details of which can be found in the sports specific sections):
Focus clubs and community clusters. Affiliated club services. Workforce development. Player/talent identification and development. Competition development. Facility development.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 13
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
TMBC also operates a ‘club forum’ which was established in 2006. Each development group feeds into the forum. It allows the Sports Development Team to communicate with clubs regarding priority areas, funding opportunities, success stories etc. The forum meets every three months and each development group is asked to submit information regarding best practice and progress reports to create an action plan. This encourages each development group to continually work with its action plan and communicate well with the respective clubs.
TMBC Sports Development Team is working to establish a club ‘market night’ in order to better coordinate communication with all clubs/sports. It is hoped that this will take place three times a year and will provide an opportunity for a range of clubs/sports to gain information about things such as X clubs (an extra-curricular sports club), coach education, volunteer recruitment and funding opportunities.
There is also a sports development fund which has a budget of approximately £200,000 per year, which is used to assist voluntary clubs in sports and facility development. TMBC is amending the criteria for award to align more closely with the Tameside Sport & Physical Activity Alliance (SPAA). However, priorities are likely to remain around facility development, sports development and team generation. TMBC also provides support for the six semi professional football teams in the area.
Tameside Talent Strategy
TMBC has a talent strategy in place to help ensure that talented athletes have an effective pathway for development. TMBC officers/coaches work with every school in Tameside, to identify students with potential through multi skills clubs/festivals. It is then possible for talented students to attend regional festivals and obtain invitations to train with various clubs in the area. The key aims of the talent strategy are to ensure talented performers and leaders:
Are identified through consistent and systematic processes. Have the opportunity to be nurtured. Have the opportunity to participate in relevant activities. Have the opportunity to succeed.
The result of these interventions will be a pathway which young people can engage at year three, or at any subsequent point, depending on their abilities and skills. The pathway will be accessible to all talented young people and will provide the mechanism for delivering the strategy aims. The Strategy will be delivered through both the existing sports development networks of Tameside Sports Development Unit, sports clubs, national governing bodies of sport (NGBs) and also through the Tameside sports college/school sports partnership network. The objectives that will help make the talent pathways successful include:
To identify talented pupils in PE and sport based on current research and models of best practice. To establish high quality, multi-skilled clubs in all Tameside’s primary schools. To provide opportunities for year three and four pupils to showcase and assess their skills and abilities. To develop and implement a talented performer coaching programme at year four. To run four multi-skill academies accessible to the 100 most talented year five and six Tameside pupils.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 14
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
To run a talent camp for 24 of the most talented year five and six performers. To introduce a programme of sports leadership at Key Stage 3 and continue to develop Key Stage 4 leadership programmes. To run a series of sport specific master classes in a range of sports for 20-30 year seven and eight pupils per SSP. To run a Borough talent camp for Tameside's 20 most talented Key Stage 4 young leaders. To implement and make accessible the JAE programme to relevant talented young people between year seven and eleven. To develop and deliver a direct mentoring scheme for selected talented pupils. To develop a system for identifying talented performers with disabilities and provide them with opportunities to progress.
Sport and Physical Activity Alliance (SPAA)
TMBC has formed a SPAA, which is in its second year. It brings together key representatives and advocates for sport and physical activity to promote the value of healthy lifestyles and offer a co-ordinated approach across Tameside. All local authorities in Greater Manchester have some form of SPAA, many of which are driven through the Sport England Community Investment Fund (CIF). The Tameside SPAA employs four SPAA officers to deliver activities; the venues used for the activities vary in order to ensure that as much of the community as possible are able to access provision.
In order to benefit from the support of Sport England and other national agencies, the SPAA has adopted actions that are seen to directly increase the percentage of adults participating on a regular basis. The Tameside SPAA has a particular focus on the following groups of people:
Young adults 16 to 19 years. Teenage girls aged 14 to 16 years. Attracting young adults ‘Back to Activity’. Family focus activities.
The SPAA has developed a delivery plan, which includes the following objectives to meet the overall aim of increasing participation in sport and physical activity, and thereby improving the health of the Borough:
Positive measures to tackle obesity and/or poor health of young people and adults through involvement in physical activities. To provide new opportunities for young people and adults aged 14 to 19 years. To establish and support a workforce of paid and voluntary qualified local people. To improve the quality of all sports and physical activity providers and develop stronger links between partners. To provide a range of activities at one site and/or at same time in order to attract family involvement in sports. To develop a ‘Back To Active Sport’ scheme in partnership with NGB’s to attract adults aged 18 + back into regular activity and club sport. To provide and develop sport and physical activities in areas of Tameside identified as in need of priority and disadvantaged. To develop a range of opportunities for referred individuals using sport as a tool for engagement.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 15
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
To report to the SPAA Executive Group on the progress of key strategies that are not fully covered in the Delivery Plan. Improve the number, quality and accessibility of indoor and outdoor sport and active recreation facilities. Encourage major employers in Tameside to offer easily accessed physical activities for their workforce. Develop accessibility and participation in active transport for both children and adults.
Get Active, Be Healthy, Enjoy and Achieve – a sport and physical activity strategy for Tameside 2010 – 2020. Draft 1.6
The strategy aligns itself with the Tameside Sustainable Community Strategy 2009-19. The priorities and recommendations contained in the Strategy will result in a refresh of the SPAA delivery plan and monitoring of progress will be carried out through the SPAA. The Strategy holds the following vision:
To make Tameside an active place by supporting inactive people to start becoming more active, and by creating accessible opportunities for all to stay active and succeed through the achievement of personal goals.
The Strategy is also working to five strategic aims:
Raise awareness of the benefits of sport and physical activity to improve health and well-being. Ensure all Tameside residents have access to, and the opportunity to become active in schools, sports clubs and community settings. Continue to increase participation for adults aged 16+ and provide a broad “five hour offer” for all young people to participate in school and community sport and physical activity. Focus support for those who are least active, to become active, and thereby achieve a proportionally greater increase in participation by groups experiencing health inequalities. Continue to develop and achieve true multi agency approach to the research, planning, delivery and monitoring of sport and physical activity.
The Strategy will impact on a number of National Indicators (NI) and Local Area Agreements (LAAs), including NI8 (adult participation in sport 1% year on year increase), NI55 and NI56 (reducing obesity in primary and year 6 school children). Aspirations for the Strategy regarding facilities include:
High quality club facilities and clubs accessing the best school/community facilities. Designated performance clubs, centres of excellence and feeder clubs. Greater integration of disability provision. Use of a wide range of facilities and environments, including parks. Development of a Facility Development Strategy which will focus on: Sustainable facility development based on a detailed needs assessment and developer contributions. Greater representative community use of facilities and use by priority groups. BSF developments prioritising sport and physical activity for school and community use. Improved access to facilities by walking, cycling and public transport.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 16
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Environmental developments to promote physical activity, including improved pedestrian and cycling infrastructure.
The Principles of Delivery of the Strategy will focus on behaviour and lifestyle change followed by personal best/achievement, through the provision of opportunity, access and motivation to take part in sport and physical activity.
Sport England: Active People
The Active People Survey is conducted across every local authority in England and is the largest ever survey of sport and active recreation to be undertaken in Europe. The first year of the survey, Active People Survey 1 (APS1), was conducted between October 2005 and October 2006. A total of 363,724 adults living in England took part in Active People Survey 1. Active People Survey 2 (APS2), the second year of the survey, was conducted between October 2007 and October 2008. A total of 191,325 adults living in England took part in the survey. The survey is now a continuous annual survey, with Active People Survey 3 starting in October 2008 and running until Oct 2009, at which point Active People Survey 4 will commence.
Each survey gathers data on the type, duration and intensity of people's participation in different types of sport and active recreation and now (as of APS2) cultural participation, as well as information about volunteering, club membership, tuition from an instructor or coach, participation in competitive sport and satisfaction with local sports provision.
Nationally, APS2 results highlight:
Over two million adults in England (age 16 and over) volunteer in sport for at least one hour a week. This has increased by 125,000 between 2005/6 and 2007/8 (from 1.92 million adults to 2.04 million adults). There has been no change in the percentage of the adult population who receive tuition between 2005/6 and 2007/8. Between 2005/6 and 2007/8 there has been a statistically significant decrease in the percentage of the adult population that take part in organised competition, and the percentage of the adult population that are members of a club where they play sport. Satisfaction with local sports provision has significantly declined from 2005/6 to 2007/8. Football participation (indoor and outdoor) has grown from 2.91 million adults (7.1%) to 3.12 million adults (7.6%), an increase of 232,000 participants. Athletics participation has grown by 460,000 participants, from 2.04 million adult participants (5.0%) to 2.50 million adults (6.0%). This includes athletics track/field, running and jogging. Participation in golf has increased from 1.46 million adults (3.6%) to 1.54 million adults (3.7%), an increase of 87,000 participants.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 17
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Table 4.1 below shows the APS1 and 2 survey results for the Tameside in comparison to England and Sport England Region of the North West; as well as those for the nearest neighbours.1 The nearest neighbours are not geographic neighbours, but those which are the closet to Tameside in terms of socio-demographics. This type of comparison has been developed to aid local authorities in comparative and benchmarking exercises, the models use a wide range of socio-economic indicators upon which the specific family group (nearest neighbours) is calculated.
AP1 found that 17.5% of those people surveyed in Tameside participated in sport at least three days a week for 30 minutes at a moderate level, which places the local authority in the lower 25% of national participation; and below the national average (21%). This increased marginally to 18.8% following APS2.
Of those surveyed, over two thirds (67.9%) of people from Tameside were satisfied with local sports provision (APS1) which is just below the national average (69.5%) but similar to the comparable areas. However, APS2 found that the satisfaction levels decreased marginally in Tameside (65%), but has decreased in most of the comparable areas. The community consultation, as discussed later in the report, helps to shed some light on the causes of this comparable dissatisfaction.
Table 2.4: Summary of Active People Survey results by key performance indicator (KPI)
KPI National North Wigan Bolton Barnsley Tameside (NAT) West (LA) (LA) (LA) (LA) (REG) KPI 1 - At APS 21.00 20.60 21.19 18.29 18.98 17.51 least 3 days 1 a week x 30 APS minutes % 21.32 21.29 20.10 18.78 19.75 18.78 2 moderate APS participation 21.64 21.40 20.40 22.00 20.80 19.90 (all adults) 3 KPI 2 - At APS 4.71 4.55 4.38 2.76 3.25 4.63 least 1 hour a 1 week APS volunteering % 4.93 5.02 6.58 6.27 3.22 4.16 2 to support APS sport (all 4.72 4.80 5.60 4.30 3.00 5.10 adults) 3 APS 25.11 24.85 24.02 22.03 19.12 24.27 1 KPI 3 - Club APS member (all % 24.73 24.19 21.81 25.04 20.00 20.49 2 adults) APS 24.13 24.20 24.00 22.00 19.10 24.30 3
1 According to www.cipfastats.net Tameside’s top three nearest neighbours are Bolton, Wigan, and Barnsley.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 18
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
KPI National North Wigan Bolton Barnsley Tameside (NAT) West (LA) (LA) (LA) (LA) (REG) KPI 4 - APS 18.02 16.37 15.38 14.01 12.90 18.19 Received 1 tuition from APS an instructor 18.14 16.50 13.44 16.84 13.23 13.62 2 % or coach in last 12 APS 17.55 15.90 15.40 15.50 12.80 12.20 months (all 3 adults) KPI 5 - APS 14.98 14.50 13.90 12.47 9.08 13.91 Taken part in 1 organised APS competitive % 14.65 14.54 13.60 14.11 11.72 10.55 2 sport in last APS 12 months 14.40 14.20 11.90 15.80 10.00 10.80 (all adults) 3 APS KPI 6 - 69.53 70.12 68.63 67.84 66.03 67.90 Satisfaction 1 with local APS % 66.65 66.51 68.34 67.24 69.46 65.00 sports 2 provision (all APS adults) 68.41 68.10 71.20 65.00 65.40 67.50 3
The APD also illustrates the 'expected' participation rate. This means that a broad range of socio-demographic variables are taken into account and allowed for. This information can enable those developing and promoting sport locally to assess their relative levels of participation compared with what might be expected. By doing so it provides an opportunity to identify areas delivering levels of participation above what would be expected and to learn from their experience. Local authority areas can be assessed in three different ways, as shown in figure 2.1 below:
According to the actual sport participation rates (blue and red bars). According to the expected sport participation rates (yellow bars). This is the sport participation rate a local authority area is expected to achieve, given its socio- economic profile, based on 2005/06 data. In this way for example, high income areas (positive influence) might be expected to have higher sport participation than low income areas. According to the variation between the actual and expected sport participation rates (pale blue bars).
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 19
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Figure 2.1: Expected versus actual participation
Participation forecasting
25.00%
19.75% 19.73% 19.58% 20.00% 18.38%
15.00%
10.00%
5.00% 1.46% 0.61% 0.00% Barnsley Bolton Wigan Tameside -1.47% -2.08% -5.00% Local authority
AP1 actual participation AP2 actual participation Expected participation Difference (AP1 vs Expected participation)
Figure 2.1 above shows that Tameside has a participation level which is below the expected level by more than 2% (APS1), which decreases to 0.8% for APS2, which shows a level of improvement in participation. Both Barnsley and Wigan exceed their expected levels of participation. This means that the Tameside should not only continue with current initiatives/programmes but also build on current delivery to drive up participation.
Market segmentation
Sport England has also developed a segmentation model with 19 ‘sporting’ segments to help better understand attitudes, motivations and perceived barriers to participation.
Knowing which segment is most dominant in the local population is important as it can help direct provision and programming for sport. For example, whilst the needs of the smaller segments should not be ignored, it may be useful for TMBC to know the sports enjoyed by the largest proportion of the population. The segmentation may also be able to assist partners to make tailored interventions, communicate more effectively with target market(s) and to better understand participation in the context of life stage and lifecycles. Those segments found to be most dominant in Tameside are shown in table 2.5 below.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 20
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Table 2.5: Market segmentation results for Tameside
Segment label Segment description % Tameside % Nationally Generally have the lowest participation rates of the 19 segments. Poor health and disability are major inhibitors. Participation Elsie and Arnold – occurs mainly in low intensity retirement home 11.6 8.3 activities. Safer neighbourhoods or singles people to go with would encourage participation. Organised, low-impact, low intensity events would be welcomed. Enjoys participating in a number of activities; likely to be a member of fitness/sports clubs. Motivated by meeting friends, taking the children, Philip – comfortable improving performance and 8.3 7.8 mid life male enjoyment. Help with childcare may encourage this type to participate more although lack of time is a significant factor. An active type that primarily enjoys exercise classes that they can go to with friends. Swimming is popular, as is going to the gym, but combat Chloe - fitness class sports do not tend appeal. Primary 7.8 6.9 friends motivation is to lose weight and keep fit. Tend to exercise with people. They would exercise more if they had more free time, people to go with, or facilities were open longer
Elsie and Arnold is the market segment with the highest proportion of Tameside’s population (11.6%). The male market segment with the greatest proportion (8.5%) of the Tameside population is “Philip”, a comfortable, mid-life male. The female market segment with the greatest proportion (6.5%) of the Tameside population is “Chloe”, someone who has fitness class friends. “Norma”, a later life lady is the female market segment with the lowest proportion (2.4%) of Tameside’s population. “Ralph and Phyllis”, comfortable retired couples, is the market segment with the lowest proportion (1.02%) of Tameside’s population.
This means that whilst provision for “Norma” and “Ralph and Phyllis” should not be ignored, the greatest proportion of residents would benefit from initiatives that appeal to the larger market segments, such as “Elsie and Arnold”: walking, bowls, dancing, and low-impact exercises, or “Chloe” and “Phillip”; sports such as netball, swimming, tennis, aqua aerobics, cricket, golf, cycling, squash, or football.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 21
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Clubmark
‘Playing to Win’ is the Government’s plan to get more people participating simply for the ‘love of sport’. Its stated vision is to give more people of all ages the opportunity to participate in high quality competitive sport through developing an integrated and sustainable sporting system which will nurture and develop sporting talent, underpinned by a high quality club and competition structure.
Sports clubs, and, in particular, Clubmark clubs directly support this aim for young people. Clubmark accredited clubs are externally assessed to ensure they achieve minimum operating standards, regardless of the NGB to which they affiliate. Evidence collected independently of NGBs suggests that they have, over the past two years, increased junior participation, raised the number of active, qualified coaches and improved levels of coach qualification, thus making them, in their own view and that of the evaluators, more effective and sustainable community sports clubs. Tameside has several Clubmark clubs plus a further 14 ‘working towards’ their accreditation. Table 2.6 shows the status of clubs in Tameside that use sport and recreation facilities in Tameside:
Table 2.6: Clubmark status in Tameside
Sport type Club name Status Athletics East Cheshire Harriers & Tameside AC Accredited Basketball Tameside Area Accredited Cricket Hyde CC, Cheshire Accredited Cricket Newton CC, Cheshire Accredited Cricket Droylsden CC Accredited Cricket Mottram CC Accredited Cricket Stalybridge St Pauls CC Accredited Cricket Denton St Lawrence CC Accredited Cricket Micklehurst Cricket & Social Club Accredited Cricket Broadbottom CC Accredited Cycling Mossley CRT Accredited Judo Raven Judo Club Accredited Lacrosse Ashton LC Accredited Netball Denton Netball Club Accredited Netball Stamford Juniors Accredited Netball Tameside Youth Accredited Rugby Football Union Aldwinians RUFC Accredited Rugby Football Union Ashton-under-Lyne RFC Accredited Rugby Football Union Dukinfield RUFC Accredited Sub aqua Tameside Divers Accredited Sub aqua Dolphin Divers Snorkelling Club Accredited Tennis Priory Tennis Club (Cheshire) Accredited Cricket Ashton CC Working towards Cricket Denton CC, Lancs Working towards Cricket Denton West CC Working towards Cricket Dukinfield CC Working towards Cricket Flowery Field CC Working towards Cricket Stayley CC Working towards Fencing Ashton Tameside Working towards
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 22
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Sport type Club name Status Golf Dukinfield Golf Club Working towards Golf Ashton-under-Lyne Golf Club Working towards Hockey Tameside Hawks Juniors Working towards Netball Stamford Juniors Working towards Swimming Stalybridge SC Working towards Table Tennis Tameside TTC Working towards Volleyball Tameside VC Working towards
The various sports forums operating in Tameside have a local accreditation scheme: Kitemark, which is intended to help clubs work toward accreditation through their governing bodies, and Clubmark. TMBC may wish to consider future prioritisation of facilities particularly as these clubs can support the complementary objectives and targets of partners in local authorities. For example, achieving targets for youth participation, the five hour offer and school-club links.
Charter Standard
Charter Standard is the football equivalent to Clubmark, more details of accredited clubs can be found in the football section. The scheme is a national kite mark recognising those football clubs that demonstrate raising standards, required standards, reaching excellence and promote to all members, parents and the public that they are a well organised, safe club offering opportunities for all. The programme is aimed at boys and girls under sixteen years old and will help children and parents find a club in their local area that meets FA standards. There are three levels of Awards for Clubs:
1. FA Club/ Adult Club. 2. FA Development Club. 3. FA Community Club.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 23
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Analysis areas
For mapping purposes and audit analysis (and reflecting the street survey areas), Tameside is divided into nine analysis areas (reflecting district boundaries). These allow more localised assessment of provision and examination of open space/facility surplus and deficiencies at a local level. Use of analysis areas also allows local circumstances and issues to be taken into account. Tameside is therefore, broken down into the following areas:
Ashton-under-Lyne (Ashton). Denton. Audenshaw. Hyde. Droylsden. Dukinfield. Longdendale (including the settlement of Hattersley). Mossley. Stalybridge.
Figure 2.2: Analysis areas in Tameside
Tameside MBC Analysis Area
Pop. density per s q. mile
16,000 to 28,400 OLDHAM 14,200 to 16,000 13,100 to 14,200 Mossley 11,800 to 13,100 10,200 to 11,800 8,800 to 10,200 7,300 to 8,800 5,300 to 7,300 3,400 to 5,300 Ash ton - 30 0 to 3,4 00 u-Lyne
Stalybridge Droylsden
Dukinfield Audenshaw
MA N CHE ST E R HIGH PEAK
Longdendale
De nton Hyde
STOCKPORT
©1993-2009 NAVTEQ. All rights reserved. Created by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (www.kkp.co.uk) © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020577.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 24
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Street survey
KKP commissioned a street survey to identify the attitudes and needs of the broader local community in regards to open space, sport and recreation provision.
People interviewed were approached, and after a series of selection questions, to establish eligibility, were invited to take part in a short interview. (Interviews normally last no more than 10 minutes to minimise the risk of respondent interview termination). Key issues covered include the following:
Current usage of open space, sport and recreation facilities. Reasons for usage/non-usage of open space, sport and recreation facilities. Time taken/distance travelled to open space, sport and recreation facilities. Attitudes to open space, sport and recreation facilities (e.g., adequacy, quality, accessibility).
Survey results (generic issues, which cut across more than one typology) have been analysed and are presented in graphical format with relevant commentary. Questions relevant to individual typologies are covered in the specific sections of the Report.
The survey provides a robust sample of users and non-users of open spaces. KKP gained 824 street survey responses from across Tameside, broken down as follows:
Ashton; 162. Denton; 100. Audenshaw; 80. Hyde; 129. Droylsden; 96. Dukinfield; 70. Longdendale (including the settlement of Hattersley); 50. Mossley; 48. Stalybridge; 89.
To reflect local demographics, responses were broken down by gender, age and ethnicity to enable sound sub-analysis and provide a representation of respondents. Age and gender splits for each area are as follows:
Age groups Gender Analysis area Total 16-24 25-44 45-59 60+ Male Female Ashton 162 29 68 34 31 82 80 Denton 100 13 34 27 26 51 49 Audenshaw 80 11 28 20 21 39 41 Hyde 129 26 46 29 28 65 64 Droylsden 96 16 36 17 27 39 57 Dukinfield 70 11 25 13 21 34 36 Longdendale 50 7 18 13 12 24 26 Mossley 48 7 20 11 10 23 25 Stalybridge 89 14 31 20 24 40 49 Total 824 134 306 184 200 397 427
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 25
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
The minimum age for survey participants is 16. In addition to the street survey, the views of children and young people were gathered via a process of consultation at youth centres across the Borough.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 26
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 3: PLAYING PITCH ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY
The assessment and analysis in this report are based on Sport England’s (SE) playing pitch strategy methodology, ‘Towards a Level Playing Field’ (2003). This outlines specific criteria for assessing the quantity, quality, capacity and accessibility of playing pitches and ancillary facilities. These criteria and the principles of the assessment have also been applied to other outdoor sports facilities in Tameside. It provides clear guidance on assessment of supply and demand for sports pitches and the types and levels of analysis required in order for the local authority to plan effectively to meet local needs. These include:
The Playing Pitch Model (PPM). Team Generation Rates (TGRs).
Playing Pitch Model (PPM)
The PPM is a temporal supply and demand analysis and is largely applied as a numerical, model. The model has been used in three ways:
To reflect the existing situation using data on existing teams and pitches. To test the adequacy of current provision by manipulating the variables in the model. To predict future requirements for pitches, by incorporating planned pitches and projected changes in population and participation.
An eight-stage process has been followed to produce the PPM:
Stage Process 1 Identifying teams/team equivalents. 2 Calculating home games per team per week. 3 Assessing total home games per week. 4 Establishing temporal demand for games. 5 Defining pitches used/required on each day. 6 Establishing pitches available. 7 Assessing the findings. 8 Identifying policy options and solutions with forecasts to 2023.
Stages one to seven of this process are covered in this report. Stage eight will be informed by this assessment document and will include the development of provision standards.
The ‘electronic toolkit’, which accompanies ‘Towards A Level Playing Field’, provides tools for collecting some of the information above.
‘Team equivalents’ refers to use of pitches by groups other than those playing formal matches. This includes school games lessons, club and school training sessions, sports development sessions etc. By including these in the ‘demand equation’ a more accurate picture is presented. Information from schools and clubs was collected using the electronic toolkit school and club questionnaires.
Team identification has been undertaken via consultation with leagues, local authority officers (pitch booking records), as well as with governing bodies of sport and clubs.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 27
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
The ownership and accessibility of pitches will also influence their actual availability for community use. The term ‘secured community use’ has been adopted to define this. This is likely to embrace:
All local authority facilities. School facilities where they are subject to formal community use agreements. Other institutional facilities that are available to the public as a result of formal community use agreements. Any facilities that are owned, used or maintained by clubs/private individuals and which, as a matter of policy and practice, are available to large sections of the public through membership of a club or through an admission fee. The cost of use must be considered reasonable and affordable by the majority of the community.
Auditing pitches and assessing the level of availability is largely achieved through site visits.
Pitch quality information
All information relating to outdoor sports across Tameside is collated in the project playing pitch and non pitch database (supplied as an electronic file). All sites included within the audit, as identified and assessed by TMBC, are included within the KKP project database.
TMBC site assessments were based on the non-technical assessment sheet as provided in Towards a Level Playing Field toolkit. The maximum score was adjusted to reflect the fact that a small proportion of questions from the toolkit were not included in the TMBC assessments.
The pitch assessment sheet is a ‘tick box’ assessment, which rates various elements of pitch quality. It should be noted that although changing rooms are identified within the audit, an assessment of each pavilion has not been carried out.
This information is scored, converted into a percentage (of the highest score possible) and also into a qualitative rating. The qualitative ratings for pitch quality are:
Pitch assessment score Pitch rating 90% + An excellent pitch 64-90% A good pitch 55-64% An average pitch 30-54% A below average pitch Less than 30% A poor pitch
For ease of analysis, KKP has combined this into a three-point scale. In this report pitches are rated as:
An excellent pitch or good pitch = good quality. An average pitch = adequate quality. A below average pitch or poor pitch = poor quality.
Copies of the assessment sheets used by TMBC can be found in Appendix 2.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 28
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Capacity
KKP has developed a capacity rating for each pitch site i.e. football and rugby based on the quality rating given to pitches on the site and the number of teams currently playing at the site (identified through league handbooks, local authority booking sheets and consultation with clubs). These capacity ratings assist in the identification of sites for improvement/development, rationalisation etc.
Play refers to temporal demand or when the teams play. A figure of 1.0 in this column for instance would be representative of two teams using that pitch on a home and away basis (every other week). This means that that pitch is carrying one game at that time every week.
Calculation of capacity is based on the qualitative ratings. Taking into consideration SE guidelines1 on capacity, pitches have thus been identified to have the following capacity ratings:
If a pitch is rated as ‘good’ its capacity is specified as two matches per week. If a pitch is rated as ‘acceptable’ its capacity is specified as one match per week. If a pitch is rated as ‘poor’ its capacity is specified as one match every other week.
School pitches have been issued with a different capacity rating. This is due to the fact that they generally experience higher usage through curricular and extracurricular school based use and therefore generally receive higher levels of maintenance. School pitches have thus been identified to have the following capacity ratings:
If a pitch is rated as ‘good’ its capacity is specified as one match per week. If a pitch is rated as ‘acceptable’ its capacity is specified as one matches per week. If a pitch is rated as ‘poor’ its capacity is specified as one match every other week.
Using the pitch and non pitch database, it is possible to enter scenarios and alter the carrying capacity of school and council pitches. This means that it is possible to see how many, if any extra pitches become available.
A colour coded rating is then given by comparing the above information:
Red - the pitch is being used over capacity. Amber - the pitch is played to capacity. Green - the pitch is being used under capacity.
Where it is indicated that the level of provision is ‘sufficient’, this indicates that none of the pitches in the area (for that particular sports), are rated as poor quality and/or played ‘over capacity’, nor has any latent demand been identified by users. This is not to say that improvements to sites are not required. Conversely, where an insufficient level of provision is identified this is because one or more sites/pitches have been rated as poor quality and/or are being over-played and/or latent demand has been expressed.
1 Sport England – ‘Towards A Level Playing Field’
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 29
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Following consultation with league secretaries, it is noted that it can often be the case that U15, U16 and U17 teams play on senior sized football pitches. The capacity rating does not take into account this type of play i.e. juniors playing on senior pitches. Where a large number of junior/mini teams play on a site, particularly if they are playing on senior pitches this can result in those pitches being significantly overplayed on the capacity rating. This can also result in the PPM showing unrealistic deficiencies in provision. Many grounds are able to withstand more matches being played on by junior/mini teams than senior teams.
Team generation rates (TGRs)
TGRs indicate how many people in a specified age group are required to generate one team based on current population and participation. TGRs for each pitch sport and each age group have been calculated. These have been used with the PPM for modelling purposes, e.g., by looking at population projections, future TGRs can be estimated. These have been entered into the PPM to predict, where possible, whether current supply would meet future demand.
Consultation
A variety of consultation methods were used to collate information about leagues, clubs, county associations and national/regional governing bodies of sport. These were generally as follows:
Consultee Method of consultation Local authority officers Face to face interviews. League/county association Face to face/telephone interviews. representatives Football clubs Face to face/postal questionnaires/telephone interviews. Football Partnership meeting/presentation. Cricket/rugby/hockey club(s) Postal questionnaires/telephone interviews. Primary and junior schools Postal questionnaires via TMBC. Regional governing body officers Face to face/telephone interviews.
Local sports development officers, county associations and regional governing body officers advised which of the clubs to include in the face-to-face consultation. Issues identified by football clubs returning questionnaires were followed up by telephone or face to face interviews.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 30
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 4: GENERAL SPORTS ISSUES
Introduction
Consultation with users and non-users of sports facilities across Tameside covered many issues with regard to facilities in the area. Sport and facility specific issues are covered in the relevant sections of this report. This section sets out generic issues that cut across more than one sport/facility, including summary of the residents’ street survey and any national research. Explanations for the street survey results are offered in the sports specific sections.
Usage
Two fifths (40%) of respondents visit outdoor sports facilities once a week, and an additional 31% visit more than once a week. Of the respondents who visit once a week, 23% are from Ashton, compared to 2% from Dukinfield and none from Longdendale. This may indicate a lack of awareness, or provision in these areas, which will be discussed in the sports specific sections of this report.
Figure 4.1: Frequency of usage of outdoor sports facilities in the last 12 months
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 31
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Accessibility
Nearly two fifths (38%) of respondents state they would not visit an outdoor sports facility. However, of those that would, more respondents (30%) are willing to travel by transport to reach outdoor sports facilities than those willing to walk (25%), with a significant proportion (13%) of respondents willing to travel up to 15 minutes by transport. Of those who would not visit, the highest majorities are Hyde (21%), Ashton (20%) and Droylsden (17%).
Figure 4.2: Time willing to travel to access outdoor sports facilities
40% 38%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15% 13% 12% 11% 10% 8% 7% 6% 5% 5% 0% 0% Less than 5-10 11-15 Over 15 Up to 15 15-30 Over 30 Don’t Would not 5 minute minute minute minute minutes minutes minutes know visit walk walk walk walk by by by transport transport transport
Availability
A high proportion (42%) of respondents rate the availability of outdoor sports facilities as being good, and more than half of respondents from Mossley (54%) and Stalybridge (55%) consider provision to be good. Only a small number of respondents (3%) rate provision as being poor. Nearly a third (22%), are unable to comment on provision within the Borough, with 48% from Droylsden unable to comment.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 32
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Figure 4.3: Availability of Outdoor Sports Facilities
45% 42%
40%
35%
30%
25% 22%
20% 19%
15% 14%
10%
5% 3% 0% 0% Very poor Poor Neither / nor Good Very good Don’t know
Quality
Just over half (51%) of respondents rate the quality of provision as good/very good, whilst just 4% of respondents rate it as poor. 11% are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with provision and just over a third (35%) of respondents are unable to comment on the quality of provision of outdoor sports facilities.
Of respondents from Mossley, 81% rate provision as good/very good, where as in comparison, only 29% of respondents from Droylsden rate it as good/very good. However, almost two thirds (57%) of Droylsden respondents could not rate provision, which may be because they do not use facilities, or have a lack of awareness of provision.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 33
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Figure 4.4: Quality of provision of outdoor sports facilities
45% 41% 40%
35% 35%
30%
25%
20%
15% 11% 10% 10%
5% 4%
0% 0% Very poor Poor Neither / nor Good Very good Don’t know
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 34
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 5: FOOTBALL
Introduction
Governance of football in Tameside is split between two regional Football Associations: Manchester Football Association (MFA) and Cheshire (CFA). Those clubs that fall within the remit of CFA include teams from Stalybridge, Hyde and Hollingworth. The remainder of the clubs are governed by MFA.
Both CFA and MFA intimate that football is strong in Tameside. However, there appears to be a lack of strategic direction within the Borough and a need for clearer priorities regarding investment and closer alignment to the National Game Strategy. CFA also report a national decline in traditional 11 aside, which has prompted the FA to develop U18 and U21 football in order to ease the transition into the adult game. This should be considered in Tameside.
