GROSVENOR CAMBRIDGE SPORTING NEEDS STUDY FINAL REPORT ... · GROSVENOR CAMBRIDGE SPORTING NEEDS STUDY March 2015 3-004-1314 Final report: KKP and Grant Thornton 3 There will be a

Integrity, Innovation, Inspiration

www.kkp.co.uk www.grant-thornton.co.uk

GROSVENOR

CAMBRIDGE SPORTING NEEDS STUDY

FINAL REPORT

March 2015

http://www.kkp.co.uk/

http://www.grant-thornton.co.uk/

GROSVENOR CAMBRIDGE SPORTING NEEDS STUDY

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 1

PART 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 16

PART 2: SPORTING CONTEXT FOR CAMBRIDGE AND SOUTH CAMBRIDGESHIRE

....................................................................................................................................... 20

PART 3: PLANNING CONTEXT AND POLICY ............................................................. 27

PART 4: DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 29

PART 5: ARTIFICIAL GRASS PITCHES ....................................................................... 32

PART 6: CYCLING AND TRIATHLON ........................................................................... 47

PART 7: SWIMMING POOLS ........................................................................................ 52

PART 8: SPORTS HALLS ............................................................................................. 72

PART 9: HEALTH AND FITNESS .................................................................................. 91

PART 10: GYMNASTICS ............................................................................................... 96

PART 11: INDOOR BOWLS ........................................................................................ 100

PART 12: INDOOR TENNIS ........................................................................................ 110

PART 13: COMBAT SPORTS...................................................................................... 114

PART 14: ATHLETICS ................................................................................................. 117

PART 15: OTHER SPORTS ......................................................................................... 121

PART 16: THE CASE FOR CO-LOCATED SPORTS PROVISION .............................. 123

APPENDIX A: BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS ............................................................ 132

APPENDIX B: DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE .................................................................. 144

APPENDIX C: SWIMMING POOLS IN CAMBRIDGE CITY AND SOUTH

CAMBRIDGESHIRE ..................................................................................................... 187

APPENDIX D: SPORTS HALLS IN CAMBRIDGE CITY AND SOUTH

CAMBRIDGESHIRE ..................................................................................................... 189

APPENDIX E: SPORTS VILLAGE STAFF ESTIMATES ............................................. 193

APPENDIX F: SPORT ENGLAND MARKET SEGMENTATION SEGMENTS ............. 195

APPENDIX G: CONSULTEE LIST ............................................................................... 199

GROSVENOR


March 2015 3-004-1314 Final report: KKP and Grant Thornton 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Grant Thornton UK LLP (GT) and Knight, Kavanagh & Page (KKP) have been commissioned by Grosvenor Developments Ltd (Grosvenor) to undertake a Sporting Needs Study of the Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire area ("the study area"), as set out in the letter of engagement between Grant Thornton and Grosvenor dated 10 June 2014. We would like to thank the two local authorities, the various clubs and sporting bodies and employers for participating in the study, and Cambridge Ahead for helping to facilitate our employer survey. A full list of consultees is provided at Appendix H. In this report we examine the national and local context for sports participation and development and provide a high level supply and demand analysis for the study area for the full range of sports relevant to the Cambridge and South Cambridge study area. This report has been produced to assess the need for additional sporting facilities in this area. Appropriate attention has been given to the relevant national and local planning documents. The study overlaps slightly with the Playing Pitch Strategy (PPS) currently being undertaken by Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council with Sport England. However, the timing of this study should inform some of the strategic challenges that will arise within the PPS and enable Grosvenor to input into it. Consultation with Sport England was undertaken in the research phase of the project and at the final draft report stage. Sport England is satisfied that the report follows the guidance within its Assessing Needs and Opportunities Guide (ANOG) for Indoor and Outdoor Sports Facilities which has been produced to help local authorities meet the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework. Context The existing sports infrastructure serving the Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire area is complex. There are multiple operators of sports facilities; some of which serve a wide customer base while others serve exclusive segments of the local community. This is also further complicated with a range of potential sport related projects and developments; some of which are progressing while others are longer term aspirations of specific interest groups. South Cambridgeshire District completely encircles the City and does not have a distinct district centre, therefore all outlying areas have strong inter-relationships with the City. From a sporting perspective the dispersed nature of the South Cambridgeshire population and infrastructure leads many residents to gravitate towards the City to fulfil their sport and physical activity needs. This is reinforced by the high levels of imported use in the City and a corresponding high level of exported use from the District. Therefore, from a sports infrastructure planning perspective there are limited benefits from developing large scale provision in the District where the population is dispersed. Similarly, there is limited scope to develop provision in the City given the availability of land and the transport infrastructure challenges of getting in to the City. As a result, the development of facilities on the fringe of the City will deliver clear benefits to both City



and District residents as well as providing facilities in line with planned housing growth for both authorities. There are a number of developments that will potentially come to fruition over the next 3 to 5 years that will impact on the sporting landscape of Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire District and some of the proposed developments slightly overlap on others. Clear examples of this are the ARU development at Howes Close (recently refused planning permission from SCDC) and the Cambridge Sport Lakes Trust development. Therefore, it will be important for the City and District Council Planners to work closely with all developments and NGBs to ensure that once a project is agreed (i.e. planning and funding are in place and a start date agreed) unnecessary duplication does not occur. This is critical in ensuring strategic fit and financial sustainability of potential sports facilities. Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire District are experiencing significant residential and business growth. The two local authority areas are home for just over a quarter of a million people and this figure is expected to rise by almost 50,000 people by 2037. Not only is there an increase in population, but there will be significant change in the population make up over this period.

The area will see significant increases in the proportion of over 65’s with a small reduction in the 25 to 44 age group. Therefore, the area will have a greater proportion of time rich residents who will want access to sports facilities in order that they remain physically active.

The area can be characterised as being generally affluent, although there are pockets of deprivation, mainly in the north of the City. As a result life expectancy is higher than the national figure. However, both areas have challenges in relation to childhood obesity:



There will be a need to develop sport and physical activity programmes in high quality and vibrant facilities as part of the fight to get and keep people active, especially young people. The increase in childhood obesity levels are more pronounced in the City than the District, but it is clear that

given their interrelationships, joint working to combat these challenges is required. New, high quality sports facilities is only one way of tackling the obesity challenge among young people, but it is a significant part of the fight.

There is also strong evidence of business growth in the area with a growing number of employees in knowledge-intensive sectors. Our employer survey indicated interest in new sporting provision amongst employers with accessibility and the offer of a variety of facilities and provision for the whole family being important considerations. Participation data shows that both the City and South Cambridgeshire significantly outperform the regional and national participation rates for both 1 x 30 minutes moderate intensity sport per week and club membership. South Cambridgeshire outperforms in all other Active People KPIs whereas the City achieves below the national and regional averages with respect to volunteering, receiving sports tuition and participation in competitive sports. However, the City’s data needs to be assessed in the context of high numbers of young people (i.e. students) who have a higher propensity to participate than any other group. Therefore, this is likely to skew resident participation levels which are potentially lower, even though it is where the majority of students reside. Both authorities are in the process of determining the future need for sports pitches across the area, but neither has an up to date assessment of need for a wider range of indoor and built sports facilities. This study provides the most comprehensive assessment of sports facility need across the Cambridge City and South Cambridge District areas and should be used to inform the potential for future developments in the area. The study has engaged with NGBs, local clubs, the universities, local authorities and other key stakeholders to determine the strategic need and opportunity in the area.



Sports facility priorities Based on the analysis which follows, the table below provides a visual summary of the priorities for sporting investment across the Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire study area. This is based on the analysis of our findings and reflects the strategic need identified through a combination of NGB, CSP, local authority, local sports club and wider stakeholder consultation.

Priorities Sports Rationale

1 Swimming; Football; Cycling; Triathlon

Clear strategic need identified by NGB’s and stakeholders. Investment in new facilities will significantly increase the number of residents able to participate in the relevant sports and improve performance opportunities for athletes.

2 Hockey; Gymnastics

Clear strategic need identified by NGB’s and stakeholders. Investment in new facilities will increase the number of residents able to participate in the relevant sports and enhance performance opportunities for athletes.

3 Rowing; Sports Hall sports (e.g. Badminton)

Strategic need identified by NGB’s and stakeholders. Investment in new facilities will increase opportunities for residents to participate and improve performance. Additional facilities already identified which will potentially address demand within the area.

4 Rugby (IRB 3G pitch)

Strategic need identified by RFU and stakeholders. Investment in new facilities will increase opportunities for participation and performance. Challenge relates to suitable location of pitch.

5 Combat sports Need identified by local clubs and stakeholders, but insufficient demand by individual sports to justify bespoke facilities, but enough to justify a multi-sport facility.

6 Athletics Degree of need identified by local club; however increased demand is likely to be met through better programming and sharing of existing resource by the University and Club.

7 Indoor Tennis Not a strategic priority for the NGB, but identified as a second phase development for the University which will address any demand in the area.

8 Indoor Bowls No strategic need identified and evidence suggests that existing facilities have capacity to accommodate increased demand.

The above priorities also reflect some of the key priorities identified within the Cambridgeshire County Sports Facilities Strategy (2008) which also included an analysis of the Cambridge Horizons Major Sports Facilities Strategy (2006). Their priorities for investment for Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire District are outlined below:



Major specialist sports facilities Community football stadium Ice rink 8 x 4 lane x 25m pools (equivalent) Multi-lane rowing facility 50m swimming pool Cambridge City: 8 x 4 lane x 25m pools (equivalent) 13 x 4 badminton court sports halls 94 fitness stations (pay and play) 5 STPs Gymnastics - development of additional permanent training facilities Permanent

provision for martial arts Indoor Bowls - possible need for additional provision as population grows. Commercial 5 aside football facility South Cambridgeshire District: 9.3.5 4 lane x 25m pools 13 x 4 badminton court sports halls (ie 54.91 courts) 214 fitness stations (pay and play) 11.49 indoor bowls rinks 7 x STPs Whilst these studies were carried out over five years ago (and will be viewed as being out of date within the context of Sport England facilities planning) it is clear that their conclusions are still relevant. This is on the basis that there has been limited investment to deliver the priority developments and in some instances the quality of community facilities has deteriorated through time. In addition to the above investment requirements the study also identified the need to develop provision within multi sports hubs or ‘village’ environments. The following summary gives an overview of the updated assessment of need across the

study area.

Artificial grass pitches (AGPs)

The supply of AGPs is mainly provided by independent schools and colleges at Cambridge University. The fact that such a high proportion of supply is provided by the education sector is not unusual. What is unique is that this is almost exclusively fee paying institutions. These generate a higher level of demand for pitches than the state school sector (i.e. schools will have hockey teams for all school year groups and generally compete on a Saturday) which in turn limits the availability for community hockey and football clubs.



Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire have the following AGP provision: 4 x full size, floodlit, sand based hockey pitches 4 x full size, sand based hockey pitches which are not floodlit 1 x full size, floodlit, 3G football pitches 6 x floodlit 3G small sided pitches 9 x small floodlit sand based pitches A new full size sand dressed pitch is being built at Long Road Sixth Form Centre while Trumpington Community College in Cambridge City is currently developing a new 3G AGP. In addition to these Anglia Ruskin University has submitted a planning application for a sand dressed pitch and 3G pitch at Howes Close (although this has been refused by the planning authority). Hockey

There are eight sand based artificial grass pitches in the study area suitable for hockey. Five of these are floodlit which means they are suitable for evening activity (i.e. training). Community access to pitches is inconsistent and limited due to the high demand from respective schools and colleges. Strategic need England Hockey identified that there is unmet demand for hockey in the area and that some clubs have to use a range of pitches to accommodate all their training and fixtures requirements. Consultation confirmed that community clubs in the area have waiting lists and that latent demand is high; as an example Cambridge City Hockey Club is closed to junior members as a result of limited access to pitches. All clubs identified the need for additional pitch time to accommodate demand; for both training and fixtures. The County Squads identified that there is a need for a home base for training and fixtures. There is a clear need for additional hockey provision in the area. The need is such that a single pitch development would be insufficient and only add to the challenge of using multiple sites for the main clubs in the area. Strategic opportunity The unmet demand outlined identifies a potential opportunity for a hockey hub site for the area which serves the needs of key clubs and the County squads. A two pitch hockey facility with appropriate ancillary facilities would meet latent demand and provide a sustainable hockey environment. Coupled with appropriate ‘classroom’ space this would enable the NGB to develop a coach education and volunteer development hub at the pitches. Football There is one full size, floodlit 3G pitch in the study area. There are also six undersized 3G pitches that are floodlit and suitable for junior fixtures or training during the evenings. Two of the smaller 3G pitches have been approved by the FA to accommodate small sided fixtures (i.e. mini soccer); however the one full size 3G pitch at Comberton Leisure Centre has not. This pitch will not be able to accommodate any affiliated league fixtures for the coming season.



Strategic need The FA and County FA highlights the need for three additional full size 3G pitches in the Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire area; predominantly to accommodate the training and fixtures needs of clubs in the area. The FA has recently announced its aspiration to develop a range of football hubs across the country which will see the development of multi pitch AGP and natural turf sites for community football training and fixtures. Future AGP developments will need to demonstrate wider football engagement with leagues and clubs. Sport England’s FPM analysis for football identifies that the need for pitches is relatively evenly spread across the study area with no specific area more of a priority than others. The County FA has identified the need for a wider football development hub for the area which could deliver coach and volunteer development opportunities. Cambridge United has identified an aspiration to develop a half size indoor 3G pitch alongside outdoor 3G and natural turf pitches and support service facilities (e.g. classrooms, sports medicine and science, etc.) as part of a wider club training and academy development. This development would not only enable the club to achieve Category 2 status on the Elite Player Performance Plan, but could potentially provide a ‘complete’ training facility for the whole club. Furthermore, the Cambridge United Youth and Community Trust would also make extensive use of the facility, accommodating the wider sports development needs of young people in the area. Cambridge City FC has plans to develop a 3G training pitch at Swaston alongside its new stadium. This development has received planning permission and is likely to progress. This will be circa 4 miles from Trumpington and their community catchments could potentially overlap; however both clubs will also have their own programmes and initiatives running from their respective facilities. Strategic opportunity The high level of unmet demand for 3G pitches alongside the aspirations of Cambridge United (including the Trust) and the County FA provides a strategic opportunity for a facility development to meet the requirements of key stakeholders as well as community football clubs. As a minimum this development could potentially consist of two full size 3G pitches with associated natural turf pitches, coach education spaces and ancillary facilities. The development of a half size indoor 3G pitch would be a significant benefit to Cambridge United and its Foundation; however, given its significant cost this would be subject to funding availability. Rugby

Consultation with the RFU has identified the need for an IRB compliant 3G pitch to serve the training needs of clubs. There are at least three local rugby union clubs that report a demand for training facilities. Cambridgeshire RFU identified the need for reliable and regular bookings for a training facility for its County Squads. The County Association’s partnership with the Northampton Saints would mean that the Saints may be keen to base some of its performance programme in Cambridge (reducing Cambridge players’ travel to Northampton); however there is not an available, suitable facility.



Strategic need It is clear from the RFU consultation that there is a need to develop an IRB compliant 3G pitch to serve the training needs of clubs. 3G football facilities could be used for non-contact training if necessary. Strategic opportunity It would be unusual to develop a stand-alone IRB compliant 3G pitch to serve the training needs of clubs. However, this could be incorporated as part of a wider development, but it has greater rugby development potential if it is located at an identified rugby club site. Cycling

British Cycling has identified that there is a high demand for cycling in the Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire area and beyond, and that further growth is inhibited due to a lack of bespoke cycling facilities. The East region has the second highest membership levels of all the British Cycling regions and the membership profile is predominantly road cycling; reflecting the lack of facilities for other disciplines (e.g. velodrome, cycle speedway, etc). British Cycling identified that there are limited opportunities for young people in the area and that recent development initiatives on the back of the Tour de France have identified increased demand. However, the lack of facilities in the area has limited the capacity of the NGB and partners to accommodate this demand. A key challenge is that established road cycling clubs are not prepared to take under 16’s out on the open road as a result of health and safety concerns. A young cyclist would need to travel to Gosling Sports Park (40 miles) or Redbridge (50 miles) to access a closed road circuit (further if living in the north of the City or South Cambs.. Strategic need British Cycling identified that the immediate priority for the area is a closed road circuit. This will enable local clubs to accommodate the needs of young cyclists and to hold training sessions and time trial events within a safe environment. The NGB also identified that a BMX facility would complement the closed road circuit. This is on the basis that it is a key driver for attracting young people into the sport. Strategic opportunity It is clear that there is a need for a closed road circuit and a BMX facility in the area. However, if these two facilities are developed the wider opportunity with the NGB is to consider an expanded cycling hub which could either incorporate or have space to incorporate other disciplines within the sport. As such this could see the clustering of additional cycling facilities such as a cycle speedway track and velodrome. These facilities coupled with appropriate ancillary facilities and classroom space could result in a significant coach education and volunteer development facility for the sport in the region. Triathlon Triathlon England reiterated the challenge of introducing young people to the sport given the health and safety issues associated with road cycling. The NGB identified the need for a closed road circuit in order to develop opportunities in the sport.



Cambridge Triathlon Club is one of the largest clubs in the region and runs programmes and Go Tri events to raise the profile and interest of the sport in the area. The Club also identified the need for access to swimming training (both pool and open water) as a key challenge in meeting the needs of competitors. The City of Cambridge Triathlon event will see the demand for triathlon training and events increase further. Strategic need Aligned to the needs of cycling it is clear that there is a strategic need for a closed road circuit to serve the needs of triathlon. This will enable young triathletes to train and develop their cycling skills in a safe environment; the club is restricted in what it can deliver for young athletes due to facility limitations. Strategic opportunity

The opportunity exists to develop a facility which meets the needs of both British Cycling and Triathlon England. From triathlon’s perspective, if this could be aligned to an open water swimming venue it would have significant added value to the sport, especially during the summer months. Swimming

Swimming pool use provides an acute picture of the nature of sport across the two local authority areas and the ‘honeypot’ role that the City plays. The supply of water space indicates that there is over supply in the City and under supply in South Cambs. However, the demand for facilities in the City is significantly higher with it importing significant use by South Cambs. residents. Strategic need There is a clear strategic need for additional swimming provision across the study area, ideally within the City. This has been reinforced through consultation with the ASA, local authorities, university and club. The Cambridge University Physical Education Department has identified the development of a new swimming pool (potentially a 50m pool) as one of its strategic priorities. The City Council supports this and has identified that it will be a potential recipient of CIL funding; although it will have to compete with other strategic developments. Strategic opportunity The planned 50m pool development at Cambridge University and the proposed pool development at King’s College School will address the wider deficiencies in water space across the study area. Therefore there are no other opportunities across the area other than financially supporting these developments. Relative to the needs of triathlon the potential exists to develop an open water training and competition venue in the area. Sports hall sports

Similar to swimming, sports hall supply and demand analysis reflects a high level of demand in the City as a result of lower levels of supply in the District. There is a high level of imported demand for sports halls in the City which is generally exported from the District. As a result, all sports halls in the City are used for more than 30 hours per week (which equates to all weekday evenings plus additional time at weekends).



Strategic need There is a strategic need for additional sports hall provision within the area to accommodate the expansion of sports hall sports, most notably basketball and badminton. The opening of the new University Sports Centre has not had a significant impact on community access, given the need to accommodate significant demand from students. Strategic opportunity There will be three new sports halls developed across three new schools in the City. The opportunity exists to provide additional sports hall provision on these sites in order to accommodate the high levels of demand in the area. Gymnastics

Gymnastics in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire is all delivered within sports halls and activity rooms in leisure centres and educational facilities. There is no specialist facility within the local authority areas. Strategic need There are nine gymnastics clubs in the area, all of which currently hire or rent facilities from local providers. Almost all clubs express a desire to expand the number of sessions but cannot secure additional time at suitable facilities. The demand for gymnastics in the area is high and there is a lot of unmet demand, particularly in the junior clubs, which all have long waiting lists. Strategic opportunity There are two facilities in the area with aspirations to develop dedicated gymnastics areas. The national governing body identified the potential for additional activity with dedicated facilities. A dedicated gymnastics facility in the area could provide an outlet for a large number of new participants to engage in either gymnastics or trampolining and help to address the waiting lists found in clubs. A specialist facility could be the catalyst for clubs to co-locate or merge in order that programmes for young people can be expanded and the performance pathways improved. Indoor bowls Bowls is a particularly popular sport amongst older age groups and population projections predict the 65+ age group to make up 22.7% of the population in 2037. There are ten rinks in the study area, some currently unused. Strategic need There are two facilities with ten rinks in the study area, and another eight facilities across the County. Clubs report a decline in membership and a number of rinks are currently unused. Clubs are reporting the need for investment to refurbish facilities to improve attractiveness and prepare for a rise in participation with future population increase.