MFA has, in the past worked with TMBC to produce a local area plan (2007) for football in Tameside. However, it is felt by both parties that due to a lack of resources (such as a football development manager to deliver the plan) this has not progressed or been regularly updated.
Questionnaire results
An electronic questionnaire was sent to football clubs in Tameside, contact details were provided by TMBC and the invitation to complete the online questionnaire was also included in the pitch allocation letters sent by TMBC at the start of the football season. The questionnaire was returned by 41 clubs and the results are summarised in the pages which follow.
Current provision
The FA produces an area datasheet for each local authority in England and a total of 318 teams (adult, junior and mini and small sided) are listed as playing in Tameside, from c106 clubs. However, following extensive consultation via questionnaires and telephone interviews KKP has found there to be 362 teams playing in Tameside.
Table 5.1: Summary of pitches available for community use and teams by analysis area
Analysis area No. of available No. of teams pitches* Senior Senior Junior Junior Mini- Senior Junior Mini men women boys girls soccer Ashton 13 4 14 18 1 16 1 87 Audenshaw 5 2 2 4 - 9 - 1 Denton 14 2 1 9 - 26 - 1 Droylsden 11 4 4 14 - 22 3 6 Dukinfield 11 9 2 22 - 43 3 5 Hyde 11 2 3 19 - 11 - 1 Longdendale 11 3 - 4 - 5 - - Mossley 2 - 1 2 - 9 - 6
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 35
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Analysis area No. of available No. of teams pitches* Senior Senior Junior Junior Mini- Senior Junior Mini men women boys girls soccer Stalybridge 3 1 - 6 - 8 - - Tameside 81 27 27 98 1 149 7 107
*Please note that semi professional football club sites such as Bower Fold (Stalybridge Celtic FC) and Butchers Arms Market St (Droylsden FC) are not identified as being available for community use as restrictions apply to the use of these pitches.
Teams are allocated to a homeground following consultation and research. The consequences of the pitch supply and the teams wanting to play on them are discussed later in this section.
There are a number of pitches, as summarised below, which have been excluded from the supply and demand analysis because there are no teams currently playing on site (marked as “no community use”). These sites could offer potential capacity/additional pitches if the supply does not meet demand in the Borough. However, the quality of these sites varies and site inspections and any necessary remedial work should be carried out before allowing teams to use these sites.
Table 5.2: Summary of pitches not currently available for community use
Analysis area No. of available pitches Senior Junior Mini Ashton 3 6 4 Audenshaw 1 1 - Denton 6 5 2 Droylsden 2 1 - Dukinfield 3 1 3 Hyde 2 3 2 Longdendale - 1 2 Mossley 1 1 1 Stalybridge 3 3 - Tameside 21 22 14
Of those pitches not currently available for community use, or without teams allocated to the site, 91% of senior pitches are on secondary school sites, and 84% of junior pitches are on junior/primary school sites. This indicates potential to increase community access to school sites in order to alleviate overplay on existing sites.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 36
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Figure 5.1: Location and capacity of all grass football pitches
Tameside Football Pitches Assessed by Quali ty / Capac ity
Over Use OLDHAM At Guidance Level Under Use 172 Mossley Anal ysis Area Boundary 199 Pop. densi ty per s q. mil e 174 171 152 16,000 to 28,400 12 14,200 to 16,000 204 Ashton- 13,100 to 14,200 144 u-Lyne 203 97 11,800 to 13,100 100 154 195 29 10,200 to 11,800 44 8,800 to 10,200 27 268 7,300 to 8,800 261 230 46 8 5,300 to 7,300 167 258 218 3,400 to 5,300 4 Stalybridge 190 260 28 183 263 300 to 3,400 Droylsden 223 15 213 38 110 24 20 55
219 227 211 212 164 138 133 129 98 41 106 10 47 188 169 240 88 5 92 248 39 49 54 162 23 19 Dukinfield 82 Audenshaw 111 7 239 51 149 185 11 209 43 228 21 89 MANCHESTER 269 197 59 13 33 124 179 135 22 Longdendale 42 166 257 208 137 57 73 Denton 56 156 255 150 225 25 128 77 50 176 113 Hyde 160 214 147 226 140 36 93 HIGH PEAK 112 206 118 145 75
STOCKPORT
Created by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (www.kkp.co.uk) © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020577.
Figure 5.1 indicates that there is generally an even distribution of football pitches across the Borough. Areas with high population density are generally well served by football pitches (e.g., Ashton and Droylsden). However, several sites have high levels of use and as such are overplayed (red dots on the map). This affects their quality, and subsequently playing capacity. Therefore, whilst there is a good distribution of pitches throughout the Borough, they are not all available/suitable for additional use.
Table 5.3: Key to map of all grass football pitches
TMBC KKP Site name Analysis Community Senior Junior Mini ref ref area use 5/AH/03 195 Rosehill Methodist Community Ashton No 1 School (PF) 5/CO/01 38 Ashton Under Lyne Sixth Form Ashton Yes 2 College 5/CT/03 183 Our Lady of Mount Carmel Ashton No 1 Primary School 5/CT/04 223 The Heys Primary School Ashton No 1 5/CT/06 268 King George V Playing Fields Ashton Yes 1 11 (pitches) 5/HO/01 27 Palace Road Ashton Yes 1 5/HO/02 218 Stamford High School Ashton No 1 5/PB/03 204 St Damiens RC Science College Ashton No 1 5/PB/04 152 Holden Clough Primary School Ashton No 1 5/RI/01 44 Mossley Road Ashton Yes 1 2 5/SA/01 154 Hurst Cross Ashton Yes 1
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 37
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
TMBC KKP Site name Analysis Community Senior Junior Mini ref ref area use 5/SA/03 29 Smallshaw Lane Ashton Yes 1 5/SA/05 8 Cedar Park Ashton Yes 1 5/SA/06 203 St Christophers RC Primary Ashton No 1 School 5/SA/07 144 Hartshead Sports College Ashton No 1 2 5/SA/08 258 Cedar Park (pitches) Ashton Yes 1 5/TA/01 28 Richmond Street (athletics) Ashton Yes 1 5/TA/02 4 Tameside Stadium Ashton Yes 1 5/TA/04 261 Richmond Street (pitches) Ashton Yes 2 5/TA/09 230 Waterloo Primary School Ashton No 1 5/WA/01 46 Dale Grove Special School Ashton Yes 2 2 5/WA/02 100 Cannon Burrows Primary School Ashton No 1 (football pitch) 5/WE/04 211 St Peters C of E Primary School Ashton No 1 5/WE/07 188 Pottinger Street (football) Ashton Yes 1 5/AU/01 41 Brendon Drive Audenshaw Yes 1 5/AU/04 47 Aldwyn Primary School Audenshaw Yes 1 5/AU/05 54 St Annes Primary School Audenshaw Yes 1 5/AU/07 162 Kershaw Lane Audenshaw Yes 1 5/AU/11 23 Lumb Lane Audenshaw Yes 1 5/ND/05 149 Hawthorn School Audenshaw No 1 5/ND/10 185 Poplar Street Primary School Audenshaw No 1 5/ND/12 19 King Georges Playing Field Audenshaw Yes 2 2 5/CP/02 150 Heather Lea Denton Yes 1 5/CP/03 166 Linden Road Primary School Denton No 1 5/CP/04 208 St Mary`s Primary School, Denton No 1 Denton 5/CP/06 42 Martin Field King Street Denton Yes 3 5/CP/06 56 Stockport Road Denton Yes 3 5/HG/01 112 Corrie Primary School Denton No 1 5/HG/02 147 Haughton Green Youth Centre Denton Yes 1 5/HG/02 50 Lancaster Road Denton Yes 1 5/HG/04 226 Two Trees High School Denton No 2 5/HG/05 206 St Johns Fisher Primary School Denton No 2 5/HG/06 145 Haughton Green Park (pitches) Denton Yes 2 1 5/ND/03 124 Egerton Park College (pitches) Denton No 2 5/ND/13 197 Russell Scott Primary School Denton No 1 5/SW/01 225 Town Lane Denton Yes 0 1 5/SW/02 160 Jackson Gardens Denton Yes 1 5/SW/04 214 St Thomas Moore College Denton No 2 5/WD/04 73 Granada Fields (West End boys Denton Yes 1 and girls) 5/WD/05 113 Danebank Primary School Denton No 1 5/WD/06 257 Granada Park (pitches) Denton Yes 2 14/FF/01 248 Fairfield Road Primary School Droylsden Yes 1 5/FF/01 10 Copperas Lane Droylsden Yes 2 5/FF/02 129 Fairfield Community Centre Droylsden Yes 1 5/MR/01 167 Littlemoss High School Droylsden No 1 5/MR/03 24 Medlock Street Droylsden Yes 1 1 5/MR/04 20 Lees Park Droylsden Yes 1
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 38
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
TMBC KKP Site name Analysis Community Senior Junior Mini ref ref area use 5/MR/05 98 Butchers Arms Market St Droylsden No 1 (Droylsden FC) 5/MR/06 164 Lees Park Playing Field Droylsden Yes 1 5/MR/03 260 Medlock Sports Centre (pitches) Droylsden Yes 1 2 5/SN/03 227 Wadsworth Mews Droylsden Yes 1 5/SN/04 219 Sunnybank Park (football) Droylsden Yes 2 1 2 5/SN/05 15 Greenside Lane Droylsden Yes 1 5/SN/05 190 Rear of Chelwood Drive Droylsden Yes 1 5/SN/08 213 St Stephens RC Primary School Droylsden No 1 5/CD/03 106 Clarendon St (PF) Dukinfield Yes 1 1 5/CD/05 5 Armadale Road Dukinfield Yes 2 1 5/CD/06 7 Blocksages Birch Lane Dukinfield Yes 4 5/CD/07 240 Blocksages Birch Lane (Duki Dukinfield No 1 Town FC) 5/CD/08 11 Dewsnap Lane Dukinfield Yes 1 2 5/CD/09 169 Lyndhurst Primary & Community Dukinfield No 1 School 5/YT/01 92 Broadbent Fold Primary School Dukinfield No 1 5/YT/05 39 All Saints Catholic College Dukinfield Yes 1 1 (pitches) 5/YT/07 209 St Mary's Primary School Dukinfield No 1 5/YT/08 239 Yew Tree , Oakdale & Acorn Dukinfield No 1 Nursery 5/YT/09 43 Astley Park Dukinfield Yes 2 5/YT/09 82 Astley Sports College & Dukinfield No 1 1 Cromwell HS (pitches) 5/YT/11 111 Coronation Ave (Dukinfield JFC) Dukinfield Yes 2 2 5/YT/11 49 Yew Tree Lane Dukinfield Yes 1 1 5/CH/03 25 Mill Lane Hyde Yes 1 5/FL/02 269 Bennett Street Playing Field Hyde Yes 1 5/FL/07 59 Jet Amber Fields Hyde Yes 1 5/FL/07 179 Nursery Rd Hyde Yes 1 5/FL/08 156 Hyde Clarendon Sixth Form Hyde No 1 College 5/FL/09 135 Flowery Field Primary School Hyde No 2 5/GC/01 118 Dowson Primary School Hyde No 2 5/GC/05 75 Alder Community High School Hyde Yes 1 5/GO/01 137 Godley Brook Hyde Yes 1 5/GO/02 128 Ewens Fields Hyde No 1 5/GO/03 140 Grange Road North Hyde Yes 1 5/HT/01 36 Ken Ward Sports Centre Hyde Yes 1 1 5/HT/03 52 Pinfold Primary School Hyde Yes 1 5/NE/01 21 Leighfold Hyde Yes 1 5/NE/02 33 Victoria Street Hyde Yes 2 1 5/NE/03 13 Garden Street Hyde Yes 2 5/NE/06 89 Bradley Green Primary School Hyde No 1 5/BR/02 93 Broadbottom C of E Primary Longdendale No 1 School 5/HL/01 51 Longdendale Comprehensive Longdendale Yes 2 2 School 5/HL/04 228 Water Lane Longdendale Yes 1
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 39
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
TMBC KKP Site name Analysis Community Senior Junior Mini ref ref area use 5/HT/05 77 Arundale Community Primary & Longdendale No 1 Nursery School 5/HT/06 57 Longendale Playing Fields Longdendale Yes 4 5/HT/07 22 Longdendale Sports Centre Longdendale Yes 4 14/MT/01 255 Mottram Primary School Longdendale No 1 5/MT/02 176 Mottram Rd Longdendale Yes 1 5/BM/02 12 Egmont Street Mossley Yes 2 5/BM/03 171 Micklehurst All Saints Primary Mossley No 1 School 5/TM/01 172 Milton Primary School Mossley No 1 5/TM/05 174 Mossley Park (football) Mossley Yes 1 5/TM/03 199 Seel Park Mossley No 1 5/CL/01 55 Harridge Avenue Stalybridge Yes 1 5/CL/02 133 Fern Bank Stalybridge Yes 1 5/CL/05 110 Copley High School (pitches) Stalybridge No 2 5/CM/04 97 Buckton Vale Primary School Stalybridge No 1 5/HA/03 212 St Peters RC Primary & Nursery Stalybridge No 1 School 5/HA/04 138 Gorse Hall Primary & Nursery Stalybridge No 1 School 5/MO/01 88 Bower Fold (Stalybridge Celtic Stalybridge No 1 FC) 5/RI/07 263 Stamford Park (pitches) Stalybridge Yes 2
NB: The table and mapping above does not include synthetic turf pitches which are included later in this section under training facilities.
Accessibility
It is noted that at young age groups i.e. mini and junior levels the majority of players tend to play for teams with home grounds close to where they live and will only travel locally. However, players aspiring to play at larger or clubs which are perceived to offer a higher standard of competition (including the Borough’s Charter Standard clubs), are willing to travel further (i.e. up to five miles) to play.
Leagues
There are a number of leagues which service the Tameside area. Some leagues only service a small number of teams whilst others service the Borough as a whole. Whilst there is variety in the number of senior leagues, in general terms, junior football is accommodated by the Tameside Junior Football League.
Tameside Junior Football League is the main provider of junior football (U8 – U16) in the area. It has gradually developed to be the leading Saturday league in the area and plays home and away fixtures. It is currently applying for Charter Status (2009).
East Manchester Mini Soccer League is also active in Tameside, which takes place at a central venue (Curzon Ashton STP). The League has approximately 45 teams playing at the venue.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 40
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Tameside Sunday Football League (TSFL) is split into three parts to encourage progression and retain participants. There are over 60 adult teams, 21 intermediate (U18 and U19) teams and 120 junior (U11 – U16) teams. Junior and senior matches are played on Sunday mornings and intermediates in the afternoon. The League also allows matches to be played on weekday evenings at the start of the season to allow teams to develop a “fixture buffer”, in case of cancellations due to poor weather etc, later in the season. This has not been taken into account in the playing pitch model as fixtures do not occur throughout the season, only at the beginning when there is sufficient light.
The Cheshire League (formerly the Mid Cheshire League) is a Saturday League and offers competitive Association Football to Clubs based within a 35 mile radius of League Headquarters, Northwich, Cheshire. The league is at Step 7 of the National League System and consists of three divisions and has 16 teams in Division One, 16 in Division Two, with annual promotion and relegation between these divisions and a Reserve Division made up of 16 reserve teams of member clubs. Teams have the opportunity of gaining promotion to a League at Step 6 of The National League System, The North West Counties Football League, subject their success, status and facilities.
Semi professional clubs
The senior non-league divisions in England administered by the FA are often known as football's "Pyramid". Promotion at all levels within the National League System is subject to FA ground grading requirements as well as league specific rules and requirements.
The FA announced that there would be a complete review of the current league boundaries during the course of the 2009/10 season.
There are six semi professional clubs in Tameside:
Ashton United – its home ground, Hurst Cross is one of the oldest football grounds in the country (built in 1879) (current capacity 4,500) and it currently plays in the Unibond League, Premier Division. Mossley AFC – it plays at Seel Park and currently competes in the Unibond League, First Division, North. Stalybridge Celtic – its home ground is Bower Fold in Stalybridge and it plays in the Conference League, Blue Square North. Hyde United – it plays at Ewens Field in Hyde and the first team plays in the Conference League, Blue Square North. Droylsden FC – its home ground, Butchers Arms Ground has a capacity of 3,000 and it competes in the Conference League, Blue Square North. Curzon Ashton FC – its home ground is Tameside Stadium and the first team plays in the Unibond League, First Division North. It operates 23 teams, from U7 through to adult, for both males and females. There is a premiere pitch, and third generation (3G) pitch on site with a large clubhouse. There are separate changing areas for the community using the 3G pitch.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 41
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Development priorities and opportunities
Football development
Tameside Sports Trust employs a football development manager (FDM), whose remit is to encourage greater involvement in grass roots football within the Borough. To assist in this the Trust, with the aid of the Football Foundation, has invested in two football facilities at The Copley Centre, Stalybridge and Medlock Leisure Centre, Droylsden. There are two sets of four, six a side pitches with floodlighting, rubber filled synthetic playing surfaces and dedicated changing rooms. The FDM delivers a number of programs on the pitches, most notably the soccer schools and mini soccer courses.
There are five soccer schools in Tameside, which provide opportunities for children to be introduced to the game, and play informal but competitive football. Soccer schools are run at:
Stalybridge Celtic runs a soccer school that attracts up to 100 boys and girls, aged between 4 and13 years, every Saturday morning at Mossley Road. Curzon Ashton FC’s soccer school is operated by the Club on a pay and play basis and is for boys and girls aged four to 13 years. Medlock and Copley Sports Centres hold soccer schools operated by Tameside Sports Trust in most school holidays. The sessions are for boys and girls aged seven to 12 and have the FA Charter Standard for holiday courses. Denton Girls FC also runs a soccer school for girls.
In addition to the above, Tameside Sports Trust also offer mini soccer courses throughout the year on a Saturday mornings.
The KKP football questionnaire asked clubs to detail issues relating to development and growth. The most common issues reported in Tameside are:
Lack of internal funding, such as subs and fundraising (46% of respondents believe this is an issue). Lack of external funding, from agencies such as the FA (32% of respondents believe this is an issue). Lack of appropriate local facilities (39% of respondents believe this is an issue).
Cost of courses and CRB checks are a frequently cited reason for a lack of volunteer retention in clubs. For example, Brushes Rangers FC state that it is unable to continue to expand, both due to a lack of facilities (pitches), but also due to a lack of volunteers able and willing to undergo training to become a coach.
CFA reports that no formal programs have been delivered via school-club links. However, it is looking to deliver a program with Dukinfield Tigers FC and will focus on the development of girls’ football.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 42
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Charter Standard
Of the 106 football clubs in Tameside, 16 have achieved FA Charter Standard; 10 have the basic charter standard, three are considered ‘community’ clubs and three are ‘development’ clubs. The FA identifies that just over three quarters of all junior and mini teams play within a club of Charter Standard status. This reflects the continued commitment to improving the standard of football being played and the quality of provision.
Both CFA and MFA have aspirations to increase the number of Charter Standard clubs in Tameside. The plan is to target the leagues and bring them up to standard, which will, in turn increase the number of clubs seeking to obtain the standard. Tameside Junior and Tameside Sunday Football leagues are likely to be a priority target. In order for a league to be awarded Charter Standard status, 70% of clubs in the league have to be accredited.
It is a requirement of Charter Standard to have school-club links in order to provide a pathway for participation and competitive opportunities.
Women and girls
Women’s football is thought to be declining in Tameside; there are seven active women’s teams in Tameside, a reduction of one in the 2008/09 season. CFA also report that U11 girls’ participation in football has reached a plateau. To help reinvigorate participation, CFA is working with local primary schools to develop festivals and allow mixed teams to compete.
TMBC has established a women and girls’ football development group. Consultation highlights that a number of women’s teams playing on TMBC pitches were forced to relocate to school pitches (or disband), as the need for access to appropriate changing accommodation became a priority.
Curzon Ashton Ladies FC play at Tameside Stadium in the Northern Premier League. This is the only ladies team in Tameside.
Cheshire and Manchester Women’s County Football League used to be one of the largest providers of women’s competition football in Tameside. However, due to a variety of reasons, including funding availability and volunteer retention, only one Tameside based team remains in the League. Tameside Girl’s Football League (seven aside) has also folded in the last five years. Despite this, Curzon Ashton FC, Dukinfield Youth FC and Dukinfield Tigers FC have continued to provide opportunity for girls’ football, which suggests the number of girls’ teams is growing.
Facility development
TMBC is working hard to improve the quality of football facilities across the Borough. For example, it has acquired a verti drain machine which was used on 10 sites in 2008/09. The intention is to increase use once need is identified; there will be an initial focus on junior pitches but a continuation on the senior pitches. This, along with other improvements, will help to further reduce the number of cancellations currently occurring on TMBC pitches. There is a general perception amongst clubs that the quality of sports pitches has improved in the last five years on those sites which have been “verti-drained” or have had top soil rotation. TMBC pitches are maintained on a fixed cutting schedule.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 43
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
As standard, goal posts are removed from TMBC pitches at the end of each season to help reduce misuse/damage to the surface during the summer. The posts are painted and lines are burnt onto the playing surface at the start of each season and then repainted weekly.
Specific club developments and plans are detailed below as identified during consultation with the clubs.
Dukinfield Youth FC
Dukinfield Youth FC (DYFC) is an FA Charter Standard club which has now achieved ‘community’ status. The recently completed home ground incorporates four football pitches (mini soccer through to full size pitches) and changing accommodation. All its junior teams are based at the new site which is located adjacent to Astley Sports College.
Dukinfield Town FC
Dukinfield Town FC (DTFC) plays at Woodhams Park on the Blocksages complex in Dukinfield (leased from TMBC with four years remaining). There is a league requirement for the senior pitch to be fenced off, and the Manchester League requires dug outs. However, due to continued vandalism to the site (resulting in public access to the main pitch), it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain league requirements to the standard required. The main pitch itself is on an old cinder pit and although drainage is mostly adequate, there are areas of poor drainage. The clubhouse, which is leased from TMBC (with 11 years remaining), is in need of refurbishment and repair. The roof has had remedial work but due to a lack of funds it has not been completed. There is also an identified need to extend/improve provision to better cater for women and girls.
An aspiration exists to develop a sports hub site at Blocksages between DTFC and Dukinfield Rugby Club. This would result in replacing the aging clubhouse/changing rooms for both clubs and re-arranging the current pitch lay-out to improve quality. More details can be found in the rugby section of this report.
Longdendale
TMBC is investing £0.5 million in Longdendale football pitches (KKP ref 57). The work will take place in summer 2010 and the pitches are anticipated to be playable in 2011. The investment will provide four senior pitches and significant modernisation to the existing changing facilities. The facility will then be used by Hattersley FC and Hollingworth FC.
Droylsden Youth FC
Droylsden Youth FC (DYFC) is based at Droylsden Youth Centre and uses the grass pitches at Sunnybank Park (KKP ref 219). The site also comprises a boxing club, a nursery, youth club, changing accommodation (currently unused due to poor quality) and small kitchen in a prefabricated building. There is also a small MUGA (shale) and disused tennis courts. DYFC has plans to develop a new facility in order to provide up to date leisure facilities for the local community.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 44
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
The plans include:
Demolishing the existing building. Installing new fencing around the site, and enclosing the STP. Developing a new building to include: Multi purpose function room. Indoor training area. Café. Changing rooms, including those suitable for disabled access to service both the STP and grass pitches in the adjoining park. Reception, office and storage. 60m x 40m 3G STP with floodlighting.
The plans have been approved by TMBC (February 2010) and funding pledges have been obtained. On completion of the development, the Club aspires to increase in size by c15 teams. DYFC will also consolidate links with adult teams, such as Droylsden Amateurs, and to a lesser extent Butchers Arms FC to ensure that the junior players have a strategy for progression.
Other investments funded by the Football Foundation are shown below, note this is a summary of awards up until 2007.
Organisation Name Project Description Project Value Grant Value2 Community and Education Applications Tameside Metropolitan Sports Federation £128,662.00 £83,662.00 Borough Council Manager Facility Project Applications By FA County Tameside Metropolitan New pitches and changing £1,279,140.00 £740,580.00 Borough Council rooms Tameside Metropolitan Revenue post £60,000.00 £30,905.00 Borough Council Tameside Metropolitan Kenward Sports Centre £778,233.00 £537,328.00 Borough Council Tameside Sports Trust Eight small-sided pitches £986,313.00 £656,991.00
Key issues for football
Ownership and lease agreements
There are c40 pitch sites in Tameside, not including education sites and most of which are owned by TMBC. However, the type and cost of lease agreements used varies between clubs, and even type of sport. The length of tenure can affect a club’s ability to improve facilities. The ability to raise funds from external sources, such as the Football Foundation, Lottery, or Sport England; and to be granted planning permission for facility improvements, are greatly influenced by the length and type of lease in place. Accessibility to, and availability of, external funding can greatly affect the sustainability and growth of clubs.
2 Football Foundation Full Reports October 2007
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 45
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
A potential solution is to, where possible, consult clubs and landowners with existing short term leases or annual rental agreements to investigate the feasibility of extending current contracts, thereby better enabling the clubs to access external funding and develop facilities.
Analysis of returned club questionnaires reveals that 15% of pitches are leased to clubs, with the average lease being 25 years. 80% of pitches are rented from the landowner, the majority of which are TMBC. Council pitches are booked directly though TMBC on a block booking system. This allows both the Club and TMBC to schedule match play and maintenance respectively.
A number of clubs have highlighted the cost of hiring facilities, both for match play and training purposes, to be prohibitive. Clubs are particularly concerned that prices may increase following the completion of changes to school provision through BSF. However, the prevalence of new facilities may help provide a competitive pricing environment.
Pitch quality
The audit of pitches available for community use in Tameside identifies 41 senior, 32 junior and all (41) mini pitches as being poor quality. The remaining pitches are assessed as good or average quality3. Table 5.4 below summarises pitch quality following site visits (including those not available for community use).
Table 5.4: Pitch quality of all pitches (regardless of community use) following site visits
Senior pitches Junior pitches Mini pitches 102 49 41 Good Average Poor Good Average Poor Good Average Poor 25 36 41 3 14 32 - - 41
There are 81 senior football pitches available for community use in Tameside, of which, 27% were found to be good, 37% average and 36% poor quality. The distribution of pitches across the Borough is also relatively even, as illustrated in Figure 5.1.
3 TMBC conducted the site visits, which took place in throughout the summer/autumn 2009. There is recognition that pitch quality deteriorates throughout the season due to overplay and the decline in weather conditions.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 46
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Table 5.5: Summary of quality information for football pitches available for community use by analysis area
Analysis area Senior Junior Mini G A P Total G A P Total G A P Total Ashton 2 4 7 13 - 2 2 4 - - 3 14 Audenshaw 2 2 1 5 - - 2 2 - - 2 2 Denton 4 6 4 14 - - 2 2 - - 1 1 Droylsden 1 3 7 11 - 1 3 4 - - 4 4 Dukinfield 4 4 3 11 - 6 3 9 - - 2 2 Hyde 2 4 5 11 - 1 1 2 - - 3 3 Longdendale 2 8 1 11 2 - 1 3 - - - - Mossley 2 - - 2 ------1 1 Stalybridge - - 3 3 - - 1 1 - - - - TAMESIDE 19 31 31 81 2 10 15 27 - - 27 27
Table 5.5 illustrates the variation in the quality of pitches available for community use across the District. For example:
Ashton has the greatest number of pitches (31 in total) and contains the vast majority of mini pitches (14). Most pitches are assessed as poor quality (52%), with all mini pitches being assessed as poor. Almost 36% of the senior pitches are considered poor. Droylsden has 19 pitches, but 14 are of poor quality.
However, quality of pitches should not be considered in isolation as the level of play on a site can affect the quality; Figure 5.1 highlights the distribution of pitches by capacity.
The football club questionnaire results regarding quality are shown in Table 5.6 below. This highlights that evenness of the pitch, surface drainage, evidence of dog fouling and evidence of glass/stones/litter are considered to be the poorest aspects of clubs’ home grounds.
Table 5.6: Questionnaire quality rating scores
No reply Good Average Poor Not
applicable Grass cover 10% 32% 44% 15% - Length of grass 12% 29% 37% 22% - Eveness of pitch 12% 27% 27% 34% - Size of pitch 15% 46% 32% 5% 2% Pitch gradient 17% 34% 37% 12% - Surface drainage 15% 17% 27% 41% - Adequate safety margins 32% 22% 32% 15% - Evidence of dog fouling 10% 24% 17% 44% 5% Evidence of glass/stones/litter 12% 12% 37% 34% 5% Evidence of unofficial use 29% 12% 24% 27% 7%
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 47
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
No reply Good Average Poor Not
applicable Evidence of damage to surface 44% 12% 24% 20% - Line markings 10% 29% 41% 20% - Posts and sockets 12% 32% 34% 22% - Changing accommodation 7% 24% 12% 15% 41% Clubhouse facilities 7% 5% 10% 5% 73% Toilet facilities 12% 22% 17% 7% 41% Shower facilities 12% 20% 12% 5% 51% Overall quality 15% 20% 34% 29% 2%
Pitches on Armadale Road and Blocksages, are thought to be, by users, the best sites in Tameside. This is accredited to the relatively high quality grass and presence of changing facilities. Further analysis of the questionnaire responses found that:
Only 7% of clubs which responded to the questionnaire consider quality to be much poorer than in 2008/09. 22% of clubs which responded to the questionnaire consider quality to be better/much better than in 2008/09.
Reasons identified in the questionnaires for increases in quality to designated pitches since the 2008/09 season include:
Ground improvement works, which have improved pitch quality. Less play on pitches through use of alternative venues for training. Use of a roller. Time spent by club members weeding and maintaining surrounding hedgerows Regular, high quality maintenance which improved the quality of the pitch surface. Reseeding and drainage improvements during the off season.
Reasons identified by the questionnaires for decreases in quality to designated pitches since the 2008/09 season include:
Increasing number of stones coming through the surface. Lack of remedial work to improve drainage. Playing on pitches when they are wet/water logged has made surfaces rougher and increased damage to surface. Youths riding motorbikes across playing surfaces. Rubbish and dog fouling on pitches is a recurring problem and has to be cleared by teams before matches. Lack of grass cutting and line marking.
TMBC management
TMBC is responsible for 74 sports pitches (one rugby union, three lacrosse, 36 senior, 10 junior and 24 mini football). It operates three tier management system (based on quality) for football pitches, whereby 17 senior and three junior pitches are classified in Group A, eight senior and three junior pitches in Group B and 14 senior and two junior are Group C.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 48
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
The variation in quality between the pitches is reflected in the price to hire which varies from £400 per season for a senior Group A pitch, to £248 for a Group C pitch; there is a discount for junior teams. TMBC offer priority to local clubs to the site when arranging pitch allocation.
TMBC carries out pitch inspections on a Friday afternoon to confirm if pitches are playable, if so, further referee discretion is applied on match days. TMBC is introducing a text notification service this season (2009/10) to better communicate with teams and users regarding cancellations and quality issues.
There is a need to rotate and rest pitches to ensure their long term sustainability. This particularly applies to TMBC owned pitch sites, which users note are in danger of becoming unplayable, particularly after bad weather, resulting in pitches becoming overplayed at the end of the season. Other issues regarding quality to emerge from consultation include:
There are some issues with misuse (horses) at Richmond Street Playing Fields but TMBC is aware of the problem and is working to resolve it. There are also issues with drainage. Longendale Recreation Ground contains four pitches but suffers from poor drainage. The pitches are used by Hollingworth Junior FC and there is potential for improvement as a multi pitch site, given investment. Dog fouling is an issue at most sites, but a particular problem at Blocksages (Dukinfield). There are active patrols in many of the parks which have lead to a significant increase in on the spot fines but dog fouling is still reported to be a problem on pitches. Vandalism and damage to the pitch, as well as youths loitering is an issue at a number of sites, including Dukinfield Town and Denton Town FC. Fencing the ground may help improve the situation and reduce misuse.
Consultation highlights a general opinion that TMBC pitches would benefit from greater maintenance, and a number of consultees suggest that games are too often cancelled on TMBC pitches due to poor pitch quality rather than adverse weather. However, it is noted that playing in poor conditions can be detrimental to the quality of the pitch and can cause lasting damage.
There is a Borough wide problem with unofficial access to TMBC playing pitches. Many users comment that bikes/motorbikes/horses churn up the playing surface, making it dangerous for players and officials. Although TMBC and other land owners respond to reports of rutting on the playing surface, they are not always fully remedied through filling and rolling. Many TMBC pitches are also used for unofficial games, further adding to their wear and tear.
Current demand
Current demand for grass pitches is high and the current most of the provision is played to capacity.
Consultation reveals demand for large, multi pitch sites in the Borough. The largest site is currently Blocksages, which has four pitches. Demand is also identified for development of specific sites for mini, junior and senior football, as it is not always considered to be appropriate to have senior football running alongside junior football for example.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 49
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Currently, there are limited mini soccer pitches in the neighbouring authority of Oldham. However, a new league for U7 is likely to be initiated in the near future and will play on existing junior/senior pitches. This suggests that teams currently travelling from Oldham into Tameside may no longer do so. However, it is thought that this will create some spare capacity to cater future growth of mini soccer in Tameside.
The main site for mini football is King George Playing Fields, Ashton. There is a need to improve the parking facilities on site to cater for peak time usage.
Consultation generally highlights a perception of a lack of designated grass mini pitches available within Tameside. In part, this is due to mini soccer schools playing on 3G pitches. However, mini teams are still known to be playing across senior/junior pitches or pitches are marked out informally using cones (as at King George Playing Fields, KKP ref 268).
The TDJFL has plans to start an U7 division in Tameside, but there is no suitable site available. It is not a league requirement to have changing accommodation, but it is desirable.
It is thought that the TSFL is one of the fastest growing in Greater Manchester, which may mean an increase in demand for pitches in Tameside. For example, the League has grown by 30 teams this year (2009). It is a league requirement that senior teams in the top two divisions and all intermediate teams have access to changing facilities. It is not mandatory for the junior sides to have changing facilities on site, and many arrive to games ready to play.
Change in demand
Despite the relatively static nature of football in Tameside, 19 clubs consulted have seen a change in membership over the last five years.
The change in the number of teams appears to have occurred in both the junior and senior age groups, and the reason for a reduction in teams varies from a lack of players, to a lack of personnel to prohibitive costs to run the team. This indicates a need for support for clubs in all aspects, including club development and volunteer training, and in terms of revenue funding.
The FA Local Area Data Report (2009) shows that the greatest area of growth since the 2007/08 season has been in junior football, indicating a need for additional, age specific provision.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 50
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Provision of football pitch sites assessed by quality and capacity
This section presents the current pitch stock available for football in the District. It illustrates the:
Number of pitches rated as Good (G), Average (A) and Poor (P) on each site. Type of pitch(es) on each site (i.e., senior, junior, mini).
The column entitled ‘matches per week’ is split into three sections – play, capacity and rating:
The current level of play per week (0.5 for each match played at the site, assuming half of matches will be played ‘away’). The capacity of the pitches on each site. The rating of the pitches, which indicates if pitches are played under capacity (green), played at capacity (amber) or played over-capacity (red).
Calculation of capacity is based on the qualitative ratings. Taking into consideration Sport England guidelines on capacity the following was concluded:
If a pitch is rated as ‘good’ its capacity is specified as two matches per week. If a pitch is rated as ‘acceptable’ its capacity is specified as one match per week. If a pitch is rated as ‘poor’ its capacity is specified as one match every other week.
It is assumed for school pitches that the capacity for community use is generally lower than other pitches in the Borough, given their use for curricular and extra curricular play. Therefore the following was concluded:
If a pitch is rated as ‘good’ its capacity is specified as one matches per week. If a pitch is rated as ‘acceptable’ its capacity is specified as one match per week. If a pitch is rated as ‘poor’ its capacity is specified as one match every other week.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 51
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Table 5.7: Capacity of football sites available for community use
KKP ref Site name Analysis area Senior Junior Mini Play Capacity Rating G A P G A P P 4 Tameside Stadium Ashton 1 2.0 2.0 8 Cedar Park Ashton 1 0.5 0.5 27 Palace Road Ashton 1 3.0 0.5 1 28 Richmond Street (athletics) Ashton 1 - 1.0 3 29 Smallshaw Lane Ashton 1 1.0 0.5 1 38 Ashton Under Lyne Sixth Form Ashton 2 2.0 1.0 1 College 44 Mossley Road Ashton 1 2 0.5 1.5 3 46 Dale Grove Special School Ashton 2 2 2.5 4.0 3 154 Hurst Cross Ashton 1 0.5 2.0 3 188 Pottinger Street (football) Ashton 1 2.5 0.5 1 258 Cedar Park (pitches) Ashton 1 - 1.0 3 261 Richmond Street (pitches) Ashton 2 3.0 1.0 1 268 King George V Playing Fields Ashton 1 11 - 6.0 3 (pitches) 19 King Georges Playing Field Audenshaw 2 2 3.0 3.0 23 Lumb Lane Audenshaw 1 1.0 0.5 1 41 Brendon Drive Audenshaw 1 1.5 2.0 3 47 Aldwyn Primary School Audenshaw 1 1.0 0.5 1 54 St Annes Primary School Audenshaw 1 0.5 0.5 162 Kershaw Lane Audenshaw 1 - 2.0 3 42 Martin Field King Street Denton 3 4.0 6.0 3 50 Lancaster Road Denton 1 0.5 1.0 3 56 Stockport Road Denton 3 0.5 3.0 3
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 52
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
KKP ref Site name Analysis area Senior Junior Mini Play Capacity Rating G A P G A P P 73 Granada Fields (west end boys Denton 1 5.5 0.5 1 and girls) 145 Haughton Green Park (pitches) Denton 2 1 5.0 1.5 1 147 Haughton Green Youth Centre Denton 1 - 0.5 3 150 Heather Lea Denton 1 - 2.0 3 160 Jackson Gardens Denton 1 - 0.5 3 225 Town Lane Denton 1 - 0.5 3 257 Granada Park (pitches) Denton 2 2.5 2.0 1 10 Copperas Lane Droylsden 2 5.0 1.0 1 15 Greenside Lane Droylsden 1 - 1.0 3 20 Lees Park Droylsden 1 1.5 0.5 1 24 Medlock Street Droylsden 1 1 7.5 2.0 1 129 Fairfield Community Centre Droylsden 1 - 0.5 3 164 Lees Park Playing Field Droylsden 1 - 1.0 3 190 Rear of Chelwood Drive Droylsden 1 - 0.5 3 219 Sunnybank Park (football) Droylsden 2 1 2 7.5 2.5 1 227 Wadsworth Mews Droylsden 1 - 0.5 3 248 Fairfield Road Primary School Droylsden 1 - 0.5 3 260 Medlock Sports Centre (pitches) Droylsden 1 2 0.5 3.0 3 5 Armadale Road Dukinfield 2 1 10.0 1.5 1 7 Blocksages Birch Lane Dukinfield 4 12.0 8.0 1 11 Dewsnap Lane Dukinfield 1 2 9.0 1.5 1 39 All Saints Catholic College Dukinfield 1 1 0.5 2.0 3 (pitches) 43 Astley Park Dukinfield 2 1.0 2.0 3 49 Yew Tree Lane Dukinfield 1 1 2.5 2.0 1
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 53
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
KKP ref Site name Analysis area Senior Junior Mini Play Capacity Rating G A P G A P P 106 Clarendon St (PF) Dukinfield 1 1 1.0 1.0 111 Coronation Ave (Dukinfield JFC) Dukinfield 2 2 - 4.0 3 13 Garden Street Hyde 2 4.5 4.0 1 21 Leighfold Hyde 1 - 0.5 3 25 Mill Lane Hyde 1 1.0 0.5 1 33 Victoria Street Hyde 2 1 2.0 2.5 3 36 Ken Ward Sports Centre Hyde 1 1 2.0 2.0 52 Pinfold Primary School Hyde 1 0.5 0.5 59 Jet Amber Fields Hyde 1 0.5 1.0 3 75 Alder Community High School Hyde 1 - 0.5 3 137 Godley Brook Hyde 1 - 0.5 3 140 Grange Road North Hyde 1 3.0 0.5 1 179 Nursery Rd Hyde 1 - 0.5 3 269 Bennett Street Playing Field Hyde 1 - 0.5 3 22 Longdendale Sports Centre Longdendale 4 1.0 4.0 3 51 Longdendale Comprehensive Longdendale 2 2 0.5 4.0 3 School 57 Longendale Playing Fields Longdendale 4 0.5 4.0 3 176 Mottram Rd Longdendale 1 2.0 0.5 1 228 Water Lane Longdendale 1 0.5 0.5 12 Egmont Street Mossley 2 6.5 4.0 1 174 Mossley Park (football) Mossley 1 1.0 0.5 1 55 Harridge Avenue Stalybridge 1 0.5 0.5 133 Fern Bank Stalybridge 1 - 0.5 3 263 Stamford Park (pitches) Stalybridge 2 6.0 1.0 1
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 54
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
The capacity of a site is calculated by applying a carrying capacity (i.e. matches per week) that should be played on the pitch based on its current quality. In total, 25 sites are said to be overplayed (comprising of 33 senior, nine junior and five mini pitches), to an equivalent of 66 matches per week across the Borough.
Analysis of supply and demand found that:
Droylsden and Dukinfield analysis areas have the greatest levels of overplay. Armadale Road has the highest level of overplay by 8.5 matches per week. Medlock Street has the second highest level of overplay at 5.5 matches per week.
Most overplay is attributed to junior teams being assigned to a particular site and that particular site not containing formal marked out pitches of that size. So, for example, junior matches being playing across senior sized pitches or mini pitches being informally marked out by cones across the site. An increase in formally marked out junior pitches through creation of dedicated junior sites will help to reduce levels of overplay and reduce wear and tear of senior pitches.
A good example of a site where this occurs is Armadale Road (KKP ref 5). In addition to senior use of senior pitches, these are also being used by junior teams for matches. In this instance this results in the site being overplayed by 8.5 matches each week.
A number of sites are not currently played to capacity; where possible, it is recommended that overplay (as indicated above) is directed to these sites. In addition, 23 sites (equivalent to 24 senior, five junior and two mini pitches) are available for community use but there are no teams currently using them for formal matches. These pitches also represent an opportunity to reduce overplay identified at other sites in the area.
Ancillary facilities
Both local leagues and the County FAs suggest that there is a lack of appropriate changing facilities to service pitches in Tameside, particularly at sites catering for junior/mini participation.
TMBC report that the facilities at both Ashton Utd and Mossley AFC may be limiting both club’s chances of promotion. In January 2010 two of Mossley AFC's floodlight pylons collapsed under the weight of snow combined with high winds and a structural inspection revealed the other six pylons to be unsafe. As a result, all Mossley AFC's midweek home games will be played at Ashton United.
The questionnaire found that of those clubs who responded just over a third (34%) has access to showers at the home ground, and 44% have toilets. However, only 12% of respondents report they have access for the disabled.
It has not been possible to include detail regarding the quality of changing provision, as the site assessment matrix used by TMBC did not allow for this. However, the following pitches are identified as having changing accommodation. NB access may vary between sites, as many are on school sites.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 55
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Table 5.8: Pitches with changing accommodation
KKP Site name KKP Site name KKP Site name ref ref ref 4 Tameside Stadium 84 Audenshaw High 154 Hurst Cross School 7 Blocksages Birch Lane 88 Bower Fold 156 Hyde Clarendon Sixth Form College 11 Dewsnap Lane 93 Broadbottom C of E 162 Kershaw Lane Primary School 12 Egmont Street 98 Butchers Arms Market 167 Littlemoss High School St (Droylsden FC) 13 Garden Street 101 Canon Johnson C of E 169 Lyndhurst Primary & Primary School Community School 19 King Georges Playing 110 Copley High School 183 Our Lady of Mount Field (pitches) Carmel Primary School 38 Ashton Under Lyne 110 Copley High School 189 Ravensfield Primary Sixth Form College (pitches) School 39 All Saints Catholic 111 Coronation Ave 195 Rosehill Methodist College (pitches) (Dukinfield JFC) Community School (PF) 41 Brendon Drive 112 Corrie Primary School 199 Seel Park 42 Martin Field King 118 Dowson Primary 204 St Damiens RC Street School Science College 44 Mossley Road 124 Egerton Park College 214 St Thomas Moore (pitches) College 51 Longdendale 128 Ewens Fields 223 The Heys Primary Comprehensive School School 53 Greenfield Primary 135 Flowery Field Primary 226 Two Trees High School School School 57 Longendale Playing 136 Gee Cross Trinity 235 West Hill School Fields Primary School (football) 75 Alder Community High 144 Hartshead Sports 240 Blocksages Birch Lane School College (Duki Town FC) 82 Astley Sports College 145 Haughton Green Park 260 Medlock Sports Centre & Cromwell High (pitches) (pitches) School (pitches) 150 Heather Lea 261 Richmond Street (pitches)
Consultation suggests that there is an increasing need for investment in ancillary facilities that are not keeping pace of improvements in pitch quality. When prompted to note specific comments or observations regarding facility provision, the majority of users commented on poor quality changing facilities across the Borough. Clubs identify that a lack of good quality changing is a concern in terms of attracting junior players and retaining adult players. A frequently cited issue was not having segregated changing for males and females. Issues to emerge include:
Dukinfield Town FC has a poor clubhouse/changing facility with a poor roof and no segregated changing areas, which is limiting the development of the club, and its junior section.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 56
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Curzon Ashton FC has aspirations to increase changing provision in the far stand, which is currently used by football teams and cyclists. Dukinfield Tigers FC reports a need for floodlighting on site. Kippax Boys FC highlights a need for changing as the membership ages. Denton Town FC has limited space for parking and local residents are becoming increasingly frustrated with cars on match days. The club house is also dilapidated with no ladies toilets (currently use the referee’s room).
The audit identifies that a number of goal posts were temporary and anecdotal evidence suggests that goal posts in general on public sites could benefit from improvement. The Football Foundation Goalpost Safety Scheme (GSS) aims to replace goals, which fail to meet the British Standards (BS8462) requirements. Applicants must match-fund the application at the level of 50%. None of the clubs consulted have referred to accessing this scheme. Access to this funding stream could help improve the quality and safety of provision within Tameside.
Car parking is an issue across many sites in Tameside. The limited availability of spaces at sites forces players and spectators to park in surrounding residential streets or the edges of the playing fields. There are reported issues with parking, and subsequent complaints from residents, at Blocksages and Haughton Green. Granada Park is also in need of additional parking in addition to showers in the changing rooms. The parking facilities at Curzon Ashton and the neighbouring Richmond Street are often at capacity, particularly at weekends and during EAC training. This causes discontent among local residents.
King George Playing Field (KKP ref 268) is one of the main sites for mini football containing five senior pitches, which are used as mini pitches. TMBC is hoping to improve the parking provision on site, as there have been a number of complaints from local residents.
Training facilities
Consultation with football clubs found that a number of clubs, particularly smaller senior clubs and large junior clubs, which operate on a subsidy basis, struggle to sustain training sessions because of:
Cost and availability of current sites particularly at the secondary schools. Although, this availability is likely to increase on completion of BSF. Availability and priority for bookings. Poor pitch quality.
Consultation with users finds that access to training facilities varies between clubs. The majority of junior, intermediate and senior teams playing in the TSFL train during the week, and most use artificial surfaces (namely 3G pitches) at sites which include:
Curzon Ashton Football Club. Failsworth (outside the Borough). Dukinfield Youth Football Club. Denton Youth Football Club.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 57
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Those using grass pitches to train, report a decrease in the quality of the grass coverage and overall condition of the pitch. A common theme to emerge from consultation is that teams do not have formal venues for pre-season training and tend to use a local pitch/field if it is available. A number of clubs report that this is adequate for the time being, but are concerned that it is affecting both the quality of the football and the quality of the pitches.
There are sand based astro turf pitches (STPs) at Astley Sports College and Alder Community High School which have not been considered in the supply and demand assessment for football. This is because the FA does not support the use of sand based astro turf for match play. However, it is recognised that STPs provide capacity for training sessions. In addition, there are
There are also third generation (3G) pitches planned as part of the BSF developments. These new facilities present opportunities for clubs to use them as a base for training, and if applicable to the League, match play. The potential to include ancillary facilities, and access policies conducive to club use should be considered during the design phase of the school developments.
Therefore, due to the inclusion of 3G pitches in BSF developments, it is likely that any demand for synthetic surfaces for training will be met on completion of the changes to school stock and no additional synthetic facilities will be required.
Figure 5.2: Artificial/Synthetic turf pitches
Tameside MUGAs (MACAs) Non-c ommunity use OLDHAM Community Us e Anal ysis Area Boundary
Pop. densi ty per s q. mile Mossley 16,000 to 28,400 14,200 to 16,000 13,100 to 14,200 11,800 to 13,100 10,200 to 11,800 8,800 to 10,200 Ashton- 196 7,300 to 8,800 u-Lyne 5,300 to 7,300 3,400 to 5,300 262 300 to 3,400 Stalybridge Droylsden 45 109
186
245 Aude nshaw Dukinfield
83
MANCHESTER 125 Longde ndale
Denton
Hyde 36 HIGH PEAK
STOCKPORT
Created by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (www.kkp.co.uk) © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020577.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 58
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Table 5.9: Key to synthetic turf pitch map
TMBC KKP Site name Analysis area Type Size Community ref ref use 5/AH/04 196 Rosehill Methodist Community Ashton 3G 5aside Yes School 5/TA/10 262 Richmond Street Ashton 3G Full Yes 5/WE/05 186 Pottinger Street Ashton 3G Full Yes 5/ND/08 83 Audenshaw High School* Audenshaw 3G Full No 5/ND/06 125 Egerton Park College Denton 3G 5aside Yes 5/MR/02 45 Medlock Sports Centre Droylsden 3G 4 x Yes 5aside 5/HT/01 36 Ken Ward Sports Centre Hyde 3G Full Yes 5/CL/04 109 Copley High School Stalybridge 3G 4 x Yes 5aside *Please note that this facility is for rugby use.
‘Shortfall, adequacy and requirement’
Current demand for grass pitches is high and is largely led by the high incidence of large junior clubs in the District.
Summary of current demand
The table below summarises the sites in each area that are currently being played beyond their capacity. The capacity of the site is calculated by applying a carrying capacity (i.e. matches per week) that should be played on the pitch based on its current quality.
Table 5.10: Pitch sites that are overplayed
KKP Site name Analysis area Matches per week ref Play Capacity Overplay 27 Palace Road Ashton 3 0.5 2.5 29 Smallshaw Lane Ashton 1 0.5 0.5 38 Ashton Under Lyne Sixth Form Ashton 2 1 1 College 188 Pottinger Street (football) Ashton 2.5 0.5 2 261 Richmond Street (pitches) Ashton 3 1 2 23 Lumb Lane Audenshaw 1 0.5 0.5 47 Aldwyn Primary School Audenshaw 1 0.5 0.5 73 Granada Fields (west end boys Denton 5.5 0.5 5 and girls) 145 Haughton Green Park (pitches) Denton 5 1.5 3.5 257 Granada Park (pitches) Denton 2.5 2 0.5 10 Copperas Lane Droylsden 5 1 4 20 Lees Park Droylsden 1.5 0.5 1
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 59
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
KKP Site name Analysis area Matches per week ref Play Capacity Overplay 24 Medlock Street Droylsden 7.5 2 5.5 219 Sunnybank Park (football) Droylsden 7.5 2.5 5 5 Armadale Road Dukinfield 10 1.5 8.5 7 Blocksages Birch Lane Dukinfield 12 8 4 11 Dewsnap Lane Dukinfield 9 1.5 7.5 49 Yew Tree Lane Dukinfield 2.5 2 0.5 13 Garden Street Hyde 4.5 4 0.5 25 Mill Lane Hyde 1 0.5 0.5 140 Grange Road North Hyde 3 0.5 2.5 176 Mottram Rd Longdendale 2 0.5 1.5 12 Egmont Street Mossley 6.5 4 2.5 174 Mossley Park (football) Mossley 1 0.5 0.5 263 Stamford Park (pitches) Stalybridge 6 1 4
In total, 25 sites are said to be overplayed (comprising of 33 senior, nine junior and five mini pitches), to an equivalent of 66 matches per week across the Borough.
Summary of future/latent demand
Latent demand is defined as the number of teams that could be fielded were access to a sufficient number of pitches available. Consultation reveals that a number of clubs currently consider themselves to have latent demand, which they cannot meet due to lack of access to pitches.
Table 5.11: Summary of latent demand expressed by clubs
Club Analysis area Latent demand Pitch requirement Number Type Dukinfield Town/Youth FC Dukinfield 1 women 0.5 Senior 1 girls team 0.5 Junior Dukinfield Tigers Dukinfield U7, U8 & U12 1.5 Junior Denton Youth FC Denton U9 girls 0.5 Junior Kippax Boys Dukinfield None specified 0.5 Junior Medlock Rangers FC Droylsden 5 teams 2.5 Junior Nelly FC Ashton 1 men 0.5 Senior Ring O Bells FC Hyde 1 men 0.5 Senior Denton Town FC Denton 1 men 0.5 Senior 1 junior 0.5 Junior 2.0 Senior TOTAL 6.0 Junior
The greatest area of latent demand is for junior pitches, which, as shown later in the section, concurs with the PPM calculations.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 60
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
In addition, some teams do not express latent demand but do have an aspiration to increase teams/provision in order to grow and develop the club:
Droylsden JFC – 15 junior teams over next five years, on completion of club improvements. Stalybridge Celtic Amateurs and JFC – three junior teams. West End Boys and Girls FC – unspecified.
Team Generation Rates (TGRs)
TGRs indicate how many people in a specified age group are required to generate one team. TGRs are derived by dividing the appropriate population age band in the area by the number of teams playing within that area in that age band. Calculating TGRs enables a comparison of participation to be made where similar studies have been undertaken. TGRs can help to target sports development activities in particular areas where participation may be low.
The following current TGRs (based on current population figures) are calculated based on current supply and demand.
Table 5.12: Football TGRs
Mini Senior Senior Junior Junior soccer men women boys girls (6-9) (16-45) (16-45) (10-15) (10-15) mixed National TGR 1:452 1:19,647 1:195 1:4,038 1:431
TGR 1:440 - 1:62 1:1,281 1:107 Number of Current 98 - 149 7 107 teams Tameside No. of Future additional 14 - 21 1 15 teams* Total No. of teams in 112 - 170 8 122 2023
Relative to national averages, participation rates in Tameside are similar to national averages, with the exception of junior girls and mini soccer which are higher. This is likely to be a result of the mini soccer centres throughout the District which provide introductory and competitive opportunities through league structures.
By applying TGRs to the projected population for 2023, we can project the theoretical number of teams that would be generated in the future, and therefore the expected demand on the facilities. Table 5.12 above provides details about potential increases in the number of teams in 2023, and that the greatest area of growth is in junior football.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 61
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Playing Pitch Model (PPM)
Sport England’s PPM is used to assess whether supply of pitches will be sufficient at peak times. The current TGRs recommended above are applied to the PPM to illustrate any shortfalls of pitches. A summary of surpluses and deficiencies is shown below.
Table 5.13: PPM summary
Analysis area Football pitches Current surplus/deficiency Future surplus/deficiency Senior Junior Mini Senior Junior Mini pitches pitches pitches pitches pitches pitches Ashton 8.0 -0.5 -29.5 7.3 -1.1 -35.6 Audenshaw 3.0 -0.5 1.5 2.7 -0.8 1.4 Denton 10.0 -7.5 0.5 9.7 -8.2 0.5 Droylsden 6.0 -5.5 2.0 5.6 -6.4 1.8 Dukinfield 1.5 -3.5 0.5 1.0 -4.1 0.4 Hyde 4.5 -2.0 2.5 3.2 -2.8 2.4 Longdendale 4.5 -1.0 0 -1.8 -2.8 0 Mossley -4.5 -4.0 0.5 -17.2 -5.0 0.5 Stalybridge -3.5 -3.0 0 -7.7 -4.1 0
Those sites which have not been allocated as having current regular play have not been included in the PPM analysis. This means that only sites with community use, and therefore with teams allocated against them have been included in the PPM. The PPM considers the number of teams and pitches on a site, and therefore the number of home games (demand) for the pitches along with the quality and carrying capacity of the sites.
It should be noted that these surplus/deficit predications should not be used in isolation and should be considered within the context of other report findings/outcomes. For example, in most areas there will be a surplus of senior pitches, but a deficit of junior and mini football pitches. The deficit of junior pitches broadly equates to the surplus of senior pitches and suggests a significant lack of designated junior/mini pitches across the Borough. However, it can be said that there is general shortfall of football pitches in Mossley and Stalybridge.
The lack of junior pitches is further exaggerated by the latent demand expressed for a further six junior pitches. Therefore, the current playing pitch stock should be protected and consideration should be given to changing the designation of some senior pitches to cater for junior football.
The deficit of junior and mini pitches is most pronounced in Ashton. This is likely to be due to the a number of sites suffering from overplay, and the large number of junior teams in the area which use senior pitches in the area, such as King George V Playing Fields (KKP ref 268).
In view of all the forecasting information and consultation (including reported latent demand) a demand for additional facilities for junior football emerges.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 62
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Football summary There are 135 football pitches available for community use in Tameside, accommodating 362 teams (including senior, junior and mini). In addition, there are 57 pitches not currently available for community use, the majority of which are on school sites. Consultation strongly suggests that there is a current shortfall of junior and mini pitches. This is further reflected in the supply and demand analysis, which highlights an oversupply of senior football pitches but a shortfall of junior and mini pitches. The overall deficit of junior and mini pitches is most pronounced in Ashton. This is likely to be due to the number of sites suffering from overplay, and the large number of junior teams in the area which use senior pitches in the area. In total, 25 sites are said to be overplayed (comprising of 33 senior, nine junior and five mini pitches), to an equivalent of 66 matches per week across the Borough. Specifically: Droylsden and Dukinfield analysis areas, Armadale Road (8.5 matches per week) and Medlock Street (5.5 matches per week) have the greatest levels of overplay. Most overplay is attributed to junior teams being assigned to a particular site and that particular site not containing formal marked out pitches of that size. Consultation suggests that there is an increasing need for investment in ancillary facilities. The majority of users commented on poor quality changing facilities across the Borough. Clubs identify that a lack of good quality changing is a concern in terms of attracting junior players and retaining adult players. There is also a lack of changing facilities across the Borough, in particular regarding the lack of separate changing areas for males and females, which could in the future, inhibit the growth of junior/mini football. Eight clubs express latent demand: this equates to an additional requirement of two senior and six junior pitches. Pitch quality, as assessed by TMBC, is varied. For example, 27% of senior pitches were found to be good, whilst 37% were average and 36% poor. Armadale Road is thought, by users, to be one of the best sites in the area. Overall, improvements to ground works and drainage were attributed to any increases in quality.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 63
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 6: CRICKET
Introduction
Cricket in Tameside is nationally governed by the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) and regionally through both the Lancashire Cricket Board (LCB) and Cheshire Cricket Board (CCB). The CCB is responsible for six teams, whilst the remaining 11 fall under the remit of LCB. The aims of both boards are to promote the game of cricket at all levels through partnerships of the professional and recreational cricketing bodies, and other appropriate agencies within the County.
The High Peak Junior Cricket League (HPJCL) is the main provider of opportunity for junior cricket in Tameside. Lancashire County Cricket League, Cheshire County Cricket League, Central Lancashire Cricket League, and the Derbyshire and Cheshire Cricket League are the main senior cricket leagues servicing the area.
A postal questionnaire was sent to all cricket clubs in Tameside, The questionnaire was returned by 11 clubs (65% return rate) and the results are summarised in the pages that follow.
Current provision
Pitch ownership and management is primarily through private sports and social clubs. Clubs range from those such as Haughton Green CC, a small two team club offering recreational cricket to the larger more established clubs such as Hyde Cricket Club, providing competitive opportunities for all age groups with provision for both men and women.
Table 6.1: Summary of pitches available for community use and teams by analysis area
Analysis area Number of cricket teams No. of available pitches Senior Junior Senior Ashton 5 6 2 Audenshaw - - - Denton 9 15 4 Droylsden 4 6 2 Dukinfield 4 9 2 Hyde 144 16 3 Longdendale 7 14 3 Mossley 2 4 1 Stalybridge 2 3 1 TAMESIDE 47 73 18
4 Includes the senior women’s team at Hyde Cricket Club
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 64
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Note TMBC information states that Jay Hind CC play at Droylsden CC. However, its returned questionnaire suggests it plays outside the District. The two teams fielded by the club have remained in the supply and demand calculations as a “worst case” scenario.
In addition to the above, there are also four senior cricket pitches which are not available for community use. However, some of the sites below are likely to be lost through the development of school sites and BSF. More details of which can be found in the education section.
Copley High School (KKP ref 110). Hartshead Sports College (KKP ref 144). Two Trees High School (KKP ref 226). West Hill School (KKP ref 234). Littlemoss High School (KKP ref 167).
All are single pitches located on school sites, and are often only available in the summer due to being over marked with other pitches. It may be necessary to increase the level of community use available at these sites through discussions with the school/landowner to alleviate any overplay identified.
There are 18 cricket clubs in Tameside, which are made up from 47 senior cricket teams and 73 junior cricket teams. The only analysis area without either teams or a cricket ground is Audenshaw.
Figure 6.1: Location of all cricket pitches
Tameside Cricket Pitches Assessed by availability Non- community use OLDHAM Community use Analysis Area Boundary
Pop. densi ty per s q. mil e Mossley 16,000 to 28,400 14,200 to 16,000 191 13,100 to 14,200 11,800 to 13,100 10,200 to 11,800 8,800 to 10,200 266 7,300 to 8,800 Ashton- 5,300 to 7,300 u-Lyne 184 3,400 to 5,300 300 to 3,400 63 Stalybridge 260 119 234 Droylsden
107 168 Dukinfield Aude nshaw
200 MANCHESTER 114 Longdendale 224 178 Denton 95 237 108 226 Hyde 90 94 HIGH PEAK
STOCKPORT 232
Created by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (www.kkp.co.uk) © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020577.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 65
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Table 6.2: Key to map of all cricket pitches
TMBC KKP Site name Analysis area Community No of ref ref use pitches 5/AH/03 266 Rosehil Community School (cricket Ashton Yes 1 overmark) 5/AN/01 63 Ashton under Lyne Cricket & Bowls Club Ashton Yes 1 5/CP/01 108 Clayton Street Denton Yes 1 5/HG/04 226 Two Trees High School Denton No 1 5/HG/08 90 Bradwen Close (Haughton Green CC) Denton Yes 1 5/ND/04 114 Denton Cricket Club Denton Yes 1 5/WD/02 237 Windsor Park Granada Fields Denton Yes 1 5/MR/07 119 Droylsden CC Droylsden Yes 1 5/MR/03 260 Medlock Sports Centre (pitches) Droylsden Yes 1 5/CD/04 107 Clarendon St (Duki CC) Dukinfield Yes 1 5/YT/04 168 Lodge Lane Dukinfield Yes 1 5/FL/01 224 Throstle Bank Street Hyde Yes 1 5/GC/03 232 Werneth Low Road Hyde Yes 1 5/GO/06 178 Newton Cricket Ground Hyde Yes 1 5/BR/01 94 Broadbottom CC Mottram Rd Longdendale Yes 1 5/HL/02 200 Spring St Longdendale Yes 1 5/MT/03 95 Broadbottom Rd (Mottram CC) Longdendale Yes 1 5/BM/01 191 Richmond Hill Castle Lane Mossley Yes 1 5/CM/02 184 Oxford St Stalybridge Yes 1 5/RI/03 234 West Hill School (cricket) Stalybridge No 1
Development priorities and opportunities
There is a high level of junior participation at clubs in the Borough; a large proportion field more than one junior team. Continued increases in club membership (particularly junior members) could have a significant impact on access to and (ultimately) the quality of pitches.
Focus clubs have been identified strategically by the ECB as those committed to long- term junior development. This includes the adoption of a development plan (for the purposes of the development of the sport and facilities) and achieving (or working towards) Clubmark accreditation. It is also necessary for the clubs to be members of the Cheshire Association of Groundsmen, be able to deliver the Natwest Cricket Force Program and be available to host County matches. In working towards these principles, clubs receive support (both technical and financial) from the ECB.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 66
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
There are eight focus clubs in Tameside:
Lancashire Cricket Board: Droylsdon Cricket Club. Denton St Lawrence Cricket Club. Cheshire Cricket Board: Hyde Cricket Club. Broadbottom Cricket Club. Hollingworth Cricket Club. Mottram Cricket Club. Newton Cricket Club. Stalybridge St Pauls Cricket Club.
Club development
TMBC Sports Development Team has a development group for cricket, which aims to increase participation in the sport and improve provision. The group meets monthly and is attended by representatives from schools, local clubs, the schools association and the development officers from both CCB and LCB. The group has developed an action plan, which centres on the following areas:
Focus clubs and community clusters. Affiliated club services. Workforce development. Player/talent identification and development. Competition development. Facility development.
Volunteer recruitment and subsequent retention is a common issue across a number of sports. In order to help pre-empt any problems with key personnel leaving, CCB is encouraging all clubs to develop a succession policy. Despite this potential pitfall, CCB report that most clubs in the area report that they have c30 volunteers which illustrates an adequate infrastructure.
Clubmark and school club links
The eight ECB focus clubs (see above), are either accredited or in the process of reaccrediting for Clubmark accreditation. However, there are some concerns that Stalybridge St Pauls CC may need additional time/support as there are issues with recruiting and retaining volunteers. It is likely that Denton West and Ashton CC will also achieve accreditation in July/Aug 2010.