Strategic opportunity Sport England data suggests a deficit of rinks both now and with the future population change, however balanced with the knowledge regarding declining membership figures, it would not be logical to develop new rinks in the area at this moment in time. The focus should be to refurbish the existing facilities. Indoor tennis Strategic need Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire is not a priority area for the LTA and there is no evidence of unmet demand. Culford School in nearby Bury St Edmund’s provide courts necessary to offer scholarships in conjunction with Hills Road Sports and Tennis Club. Strategic opportunity Phase 2 of the planned development at Cambridge University includes four indoor and two outdoor tennis courts. This would provide Cambridge LTC with the opportunity to access indoor courts and expand its membership. Combat sports Local activity currently takes place in a mixture of community facilities and sports halls; there is no specialist facility for fencing, judo or boxing. Trumpington Boxing Club is investigating possible facility opportunities at Cambridge University; however nothing has yet been agreed and consultation with the University identifies that it is unlikely to be able to meet all of the club’s needs. ARU currently runs a degree in Judo; however, this is done in isolation to the NGB and the University uses facilities at Comberton College. Strategic need There is no identified need for any specialist facility provision (through NGB or club consultation) but potentially enough for a multi-sport combat facility. This could accommodate the needs of a wider range of clubs and facilitate increased participation across the area.

Strategic opportunity

Many combat sports operate as a small business, therefore there is an opportunity to develop a cluster of operations within a single venue, ensuring financial and sporting sustainability.

Athletics tracks

Wilberforce Road is the sole athletics track in the study area. It is an eight lane 400m synthetic running track (10 lane straight) with training floodlights and is heavily used by both Cambridge and Coleridge Athletics Club and Cambridge University for both training and competitions. In addition the County Association regularly hold track and field championships at the venue.



Strategic need The track is heavily used and Cambridge and Coleridge Athletics Club are currently operating at capacity with approximately 1,000 members. The Club has grown rapidly in recent years with a 50% increase in membership since the London 2012 Olympic Games. There is currently no waiting list; however the Club states it is at capacity and will be unable to accommodate additional growth based on the availability of the track. As such, the Club suggests that it will require an additional facility to service any future growth. However, a closer working relationship between the University and the Club and better programming of the facility could create additional opportunities (beyond the existing 10 hours per week) for more athletes to be accommodated. Strategic opportunity There are numerous Counties across England that are only serviced by one athletics facility so it would be reasonable to assume that the City of Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire does not require additional athletics provision. Furthermore, opportunities exist to increase the club’s access to the track which do not appear to have been exhausted at this stage. Consultation also suggests that there is a proposed development to include a new athletics track in Saffron Walden (North Essex). Rowing

Strategic need The strategic need for the rowing facility has already been made within the Cambridge Sports Lakes Trust development. This is reinforced and supported by British Rowing but to date there are insufficient funds to develop this facility. It would appear that the facility will be reliant on a wide combination of funding sources such as Sport England, British Rowing, local authorities and commercial partners. However, no successful funding applications appear to have been submitted to date.

Strategic opportunity

The strategic opportunity for this development has been identified by Cambridge Sports Lakes Trust; however there may be challenges in getting University Colleges to commit to developing additional or replacing existing boat houses which exist on the river.



Investment priorities and financial sustainability As well as considering the potential investment priorities based on needs, part of the premise of this study is to consider delivery mechanisms for sports and whether a Sports Village model for Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire could deliver significant sporting facilities and sporting benefits more effectively. This takes account of the financial challenges associated with developing a sustainable mix of facilities with the ability to generate sufficient income to ensure financial sustainability. It also assumes that a sports village would be operated and priced to ensure it is accessible to the whole community; and not a commercial facility, providing a financial return to shareholders.

Priority Sports Rationale

1 Football 3G pitches and 5-a-side facilities are high income generators and proven to be sustainable in the longer term.

2 Gymnastics Many clubs operate as successful small businesses within stand-alone facilities (e.g. industrial units) generating sufficient income to pay staff, replace equipment, club operations and competitions.

3 Hockey

The majority of hockey AGPs are programmed for football in order to generate additional income in order to fund future maintenance and replacement. Locating the hockey pitches adjacent to 3G pitches could potentially impact on the operator’s ability to generate sufficient use.

4

Sports Hall sports (e.g. Badminton); Combat sports

Many combat sports operate as small businesses, therefore there is a need to ensure that buy-in to a central venue is achieved. Similarly, there is a need to ensure strategic support from sports hall clubs and NGBs to develop programmes at the facility (especially daytime programmes).

5 Cycling; Triathlon

Although relatively cheap to develop and operate, the facilities are likely to need ongoing revenue funding to support club development work in the area. Ongoing maintenance is likely to be relatively low cost but potentially not funded through user income. Reinforces need to co-locate with other facilities.

Potential for open water development aligned to cycling.

6 Rowing High cost facility to develop - significant ground works. Development site already identified and planning permission achieved.

7 Athletics; Swimming

Swimming pools are costly facilities to build and manage and unless operated as commercial health and fitness facilities tend to require annual revenue funding. Many local authorities are looking to develop revenue neutral sports facilities, but Council will still pick up future capital investment costs.

Athletics tracks are low income generating with high maintenance and operating costs.

8 Indoor Bowls;

Indoor Tennis

Insufficient market for indoor bowls facilities in the area given that existing facilities are operating within capacity.

Indoor tennis facility already identified as a 2nd

phase development to the University Sports Centre.



In addition to the above investment priorities it is also recommended that health and fitness facilities are developed as the primary income generator for any potential sports village. The demand for additional facilities within the area is evident. This provides the operator with sufficient surplus income to ensure that key areas of future maintenance, replacement and investment can take place in order to keep facilities to a high standard. As already identified in the study Cambridge does not appear to have as many key health and fitness operators in the area as one would expect. This is potentially as a result of the high cost of land and the fact that many commercial health and fitness operators develop facilities on out of town brownfield sites adjacent to arterial routes. This opportunity does not appear to be relevant to the wider Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire area. The case for co-location

We have considered the case for co-location across top five priorities for strategic investment. We have excluded swimming and rowing given their high cost of development and that existing proposals for development have separately been identified. In summary, it is clear that the development of a cluster of sports facilities is the most financially sustainable option. The development of high income generating facilities cross subsidises those which potentially require greater sports development input to get them to a sustainable level. Furthermore, the longer term need to replace facilities and refresh the offer means that funds need to be set aside to deliver these, and this can only be done from cross subsidising across a wider network. The potential exception to this is the development of additional hockey facilities which could realistically be located at the Wilberforce Road site rather than at a hub site; however this would result in the creation of one additional pitch. Using this analysis we have developed the following indicative facility mix within a co-located facility "(Sporting Village") which would address our top five areas of strategic sporting need: 60m x 40m indoor 3G pitch (half size) 100 station health and fitness facility 2 x studios – both 10m x 10m 1 x multi-sport combat facility 10m x 10m Specialist gymnastics facility (if clubs are willing to relocate) 2 x full size floodlit 3G pitches 2 x full size floodlit sand dressed pitches (potential for location at Wilberforce Road,

although this would only provide one additional pitch) 6 x 5-a-side cages 5 x natural turf pitches – levelling and drainage 2.5 k Closed road circuit – 6m wide tarmac circuit which needs to be fully fenced. Competition BMX track 12 x 16 person team changes to serve outdoor pitches Health and fitness changing



We have also assessed the potential economic benefits flowing from this type of co-located facility using assumed the construction costs and staffing requirements identified in Appendix E. We estimate that the construction of the Sporting Village could create 291 direct and indirect jobs and £16.79 million GVA; and its operation could create approximately 34 direct and indirect jobs and 0.81 million GVA per annum. To put this into context, the annual GVA for Cambridgeshire is £14.8bn and for the East of England region is £116bn. A Sporting Village provides a relatively small contribution by comparison it does highlight the potential to deliver economic benefits through larger co-located facilities. This excludes the wider health and well-being benefits which may be generated by increased participation in sports. Clearly economic benefits may also be delivered through individual sports developments but it is unlikely that these would be delivered at the same time and there is no certainty that they would be all be funded and delivered. As such co-location offers the opportunity to drive the delivery of benefits and the potential to increase them through generating additional visitor numbers.



PART 1: INTRODUCTION

Grant Thornton UK LLP (GT) and Knight, Kavanagh & Page (KKP) were commissioned by Grosvenor Developments Ltd (Grosvenor) to undertake a Sporting Needs Study of the Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire area, as set out in the letter of engagement between Grant Thornton and Grosvenor dated 10 June 2014 . The study comprises: A Sporting Needs Analysis including: An assessment of the level of provision needed to meet current and future demand; A breakdown of facility improvement priorities; Long-term priorities for facility development and incremental steps to be taken; Issues and opportunities to implement this strategy; An analysis of best location options in terms of clustering opportunities or dispersal

across the county; and A survey of the top ten companies in the area to understand the sports and

recreation requirements of their employees. An overview of the potential options for new sports provision and outline of the key decision factors which will: Assess the relative merits of differing levels of provision incorporating financial and

commercial criteria; Assess the potential of options to generate wider economic benefits to the study

area; and Identify the key planning/development constraints and opportunities. The study will identify and analyse the need and demand for sport in the area and the degree to which there is: Unmet demand - people who wish to take part in sport but are unable to due to lack

of provision. Latent demand - people who are not currently interested in sport but would be more

likely to participate if there were facilities. Displaced demand – people from the area who are participating outside of the area

due to lack of facilities. The study overlaps slightly with the Playing Pitch Strategy currently being undertaken by Cambridge City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council with Sport England. However, the timing of this study should inform some of the strategic challenges that will arise within the PPS and enable Grosvenor to input into it. We would like to thank the two local authorities, the various clubs and sporting bodies and employers for participating in the study, and Cambridge Ahead for helping to facilitate our employer survey. A full list of consultees is provided at Appendix H.



1.1 Methodology The assessment of provision is based on the Sport England Assessing Needs and Opportunities Guide (ANOG) for Indoor and Outdoor Sports Facilities. This guide provides a recommended approach to undertaking a robust assessment of need for indoor and outdoor sports facilities. The guide has primarily been produced to help local authorities meet the requirements of the Government’s National Planning Policy Framework, which states that: ‘Access to high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and recreation can make an important contribution to the health and well-being of communities. Planning policies should be based on robust and up-to-date assessments of the needs for open space, sports and recreation facilities and opportunities for new provision. The assessments should identify specific needs and quantitative or qualitative deficits or surpluses of open space, sports and recreational facilities in the local area. Information gained from the assessments should be used to determine what open space, sports and recreational provision is required.’ (NPPF, Paragraph 73) The assessment of provision is presented by analysis of the quality, quantity, accessibility and availability for the identified facility types. Each facility is considered on a ‘like for like’ basis within its own facility type, in order that it can be assessed for adequacy. The report considers the distribution of and interrelationship between all facility types in study area and evaluates demand. It gives a clear indication of areas of high demand. The report identifies where there is potential to provide improved and/or additional facilities to meet this demand and to, where appropriate, protect or rationalise the current stock. The following diagram is taken from the ANOG to demonstrate the whole process.



Recommended approach



The above methodology has used, where appropriate the relevant Sport England Planning tools. As an example, Sport England provides Facilities Planning Models (FPM) for sports halls, swimming pools and artificial grass pitches. This modelling has been used to inform the need for these key facilities within the study area and then supplemented with local analysis and consultation. The FPM is not available for other sports facility types, therefore local consultation (NGB’s. clubs and stakeholders) is used to inform the demand. 1.2 Context

It is clear that the number of homes and residents in the study area is expected to increase significantly by 2031. Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire Councils are both therefore considering how to plan for sustainable growth and continued economic prosperity in the area. Both authorities aim to ensure that the area is a great/the best place to live and study and work, with priority areas around increasing housing, providing essential services, economic development and developing the travel network to cope with increased demand. Cycling, walking and public transport will be championed through the two authorities. In addition, the authorities are jointly working to improve local health initiatives to address local priorities. Sport and leisure facilities shall be protected and improved. They will only be closed should evidence be provided that there is no longer a need. However, current planning strategies do not appear to provide a specific strategy to deal with the increased population in relation to the additional demand that this will generate for sports facilities. This is reinforced by the lack of investment in the last 6 to 8 years following the production of the Cambridgeshire County Sports Facilities Strategy (2008) and the Cambridge Horizons Major Sports Facilities Strategy (2006).



PART 2: SPORTING CONTEXT FOR CAMBRIDGE AND SOUTH CAMBRIDGESHIRE

The existing sports infrastructure serving the Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire area is complex. There are multiple operators of sports facilities; some of which serve a wide customer base while others serve exclusive segments of the local community. This is also further complicated with a range of potential sport related projects and developments; some of which are progressing while others are longer term aspirations of specific interest groups. The following section provides an overview of the current position and the potential developments on the horizon: Cambridge City Council

The City Council has contracted with Greenwich Leisure Limited (GLL) to operate four indoor sports facilities on its behalf, namely Parkside Pools, Abbey Leisure Complex, Cherry Hinton Village Leisure Centre and Kings Hedges Learner Pool. In addition to this the company also managed the Jesus Green Lido on behalf of the Council. GLL has recently invested in Parkside Pools and the Abbey Leisure Complex; mainly in relation to improved health and fitness provision. The Council also funds the Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre; which is operated by a Charitable Trust. Strangely, Parkside Pools and Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre share the same entrance and directly compete against one another for both student and public membership to their fitness suites. This is a unique set up and one which could be described as demonstrating an uncoordinated approach to the provision of sports facilities. The City Council does not have any plans for facility development but is aware of other organisations’ plans to develop facilities. The Council is driving for sports facilities to be cost neutral and is not looking to take on any additional facilities. The Council's current policy highlights the need to ensure that community access arrangements are built into any new developments across the City. As such the Council has committed circa £250k to the development of a new AGP site at Howes Close in partnership with Anglia Ruskin University. This funding seeks to ensure that community access is factored into the operation of the facilities. The Council is also collecting Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) funding towards the development of a new swimming pool for the City. This will potentially be a partnership with the University of Cambridge to develop a 50m pool. The City Council Leisure Officers recognised the need for additional football and hockey specific AGPs in the area and reinforced the challenges in accommodating the demand for cycling in the area. South Cambridgeshire District Council

South Cambridgeshire District Council completely encircles the City and does not have a distinct district centre. The main administrative function of the Council is located in Cambourne, with all outlying areas having strong inter-relationships with the City.



The sports facilities in the District are of varying sizes and quality. All are located on school sites and have variable degrees of availability. There is no coordinated approach to opening times or programming across the District; but in the main fitness facilities are available during all hours and all other activity areas are available from 5pm onwards and at weekends. University of Cambridge

The provision and operation of sports facilities across the University is, to say the least, cmplex. The University has a Physical Education Department which manages three facilities: University of Cambridge Sports Centre, Wilberforce Sports Ground and Fenners Cricket Ground. The new sports centre contains a double sports hall, fitness suite, studios, strength and conditioning and fives courts. The University has recently added a new squash centre and has aspirations for a new team training area. Wilberforce Sports Ground has a floodlit hockey AGP and athletics track. The University has a good relationship with Cambridge and Coleridge Athletics Club which uses the track for its training and events. The University has a partnership with Cambridge City Hockey Club which uses the site for some training and matches. Planning permission has been granted for a second hockey pitch adjacent to the existing pitch; however, the PE Department has not sought the funding from the University to deliver this. Fenners Cricket Ground also has an indoor cricket facility at which both universities have a partnership to offer cricket scholarships to talented athletes. In addition to this the various Colleges within the University also own and operate their individual sports facilities on behalf of their respective students. That said; the University PE Department has no influence over what use is made of the Colleges’ sports facilities and there is no overarching approach to providing sport across the University. Therefore, there is competition between the colleges and with the PE Department facilities; with some colleges responding to the development of the new University Sports Centre by developing their own fitness facilities. The University of Cambridge (PE Department) has recently opened its new sports centre which contains a double sports hall, fitness suite, studios, strength and conditioning and fives courts. The University has recently added a new squash centre and has aspirations for a new team training area. (Ref: S/0466/84/F). The second phase of this development is a tennis centre which will comprise circa 4 indoor courts and two outdoor courts. The University has achieved planning permission for this development and is potentially looking at a partnership with Cambridge Lawn Tennis Club in order to ensure community use and underpin the business model for the facility. Phase three of the development is a 50m pool. Planning permission has also been achieved for this. Cambridge City Council has identified additional water space as a strategic need for the City and as such has identified this development as a potential recipient of CIL funding.



Anglia Ruskin University

The University does not currently own any indoor sports facilities other than a fitness suite within its main campus. The University’s outdoor sports facilities are located at Howe’s Close on the north side of the City. The facility consists of four grass football pitches and a rugby pitch, along with a small pavilion which does not provide any changing rooms. The University sought planning permission for two floodlit all weather pitches and a new clubhouse (reference S/1215/07/4). That application was refused by South Cambridgeshire District Council on the 5th November 2014. The University has established a close relationship with Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre and uses the facility for a range of fixtures and sports team training. In total the University hires the facility (mainly the sports hall) for circa 30 hours per week. Ideally the University would want additional sports hall hours in order to expand its sports provision; it has doubled the number of sports club members, increased student participation in sport and improved its BUCS ranking by 12 places over the last three years. ARU students also receive a concessionary rate on the fitness suite membership at the facility; however, there is no such arrangement with Parkside Pools. Health and fitness

The study area has a reasonable supply of health and fitness facilities with some of the main commercial operators located within the area: David Lloyd, DW Fitness, and Nuffield. LA Fitness has very recently closed. The commercial sector is complemented with a strong public sector offer at Parkside Pools, Kelsey Kerridge, Abbey Leisure Complex and Cambourne Fitness and Sports Centre as well as both Universities. However, given that demographics of the area we would have anticipated a higher level of competition for the health and fitness market in the area. This is potentially due to the high cost of land within the area as many of the commercial operators tend to locate on brownfield sites along arterial routes in order to attract the ‘travel home’ market.

Other planned developments

There are a range of other developments in train that need to be taken into account. Some of these are subject to external funding being sourced to deliver them, while others are required in order to meet identified need.



Cambridge Sports Lakes Trust

This development has been planned for a number of years and has achieved planning permission. The facility mix includes: 2,000m rowing lake – international standard. A triathlon facility suitable for day-to-day training and hosting all levels of competition. A 3-mile long cycle circuit built to international competition standards. A combined competition and training BMX track. A lake stocked with fish for angling. A network of cycle paths connecting to Cambridge and Milton Country Park. Educational and nature trails.

Discussions with British Rowing and British Cycling identified that the scheme has been in development for many years and that it is not anticipated to come to fruition for several years yet as it will require significant external funding. A key challenge identified by British Cycling is that the 3 mile cycle circuit (which goes around the lake) does not meet its technical requirements as a closed road circuit. Although this layout is ideal for triathlon it does not meet the safety and design requirements for cycling. Although this development has achieved planning permission its funding package has not been secured; therefore, it should not deter other cycling developments in the area coming to fruition as it would appear that the cycling components of the development are secondary to rowing.