The ECB encourages links between clubs and schools through the development of Kwik Cricket festivals. However, links tend to be “driven” by individual clubs, and are almost invariably underpinned by active club members and the Partnership Development Manager (PDM). These relationships are thought to have increased the level of participation in cricket.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 67
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
There are four clubs with official links to schools in Tameside:
Cricket Club School Ashton Cricket Club West Hill School Ridgehill Primary Parochial Primary School Holy Trinity School Parochial Primary School Gorse Hall Primary School West Hill Secondary School Arlies Primary School Ridgehill Primary School Waterloo Primary School Micklehurst Cricket Club Millbrook Primary School Denton St Lawrence St Thomas More Two Trees Sports College St John Fisher RC Primary School Linden Road Primary School Droylsden Cricket Club St Mary’s CE Primary School Moorside Primary School St Stephens RC Primary School
The Cricket Foundation launched ‘Chance to Shine’ in May 2005 and set out to bring competitive cricket and its educational benefits back to at least a third of the country’s state schools over a ten year period. It is delivered through individual projects across England and Wales. Each project provides a structured coaching and competition programme for a group of around six primary and secondary state schools. The following schools in Tameside are involved:
Astley Sports College and Community High School. Alder Community High School. Bradley Green Community Primary School. Stalyhill Junior School. Gee Cross Holy Trinity CofE Primary School. Dowson Primary School. Broadbottom Church of England Primary School. Hollingworth Primary School.
Women and girls
Hyde CC provides women’s and girl’s teams playing competitive cricket in Tameside. In general, other clubs in the area direct their talented female players to Hyde CC. Mottram CC is also developing provision for females. It is possible for girls U14 to play cricket with boys; however, they have to play separately from age 14.
The limited provision for female cricket is, in some part, indicative of the limitations of changing facilities at sites in the Borough, which is not conducive to the development of this area of the sport. For example, a number of the current facilities are not thought to at least provide separate male and female changing facilities.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 68
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
However, some teams, with assistance from TMBC Sports Development Team, have plans to increase provision for girls’ cricket in particular. For example, Denton St Lawrence CC plans to start a junior girls’ team.
Facility development
The pavilion located at Stalybridge St Pauls CC is in need of repair and refurbishment. The Club is investigating the feasibility of selling a plot of land adjacent to the ground in order to fund improvements. However, due to the recent economic downturn (2009), it has elected to put the sale on hold in order to secure the maximum amount of funds at a later date. CCB has been consulted regarding the sale of the land, and it is not thought that it will impact on the current provision of cricket (as it is hard standing area currently used for carparking) and therefore satisfies Sport England’s guidelines.
Denton West CC is currently (2009 winter) carrying out drainage improvement works to its pitch. The Club also has a long term aspiration to improve the built facilities on site, but there is no immediate need identified.
Newton CC is in the early stages of planning a development to its clubhouse, which will involve the conversion and extension of the existing facility into a two storey building with changing accommodation and lounge area. Once the plans are finalised, it intends to source funding and submit full planning applications.
Key Issues for cricket
Ownership and lease agreements
Questionnaire analysis found that 70% of clubs own their home ground, and carry out maintenance either via a resident groundsman, or through an externally hired contractor. Only two clubs lease their ground:
Flowery Field CC lease from Ashton Trust. Broadbottom CC lease from TMBC on a long term agreement.
Ownership and long term lease agreements mean that clubs are able to access funding streams to improve provision more readily than if the arrangement was as an annual rental, for example. However, this also means that the clubs are liable for any costs to the facility, such as repairs or improvements and grounds maintenance.
Pitch quality
The audit of pitches in Tameside identifies 22 senior cricket pitches, of which, nine were found to be poor quality. The remaining pitches are assessed to be good or average quality5. Table 6.3 below summarises the pitch quality following site visits of all pitches in the area (including those not available for community use).
5 TMBC conducted the site visits, which took place in throughout the summer/autumn 2009. There is recognition that pitch quality deteriorates throughout the season due to overplay and the decline in weather conditions.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 69
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Table 6.3: Pitch quality of all pitches (regardless of community use) following site visits
Good Average Poor 7 6 7
There are 18 senior cricket pitches available for community use in Tameside, of which, 39% were found to be good quality, 28% average and 33% poor. There are no cricket pitches in Audenshaw, but the distribution of pitches across the remaining analysis areas is relatively even, as illustrated in Figure 6.1.
Table 6.4: Summary of quality information for cricket pitches available for community use by analysis area
Analysis area Senior G A P Total Ashton 1 2 - 3 Audenshaw - - - - Denton - 1 3 4 Droylsden - 1 - 1 Dukinfield 2 - - 2 Hyde 2 1 - 3 Longdendale 1 - 2 3 Mossley 1 - - 1 Stalybridge - - 1 1 TAMESIDE 7 5 6 18
Table 6.4 illustrates the variation in the quality of pitches available for community use across the District. For example,
Denton has the greatest number of pitches but the majority are considered poor. There are no pitches in Audenshaw. Longdendale has two pitches which are poor quality and only one that is good.
However, quality of pitches should not be considered in isolation, as the level of play on a site can affect the quality.
The cricket club questionnaire results regarding quality are mixed but highlighted that surface drainage, evidence of dog fouling and changing accommodation/showers are considered to be the poorest aspects of clubs’ home grounds. The general quality of the pitches was considered good, for example eight clubs believe the length of grass on both the outfield and the square to be ‘good’. The most frequently cited explanations for poor quality include:
Poor drainage. Dog walkers and dog fouling. Unacceptable changing rooms/showers (in terms of quality). Unofficial use, such as golf divots causing damage to the outfield. Excessive clover on areas of the outfield.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 70
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Despite employing dedicated grounds maintenance staff, Denton St Lawrence Cricket Club continues to have issues with pitch drainage, which requires significant remedial action each season.
A number of clubs have recently installed CCTV on site and most clubs report issues with vandalism and misuse of the facility in the past year. For example:
Stalybridge St Pauls CC – damage to fencing, square and outfield. Denton West CC – frequent break-ins to the clubhouse over the past three years. Damage to static nets at Broadbottom CC. Damage to the indoor practice facility at Hyde Cricket and Squash Club. Vandalism to nets and break-ins at Mottram CC. Dukinfield CC – damage to seating, fencing and cars in the car park; and robberies from the grounds maintenance store/clubhouse. Ashton under Lyne CC – arson and damage to fencing.
Ancillary facilities
The ECB has produced a series of technical guidance notes for cricket, including a document on pavilions and clubhouses. The aim of the guide is to provide practical advice for club officials and designers when planning pavilions and clubhouses. It applies to new buildings and alterations to existing facilities. The table below details the elements considered by ECB6 to be essential/desirable for changing rooms.
Changing rooms Essential for each team changing Desirable room Bench seating 12 spaces at 500mm wide x 450mm 600mm wide deep x 450mm high Kit bags 12 spaces at 1200mm long x 450mm 450mm high deep x 400mm high. The changing room layout should account for each player having their own kit bag or box, which can be as long as 1200mm Changing Two rooms each with 20sqm for 2m between the front face of changing space, benches and bag opposite benches storage with 1.8m between the front face of opposite benches Showers Three shower heads per changing Four shower heads. Always room at 750mm centres with 450- check the requirements of 500mm between showers fittings and other sports governing bodies the side walls. Showers on opposite when designing mixed sports walls should be at least 2.5m apart to facilities. Consider privacy allow circulation. A separate dry-off screens between showers or area should be provided. separate cubicles.
6 TS5 document on Pavilions and Clubhouses – www.ecb.co.uk
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 71
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Changing rooms Essential for each team changing Desirable room Toilets for players Ideally provided with convenient Two WCs and wash hand access from the changing room: one basins. WC and one wash-hand basin with Note that providing urinals mirrors above. would make the changing In pavilions with four or more team rooms less flexible for female changing rooms, toilets for players use. must be integrated in the changing room and for the exclusive use of each team. This is not essential in two- changing room pavilions.
It is recognised that this guidance can be difficult to meet with limited space/funds available. However, any developments should strive to meet these requirements.
As previously mentioned, a number of clubs consider their changing accommodation to be poor. This can limit the club’s ability to develop and expand. For example, Denton St Lawrence CC has a clubhouse with two main changing areas; however, it is not possible to segregate the changing facilities into male/female. It therefore, does not have any girls’ teams. Similarly, Droylsden CCs clubhouse is reportedly run down and of poor quality, and would benefit from investment for improvement in order to attract new players and increase participation.
Dukinfield CC would provide an additional two junior girls’ teams and one veteran’s team, if it had access to suitable changing accommodation in terms of size, quality and segregation.
Training facilities
Access to training nets is important. A number of clubs, including Droylsden CC and Flowery Field CC use indoor training nets at local schools, such as West Hill School in the pre season/in winter.
Hyde Technology School and West Hill School are the most frequently used training venues because they are considered, by the clubs, to be of high quality. Astley Sports College and Alder High School both have new provision; however, the floor is sprung which not conducive for cricket. Schools with indoor training nets include:
Hyde Technology School. Alder High School (new nets). Tameside College. Hyde Clarendon Sixth Form. West Hill School. Astley Sports College (new nets).
In addition, Medlock Sports Centre also provides indoor training nets. There is also a private training facility available at Portland Mill, Ashton which has two nets, reportedly of high quality. A number of the cricket clubs in Tameside use this facility as it is often more readily available than TMBC facilities (such as West Hill School).
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 72
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Dukinfield CC has expressed a desire for its own indoor training facility, but it is unlikely that the facility will be used significantly enough during the day time to warrant TMBC support. Mottram CC has approached the ECB to regarding funding to develop a two bay net facility and Hollingworth CC is also keen to install similar provision.
‘Shortfall, adequacy and requirement ’
Summary of current demand
Although it is difficult to fully express overplay through calculating the capacity of cricket pitches, it would appear that through analysis of play that current pitches are generally operating at capacity. Newton Cricket Club (Newton Cricket Ground - KKP ref 178) and Hyde Cricket Club (Wernerth Low Road KKP ref 232) are highly used. In contrast, no teams have been allocated to St Albans Avenue (KKP ref 202).
In general, clubs in Tameside report that membership levels have either increased, or stayed the same. However, two clubs report a decline in membership in the last five years:
Denton St Lawrence CC – the U17 team has folded because players have aged and progressed to the newly formed 3rd XI. Stalybridge St Pauls CC – decreased by one senior team attributed to a lack of volunteers to run the club.
Future/latent demand
Latent demand is defined as the number of teams that could be fielded given access to sufficient pitches. Latent demand is expressed by Hyde CC which would have three additional girls’ teams but highlights the development of these teams is currently limited by the lack of a junior cricket facility in the area (expressed as 1.5 pitches).
A number of clubs also have aspirations to increase the number of teams in the club. For example:
Denton St Lawrence CC plan to have a junior girls’ team that will play at the club’s current ground. Stalybridge St Pauls CC plan to develop an additional boys’ team that will play at the club’s current ground.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 73
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Team Generation Rates (TGRs)
TGRs indicate how many people in a specified age group are required to generate one team. They are derived by dividing the appropriate population age band in the area by the number of teams playing within that area in that age band. Calculating TGRs enables comparison of participation between different areas where similar studies have been undertaken.
The following current TGRs have been calculated for each analysis area. Where none is shown, no teams operate at that age group, for cricket, in that area.
Table 6.5: Cricket TGRs
Senior Senior Junior Junior men women boys girls (18-55) (18-55) (11-17) (10-15) National TGR 1:1,415 1:54,815 1:1,480 - TGR 1:1,185 1:46,933 1:142 - Current Number of teams 46 1 73 - Tameside Future No. of additional teams* 7 0 10 0 Total No. of teams in 2023 53 1 83 0
TGRs are higher in Tameside than nationally, in particular, there are high TGRs recorded for boys’ cricket. Proportionally, the largest amount of growth is for women’s cricket. However, male cricket (senior and junior) is forecasted to grow by c15% in each area.
Playing Pitch Model (PPM)
Sport England’s PPM is used to assess whether supply of pitches will be sufficient at peak times. The current TGRs recommended above are applied to the PPM to illustrate any shortfalls of pitches. A summary of surpluses and deficiencies is shown below.
Table 6.6: PPM summary
Analysis area Current Future Senior pitches Senior pitches Ashton -0.5 -0.8 Audenshaw - - Denton -1.7 -2.1 Droylsden -0.3 -0.5 Dukinfield -1.2 -1.4 Hyde -4.0 -5.4 Longdendale -4.0 -6.1 Mossley -6.0 -13.5 Stalybridge -6.0 -14.5
It should also be noted that these surplus/deficit predications should not be used in isolation, but rather put within the context of other findings and issues highlighted in the report.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 74
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
There is anticipated to be a deficiency of pitches in Tameside, particularly in Mossley and Stalybridge. It should be noted that these surplus/deficit predications should not be used in isolation, but rather put within the context of other findings and issues highlighted in the report. For example, the high levels of deficiency can be explained, in part, by the large number (74) of junior teams allocated to cricket pitches in Tameside.
Junior teams are likely to play shorter games (and therefore more teams can be accommodated than specified by the PPM), or play less regular competitive matches (i.e., not one match every other week as adult teams may have). This means that the shortfalls in current provision may not be as severe as they appear and in reality most current play can be accommodated on current supply. Consultation demonstrates that most sites are operating at capacity and recent membership has either increased on remain static. If this trend continues, it is likely that new provision will be required to satisfy future demand, particularly given the high levels of population growth anticipated by 2023. However, deficiencies could be reduced by increasing access to education sites.
Cricket summary There are 18 cricket pitches available for community use in Tameside, accommodating 120 teams (including senior and junior). In addition, there are four pitches which are not currently available for community use. These, along with school sites may provide an opportunity to reduce the current undersupply identified in Tameside. Although it is difficult to fully express overplay through calculating the capacity of cricket pitches, it would appear that through analysis of play that pitches are currently operating beyond capacity. This is likely to be due to the large number of junior teams in the area. The audit of pitches in Tameside identifies 20 senior cricket pitches, of which, seven were found to be poor quality. The remaining pitches are assessed to be good or average quality. The cricket club questionnaire results regarding quality are mixed but highlighted that surface drainage, evidence of dog fouling and changing accommodation/showers are considered to be the poorest aspects of clubs’ home grounds. The general quality of the pitches was considered good. A number of clubs, including Droylsden CC and Flowery Field CC use indoor training nets at local schools; Hyde Technology School and West Hill School are the most frequently used training venues because they are considered, by the clubs, to be of high quality. Astley Sports College and Alder High School both have new provision; however, the floor is sprung which not conducive for cricket. Latent demand is expressed by Hyde CC which would have three additional girls’ teams but highlights the development of these teams is currently limited by the lack of a junior cricket facility in the area (expressed as 1.5 pitches). The high levels of pitch deficiency expressed can be explained, in part, by the large number of junior teams allocated to cricket pitches in Tameside. Deficiencies could be reduced by increasing access to education sites.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 75
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 7: RUGBY
Introduction
The Lancashire Rugby Football Union (LRFU) administers rugby union across Tameside. Three clubs are active in the area and play on pitches provided at privately owned sports clubs, and by lease agreement, in the larger conurbations within Tameside: Audenshaw, Ashton and Dukinfield. The table below summaries the current provision of pitches currently available for community use and the number of teams in the District.
Current provision
Table 7.1: Summary of pitches available for community use and teams by analysis area
Analysis area No. of available pitches No. of teams Senior Junior Senior Junior Mini men boys Ashton 3 - 3 5 5 Audenshaw 2 - 4 7 7 Denton - - - - - Droylsden* - 1 - - - Dukinfield 2 - 3 4 2 Hyde - - - - - Longdendale - - - - - Mossley - - - - - Stalybridge - - - - - Tameside 7 1 10 16 14
*Note that there is not a club based in Droylsden, but the junior pitch at Lees Park (KKP ref 20) is used by Aldwinians RFC when in a playable condition.
Juniors/minis tend to play either across senior pitches or on areas marked out with cones. This creates significant overplay, as in order to account for junior/mini teams, they are allocated to the site.
The following school pitches are not currently available for community use, but may present an opportunity for future use:
Audenshaw High School (KKP ref 84) – three senior grass rugby pitches. Littlemoss High School (KKP ref 167) – one senior grass rugby pitch.
The distribution of sites is focused on the central band of the Borough, with little provision in the south. The main clubs in the area report that their players are travelling, on average, five miles to access provision.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 76
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
There are also rugby pitches/clubs in close proximity to Tameside, for example:
Oldham RFC is in close proximity to Ashton RFC, despite this the clubs have a good relationship and there are no issues with cross over in demand for players. North Manchester RFC is approximately five miles from the nearest Tameside club: Ashton RFC. North Manchester RFC has an adult focus but is in the process of developing and has an aspiration to increase mini/junior provision. However, at this stage it may be appropriate for the Club to develop a closer relationship with Ashton RFC and feed in any junior/mini players.
Figure 7.1: Location and capacity of all rugby pitches
Tameside Rugby Pitches Assessed by Quali ty / Capac ity
Over Use OLDHAM At Guidance Level Under Use Analysis Area Boundary Mossley Pop. densi ty per s q. mil e
16,000 to 28,400 14,200 to 16,000 13,100 to 14,200 201 11,800 to 13,100 202 10,200 to 11,800 8,800 to 10,200 7,300 to 8,800 Ashton- u-Lyne 5,300 to 7,300 167 3,400 to 5,300 300 to 3,400 Stalybridge Droylsden 235 20
72 Dukinfield Aude nshaw 7 84
MANCHESTER Longde ndale
Denton
Hyde
HIGH PEAK
STOCKPORT
Created by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (www.kkp.co.uk) © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020577.
Table 7.2: Key to map of all rugby pitches
TMBC KKP Site name Analysis area Community Senior Junior ref ref use 5/PB/01 201 St Albans Avenue (Ashton RFC) Ashton Yes 1 5/PB/02 202 St Albans Avenue Ashton Yes 2 5/AU/06 72 Old Aldwinians Rugby Club Audenshaw Yes 2 5/ND/07 84 Audenshaw High School Audenshaw No 3 5/MR/01 167 Littlemoss High School Droylsden No 1 5/MR/04 20 Lees Park Droylsden Yes 1 5/CD/06 7 Blocksages Birch Lane Dukinfield Yes 2 5/RI/04 235 West Hill School (rugby league) Stalybridge No 2
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 77
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Development priorities and opportunities
Club development
Each of the three rugby clubs in Tameside contributes equally toward the funding of a Community Rugby Coach post. Clubs work closely with the coach and each club is used for various festivals and events.
All three clubs in Tameside are considered to be of good standard, but none are without issues. Dukinfield RFC has grown in all sections in the last three years, and with a small number of additional members, would be able to field an additional senior team. The Club has a development plan, which focuses on developing junior provision. However, the offer for females is currently limited by a lack of appropriate changing accommodation. Existing girls playing mixed rugby arrive already changed.
Ashton-u-Lyne RFC is working to increase the number of coaches it employs, which will in turn help to further develop the Club and increase teams/juniors. Despite this, it is relatively self sufficient and, as such has a lower level of engagement with the RFU than others in Tameside.
Aldwinians RFC is the biggest rugby club in the area. The RFU has worked with the Club in recent years, and has funded floodlighting and drainage improvements to the training area. This is thought to have increased the capacity of the ground and led to growth of the Club.
Dukinfield RFC is the oldest rugby club in Tameside. It currently fields three senior and six junior teams and has Clubmark accreditation but intimates that finances are strained, particularly because of funds spent on pitch improvements in summer 2009.
Women and girls
Ashton-u-Lyne RFC plays host to the Tameside Girls Tag Rugby, which is for girls aged 7 – 11 and 12 – 15. The sessions run over the summer holiday and are organised by the Tameside Rugby Development Officer. Aldwinians RFC also offers training sessions for girls’ rugby and is working with local schools in conjunction with the TMBC Sports Development Officer to increase participation.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 78
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Facility development
The RFU has developed an activity versus facility continuum in order to show current activity levels (y axis) in comparison to the facilities required to sustain that activity (x axis). The red line indicates where facilities meet the need of the activity.
Figure 7.2: The RFU Activity v Facility Continuum
This means that club A has a good range of activity, which exceeds the level of facilities needed to sustain it. This means that it requires improvements, and/or investment in facilities. Conversely, club B has facilities which are over and above its requirements at the current level and needs business/rugby development to ensure sustainability. Club C has facilities which are appropriate to its activity.
The RFU has produced a facilities strategy for the North West (incorporating constituent bodies of Cheshire, Cumbria and Lancashire). It identifies priorities for investment and highlights Model Venues (MV), which are:
MV1 – usually a club, school or university playing lower level or recreational rugby. MV2 – an established club venue with a wider programme of adult and junior rugby for both males and females. MV3 – a venue with potentially higher level competitive rugby that can provide sophisticated RFU and RFUW development programmes.
The RFU aspires to have a MV 3 in each district (i.e. one in Tameside).
The RFU consider Dukinfield RFC to be MV1, which is because the infrastructure of the Club is not as established as others in the area and it is the smallest in the area. However, the RFU is working with the Club to increase its sustainability and therefore its revenue. Following the consolidation of infrastructure, and therefore its financial position, the Club will be in a better position to apply for capital funding for facility development.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 79
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
The proximity of Aldwinians RFC to Audenshaw School suggests that there is potential to develop an MV3 in Tameside. However, following consultation with the Club, access to the school facilities is reportedly limited. If access to the facility can be increased, the pitch will be suitable to help alleviate overplay expressed on the current provision. Audenshaw School is also a key delivery venue for Tameside’s Community Rugby Coach (CRC).
Ashton RFC is on the cusp of becoming a MV2 facility, but requires additional development to its junior section and subsequently more involvement with the RFU.
The RFU continuum for mini/midi rugby is based on the principle that the rules of the game and therefore the facility requirements should evolve as a player gets older. The introduction of different elements of the sport in this way allows players to safely develop their skills, season by season:
U7s and U8s play TAG rugby, seven-a-side, non-contact version of the game. This provides an introduction to the basics of passing and catching, going forward with the ball, as well as positioning for support and defence. U9 and U10 age-groups, normal tackling, scrums, line-outs rucks, and mauls are introduced. The matches are nine-a-side. U11 and U12s play the 12/13-a-side game and they are allowed to kick the ball from the hand.
Currently, none of the clubs in Tameside have specific facility provision for junior or mini rugby.
Dukinfield RFC is investigating the feasibility of developing a new hub site (with new changing and social accommodation) in conjunction with Dukinfield Football Club at Blocksages, adjacent to the existing swimming baths. It is thought that a new clubhouse would enable the Club to develop female provision. The new sports hub could be managed by a community sports club (formed by Dukinfield RFC and Dukinfield FC). The new development would also result in rearranging the current pitches, as Dukinfield FC has a need (league requirement) for a private pitch with direct access from the changing rooms for competitive club use only.
Key issues for rugby
Ownership and lease agreements
The ownership and maintenance varies between the three clubs. However, all clubs suggest they would benefit from access to verti-drain equipment in order to improve the quality of pitches.
Dukinfield RFC and Aldwinians RFC have a long term lease agreements with TMBC and carry out grounds maintenance in-house using their own equipment. Ashton RFC owns its pitch and ancillary facilities and contracts the maintenance to TMBC.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 80
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Pitch quality
The audit of pitches identifies seven senior pitches available for community use, of which, two were assessed to be poor quality. The remaining pitches are assessed to be good or average quality7. Table 7.3 below summarises pitch quality following site visits to all pitches (including those not available for community use).
Table 7.3: Pitch quality of all pitches (regardless of community use) following site visits
Senior pitches Junior pitches 13 1 Good Average Poor Good Average Poor 8 - 5 - - 1
There is some variation in the quality of pitches available for community use across Tameside. For example,
The majority of rugby pitches are ‘good’ quality. There are no rugby pitches in Hyde, Longdendale, Mossley or Stalybridge.
However, quality of pitches should not be considered in isolation as the level of play on a site can affect the quality; Figure 7.1 further highlights the distribution of pitches by capacity.
Table 7.4: Pitch quality of all sites
KKP Site name Analysis Community Senior Junior ref area use Good Average Poor Poor 201 St Albans Avenue Ashton Yes 1 - - - (Ashton RFC) 202 St Albans Avenue Ashton Yes - - 2 - (pitches) 72 Old Aldwinians Audenshaw Yes 2 - - - Rugby Club 84 Audenshaw High Audenshaw No 3 - - - School 7 Blocksages Birch Dukinfield Yes 2 - - - Lane 20 Lees Park Droylsden Yes - - - 1 167 Littlemoss High Droylsden No - - 1 - School 235 West Hill School Stalybridge No - - 2 -
7 TMBC conducted the site visits, which took place in throughout the summer/autumn 2009. There is recognition that pitch quality deteriorates throughout the season due to overplay and the decline in weather conditions.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 81
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Consultation highlights that misuse and dog fouling are recurring pitch issues at each club, and a particular issue at Dukinfield RFC. It has requested installation of dog fouling bins to help alleviate the problem. The level of misuse is higher in the off season because the posts are used informally, increasing the wear of the goal mouth area.
Blocksages is also used as a cut through from the adjacent estates to reach the existing sports provision and youth club. In addition, the main pitch has significant drainage issues and often floods; the 2nd team pitch was re-seeded in summer 2009. The Club also highlights issues with theft and vandalism, for instance, there has been a number of break-ins to the clubhouse, with substantial theft and damage in the past three months.
Ancillary facilities
All three rugby clubs in the area have clubhouses, of varying quality, which have changing accommodation and social facilities, such as a bar.
Ashton-u-Lyne RFC report that the clubhouse is not sufficient to meet current needs; this may be due to the use of ancillary provision by Ashton Lacrosse Club. However, despite the increase in demand for provision, the RFU are keen to establish multi-sport facilities, as they can often be more sustainable and both clubs should work to improve their relationships to increase chances of successfully applying for funding in later years. The proximity of New Charter Academy may also help increase the growth of Ashton-u-Lyne RFC, if relationships are developed and the use of facilities on the school site may help alleviate any overcrowding of both pitches and changing rooms.
Dukinfield RFC own the clubhouse (via a mortgage with the brewery), which has a private bar, players bar, kitchen and changing accommodation, with showers. However, the clubhouse is in a poor state of repair, despite efforts by the members to improve the décor. For example, there is no segregated changing and shower facilities are communal. The clubhouse is available for private functions. The parking at the club is poor and inadequate in size and quality: potholed with poor drainage.
Aldwinians RFC has a clubhouse which has been extended in the last five years and now contains 11 changing rooms, four of which have en suite showers, a referees room and a bar area. The parking area is large and in reasonable condition, but the club report that the parking area can become crowded, especially during mini rugby sessions on Sunday.
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 82
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Training facilities
Audenshaw High School has recently had an International Rugby Board (IRB) compliant 3G pitch, with appropriate lighting installed, allowing competitive rugby to be played on it.
Training facilities are most often on the club site and consist of a grassed area with training lights. Ashton-u-Lyne RFC has worked with the RFU to increase the provision of training facilities and install lights. However, there are some issues to be resolved regarding an electrical upgrade which has slowed the installation of the lights.
Artificial turf pitches provide a training resource for rugby and Audenshaw High School is a potential training venue on the IRB compliant STP. Aldwinians also use the STP and changing accommodation at Wright Robinson School in Gorton.
Provision of rugby pitch sites assessed by quality and capacity
Table 7.5 overleaf shows the ratings of each rugby pitch based on the non-technical quality assessment and the carrying capacity for each pitch. Calculation of capacity is based on the qualitative ratings. Taking into consideration SE guidelines on capacity the following was concluded:
If a pitch is rated as ‘good’ its capacity is specified as two matches per week. If a pitch is rated as ‘acceptable’ its capacity is specified as one match per week. If a pitch is rated as ‘poor’ its capacity is specified as one match every other week.
The following section presents the current pitch stock available for rugby in the District. It illustrates:
Number of pitches rated as good (G), average (A) and poor (P) on each site. The type of pitch(es) on the site (senior, junior, mini). The column entitled ‘matches per week’ is split into three sections – play, capacity and rating: The current level of play per week (0.5 for each match played at the site, assuming half of matches will be played ‘away’). The capacity of the pitches on each site. The rating of the pitches, which indicates if pitches are played under capacity (green), played at capacity (amber) or played over-capacity (red).
S 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 83
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Table 7.5: Rugby provision and level of community use
KKP Site name Analysis area Community Senior Junior Mini Matches per week ref use G A P G A P G A P Play Capacity Rating 201 St Albans Avenue (Ashton Ashton Yes 1 6.5 2.0 RFC) 202 St Albans Avenue (pitches) Ashton Yes 2 - 4.0 72 Old Aldwinians Rugby Club Audenshaw Yes 2 9.0 4.0 20 Lees Park Droylsden Yes 1 - 0.5 7 Blocksages Birch Lane Dukinfield Yes 2 4.5 4.0
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 84
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
‘Shortfall, adequacy and requirement ’
Summary of current demand
In general, clubs in Tameside report that membership levels have either increased, or stayed the same. There are currently 16 junior, 14 mini and ten senior rugby teams playing in Tameside, none of which are female.
Three sites are currently being played beyond their capacity: St Albans Avenue (KKP red 201), Aldwinians RFC (KKP ref 72) and Blocksages (KKP ref 7), which will be detrimentally affecting the quality of the site. The level of overplay is equivalent to ten matches per week, which is broken down as follows:
St Albans Avenue (Ashton RFC) – 4.5 matches per week. Aldwinians Rugby Club – 5 matches per week. Blocksages Birch Lane – 0.5 matches per week.
This level of overplay may be explained by the number of junior/mini teams playing on senior pitches and not on age specific facilities.
Future/latent demand
Latent demand is defined as the number of teams that could be fielded given access to enough pitches. TMBC considers the level of rugby pitch provision to be sufficient, as there have been no formal requests for additional pitches. Dukinfield RFC suggests that an additional senior men’s team could be established. However, there would be issues with programming on both the pitch and the changing facilities. The Club also suggests that there would be a competitive element for females, if the ancillary accommodation was suitable.
Aldwinians RFC also reportedly has sufficient players to field a fifth team, but player commitment means the team may miss more than three matches a season, which is contrary to league rules. Therefore, it does not have a competitive fifth team; however, this is not strictly latent demand. The Club also report that the current level of provision on site does not allow for the reversing of fixtures.
Team Generation Rates (TGRs)
TGRs indicate how many people in a specified age group are required to generate one team. They are derived by dividing the appropriate population age band in the area by the number of teams playing within that area in that age band. Calculating TGRs enables comparison of participation between different areas where similar studies have been undertaken.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 85
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
The following current TGRs have been calculated for each analysis area. Where none is shown, no teams operate at that age group, for rugby, in that area.
Table 7.6: Rugby union TGRs
Senior Senior Junior Mini- men women boys rugby
(18-45) (18-45) (13-17) (8-12) Mixed National TGR 1:7,032 1:43,770 1:2,105 - TGR 1:4,038 - 1:450 1:1,072 Current Number of teams 10 - 16 14 Tameside Future No. of additional teams* 1 - 2 2 Total No. of teams in 2023 11 - 18 16
TGRs are higher in Tameside than nationally, in particular, there are high TGRs recorded for boys’ rugby. There is currently no participation recorded for girls or women; this is a possible area for development in the future. However, this is the case across the country and not just an issue for Tameside in isolation.
Playing Pitch Model (PPM)
Sport England’s PPM is used to assess whether supply of pitches will be sufficient at peak times. The current TGRs recommended above are applied to the PPM to illustrate any shortfalls of pitches. A summary of surpluses and deficiencies is shown below.
Table 7.7: PPM summary
Analysis area Current Future Senior Junior Mini Senior Junior Mini Ashton 1.5 -2.5 -2.5 1.3 -2.8 -2.8 Audenshaw - -3.5 -3.5 -0.3 -4.0 -3.9 Denton ------Droylsden - 1.0 - - 1.0 - Dukinfield 0.5 -2.0 -1.0 0.4 -2.1 -1.1 Hyde ------Longdendale ------Mossley ------Stalybridge ------TAMESIDE 2.0 -7.0 -7.0 1.5 -7.9 -7.8
Note that those sites which have not been allocated as having current regular play (i.e. no teams have identified the site as their home ground) have not been included in the PPM analysis. It should also be noted that these surplus/deficit predications should not be used in isolation, but rather put within the context of other findings and issues highlighted in the report.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 86
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
There is anticipated to be a small surplus of senior pitches in Tameside, but a deficiency in both junior and mini pitches. This pattern continues to 2023 and the deficiencies are exacerbated following the application of population increases. The deficit of junior and mini pitches can be equated for in the surplus of senior pitches, as the majority of juniors will be playing on senior sized pitches. The surplus of senior pitches may also go some way towards meeting demand/deficit of mini pitches. However, even when taking this into account, the demand/deficit for pitches is not likely to be offset by the surplus of senior pitches.
Rugby summary There are eight rugby union pitches available for community use in Tameside (there are 14 in total including two rugby league pitches), accommodating 44 senior, junior and mini teams. There are three rugby clubs in the area. Juniors/minis tend to play either across senior pitches or on areas marked out with cones. This creates significant overplay, as in order to account for junior/mini teams, they are allocated to the site. The ownership and maintenance varies between the three clubs. However, all clubs suggest they would benefit from access to verti-drain equipment in order to improve the quality of pitches. In general, clubs in Tameside report that membership levels have either increased, or stayed the same. The audit of pitches identifies eight senior pitches available for community use, of which, two were assessed as poor quality. The remaining pitches are assessed as good quality. Consultation highlights that misuse and dog fouling are recurring pitch issues at each club, and a particular issue at Dukinfield RFC. Three sites are currently being played beyond their capacity: St Albans Avenue (KKP red 201), Aldwinians RFC (KKP ref 72) and Blocksages (KKP ref 7), which will be detrimentally affecting the quality of the site. The level of overplay is equivalent to ten matches per week. There is anticipated to be a surplus of senior pitches in Tameside, but a deficiency in both junior and mini pitches. The deficit of junior and mini pitches can be equated for in the surplus of senior pitches, as the majority of juniors will be playing on senior sized pitches.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 87
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 8: HOCKEY
Introduction
Governance of the sport is devolved by England Hockey (EH) at a regional and local level to regional and county associations.
Hockey is played on synthetic turf, sand based pitches. EH recommends that long pile pitches are not suitable for competitive hockey. At present, EH does not sanction the use of third generation turf (3G) pitches for hockey matches. It is further recommended that for training and community facilities that include smaller multi use surfaces, the long pile surface is not a preferred option for the teaching of hockey. It is noted that access to long pile surfaces as a flat playing surface for introducing the game to beginners would be preferable to a poor grass or tarmac surface.
Current provision
There are two, full sized, sand based, synthetic turf pitches (STPs), suitable to play competitive hockey in Tameside.
Astley College is the main venue for hockey in Tameside and is used by both Tameside and Tameside Hawks hockey clubs. The site is also used by primary and secondary schools for larger hockey events.
Figure 8.1: Location of STPs in Tameside
Tameside STP sites
STP OLDHAM Analysis Area Boundary
Pop. densi ty per s q. mil e Mossley 16,000 to 28,400 14,200 to 16,000 13,100 to 14,200 11,800 to 13,100 10,200 to 11,800 8,800 to 10,200 7,300 to 8,800 Ashton- 5,300 to 7,300 u-Lyne 3,400 to 5,300 300 to 3,400 Stalybridge
Droylsden
Dukinfield Audenshaw 81
MANCHESTER Longdendale
Denton
Hyde
HIGH PEAK 75
STOCKPORT
Created by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (www.kkp.co.uk) © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020577.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 88
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Table 8.1: Key to STPs location map
TMBC Site name KKP Analysis area Community STP ref ref use 5/YT/10 Astley Sports College & Cromwell HS 81 Dukinfield Yes 1 5/GC/05 Alder Community High School 75 Hyde Yes 1
There are no STPs in the north of Tameside; however, the Belle Vue Hockey Centre is in the neighbouring authority of Manchester. The centre is a permanent legacy to the success of the Commonwealth Games 2002. The centre has two full-size water based hockey pitches, extensively used on evenings and weekends by local clubs. The Greater Manchester Junior Hockey League uses this venue for competitions and it is likely that players travel from Tameside to access high quality provision on site.
Club summary
Tameside Hockey Club (THC) is the largest club in the Borough and provides opportunities for senior men and women, playing at Astley College. It has two men’s, one ladies and one mixed teams; at present there is no provision for junior hockey, but there are unofficial links with Tameside Hawks which feed the older players to THC.
Newton Ladies Hockey Club (NLH) is the only other club playing competitively in Tameside and plays at Alder High School, Hyde.
Tameside Hawks Junior Hockey Club (THJ) train at Astley College and have provision for both boys and girls aged U11, U13 and U15, and is working toward Clubmark accreditation. It has approximately 40 members, which is around 25% less than five years ago; this reduction is attributed to an increase in interest in other sports. It participates in the Greater Manchester Junior Hockey League which is played as a central venue league at Belle Vue Hockey Centre, Manchester.
Junior development
TMBC provides a five aside primary school competition which was attended by approximately 40 schools in 2008. There is also a secondary school competition, which used to be (c five years ago) be held at Astley College as a central venue competition. However, due to dwindling demand this competition is now held indoors.
Key issues for hockey
Pitch quality
In general, the quality of STP provision in Tameside is good and there are no reported problems with the quality of the pitch at Astley College. However, the pitch is exposed to the wind and there are no dug outs/shelters for teams or spectators.
There have been reports of vandalism to the hockey goals at Alder High School, Hyde; however, the pitch is thought to be in good condition.
Both THC and THJ have access to changing accommodation (at an extra cost) if required on match days.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 89
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Demand
Consultation has not highlighted any unmet/latent demand for additional hockey facilities in Tameside, which implies that demand is being met by current provision.
Hockey summary There are two, full sized, sand based, synthetic turf pitches (STPs), suitable to play competitive hockey in Tameside. Astley College is the main venue and is used by both Tameside and Tameside Hawks hockey clubs. In general, the quality of STP provision in Tameside is good and there are no reported problems with the quality of the pitch at Astley College. However, the pitch is exposed to the wind and there are no dug outs/shelters for teams or spectators. There have been reports of vandalism to the hockey goals at Alder High School, Hyde; however, the pitch is thought to be in good condition. Consultation has not highlighted any unmet/latent demand for additional hockey facilities in Tameside, which implies that current demand is being met by current provision.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 90
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 9: BOWLS
Introduction
The British Crown Green Bowling Association is the governing body with overall responsibility for ensuring effective governance of the sport. Locally, it is administered by the Greater Manchester Crown Green Bowling Association (GMBA) with eight men’s leagues covering the County. These include Tameside, Tameside Veterans, Saddleworth, Longdendale, Failsworth & District, Chadderton & District, and Oldham & District bowling leagues. Ladies bowls is serviced by a number of separate leagues including the Greater Manchester, Manchester & District, Tameside, Stockport and Oldham bowling leagues.
Current provision
There are 38 bowling facilities, which provide 45 crown greens. The map below shows that the distribution of provision is relatively well spread throughout the Borough.
Table 9.1: Summary of bowling greens available for community use
Analysis area No. of lawn bowling greens Ashton 11 Audenshaw 2 Denton 7 Droylsden 4 Dukinfield 4 Hyde 12 Longdendale 1 Mossley 1 Stalybridge 3 Tameside 45
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 91
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Figure 9.1 indicates that there is a moderate provision of bowling greens in the Borough. However there are areas of high population density (e.g. Dukinfield, Stalybridge and areas of Denton) that do not have any bowling green provision.
Figure 9.1: Location of bowling greens in Tameside
Tameside Bowls sites by Availability Comm unity use OLDHAM Anal ysis Area Boundary
Pop. densi ty per s q. mil e Mossley 16,000 to 28,400 175 14,200 to 16,000 13,100 to 14,200 11,800 to 13,100 10,200 to 11,800 102 8,800 to 10,200 229 Ashton- 7,300 to 8,800 8 u-Lyne 5,300 to 7,300 3,400 to 5,300 86 300 to 3,400 18 194 63 Stalybridge 30 Droylsden 66 68 104 187 198 105 69 60 91 Dukinfield Audenshaw 182
62 222 6 MANCHE STE R 71 Longdendale 193 14 Denton 67 116 Hyde 241
87 134 243 146 HIGH PEAK 181 61 161 STOCKPORT 242
Created by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (www.kkp.co.uk) © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020577.
Table 9.2: Key to bowling green location map
TMBC KKP Site name Analysis area No. of Ref ref greens 5/AN/01 63 Ashton under Lyne Cricket & Bowls Club Ashton 1 5/CT/01 18 King George V Playing Fields Ashton 3 5/CT/02 194 Rodney Street Ashton 1 5/SA/05 8 Cedar Park Ashton 2 5/WA/03 86 Bishop Close Ashton 1 5/WA/04 229 Waterloo Park Ashton 1 5/WE/03 66 West End Park (bowling) Ashton 1 5/WE/06 187 Pottinger Street (bowling green) Ashton 1 5/AU/09 198 Ryecroft Hall Audenshaw 1 5/ND/11 91 Bridge Street Audenshaw 1 5/CP/05 116 Denton Park Denton 2 5/CP/05 67 Victoria Park (bowls) Denton 2 5/HG/03 181 Off Ilkeston Walk Denton 1 5/HG/07 146 Haughton Green Park (bowling green) Denton 1 5/WD/07 14 Granada Park (bowls) Denton 1
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 92
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
TMBC KKP Site name Analysis area No. of Ref ref greens 5/SN/02 68 Floral Gardens Droylsden 2 5/CD/01 69 Dukinfield Park Dukinfield 1 5/CD/02 105 Chapel Street Dukinfield 1 5/YT/03 182 off Lord St Dukinfield 1 5/YT/03 60 Stalybridge & Dukinfield Recreation Club Dukinfield 1 5/CH/04 193 Riverside Manchester Road Hyde 1 5/CH/05 61 Hyde Bowling Club Hyde 1 5/FL/03 6 Bennett Street Hyde 1 5/FL/03 62 George & Dragon Public House Hyde 1 5/FL/05 71 Hyde Park Hyde 2 5/GC/02 242 Grapes Hotel Hyde 1 5/GC/02 161 Joel Lane Hyde 1 5/GO/04 87 Booth Street Hyde 1 5/GO/04 243 James North Memorial Bowling Green Hyde 1 5/HT/02 134 Field Farm Rd Hyde 1 5/HT/02 241 Hattersley Bowling Club Hyde 1 5/HL/05 222 The Boulevard Longdendale 1 5/TM/04 175 Mossley Park (bowling) Mossley 1 5/CM/05 102 Carr Rise Stalybridge 1 5/RI/02 30 Stamford Park (bowls) Stalybridge 2
Key issues for bowls
The key issues below summarise information gathered from postal questionnaires sent to bowls clubs playing in Tameside. In total, these were sent to 46 clubs and 35 responded, which, equates to a good response rate of over three quarters (76%).
The average playing membership per club is 44. The majority of players travel between two to five miles to play at their home ground. Half of clubs comment that average levels of membership have generally stayed the same over the previous three years. However, eight stated that membership levels have increased and a further five clubs report decreases over the previous three years. Only one club; Stalybridge & Dukinfield Recreation, report an increase in junior membership. Furthermore, only four clubs report that they have plans to increase the number of junior members. Just over half (51%) report that the quality of their designated green has improved since last season. Reasons cited for this include, inclement weather (allowing the grass to grow better), improved drainage, treatments such as verti draining and fertiliser and the work of club volunteers maintaining greens. Ten clubs report a decline in green quality and suggest this is due to a lack of fencing resulting in unofficial use, disease on the green and poor maintenance. 18 clubs report facility/development plans. Proposals include the provision of toilets, floodlights, improvements to disabled access, clubhouses and the erection of pitch side shelters.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 93
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Clubs generally do not believe that increasing the quantity of bowling greens in the area would increase club membership. One club; Grapes Hotel, suggests it would have an additional ladies team if there were more greens available at its home ground (Grapes Hotel KKP ref: 242).
Demand
Consultation with clubs reports that there has been a general decline in the number of bowling greens available for community use across Tameside in recent years. This is thought to be a result of the loss of greens, in particular in the Hyde area, due to the closure of two sites:
Bowling green on Talbot Road, Hyde – a planning application for the construction of six dwellings was refused in March 2008 as the development would result in a loss of an amenity without any sufficient justification and fails to replace an existing established recreational facility which Policy OL4 of the Tameside Unitary Development Plan seeks to protect. However, the bowling green remains closed and unused. Vymura, Talbot Road, Hyde (work site) – in 1999 the Vymura company went into administration. The site was sold to Taylor Wimpey Developments Ltd which obtained planning permission in 2008 to erect 19 dwellings. The site had previously housed football pitches and a bowling green. However, development was not completed and plans have been amended to provide a community park on site (no bowling provision).
Leagues acknowledge the decline in availability of provision, but do not consider there to have been a reduction in participation; implying that displaced players from closed greens have been accommodated at other facilities. Tameside Veterans Bowling League does report an increase in the number of teams it provides due to the aging of the general population in Tameside. However, this is not thought likely to increase demand for new greens.
Analysis of club membership shows that majority of clubs report senior membership has remained static over the last three years. Stalybridge & Dukinfield Recreation Club is the only club to report an increase in its junior membership. Four clubs have plans to increase the overall number of playing members/teams. Any increases in membership will be accommodated at existing facilities and it appears that there is no current or future demand for new provision.
Local authority site, Stamford Park (KKP ref 30) houses three crown bowling greens. Stamford Park has recently received a grant for £3.95million following a successful bid to the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF). Scheduled improvements include a new pavilion that will consist of a café, community rooms, and an information point. The pavilion will be housed on one of the bowling greens, resulting in its loss but will include ancillary facilities, available to users of the remaining two greens. The bowling green will be available until late March 2010 (subject to weather and conditions) with phased works due to commence in spring/summer 2010 (expected to take two years to complete). Consultation with users was undertaken prior to development of the plans. Clubs using the site; Mossley Park, Soroptimist and Stamford Park Veterans have plans to increase membership which can be accommodated on the remaining greens.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 94
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Hyde Bowling Club is used by two clubs; Bush and Hyde. Both clubs report a decrease in its membership levels over the previous three years. Bush BC believes any further decrease in membership may result in the Club disbanding. This could potentially result in the green becoming unused.
Latent demand
Grapes Hotel Bowling Club reports latent demand for one bowling green. It currently fields 12 teams and has 107 playing members. It considers its membership levels to be at capacity and it cannot accommodate any additional teams at its home ground (Grapes Hotel KKP ref 242). The site is owned by The Grapes Hotel and houses one crown green. Site assessments rate the green as good quality. The Club has an informal arrangement with the site and rents on an annual basis. The latent demand expressed by this club may not necessary result in the need for an additional bowling green. There are a number of sites that could accommodate further capacity such as Etherow Park, Haughton Green Playing Fields, Mossley Park and Ryecroft Hall Park. These sites are all local authority owned and currently accommodate a small number of teams.
Quality
In total, there are 15 crown greens located on 12 sites which are owned by TMBC, all of which are located in public parks. King George V Playing Fields, (KKP Ref 18) and Stamford Park (KKP ref 30) are the main providers; housing three greens per site. Both sites also accommodate a significant number of competitive games. The following table identifies the number of teams playing at local authority owned sites:
Site name No. of teams playing at the site Cedar Park 4 Victoria Park 3 Floral Gardens 3 Dukinfield Park 2 Etherow Park 1 Haughton Green Playing Fields 1 Hyde Park 4 King Georges Park 5 Mossley Park 1 Ryecroft Hall Park 1 Stamford Park 9 West End Park 1
The TMBC audit of provision involved a non technical site assessment. Findings of the assessments identify half of sites (50%) to be below average or poor quality including, greens located at Bishop Close, West End Park and Denton Park. Sites assessments noted evidence of vandalism to the green at Denton Park. Unfortunately, sites were not assessed for fencing, quality of fencing and disabled access which reflects the low scoring of greens. Four greens were rated as good quality; Booth Street, Riverside Manchester Road, Joel Lane and Bennett Street.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 95
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Grounds maintenance on TMBC owned sites lies within Leisure Services (Grounds Maintenance) and is undertaken prior and during the bowling season. There is a schedule of maintenance work carried out on all local authority sites, which includes green cutting three times per week on 25 occasions throughout the bowling season. Clubs playing on local authority greens generally rate the green quality as adequate. Just over half of clubs (51%) consider the general quality of greens in the area has improved since last season.
Accessibility
Consultation reveals that the catchment area for leagues operating in Tameside stretches throughout the Greater Manchester area. The catchment area of the Tameside Men’s Crown Green Bowling League is restricted to Tameside. It reports the majority of players travel two to five miles to play but some clubs have members travelling more than five miles to reach a club/green.
All TMBC owned greens are open for public pay and play use. Greens can be accessed from 10:00am until park closing when not being used for official matches. Bowling club members playing on a TMBC owned green have access to any local authority owned green in Tameside on a pay and play basis.
Ancillary facilities
It is usual for bowling clubs to have access to associated ancillary facilities, such as changing rooms and a social area/kitchen. All TMBC owned sites have a pavilion; however, their quality varies. A large number of clubs have facility improvement plans to increase the clubhouse and quality, some of which are summarised below.
Newton Lime Street Bowling Club (playing at Chapel Street KKP ref 105) reports aspirations to make improvements to its clubhouse facility and installation of floodlights. However, greater tenure of the site is required to access funding. The site is understood to be TMBC owned and leased to Lees Brewery. The site originally housed Dukinfield Working Men’s Club which has since been demolished. There were plans to build residential homes on the site but this has never materialised. It has an informal arrangement with Lees Brewery to use the green and has recently invested in improving the quality of the green. It believes better ancillary facilities would attract more teams, in particular ladies and junior teams. The site currently has a portaloo but no social facility/kitchen for club events.
One of the main factors impacting on the quality of public bowling greens in Tameside, is vandalism. Greens are often located in parks or recreation grounds and can be accessed by the general public. Vandalism is considered to be an issue at a number of sites including Stamford Park, Ryecroft Hall, Floral Gardens, Haughton Green, Hyde Bowling Club and Chapel Street. The clubhouse facility at Stamford Park burnt down in 2009 through an arson attack. Newton Lime Street Bowling Club reports vandalism has reduced due to the provision of new fencing at the site.
There are also some reported issues relating to misuse of greens, particularly with young people playing ball games. Some TMBC greens are fenced, which helps to deter misuse. However, this also restricts access for general pay and play as clubs are the only key holders of the greens.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 96
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
The following table summarises the key site specific issues raised by clubs during consultation.
Table 9.3: Summary of site specific issues
KKP Ref Site name Comments 8 Cedar Park, Queens Road The clubhouse facility has undergone facility improvements in 2009. However, consultation reports demand for further improvements including provision of floodlights, green improvements and cutting the overhanging trees on site. Consultation reports vandalism is an issue. 18 King George V Park, Henrietta The site houses three greens. There is demand Street for more regular green cutting and attention to surrounding areas of the green. Clubs report the green has suffered from vandalism in the last year such as damage from riding bikes on the green. 26 Oxford Park, Stockport Road The clubhouse has recently been improved. Oxford Park Vets Bowling Club report demand for toilets. Users of the green can access toilets in the nearby Leisure Centre. However, consultation reports this is not approved by the leisure centre management. The Club has plans to increase its membership levels; including ladies and junior members. 66 West End Park, Manchester Consultation suggests the green quality is much Road poorer since last season due to the green being out of use for approximately 18 months. As a result, West End Veterans Bowling Club played fixtures at Oxford Park. 60 Stalybridge & Dukinfield In total, the green is used by 13 teams on a Recreation Club weekly basis and accommodates approximately 130 matches per season. Stalybridge & Dukinfield Recreation Club report there are limited vacant slots to accommodate any growth in teams. The Club has facility improvement plans which include replacement of windows to clubhouse, disabled facilities and external lighting. It is also seeking to replace its maintenance machinery. Vandalism is an ongoing issue with instances such as damage to the fencing and green. 17 Haughton Green Bowling Club The bowling greens were re-laid approximately two years ago. Funding from Groundwork enabled the creation of Haughton Green Bowling Club. The Club report demand for a stand/shelter and storage facilities. The bowlers have access to a hut facility and can also access facilities at nearby Green Park Centre.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 97
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
KKP Ref Site name Comments 67 Victoria Park, Victoria Street The site is used by three clubs; Victoria Park Ladies and Denton Vet and Post Office Engineers. Consultation reports there are plans to upgrade the toilet facilities. There is also demand for fencing to help reduce levels of vandalism. 242 Grapes Hotel The Club has plans to refurbish the clubhouse facility and huts on site. The quality of the green has reduced compared to the previous bowling season due to Fusarium, which is a common disease present in the UK on greens. However, the Club report this is now under control. 61 Hyde Bowling Club The site is used by two clubs; Bush and Hyde. An area of the green has moss due to overhanging trees. 243 James North Memorial Bowls The site has recently undergone clubhouse Club facility improvements. The site is owned by TMBC and is leased to the Club. The Club report demand for covered spectator seating. 102 Carr Rise The site is owned by TMBC and is leased to Carrbrook bowling club on a 15 year lease (due to expire 2012). The Club is in the process of facility upgrades which include resurfacing the access areas which will enable better disabled access. It will be seeking funding for this. The green is set within a parkland area. Consultation reports the Club would like the Council to adopt maintenance of this area. 68 Floral Gardens The site is the homeground of Droylsden Park and Droylsden Ladies bowling clubs. The quality of the green has improved since last season due to fencing of the green. Consultation rates the quality of the green as good quality. However, site assessments score the green as adequate. Consultation identifies car parking is not adequate to service the greens and there is only on street parking available. 69 Dukinfield Park, King Street The Club is seeking funding to install toilet facilities, fencing and improve disabled access at the site. The green regularly suffers from unofficial use with instances such as football and golfing on a regular basis and vehicles being driven onto the green. It believes provision of fencing will help to reduce unofficial use and will help towards improving the green quality. 71 Hyde Park, Park Road The green has improved since last season due to increased maintenance work. Vandalism to the green and clubhouse facility is an issue. The green also has an issue with underage drinking during weekends and during the evenings.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 98
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
KKP Ref Site name Comments 64 Etherow Bowling Club, The There is demand for better maintenance of the Boulevard off Turner Street green including treatment, particular towards the end of the bowling season. 63 Ashton under Lyne Cricket & The site houses a bowling green and cricket Bowls Club pitch. Drainage on the green is an issue to the construction of a new road adjacent to the site. The Club would like to install drainage but funding is required for this. The site suffers from vandalism. 65 Mono Pumps Ltd The site is privately owned by Mono Pumps Ltd. Consultation rates the green quality as average.
Bowls summary There are 45 bowling greens, of which 12 sites are owned by TMBC. Consultation highlights that there has been a general decline in the number of bowling greens available for community use in Tameside in recent years due to the loss of greens in the area. Vandalism is an issue on a large number of sites. Clubs believe that the provision of fencing may help to reduce levels of vandalism and in return help to sustain and increase green quality. Clubs generally do not believe that increasing the number of bowling greens in the area would increase club membership. Site assessments scored half of sites (50%) as below average or poor. However, four greens were rated as good quality; Booth Street, Riverside Manchester Road, Joel Lane and Bennett Street. Analysis of club membership indicates that the majority of senior membership has remained static over the last three years. Clubs that are seeking to increase membership suggest any increase can be accommodated on existing provision. Latent demand expressed by The Grapes Hotel Bowling Club could potentially be accommodated on other greens where there is capacity for further match play such as Etherow Park, Haughton Green Playing Fields, Mossley Park and Ryecroft Hall Park. These sites are all local authority owned and currently accommodate a small number of teams. It is not thought likely that current and future demand for bowls will result in the need for new provision.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 99
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 10: GOLF
Introduction
The England Golf Partnership comprises the English Golf Union, English Women’s Golf Association and the Professional Golfers Association with the support of the Golf Foundation and Sport England. Its aim, through the implementation of its Whole Sport Plan (2009 - 2013, is to increase and widen participation levels in golf and achieve a vision of being ‘The Leading Golf Nation in the World by 2020’ from grass roots right through to elite level8, as follows:
GROW 74,600 new participants by 2013
SUSTAIN EXCEL 23% Englishmen, 5% increase in 13% satisfaction levels Englishwomen in by 2013 (subject their respective to further European Orders discussions) of Merit (TBC)
8 http://www.englishgolfunion.org/showpage.asp?code=000100020006
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 100
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Current provision
There are six golf clubs in Tameside. None of the clubs are owned or managed by TMBC. Golf junior competition is strong in Tameside with all clubs competing in the Tameside Golf League.
Figure 10.1: Location of golf courses in the Borough
Tameside Golf sites by Availability Community use OLDHAM Analysis Area Boundary
Po p. d e ns i t y pe r s q. mil e Mossley 16,000 to 28,400 14,200 to 16,000 13,100 to 14,200 11,800 to 13,100 78 10,200 to 11,800 8,800 to 10,200 24 4 Ashton- 7,300 to 8,800 u-Lyne 5,300 to 7,300 3,400 to 5,300 300 to 3,400
S talybr idge Droylsden
Dukinfield Audenshaw 130 121
MANCHESTER 115 L o ngd e nd ale Denton Hyde
HIGH PE AK
STO CKPORT 231
Created by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (www.kkp.co.uk) © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020577.
Table 10.1: Key to golf course map
TMBC KKP Site name Analysis area Community Holes ref ref use 5/AH/01 78 Ashton Golf Club Ashton Yes 18 5/AU/10 130 Fairfield Golf & Sailing Club Audenshaw Yes 18 5/WD/09 115 Denton Golf Course Denton Yes 18 5/GC/04 231 Werneth Low Golf Club Hyde Yes 11 5/YT/12 121 Dukinfield Golf Course Hyde Yes 21 5/CM/03 244 Stamford Golf Club Stalybridge Yes 18
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 101
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Summary of club consultation for golf
Fairfield Golf & Sailing Club
The course has recently undergone a £1.8m redevelopment and has increased in size and now provides additional holes.
In order to attract additional members the Club has introduced a taster trial membership offering members four months for the price of two. In addition, it offers a range of membership types including gents, ladies, junior and social. The clubhouse facility accommodates 130 people and includes a licensed bar.
Dukinfield Golf Club
The facility has undergone a number of developments both on and off the course throughout the recent years.
In 2008, the Club sold an area of the course (losing two holes) for housing development. It then purchased agricultural land to build a new clubhouse facility and provide six additional holes, taking it to a 21 hole course. The additional holes will be playable from March/April 2010. The new clubhouse includes a shop, changing facilities and a bar/ dining area. The Clubhouse is now considered to be excellent quality.
The course is renowned for its excellent quality. Membership stands at approximately 500 playing members, including ladies and juniors. The Club reports membership levels have remained static over the previous three years.
There are playing restrictions for ladies with designated reserved ‘tee off’ times for competitions. The Club has active links with Broadbent Fold Primary School and delivers Tri-golf at the school’s sports hall.
Denton Golf Club
This 18 hole course is situated just off the M60 motorway and is easily accessible. It also attracts residents from outside of Tameside. The clubhouse facility is rated as good quality and has disabled access.
It does not operate a waiting list. The Club recently introduced a golf analysis program. This is a computer software programme that captures compares and improves golf swings for golfers. Junior membership is strong and stands at approximately 70 members.
During summer 2009, the Club worked with Tameside Sports Development to provide young people taster sessions. This was well attended by young people in the area. Following this, the Club has introduced a special junior membership to encourage more juniors to join.
Stamford Golf Club
The Club did not respond to the consultation. The Club is a private members club and provides a 18 hole course which lies on the eastern slopes of the Tame Valley River and is overlooked by the Pennine hills.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 102
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Werneth Low Golf Club
The Club regards itself as a ‘small club’ (located to the south of Manchester). However, membership levels are relatively high with 210 male, 20 female and 12 junior members. In the previous three years there has been a decrease of 47 members; including 35 full and 12 junior members. The Club believes this reduction follows national golf trends. It comments there has been a change in the demographics of it’s members. In particular, young people who do not want the discipline of club membership. It plans to increase the number of playing members. The Club has recently designated its own junior members area of its website and hopes this will encourage additional members.
The Club rates the course as average quality. Consultation reports the quality has reduced since last season due to adverse weather conditions and financial budget. The course provides 11 holes (playing 7-4-7 loop). There are ongoing development plans (when funds allow) to the course and clubhouse. There is a public right of way running though the course which attracts dog walkers onto the course. The Club suggests this creates a health and safety issue.
Ashton under Lyne Golf Club
This course provides 18 holes and is nestled in the foot hills of the Pennines on the edge of the Greater Manchester conurbation. It is a private members club. It operates a small waiting list for membership. However, the members list is open to social members as well as playing members.
The Club provides bar and clubhouse facility on site which is rated as good quality. It has a putting green and practice area. Over recent years it has undergone a number of improvements which include; increasing the course in length, additional bunkers, improved tees and greens and planting.
Accessibility
Sport England recommends that the drive time catchment for golf courses be set at 20 minutes. This is considered by clubs to be an appropriate distance to travel to access a golf course in Tameside. Most clubs report the majority of its members travel two to five miles to access the course.
Clubs in Tameside tend to offer ‘pay and play’ options, although there are some restrictions and conditions: such as dress code and member accompaniment in some cases. This is important given that there is no municipal course. Clubs also offer coaching opportunities (via the Professional who is, in most cases, based on site) for non-members and more comprehensive membership in order to attract additional members.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 103
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Development
In order to increase junior participation, the Golf Foundation has created a junior development programme ‘Community Links’. It has a number of aims, including:
Increase the number of young people playing the sport. Enable more young people to try the game in their school or community. Enable young people to try the game in a welcoming club or facility environment at little or no cost. Make the young person’s introduction to golf a fun and safe experience. Ensure that beginners receive expert tuition on the basic skills and swing technique delivered through an emphasis on learning through games and activities. Teach beginners the principal rules and etiquette of the game. Provide young players with the opportunity to progress through the Junior Golf Passport to a level where they can play 18 holes in 110 shots or better. Strengthen the links between clubs, schools and the wider community.
In return for their involvement, clubs delivering the programme receive a number of benefits including registration as a Junior Golf Passport user which includes listing on the Golf Foundation website, support pack including promotion letters and posters to use in schools, sessions plans, support from England Golf Partnership Development Officers and access to levels of discretionary grants ranging from £200 to £1k. There are no clubs from Tameside delivering the Community Links Programme.
Tameside School Sports Partnership has delivered golf training to primary school teachers for the previous four years. Following this, some schools have implemented the Tri Golf programme. Tri golf has been included in the Greater Manchester Mini Games 2010. Consultation reports future local authority competition structures are likely to be put in place to provide schools and young people with a progression route to the mini games.
Ashton Moss Golf Course – planning permission (ref: 09/00821/FUL) was approved in December 2009 for a Golf Driving Range, Par 3, 9 Hole Golf Course, Training and Members Area, Five-a-Side and Eleven-a-Side Football Facility. Golf Club Complex Building, Football Changing facility and Green keeper’s compound. Currently it is unclear of the targeted date for completion but it is likely that the development will be influenced by the “credit crunch” and progress of the overall Ashton 3000 development (residential and commercial development).
Key issues for golf
Demand
The Active People Survey shows that adult golf participation in the North West has slightly increased from 2.34% in 2005/06 to 2.74% in 2007/08. However, clubs KKP consulted with identify senior participation levels have remained static over the last three years. Clubs which did not respond to the consultation (Denton, Stamford Fairfield Golf & Sailing Club and Ashton under Lyne Golf Club) may also have experienced an increase in senior membership levels.
In general, the clubs in Tameside appear to have capacity to increase membership levels, with the vast majority (except Ashton under Lyne).
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 104
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Quality
The general quality of golf courses in Tameside is judged, by the majority of clubs to be adequate, good or excellent quality. No club rates its course as poor quality. This is likely to be mainly due to clubs employing designated green keepers to maintain and improve course quality.
In general, clubs report minimal levels of vandalism; however, there are a number of reports of misuse. For example, Werneth Low and Stamford golf courses have had a number of incidences including acts of vandalism to the course, greens, walls and flags. The courses are easily accessible as there is a public right of way running through them.
Golf summary There are six golf clubs in Tameside; all are privately owned/managed. Clubs generally regard the quality of their courses as adequate, good or excellent. Golf participation is not currently measured and there are no formal school/golf clubs link for the Tri Golf programme. However, there are some schools within the SSP delivering the programme. Tri golf has been included in the Greater Manchester Mini Games 2010. Therefore, future local authority competition structures are likely to be put in place to provide schools and young people with a progression route to the mini games. The Active People Survey show that adult golf participation in the North West has slightly increased from 2.34% in 2005/06 to 2.74% in 2007/08.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 105
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 11: OTHER SPORTS
Tameside has a variety of other outdoor sports provision that have been identified by TMBC during the audit of provision and the following sections include details of these.
11.1 Lacrosse
Current provision
There are three lacrosse pitches available in Tameside, two of which, are new and located at St Albans Avenue (shared ground with Ashton RFC) and the other, at Richmond Street. Ashton Lacrosse Club is the only club in the area and it provides teams at U12, U14 and U16 age groups in addition to two senior teams. Matches are played at St Albans Avenue on Saturdays and the club train on a small MUGA at Rosehill School. In previous years, the Club used the pitch at Richmond Street but has relocated to St Albans Avenue because it is in need of access to two pitches.