Cambridge Lakes – Coldhams Lakes

A vision is being developed for the community use and access to Coldham Lakes which was formerly the Cherry Hinton Chalk Pits to the public. The lakes consist of three former chalk quarries that have been filled in with water since the 1980s. It would appear that a group of community members is in the process of developing a vision for the site. City Council Planners have identified that the plans are underway, but that they are not in receipt of the options report developed by the group. Initial consultation identified that there is the potential for the following facilities to be included within the development: Open water swimming Jogging/walking trail BMX track Skateboard park Fitness circuit Playground Picnic areas A nature trail and nature centre The above mix of facilities is clearly an outdoor recreation and parkland facility geared for family activities and informal recreational activity. To date the site does not appear to be



considered for a formal sporting activity mix and should not have any major impact on other formal sports provision in the area. New school developments

In response to the increased population projections and new housing developments there are likely to be three new secondary schools developed to serve the Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire areas. Clay Farm (South): the secondary school will be developed in the Trumpington area to serve the needs of the 4,000 new homes in the southern fringe. The facility will consist of a sports hall and sports pitches to serve the needs of the school, although this appears to be less than originally envisaged within the outline scheme. It is envisaged that these will be available for community use. North West - Darwin Green: a site has been identified for a new secondary school to serve the North West of the City. The site identified is adjacent to the proposed ARU development at Howes Close. The current Playing Pitch Strategy will be used to determine the pitch needs for the school and community. However, the opportunity exists for the school and ARU to develop a partnership where the school could access the sand dressed and 3G pitches for school use and potentially invest in enhanced sports hall facilities which ARU could use in the evenings and weekends. (This is on the basis that ARU re-submits and is successful in its planning application). North East: it is anticipated that in time a new secondary school will be required in the North East of the City. However, a site has not been identified as yet. Ice facility

The Cambridge Leisure and Ice Company (CLIC) is a registered charity established for administering the charitable bequest of David Gattiker, who left monies to the University of Cambridge to be used in building an ice hockey rink. The University has a number of students from America and Eastern Europe who play ice hockey and as such has three ice hockey teams who are required to train and play fixtures at Planet Ice in Peterborough. The teams play in the British Universities Ice Hockey Association League. CLIC is continuing to explore options to develop the facility; however, it is facing a number of challenges including the funding package and land availability for the development. To date a number of options have been considered which have resulted in funding gap. Cambridge City Football Club Cambridge City FC has received planning permission to relocate and to develop a new stadium and full-size 3G training pitch at Sawston. The site will be approximately 4 miles south-east of Trumpington. The 3G pitch would be within a 20 minute drive time of Trumpington and could impact on demand for similar facilities there; however, it is understood that the club will have a range of programmes and initiatives that it will be delivering at the facility. Furthermore, this type of distance between pitches does not represent over provision of pitches within an area where there is high demand for football.



Trumpington Meadows Sports Village

Grosvenor has an aspiration to develop a sports village adjacent to the park and ride facility at Trumpington Meadows; funded through an enabling residential development. The development originally included a community stadium with Cambridge United as the anchor tenant; however following community engagement and discussion with the local planning authorities, attention is now focussed on converting the existing Abbey Stadium into a community facility whilst still delivering a hub of community outdoor sports at Trumpington The vision for the sports village includes a partnership with the FA, Cambridge United FC and Cambridge City Hockey Club to develop a football academy and community football hub site (indoor and outdoor 3G pitches as well as natural turf pitches), double pitch hockey facility, fitness and cycling facilities and ancillary facilities. This would be a formal sports facility catering for athlete development as well as wider community use of the site. The company is also developing a country park and lake as part of a current housing development. The formal sporting potential of this has not yet been defined but presents an opportunity to enhance the formal sporting offer by considering the potential uses of sports such as triathlon. The exact facility mix for the sports village will be subject to further refinement, but Grosvenor is willing to invest substantially in the site, subject to achieving planning permission for the enabling development. Northstowe A major new town development is taking place in Northstowe which will hopefully deliver up to 10,000 new houses on a site bordering the villages of Longstanton and Oakington to the north of Cambridge. This new town will deliver significant new sporting facilities including an 8 court sports hall, 3/ 4 new AGPs, playing fields and a six lane 25m pool on three separate sports hubs. Although this will increase the supply of facilities across the area, the provision is purpose built to accommodate the needs of the new resident population; both from a school and community perspective. Therefore, given that Northstowe is approximately 8 miles north of Trumpington it will not impact on the potential development in this side of the City. Summary It is clear that there are a number of developments that will potentially come to fruition over the next 3 to 5 years that will enhance on the sporting landscape of Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire District. All of the developments appear to be subject to either complex planning processes or a reliance on external funding agencies. Some of these developments were referred to in the Cambridgeshire County Sports Facilities Strategy (2008) and the Cambridge Horizons Major Sports Facilities Strategy (2006). Therefore, the gestation period for new facilities can be significant and there will be a need for both local authorities to consider joint strategic planning of sports facilities.



It is clear that many of the developments slightly overlap on others. Clear examples of this are the ARU development at Howes Close and the Cambridge Sport Lakes Trust development which both overlap with the Trumpington Meadows Sports Village. Therefore, it will be important for the City and District Council Planners to work closely with all developments and NGBs to ensure that once a project is agreed (i.e. planning and funding are in place and a start date agreed) unnecessary duplication does not occur. This is critical in ensuring strategic fit and financial sustainability of potential sports facilities.



PART 3: PLANNING CONTEXT AND POLICY

National Planning Policy Framework

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out planning policies for England. It details how these changes are expected to be applied to the planning system. It also provides a framework for local people and their councils to produce distinct local and neighbourhood plans, reflecting the needs and priorities of local communities. It states that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. It identifies the need to focus on three themes of sustainable development: Economic Social Environmental A presumption in favour of sustainable development is a key aspect for any plan-making and decision-taking processes. In relation to plan-making the NPPF sets out that Local Plans should meet objectively assessed needs. The ‘promoting healthy communities’ theme identifies that planning policies should be based on robust, up-to-date assessments of need for open space, sports and recreation facilities and opportunities for new provision. Specific needs and quantitative and qualitative deficiencies and surpluses in local areas should also be identified. This information should be used to inform what provision is required in an area. In addition to the above, the national planning context for sport is framed in Sport England’s A Sporting Habit for Life (2012-2017). This indicates that in 2017, five years after the Olympic Games, Sport England aspires to transform sport in England so that it is a habit for life for more people and a regular choice for the majority. The strategy will: See more people starting and keeping a sporting habit for life Create more opportunities for young people Nurture and develop talent Provide the right facilities in the right places Support local authorities and unlock local funding Ensure real opportunities for communities In response to the national planning framework and Sport England’s strategic plan both authorities have developed a range of individual and joint strategic planning documents to account for the wider changes in the area. These include: Cambridge City Council: Cambridge Local Plan: 2006 – 2016 Review of the Local Plan: 2014 Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire “Improving health plan”: 2008 – 2011 The Cambridge Olympic Plan: 2010 – 2013 Cambridge Sport and Physical Activity Plan 2014 to 2017



South Cambridgeshire: Local Plan 2011-2031 Local Plan 2011-2031 Corporate plan: 2014-2019 Transport Strategy for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire: 2011 – 2016 Living Sport Strategic Plan: 2011-15

In addition to the above, both authorities have engaged consultants to develop a joint Playing Pitch Strategy for the area. This will give an indication of the wider need for sports pitch provision in the area, taking into account population growth, population change and housing growth. The Councils are also looking for it to inform the need for sports pitches on new schools planned within the area. However, it should be noted that neither authority has determined the impact of population growth, population change and housing growth in the area in relation to the need for indoor sports facilities. Neither authority has an up to date sports facilities strategy. However, as identified previously, there are a number of potential facility developments which will impact on the wider sports facilities infrastructure across the area. Using this study process as an example, it would appear that both authorities have not actively participated in various facility planning and feasibility studies developed in relation to potential facility developments. In relation to this study, both authorities have engaged towards the end of the study (four months in), but did not appear to want to inform how the study might be developed. Furthermore, the Councils did not provide any local club contact information to inform the wider consultation process. The authorities are aware of other developments in the area (e.g. 50m pool, Tennis Centre, Cambridge Lakes, etc.), but do not appear to up to date knowledge on what stage of development they are at. Although Cambridge City Council is collecting CIL funding for the 50m pool (although this is in competition with other priorities) there is still a question over the final facility mix and the need to include diving within the mix. This is a key area that will affect the proposed facility as well as the operation of Parkside Pools. However, it should also be noted that both authorities are willing to meet to discuss the assessment of need across the area once the study is complete. In summary, both authorities are in the process of determining the future need for sports pitches across the area, but neither has an up to date assessment of need for a wider range of indoor and built sports facilities. That said this study provides the most comprehensive assessment of sports facility need across the Cambridge City and South Cambridge District areas and should be used to inform the potential for future developments in the area. The study has engaged with NGBs, local clubs, the universities, local authorities and other key stakeholders to determine the strategic need and opportunity in the area.



PART 4: DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS

This section summarises the findings of our demographic analysis. More detailed analysis and statistics are provided in Appendix B. The demographic data for the study area shows that the two authority areas are home for just over a quarter of a million people. This figure is expected to rise by almost 50,000 people by 2037. The number of 0-15 year olds is predicted to rise by 6,147 (12.7%) over the first half of the projection (to 2024) and stabilising thereafter up to 2037. This will place pressure on differing types of sporting, educational and cultural provision (facility and services) by age, gender and sub-groups of the cohort. There is a slight decline predicted in the number of 25-34 year olds- this young professional age group are often the key target for health and fitness providers. There is a continuous increase in the numbers of persons aged 65+ and a need to consider varying sports offers for this age group. While the age group represented 15.0% of Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire’s population in 2012 it is projected to be 22.7% of the total by 2037 - this is over 1 in 5 of the population. The challenge here is to accommodate the needs of a population base that is time rich. Generally there is a low level of both health and multiple deprivation in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire, and none of the population live in what is defined as the most deprived areas in the Country. However, there are pockets of deprivation, which may be more acute given the overall lack of deprivation in the area. Life expectancy is higher than the national figure. Lower deprivation could suggest there is more available finance amongst the population to engage in physical activity, which may not be possible in more deprived areas of the country. Both adult and child obesity levels are both below the regional and national average, however child obesity increases significantly between the ages of 4 and 10. The annual cost to the NHS of physical inactivity in Cambridge City is estimated at £1,572,148; whereas in South Cambridgeshire the figure is £2,256,024. There is strong evidence of business growth in the area with a growing number of employees in knowledge-intensive sectors. Our employer survey indicates interest in new sporting provision amongst employers with accessibility and the offer of a variety of facilities and provision for the whole family being important considerations. Sport England has classified the adult population via a series of 19 market segments which provide an insight into the sporting behaviours of individuals (these are dscribed in detail at the end of the report). The segmentation highlights that the "Tim, Philip and Chloe" profiles represent just over 28% of the population. Typically Tim and Philip are professional males that participate in cycling, keep fit/gym and swimming predominantly, and Chloe is a female graduate professional that participates in keep fit/gym, swimming and athletics. The main motivations for all three profiles to participate are enjoyment, keeping fit and socialising.



Work commitments are the main barriers to participation for Tim and Philip. Chloe cites ‘Other factors’, such as left school, no opportunity and economic/work reasons. Participation data shows that a higher proportion of the population in the study area participated in at least 1 x 30 minutes moderate intensity sport per week. This needs to be assessed in the context of high numbers of young people (i.e. students) who have a higher propensity to participate than any other group. Therefore, this potentially skews the results for the resident population, where participation rates are likely to be lower. Volunteering rates, receiving sports tuition and participation in competitive sports all have higher rates in South Cambridgeshire than regional and national figures. These rates in Cambridge City are significantly lower, which may be explained by the corresponding difference in Mosaic profile in that there are more ‘Professional Rewards’ and ‘Careers and Kids’; who are more likely to volunteer alongside their children’s’ participation and attend instructed activities rather than team and individual sports. What does mean for the provision of sports facilities?

The above analysis highlights the following critical factors for the area: Neither of the local authorities currently has detailed plans to deal with the increased

demand for sports facilities in the area as a result of population growth, population change and major housing developments.

Not only is there an increase in population, but there will be a significantly higher proportion of the population that is over 65. This age group will be time rich and it will be imperative from a health and social care perspective that they are as physically active as possible and able to live independently. Therefore, there is a need to plan for sport and leisure facilities and programmes to meet their needs. The key drivers for this age group will be fitness and social activities such as walking, swimming and low impact fitness.

The increase in 0 to 15 year olds will create additional demand for sports facilities to accommodate this age group. The PPS will provide guidance on the team generation rate impact but there will also be additional demand for other facility types (e.g. swimming pools, multi sports, cycling, etc.).

The slight decline in the number of 24 – 35 year olds (4.3%) is not significant enough to impact on the need for sports facilities specific to this age group.

Like the rest of the UK, there is a drive to address the obesity epidemic, especially that facing young people in the area. Therefore, there will be a need to develop sport and physical activity programmes in high quality and vibrant facilities as part of the fight to get and keep people active. It is clear that the area does not have enough sports facilities to help address this challenge; therefore the addition of new, high quality sports facilities is instrumental in the fight against obesity levels among young people.

Given that time is a key challenge for many adult participants in the area, there is a need to ensure that facilities are located in the right place with the right facility mix to meet their sport and physical activity needs. It is clear that there is no opportunity to develop facilities in the heart of Cambridge, therefore accessible locations with good road and public transport links becomes a critical factor in facility development.

Based on Sport England market segmentation, the sports most participated in across the area include: cycling, keep fit, swimming, football, athletics and running.



However, it is also clear that other sports such as hockey and combat sports are popular among residents within Cambridge and there are a range of strong clubs within the area.

Based on the consultation with employers in the area it is clear that the provision of high quality sports facilities is a key component in the quality of life of employees and their families. This is especially relevant to those employers that are expanding and looking to attract new employees to the area.



PART 5: ARTIFICIAL GRASS PITCHES

Artificial Grass Pitches (AGP) or Football Turf Pitches (FTP) supplement good quality natural turf pitches by providing playing, training and education facilities with a consistent surface throughout the year upon which the game can develop. In addition a full size AGP can provide a large space, suitable for dividing into separate areas to deliver activity. The development of artificial grass surfaces that replicate the playing qualities of good quality natural grass has been beneficial for hockey, rugby and football in particular. The improved qualities of these new surfaces have been recognised by the international governing bodies of these sports and they have each amended their rules to allow the use of artificial grass pitches in their competitions. There are a large number of artificial turf pitches, most of which look quite similar, but may be made of different materials, manufactured by different techniques and designed for use in different ways. The NGBs that administer sports using artificial grass pitches are England Hockey, The Football Association, The Rugby Football Union and The Rugby Football League. Table 5.1: Types of AGP

Surface type Category Suitability

Rubber crumb

Long Pile 3G (65mm with shock pad)

Rugby union surface – must comply with IRB type 22 Football surface Rugby league surface- all levels of training and competition

Long Pile 3G (55-60mm) Preferred football surface Rugby league surface- all levels of training and competition

Short Pile 3G (40mm)

Acceptable surface for some competitive football Rugby league- Recreation and training but not full contact

Sand Sand filled

Competitive hockey and football training

Sand dressed Preferred hockey surface and suitable for football training

Water Water based Preferred hockey surface and suitable for football training if irrigated.

Just as different pitch surfaces are suitable for different sports, each sport has specific requirement on size of pitch. This will also be dependent on the level of competition. Table 5.2 shows the technical dimensions for AGPs.



Table 5.2: AGP dimension requirements for different sports

Age and sport

Recommended pitch size without run off (metres)

Recommended pitch size including run off (metres)

Width Length Area (m2)

) Width Length Area (m

2))

Hockey

Senior hockey 55 91.4 5027 63 101.4 6388.2

Junior hockey 43 55 2365 50.7 63 3194.1

Football

Mini soccer U7/U8

27.5 36.5 1003.75 33 42 1386

Mini soccer U9/U10

36.5 55 2007.5 42 60 2520

Youth 11/12 45.5 73 3321.5 51 78.5 4003.5

Youth 13/14 50 82 4100 55.5 87.5 4856.25

Youth 15/16 55 91 5005 60.5 97 5868.5

Youth 17/18 64 100 6400 69.5 106 7367

Over 18 (senior ages)

64 100 6400 69.5 106 7367

Rugby union

Full size 70 100 6500 75 110 8250

Training 36.5 55 2007.5 42.5 61 2592.5



5.1 Sport England’s Facilities Planning Model conclusions

Sport England has provided a summary of the FPM analysis for the area using 2013 data. The FPM identified the following conclusions based on the theoretical modelling of supply and demand. Hockey

The level of undersupply of hockey pitches is having a negative impact on hockey’s

ability to develop. It is recognised that the modelling does not potentially reflect the locally higher

demand for hockey at school and college facilities, which may be greater than other study areas.

The proposed growth in population will create further demand for hockey pitches. There is no specific location within the study area with a greater need for hockey

AGP provision. Football

The level of football specific AGP provision is very poor and potentially one of the

lowest levels in England. Whilst the overall number of AGP’s is not significantly low, their availability to deliver

football opportunities is; mainly as a result of: The fact that the majority of facilities are sand based, a hockey specific surface. As

a result the model allocates significant hockey usage to each site, limiting the amount of football that can be accommodated.

Given the prevalence of sand based facilities the model predicts these will have a higher level of hockey use rather than football.

As Cambridge has a relatively young population it has high levels of demand for AGP’s.

The football specific AGPs are located in a central / north band across the city and predicted to be at full capacity in the peak period.

The current and future needs for football are only likely to improve and be met by the provision of additional AGP’s with 3G surfaces, ideally either under the control of the local authority or under the guidance of an appropriate community use agreement.

Any new provision should focus around the north and north eastern areas if it is to have the greatest benefit to the existing population.

5.2 Supply

Quantity

Operational facilities

Active Places Power (APP) lists 24 operational AGPs in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. Of these, six are classed as full size. In addition, smaller pitches suitable for junior hockey, football and rugby training total 18, again the surface of these vary. There are no water based pitches in either local authority areas.



There is an additional full size artificial grass pitch at St John’s College, which is not listed on APP. This has not previously been available for community use until last year. There is reportedly also a full size sand dressed AGP at The Perse Preparatory School. However due to planning regulations this is not available for community use and is built purely for school use. As this is very unlikely to change and has been discounted from inclusion in this study. Table 5.3: AGP by type and amount

Sand filled

Sand dressed

Water based

Rubber crumb (3G)

Total

No. of full size pitches (6000m2

or more) 2 4 0 1 7

No. of pitches half size-full size (3000m

2 -5999m

2))

1 1 0 0 2

No. pitches under 3000m2 9 1 0 6 16

Total 12 6 0 7 25

The two facilities that are categorised as half-size are both over 5880m2 so are generally accepted and used as full sized pitches. They are therefore considered so for the purposes of this report. In summary, Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire has the following supply of AGPs: 4 x full size, floodlit, sand based hockey pitches 4 x full size, sand based hockey pitches which are not floodlit 1 x full size, floodlit, 3G football pitches 6 x floodlit 3G small sided pitches 9 x small floodlit sand based pitches Figure 5.1 shows that there is a cluster of full size AGPs in the southern part of Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire (aligned to the location of independent schools). The north and east of the study area do not have any full size pitches; although the pitches at Abbey LC and Netherhall Community Sports Centre serve the east side of the City. The smaller pitches are generally located in the north of the area.



Figure 5.1: Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire AGPs by size and surface type

Table 5.4: Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire AGPs by size and surface type

Map ID Site Name Surface Type AGP Size

1 Abbey Leisure Complex Sand Filled Full

2 Chesterton Sports Centre Rubber crumb pile (3G) Under

3 Manor Community College Sports Centre Sand Filled Under

4 Netherhall Community Sports Centre Rubber crumb pile (3G) Under

5 The Leys Sports Complex Sand Dressed Full

6 The Perse School Sand Filled Full

7 The Perse School for Girls Sports Ground Sand Dressed Full

8 Wilberforce Road Sports Ground Sand Dressed Full

9 Bar Hill Village Green Sand Filled Under

11 Bassingbourn Sports Centre Sand Dressed Under

12 Comberton Leisure Centre Rubber crumb pile (3G) Full

13 Cottenham & District Sports Centre Rubber crumb pile (3G) Under

14 Fulbourn Recreation Ground Rubber crumb pile (3G) Under

15 Girton Recreation Ground Sand Filled Under



Map ID Site Name Surface Type AGP Size

16 Histon and Impington Recreation Ground Sand Filled Under

17 Linton Community Sports Centre Rubber crumb pile (3G) Under

18 Melbourn Sports Centre Sand Filled Under

19 Oakington Recreation Ground Sand Filled Under

20 Orchard Park Sand Filled Under

21 Over Community Centre Rubber crumb pile (3G) Under

22 Sawston Village College Sports Centre Sand Filled Under

23 St Catherine's College Artificial Turf Sand Filled Full

24 Swavesey Village College Sports Centre Sand Filled Under

25 St John’s College Sand Dressed Full

The AGPs that are not full size can still play an important role in providing training and junior facilities. Reportedly all smaller AGPs are floodlit so could potentially be available for evening use the whole year. Six of these surfaces are 3G (rubber crumb), so not suitable for hockey activity. These could be utilised for junior football and training. The cluster of facilities is due to the cluster of schools in the Cambridge City area. Facilities not in operation

There is one facility listed on Active Places Power, as no longer operational. This is a full size sand filled pitch at the Perse School (Active Places reference: 1004909 Facility ID- 2071059). This may be the previously mentioned pitch at the Preparatory School, which is not available for community use. The sand based AGP at St Catherine’s College has been deemed unplayable and should not be considered as an active facility. Planned future developments

Anglia Ruskin University currently operates Howes Close Sports Ground, Whitehouse Lane, as the University’s principal outdoor sports facilities. There are current proposals to enhance the existing facilities to ensure that the potential and quality of the site is maximised for sporting use. This includes a full size 3G AGP and a full size sand dressed AGP. It is reported that these pitches will be available for community use; however, given the demand for use by the University (BUCS teams as well as recreational football) it is unlikely that this will be extensive. The University has seven football, three rugby, two hockey and two American football teams competing in the BUCS league, all of which will require access to training and fixtures. In addition students will generate high demand for casual football.



There is also a new full size sand dressed pitch currently being built at Long Road Sixth Form Centre. Cambridge South Hockey Club will base itself at this facility. Trumpington College in Cambridge City is currently developing a new 3G AGP. This should be built with a Community Use Agreement so time will be available for community use.

Quality Site assessments Technical visual quality assessments were undertaken at 7 sites with full size pitches. In addition, information was gathered through consultation to assess the quality of provision in the study area. These assessments give an overall quality scoring. Due to the lack of local authority input and wider buy in to the study from other facilities, it was difficult to access some facilities and complete full site assessments. A combination of site visits and mystery visits were undertaken to ensure the study was as thorough as possible. The following table provides a breakdown of the quality scoring and highlights that the majority of full size artificial grass pitches are above average or good quality. The poor quality pitch is that found at St Catherine’s College, which has been previously highlighted. The quality of the pitches does not appear to be a huge issue. Table 5.5: Quality of full size artificial grass pitches in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Quality rating of assessed AGPs

Good Above average Below average Poor Not assessed

4 3 1 1

Technical requirements

From the 2014/15 season, all 3G pitches of all sizes wishing to be used for competitive play outside the football National League System (NLS) i.e. Step 7 and below, are required be tested in accordance with FA or FIFA standards. A pitch passing the test will be approved and added to a national FA Register. AGPs need to be tested every three years to remain on the Register. The study area has two AGPs listed on the FA Register, both are located in Cambridge City. Chesterton Sports Centre- one medium sized pitch Netherhall Sports Centre- one medium sized pitch



The full size 3G at Comberton Leisure Centre does not currently appear on the FA Register. Availability

Management and ownership

The ownership of AGPs can be categorised as follows (St Catherine’s College is excluded from this section) Table 5.6: Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire AGPs by ownership type

Type AGPs total

Ownership type No. of AGPs

No of full size AGPs

Secondary Education 13

Academy Sponsor Led 2 0

4 Foundation School 4 1

Community School 4 0

Other independent School 3 3

FE and HE 2 Higher Education Institution

2 2

Local Authority 8 Local Authority 8 1

Other 1 MOD 1 1

Total 24 24 8

There are eight full size AGPs, one is local authority owned, Abbey Leisure Complex, also known as Coldhams Common. Three full size AGPs are owned by independent schools and two are owned by different colleges at Cambridge University. The remaining three full size facilities are all located at foundation schools. Although some of these facilities may purport to offer community use their availability is limited due to the high level of demand from students. A key example of this is at The Perse School where the level of hockey demand is significant: Year 3/4 and Year 5/6 hockey – training only Eight U13 squads Four U14 squads Three U15 squads Two U16 squads Three U18 squads With an established fixture list at each age group, this places extensive demand on the hockey pitches and leaves little time for community use. A similar pattern will be found at the other school and college facilities.



The full size AGP at Bassingbourn Barracks is no longer available for community use due to a change of policy at the Ministry of Defence. The provision of AGPs across the study area is predominantly on university and independent school sites, and the local authority which currently has responsibility for sport and physical activity policy and delivery has often limited control over how they are programmed. Therefore there is a need to consider how community accessible facilities are available to meet the sports development needs for the area.

Accessibility

According to records and on site consultation, the vast majority of AGPs across Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire are available for community use (albeit to varying degrees), offering either Pay and Play or Sports Club/Community Association Access (i.e. regular block bookings). Figure 5.2: Community use of AGPs in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire



Table 5.7: Community use of AGPs in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Map ID Site Name Community

Use

1 Abbey Leisure Complex Yes

2 Chesterton Sports Centre Yes

3 Manor Community College Sports Centre Yes

4 Netherhall Community Sports Centre Yes

5 The Leys Sports Complex Yes

6 The Perse School Yes

7 The Perse School for Girls Sports Ground Yes

8 Wilberforce Road Sports Ground Yes

9 Bar Hill Village Green Yes

10 Bassingbourn Barracks No

11 Bassingbourn Sports Centre Yes

12 Comberton Leisure Centre Yes

13 Cottenham & District Sports Centre Yes

14 Fulbourn Recreation Ground Yes

15 Girton Recreation Ground Yes

16 Histon and Impington Recreation Ground Yes

17 Linton Community Sports Centre Yes

18 Melbourn Sports Centre Yes

19 Oakington Recreation Ground Yes

20 Orchard Park Yes

21 Over Community Centre Yes

22 Sawston Village College Sports Centre Yes

23 St Catherine's College Artificial Turf* Yes

24 Swavesey Village College Sports Centre Yes

25 St John’s College Yes *When in use, so potential for future use

Contrary to the above, local consultation suggests that in reality it is difficult to secure bookings for regular community activity. In particular, the hockey sector reported real issues for both club and county activity. Cambridge University has a lot of student activity taking place on its pitches (i.e. both hockey and football) and the independent schools facilities are heavily used by pupils. In addition, during the summer months, capacity is reduced further as the schools in particular use the facilities for tennis activity. A key impact of this is that the County hockey programme has moved fixtures to a facility outside of the area due to the difficulties in securing a suitable facility at an appropriate time. The only pitch which is owned by the local authority is Abbey Leisure Complex, which serves as a main pitch for Cambridge Nomads, and is also regularly used for football activity. Rugby union in Cambridge and the surrounding area is keen to find facilities for both County squads and club activity. The training pitches for the clubs are of poor quality in the winter and some training is cancelled. Training on an AGP surface would avoid this; however the current facilities are booked up in the evening sessions. Three local clubs would have a high demand for an AGP for training purposes.



The FA and Cambridgeshire FA both report difficulty for clubs accessing existing sites. There are over 1,100 teams in the County and over 40%, are in South Cambridgeshire. There is particular unmet demand in South Cambridgeshire. Overall the FA has identified that the only way to accommodate more use of 3G pitches by clubs is to develop more, given that existing provision is at capacity. Summary of supply

There are 26 artificial grass pitches in the study area. However, two of these are not available for community use (Perse Preparatory School and Bassingbourn Barracks). There are eight full size pitches: 1 x 3G – football 3 x sand filled – hockey 4 x sand dressed - hockey There are currently three projects proposed that will deliver four additional pitches in the area: Long Road Sixth Form College (1 x sand dressed) – although it is understood that

this pitch has restricted use until 9.30pm weekdays and 6pm at weekends; and the lux lighting levels are restricted to 200 lux which is significantly below the 500 lux required for junior and low level competition and 300 lux for non-competitive training.

Trumpington Community College (1 x 3G) – although it is understood that this pitch is undersized.

Anglia Ruskin University, Howes Close Sports Ground (1 x 3G, 1 x sand dressed). The planning application on this development has been refused (November 2014).

The three proposed facilities are all located on educational sites, which will limit the community access. The majority of the supply is owned by the University and independent schools, which extensively limits the availability for community use, as a result of high levels of demand from these institutions. Half of the planned pitches are also on similar sites; therefore it would appear unlikely that they will significantly meet the demand from community clubs. The smaller AGPs are also generally fully booked, however these tend to be filled with casual football. These also tend not to meet the requirements of some of the hockey clubs and county programme requirements due to the limited capacity. There is currently no supply of AGPs suitable for rugby.



5.3 Demand

Sports specific and local consultation

Rugby

There are at least three local rugby union clubs that report a demand for training facilities. In addition the Cambridgeshire RFU requires reliable and regular bookings for a training facility for the County Squads. The County Association’s partnership with the Northampton Saints would mean that the Saints may be keen to base some of their performance programme in Cambridge (minimising travel to Northampton for Cambridge players); however there is not an available, suitable facility. Consultation with the RFU has identified the need for an IRB compliant 3G pitch to serve the training needs of clubs. No specific club or site has been identified as the preferred location for this. However, it would be unusual to develop a stand-alone IRB compliant 3G pitch to serve the training needs of a number of clubs. In other areas the RFU has supported the development of an IRB compliant pitch at a specific rugby club site and encouraged training opportunities across a range of clubs. Football

Cambridgeshire FA has identified a need for three additional pitches in the area. There is a deficit of football suitable AGPs, especially in the north of the City area. There is a lack of 3G provision in South Cambridgeshire in particular. The FA identified that the development of a new 3G AGP at Trumpington College in Cambridge City will have a Community Use Agreement, although this pitch may not be full size. Any new provision should focus around the north and north eastern areas if it is to have the greatest benefit to the existing population (i.e. where the current larger clubs are based). Local clubs are limited by the amount of training opportunities that they are able to access. This is especially the case during the winter, where access to suitable facilities is difficult; thus limiting activity, specifically for junior teams. The FA estimates that three additional full size 3G pitches are necessary to accommodate current demand for club training. This does not take into consideration latent or unmet demand, generated by casual or informal football, such as works leagues, 5 a side leagues, health interventions etc. There has been no discussion to date or partnership working between the FA and RFU in order to develop a rugby and football specific AGP. There is a particular need to develop ancillary facilities associated with grass pitches, but the FA does not feel that there is a shortage of grass pitches. The County FA has identified that there is an aspiration to identify a site and finance to develop a football development centre in the area. The Centre would provide a hub for coach education, match officials development, as well as training for administrators, grounds men and club medical staff.



Cambridge United has an aspiration for indoor 3G provision in order for the club to achieve Category 2 status in the Elite Player Performance Plan. This is an aspiration of the club and one which requires significant investment. This development would be part of the club’s wider academy facility and potentially a full club training and development base. Aligned to the aspirations of the County FA, this could provide a strategic opportunity for a facility development to meet the needs of both organisations and also address the wider needs of community clubs. Cambridge United Youth & Community Trust provides activity for over a thousand children each week in over 40 primary schools. This covers a wide range of sporting activities and includes education on healthy eating, nutrition, discrimination against race etc. In addition the Trust runs over 50 after school clubs with typically 15 or more children. Football Development Programmes are run at 16 centres, coaching over 1,000 players from under 6’s to 16’s. Currently all facilities have to be hired from schools or commercial providers which restricts the numbers of participants and often impacts on the Trust’s ability to deliver activities at the most appropriate times. Indoor facilities are hired because of the lack of playing facilities. With the correct facilities available, the Trust would be able to achieve its ambition of 10,000 children within the community participating in sport on a weekly basis through activities run by the Trust. The Trust would also be a key user of the indoor 3G facility and use this to deliver some of its programmes. Therefore, it is clear that there is a strategic need for football specific AGPs to be developed across the study area. The location of these will be significant in that they will need to accommodate grass roots football clubs as well as football interventions by Cambridge United Youth & Community Trust. Hockey

England Hockey suggests that there are not enough AGPs in the area to satisfy demand. Club growth is being restricted by the lack of available facilities. Hockey is popular in schools in the area, creating more demand. The NGB reports that clubs are turning junior players away due to facility limitations. Within its player pathway, Cambridge is host to Junior Development Centre (JDC) and Junior Academy Centre (JAC) which attracted 738 junior players. The programme has struggled to obtain pitch time in the Cambridge area. The programme will therefore be forced to move to an alternative venue outside of Cambridge which can accommodate the programme. The NGB has the perception that there is a lot of football use on some of the sand based AGPs, which exacerbates the capacity for hockey. The development of a new pitch at Long Road Sixth Form Centre will allow Cambridge South Hockey Club to deliver quality training sessions, additional Back to Hockey sessions, plus the possible creation of a junior section for the Club.



Latent demand intelligence from England Hockey suggests that a site with two pitches would create a base for Cambridge City Hockey Club to manage its increasing numbers, and provide the County with a home ground for fixtures; given that County squads currently have to move out of Cambridge for fixtures. The Club and County agree that a two pitch site is essential. The Club already has a waiting list of over one year and has the capability to increase the number of teams by 6, to 18 senior teams. However, this is dependent on facilities being available. In addition the junior section has potential to increase from 350 to circa 600 players in 3-5 years. The club currently trains and plays at five separate sites across the area. Cambridge Nomads Hockey Club also has demand for an additional training session in order to increase numbers; however the club is unable to secure a regular booking at a facility. The junior sessions in particular is limited by lack of pitch space. The level of unmet demand identified above reinforces the strategic need for additional hockey provision in the area. There is a potential opportunity to develop a hockey hub site for the County. A facility with two or more pitches could provide a focal point for community and talent programme in the area. Working in partnership the clubs, County Association, leagues, schools and NGB could work in partnership to maximise the opportunities available. Taking into account the demand for facilities from local clubs, plus the County, it would be logical to amalgamate the demand and develop a site to meet both needs in the Cambridge City or South Cambridgeshire area.

5.4 Conclusions

The following conclusions can be identified from the supply and demand analysis for AGPs in the area: The current supply of AGPs is provided in the main by independent schools and

colleges at Cambridge University. These institutions generate significantly high levels of demand for AGPs which in turn limits the opportunity for community use.

The RFU has identified the need for an IRB compliant 3G pitch in order to accommodate the training needs of local rugby clubs and county squads.

The lack of access to and availability of suitable facilities is currently restricting growth in hockey, football and rugby in Cambridge and South Cambs. In some instances clubs cannot meet latent demand and are forced to limit the number of teams and training opportunities due to a lack of facilities.

The County Hockey Association identified that there is a need for a home base for training and fixtures. There is a clear need for additional hockey provision in the area. The need is such that a single pitch development would only add to the challenge of large clubs having to use using multiple sites to accommodate training and fixtures.

The level of unmet demand reinforces the strategic need for a hockey hub site for the area which serves the needs of key clubs and the County squads. A two pitch hockey facility with appropriate ancillary facilities would meet latent demand and provide a sustainable hockey environment. Coupled with appropriate ‘classroom’ space this would enable the NGB to develop a coach education and volunteer development hub at the pitches.

There is a need for at least three additional 3G pitches in the Cambridge and South Cambs. area; predominantly to accommodate the training and fixtures needs of community football clubs.



Sport England’s FPM analysis for football identifies that the need for pitches is relatively evenly spread across the study area with no specific area more of a priority than others. However, the FA identified the need for a 3G pitch in the north of the city aligned to its larger club base.

Cambridge United has identified the need for a new academy facility which would include the development of an indoor 3G pitch as well as outdoor 3G and natural turf pitches. This facility would also be used by the Cambridge United Youth & Community Trust as its hub site for the delivery of intervention and sports development programmes. The indoor pitch would enable the club to achieve Category 2 status in the Elite Player Performance Plan.

The County FA has identified the need for a wider football development hub for the area which could deliver coach and volunteer development opportunities. The opportunity exists that this could form part of a wider football development centre in partnership with Cambridge United and local community clubs.

Given that, as a minimum hockey and football have identified the need for strategic hub sites, the opportunity exists to co-locate these (if there is a large enough site) and provide a cluster of coach education, player and volunteer development spaces in order that the wider infrastructure of these sports can be developed.



PART 6: CYCLING AND TRIATHLON

There are many forms of cycling currently undertaken across the country with the disciplines being Track, BMX, Road, Mountain, Speedway and Cyclo Cross. The profile of these disciplines will inform the need for facilities within the area in order to serve their needs. However, it is also important to note that the development of bespoke facilities often drives the participation rates and performance levels of a particular discipline in the sport. The provision of a new track (for whatever discipline), or the refurbishment of an existing one, will normally be motivated by local cycle racing or triathlon clubs intent on furthering the standards of the sport and the development of youth talent towards national and international competition. A purpose-built track can also benefit user groups not currently involved in organised cycling or triathlon. Cycle tracks come in several sizes and there is flexibility to include local needs within the central arena area. Track cycling has been the best known form of cycling given the sustained Olympic success of the sport. The UK has four principal indoor velodromes in London, Manchester, Glasgow and Newport, Wales. The London and Manchester sites also have other cycling discipline facilities within their mix. It is unlikely that another indoor velodrome will be built again in the UK unless a British city is in a position to bid for an Olympic or Commonwealth Games. However, British Cycling has identified the need for several indoor cycle tracks to be built as training facilities. The price of these venues can be kept to a minimum with a cost-effective building shell providing a small volume of spectator/educational trackside seating. The alternative to an indoor track is an outdoor 250m track, which is a good compromise for general training and racing. There have been a number of recent outdoor tracks developed in Knowsley, Bournemouth and one under construction in Middlesbrough. However, in addition to velodromes there has also been the development of other cycling discipline facilities including closed road circuits, BMX and mountain bike trails. These have been developed where demand for these sports justifies it or where the NGB is committed to developing the sport within that locality. The context and profile of cycling in Cambridge and South Cambs. needs to be considered prior to the potential development of any cycling facility in the area. The priorities for investment must be driven by the identified need within the area or where there is a strategic drive by the NGB to use a facility development to drive participation.



6.1 Supply

Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire have strong cycling communities with many people choosing to travel by bike as opposed to using the car or public transport. This is as a direct result of the transport challenges of getting into the city and parking. Therefore, there are a wide number of cycle paths and road routes for cyclists. With respect to the sport of cycling (as opposed to commuter routes) there is currently no closed-road, track, cycle speedway, mountain bike trails or BMX tracks in the study area. The closest facilities to Cambridge are located at Gosling Sports Park and Redbridge; both of which are 40 to 50 miles away. 6.2 Demand

NGB consultation

The East region has the second largest membership levels of the nine British Cycling regions; this puts it above the North West of England which has been the focus for the sport over the last decade and has had significant investment in relation to its cycling infrastructure. However, the majority of members are road based cyclists rather than the other disciplines within the sport; therefore the need is based on this type of infrastructure. It is also identified that in the main these members are adult given the challenges for young people (under 16) in accessing road cycling clubs. British Cycling and Triathlon England both identified that there is a strategic need in the area is for a closed road circuit. The circuit should be 1.5 - 3km in distance and have undulations to reflect a typical road route. This facility should be fenced and have floodlights (street lights). The facility would be a Cambridgeshire hub for both sports and would attract athletes from across the area; with clubs from Newmarket, St Ives and Bury St Edmunds predicted to use the facility on a regular basis. Ideally, ancillary facilities such as storage, meeting space, changing, shower and toilet facilities would be vital to provide a quality environment to harness the interest and potential talent of new beginners in the area. If the local infrastructure is organised and ambitious then the facility should be developed to meet competition standard, with a view to attract regional and national competitions to the venue. Importantly the facility would meet the needs of young people wanting to participate in the sport. The NGBs both recognise the challenges of young people (under 16) being able to access road cycling clubs. As such the facility would provide a safe environment for young people to cycle. British Cycling would support the development of a closed road circuit with a Go Ride Coach to facilitate junior development within the sport and to aid the cross-over between various disciplines.