The Club has access to ancillary facilities (changing rooms, showers and social areas) at Ashton RFC through an associate membership. The parking is adequate, even at times of high demand.
Quality of provision
The pitch at Richmond Street is considered by the club, to be of poor quality and the Club were forced to reverse many of its fixtures last year. The quality of the pitches is better at St Albans Avenue, but there is a concern that drainage will be an issue in the winter months. However, the pitches are not correctly marked for lacrosse and the Club is in talks with TMBC regarding the fees paid to improve the quality of provision at St Albans Avenue because the Club consider the current improvements to be inadequate.
The Club would be willing and able to pay a nominal/peppercorn rent to TMBC and maintain the pitches at St Albans Avenue themselves; this is a similar arrangement to that held between Ashton RFC and TMBC on the nearby pitches.
The Club train at Rosehill Primary School on a small MUGA but the lighting is not suitable for small ball games and it is not of an adequate size. The girls’ team train at Fairfield School. The floodlights at Richmond Street STP pose a similar problem for small ball games and means that it is hard to see the ball because of the shadows created and the angle/brightness of the lights. The Club has tried to obtain training slots elsewhere but have not been able to find availability.
Club development
The Club is continuing to expand and hopes to generate a junior girls’ team in the coming season, and matches would be played on Sundays. It believes it would be possible to field additional teams given more pitch space.
The Club anticipate working closely with New Charter Academy on its completion as the school playing fields will be adjacent to those at St Albans Avenue. It is willing to provide coaching in schools and develop an official link to the School and hopes to be able to use the synthetic pitch on site. The Club already has official school-club links with Ashton Sixth Form College.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 106
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Lacrosse summary There are three lacrosse pitches available in Tameside, two of which, are new and located at St Albans Avenue (shared ground with Ashton RFC), and the other at Richmond Street. Ashton Lacrosse Club (the Club) is the only club in the area and there are teams for the U12, U14 and U16 in addition to two senior teams. The Club train at Rosehill Primary School on a small MUGA but the lighting is not suitable for small ball games and it is not of an adequate size. The girls’ team train at Fairfield School. The Club is continuing to expand and hopes to generate a junior girls’ team in the coming season. The Club expresses latent demand for additional pitch space.
11.2 Athletics
The sport is governed by England Athletics (EA) which also works at a regional and local level via regional and county associations. There is one main athletics club in Tameside: East Cheshire Harriers & Tameside Athletics Club, (EAC) which has its own facility in Ashton (Richmond Street 5/TA/01).
Current provision
EAC has provision for track, field, cross country and road running and leases the track, on a long term lease, from TMBC, at Richmond Park Stadium, Ashton.
The Club is considered to have strong junior endurance and disability sections with a high level of women and girls participating. EAC has a former paralympian based at the Club and this is thought to encourage other disabled athletes to travel from outside the Borough to access the high standard of provision. The track facility at EAC includes:
Eight lane sprint track. Six lane 400m track. Long and triple jump pits. Field area suitable for javelin, discus, shot-put and hammer throwing.
The track is exposed and there is no shelter for spectators. This has resulted in previous cancellations of the Tameside Secondary Schools Athletics Competition, which has now relocated to facilities at Sports City, Manchester for this reason. Schools are generally unhappy that additional costs associated to travel and facility hire now have to be incurred and it is thought that this is not sustainable.
EAC has recently improved the hammer cage and is applying for funding for a cover for the long/triple jump sand pit. There is also a recognised need to improve the pole vault area in order to meet league requirements (EAC has been promoted to the Northern League Young Athletics Competition Premier League from 2009). It is estimated that this improvement will require an investment of approximately £20,000.
Although the track is often used to capacity at training nights, it was cleaned in 2009 and, as a result, is of high quality. However, the field area often becomes overgrown. This is because the grass is cut according to a fixed schedule (Ashton District Assembly), and growth can increase between cuts.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 107
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Ancillary provision is adequate, and the clubhouse includes a bar area, separate male/female changing and showers and a small training room with free weights.
There are future plans to build a cycle track on land adjacent to Richmond Street Playing Fields. Any new provision will be managed by the athletics club. The development will also result in additional space for the athletics club to use for training purposes.
Club development
The Tameside Athletics Development Group was formed in 2002. Its main aim is to develop athletics within the Borough at junior level, linking all interested athletes to EAC. It meets five to six times per year and is working to identify opportunity to gain external funding.
The Group now has a four year development plan in place, which covers junior development of track and field athletes as well as road and cross country, from participation level through to excellence level. It works with all primary and secondary schools to offer the athletes a pathway to the sport.
It has also established two satellite centres at Hyde Technology School, and more recently, at Fairfield High School, where young people are given the chance to attend a ten week starter club. During this period, young people are given the chance to compete in an indoor competition representing the Club on a monthly basis. The Group also work to improve club facilities and equipment.
EAC has Clubmark accreditation, which is due for renewal in 2010. The Club has also been awarded Tameside club of the year on a number of occasions, including 2008. It has established official links with the following schools, through which athletics festivals are delivered:
Our Lady of Mount Carmel. Waterloo Primary School. Russell Scott Primary School. St Thomas More. St Anne’s RC, Audenshaw. Broadbent Fold Primary School. Samuel Laycock High School. St Mary’s RC Primary School.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 108
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Athletics summary There is one main athletics club in Tameside: East Cheshire Harriers & Tameside AC, (EAC) based at Richmond Park Stadium, Ashton. The track is exposed to strong winds and there is no shelter on site for spectators. However, the quality of track is high and investment has been used to improve provision (hammer cage and track surface) in recent years. Ancillary provision is adequate, and the clubhouse includes a bar area, separate male/female changing and showers and a small training room with free weights. There are plans to build a cycle track on land adjacent (Richmond Street Playing Fields) to EAC, which would not result in the loss of the existing sports pitches. The development of the track, with lighting, will mean that EAC will have additional space to use for training purposes. The track will also be used by Mossley Cycling Club and the disability cycling arm of Tameside Tigers; Criterion Racing (a closed circuit race, on road bikes for a set period of time) will also be possible on the track.
11.3 Tennis
Introduction
Governance of the sport is through the British Tennis (also referred to as the Lawn Tennis Association or LTA). As with other sports in Tameside, regional governance is split between Lancashire and Cheshire; however, the Tameside Tennis Development Coach (TDC) covers the whole of the District. TMBC operates a tennis development group and works closely with the British Tennis and the TDC to:
Support existing clubs. Develop and support tennis coaches in the area. Work to maintain existing and establish additional school-club links. Identify and support talented players.
Development
The Tameside TDC is based at, and part funded by, Priory Tennis Club (PTC) in Stalybridge (KKP ref 2); also funded by TMBC. The Coach works with the local School Sports Partnership (SSP) and runs competitions and talent identification days. Both the TDC and PTC work with the Tameside Sport and Physical Activity Alliance in order to increase participation, in both formal tennis and informal activity on park/recreation ground courts. West Hill School is a satellite centre for tennis in Tameside and focuses on mini tennis (indoor).
PTC has aspirations to develop satellite centres throughout Tameside, initially targeting areas with high levels of deprivation to deliver “Kidzone” tennis. However, the Club has been unsuccessful in applying for funding to develop the scheme. It also wants to increase the junior section following interest triggered through the satellite centres.
Priory Tennis Club has Clubmark accreditation, and as a result, is a priority for work with British Tennis. Rosehill Tennis Club is relatively self sufficient and as such, TDC and British Tennis are looking to further develop their relationship with the Club.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 109
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
The Places to Play Strategy is being driven by British Tennis to increase the opportunities to participate, compete and get access to coaching at all levels. The Strategy gives clear guidance on expectations for financial support from the resources and funds available to British Tennis.
Delivery of the Places to Play Strategy will increase the number and standard of facilities available throughout the UK. These facilities will be available to the whole community at a reasonable, affordable cost whilst sustaining the financial viability of the clubs and tennis providers. Currently, no investment has been identified for tennis in Tameside through Places to Play.
Current provision
There are 13 tennis courts in Tameside (plus two disused at Sunnybank Park) and two tennis clubs. The level of provision and size varies between each club and site. For example, Priory Tennis Club (KKP ref 2) is the largest in the area and has four artificial turf courts which are maintained to a high standard, which contrasts with the tennis court at Victoria Park (KKP ref 267) where there is only one court on a hard surface.
Figure 11.2 illustrates that each analysis area, with the exception of Longendale and Mossley, have provision for tennis.
Figure 11.2: Location of tennis courts in Tameside
T ameside Tennis sites by Availability
Non-c ommunity use OLDHAM Community use Analysis Area Boundary
Pop. densi ty per s q. mil e Mossley
16,000 to 28,400 14,200 to 16,000 13,100 to 14,200 11,800 to 13,100 10,200 to 11,800 1 8,800 to 10,200 195 7,300 to 8,800 Ashton- 5,300 to 7,300 u-Lyne 3,400 to 5,300 300 to 3,400 Stalybridge Droylsden 220 265
80 2 Dukinfield Aude nshaw
MANCHE ST E R 158 Longdendale
Denton
Hyde
HIGH PEAK
STOCKPORT
Created by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (www.kkp.co.uk) © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020577.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 110
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Table 11.1: Key to tennis court map
TMBC KKP Site name Analysis area Community Number of Ref ref use courts 5/AH/02 1 Rose Hill Tennis Club Ashton Yes 2 5/AH/03 195 Rosehill Methodist Ashton No 1 Community School 5/WE/02 265 West End Park Ashton Yes 2 5/AU/03 80 Assheton Avenue Audenshaw Yes 2 5/SN/06 220 Sunnybank Park* Droylsden No 2 5/FL/04 158 Hyde Technology School Hyde Yes 2 5/HA/02 2 Priory Tennis Club Mottram Stalybridge Yes 4 Rd *Please note that these courts are disused due to poor quality
In addition to the above, Victoria Park in Denton (8/CP/04) also provides a hard court MUGA with marked tennis courts.
The only private club courts in Tameside are located at the two tennis clubs, Rosehill and Priory tennis clubs. TMBC owns courts located at West End Park (two courts), Assheton Avenue (two courts), Victoria Park (one court with basketball over marked) and Sunnybank Park (two courts). None of the park sites are used for competitive matches. However, these are available for general free usage. Assheton Avenue and Sunnybank Park are currently in a derelict state being overgrown with weeds and as such are unplayable. There has been a significant reduction in public tennis court provision in the last five to ten years which is further exacerbated with courts continuing to fall into disrepair.
Public provision is generally underused for casual use (primarily due to poor quality); however, this type of provision forms an intrinsic feature to many public recreation grounds and provides opportunities for casual participation, which may otherwise not be captured. Usage of public courts is particularly seasonal but good quality courts are better used. Public courts, such as those at West End Park, Ashton can also provide strategic reserve for club use, where clubs are operating to capacity, particularly for junior use.
Priory Tennis Club has floodlights on all four courts, but Rosehill Tennis Club does not. Floodlights are estimated to increase the number of playing hours by 35 per cent between November and April. Provision of floodlighting often allows clubs to provide structured coaching sessions during the evenings throughout the year. British Tennis guidelines state that club facilities should be able to accommodate 40 members per court and 60 members per floodlit court.
Club summary
Priory Tennis Club
PTC is affiliated to British Tennis and has four teams. Its home ground accommodates four floodlit courts (KKP ref 2). Mini tennis is also available and the Club has achieved Clubmark accreditation. PTC has a membership of 198, of which 96 are under 16. There is also a regular junior section for U17, which is particularly popular and operates a waiting list.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 111
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
The Club also runs summer tennis camps for boys and girls aged eight and over that wish to improve at tennis, through a fun, structured tennis. This helps to increase tennis participation in the area and increase membership/awareness of the Club. However, it does not express any demand for additional courts to meet current or anticipated future increases in participation.
Rosehill Tennis Club
Rosehill TC is a member’s only club located in Ashton. There are two outdoor courts in good condition and a clubhouse, with a small amount of parking on site. The Club currently has two tennis teams playing in the Oldham District League.
The Club does not express any demand for additional courts to meet current or anticipated future increases in participation. The option for floodlighting at the site could help to increase capacity in the future if required.
Demand
Although neither club expresses specific demand for additional courts, Priory TC reports pressure on courts and changing accommodation at peak times, and a need for additional personnel and coaches to support the U17/U18 teams.
If required, additional capacity could be sought at Rosehill TC by floodlighting courts. However, planning permission will depend on the proximity of the site to residential housing, which may be prohibitive.
Demand for public courts is much more difficult to quantify and should therefore be led by a strategic standard of providing and maintaining courts on an area by area basis. There is no current provision of public tennis courts in Stalybridge (although a private club is based here), Dukinfield, Longdendale and Mossley.
Tennis summary There are 13 tennis courts in Tameside (plus two disused courts) and two tennis clubs. The level of provision and size varies between each club and site. Each analysis area, with the exception of Longendale and Mossley has provision for tennis. Public tennis court provision is generally of poor quality and reflects low usage levels. There has also been a significant reduction in the number of courts provided in recent years. There is currently no reported unmet demand from clubs for additional courts and there is some opportunity, if required, to floodlight club provision to create additional capacity in the future. Although public provision is generally underused for casual use, it is recommended this type of provision forms an intrinsic feature to many public recreation grounds and provides opportunities for casual participation, which may otherwise not be captured. There are no public courts in Stalybridge, Dukinfield, Londendale and Mossley. Given that there is a push through Tameside Sport and Physical Activity Alliance to increase participation in both formal tennis and informal activity, current public provision should at least be retained and strategic consideration given to increasing access to informal provision in those areas without provision. Increasing access to school sites could go some way towards meet this perceived deficiency.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 112
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
11.4 Cycling
There is one formal cycle/BMX track located in Tameside at Longdendale Sports Centre (ref 5/HT/07). Although it has fallen into disrepair there has been some renewed interest from local young people in refurbishing the facility, although this is currently being assessed.
There are plans to build a cycle track on land adjacent to Richmond Street Playing Fields, which would not result in the loss of any of the existing sports pitches. The 1km track would be tarmac and would fit in around the sports pitches, meaning the track will not be a conventional shape. To date there have been some objections from local residents regarding the lighting and increase in traffic to the area. However, it is hoped with additional consultation these issues will be resolved and the track will be complete in early 2011. British Cycling has set aside £300,000 in its investment programme for the development.
The track will be used by Mossley Cycling Club and the disability cycling arm of Tameside Tigers; Criterion Racing (a closed circuit race, on road bikes for a set period of time) will also be possible on the track. It is likely the maintenance/upkeep of the track will be carried out by the athletics club in partnership with Mossley Cycling Club. The facility will be used by the community as part of organised sessions only, such as cycling proficiency lessons, but will remain closed when formal activities are not taking place.
The scope of the works for the new track includes:
Closed loop cycle track, 1km long and average width of 4.6m. Fully fenced track using 2.1m high steel fencing. Spectator area to rear of Curzon Ashton football ground, which will also act as a pit area for race events. Portable PA system. Street style lighting. Redevelopment of the existing car parking facilities (currently unsurfaced and in poor condition), which will increase capacity to 78 cars. Brick cycle shelter to store bicycles and race equipment.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 113
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 12: EDUCATION PROVISION
Introduction
The provision of playing pitches at schools and colleges can make an important contribution to the overall availability of stock within a particular analysis area. It is therefore important to have accurate information about the number, type, quality and availability of pitches within the education sector in Tameside.
The new Education and Inspection Act (2006) came into force in early 2009 and amends the existing legislation within the Schools Standards and Framework Act (SSFA) 1998, which was originally introduced by the Government requiring all schools to seek approval from the Secretary of State for Education and Employment (Education and Skills since July 2001) for the sale or change of use of their playing fields. Section 77 of the SSFA seeks to protect school playing fields against disposal or change of use by requiring the prior consent of the Secretary of State before disposal or change of use may take place. The School Playing Fields General Disposal and Change of Use Consent (No.3) 2004 order highlights some limited circumstances in which the requisite approval has been delegated to the relevant governing body (i.e. local authority), which can decide whether the disposal or change of use meets the circumstances and criteria set out in the Consent Order9.
School sports partnerships (SSP)
The SSP programme is part of the national Physical Education (PE) and Sport Strategy for Young People (PESSYP). This is led by the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) to widen participation, raise standards and improve the quality of PE and school sport.
The objective of the Strategy is to ensure that by 2011 all children are offered at least five hours of sport every week, comprising:
At least two hours high quality PE in the curriculum (5-16 year olds). The opportunity for at least a further three hours sport beyond the school day delivered by a range of school, community and club providers (5-19 yr olds).
SSP have a number of targets to reach by 2010, with individual key performance indicators (KPIs). These are:
Increase in participation in high quality PE. The KPI is for 75% of the schools to deliver 90 minutes of high quality curriculum time. Increase in participation in high quality out of school hours learning (OSHL). All schools will offer at least two OSHL opportunities to KS1 pupils. Increase in participation in high quality informal physical activity. This will be achieved by making effective use of playground markings with all secondary schools to offer at least two informal activities. Increase participation in high quality competition and performance, to include the establishment of a calendar of sports events and competitions.
9 Full and detailed guidance can be accessed at http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/docbank/index.cfm?id=11600
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 114
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Improvement in attitude, behaviour and attendance in PE and sport through the provision of structured activities during break and lunchtimes to discourage incidences of bullying and disruptive behaviour. Increase in attainment and achievement in and through PE, OSHL and sport. This will involve all secondary schools achieving accreditation for delivering the sports leadership level 1 course, and all schools to work towards gaining an accreditation of some sort. Increase in participation in community based sport. This will require the strengthening of school-club links.
In addition to the existing PESSCL strategy work, it also seeks to:
Create new sporting opportunities for young people in the FE sector by appointing FE sport co-ordinators, linked to school sport partnerships. Invest more in coaching in schools, FE colleges and community sports networks. Create a national network of competition managers to work with school sport partnerships on inter-school sport. Provide a more attractive range of sporting activity based on what young people say they want. Create a national network; one in each partnership, of multi-sport clubs for young people with disabilities. Establish a National School Sport Week, championed by Dame Kelly Holmes, motivating young people to take part in competitive sport.
National Competition Framework
Tameside SSP is also part of the National Competition Framework. The aim of the framework is to provide a competitive environment for all young people and to help sport through attracting, supporting, retaining and passing on talent. The vision is to establish a high quality competitive school sport structure by developing school based competition pathways. This can be achieved through inter-school (local), inter-partnership (Borough) and county, regional and national levels. The framework looks to develop: annual multi- skill festivals for Key Stage 1; termly multi-skill festivals for lower Key Stage 2; multi-sport competitions and central venue leagues for upper Key Stage 2 and lower Key Stage 3; and, inter-school leagues and cup competitions for Key Stage 3 & 4. The Youth Games fit into this.
TMBC Sports Development has established primary school pathways, which are as follows:
Year 1 and 2: future stars. Year 3 and 4: skill stars. Year 5 and 6: sports stars (sports specific).
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 115
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Primary schools
Note that a number of schools declared their facilities available for community use. However, no teams have been allocated to these, so the pitches (listed below) have not been included in the supply and demand analysis.
Table 12.1: Primary schools without community use
KKP ref Site name Analysis area 96 Broadoak Primary School 101 Canon Johnson C of E Primary School 252 Heys Primary School 152 Holden Clough Primary School 155 Hurst Knoll C of E Primary School 183 Our Lady of Mount Carmel Primary School Ashton 195 Rosehill Methodist Community School 203 St Christophers RC Primary School 211 St Peters C of E Primary School 223 The Heys Primary School 230 Waterloo Primary School 233 West End Primary School 85 Audenshaw Primary School 149 Hawthorn School (closed and subject to planning application) Audenshaw 185 Poplar Street Primary School 112 Corrie Primary School 113 Danebank Primary School 117 Denton Primary School 142 Greswell Primary School 166 Linden Road Primary School Denton 246 Manor Green Primary school 197 Russell Scott Primary School 206 St John’s Fisher Primary School 208 St Mary`s Primary School, Denton 141 Greenside Primary School Droylsden 213 St Stephens RC Primary School 92 Broadbent Fold Primary School 169 Lyndhurst Primary & Community School 189 Ravensfield Primary School Dukinfield 207 St John’s Primary & Nursery School 209 St Mary's Primary School 239 Yew Tree Primary, Oakdale Special School & Acorn Nursery
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 116
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
KKP ref Site name Analysis area 89 Bradley Green Primary School 118 Dowson Primary School 135 Flowery Field Primary School 136 Gee Cross Trinity Primary School Hyde 157 Hyde St Pauls Primary and Nursery School 165 Leigh Primary School 180 Oakfield Primary School 205 St James Catholic Primary School 77 Arundale Community Primary & Nursery School 93 Broadbottom C of E Primary School Longdendale 153 Hollingworth Primary School 255 Mottram Primary School 171 Micklehurst All Saints Primary School 172 Milton Primary School Mossley 251 St Joseph's RC Primary School 76 Arlies Community Primary School 97 Buckton Vale Primary School 138 Gorse Hall Primary & Nursery School 254 Millbrook Primary School 192 Ridge Hill Primary School Stalybridge 210 St Pauls C of E Primary School 212 St Peters RC Primary & Nursery School 215 Staly Hill Junior School 236 Wildbank Primary School 109 Copley High School (STP)
Secondary schools
The following secondary school sites have been allocated as having ‘no’ community use as the consultation did not identify any teams to be playing competitively on the site.
Table 12.2: Secondary schools without community use
KKP ref Site name Area 144 Hartshead Sports College 204 St Damiens RC Science College 218 Stamford High School Ashton 99 Cannon Burrows C of E Primary School 100 Cannon Burrows Primary School 84 Audenshaw High School Audenshaw 124 Egerton Park College 214 St Thomas Moore College Denton 226 Two Trees High School 120 Droylsden Girls School 132 Fairfield High School Droylsden 167 Littlemoss High School 82 Astley Sports College & Cromwell High School Dukinfield
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 117
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
KKP ref Site name Area 156 Hyde Clarendon Sixth Form College Hyde 159 Hyde Technology School 247 Mossley Hollins High School Mossley 110 Copley High School Stalybridge 234 West Hill School
Building Schools for the Future
The Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme is a large strategic capital investment programme to rebuild or renew secondary schools in England over the next 15–20 years. The indicative Wave 3 funding allocation for Tameside amounts to c£75million and will embrace all of the secondary school estate in one wave of funding.
TMBC has begun work on three school sites (New Charter Academy/Samuel Laycock, Mossley Hollins, and St Damian’s), which are due for completion in 2011, the remaining schools will be in waves 10–12 and all schools in the current wave of the BSF programme will be completed by the end of 2012. BSF presents an opportunity to increase the availability of school sports facilities for community use and address any potential deficiencies in provision, as may be identified by this study. BSF in Tameside is essentially part of a three stage improvement/development program.
Stage one (complete summer 2010) - new buildings being completed for Mossley Hollins Specialist in Sports and Art and St Damian’s R.C. Science College through a £40 million Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contract. It will also include a £38 million contract to construct state of the art buildings for Samuel Laycock High School and New Charter Academy on a site off Broadoak Lane in Ashton, by Autumn 2010. Alder Community High School Specialist in Maths and Computing which is a recently built school operated under a PFI contract will also receive ICT investment. Stage two (complete late 2011) - The Droylsden Academy, Hyde Technology School, Astley Sports College, Denton Community College and the Key Stage 3 and 4 learning centres. Hyde Technology School began work on site in Autumn 2009. The other schools will follow in early 2010. Stage three (complete 2016) - last seven schools in the Tameside BSF programme: Copley, West Hill, Fairfield, Longdendale, All Saints, St Thomas More and Audenshaw were originally in the government’s national programme to be delivered in Waves 10-12.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 118
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Current proposals will see a school re-organisation from 18 to 13 secondary schools with the relocation of two special schools. The table below summarises changes to the school stock.
School Proposed action Demolish Demolish Refurbish New build and clear and rebuild and extend site on same site Two Trees High School St Thomas More RC College Hyde Technology School Egerton Park Arts College Audenshaw High School All Saints Catholic College Fairfield High School for Girls Droylsden High School for Girls Littlemoss High School Astley Sports College Longendale Comprehensive School West Hill School Samuel Laycock Special School(s) Stamford High School Hartshead Sports College New Charter Academy St Damiens RC Science College Mossley Hollins High School
Proposed changes to the pitch stock and sports facilities are detailed in Table 12.3. Sport England is a statutory consultee when any change to sports provision is likely to result in a loss of provision.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 119
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Table 12.3: Changes to outdoor sports provision following BSF
Current Current pitch stock New New pitch stock Estimated School school completion name name Mossley 1 senior football Mossley 1 grass pitch (104m x 2010 Hollins pitch. Hollins 59m) suitable for rugby or High High 1 tarmac hard cricket. School School standing marked 1 3G (121m x 82m) senior (new site) out for 3 tennis sized pitch suitable for courts or 2 junior hockey, football, athletics pitches (44m x or 5 a side. 33m). 166m outdoor velodrome 1 tarmac hard sprint cycle track. standing used as 1 hard surface games basketball court court Macadam surface (16m x 27m) with (36m x 21m) suitable for permanent netball and basketball. baskets. 1 MUGA open porous macadam surface (37m x 18m) suitable for tennis. St Damians 1 tarmac hard St Damians 1 senior grass football and 2010 RC standing marked RC Science hockey pitch. Science College as 2 junior 5 a 1 junior football pitch, area College side pitches (34m across junior and senior x 34m). pitch doubles as athletic 1 large playing facilities during summer. field marked with 3 1 games court, porous senior sized surface and lighting football pitches suitable for 3 basketball and long/triple courts. jump pitch likely to be marked for 1 senior synthetic turf pitch athletics during fenced and floodlit. summer (190m x 2 long jumps. 190m). 1 cricket wicket.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 120
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Current Current pitch stock New New pitch stock Estimated School school completion name name Hartshead 1 tarmac hard New 1 games court markings to 2010 High standing marked Charter be agreed with the school School as 2 junior 5a side Academy open textured macadam to pitches (35m x (new site) Sport England 35m). specifications. 1 tarmac hard 1 synthetic turf football standing marked pitch. Playing field area as 1 senior 5a marked as 3 senior sized side pitches (94m football pitches with cricket x 56m). wicket used as athletics (98m x 158m) track during summer. grassed area marked as athletics track, long jump, 4 rounders square and 4 cricket wickets. 1 senior sized grass football pitch (66m x 130m). Stamford 1 tarmac hard New 1 games court markings to 2010 High standing marked Charter be agreed with the school School as basketball court Academy open textured macadam to (26m x 14m). (new site) Sport England 1 tarmac hard specifications. standing marked 1 synthetic turf football as 2 junior football pitch. Playing field area pitches (34m x marked as 3 senior sized 32m). football pitches with cricket 1 grassed senior wicket used as athletics football pitch. track during summer. 4 rounders square 1 long jump doubles as athletics track during summer (120m x 150m).
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 121
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Current Current pitch stock New New pitch stock Estimated School school completion name name Astley 1 tarmac hard Astley 2 MUGA marked as 3 2011 Sports standing used for Sports junior 5 a side pitches College general play (46m College each or 4 tennis courts x 62m). each. 1 floodlit senior 3G 1 artificial cricket pitch. football pitch (72m 1 3G senior sized football x 121m). pitch (96m x 60m) also 1 senior football marked as hockey pitch. pitch and used for 3 junior football pitches general play (99m (70m x 44m). x 126m). 1 MUGA marked as 4 junior basketball courts or 4 tennis courts. Hyde 1 MUGA used for Hyde 1 three court MUGA 2011 Technology 1 junior size Technology macadam play surface High football pitch and High (37m x 58m) marked for 3 School 2 junior sized School junior basketball courts, 3 basketball courts tennis courts and 1 junior (35m x 20m). football pitch. 1 cinder/gravel 1 All weather senior pitch 200m athletics (90m x 45.5m). track with 100m 1 long jump. straight (100m x 50m). 2 cricket practice nets. 1 tarmac hard 1 discus circle. standing used for Grass playing field marked 2 junior 5 a side as junior grass football pitches or 2 tennis (82.3m x 45.5m) pitch and courts (47m x 9v9 football pitch (64m x 37m). 42m) marked in summer 1 cinder/gravel use with 200m grass area (100m x running track and 100m 50m) used for grass straight and high general play and jump area. marked for 2 rounders pitches.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 122
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Current Current pitch stock New New pitch stock Estimated School school completion name name Edgerton 1 tarmac hard Denton 1 playing field (150m x 2011 Park arts standing with Community 115m) accommodating College markings for three College three full size junior junior 5a side football pitches (17-18yrs), football pitches or artificial cricket wicket and three tennis courts 2 long/triple jump pit. (35m x 63m). Potential summer marking 1 playing field include rugby union pitch, (200m x 130m) grass volleyball court, accommodating 1 rounders and 300m artificial cricket athletics track. wicket 1 long jump 1 MUGA (74m x 44m) pit and 2 full size accommodating markings senior football for 4 junior basketball pitches, summer courts or 4 tennis courts. use for full size Additional MUGA (25m x athletics track. 50m) 3 half court junior basketball courts. 1 full size grass football pitch (17-18yrs) 54m x 86m. Droylsden 2 grass pitches, Droylsden 3 adult size football pitches 2011 High thought to be Academy with a single junior pitch. School for grass hockey but Porous bitmac MUGAs Girls markings unclear. with a 3m high ball fence Littlemoss 1 senior rugby to surround, markings will High pitch. include tennis, basketball School 1 senior football and netball. pitch.
The remaining seven schools, as listed below, in the Tameside BSF programme were originally in the government’s national programme to be delivered in Waves 10-12 which are due for completion in 2015/16:
Copley High School. West Hill School. Fairfield High School for Girls. Longdendale School. All Saints Community School. St Thomas More School. Audenshaw High School.
BSF developments will be compliant to BB98: Briefing framework for secondary school projects and most will include 3G synthetic turf pitches. Although these will be available for community use, there is some concern that opportunities to further improve provision from a community use perspective may have been missed. For example, the layout of the sites may not be conducive to “stand alone” facilities. There is also concern that Droylsden Academy, if the 3G pitch is included will duplicate provision at nearby Droylsden Youth FC.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 123
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
During the build stage, usage of sports pitches will be limited. However, this is not likely to affect current availability, as schools have limited use. There may be some increase in demand for other venues/sites which will require careful programming.
Summaries of planning documents for those schools in the first phase of the BSF development are below. Table 12.3 above summarises changes to outdoor sports provision.
Mossley Hollins High School
The new development at Mossley Hollins High School (MHS) will be adjacent to the existing school site on the existing playing fields. The pupil role will increase marginally to 750 pupils on completion.
The existing school playing fields (two sets of football posts but no formal markings) are provided off site approximately 300m north of the current site. Access is reportedly difficult because of the slope of the site and there is no hard-surface path to the pitches, which causes a particular problem in poor weather. The pitch area has drainage issues which limits the use of the site.
The new MHS sports facilities are likely to include a grass pitch suitable for senior rugby with a cricket field overmarked for use in the summer, a 3G pitch suitable for football with an option to include line markings for an athletics track, two hard court areas one of which will be suitable for tennis, and the other for netball/basketball. In addition, there is an option to include a 166m velodrome sprint track with hard court centre for netball and basketball. The indoor facilities will include a four court hall and an ancillary gymnasium with one badminton court.
Full site completion is estimated for summer 2010.
St Damian’s RC Science College
St Damian’s RC Science College will be a replacement of the current school on the existing site. The School has a wide catchment and includes students from Manchester, Salford and Oldham as well as Tameside. It will accommodate 750 pupils, which is similar to the current school population.
The sports facilities will be located to the rear of the site and capable of operating as a standalone facility with separate parking and direct access. There will be one junior and one senior football pitch, with cricket overmark, a 3G pitch and an outdoor games court likely to hold three basketball courts. The indoor sports hall will include four badminton courts.
Full site completion is estimated for summer 2010.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 124
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
New Charter Academy
New Charter Academy (NCA) will be located on the Ashton campus and is the amalgamation of two schools: Hartshead High and Stamford High. The campus will also have co-location of Samuel Laycock School (SLS). NCA will accommodate 1,650 students, including 300 sixth form students. SLS is a special school and has 100 pupils with an emphasis on performing arts and sport. The sports provision will incorporate an all - weather 3G pitch, seven multi use games courts and four grass pitches (football and rugby) which can be over-marked for cricket and athletics.
The footprint of the Academy is located on an area of playing fields, which means Sport England were consulted regarding the development due to a potential loss of playing fields. The new development will also include significant investment in indoor sport and artificial turf areas. This means that Sport England are satisfied that “the playing field that would be lost as a result of the proposed development would be replaced by a playing field, or playing fields of an equivalent or better quantity, and quality in a suitable location and subject to equivalent, or better management arrangements prior to the commencement of the development.10”
Full site completion is estimated for summer 2010.