British Cycling identified that a BMX facility is also a strategic need within the area. BMX is more attractive to young people and is a key driver for engaging them within the sport. Even though there is not a strong BMX club within the area British Cycling identified that it would need to undertake specific sports development work in the area to support the development of a BMX club. British Cycling identified other developments such as the Cyclo Park in Kent which has seen the development of a BMX facility within the ‘infield’ of the closed road circuit; but where access to the BMX facility is via an underpass rather than over the track. The NGB identified that a velodrome is not currently a priority for the sport at this stage given the profile of the current membership in the area (i.e. predominantly road cyclists). However, the NGB did identify that if a closed road circuit and BMX facilities are developed then there is the wider opportunity to consider additional facilities at a subsequent point. Ideally the NGB would want these facilities clustered in the same area in order to support the transition from one discipline to another. Therefore, if funding is available to develop the initial facilities the NGB would need to consider its longer term aspirations for the sport in the area and how other disciplines could be factored into an overall master plan. In line with facility aspirations the NGB would need to consider how it developed interest in the other disciplines within the area. British Cycling and Triathlon England have a close working relationship given the cross over in disciplines. British Cycling identified that, given the synergies between the sports it would be ideal if they could be located on the same site which would facilitate the training and development expertise of both as well as aiding cross over between the sports. Triathlon England reiterated this but felt that the wider aspirations of its local clubs also needs to be considered within any wider plans for the area. However, it was identified that a strategic hub would provide a facility that will not only benefit the immediate area, but would be a focus for cycling and triathlon in the region. Local consultation

Clubs

The main cycling club in the area is Cambridge Cycling Club. This is an adult road cycling club with 200+ members. The Club is unable to accept junior members as there are no suitable facilities to allow junior and beginner cycling. That is, the club is not prepared to take under 16 cyclists out on the open road due to health and safety and insurance concerns. Cambridge University Cycling Club is a growing club. CC Ashwell is based in nearby North Hertfordshire and has a large number of members from Cambridge and the surrounding area. The club has 200+ members currently and is growing. The consistent challenge is that none of the clubs are able to accommodate young people due to a lack of a cycling facility.



British Cycling also identified that there are strong road cycling clubs in St Ives and Bury St Edmunds which also face the same challenges with regards appropriate access to facilities for young cyclists (both of these clubs have 200+ members). Cambridge Triathlon Club is the largest triathlon club in the area, with approx. 250-300 members and it reportedly still growing. The Club has capacity issues in accommodating additional members, due to lack of swimming pool space for year round training. There is also a junior section of the club with approx. 150 members. The waiting list is currently one year long, as all young people cannot be accommodated. The main challenges which restrict the club from meeting its latent demand are a lack of pool training time and a safe environment for young people to train on bikes. The triathlon club has used a piece of open water at Milton Lakes, however the nearby path is unsuitable for cycling. There are local community coaches in the area that have a remit for triathlon and increasing the demand for the sport. However it would appear that opportunities are limited due to appropriate facilities. The club has had plans to develop open water swimming facilities at Milton Lakes, but does not appear to have funding to support this. In addition there are a large number of people participating in cycling both recreationally and as a method of transport across the whole City. Sports development

Living Sport County Sports Partnership is currently delivering cycling sessions for young people following the success of the Tour de France in Cambridge and the lack of opportunities for young people to try the sport. The CSP and NGB have been inundated with requests from parents for their children to get involved in cycling. However, the sport has been unable to accommodate all of the demand for activity. This is a key challenge locally for the sport as it has identified latent demand for cycling but insufficient facilities to meet this. The Cambridge City Triathlon will be held for the first time in 2014, and expects over one thousand entries. The event is aimed at athletes new to the sport, with an aim of increasing participation. In addition there are a number of Go Tri events being run in the area. Consultation identified that clubs are unable to accommodate the increased interest to the sport. The club has identified that it cannot accept new members as it is at capacity; this is especially in relation to junior members where one of the key challenges is the provision of safe cycling routes for training and events.



6.3 Conclusion The following conclusions can be identified from the supply and demand analysis for cycling and triathlon in the area: Cycling is a strategically significant sport and activity in the Cambridge and

surrounding area; not just from a sporting perspective but also in relation to local transport and healthy living.

The East Region has the second highest membership levels of all the nine British Cycling regions, even though it has a limited range of facilities.

The majority of members are road cycling members which in turn means that they are predominantly adult.

There is unmet demand for cycling among young people in the area. This is as a result of sports development initiatives undertaken on the back of the Tour de France and due to a lack of appropriate facilities.

A key challenge for local clubs is their ability to accommodate young people; with clubs unwilling to take under 16s out on the road due to health and safety and insurance concerns.

The strategic need is to develop a 1.5 - 3km closed road circuit in the area which should be fenced and floodlit (street lights). This was reinforced by Triathlon England.

There is also a strategic need for a BMX facility in the area; this is more attractive to young people and is a key driver for engaging them within the sport. Even though there is no strong BMX club, British Cycling identified that it would undertake specific sports development work to support the development of a club.

There is a strategic opportunity to develop a wider cycling hub to serve the region. If the above facilities are developed the NGB will need to consider its priorities for other disciplines and potentially look to plan these within a hub site. The development of such a hub would benefit existing cyclists and provide an opportunity to strengthen the wider opportunities for young people and talent identification across a range of disciplines.

There is unmet demand for triathlon in the area with the key challenges related to access to year round swimming training and safe bike training for young people.



PART 7: SWIMMING POOLS

A swimming pool can be defined as an “enclosed area of water, specifically maintained for all forms of water based sport and recreation”. It includes indoor and outdoor pools, freeform leisure pools and specific diving tanks used for general swimming, teaching, training and diving. Many small pools will be used solely for recreational swimming and will not necessarily adhere to ASA technical standards. It is generally recommended that standard dimensions should be used to allow appropriate levels of competition and training and to help meet safety standards. However, relatively few pools need to be designed to full competition standards or include spectator facilities. Single community pools should have a minimum shallow water depth of 0.9 m (if there is no learner pool) and a deep end of 1.8 m or 2.0 m. Where a learner/teaching/training pool is provided, the shallow water depth of the main pool should be increased to 1.0 m in order to better cope with tumble turns. Training for competition, low-level synchronised swimming, and water polo can all take place in a 25 m pool, and with modest spectator seating, the pool will also be able to accommodate competitive events in these activities. Diving from boards, advanced synchronised swimming and more advanced sub-aqua training require deeper water. These can all be accommodated in one pool tank, which ideally should be in addition to the main swimming pool. A dedicated tank for deep-water use may be an essential requirement for some activities at certain levels of competition. 7.1 Supply

Quantity


Across Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire there are 26 swimming pools. These are all listed in Appendix C. For inclusion as a main pool for the purposes of Sport England Facilities Planning Model, a swimming pool should be at least 20m in length and/or at least 160m2 in area. Small pools and lidos are excluded from the analysis due to their limited value in driving year round swimming participation. Smaller pools (including leisure pools) are included where they are on the same site as a larger indoor pool. There are nine main swimming pools and three additional pools in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. These are listed in Table 7.1 below. Just two of these pools are in South Cambridgeshire- Impington Sports Centre and Melbourn Sports Centre.



Table 7.1: Main swimming pools in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Site Name No of Lanes

Width (m)

Length (m)

Area (m

2)

Min depth

(m)

Max depth

(m)

Abbey Leisure Complex 5 12 25 300 0.8 1.8

Abbey Leisure Complex 0 12 12 144 0.8 0.8

Cambridge Fitness & Wellbeing Centre

2 8 25 200 1.4 1.4

David Lloyd Club (Cambridge) 4 10 25 250 1.2 1.2

DW Sports Fitness (Cambridge) 1 9 20 180 1.2 1.2

Frank Lee Centre 3 12.5 25 312.5 1 3

Parkside Pools 8 18 25 450 1 1.8

Parkside Pools 0 3 10 30 0.25 0.25

Parkside Pools 0 12.5 12.5 156.25 0 3.8

The Leys Sports Complex 4 10 25 250 1.3 1.8

Impington Sports Centre 4 10 25 250 1 2.4

Melbourn Sports Centre 4 8 20 160 0.9 1.5

The 12.5m x 12.5m pool at Parkside Pools is a specifically designed diving pit with adjustable depth (to create a teaching pool) and incorporates 2 1m spring boards, 3m spring board, 3m platform and 5m platform, bubble machine, time delay replay system. This is the only diving facility in the area. There was also a 17m swimming pool at LA Fitness (Cambridge); however this facility closed on 1st August 2014. Neighbouring facilities

There are four main swimming pools in neighbouring local authorities within 2 miles of the South Cambridgeshire boundary. These are spread fairly evenly around the border of the study area. The neighbouring facilities are shown in Figure 7.1 and Table 7.2. Planned future developments

Consultation with both local authorities and Cambridge University identified that the University has planning permission to develop a new swimming pool adjacent to its new sports centre. The wider aspiration is for a 50m pool and for this to be (using the new technology developments at the University) a carbon neutral facility. The University does not currently have funding in place to deliver the pool as it is phase 3 of its sports centre development. The City Council is collecting Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) funding towards the development of a new swimming pool for the City (although it will be competing with other infrastructure priorities) and views a potential partnership with the University as a realistic vehicle for delivering this.



Consultation with the ASA confirmed the wider aspiration of the University but also identified the potential development of a 25m swimming pool at King’s College School. Funding is not yet in place for this latter development so it is treating the project as a wider aspiration at this stage. The ASA identified that it does not have funding to invest either development directly, but it would potentially support funding applications to other organisations (e.g. Sport England) in order to deliver the facilities. Location

Unsurprisingly the majority of swimming pools are located in the Cambridge City and surrounding area. There are two main pools- Melbourn Sports Centre and Impington Sports Centre- that are located in the South Cambridgeshire district. Figure 7.1: Location of swimming pools in Cambridge City, South Cambridgeshire and the surrounding area

Table 7.2: Location of swimming pools in Cambridge City, South Cambridgeshire and the surrounding area

Map Ref Site Name Pool Length Area

1 Abbey Leisure Complex 25m Cambridge

2 Cambridge Fitness & Wellbeing Centre 25m Cambridge

3 David Lloyd (Cambridge) 25m Cambridge

4 DW Sports Fitness 20m Cambridge



Map Ref Site Name Pool Length Area

5 Frank Lee Centre 25m Cambridge

6 Impington Sports Centre 25m South Cambridgeshire

7 Melbourn Sports Centre 20m South Cambridgeshire

8 Parkside Pools 25m Cambridge

9 The Leys Sports Complex 25m Cambridge

10 Bottisham Village College Sports Centre 25m East Cambridgeshire

11 Royston Leisure Centre 25m North Hertfordshire

12 Haverhill Leisure Centre 25m St Edmundsbury

13 One Leisure St Ives 25m Huntingdonshire

Quality

Age, refurbishment and investment of facilities

The age and condition of a swimming pool can have a major impact on a user’s experience and their likelihood to continue in regular participation. At present the pools in the study area range quite significantly in age. The oldest pool is at the Frank Lee Centre which was built in 1973; this had significant investment in 2010. The Abbey Leisure Complex was built in 1991 but has had refurbishment in 2009. The remaining pools range from 1995- 2008. Any pool that is nearing 20-25 years old will require significant investment in changing rooms, pool plant, pool tank and general circulation areas. This is the main risk for the mid to long term pool provision in Cambridge. Table 7.3: Build and refurbishment date of 20m+ swimming pools

Site Name Year Built

Refurb date

No lanes

Length (m)

Area (m

2)

Abbey Leisure Complex 1991 2009 5 25 300

Abbey Leisure Complex 1991 2009 0 12 144

Cambridge Fitness & Wellbeing Centre 1999 - 2 25 200

David Lloyd Club (Cambridge) 2004 - 4 25 250

DW Sports Fitness (Cambridge) 2008 - 1 20 180

Frank Lee Centre 1973 2010 3 25 212.5

Parkside Pools 1999 - 8 25 450

Parkside Pools 1999 - 0 10 30

Parkside Pools 1999 - 0 12.5 156.25

The Leys Sports Complex 1995 - 4 25 250

Impington Sports Centre 1995 - 4 25 250

Melbourn Sports Centre 1991 2003 4 20 160

Quality assessments

Seven of the main swimming pool sites were assessed to audit quality of provision in the study area. Two pools were not directly assessed, but assumed to be good quality given that they are David Lloyd and Nuffield Health (Cambridge Fitness and Wellbeing Centre) facilities. Non-technical visual assessments or telephone consultations were completed. These assessments give an overall quality scoring.



Due to the lack of local authority input and wider buy in to the study from other facilities, it was difficult to access some facilities and complete full site assessments. A combination of site visits and mystery visits were undertaken to ensure the study was as thorough as possible. The following table provides a breakdown of the quality scoring and highlights that all of the nine 20m+ swimming pools in the study area are rated as good or above average quality. Table 7.4: Quality of swimming pools 20m+ in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Quality rating of assessed swimming pools


6 3 0 0 -

Figure 7.2: Location and quality of main swimming pools (20m+) in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire



Table 7.5: Quality of main swimming pools (20m+) in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Map Ref Site Name Pool Length Quality

1 Abbey Leisure Complex 25m Above Average

2 Cambridge Fitness & Wellbeing Centre 25m Good

3 David Lloyd 25m Good

4 DW Sports Fitness 20m Good

5 Frank Lee Centre 25m Good

6 Impington Sports Centre 25m Good

7 Melbourn Sports Centre 20m Above Average

8 Parkside Pools 25m Good

9 The Leys Sports Complex 25m Above Average

Availability


Parkside Pools and Abbey Leisure Complex are the two key community accessible facilities which are local authority owned (Cambridge City Council) and Trust managed (Greenwich Leisure). Of the total visits per week in the peak period, as outlined in Sport England’s Facilities Planning Model discussed later in the report, 47% of the opportunities in Cambridge City are provided at Parkside Pools and Abbey Leisure Complex. As a result these two facilities are crucial for public peak time swimming in Cambridge. The Leys Sports Complex, Impington Sports Centre and Melbourn Sports Centre are all education owned and managed in house. The Frank Lee Centre is owned by Addenbrooke’s Charitable Trusts and managed in house/NHS. The remaining four sites are all commercially owned and operated. Availability type

Cambridge Fitness and Wellbeing Centre, David Lloyd Club (Cambridge) and DW Sports and Fitness are all members clubs and offer Registered Membership use. Whilst these sites play a valuable role in providing a mixed economy of opportunities in Cambridge not all facilities will be accessible to all members of the community. The Frank Lee Centre is located at Addenbrookes Hospital site and access is limited to NHS employees so is for Private Use only. The remaining five facilities are all available for Sports Club/ Community Association Access or Pay and Play activity. The swimming pools located on school sites accommodate school demand prior to any community bookings. Therefore there will be limitations on the availability of these facilities during the school day and potentially during some peak hours. Programming and opening

The majority of main swimming pools are available for more than 35 hour per week. The exception to this is the Frank Lee Centre which is not available for community use.



Impington and Melbourn Sports Centre are both located on school sites so the availability may alter throughout the year dependent on school demand for pool time. Table 7.6: Hours available for community use per week

Site Hours available

Lanes/water space

<1

5

ho

urs

Frank Lee Centre 0 25m x 8.5m

15

-35

ho

urs

The Leys Sports Complex 34 25m x 10m

>3

5 h

ou

rs

Abbey Leisure Complex 68.75 25m x12m

Cambridge Fitness and Wellbeing Centre 106 25m x 8m

David Lloyd (Cambridge) 119 25m x 10m

DW Sports Fitness (Cambridge) 101.5 20m x 9m

Impington Sports Centre 41.75 25m x 10m

Melbourn Sports Centre 50 20m x 8m

Parkside Pools 87 25m x 18m

Accessibility

Appropriate walk and drive time accessibility standards can be applied to indoor sports provision to determine deficiencies in provision. The normal acceptable standard would be to apply a 20 minute walk time (1 mile radial catchment) for an urban area, such as Cambridge City and a 20 minute drive time for a rural area, such as South Cambridgeshire. Catchment mapping, based on a 20 minute drive time for rural facilities (South Cambridgeshire) and a 20 minute walk time for urban facilities (Cambridge City) has been adopted to analyse the adequacy of coverage of swimming pool provision across the study area. This helps to identify areas currently not serviced by existing swimming pools All swimming pools of 20m+ have been included, aside from the Frank Lee Centre. As illustrated in the previous section, all swimming pools are managed/owned for Sports Club/Community Association Access, Pay and Play or Registered Membership Use, aside from the Frank Lee Centre. Although commercial facilities are available for Registered Membership Use and not public access, these still contribute to the provision of facilities in the area and so should be considered to an extent of satisfying some demand.



Figure 7.3: Main swimming pools with 20 minute drive time catchment

Figure 7.3 shows the catchment of swimming pools with a 20 minute walk time (for Cambridge) and 20 minute drive time (for South Cambridgeshire) The majority of Cambridge City is within the walk-time catchment of a pool, however there is a densely populated are in the north and north west of the authority that falls outside this catchment. The areas to the north, specifically, are the most deprived communities in Cambridge. Table 7.7 shows that almost a third (32.3%) of the City’s population lives outside the 20 minute walk-time of a swimming pool, with a significant proportion of this being within the most deprived communities. Almost all of the study area is within a 20 minute drive of the swimming pools in South Cambridgeshire. The exception is some small pockets around the edge of South Cambridgeshire, equating to 6.9% of the population (outlined in Table 7.7). These may access facilities in neighbouring authorities. Large portions of neighbouring authorities also fall within a 20 minute drive of main swimming pools in the study area, suggesting further demands placed on these facilities.



Table 7.7: Population within / outwith 20 minute drive time catchment of main swimming pools

IMD 2010 10%

bands Pools catchment populations by IMD band

Inside % Outside% Inside % Outside%

Cambridge City South Cambridgeshire

00 - 10% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

10 - 20% 0.0% 2.3% 0.0% 0.0%

20 - 30% 4.6% 5.8% 0.0% 0.0%

30 - 40% 9.8% 3.9% 1.7% 0.0%

40 - 50% 5.0% 4.0% 0.0% 0.0%

50 - 60% 10.6% 2.6% 1.0% 0.0%

60 - 70% 14.1% 2.5% 11.2% 0.0%

70 - 80% 12.2% 1.9% 18.6% 3.5%

80 - 90% 5.3% 5.3% 24.2% 1.3%

90 - 100% 6.2% 4.0% 36.3% 2.2%

Total 67.7% 32.3% 93.1% 6.9%

Facility Planning Model

The FPM is based on the assumed supply as outlined below. Data is taken from the two following documents: Sport England Strategic Assessment for swimming pool provision in Cambridge City,

Facilities Model National Run. 2014 Profile Report, September 2014 Sport England Strategic Assessment for swimming pool provision in South

Cambridgeshire, Facilities Model National Run. 2014 Profile Report, September 2014 The supply of total water space is measured by visits per week in the peak period (VPWPP). It should be noted that the FPM included the 17m x 10m pool at LA Fitness. This facility closed during the lifespan of this study so was excluded in analysis. The Frank Lee Centre was also included in the FPM but excluded for the purposes of this report as it is not available for community use; use is limited to NHS employees.



Table 7.8: Facilities Planning Model- supply of swimming pools in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Cambridge City South Cambs

Cambs County

England

Number of pools 11 2 28 3,086.00

Number of pool sites 8 2 22 2,187.00

Supply of total water space in m2 2,342.8 410 5,927.8 688,869.80

Supply of publically available water space in m

2, scaled by

hours available in the peak period 2,213.93 329.13 5,316.93 571,371.75

Supply of total water space in VPWPP

19,187.00 2,853 46,080 4,951,889.00

Waterspace per 1000 population in m

2

19.14 2.61 9.22 12.65

The supply of water space in Cambridge City is unsurprisingly much higher than in South Cambridgeshire. The water space per 1000 population (19.14m2) is more than double the figure across the County (9.22m2). It is also over 50% more than the national figure (12.65), suggesting that Cambridge City is well supplied for swimming pools. This figure is only higher in Oxford- a CIPFA (Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy) neighbour close to Cambridge. The pool space in Oxford in 25.15m2. The South Cambridgeshire supply of water space (2.61m2) is the lowest of all nearest neighbours and regional or national figures. This suggests a large undersupply of water space in the local authority area. Summary of supply

There are 26 swimming pools in the study area. Nine of these are main pools, two in South Cambridgeshire and seven in Cambridge City. 98.3% of the local population are within a 20 minute drive of one of these facilities. There are two potential developments in the area, one 25m and one 50m pool, however neither proposal is at a stage with secured funding or confirmed planning permission so these remain as aspirations for now. Seven of the nine pools have been assessed and are good or above average in quality. Two pools were not directly assessed, but assumed to be good quality given that they are David Lloyd and Nuffield Health facilities. The pools in the study area range quite significantly in age. Most pools were built between 1991 and 2008. Two pools are owned by the local authority, three are located on school sites and four are commercial operators. One facility is for Private Use only; three offer Registered Membership Use and five offer Sports Club/Community Association Access.



FPM data suggests that Cambridge City has an adequate supply of pool space and South Cambridgeshire has a large undersupply of pool space. These are respectively different to the regional and national comparative figures. Consultation suggests that there are wider aspirations to develop new swimming pools at Cambridge University and King’s College School, which will potentially be 50m and 25m pools respectively. However, there is no current funding available at present to deliver these facilities and they are unlikely to be developed within the next 3 to 7 years. 7.2 Demand

Appendix B of the report looks at Sport England Active People Survey and Market Segmentation data across Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. These are now considered in the context of swimming pool users. The age and demographic of an area does have a significant impact on their likelihood to participate in any activity including swimming. As a result if the area is likely to benefit from significant population growth (as Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire are) or change in the future it is also important to understand what implications this may have for demographic change so this can be accommodated when planning for all sports provision, including swimming pools.

Current demand

Local sports participation

Active People Survey 7 suggests that the participation rate in swimming in Cambridge City (10.8%) and South Cambridgeshire (7.58%) are both greater than the regional rate of 5.7% and national rate of 5.9%. Local latent demand

According the Active People Survey 7 (2012/13), the number of adults wanting to do more sport in Cambridge is 73,000, which is 67%. This is significantly higher than the regional rate of 55.9% and national figure of 57.5%. In South Cambridgeshire the rate of adults wanting to do more sport is 60.2% and the top sports that adults want to do more of are cycling (9.6%) and swimming (8.2%). The top sport in Cambridge is swimming (11.9%). Sport England’s Segmentation Tool enables analysis of ‘the percentage of adults that would like to participate in swimming but are not currently doing so’. In Cambridge City the tool identifies latent demand of 12,858 people. 10.5% of the population that would like to participate in swimming is the segment ‘career-focused females’. Of the 12,858 people, 3,920 (30.5%) are males; the largest segment of which is ‘settling down males’. In South Cambridgeshire identified latent demand is 15,225 people. 13.3% of the population that would like to participate in swimming is the segment ‘stay at home mums’.



Of the 15,225 people, 4,151 (27.3%) are males; the largest segment of which is ‘settling down males’. An overview of the different segments can be found in Appendix G. Future demand

The most recent ONS projections indicate a rise of 18.0% in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire’s population (+49,630) over the 25 years from 2012 to 2037. While strategic planning needs to consider change over 20 to 25 years, service planning is often more closely aligned to a much shorter time horizon, typically 5 to 10 years. Over the decade to 2024 it is projected that the overall number of people in Cambridge City and South Cambridge will rise by +21,706 (+7.8%). However, significant age specific variations will have implications for different markets, economic and health issues, for example, there will be: +4,762 (+9.6%) more 0-15 year olds; and -2,386 (-5.7%) fewer 25-34 year olds; and +6,216 (+21.6%) more 55-64 year olds; and +11,294 (+25.6%) more people aged 65+. Figure 7.4: Projected population change in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

This data allows us to consider what the increase in demand on sports facilities will be. The Sport England Market Segmentation data tells us that the segments that fit the age profiles set to increase significantly are as follows, along with the sports that they have the propensity to participate in.



Table 7.9: Sport England Market Segmentation in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire for the 55 years + age group

Segment

Current population in

study area

Participation

At

least

once a

week *

Top sports currently

Top sports would like to

No. %

Early Retirement Couples

Roger & Joy (age 56-65 )

14,132 7 38% Keep fit/gym (13%) Swimming (28%)

Local 'Old Boys'

Terry (age 56-65)

4,342 2.15 26% Keep fit/gym (8%) Swimming (6%)

Swimming (21%) Keep fit/gym (10%) Cycling (10%)

Later Life Ladies

Norma (age 56-65)

2,989 1.48 23% Keep fit/ gym (12%) Swimming (10%)

Swimming (35%) Keep fit/gym (20%)

Twilight Year Gents

Frank (age 66+)

5,708 2.83 21%

Golf (7%) Keep fit/gym (6%) Bowls (6%) Swimming (6%)

Swimming (18%)

Comfortable Retired Couples

Ralph & Phyllis (age 66+)


Swimming (25%) Keep fit (7%) Golf (7%)

Retirement Home Singles

Elsie & Arnold (age 66+)


Swimming 30%

*30 minutes at least once a week. National rate is 40%

In simple terms the data gives guidance on the likely increases in demand on sports facility types in the future. Swimming is one of only two sports that appears in every segment in the age group as participating in, or would like to participate in. This is particularly relevant for the ‘early retirement couple’ segment, that has the highest a participation rate of 38%. Local priorities

Cambridge City Council states that Parkside Pools is currently oversubscribed and the operator has difficulty accommodating a wide range of user groups at the facility including the learn to swim scheme, club swimming and triathlon, as well as balancing the needs of a wide range of other uses. The Council has identified the need for additional water space in the City and as such a new swimming pool is a strategic priority for the collection of CIL funding from a range of developments. The Council is committed to actively engaging with Cambridge University and the ASA regarding the University’s aspirations for a 50m pool in West Cambridge. The City Council views that this development would see some of the club programmes at Parkside Pools transferring to the University pool thus freeing up additional time for it to accommodate other user groups.



The City Council predicts that a diving pool will not be developed within any new pool development and that the sport will continue to be accommodated and developed at Parkside Pools. NGB consultation

The Amateur Swimming Association (ASA) is generally happy with the supply of swimming pools in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. The priority in terms of the aging stock of pools, is the Sheeps Green outdoor learner pool, open in the summer months for public use. South Cambridgeshire local authority does not own any swimming pools and relies on school provision and migration outside of the authority. On paper Cambridge City provision is sufficient to meet demand within the local authority, however the cross boundary migration from South Cambridgeshire is significant, which has a detrimental effect on the supply and demand balance in the City. The ASA is aware of the two potential developments in the study area, at King’s College School and Cambridge University. However the NGB remains cautious regarding both plans as it is not yet aware of confirmed funding for either project. Corby East Midlands International Pool is a 50m pool located 50 miles away in Northamptonshire. The ASA questioned whether there was a necessity for an additional 50m pool in the area. Local consultation suggests that this pool is not regularly utilised by Cambridge residents or clubs. Triathlon England highlighted that securing swimming pool time is a big issue for the local club. There is not enough pool space to meet the needs of the Club. There is not enough time available at the right time to accommodate the Club’s requirements, which is one of the largest clubs in the region. In addition clubs from outside of the area, such as Saffron Walden, use facilities in Cambridge to train. Clubs are running events to increase participation, both themselves and on behalf of Triathlon England, but there is nowhere to accommodate new members Local consultation

Consultation with the local triathlon club and coach suggest that pool time is difficult to access for training. This is limited for club activity and the performance pathway uses slots in the middle of the day to ensure training is able to take place. Cambridge City Swimming Club is a large club offering swimming and water polo for its 300 members. The Club is Swim 21 accredited. Training sessions occur at Parkside Pools, the Abbey Leisure Complex and The Leys Sports Complex. Bottisham Swimming Club has just under 100 members from 7-20 years old. Training sessions take place Bottisham Village College which is outside of the study area, and also Impington Village College. There is a swimming club based at Melbourn Sports Centre. This is McSplash Swimming Club and uses the pool one evening per week.



Cambridge Dive Team is a Swim 21 accredited club based at Parkside Pools and Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre. Facilities Planning Model

The FPM is based on the assumed demand as outlined below. Data is taken from the Sport England documents mentioned previously. Table 7.10: Facilities Planning Model- demand for swimming pools in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Cambridge

City South Cambs

Cambridgeshire County

England

Population 122,418 156,935 642,899.00 54,472,081.00

Swims demanded – visits per week in the peak period

8,112 10,066 41,245.00 3,515,618.00

Equivalent in waterspace in m

2 – with comfort factor

included 1,337.11 1,659.16 6,798.63 579,497.43

% of population without access to a car

32.20 10.5 16.40 24.90

The population of Cambridge, based on its size and demographic profile creates a demand for 8,112 visits per week in the peak period (VPWPP). The 8,112 VPWPP creates a demand for 1,337m2 of water space. In South Cambridgeshire, this demand is 10,066 VPWPP, creating a demand for 1,659.16m2. These figures suggest that there is a demand for more water space in South Cambridgeshire than Cambridge City. 32.2% of the Cambridge population do not have access to a car. This is higher than the National (24.9%) and Regional (17.7%) averages. The figure is also significantly higher than the County average (16.4%). However, as a city location these figures are not a surprise. Cities tend to have more convenient public transport networks, cycle networks and shorter distances to walk to the nearest facility. However, it does need to be recognised that for some users lack of access to personal transport will impact negatively on their likelihood to participate in swimming. 10.5% of the South Cambridgeshire population do not have access to a car. This is significantly lower than the National, Regional and County averages. This is not a surprise for a rural district like South Cambridgeshire and is a reflection of the need for personal transport to lead everyday lives. This should not be seen as an automatic reflection of affluence, but it does suggest that South Cambridgeshire residents have greater opportunities to access personal transport to make use of sporting facilities



Summary of demand

APS data outlines that the participation rates in Cambridge City are higher than the national average. This suggests a larger demand on water space in the area than nationally. Local consultation also suggests that there is a high demand for water space and pool time is at a premium. There are waiting lists for both swimming and triathlon clubs in the area, as well as learn to swim programmes at the City’s main public swimming pools. Market Segmentation data suggests that there is a latent demand for swimming in both Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire, 10.5% and 13.3% respectively. ONS population projections outline an expected significant increase in the population in the study area, specifically in the over 55’s. Sport England Market Segmentation data suggests that profiles fitting this age group have a higher propensity to participate or want to participate in swimming. The ASA does not identify a huge unmet demand in either area, but does recognise that this may be the case in Cambridge City due to the migration from South Cambridgeshire. Triathlon England report waiting lists for the triathlon club, due to lack of pool time, while demand is set to increase further. 7.3 Supply and demand analysis

Initially the analysis from the FPM will be studied. It is important to recognise the constraints that the FPM works with. This can affect the swimming pools which will be included in the analysis and therefore local context, consultation and other factors should be taken into consideration alongside the FPM findings. The following parameters are used, based on the information taken from Active Places Power:

The number of lanes will be calculated on water space and not actual number of

lanes used. A swimming pool will only be included if the water space is 160m2 or larger, or if it is

20m in length or more. A swimming pool will not be included in the FPM if no public access is indicated. A smaller pool (learner/teaching/leisure pool) will be included if on the same site as a

main swimming pool that meets the above criteria. The model only assessed peak period demand. A swimming pool is deemed at capacity when 70% full The following is taken directly from the FPM analysis from the Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire reports:



Table 7.11: Supply and demand balance in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

When looking at a very simplistic picture of overall supply and demand for Cambridge City the population is estimated to generate a demand for a minimum of 1,337m2 of water space. This compares to current available supply of water space in Cambridge for community users in the peak period of 2,213m2. This creates a significant pool based oversupply of 876m2. This equates to 2.69 6 lane 25m pools, which is significant. It must be stressed that this analysis purely uses the supply in Cambridge City and the demand created by Cambridge City based residents. In Cambridge there will be imported activity from South Cambridgeshire residents, there is also likely to be significant import of users from other areas who work in Cambridge and undertake their leisure activity in the City, but the biggest factor impacting on use which the model cannot account for is student demand. As students are not classed as permanent residents they do not appear on the stated population figure for the City. As a result significant other demand has to be considered for pools in the City. When looking at the overall supply and demand for South Cambridgeshire the population is estimated to generate a demand for a minimum of 1,659m2 of water space. This compares to current available supply of water space in South Cambridgeshire for community users in the peak period of just 329m2. This creates a very significant pool based shortfall of 1,330m2. This is the equivalent of 4.1- 6 lane pools. This is a very significant shortfall. As previously indicated this is on the basis of current population levels, with significant growth anticipated in the area this issue is only going to become more challenging. This level of undersupply is four times the current level of supply. It must be noted that this assessment sees South Cambridgeshire as an island and compares the supply based in the district to the demand residents create. We know that residents will participate in pools outside of the district but it does give a very clear indication that pool access in South Cambridgeshire itself is very poor and will only get worse with increases in participation and population. South Cambridgeshire residents benefit from the proximity to Cambridge and the pools in the City. However, it does have to be recognised that the time taken to travel in to the City is not always conducive to participation. There are pools in other bordering authorities that residents can benefit from such as St Ives, Newmarket and Royston but these will only be accessible by certain residents due to where the sites are and where residents live. It must also be recognised that a number of these neighbouring pools are

Cambridge

City South Cambs

Cambs County

England East

region

Supply- Swimming pool provision (m

2) scaled to

take account of hours available for community use

2,213.93 329.13 5,316.93 571,371.75 62,934.66

Demand- Swimming pool provision (m

2) taking into

account a ‘comfort’ factor 1,337.11 1,659.16 6,798.63 579,497.43 63,613.97

Provision available compared to the minimum required to meet demand

876.82 -1,330.03 -1,481.70 -8,125.68 -679.31



near to, or above, their comfortable capacity of 70%. As a result the quality of experience received by South Cambridgeshire residents is compromised and may impact on their desire to regularly participate. Table 7.12: Demand from Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire residents currently being met by supply

Satisfied Demand Cambridge South Cambs

Cambs County

England

Total number of visits which are met

7,685.00 8,654.00 36,266.00 3,212,349

% of total demand satisfied 94.70 86.00 87.90 91.40

% of demand satisfied who travelled by car

64.08 95.19 85.63 75.74

% of demand satisfied who travelled by foot

23.94 1.89 9.10 14.97

% of demand satisfied who travelled by public transport

11.98 2.92 5.28 9.29

Demand Retained 7,318.00 1,845.00 32,831.00 3,210,450

Demand Retained -as a % of Satisfied Demand

95.20 21.30 90.50 99.90

Demand Exported 367.00 6,809.00 3,435.00 1,899

Demand Exported -as a % of Satisfied Demand

4.80 78.70 9.50 0.10

It can be seen that 95.2% of demand by Cambridge City residents is retained within Cambridge City. This is a high figure and compares well to all comparator data. Just 4.8% of demand is exported elsewhere, which equates to just 60m2 of water space or just over 1 lane of a 25m pool. This picture is very different in South Cambridgeshire, just 21.3% of demand is met within the local authority area, this is the second lowest in the whole of England. 78.7% of demand is exported to neighbouring authorities. These figures reflect the major under supply of water space in South Cambridgeshire and the reliance residents have on neighbouring authorities for their swimming participation. As previously indicated Cambridge is a major importer of swimming activity. This does raise the concern that South Cambridgeshire as a Council has no control at all over this supply and therefore decisions taken by other providers could seriously impact on South Cambridgeshire resident’s ability to swim in the future. Facility implications

The demand data suggests that pool space is at a premium and clubs in particular would utilise more time if it were available. Based on population the supply of pools in Cambridge City is adequate, but this does not allow for the mass migration from South Cambridgeshire residents that place further demands on the facilities. With the population increase and the waiting lists that the learn to swim schemes, swimming and triathlon clubs have, the demand on pool time is only set to increase.



Facilities planning for increases in the 65+ and 0-15 age groups may determine that these opposing age groups require very different provision at key times of the day and week from other users. Pressure on learn to swim sessions and recreational swimming by the 0-15 age group is going to be after school and at weekends, whereas it is expected that the 65+ age group require access in the early morning and during the week day. 7.4 Summary

There are nine main swimming pools in the study area, two are located on school sites in South Cambridgeshire, and the other pools are in Cambridge City. One is a commercial operator; the other commercial facility ceased trading on 1st August 2014. There is one swimming pool at the Frank Lee Centre on the site of Addenbrookes Hospital that is Private Use only, for employees of the hospital. Other facilities all have registered community access. In addition there is a specialist diving facility alongside the main pool at Parkside Pools. 32.3% of Cambridge City residents live outside a 20 minute walking catchment of a main swimming pool, compared with 6.9% of South Cambridgeshire residents living outside of a 20 minute drive time catchment. Cambridge University have planning permission for a 50m pool on the site of its new sports centre development. King’s College School also has aspirations for a new 25m pool. Funding has not been secured for either proposal. The supply of water space in Cambridge City is much higher than in South Cambridgeshire. The water space per 1000 population (19.14m2) is more than double the figure across the County (9.22m2). The South Cambridgeshire supply of water space (2.61m2) is very low, which suggests a large undersupply of water space in the local authority area. APS data outlines that the participation rates in Cambridge City are higher than the national average. This, plus local consultation, suggests a high demand on water space and pool time is at a premium. There are waiting lists for swimming lessons as well as swimming and triathlon clubs in the area. Data suggests that there is latent demand for swimming in both Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. ONS population projections outline an expected significant increase in the population in the study area, specifically in the over 55’s. Profiles fitting this age group have a higher propensity to participate or want to participate in swimming. Added to this the 0-15 age group creates increased demand for learn to swim provision. The ASA does not identify a huge unmet demand in either area, but does recognise that this may be the case in Cambridge City due to the migration from South Cambridgeshire. Triathlon England report waiting lists for the triathlon club, limited due to lack of pool time, while demand is set to increase further. In Cambridge there will be imported activity from South Cambridgeshire residents, there is also likely to be significant import of users from other areas who work in Cambridge and undertake their leisure activity in the City, plus the demand by students in the area.



Simple supply and demand equations suggest that there is a significant shortfall of over four 6 lane pools in South Cambridgeshire. With significant growth anticipated in the area this issue is only going to become more challenging. The demand data suggests that pool space is at a premium and clubs in particular would utilise more time if it were available. Based on population the supply of pools in Cambridge City is adequate, but this does not allow for the mass migration from South Cambridgeshire residents that place further demands on the facilities. With the increase in aging population set to increase and the waiting lists that the swimming and triathlon clubs have, the demand on pool time is only set to increase. The planned 50m pool development at Cambridge University and the proposed pool development at King’s College School will contribute to addressing the wider deficiencies in water space when the City and South Cambridgeshire areas are taken into account. However it is unlikely that they will be ‘community facilities’ in their widest sense, but some community usage will be available in order to maximise the operational cost. The strategic justification for the facilities is clear.