Hyde Technology School
The new Hyde Technology School (HTS) will be built on the existing site of Hyde Technology School and will encompass HTS and Dale Grove School. HTS will cater for 1,230 students, increasing from 900. The existing school site will remain operational during the construction period; however, there will be some “re-homing” of some elements, such as the dance studio and music facilities.
On completion of the new buildings, the old facility will be demolished making room for the new sports pitches. The sports hall (four courts) will be to rear of the site and will have appropriate changing facilities, which will open onto to the outdoor sports facilities (including an STP); along with a fitness suite/activity studio. Separate entry will be provided and supervised at ground level by the facility managers.
Full site completion is estimated for 2011.
Denton Community College
Denton Community College (DCC) will be created as a result of an amalgamation of Two Trees and Egerton Park schools, and is planned to open in September 2010. It will cater for c1350 school pupils. DCC will be constructed under a PFI contract through the Local Education Partnership (LEP), and will occupy the former Egerton Park site. There are two MUGAs, an STP and school playing fields to the south of the existing buildings, the existing sports hall is located to the south of the site.
Highlighting DCC’s specialism in sport and performing arts is one of the key drivers of the design of the site. The new pitches will be located to the north of the school buildings and the proposed pitches include three grass football pitches which will be overmarked in the summer to form a “cricket batting track” and outfield, with a 400m running track. Other
10 Sport England North West ref PA 3711 22nd Nov 2006
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 125
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
athletics facilities will include long and triple jump pits and throwing facilities. The existing MUGAs will be replaced with new enclosed pitches and will include four tennis courts, overmarked with netball courts and mini five aside football pitches. The MUGA is not planned to be floodlit and will be fenced. There will be an additional three mini basketball practice courts to the south of the school buildings.
Full site completion is estimated for 2011.
Audenshaw High School
Audenshaw High School is a grant maintained school for boys, with a mixed gender sixth form. It has an iRB compliant synthetic pitch on site, which means rugby can be played on it. In addition, it has one senior football pitch and one senior and two junior rugby pitches. There is community use of the pitch but this is limited until 8pm as there are no floodlights. The School has informal links with Aldwinians RFC. BSF will not involve any significant changes to the school, but will see development to ICT on site.
Full site completion is estimated for 2011.
Droylsden Academy
Droylsden Academy consists of the amalgamation of Droylsden and Littlemoss schools and opened in September 2009 on a split site basis. Droylsden Academy will be constructed under a design and build contract through the LEP. The project is a new build school on the site of the old Droylsden School for Girls and will cater for 1,200 students and 200 sixth form students.
The site is approximately 6.8 hectares in area and is adjacent to Sunnybank Park. In order to minimise disruption to the existing Droylsden School and remove the need for temporary decant, the new Droylsden Academy will be constructed on the existing playing fields. The existing buildings will be demolished when the new college buildings are operational and the new playing fields and MUGAs will be constructed over the footprint.
The existing playing fields are located to the west of the site although no definitive line marking is apparent. The majority of these will be built upon with the topsoil salvaged prior to construction commencement. A new area of natural seeded grass pitches will be created along the south and north eastern quadrant of the site comprising three adult size pitches with a single junior pitch proposed in a central location adjacent the northern boundary. Proposed porous bitmac MUGAs are located along the northern boundary of the site with a 3m high ball fence to surround. The MUGA games courts include line marking for tennis, basketball and netball.
Full site completion is estimated for 2011.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 126
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
PART 13: INDOOR SPORTS ASSESSMENT
Introduction
This part considers supply and demand issues for indoor sports facilities in Tameside. This report centres on provision of ‘sports facilities’ and the demand created for these facilities by sports clubs’ use and, where possible, general public use. In summary it evaluates the following types of facilities:
Sports halls. Swimming pools. Fitness facilities.
NB All information/details contained in this report are correct at the time of survey/consultation.
Methodology
The assessment of indoor sports provision is presented by analysis of quality, quantity and accessibility for each of the major facility types i.e. sports halls, swimming pools and health and fitness provision. Each facility is considered as ‘like for like’ facilities within its own facility type, in order that it can be assessed for adequacy. In addition, other facility types such as tennis and bowls facilities are considered within the context of outdoor sports provision.
The report considers the distribution of, and interrelationship between, all indoor sports facilities in Tameside and evaluates demand. It gives a clear indication of areas of high demand. The Strategy will identify where there is potential to provide improved and/or additional facilities to meet this demand and to, where appropriate, protect the current stock.
Catchment areas
Catchment areas for different types of provision provide a tool for identifying areas currently not served by existing sport and recreation facilities. It is recognised that catchment areas vary from person to person, day to day, hour to hour. This problem has been overcome by Sport England and accepting the concept of ‘effective catchment’, defined as the distance travelled by around 75-80% of users.
Active Places Power Plus
The Active Places Power Plus tool can be used as a planning tool for the provision of sports facilities in order to identify demand for provision. It has been designed to assist in investment decisions across Government and to help local authorities carry out audits of their sports provision and develop local strategies. It also assists national governing bodies of sport to identify areas in need of an improvement in sports facility provision. This was used to initially identify the facilities and then used to evaluate demand for facilities specifically in Tameside.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 127
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Current provision
Consultation with users suggests that Tameside is well provided for in terms of indoor sports facilities providing that access to the facilities continues to be well advertised and the quality is either sustained or improved.
Tameside Sports Trust manages swimming pools and sports centres on behalf of TMBC. The Trust is a registered charity and a 'not for profit' organisation which means that any surplus income (or profit) must be put back into the facilities and services that it provides. The Trust is overseen by a board of voluntary trustees recruited from the local community.
Facilities managed by the Trust include swimming pools, indoor sports halls and activity areas as follows:
Site Swimming Sports halls STP Health and pools fitness suite Ashton Pools 6 lanes - - 63 stations The Copley Centre 6 lanes 6 badminton 1 six-a-side 130 stations courts Denton Pools 5 lanes - - - Dukinfield Pool 6 lanes - - 4 stations Egerton Park Arts - 4 badminton 1 five-a-side & 1 - College courts MUGA Etherow Bowling and - - - - Activity Centre (The Etherow Centre) Fairfield High School - 4 badminton - - courts Hyde Leisure Pool Leisure pool - - 33 stations Tameside - 3 badminton - 16 stations Gymnastics Centre courts (The Longdendale Centre) Medlock Leisure 6 lanes 6 badminton 2 full size 66 stations Centre courts Oxford Park - 3 badminton - 18 stations courts St Thomas More - 4 badminton - - courts
In conjunction with Pulse Fitness, the Trust provides five 'Active' fitness studios in Ashton, Copley, Medlock, Oxford Park and Hyde.
The Trust also provides swimming instruction for children and adults, parents and tots, pre natal classes, ladies only, adults only, lane swimming, early morning sessions and children's fun sessions. Each pool also has a range of clubs providing for competitive swimming and other specialist water based activities.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 128
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
In addition to the indoor facilities, ‘Active Soccer’ football centres are provided at The Copley Centre and Medlock Leisure Centre. Each site has four floodlit pitches providing the ultimate in synthetic playing surfaces and catering for club and pub teams, leagues and coaching.
Local needs
Consultation with users and non-users of sports facilities across Tameside covered many issues with regard to facilities in the area. Sport and facility specific issues are covered in the relevant sections of this report. This section sets out generic issues that cut across more than one sport/facility, including summary of the resident and leisure centre survey.
Street survey
Indoor sports facilities have relatively high usage with two fifths (40%) of respondents stating that they visit indoor sports facilities once a week, whilst 24% visit more than once a week. Of those that visit once a week, a fifth (20%) are from Stalybridge. In addition, just over a tenth (13%) of all respondents visit indoor facilities 2-3 times a month.
Figure 13.4: Frequency of usage
45%
40% 40%
35%
30%
25% 24%
20%
15% 13% 11% 10% 10%
5% 1% 0% More than Once a week 2-3 times a Once a month Less than Don’t know once a week month once a month
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 129
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Accessibility
Almost a third of respondents (30%) state they would not visit indoor sports facilities, of these, 19% were from Hyde and a further 19% were from Ashton. The survey also found that more respondents are willing to travel by transport (34%); and nearly a fifth (17%) of respondents are willing to travel up to 15 minutes by motorised transport to reach indoor sports facilities than those willing to walk (29%). Respondents in Mossley (31%), Stalybridge (25%) and Longdendale (24%) are more willing to travel up to 15 minutes by transport compared to other analysis areas.
Figure 13.5: Time willing to travel to access indoor sports facilities
35%
30% 30%
25%
20% 17%
15% 13% 13%
10% 9% 6% 6% 5% 4% 1% 0% Less than 5-10 11-15 Over 15 Up to 15 15-30 Over 30 Don’t Would not 5 minute minute minute minute minutes minutes minutes know visit walk walk walk walk by by by transport transport transport
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 130
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Availability
Most respondents (42%) rate the provision of indoor sports facilities as being good, of which a large proportion of respondents from Mossley (52%), Stalybridge (54%) and Ashton (50%) agree. As there are no facilities in Mossley, survey respondents from the area are more willing to travel by transport to access provision. Nearly a third of respondents (31%) from Mossley state they are willing to travel up to 15 minutes by transport, with a further 27% willing to travel 15-30 minutes by transport.
Only a small number of respondents (3%) rate provision as being poor. Although a third (22%) are unable to comment on provision within the Borough, this can be attributed to the number of respondents that do not use provision.
Figure 13.6: Availability of Indoor Sports Facilities
45% 42%
40%
35%
30%
25% 22%
20% 19%
15% 14%
10%
5% 3% 0% 0% Very poor Poor Neither / nor Good Very good Don’t know
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 131
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Quality
Just over two fifths (44%) of respondents rate the quality of provision of indoor sports facilities in Tameside as good with a high proportion from Ashton (17%) and Hyde (15%). However, whilst only 3% rate quality of provision as poor, 10% are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with provision, and 28% of respondents are unable to comment on the quality of provision.
Figure 13.7: Quality of provision of indoor sports facilities
50%
45% 44%
40%
35%
30% 28%
25%
20% 15% 15% 10% 10%
5% 3% 0% 0% Very poor Poor Neither / nor Good Very goodDon’t know
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 132
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Tameside leisure centre survey
A survey of sport and recreation facility users was developed by KKP and distributed by Tameside Sports Trust (equally distributed at each leisure centre in Tameside) over a three week period in October 2009. The following responses were achieved:
Leisure centre No. of responses Denton Pools 10 Dukinfield Pool 18 Medlock Leisure Centre 100 Oxford Park 32 Total number of respondents 160
There were no responses from eight leisure centres; Ashton, Egerton Park, Fairfield High School, Hyde Leisure Centre, St Thomas More, The Copley Centre, The Etherow Centre and The Longdendale Centre. However, respondents were still given the opportunity to provide a response on facilities other than where they answered the questionnaire,
The age of respondents to the questionnaire varies ranging from under 16’s to 60 plus. However, a large number of respondents (46%) were within the age band of 25 to 44 and just over a quarter (26%) were aged between 45 to 69. There was an equal split of responses from males (49%) and females (48%) (3% of respondents did not identify their gender).
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 133
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Usage
Over a third (33.8%) of respondents identified accessing gym facilities (health and fitness facilities), as the main reasons for using sports facilities in Tameside. This was followed by swimming lessons (32.8%) and exercise classes (14.2%). Nearly one in ten (9.8%) reported attending a sports club. Other reasons for visiting the centres include cardiac rehab, accessing the sauna, sun bed facilities and the badminton courts.
Figure 13.1: Main reasons cited for using sports facilities in Tameside
40%
34% 35% 33%
30%
25%
20%
15% 14%
10% 10% 10%
5%
0% Gym (health and Swimming (inc Exercise classes Sports club Other fitness) lessons)
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 134
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Accessibility
There is a clear pattern in the length of time respondents would be prepared to travel to reach a leisure centre. Just over a quarter (27%) would walk for no more than 15 minutes to travel to a leisure centre. A further one in ten (13%) would be prepared to walk over 15 minutes. Almost a third (32%) would travel up to 15 minutes by transport to access leisure centre provision.
Figure 13.2: Percentage of respondents willing to travel to reach a leisure centre
35% 32%
30%
25%
20%
16% 15% 13%
10% 10% 10% 8%
5%
1% 0% Under 5 min 5-10 min walk 11 - 15 min Over 15 min upto 15 min 16 - 30 min by Over 30 min walk walk walk by transport transport by transport
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 135
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Awareness
Respondents to the survey demonstrated a mixed awareness of leisure centres within Tameside. Respondents were most aware of the following sports facilities; Ashton Pool, Medlock Leisure Centre, Hyde Leisure Centre, the Copley Centre and Dukinfield Pool. The survey identifies there is a lack of awareness of facilities; particularly of The Etherow Centre, Fairfield High School, St Thomas More and The Longdendale Centre. This tends to be due to a lack of availability at school sites coupled with a lack of advertising and information available for users.
Figure 13.3: Awareness of sports facilities in Tameside
18% 16% 16% 16% 14% 14% 13% 13%
12%
10% 9%
8% 6% 6% 4% 4% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1%
0% Ashton Pool Medlock The Etherow Denton Pools Fairfield High The Other Leisure Centre School Longdendale Centre Centre
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 136
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Site specific usage
Egerton Park was by far the most regularly used facility in the last year (by 60% of respondents). In addition, five sites; Ashton Pool, The Copley Centre, Hyde Leisure Centre, Medlock Leisure Centre and Oxford Park were cited as leisure centres used regularly. A number of sites were unused by respondents including; St Thomas More, The Etherow Centre, The Longdendale Centre and Fairfield High School. Similar to the street survey, respondents identified a lack of awareness as being the main reasons for non-use.
Ashton Pool (1.8%) The Longdendale Centre (0%) The Copley Centre (1.2%) Medlock Leisure Centre (3%) Denton Pools (0.6%) Egerton Park (60%) St Thomas More (0%) Fairfield High School (0%) Dukinfeld Pool (0.6%) Oxford Park (1.8%) The Etherow Centre (0%) Sports pitches (0%) Hyde Leisure Centre (1.2%) Other (0%)
Please note that although there were no recorded users of St Thomas More, respondents still provided an opinion regarding its quality. This may also apply to other facilities and as a result, the percentage of users recorded is not reflective of the total percentage of respondents that provided an opinion regarding quality.
Quality
Overall, the average rating given to leisure sites (see table below) by respondents was either good or very good. Medlock Leisure Centre received the highest rating, scoring very good amongst nearly half of users (46%).
Table 13.1: Quality ratings for leisure centres
Leisure Centre Very Good Neither Poor Very Don't good poor know Ashton Pool 12.2% 16.5% 1.8% 2.4% - 3.0% The Copley Centre 12.2% 6.7% 1.2% - 1.2% 4.3% Denton Pools 3.7% 7.9% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 4.9% St Thomas More 0.6% 0.6% 1.2% 1.2% 2.4% 4.9% Dukinfeld Pool 7.9% 6.7% 1.8% 2.4% - 3.7% The Etherow Centre 1.2% 0.6% 0.6% - 1.2% 4.3% Hyde Leisure Centre 2.4% 6.7% 2.4% 1.2% - 3.0% The Longdendale 1.2% 1.8% 0.6% - - 4.3% Centre Medlock Leisure Centre 45.7% 14.6% 0.6% - - 1.8% Egerton Park 1.2% 1.2% 0.6% - - 4.3% Fairfield High School 1.8% 2.4% 1.2% - - 4.3% Oxford Park 12.8% 6.1% 1.2% - - 3.7% Sports pitches 1.2% 2.4% 0.6% - - 4.9% Other - 1.2% 0.6% - - 3.0%
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 137
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Respondents were asked to provide their opinion on a number of statements regarding facility provision in Tameside. The table below summarises the level of agreements:
Table 13.2: Level of agreement to statements about leisure in Tameside
Level of agreement Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Strongly Don’t statements agree agree disagree know nor disagree Generally there is an 26.8% 47.6% 7.9% 4.3% 0.6% 2.4% acceptable level of sport and leisure provision in Tameside Tameside does not need 7.9% 13.4% 31.1% 23.8% 3.7% 5.5% any additional sport and leisure facilities Tameside’s sport and 23.8% 47.6% 7.9% 4.9% 1.8% 1.2% leisure facilities are well maintained I can access the sports 19.5% 43.3% 14% 11% 1.2% 1.2% facility (i.e. pool, badminton court etc) when I need/want The price of my activity at 22.6% 44.5% 9.8% 9.8% - 1.2% the sports centre is acceptable The price/availability of 16.5% 39.0% 19.5% 5.5% - 5.5% equipment is acceptable There are adequate parking 28.7% 40.9% 3.7% 7.9% 4.3% - facilities at the sports centre (for bikes and cars)
Three quarters (74%) strongly agree or agree that generally, there is an acceptable level of sport and leisure provision in Tameside only. A small proportion (4%) disagrees with this statement. Over a third of respondents neither agree nor disagree (31%) that Tameside does not require any additional sport and leisure facilities. However, over a fifth (27%) suggests there to be a need for additional sport and leisure facilities, likewise an additional fifth (21%) believe there is not demand for additional facilities. The maintenance of Tameside’s sport and leisure facilities are considered by nearly three quarters of respondents (71%) to be well maintained. Over three fifths (63%) of respondents can access the necessary sports facilities (i.e. pool, badminton court etc) as and when required. Just over one in ten respondents (12%) disagree with this statement and a further 14% of respondents neither agree nor disagree. Nearly seven out of ten (67%) respondents believe the price of their activities at Tameside sports centres is acceptable. The price/availability of sports equipment is considered by over half of respondents (56%) to be acceptable. One in ten respondents neither agree nor disagree with this statement.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 138
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Parking (for bikes and cars) is deemed acceptable by over three thirds (70%) of respondents. A small proportion of respondents (4.3%) disagree with this statement. The survey also identified Medlock Leisure Centre would benefit from additional car parking.
Key issues
The following provides a summary of any facility or sport/club issues raised during consultation with users and TMBC officers:
A Sport England grant has been obtained to build a new development at Ken Ward Sports Centre. The work is well advanced on the ground (to be completed by April 2010) and will provide a three badminton court sports hall. The fitness element from The Longdendale Centre will also be moved to Ken Ward, where 20 stations will be provided. The sports hall at Longdendale will then become a dedicated gymnastics facility. As a result clubs and facilities in the Hattersley area will be moved around and re-designated. The Etherow Centre (where gymnastics used to be) will then cater for Hattersley boxing club and indoor bowls. The health and fitness provision has been significantly improved across the Borough in the past two years. Oxford Park is a key community site and has a good balance of accessibility (i.e., location and access routes) and informal setting making the facility welcoming. Fairfield High School is a key location for volleyball in the Borough and TMBC is working in partnership with Tameside Volleyball Club (TVC) and Manchester City Council to deliver premier league coaching. There are plans to develop provision for boys’ volleyball. There is a desire to provide an eight or six badminton court hall to deliver school sport and act as a competition venue and host larger School Sport Partnership (SSP) events. Cheerleading is the fastest growing physical activity for the SSP and there are three community clubs and a number of primary school clubs in the Borough. It would be of benefit if there were an “atmospheric” venue for cheerleading with stadium seating. The general opinion of TMBC staff appears to be that there are a sufficient number of facilities but programming could be adjusted to be more accessible, for example, secondary schools would benefit from additional pool time. Hyde Seal Swimming Club currently train and compete at Denton Pool as the leisure pool in Hyde is unsuitable for water polo or formal swimming.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 139
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
KEY INDOOR SPORTS
Netball
This section covers indoor and outdoor netball provision in Tameside. England Netball Association (ENA) is the governing body with overall responsibility for ensuring the effective governance of the sport. There are two netball clubs currently in Tameside; Denton Villa Football & Netball and Tameside. However, there is no Tameside specific netball league.
The main indoor league servicing the area operates out of a central venue at Stockport Sports for All Centre (located in the grounds of Reddish Vale Technology College, Reddish), approximately 15 minute drive from Ashton (13 minutes away). In total, there are over 200 junior and senior netball teams competing in the League. The facility houses three indoor netball courts.
The other leagues (playing on indoor and outdoor courts) servicing the area include the Greater Manchester Netball League (GMNL), Manchester Evening League and Northern Netball Regional League. GMNL operates matches from Wright Robinson Sports College, Gorton, which is located 13 minute drive from Ashton (four mile drive) outside the assessment area.
TMBC runs a Netball Academy using indoor courts at St Thomas Moore School as part of the delivery of its Sports Development’s Talent Strategy (2006 – 2012). The Netball Academy enables talented performers to have the opportunity to participate in netball activities.
Although there is a small presence of clubs, netball is considered to be strong in Tameside. The Tameside Netball Development Group consists of a number of partners including clubs, Tameside Schools Sports Partnership and TMBC. It has recently completed an action development plan with a number of objectives including supporting coaches in primary school schemes, providing competitions at primary and secondary schools, improving the quality and quantity of netball, workforce development, and grant aid for clubs. The action plan also included the formation of a new club called Pink Ladies, which will play on courts at Oxford Park Community Sports Centre. Following on from this, there is an action to develop sessions at two more venues across Tameside and create a mini league.
Quality
Due to a lack of availability of good quality courts, Tameside Netball Club was forced to access outdoor courts outside the Tameside area at Sale Grammer and Hathershaw schools. The quality of Egerton Park Art College indoor courts is particularly poor and consultation reports the roof leaks. The Club reports the courts at Copley Recreation Centre are poorly lined and the courts are undersized.
Consultation reports Tameside offers little outdoor court provision. Fairfield High School has recently resurfaced the tarmac of the playground which is also marked with two tennis courts. These courts are not floodlit and as a result, cannot be used during the winter months.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 140
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Accessibility
The majority of netball courts are located at education sites and consultation reports it can be difficult to access provision at peak times. Astley Sports College is also considered expensive by users inhibiting some usage.
Demand
Tameside clubs suggest that there is adequate demand (if appropriate facilities were made available) to host a central venue in the area (preferably in Ashton).
Tameside Netball Club suggests there is demand for a six court central venue facility (which could potentially accommodate a central venue league). It believes a central venue site would not only help to increase netball participation in Tameside, but would also attract clubs from Manchester and Oldham.
Club development
Tameside Netball Club (TNC)
Approximately four years ago the Club merged with Stamford Netball Club which played at Westhill School. It now fields 11 teams in total, including nine junior teams (U8 – U16). The senior section has four teams.
The junior teams compete in the Stockport Sports for All Centre and the Greater Manchester Netball League. The Club uses a number of venues for training in Tameside:
Copley Recreation Centre. Hyde Clarendon College. Fairfield High School for Girls. Westhill School. St Thomas More School.
Its playing membership stands at 43 seniors and 135 juniors. This has increased in the previous three years. The Club has a good reputation and provides a good standard of netball, thought to be the reason for the increase in members. It has a large catchment area which includes; Tameside, Stockport, Alderley Edge and Oldham. TNC uses Medlock Sports Centre, Droylsden for regional matches but it only accommodates one netball court.
TNC is Clubmark accredited and as such, has official school club links with Hyde Technology College and Fairfield High School for Girls. It aims to increase club participation levels through school/club links, school festivals, play netball fun days and working with local partners including TMBC and the Tameside Netball Development Group. The Club aims to work with a further two schools by 2010 and provide coaching sessions within these schools in extra curricular time.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 141
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Denton Villa Football and Netball Club
The Club uses school sites, St Thomas More Roman Catholic School and Egerton Park College for training but travels to the central venue at Stockport Sports for All Centre. It fields ten junior teams and a further six ladies teams.
Volleyball
There is one volleyball club in Tameside, based at Fairfield High School. There are seven teams for ladies and girls from U11 to adult. The adult team plays in the National Volleyball League and the Greater Manchester Volleyball League.
There is occasional use of the Medlock Sports Centre for TMBC volleyball coaching sessions that run in partnership with Tameside Volleyball Club. The coaches are jointly funded by TMBC Sport Development Fund and the Club. This allows new members to be directed to the Club.
Volleyball is a focus sport for TMBC Sports Development and it runs coaching sessions in primary schools and 65 of the c75 schools deliver the sport through PE lessons. Talented players are signposted via the talent identification days to Tameside Volleyball Club.
Basketball
The main venue for competitive basketball in Tameside is at The Copley Centre (operated as a central venue) and training also takes place at Hyde Technology College.
There are six clubs in all, three of which have come together as an association in order to achieve Clubmark accreditation (Tameside Area Basketball Club).
Basketball is a priority sport for TMBC Sports Development and it has allocated a lead officer to help increase participation. As a result, TMBC runs coaching sessions in primary schools and the vast majority of schools deliver the sport through PE lessons. Talented players are signposted via the talent identification days to Tameside clubs.
Badminton
The main venues for badminton in Tameside are Copley and Medlock sports centres.
In addition to the large amount of casual badminton played in Tameside, there is also an adult’s league and a development league which feeds into the Greater Manchester Badminton League. Tameside Badminton League is an adult league which has two teams from Tameside, with the remainder from surrounding authorities. The League was established in early 2010 and provides opportunities for U7 to U16. It operates via satellite centres at Astley Sports College, West Hill School, Medlock Sports Centre and Oxford Park. The teams play in a round robin competition in order to send a “winner” to the Greater Manchester Badminton League each month.
Badminton is a priority sport for TMBC Sports Development and it has appointed a development officer to help increase participation. As a result, TMBC runs coaching sessions in primary schools and the vast majority of schools deliver the sport through PE lessons. Talented players are signposted via the talent identification days to Tameside leagues.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 142
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
FACILITY BY FACILITY
Sports halls
Analysis of supply
A total of 17 sites in Tameside provide a minimum of four badminton courts on one site (as recommended by Sport England). An additional three sites are identified as providing three or less badminton court sized sports halls. The majority of provision is located on education sites with varying degrees of access. Over half of sites are identified as being of poor quality. Copley Sports Centre has recently undergone refurbishment and as such the site as a whole is assessed as good quality. However, the sports hall has had minimum investment/improvement. There is a general perception among users that the lining on the hall’s surface is complicated and unclear.
In 2010 Ken Ward Sports Centre will provide a three badminton court sports hall to replace the same facility at The Longdendale Centre, which will become a dedicated gymnastics facility. This does not have a significant impact on accessibility and as such the audit includes the Ken Ward sports hall (even though it will not be available until the end of May 2010) and discounts the Longdendale sports hall (even though technically it still exists).
An important consideration in examining the provision of sports halls in Tameside is access. This is particularly significant because the majority of sports halls (70%) are on school sites. This suggests that, whilst there is a good range of sports hall provision in the Borough, access could be restricted at a number of sites.
Figure 13.8: Sports halls in Tameside
Tameside MBC Sports Halls - by Badminton Courts : Less than 4 Courts : 4 or more Analysis Area Boundary OLDHAM Pop. densi ty per s q. mil e Mossley 16,000 to 28,400 14,200 to 16,000 13,100 to 14,200 106 11,800 to 13,100 10,200 to 11,800 Ashton- 8,800 to 10,200 u-Lyne 7,300 to 8,800 66 5,300 to 7,300 3,400 to 5,300 80 300 to 3,400 Stalybridge 30 79 100 43 Droylsden
5 29 7 Dukinfield
Audenshaw 51 33 55 HIGH PEAK
38 86 Longdendale 42 Denton MANCHE ST E R 20 24 Hyde 28 122 87
STOCKPORT
Created by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (www.kkp.co.uk) © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020577.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 143
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Table 13.1: Key to sports hall map
TMBC ref KKP Site name Size of Access Analysis area Quality ref facility type (badminton courts) 10/CO/01 79 Tameside College 4 Private Ashton 10/CO/02 80 Ashton Sixth Form College 4 Private Ashton 10/HO/01 66 Stamford High School 4 School Ashton 10/SA/04 106 Hartshead Sports College 4 School Ashton 10/WE/01 29 Oxford Park Sports Centre 3 Public Ashton Pottinger Street 10/ND/03 33 Audenshaw High School 4 School Audenshaw 10/HG/03 28 Two Trees Sports College 4 School Denton 10/ND/01 38 Egerton Park College 4 School Denton 10/SW/03 24 St Thomas Moore College 4 School Denton 10/WD/02 20 West End Boys and Girls 1 Private Denton Club 10/FF/02 7 Fairfield High School 4 School Droylsden 10/MR/02 30 Medlock Sports Centre 6 Public Droylsden 10/YT/05 51 Astley Sports Complex 4 Public Dukinfield 10/FL/01 42 Hyde Clarendon College 4 School Hyde 10/FL/03 86 Hyde Technology School 4 School Hyde 10/GC/02 87 Alder Community High School 6 School Hyde 10/HT/05 122 Ken Ward Sports Centre 3 Public Hyde 10/HL/01 55 Longdendale Comprehensive 6 School Longdendale School 10/CL/01 43 Copley High School (The 6 Public Stalybridge Copley Centre) 10/RI/01 100 West Hill School 4 School Stalybridge 10/FF/04 5 ‘Sporting Edge’ Sports Centre 4 Public Outside
Sport England recommends that an appropriate drive time and walk time accessibility standard be applied to indoor sports provision to determine shortfalls in provision. The normal acceptable standard would be to apply a 20 minute drive time. However, in taking account of local need we are able to determine locally specific standards.
The street survey demonstrated that residents in Mossley (31%), Stalybridge (25%) and Longdendale (24%) are more willing to travel by transport compared to other analysis areas. It can be said that these areas exhibit more rural characteristics and it is therefore not surprising that residents in more urban areas, are more likely to walk to access provision.
The street survey demonstrated that most respondents are willing to travel 15 minutes to access provision. On this basis we recommend application of both a walk and drive time catchment of 15 minutes. It is likely that gaps in the provision of sports halls will be identified in Ashton and Droylsden. However, it is likely that following BSF, availability of provision will further change.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 144
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
School halls
School gymnasiums or halls can make an important contribution to the overall stock of sports hall provision in the Borough, even though they are unable to be used for competitive sports. In general, school halls (where available) are used for football training and fitness classes. The vast majority are assessed as being of adequate quality and fit for purpose.
Figure 13.9: School halls in Tameside
Tameside MBC Indoor Sports Faci lities School Hall Analysis Area Boundary OLDHAM 48 Pop. densi ty per s q. mil e 61 45 44 16,000 to 28,400 Mossley 62 14,200 to 16,000 46 99 13,100 to 14,200 Ashton- 11,800 to 13,100 68 u-Lyne 10,200 to 11,800 105 39 8,800 to 10,200 112 113 70 7,300 to 8,800 103 5,300 to 7,300 40 111 104 101 3,400 to 5,300 41 84 300 to 3,400 36 82 63 102 71 Stalybridge 110 Droylsden 83 109 77 69 107 31 78 73 93 92 6 9 114 108 19 74 49 17 Dukinfield 94 10 15 50 53 Audenshaw 32 115 52 98 35 97 HIGH PEAK 56 34 85 96 Longdendale 37 22 Denton MANCHE STE R 81 2 90 60 95 58 21 75 Hyde 91 65 57 27 76 25 26 72 89 88
STOCKPORT
Created by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (www.kkp.co.uk) © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020577.
Table 13.2: Key to schools hall map
TMBC ref KKP ref Site name Quality 10/AH/01 70 Rosehill Methodist community School 10/AN/04 78 West End Primary School 10/AN/05 71 Holy Trinity C of Primary School 10/AU/01 19 Aldwyn Primary School 10/AU/01 10 St Annes School 10/AU/03 15 Audenshaw Primary School 10/AU/04 17 St Stephens Primary School 10/BM/01 61 Mossley Hollins College 10/BM/02 62 Micklehurst All Saints 10/BR/02 72 Broadbottom C of E Primary School 10/CD/01 73 Lyndhurst Primary and Community School 10/CD/02 74 Ravensfield Primary School 10/CH/02 75 Greenfield Primary School
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 145
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
TMBC ref KKP ref Site name Quality 10/CH/03 76 St Georges C of E Primary School 10/CL/02 111 Wildbank Primary School 10/CL/03 77 St Pauls C of E Primary School 10/CM/01 41 St Raphael's Primary School 10/CM/02 40 Millbrook Primary School 10/CM/03 39 Buckton Vale Primary School 10/CP/01 2 Linden Road Primary School 10/CP/03 81 St Mary's RC Primary School 10/CT/01 63 St James Cof E Primary School 10/CT/02 82 Our Lady of Mount Carmel Primary School 10/CT/03 83 The Heys Primary School 10/CT/04 84 Canon Johnson C of E School 10/FF/01 6 Fairfield Primary School 10/FF/03 9 St Marys Primary School 10/FL/02 85 Flowery Field Primary School 10/GC/03 88 Gee Cross Trinity Primary School 10/GC/04 89 Dowson County Primary School 10/GO/02 90 Godley County Primary School 10/GO/02 91 Leigh Primary School 10/HA/01 92 St Peter's RC Primary School 10/HA/02 93 Gorse Hall Primary School 10/HG/01 25 Corrie Primary School 10/HG/02 26 Manor Green Primary School 10/HG/04 27 St John’s Fisher School 10/HL/02 56 Hollingworth Primary School 10/HT/01 57 Pinfold Primary School 10/HT/02 58 St James Primary School 10/HT/03 60 Arundale Primary School 10/MO/02 94 Stalyhill County Junior School 10/MR/01 36 Littlemoss High School 10/MR/03 31 Moorside Primary School 10/MT/01 95 Mottram C of E Primary School 10/ND/02 35 Hawthorn School 10/ND/04 32 Poplar Street Primary School 10/ND/05 34 Russell Scott Primary School 10/ND/06 37 St Annes Primary School 10/NE/01 96 Hyde St Pauls Primary School 10/NE/02 97 Oakfield Primary School 10/NE/03 98 Bradley Green Road County Primary School 10/PB/01 68 Holden Clough Primary School 10/PB/02 99 St Damians RC Science College 10/RI/02 101 Arlies Community Primary School 10/RI/03 102 Ridge Hill Primary School 10/SA/01 103 Broadoak Primary School 10/SA/02 104 Hurst Knoll C of E Primary School 10/SA/03 105 St Christopher's RC Primary School 10/SN/01 107 Droylsden High School for Girls 10/SN/02 108 Manchester road Primary School 10/SN/03 109 Greenside Primary School 10/SN/04 110 St Stephen's RC Primary School
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 146
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
TMBC ref KKP ref Site name Quality 10/SW/02 65 Greswell County Primary School 10/TA/01 69 Waterloo Primary School 10/TM/01 48 Milton Primary School 10/TM/02 46 Livingstone Primary School 10/TM/03 45 St Georges Primary School 10/TM/04 44 St Josephs Primary School 10/WA/01 112 Cannon Burrows C of E Primary School 10/WA/02 113 Dale Grove Special School 10/WD/01 22 Denton West End Primary School 10/WD/03 21 Danebank Primary School 10/WE/02 114 St Peter's C of E Primary School 10/YT/01 53 Broadbent Fold Primary School 10/YT/02 49 St John’s Primary & Nursery School 10/YT/03 50 All Saints Catholic College 10/YT/04 52 St Mary's Primary School 10/YT/06 115 Yew Tree Primary School
Analysis of demand
In order to identify any shortfalls in the quantity of indoor sports facilities within Tameside, we have utilised Sport England’s Active Places Power capacity analysis (or supply and demand analysis). This analysis uses the current capacity of provision across the Borough and potential demand (based on population and participation trends), to analyse if the current facility capacity is being met by current demand. This then gives a clear indication of shortfalls. Capacity is calculated by looking at the number of equivalent courts on a site and the availability of the spaces over a fixed period (approximately an hour). This allows the percentage of demand met to be calculated.
In addition, we have applied population and participation increases to the demand to calculate if current supply will also meet future demands.
Table 13.3: Active Places Power analysis of demand for sports halls
Current Future (2021) Capacity 11,474 11473.75 Demand 9,869 10,619 Balance 1,606 855 % Tameside demand met 116.26 108.0 % England demand met 132.37 - % North West Region demand met 138.52 -
Identification (through analysis of Active Places Power) that 140% of demand for a particular type of facility is satisfied indicates that all needs in an area are met (this takes into account the quality of provision and the extent to which school facilities may be available). On this basis, Tameside is slightly under-provided for in terms of sports halls. When estimated population growth is taken into consideration, this situation is further exacerbated.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 147
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Consultation highlights that school competitions and clubs would benefit from a large eight court sports hall suitable, in particular to cater for netball competition. The need for spectator seating for growing sports such as cheerleading was also expressed during consultation with users.
In the long term, increasing the size of three badminton court sports halls (i.e. Ken Ward and Oxford Park) would help to increase provision to meet demand. However, it is noted that current provision is provided as such due to logistical planning reasons. TMBC should ensure that any new provision is at least four badminton courts in size.
Sports hall summary There are 17 sites in Tameside that provide a minimum of four badminton courts (as recommended by Sport England). An additional three sites are identified as providing three or less badminton court sized sports halls. Over half of sites are identified as being of poor quality. The majority of sports halls (70%) are on school sites. This suggests that, whilst there is a good range of sports hall provision in the Borough, access could be restricted at a number of sites. Copley Sports Centre has recently undergone refurbishment and as such the site as a whole is assessed as good quality. However, the sports hall has had minimum investment/improvement. There is a general perception among users that the lining on the hall’s surface is complicated and unclear. In 2010 Ken Ward Sports Centre will provide a three badminton court sports hall to replace the same facility at Longdendale Sports Centre, which will become a dedicated gymnastics facility.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 148
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Swimming pools
Analysis of supply
There are currently ten sites providing swimming pool provision in Tameside. Of these, six are full sized 25 metre pools, five of which, are TMBC owned (including Copley which operates as a dual use facility with Copley High) available for public swimming. Three pools have a degree of restricted access due to the fact that they operate on a membership basis only (the two Village hotels and FX Leisure).
An important consideration in examining the provision of swimming pools in Tameside is access and use. It should be noted that although leisure provision makes an important contribution towards recreation swimming and learn to swim programmes, it is not able to meet demand for lane or club competitive swimming. However, the analysis of demand does include the water space for the leisure pools listed below.
Figure 13.10: Swimming pools in Tameside
Tameside MBC Indoor Sports Facilities Swimming Pool Analysis Area Boundary OLDHAM Pop. density per s q. mile Mossley 16,000 to 28,400 14,200 to 16,000 13,100 to 14,200 11,800 to 13,100 10,200 to 11,800 8,800 to 10,200 Ashton- 7,300 to 8,800 u-Lyne 5,300 to 7,300 3,400 to 5,300 300 to 3,400 1 Stalybridge 30 14 43 Droylsden
47 Dukinfield Audenshaw 11 8
HIGH PEAK
Longdendale 3 23 MANCHESTER Hyde Denton 4
STOCKPORT
Created by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (www.kkp.co.uk) © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020577.
Table 13.4: Key to swimming pool map
TMBC KKP Site name Size of facility Access Analysis Quality ref ref type area 10/AC/01 1 Ashton Under Lyne Pool 25 m x 6 lanes Public Ashton Teaching pool 10/AN/02 14 Village Hotel (Ashton Leisure Private Ashton Moss)
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 149
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
TMBC KKP Site name Size of facility Access Analysis Quality ref ref type area 10/CL/01 43 Copley High School (The 25 m x 6 lanes Public Stalybridge Copley Centre) Teaching pool 10/CP/02 3 Denton Swimming Baths 25 m x 5 lanes Public Denton Teaching pool 10/DC/01 11 William Andrews 25 m x 6 lanes Public Dukinfield Swimming Baths (Dukinfield Pool) 10/GL/01 8 Village Hotel Leisure Private Dukinfield
10/GO/01 4 Hyde Leisure Pool Leisure Public Hyde 10/MO/01 47 FX Leisure Centre Leisure Private Stalybridge 10/MR/02 30 Medlock Sports Centre 25 m x 6 lanes Public Droylsden 10/SW/01 23 Esporta Health Club and 25 m x 4 lanes Private Denton Gym
Stand alone swimming pool provision in Denton and Dunkinfield are both assessed as being of adequate quality and it is noted that both these sites will require significant investment in the future in order to either bring them up to a good standard or in deed to maintain their current standard.
Sport England recommends that an appropriate drive time and walk time accessibility standard be applied to indoor sports provision to determine shortfalls in provision. The normal acceptable standard would be to apply a 20 minute drive time. However, in taking account of local need we are able to determine locally specific standards.
The street survey demonstrated that residents in Mossley (31%), Stalybridge (25%) and Longdendale (24%) are more willing to travel by transport compared to other analysis areas. In the case of Mossley, this is due to there being no local provision. However, it can be said that the other areas exhibit more rural characteristics and it is therefore not surprising that residents in more urban areas, are more likely to walk to access provision.
The street survey demonstrated that most respondents are willing to travel 15 minutes to access provision. On this basis we recommend application of both a walk and drive time catchment of 15 minutes. It is likely that gaps in the provision of swimming pools will be identified in Ashton, Droylsden and Audenshaw. However, the most significant gap is likely to be in Mossley, where there is no current provision and the nearest facility is located in Copley.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 150
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Analysis of demand
In order to identify any shortfalls in the quantity of indoor sports facilities within Tameside, we have utilised Sport England’s Active Places Power capacity analysis (or supply and demand analysis). This analysis uses the current capacity of provision across the Borough and potential demand (based on population and participation trends), to analysis if the current capacity of facilities is being met by current demand. This then gives a clear indication of shortfalls. In addition, we have applied population and participation increases to the demand to calculate if current supply will also meet future demands.
Table 13.5: Active Places Power analysis of demand for swimming pools
Current Future (2021) Capacity 17,801 17,801 Demand 12,437 13,382 Balance 5,364 4,419 % Tameside demand met 143.13 133.0 % England demand met 173.51 - % North West Region demand met 182.96 -
Identification (through analysis of Active Places Power) that 140% of demand for a particular type of facility is satisfied indicates that all needs in an area are met (this takes into account the quality of provision and the extent to which school facilities may be available). On this basis, current demand in Tameside is being met by current provision. However, by 2021 there is likely to be an under provision in terms of swimming pools.
It is therefore important to ensure that the current level of provision is sustained within Tameside. Given that stand alone pools in Denton and Dukinfield have had no recent investment and are identified as being of adequate quality, investment in these sites will help to sustain and even increase the capacity of provision to cater for future demand.
Long term future consideration should be given to additional provision in Mossley if it is not possible to secure greater levels of community access to school/private based facilities.
Swimming pool summary There are currently ten sites providing swimming pool provision in Tameside. Of these, six are full sized 25 metre pools, five of which, are TMBC owned (including Copley which operates as a dual use facility with Copley High) available for public swimming. Three pools have a degree of restricted access due to the fact that they operate on a membership basis only (the two Village hotels and FX Leisure). Stand alone swimming pool provision in Denton and Dunkinfield are both assessed as being of adequate quality and it is noted that both these sites will require significant investment in the future in order to either bring them up to a good standard or in deed to maintain their current standard. Long term future consideration should be given to additional provision in Mossley if it is not possible to secure greater levels of community access to school/private based facilities.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 151
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Health and Fitness provision
Analysis of supply
There are 20 sites, providing a total of 971 fitness stations in Tameside. The private fitness sector in Tameside is well established, reflected by the fact that 60% of sites are operated by the commercial sector (split 42% membership and 58% pay and play). Provision at the two Village hotels (152 stations in total) significantly contributes to the availability of health and fitness provision in Tameside. The largest local authority site is The Copley Centre, providing 130 stations.
Figure 13.11: Health and fitness facilities in Tameside
Tameside MBC Gymnasia - by fitness station
Stations: Less than 20 Stations: 20 or more Analysis Area Boundary OLDHAM Pop. densi ty per s q. mil e Mossley 16,000 to 28,400 14,200 to 16,000 13,100 to 14,200 106 11,800 to 13,100 10,200 to 11,800 Ashton- 8,800 to 10,200 u-Lyne 7,300 to 8,800 5,300 to 7,300 66 3,400 to 5,300 121 300 to 3,400 1 Stalybridge 79 30 12 43 Droylsden 67 14 117
119 116 29 47 Dukinfield Aude nshaw 51 8 33 HIGH PEAK Longde ndale 120 3 42 23 MANCHESTER 118 Hyde Denton 4 122
87
STOCKPORT
Created by Knight, Kavanagh & Page (www.kkp.co.uk) © Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Licence number 100020577.
Table 13.6: Key to health and fitness map
TMBC KKP Site name Size of Access Analysis Quality ref ref facility area (stations) 10/AC/01 1 Ashton Under Lyne Pool 63 Public Ashton 10/AC/02 67 Old Street Ladies only 50 Private Ashton (Unicorn Fitness) 10/GO/01 4 Hyde Leisure Pool 33 Public Ashton 10/HO/01 66 Stamford High School 14 School Ashton 10/WE/01 29 Oxford Park Sports Centre 18 Public Ashton 10/AN/03 12 Portland Mill Brook Street 80 Private Denton East (Olympic Gym)
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 152
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
TMBC KKP Site name Size of Access Analysis Quality ref ref facility area (stations) 10/GL/01 8 Village Hotel, Captain 72 Private Denton Clarke Road 10/MO/01 47 FX Leisure Centre 86 Private Denton 10/GC/02 87 Alder Community High 10 School Droylsden School 10/CL/01 43 Copley High School (The 130 Public Dukinfield Copley Centre) 10/CO/01 79 Tameside College 22 Private Dukinfield 10/MR/02 30 Medlock Sports Centre 66 Public Dukinfield 10/ND/03 33 Audenshaw High School 18 School Dukinfield 10/YT/05 51 Astley Sports Complex 40 Public Dukinfield 10/CP/02 3 Denton Swimming Baths 4 Public Hyde 10/SA/04 106 Hartshead Sports College 8 School Hyde 10/AN/02 14 Village Hotel Lord Sheldon 80 Private Stalybridge Way 10/FL/01 42 Hyde Clarendon College 11 Public Stalybridge 10/HT/05 122 Ken Ward Sports Centre 20 Public Stalybridge 10/SW/01 23 Esporta Health Club and 150 Private Stalybridge Gym
30% of fitness provision in Tameside is assessed as adequate quality, suggesting that investment will be required to improve these sites in the medium to long term. The majority of these sites are school based and as such there is some question as to their full availability to the public on a pay and play basis.
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 153
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Analysis of demand
Active Places Power does not provide any analysis for fitness provision. Therefore, in order to identify any shortfalls in the quantity of provision within Tameside, we have developed a demand based calculation. This then gives a clear indication of shortfalls. In addition, we have applied population and participation increases to the demand to calculate if current supply will also meet future demands.
Table 13.7: Analysis of demand for health and fitness provision
Current Future (2021) Adult population 212,915 232,0001 UK penetration rate 19.7% 19.7% Number of potential members 41,944 45,704 Number of visits per week (1.5 per member) 61,916 68,556 % of visits in peak time 65 65 Number of visits in peak time (equivalent to no. of 1,032 1,143 stations required i.e. no. of visits/39 weeks*65%)
Tameside currently provides a total of 971 fitness stations across all sites. Based on the national UK penetration rate, both current and future demand in Tameside is not being met. Anticipated demand in 2021 equates to the need for 1,143 stations. A sizeable proportion of provision is currently made through the private sector, there is potential for additional provision to be made at TMBC sites to help rectify the current and future shortfall of stations. In particular, there is no fitness provision in Mossley or Longdendale (unless provision is made at Ken Ward). It is also likely that, albeit small provision at school sites will be reduced/removed as part of BSF.
Health and fitness summary There are 20 sites, providing a total of 971 fitness stations in Tameside. The private fitness sector in Tameside is well established, reflected by the fact that 60% of sites are operated by the commercial sector (split 42% membership and 58% pay and play). Provision at the two Village hotels (152 stations in total), significantly contributes to the availability of health and fitness provision in Tameside. The largest local authority site is The Copley Centre, providing 130 stations. 30% of fitness provision in Tameside is assessed as adequate quality, suggesting that investment will be required to improve these sites in the medium to long term. The majority of these sites are school based and as such there is some question as to their full availability to the public on a pay and play basis. Tameside currently provides a total of 971 fitness stations across all sites. Based on the national UK penetration rate, both current and future demand in Tameside is not being met. Anticipated demand in 2021 equates to the need for 1,143 stations. A sizeable proportion of provision is currently made through the private sector, there is potential for additional provision to be made at TMBC sites to help rectify the current and future shortfall of stations.
1 Assumes population increase by 2021 of 7.6%, according to ONS 2004-based population estimates (published 20 December 2005).
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 154
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Consultee list
The core of this phase of the project revolved around extensive consultation with key individuals, sports clubs, TMBC officers and agencies working in Tameside. Qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted either face-to-face, telephone or by questionnaire using contacts provided by TMBC and those uncovered by to KKP during consultation.
Name Organisation Designation Mike Woollard Cheshire Cricket Board Club Development Sarah Friday England Athletics (NW) Club and coach support officer David Williams Total Cricket Ltd (Portland Mill) Mark Tweedie TMBC Sports development Mick O'Brien TMBC Pitch bookings Neil Chaisty Sports Trust General Manager Steve Bullows Sports Trust Football Development Manager Roger Greenwood TMBC Cultural and Customer Services Lyndsey Whiteside TMBC PE and School Sports Forum Matt Johnson TMBC Club Forum Andrew Dwyer TMBC Club Development Officer - Club Forum Colin Bridgford Manchester FA County Development Manager Arlene Lomax TMBC Disability Development Worker Susan Lever TMBC BSF contact Graham Dixon Tameside and District Football Secretary League Steve Hampson TMBC/Denton St Lawrence CC Sports development (Community) Toby Wood TMBC Sports development (Physical Activity & SPAA) Simon Gerrard Cheshire FA Senior Football Development Officer Mr E J Murphy East Cheshire Harriers and Club contact Tameside Athletic Club Steve Grime Dukinfield Youth Junior Football Club contact Club (Boys and Girls Teams Tony Corns Denton Youth Junior Football Club Club contact Mr David Hanman Tameside Hawks Junior Hockey Club contact Club John Carrington Tameside Men's Hockey Club Club contact Shaun Higgens TMBC/Tameside Titans Disability Development Worker Adrian Young Dukinfield Rugby Union Football Chairman Club
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 155
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Name Organisation Designation Bill Thorpe Aldwinians Rugby Union Football Chairman Club Mr A. Spafford Ashton-under-Lyne Rugby Union Club contact Football Club Jim Taylor Cheshire & Manchester Women's Secretary County Football League Ged Conlon East Cheshire Sunday football League secretary league Martin Hilton East Manchester Junior Football Secretary League David Williams Greater Manchester Crown Green Secretary Bowling Association Sarah Friday England Athletics (NW) Club and coach support officer Charlotte McNeela England Hockey (NW) Development Officer Rachel Brown RFU (NW) Regional Development Officer Bobby Denning Lancashire County Cricket Cricket Development Manager Mike Woollard Cheshire County Cricket Cricket Development Manager Chris Donohue Colliery Fields, Town Lane Association contact Martin Viddler Dunkinfield CC Club contact Hyde CC Club contact Dave Hillier Lancashire Tennis Association Tennis Development Officer for Lancashire Mr David Brightmore Hyde and District Sunday Football League Alan Bradbury Droylsden Juniors Football Club Club contact. Steve Dunn Denton Town FC Club contact Mark Caldwell Denton Town FC Club contact Karen Braddock Dukinfield Marlins Club contact Roger Higson TMBC Asset management Ted Pete Louvolite Boxing Club Club contact Roger Ambler Ashton Lacrosse Club Club contact Ian Spivey Aldwinians RFC Club contact
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 156
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Football questionnaire respondents
Club Name Contact Newton FC John Mcgartland Mossley Juniors Martin Pocock Hollingworth Juniors & Old Boys FC John Mattimore Droylsden Juniors Football Club Alan F. Bradbury Mbe Dukinfield Tigers J.F.C. Jackie Brook Denton Girls Football Club Debbie Watt Denton Phoenix JFC - Denton Youth FC Tony Corns Stalybridge Celtic Juniors And Amateurs Fc Pat Beswick Hyde United Juniors Simon Cragg Tameside Villa Anthony Massey FC United Of Tameside Mr N Hallsworth Listons Football Club Scott Littlewood West End Boys & Girls Junior Football Club Kevin Potts Acres Inn FC Gary Morris Butchers Arms FC Paul Harrison The British Protection Paul Griffin Brushes Rangers FC (Includes Brushes Rangers FC, FC Brushes Rangers, Spartak Brushes) Kevin Danson Denton Cc FC Mr Mark Pickles FC Stalybridge Matthew Nixon Afc Brromhouse Formly Lowes Arms FC Les Fowler Kippax Boys FC Leslie Varden Medlock Rangers JFC Mr Craig Milligan Nelly FC Mr Mark Shepley Reddish Phoenix FC Mr Jeffrey William Ogden Ridge Hill Celtic FC Mr Andrew Kenworthy Ridge Hill Celtic JFC Mr Martin Hilton Pegs Tavern FC Robert Benham Rifleman FC Matthew Kirkham Ring O Bells FC Mr Martin Williams Signol Athletic JFC Ms Julie Dawn Higgins Staly Lions FC Steve Limb Mike Morgan Stalybridge Labour FC Mr John Bailey Strawberry Gardens FC Alan Turner Toll Point FC Mr Darren Saville Denton Town Football Club Stephen Dunn Waterfold Warriors FC Bernadette Moran
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 157
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Club Name Contact Dog & Partridge (Stalybridge) Jason Roper Tontine.F.C M.Combs Lancashire Tennis Association David Hillier
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 158
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PPG17 SPORTS FACILITY ASSESSMENT
Appendix 2: site assessment matrix used by TMBC
1 Site reference 2 Newly defined township 3 Site location and/or address 4 Are there any marked grass pitch(es)? Yes/ No 5 Number of pitches Are the pitch(es) used for: Football Yes/ No Rugby Yes/ No Cricket Yes/ No 6 Hockey Yes/ No Athletics Yes/No The playing field is just used for Yes/ No general play On average how many games are 7 played on the pitch(es) per year? On average how many games are 8 cancelled on the pitch(es) per year? Do(es) the pitch(es) have safety 9 Yes/ No Narrow/Reasonable/Broad margins? Do(es) the pitch(es) have a 10 Yes/ No Slight/Gentle/Severe/None noticeable slope(s)? What is the pitch(es) surface like? Flat & smooth/gentle undulations/ bumpy&rough/ muddy/ 11 threadbare Are there problems with the Drainage Yes/No pitch(es) regarding? Dog fouling Yes/No Glass/stones/litter Yes/No 12 Unofficial Use Yes/No Vandalism Yes/No Other What is the state/ condition of any Temporary/ Permanent 13 posts? Good/OK/Poor/need replacing If there is a cricket pitch, is the 14 Yes/No wicket protected when not in use? 15 Are any line markings? permanent/temporary/have to be marked out each time 16 Are there any changing rooms? Yes/ No 17 Separate from other buildings? Yes/ No 18 With Showers? Yes/ No Does the playing field have a 19 Yes/ No dedicated car park? 20 How many spaces?
August 2010 3-053-0708 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 159
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PLAYING PITCH ASSESSMENT
Appendix 3: Towards a Level Playing Field outdoor sports facility proformas
Non Technical Visual Quality Assessment - Individual Pitch Assessment
KKP Site reference Site Name N um ber of pitches P itch ID (s) P itch Type Community Use?
Pitch Issues:
Background information: Number of games played on pitch each season
Number of games cancelled due to unfitness of pitch (excluding frozen pitches) % of gam es cancelled per season
Assessment Criteria (please rank each of the following aspects for each pitch with an 'X' in the coloured box to the right of the chosen answer)
Element Rating Guidance notes Comments About the winter pitch/cricket field Grass cover - entire pitch / cricket field >94% 85-94% 70-84% 60-69% <60% W here, 90%+ grass cover should be given 'Excellent'; less than 60% should be considered 'very poor' Length of grass Excellent Good Poor Very Poor The ideal length of grass w ill vary between sports
Size of pitch / cricket field Yes - fully No- but adequate No - not adequate Does it meet the NGB standard? See pitch sizes tab for dimensions
Adequate safety margins Yes - fully No- but adequate No - not adequate Does it meet the NGB standard? See pitch sizes tab for dimensions
Slope of pitch / cricket outfield (gradient and cross fa F lat S light G entle M oderate S evere Cricket wickets should be flat. Evenness of pitch / cricket field Excellent Good Poor Very Poor W here field is com letely level = 'E xcellent' Problem Areas: Evidence of Dog fouling None Yes - some Yes - lots If no evidence, assum e none. M ay w ish to refer to user survey Problem Areas: Evidence of Glass/ stones/ litter None Yes - some Yes - lots If no evidence, assum e none. M ay w ish to refer to user survey Problem Areas: Evidence of Unofficial use None Yes - some Yes - lots eg informal, casual use, unbooked use, kids kickabout etc. If no evidence, assume none .M ay wish to refer to user survey
Problem Areas: Evidence of Damage to surface None Yes - some Yes - lots eg. golf divots, car-parking on field etc. If no evidence, assum e none.M ay w ish to refer to user survey Training ; Estimated num ber of hours per week in se 0 1 to 2 hrs 2 to 4 hrs 4+ Training which takes place on the pitch area
Changing Accomodation
Changing Accom odation Yes No Is the pitch served by changing facilities
About the equipment/ wicket… W inter Sports Only- Goal Posts - quality Excellent Good Poor Upright, straight, painted , for football, goals are there safe net hooks at both ends. If posts are dismantled after game, or are removable goals, assume Excellent. Cricket Only - Is the wicket protected when not used Yes No Is the wicket protected when not in use - can be roped off or covered.
Line m arkings - quality Excellent Good Poor e.g. Have they been painted recently; are lines straight and clear etc Training area Yes No eg nets/ goals/ grids off main body of pitch
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 160
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PLAYING PITCH ASSESSMENT
Non Technical Visual Quality Assessment - Changing Accomodation
KKP Site reference Assessment undertaken by: Site Name: Date of Assessment: Changing Accom Name
Capacity of changing rooms; (Number of teams that can change at any one time in the facility)
Changing Accomodation Issues:
Assessment Criteria (please rank each of the following aspects for each pitch with an 'X' in the coloured box to the right of the chosen answer) Element Rating Guidance notes Comments About the Changing Accomodation Perceived quality of changing accommodationDoes it look well Overall Quality Excellent Good Average Poor No changing maintained, clean, safe etc
Evidence of vandalism None Yes - some Yes - lots Damage to pavillion, graffiti, broken glass etc
Showers Yes - GoodYes - OK Yes -poor No Are there showers facilities, what is their quality (if known)
Toilets Yes - GoodYes - OK Yes -poor No Are there toilets - what is their condition (if known)
Parking Good OK Poor Is there enough for circa 20 cars, bays marked out etc
Is the site close to public transport links, proximity to bus stop, Links to public transort Good OK Poor/non train station, hubs.
Does the accomodation look secure - secure doors/windows, Security Good OK Poor evidence of breakins ( may get info from User Surveys) pgg accomodation be used by both male and female teams at same Segregated changing Yes No time
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 161
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PLAYING PITCH ASSESSMENT
Appendix 4: Key characteristics of Sport England Segmentations
Group Sports that appeal to the Key Characteristics description segment The most active type across the population. Team sports are particularly popular, along with other high intensity Rugby, Cricket, Squash, activities such as lifting weights at the gym or competitive court games. Motivations include improving performance Ben Climbing, Windsurfing, and training for competition. Being less busy, having people to go with and better playing facilities would encourage Gym, Tennis, Football participation, though those that don’t do sport are mainly just not interested Second highest participation rate of all the types; enjoy watching and playing team sports, especially football. Football, Basketball, combat sports, social activities and weight training would be appealing but fitness classes are not. Motivations for Martial Arts, Weight Jamie participation include improving performance and being with mates. Better sporting facilities locally would encourage training, Boxing, this type. People to do exercise with and finding time may be barriers Badminton. An active type that primarily enjoys exercise classes that they can go to with friends. Swimming is popular, as is Body Combat, Netball, going to the gym, but combat sports do not appeal. Primary motivation is to lose weight and keep fit. Tend to Swimming, Pilates, Gym, Chloe exercise with people. They would exercise more if they had more free time, people to go with, or facilities were Running, Tennis, Aqua open longer Aerobics. The least active type within the population, but still participates to some extent. Social activities, swimming and Swimming, Gym, Leanne keep fit classes are popular. Unlikely to be a member of a club. Motivations include losing weight and to take Aerobics, Ice Skating, children. Would exercise more if there was help with childcare, longer opening hours and cheaper admission. Dance Exercise, Walking. Very active type particularly enjoys keep-fit, and gym related activities; winter sports and swimming are also Gym, Skiing, Road popular. Team games or social activities are less appealing. Motivations include losing weight, keeping fit and Running, Tai Chi, Dance Helena improving performance. Would exercise more if places had longer opening hours, if she had people to go with or if Exercise, Body Pump, she was less busy Horse Riding, Yoga. Canoeing, Skiing, Cricket, Likely to have private gym membership, and compete in some sports. Motivations include improving performance, Tim Golf, Cycling, Squash, keeping fit and meeting friends. He also just enjoys doing sport. Busy lives are a barrier to doing more. Football, Swimming, Tennis, Main motivations for participation include taking children, losing weight and keeping fit. Being less busy, help with Badminton, Cycling, Alison childcare and better facilities would encourage Alison to do more. Those who do not participate find it difficult to find Aerobics, Horse-riding, time Pilates, Exercise bike Swimming, Walking, Likely to have public rather than private gym membership, if any. May take children ice skating, bowling or roller Dance Exercise, Aqua Jackie skating. Main motivations are to take children or lose weight. For those who do no sport finding time is difficult, or Aerobics, Body Pump, Ice they are just not interested. Help with childcare and cheaper admission would encourage more participation Skating (with children)
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 162
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PLAYING PITCH ASSESSMENT
Group Sports that appeal to the Key Characteristics description segment Football, Karate, Weight Likely to be part of a social club which has some form of physical recreation. He is motivated to train and to meet Kev training, Boxing, Rugby, friends. Better facilities and cheaper admission may encourage more participation. Fishing, Pool, Cricket Least active type within Group. Unlikely to be a member of a fitness or sports club, though may occasionally pay for Swimming, Aerobics, Paula an exercise class. Motivations possibly include to lose weight or to accompany children. Improved transport, help Utility Walking, Ice with childcare and cheaper admission would encourage greater participation, although there is general disinterest Skating. Enjoys participating in a number of activities; likely to be a member of fitness/sports clubs. Motivated by meeting Sailing, Gym, Football, Philip friends, taking the children, improving performance and enjoyment. Help with childcare may encourage this type to Jogging, Badminton, Golf, participate more although lack of time is a significant factor. Cycling, Cricket Likely to be a member of a health or fitness club. May have received tuition in an activity. Motivations include Swimming, Yoga, Elaine keeping fit, losing weight and to help with injury. Longer opening hours, having more time and people to go with Walking, Horse riding, would encourage more participation. Those that don’t participate are just not that interested Aqua Aerobics, Gym. Participate one/two times a week; enjoy low impact activities and are likely to be a member of a sports club. Their Swimming, Sailing, Aqua- Roger and motivations include keeping fit, to help with injury and because they generally enjoy sport. Better facilities and Aerobics, Walking, Golf, Joy improved transport may encourage greater participation. Shooting, Bowls, Fishing Some participation. Likely to be without a car and she walks, rather than cycles, to get to places. Enjoys swimming Swimming, Aerobics, and keep fit classes. Unlikely to be a member of a sports club. Main motivation is to lose weight. Also may take Utility Walking, Step Brenda grandchildren to organised classes. Longer opening hours and cheaper admissions would encourage those Machine, Dance Exercise, wanting to do more. Those with grandchildren would benefit from help with childcare. Many just aren’t interested in Keep fit. participating in sport Some participation, but focused on lower intensity sports that can accommodate health problems and low income. Shooting, Snooker, Pool, Main motivations for participation are to help with injury and to meet friends. People to go with would encourage this Terry Utility Cycling Utility type to do more, whilst those who don’t participate particularly struggle with their health. May be a member of a Walking. social club that does physical recreation, but very unlikely to be a health or fitness club member Lowest participation of the Group, mainly enjoying walking and other low intensity activities. Younger members of this Type may participate in keep fit classes or swimming. Main motivation for participation is help with injury or Walking, Keep Fit, Norma disability, but this is also the most inhibiting factor. Many of this type do very little or no sport. Cheaper admissions Swimming, Aqua Aerobics and people to accompany them might encourage this group to do more Highest participation of the Group; enjoy a variety of activities and are likely to be members of sports and social Bowls, Snooker, Golf, Ralph and clubs. Main motivation for participation is to meet with friends, improve performance, and keep fit, but also because Walking, Tennis, Fishing, Phyllis they enjoy it. Better transport and people to go with would encourage participation Table Tennis, Swimming.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 163
TAMESIDE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PLAYING PITCH ASSESSMENT
Group Sports that appeal to the Key Characteristics description segment Enjoys both individual and social activities but participates less than his peers. Likely to be part of a sports or social Bowls, Snooker, Golf, Frank club that does physical recreation and his main motivation is to meet friends and because they just enjoy it. Walking, Darts, Fishing, Improved transport and cheaper accommodation would encourage more participation. Pool, Swimming Have the lowest participation rates of the 19 segments. Poor health and disability are major inhibitors. Participation Elsie and Walking, Bowls Dancing, occurs mainly in low intensity activities. Safer neighbourhoods or people to go with would encourage participation. Arnold Low-impact exercises. Organised, low-impact, low intensity events would be welcomed.
August 2010 3-053-0809 Draft report: Knight Kavanagh & Page 164