PART 8: SPORTS HALLS

Indoor multi-sport sports halls are one of the prime sports facilities for community sport because they are able to provide a venue for many different activities. The standard methodology for measuring sports halls is by the number of badminton courts contained within the floor area. According to this definition they are at least 10m x 18m (i.e., the size of one badminton court including surrounding safety area) and include specifically designed sports halls, such as leisure centres and school sports halls. Additionally it also includes halls where activities can take place, such as school assembly halls, community buildings and village halls. Specialist centres, e.g. dance centres, are not included. However it is recognised that there is extensive use of these types of facility by a wide range of other sports including basketball, volleyball, handball etc. Sports halls are generally considered to be of greatest value if they are of at least 3+ badminton court size, and with sufficient height to allow games such as badminton to be played. A 4-court sports hall provides greater flexibility in that it can accommodate major indoor team sports such as football (5-a-side and training), basketball and netball. It also provides sufficient run-up space to accommodate indoor cricket nets and to undertake indoor athletics. Many 4 court sports halls also have a dividing net which enable them to be subdivided into separate areas for use, for example, for circuit training, table tennis or martial arts activities. As such, a 4-court sports hall has greater sports development value and flexibility than its 3-court counterpart. A spread of 4 court halls is often the most effective way of achieving the greatest accessibility for general community use. However, the space required for many indoor team games exceeds the space provided by a standard 4 court hall and in general terms the higher the standard of play the larger the space required. At higher levels of performance the playing area is usually the same size but increased safety margins and clear height may be required, as well as additional space requirements for spectators, teams and officials during competitions. Larger halls i.e. 6 plus courts are therefore able to accommodate higher level training and/or competition as well as meeting day to day needs. They may also provide the option for more than one pitch/court which increases flexibility for both training and competition. Sport England has also developed new design guidance for a larger four court sports hall to accommodate sports such as netball. This assessment considers all sports hall facilities in Cambridge that comprise at least one badminton court (and measure at least 10 x 18 offering an area of 180m2). For consideration as a main hall (as defined by Sport England) it must be a three badminton court sports hall and provide a reasonable sized area to be multi-functional. Such facilities are commonplace in secondary schools across the area. However, three badminton court sports halls are not of a size sufficient to accommodate training and fixtures for key team sports.



8.1 Supply

Quantity


Across Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire there are 55 sports halls and activity halls. These are all listed in Appendix D. For inclusion as a main sports hall for the purposes of Sport England Facilities Planning Model, a sports hall should be at least be at least 459m2 in size, which equates to a three badminton court size hall. If a site has a main hall and then a secondary hall, regardless of size it will be included in the dataset. There are 21 main sports halls in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. These are listed in Table 8.1 below, alongside other halls on the same sites for a clear overview. The largest facilities are the eight badminton court halls at Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre and the University of Cambridge Sports Centre. Table 8.1: Main sports halls and ancillary halls on site in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Site Name No.

Badminton courts

Width (m)

Length (m)

Area (m2)

Cherry Hinton Village Leisure Centre 4 19 30 570

Chesterton Sports Centre 4

594

Chesterton Sports Centre 1 10 18 180

David Lloyd Club (Cambridge) 4

594

Hills Road Sports & Tennis Centre 4

594

Hills Road Sports & Tennis Centre 0 8 8 64

Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre 8

1221

Manor Community College Sports Centre 4

486

Manor Community College Sports Centre 1 10 18 180

Netherhall Community Sports Centre 4

594

Netherhall Community Sports Centre 1 10 18 180

St Bedes Inter Church School 4

594

St Bedes Inter Church School 1 10 18 180

St Faiths School 6

918

St Faiths School 1 10 18 180

The Leys Sports Complex 5

810

The Perse School 6 22.7 38 862.6

Bassingbourn Sports Centre 4 18 33 594

Cambourne Fitness And Sports Centre 4

594

Cambridge Regional College Sports Centre 4 17 28 476

Cambridge Regional College Sports Centre 4 20 30 600

Comberton Leisure Centre 4

594

Comberton Leisure Centre 1 10 18 180

Cottenham & District Sports Centre 3

486

Cottenham & District Sports Centre 1 10 18 180

Impington Sports Centre 4

594



Site Name No.

Badminton courts

Width (m)

Length (m)

Area (m2)

Impington Sports Centre 1 10 18 180

Linton Community Sports Centre 3 17 27 459

Linton Community Sports Centre 2 324

Melbourn Sports Centre 3

486

Sawston Village College Sports Centre 3

486

Sawston Village College Sports Centre 2 324

The University of Cambridge Sports Centre 8 1121

Planned future developments

In response to the increased population projections and new housing developments both Councils’ planning officers identified that there are likely to be three new secondary schools developed to serve the Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire areas. Southern fringe (South): the secondary school will be developed in the Trumpington area to serve the needs of 4,000 new homes in the area. The facility will consist of a sports hall and sports pitches to serve the needs of the school. It is envisaged that these will be available for community use, although the sports facility development is less that what was initially envisaged.. North West - Darwin Green: a site has been identified for a new secondary school to serve the North West of the City. The site identified is adjacent to the ARU development at Howes Close. The current Playing Pitch Strategy will be used to determine the pitch needs for the school and community. However, the opportunity exists for the school and ARU to develop a partnership where the school could access the sand dressed and 3G pitches for school use and potentially invest in enhanced sports hall facilities which ARU could use in the evenings and weekends. North East: it is anticipated that in time a new secondary school will be required in the North East of the City. However, a site has not been identified as yet. Neighbouring facilities

There are seven main sports halls located within 2 miles of the South Cambridgeshire border. The is one in Huntingdonshire, one in East Cambridgeshire, one in North Hertfordshire and three in St Edmundsbury. Location

The majority of main sports halls are found in the Cambridge City area, although there are a number spread across the more densely populated areas of South Cambridgeshire. The eastern strip does not have any main sports halls, however Figure 8.1 shows that area is very sparsely populated.



Figure 8.1: Location of main sports halls (3 court +) in Cambridge City, South Cambridgeshire and the surrounding area

Table 8.2: Location of main sports halls in Cambridge City, South Cambridgeshire and the surrounding area

Map Ref

Site Name Number of

Courts Area

1 Bassingbourn Sports Centre 4 South Cambridgeshire

2 Cambourne Fitness and Sports Centre 4 South Cambridgeshire

3 Cherry Hinton Leisure Centre 4 Cambridge

4 Chesterton Sports Centre 4 Cambridge

5 Comberton Sports Centre 4 South Cambridgeshire

6 Cottenham Sports Centre 3 South Cambridgeshire

7 David Lloyd 4 Cambridge

8 Hills Road Sports & Tennis Centre 4 Cambridge

9 Impington Sports Centre 4 South Cambridgeshire

10 Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre 8 Cambridge

11 Linton Sports Centre 3 South Cambridgeshire

12 Manor Community College Sports Centre 4 Cambridge

13 Melbourn Sports Centre 4 South Cambridgeshire

14 Netherhall Sports Centre 4 Cambridge



Map Ref

Site Name Number of

Courts Area

15 Sawston Village Sports Centre 3 South Cambridgeshire

16 St Bedes Inter Church School 4 Cambridge

17 St. Faiths School 6 Cambridge

18 Swavesey Sports Centre 3 South Cambridgeshire

19 The Leys Sports Complex 5 Cambridge

20 The Park - Cambridge Regional College 4 South Cambridgeshire

21 The Park - Cambridge Regional College 4 South Cambridgeshire

22 The Perse School 6 Cambridge

23 University of Cambridge 8 Cambridge

24 Bottisham Village College Sports Centre 4 East Cambridgeshire

25 Meridian School 3 North Hertfordshire

26 Royston Leisure Centre 4 North Hertfordshire

27 Castle Manor Academy 3 St Edmundsbury

28 Haverhill Leisure Centre 5 St Edmundsbury

29 One Leisure St Ives 6 Huntingdonshire

30 Samuel Ward Academy 3 St Edmundsbury

Quality

Age and refurbishment facilities

The facilities range in age significantly from Sawston Village College being built in 1970 to St Faiths and Cambourne Fitness and Sports Centre in 2011. A number of the facilities are nearing a time where investment will be required to ensure that they can continue to be effective as community use facilities. Some of the older facilities, such as Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre and The Leys Sports Complex have not had recorded refurbishment since they were constructed and in order for these facilities to continue to play the valuable role in providing for community sport it would be useful to understand the condition of these facilities via full and detailed conditions surveys. Table 8.3: Age and refurbishment of main sports halls in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Site Name Year Built Refurb date No.

Badminton courts

Cherry Hinton Village Leisure Centre 1989 2007 4

Chesterton Sports Centre 2004 2008 4

David Lloyd Club (Cambridge) 2004 - 4

Hills Road Sports & Tennis Centre 1996 - 4

Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre 1978 - 8

Manor Community College Sports Centre 2006 - 3



Site Name Year Built Refurb date No.

Badminton courts

Netherhall Community Sports Centre 1990 2009 4

St Bedes Inter Church School 2006 - 4

St Faiths School 2011 - 6

The Leys Sports Complex 1995 - 5

The Perse School 2000 - 6

Bassingbourn Sports Centre 2008 - 4

Cambourne Fitness And Sports Centre 2011 - 4

Cambridge Regional College Sports Centre 1993 2005 4

Cambridge Regional College Sports Centre 2009 - 4

Comberton Leisure Centre 1980 2005 4

Cottenham & District Sports Centre 1980 - 3

Impington Sports Centre 1995 - 4

Linton Community Sports Centre 1992 - 3

Melbourn Sports Centre 1991 - 3

Sawston Village College Sports Centre 1970 2004 3

The University of Cambridge Sports Centre 2013 - 8

15 of the main sports hall sites were visited or staff consulted as part of the study to audit quality of provision in the study area. David Lloyd (Cambridge) is assumed to be good quality. Non-technical visual assessments or telephone consultations were completed. These assessments give an overall quality scoring. The following table provides a breakdown of the quality scoring and highlights that 13 of the main sports halls in the study area are rated as good or above average quality. Seven halls were not assessed. Table 8.4: Quality of main sports halls in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Quality rating of assessed swimming pools


6 8 2 1 5

It should be noted that anecdotal information suggests that of the sites not assessed, there are reports that some are not good quality, so it would be wrong to assume those not assessed are of similar quality to those assessed.



Figure 8.2: Quality and location of main sports halls in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Table 8.5: Quality of main sports halls in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Map Ref Site Name Number of

Courts Quality

1 Bassingbourn Sports Centre 4 Above Average

2 Cambourne Fitness and Sports Centre 4 Good

3 Cherry Hinton Leisure Centre 4 Above Average

4 Chesterton Sports Centre 4 Good

5 Comberton Sports Centre 4 Above Average

6 Cottenham Sports Centre 3 Below Average

7 David Lloyd 4 Good

8 Hills Road Sports & Tennis Centre 4 Above Average

9 Impington Sports Centre 4 Below Average

10 Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre 8 Above Average

11 Linton Sports Centre 3 Above Average

12 Manor Community College Sports Centre 4 Poor

13 Melbourn Sports Centre 4 Not Assessed



Map Ref Site Name Number of

Courts Quality

14 Netherhall Sports Centre 4 Above Average

15 Sawston Village Sports Centre 3 Not Assessed

16 St Bedes Inter Church School 4 Not Assessed

17 St. Faiths School 6 Not Assessed

18 Swavesey Sports Centre 3 Below Average

19 The Leys Sports Complex 5 Above Average

20 The Park - Cambridge Regional College 4 Good

21 The Park - Cambridge Regional College 4 Good

22 The Perse School 6 Not Assessed

23 University of Cambridge 8 Good

Availability


In terms of the management all but the David Lloyd facility are identified to be managed theoretically in the public sector. However, 10 of the sites are on educational sites and schools are much more independent in terms of their operations. Whilst these currently enjoy public access it is not sure if any of this is protected / guaranteed through community use agreements. . Whilst South Cambridgeshire benefits from the Village College approach, which is very community minded, the fact that the vast majority of facilities are based on and managed by educational sites does place the long term guaranteed access by the community at risk Accessibility type

The sports halls located on school sites will have issues with providing access for the community users during the school day. This can be due to priority for school use and school concerns over members of the public accessing school facilities during the school day while students are on site. The eight court sports hall at the University of Cambridge has a community access agreement and is advertised as open to book from 6.30am-10pm Monday- Friday and 8am-8pm at weekends. In reality this time is taken up by student demand and consultation identifies that there is minimal time available for community bookings. Programming and opening

Table 8.6 shows that there are no sports halls that open for less than 31 hours per week. This generally accounts for the majority of the peak hours during weekday evenings and some at weekends. Therefore, it can be clearly demonstrated that all sports halls in the area are generally well used and operating close to maximum capacity (other than some time at weekends).



Table 8.6: Hours available for community use per week

Hours available

Site Hours

available No. Badminton

courts

<15

ho

urs

15-3

5

ho

urs

St Bedes Inter Church School 31 4

St Faiths School 31 6

The Leys Sports Complex 34 5

Bassingbourn Sports Centre 32 4

Impington Sports Centre 35 4

>35 h

ou

rs

Cherry Hinton Village Leisure Centre 81 4

David Lloyd Club (Cambridge) 115.5 4

Hills Road Sports & Tennis Centre 103.5 4

Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre 98 8

Netherhall Community Sports Centre 44 4

The Perse School 40.5 6

Cambourne Fitness And Sports Centre 95 4

Cambridge Regional College Sports Centre 47 4

Cambridge Regional College Sports Centre 47 4

Chesterton Sports Centre 45 4

Comberton Leisure Centre 41 4

Cottenham & District Sports Centre 41 3

Linton Community Sports Centre 49.5 3

Manor Community College Sports Centre 39 4

Melbourn Sports Centre 41 3

Sawston Village College Sports Centre 42 3

The University of Cambridge Sports Centre 101.5 8

Accessibility

As with swimming pools, catchment mapping, based on a 20 minute drive time for South Cambridgeshire facilities and a 20 minute walk time for Cambridge City facilities has been adopted to analyse the adequacy of coverage of sports hall provision across the study area. This helps to identify areas currently not serviced by existing sports halls.



Table 8.7: Population within / outwith 20 minute drive time catchment of main sports halls

IMD 2010 10%

bands Halls catchment populations by IMD band

Inside % Outside% Inside % Outside%

Cambridge City South Cambridgeshire

00 - 10% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

10 - 20% 2.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

20 - 30% 5.5% 4.8% 0.0% 0.0%

30 - 40% 12.0% 1.7% 1.7% 0.0%

40 - 50% 8.8% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%

50 - 60% 13.2% 0.0% 1.0% 0.0%

60 - 70% 14.9% 1.7% 11.2% 0.0%

70 - 80% 14.1% 0.0% 22.0% 0.0%

80 - 90% 10.5% 0.1% 25.0% 0.5%

90 - 100% 10.0% 0.2% 38.4% 0.0%

Total 91.4% 8.6% 99.4% 0.6%

Figure 8.3: Main sports halls with 20 minute drive time catchment



Figure 8.3 shows the catchment of sports halls with a 20 minute walk time for Cambridge) and 20 minute drive time (for South Cambridgeshire). In general it is clear that the majority of residents are within appropriate access standards for a sports hall. The slight exception to this is the small catchment to the north east of the city which represents some of the City’s most deprived communities. Facility Planning Model

The FPM is based on the assumed supply as outlined below. Data is taken from the two National Runs from September 2014 as previously stated. The supply of total hall space is measured by court space. It should be noted that the FPM included an additional ancillary hall at Netherhall Community Sports Centre which was not apparent during the site visit to the facility. Table 8.8: Facilities Planning Model- supply of sports halls in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Cambridge City

South Cambs

Cambs County

England

Number of halls 19.00 15.00 70.00 5,584.00

Number of hall sites 12.00 9.00 45.00 3,985.00

Supply of total hall space in courts 72.70 48.20 241.20 21,321.60

Supply of publicly available hall space in courts (scaled with hours available in the peak period)

62.96 42.89 201.16 16,317.16

Supply of total hall space in VPWPP 12,750.00 8,685.00 40,735.00 3,304,225.00

Courts per 10,000 people 5.94 3.07 3.75 3.91

The number of courts per 10,000 people in Cambridge City (5.94) is higher than in South Cambridgeshire (3.07) and the county (3.75) and national (3.91) figures. This suggests that Cambridge City is well supplied for sports hall space. South Cambridgeshire is less well supplied and has less court space available per 10,000 people than both county wide and nationally. Summary of supply

There are 21 main sports halls in the study area, including two eight court halls. There is a good spread between the two authority areas. The quality of the facilities is mixed and just one is for Registered Membership Use, the others are all available for community use, though some operate within educational settings so limitations on availability. 99.7% of the population live within a 20 minute drive of a main sports hall. Data suggests that Cambridge City has a much higher supply of sports hall space than South Cambridgeshire, county wide and nationally per head.



8.2 Demand

Appendix B of the report looks at Sport England Active People Survey and Market Segmentation data across Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. These are now considered in the context of sports hall users. The age and demographic profile of an area does have a significant impact on the likelihood to participate in any activity including sports hall sports such as netball, volleyball, basketball and badminton. If the area is likely to benefit from significant population growth (as Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire are) or change it is also important to understand what implications this may have for sports provision, including sports halls. Current demand


The adult (14+) participation rate in sport, of at least once a week, in Cambridge is 42.9% and in South Cambridgeshire is 40.6%. (Active People Survey 7- 2012/13). These are both greater than the regional participation rate of 36.1% and national rate of 36.7%, indicating that both authority areas, and Cambridge City residents in particular, are more active than regional and national counterparts. Local latent demand

The figures below are taken from the Sport England Segmentation tool to enable the identification of ‘the percentage of adults that would like to participate in each particular sport but are not currently doing so’. This is the latent demand and is broken down by sport and area. Badminton

There is a latent demand of 4174 people across Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire that would like to play badminton. This is broken down as follows. 1,947 people in Cambridge City. 12.3% of the population that would like to participate in badminton is the segment ‘sports team lads’. Of the 1,947 people, 952 (48.9%) are females; the largest segment of which is ‘supportive singles’. In South Cambridgeshire this figure for badminton is 2,227 people. 18.0% of the population that would like to participate in badminton is the segment ‘settling down males’. Of the 2,227 people, 1,065 (47.8%) are females; the largest segment of which is ‘stay at home mums’. Basketball

There is a latent demand of 575 people wanting to play basketball in Cambridge City. 40.3% of this is the segment ‘sports team lads’. Of the 575 people, 155 (27.0%) are females; the largest segment of which is ‘supportive singles’.



In South Cambridgeshire, the latent demand for basketball is 407 people. 34.4% of this is the segment ‘competitive male urbanites’. Of the 407 people, 124 (30.5%) are females; the largest segment of which is ‘fitness class friends’. This is a total of 982 people wanting to play basketball across the study area. Netball

The latent demand for netball is 435 people, all female. 29.2% of the population that would like to participate in netball is the segment ‘supportive singles’. In South Cambridgeshire the figure is 445. 36.6% of the population that would like to participate in netball is the segment ‘fitness class friends’. This is a total figure of 880 across both areas. It must be considered that this is the figure for netball in general so would cover both indoor and outdoor versions of the sport. Volleyball

The latent demand for volleyball in Cambridge is 131 people. 18.3% of the population that would like to participate in volleyball is the segment ‘supportive singles’. Of the 131 people, 76 (58.0%) are females. In South Cambridgeshire the latent demand is 118 people. 25.4% of the population that would like to participate in volleyball is the segment ‘fitness class friends’. Of the 118 people, 70 (59.3%) are females. Between these four sports there is a latent demand of 6285 people wanting to participate in a sports hall sport in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire combined. An overview of the different segments can be found in Appendix D. Future demand

As mentioned when discussing swimming pools, the population is predicted to increase

by 2037, providing the following differences in age profile of the population:

+4,762 (+9.6%) more 0-15 year olds; and -2,386 (-5.7%) fewer 25-34 year olds; and +6,216 (+21.6%) more 55-64 year olds; and +11,294 (+25.6%) more people aged 65+. The age group with the biggest increase is the 55-64 year olds and the 65+ age group. The Sport England Segments that fit this age profile do not appear to be interested in sports hall sports. This is outlined in more detail in Table 7.9 in the previous section. The age band that is predicted to decrease is the 25-34 year olds. The Sport England Segments that fit this age profile are listed below in Table 8.9. This shows that this age group has a greater propensity towards participation in general, which makes the reduction in population even more significant. The top sports are cycling, swimming and keep fit/gym, suggesting there will not be a huge impact on sports hall participation with the reduction of this age band in population alone.



Table 8.9: Sport England Market Segmentation in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire for the 25-34 year age group

Segment

Current population in

study area

Participation

At least 1 x per week *

Top sports currently

Top sports would like to

No. %

Settling Down Males

Tim 24,848 12.31 62% Cycling (21%)

Keep fit/gym (20%)

Cycling (17%)

Swimming (17%)

Career Focussed Females

Helena 12,293 6.09% 53% Keep fit/gym (26%)

Swimming (22%)

Swimming (31%)

Keep fit/gym (18%)

Stretched Single Mums

Paula 4,674 2.32% 36% Keep fit/gym (18%)

Swimming (17%)

Swimming (35%)

Keep fit/gym (8%)

*30 minutes at least once a week. National rate is 40%

Local priorities

Consultation with Cambridge City Council identified that there was a need for more sports halls in the City and that all available halls are at capacity during weekday evenings. Conversely, South Cambridgeshire DC did not identify any pressing need for additional provision. Both authorities perceive that the additional sports hall provision planned within the three new school developments will meet the latent demand for provision. It is assumed that 4 court sports hall will be developed at these schools. The County Sports Partnership highlighted anecdotal information that korfball in particular has difficulty in securing hall time for training sessions. There are three clubs in the area with a total of five teams competing in local, regional and national competitions. Indoor athletics is very strong during the winter months and in general use a number of facilities to meet their training requirements. There is currently no capacity to increase participation in clubs. If more hall time were to become available then clubs could plan to expand the opportunities that they offer. The CSP identified that some clubs expected hall time to become available once the new sports hall at the University of Cambridge opened. However, the demand among student teams is such that there are limited opportunities for community clubs to access these facilities during the peak training times (i.e. weekday evenings). NGB consultation

Badminton England

Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire are identified with in the National Facilities Strategy as key priority areas. Badminton England has capital funding to contribute towards facility development which would be available to apply for. Facilities are an area of concern for the Cambridgeshire Badminton Association. It is difficult to gain access and cost can be prohibitive. Any facility development should work



with the Cambridge Community Badminton Network. The network aims to increase participation by 10% and the HE Officer is working with both universities. There are 24 affiliated clubs in Cambridgeshire and a number of unaffiliated clubs playing in other leagues. Facilities in Cambridge City are expensive and difficult to access. There is a reliance on school facilities in South Cambridgeshire. Quality of facilities in both areas is not outstanding The home of County badminton is Cambridge Regional College Sports Centre. This is a venue that is flexible on bookings, affordable, located just of A14 and has good car parking. The local badminton community was excited to hear the plans regarding the University of Cambridge developing the new eight court sports hall, but in reality the facility exists to service student demand. There is minimal availability for sports club/community organisation access. The facility is reportedly empty out of term time. Other issues highlighted in consultation: The larger clubs in the area include Ely Victoria, Hurst and Ramblers. Play Badminton across the County has increased participation. Hurst Badminton Club has too many juniors wanting to play. A lack of facilities and

coaches means the Club currently has a waiting list. Other clubs in the area are also operating a waiting list due to lack of access to

suitable facilities. Manor Community Sports Centre is a poor facility with bad quality floor surface Comberton Badminton Club has recently been forced to move from Comberton

Sports Centre. Maintenance work resulted in slippery floor that was unable to be rectified.

Within Cambridge & South Cambridge, there is a lack of quality, accessible facilities. There is also a lack of qualified coaches.

England Netball

Netball is a predominantly outside sport in Cambridgeshire. Indoor facilities tend only to be used for training in the winter. The majority of teams would prefer to compete and train outdoors and there is currently no huge demand for additional indoor facilities. Popular venues for training include the Perse School, Long Road Sixth Form College, Hills Road Sixth Form College and Comberton Village College. There are no real issues in accessing sufficient training facilities. The new sports hall at the University of Cambridge is used by both university and community teams. Anglia Ruskin University run a netball league at Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre. Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre is also used by Anglia Ruskin University representative teams. Back to Netball sessions are programmed at Cambridge University and Cherry Hinton Village Leisure Centre, these are run by England Netball. In addition, some clubs are also running the Back to Netball scheme themselves as a means of increasing membership.



England Basketball

Anglia Ruskin University enter three teams into BUCS and both a men’s and women’s team into the National League. The majority of training takes place at Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre. Cambridge University also has three teams in BUCS and run a five division intra college league. Cambridge Cats Basketball Club and Cambridge Cougars are two community clubs with almost 350 members between them. Training for the clubs takes place at Chesterton Sports Centre and St Bede’s School in Cambridge. Sports hall space is limited. It is identified that additional provision is required to accommodate the needs of clubs. Volleyball England

Historically the study area has been a hot bed of activity for volleyball; however this has reduced in recent years. There are four clubs in the area- the University of Cambridge Volleyball Club, Anglia Ruskin University Volleyball Club, Cambridge Volleyball Club (Manor Community College Sports Centre) and Rhinos Volleyball Club (Leys School). There is also activity at Cambridge Regional College. The Governing Body is considering the area as a future hot spot, for workplace based activity in particular. The CSP is fully supportive of this. There is no real issue around facilities currently for the clubs or volleyball activity taking place in the area. Facilities Planning Model

The FPM is based on the assumed demand as outlined below. Data is taken from the Sport England documents mentioned previously. Table 8.10: Facilities Planning Model- demand for sports halls in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Cambridge City

South Cambs

Cambs County

ENGLAND

Population 122,418 156,935 642,899 54,472,081

Visits demanded –visits per week in the peak period

6,182 6,983 29,230 2,483,519

Equivalent in courts – with comfort factor included

38.16 43.11 180.44 15,330.36

% of population without access to a car

32.2 10.5 16.4 24.9

Cambridge’s total population, based on its demographic breakdown creates demand for 6,182 visits per week in the peak period (VPWPP). This equates to a need for 38.16 courts to meet this demand. South Cambridgeshire’s total population, based on its demographic breakdown creates a demand for 6,983 VPWPP. This equates to a need for 43.11 courts to meet this demand. These figures suggest that there is demand for more sports hall space in South Cambridgeshire



Summary of demand

Sports participation in general is higher in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire than both regionally and nationally. There is demand of over 12 thousand people wanting to play sports hall sports in the study area, the most popular sport is badminton. The predicted population growth in specific age bands will not have a huge effect specifically on sports hall sports. Consultation suggests that securing sports hall time is difficult and for some, cost is a prohibitive factor. A number of sports have the potential to grow, should the space be available to allow this. 8.3 Supply and demand analysis

Initially the analysis from the FPM will be studied. It is important to recognise the constraints that the FPM works with. This can affect the sports halls which will be included in the analysis and therefore local context, consultation and other factors should be taken into consideration alongside the FPM findings. The following parameters are used, based on the information taken from Active Places Power: The number of badminton courts in a sports hall is calculated by the dimensions of

the hall and not actual courts marked. A sports hall will only be included if dimensions indicate it can accommodate three

badminton courts or more. (459m2 or larger), making it a main sports hall. A sports hall will not be included in the FPM if no public access is indicated. A smaller hall (activity hall) will be included if on the same site as a main sports hall

that meets the above criteria. The model only assessed peak period demand. A sports hall is deemed at capacity when 80% full. The following is taken directly from the FPM analysis from the Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire reports: Table 8.11: Supply and demand balance in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Cambridge

City South Cambs

Cambs County

England

Supply – Sports hall provision (courts) scaled to take account of hours available for community use

62.96 42.89 201.16 16,317.16

Demand - Sports hall provision (courts) taking into account a ‘comfort’ factor

38.16 43.11 180.44 15,330.36

Supply / Demand balance 24.80 -0.22 20.72 986.80

Currently the population of Cambridge creates a demand for 38.16 courts in the peak period. The current supply in the same period equates to 62.96, resulting in a significant oversupply of 24.8 courts across the whole City.



What does need to be considered here is that Cambridge will have large numbers of non-residents who will undertake their sporting activity in the City. Some of this will relate to those who work in the City and remain in the City to enjoy their leisure time, an element will be imported activity from neighbouring authorities due to the fact that the halls are the most appropriate for those users. There will also be significant additional demand created by the student population. So even though the levels of oversupply seem exceptional at this stage it is likely that this level of supply is closer to what is needed to meet the role that Cambridge plays in the provision of sports hall access. The population of South Cambridgeshire creates a demand for 42.89 courts in the peak period, while the current supply in the same period equates to 43.11, providing a very low over supply of just 0.22 across the whole district. Table 8.12: Demand from Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire residents currently being met by supply

Cambridge City

South Cambs

Cambs County

England

Total number of visits which are met

5,786 6,469 26,472 2,263,744

% of total demand satisfied 93.6 92.6 90.6 91.2

% of demand satisfied who travelled by car

66.2 92.6 85.7 77

% of demand satisfied who travelled by foot

22.6 4.8 9.6 15.4

% of demand satisfied who travelled by public transport

11.3 2.5 4.7 7.6

Demand Retained 5,191 3,489 24,836 2,262,834

Demand Retained -as a % of Satisfied Demand

89.7 53.9 93.8 100

Demand Exported 596 2,981 1,635 910

Demand Exported -as a % of Satisfied Demand

10.3 46.1 6.2 0.00

It can be seen that Cambridge sports halls play a major role in meeting the needs of those users who do not actually reside in Cambridge. In fact 2,323 VPWPP are imported meaning Cambridge is a net importer of 1,728 VPWPP, which equates to 10.66 courts – this is 43% of the recorded oversupply of 24.8 courts. In South Cambridgeshire, of the 6,469 VPWPP just 3,489 are retained within facilities in the local authority. This equates to 53.9% of the total sports hall participation by South Cambridgeshire residents taking place in South Cambridgeshire based facilities. This figure is very low in comparison to all comparator authorities and indicates the reliance of neighbouring authorities (predominantly Cambridge City’s sports halls) for South Cambridgeshire resident’s participation.



8.4 Summary There are 21 main sports halls in the study area, including two eight court halls. There is a good spread between the two authority areas. The quality of the facilities is mixed and just one is for Registered Membership Use, the others are all available for community use, though some operate within educational settings so limitations on availability. 91.4%of the Cambridge City population is within a 20 minute walk time of a sports hall. 99.4% of South Cambridgeshire residents are within a 20 minute drive catchment of a main sports hall. Data suggests that Cambridge City has a much higher supply of sports hall space than South Cambridgeshire, county wide and nationally per head. Sports participation generally is higher in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire than both regionally and nationally. There is demand of over 12 thousand people wanting to play sports hall sports in the study area, the most popular sport is badminton. The predicted population growth in specific age bands will not have a huge effect specifically on sports hall sports. Consultation suggests that securing sports hall time is difficult and for some, cost is a prohibitive factor. A number of sports have the potential to grow, should the space be available to allow this. The opening of the University of Cambridge’s sports hall has not seen a noticeable difference to sports hall availability for community clubs; due to demand by University clubs and teams. Badminton and Basketball struggle to find suitable facilities; however, netball and volleyball do not report any major issues with their clubs securing sports hall space. The key challenge across both authorities is the level of demand for sports halls in the City as a result of limited supply in the District. This in turn puts pressure on the City’s infrastructure, where all sports halls are used for more than 30 hours per week. It would appear that there will be three new sports halls developed at three new secondary schools in the City. These facilities should address some of the challenges for clubs (especially Badminton and Basketball) accessing sports halls.



PART 9: HEALTH AND FITNESS

Health & fitness facilities are normally defined by a minimum of 20 stations. A station is a piece of static fitness equipment and a larger health and fitness centre with more stations will offer a more attractive offer to both members and casual users. Fitness suites can provide a valuable way for people of all ages, ethnicities and abilities to introduce physical exercise into their daily lives with the obvious benefits in health, fitness and wellbeing. 9.1 Supply Quantity and quality Across the Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire study area there are a total of 35 recorded health and fitness suites. The study area has a reasonable supply of health and fitness facilities with some of the main commercial operators located within the area: David Lloyd, DW Fitness, and Nuffield. LA Fitness has very recently closed. The commercial sector is complemented with a strong public sector offer at Parkside Pools, Kelsey Kerridge, Abbey Leisure Complex and Cambourne Fitness and Sports Centre as well as both Universities. The breakdown in health and fitness facilities by size is detailed below: Table 9.1: Breakdown of health and fitness suite size

No stations in health and fitness suite

Number of health and fitness suites

Total no of stations

0-19 4 50

20-29 14 325

30-49 7 252

50-99 5 321

100+ 5 607

TOTAL 35 1,555

However, given that demographics of the area we would have anticipated a higher level of competition for the health and fitness market in the area. This is potentially due to the high cost of land within the area as many of the commercial operators tend to locate on brownfield sites along arterial routes in order to attract the ‘travel home’ market. The location of health and fitness facilities is outlined in Figure 1. This clearly demonstrates that the three key commercial health and fitness providers (i.e. Nuffield, David Lloyd and DW Sports Fitness) are located in the east of Cambridge city centre with smaller scale provision to the south and west. All of the South Cambridgeshire fitness provision is made up of smaller scale facilities with the exception of the Barn Health and Leisure and Cambourne Fitness and Sports Centre. South Cambridgeshire has 17 facilities with 556 fitness stations, whereas Cambridge City has 18 facilities with 999 stations. As with other provision this reflects the nature of residents travelling to the City to access their fitness facilities.



In general the larger health and fitness facilities are of a good quality. Recent investment by GLL at the Parkside Pools and Abbey Leisure Complex has seen a significant improvement in quality in a bid to generate income and minimise the operational cost of the service to the Council. The main commercial fitness facilities are all of a good quality and offer an extensive range of classes as well as fitness suite facilities. The key facility that stands out as potentially needing additional investment to improve the quality of the fitness offer is at Kelsey Kerridge SC. This stands out as it shares an entrance and car park with Parkside Pools which now has excellent facilities alongside high quality fitness changing, which helps differentiate it from Kelsey Kerridge SC. Figure 9.1: Health and fitness facilities – 20+ stations

Table 9.2: Health and fitness facilities – all facilities

Map Ref Site Name Stations Area

1 Abbey Leisure Complex 52 Cambridge

2 Blue Fitness 24 Cambridge

3 Nuffield Health & Fitness 128 Cambridge

4 Cass Centre 20 Cambridge

5 Castle School 6 Cambridge

6 Chesterton Sports Centre 38 Cambridge

7 David Lloyd Club (Cambridge) 130 Cambridge



Map Ref Site Name Stations Area

8 DW Sports Fitness (Cambridge) 140 Cambridge

9 Frank Lee Centre 54 Cambridge

10 Hills Road Sports & Tennis Centre 23 Cambridge

11 Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre 100 Cambridge

12 Cambridge University Sports Centre 109 Cambridge

13 Livingwell Health Club (Cambridge) 25 Cambridge

14 Parkside Pools 70 Cambridge

15 The Glassworks Health Club 32 Cambridge

16 The Leys Sports Complex 12 Cambridge

17 The Perse School 16 Cambridge

18 YMCA (Cambridge & Peterborough) 20 Cambridge

19 Bourn Health & Fitness Club 28 South Cambridgeshire

20 Cambourne Fitness And Sports Centre 70 South Cambridgeshire

21 Cambridge Regional College Sports 23 South Cambridgeshire

22 Comberton Leisure Centre 22 South Cambridgeshire

23 Cottenham & District Sports Centre 22 South Cambridgeshire

24 Gamlingay Village College & The Fitness 22 South Cambridgeshire

25 Imagine Health and Spa (Cambridge) 24 South Cambridgeshire

26 Impington Sports Centre 47 South Cambridgeshire

27 Linton Community Sports Centre 32 South Cambridgeshire

28 Melbourn Sports Centre 32 South Cambridgeshire

29 Sawston Village College Sports Centre 38 South Cambridgeshire

30 Spirit Health Club (Cambridge) 26 South Cambridgeshire

31 Swavesey Village College Sports Centre 16 South Cambridgeshire

32 The Barn Health & Leisure 75 South Cambridgeshire

33 The Cambridge Belfry 21 South Cambridgeshire

34 The Trinity Centre Health Club 33 South Cambridgeshire

35 Waves Health & Leisure Club 25 South Cambridgeshire

9.2 Demand To identify the adequacy of the quantity of provision a demand calculation based on an assumption that ‘UK penetration rates’ will increase slightly in the future is applied. In addition, population increases are factored in to enable a calculation of whether current supply will meet future demand.



Table 9.3: UK Penetration rates for health and fitness suites in Cambs and South Cambs

Current (2012)

Future (2024)

Future (2037)

Adult population 276,223 301,743 325,853

UK penetration rate 12% 13% 14%

Number of potential members 33,147 39,227 45,619

Number of visits per week (1.75/member) 58,007 68,647 79,834

% of visits in peak time 65% 65% 65%

No. of visits in peak time (equivalent to no. of stations required i.e. no. of visits/39 weeks*65%)

967 1,144 1,331

However, as identified within the demographic analysis and market segmentation profile for both local authority areas there is a high proportion of the population that participate or want to participate in health and fitness activities. Additionally, consultation with local employers (e.g. Astra Zeneca) has indicated that it perceives that family focused sport and physical activity facilities are lacking in the area and that this is a key area where the company is looking to search out opportunities for employees moving into the area. In light of the above it is reasonable to assume that the local penetration rate for health and fitness is higher than the national rate. By increasing the rate by 1% the following impact is seen:

Current (2012)

Future (2024)

Future (2037)

Adult population 276,223 301,743 325,853

UK penetration rate 13% 14% 15%

Number of potential members 35,909 42,244 48,878

Number of visits per week (1.75/member) 62,841 73,927 85,536

% of visits in peak time 65% 65% 65%

No. of visits in peak time (equivalent to no. of stations required i.e. no. of visits/39 weeks*65%)

1,047 1,232 1,426

The study area currently has 1,555 fitness stations. Although this is higher than the potential demand based on local penetration rates it does not account for the additional stations required to provide a comfort factor during peak times. This can be as much as 40% of the number of stations to allow easy access to machines during peak times. However, the key challenge for the area is the comparatively low number of large scale facilities. In reality the larger scale facilities attract a higher ratio of fitness members to pieces of equipment than the smaller facilities. This is on the basis that they have a larger range of facilities, with enough equipment to ensure that users are not waiting to access specific types of equipment during their visit. Furthermore, they predominantly have studio provision which is key in attracting female members.



Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the smaller facilities will not be as attractive as the larger facilities and will not attract as many members. Additionally, the larger facilities are located in the east of the city except the University fitness facility. Therefore, there are potential gaps in provision, especially aligned to the new housing developments, such as in the southern fringe. Summary The provision of health and fitness facilities within public sector leisure facilities is a key driver for reducing the overall cost of the facility. This is clearly demonstrated in the fitness suite developments at Abbey Leisure Complex, Parkside Pools and Cambourne Fitness and Sports Centre. In truth Cambridge does not appear to have as many of the main commercial health and fitness operators as one would expect, given the demographic profile of the area. This is potentially due to the lack of availability and cost of land in the area; commercial health and fitness operators have generally located their facilities on brownfield sites on arterial routes to and from town centres. Although there appears to be sufficient health and fitness provision in the area, the larger facilities are located towards the east of the city centre, leaving a potential gap in provision towards the south west. Cambridge does not potentially have the number and range of health and fitness facilities one would expect. Therefore, potential exists to develop new facilities, especially aligned to new housing developments within the area. Added to this, some of the key employers in the area have also indicated that there is a lack of facilities in the local area. Within a sports facility mix, health and fitness is the primary income generator which cross subsidises other activity areas; therefore given the lack of commercial sector breadth and potential demand in the area it is anticipated that health and fitness would be a platform on which a potential sports village could be developed.



PART 10: GYMNASTICS

British Gymnastics is the National Governing Body (NGB) for gymnastics in the UK and administers gymnastics on both a national and regional level. British Gymnastics indicates that there is a trend appearing whereby bigger clubs are moving from sports halls/gym halls that can accommodate gymnastics (along with other sports and activities), to facilities that act as dedicated gymnastics facilities (e.g. industrial units). It is recognised that clubs and other gymnastics operators can offer a range of programmes in a range of facilities, not just dedicated gymnastics facilities. The type of non-permanent gymnastics facilities include:

leisure / sports centres community / village hall schools / nurseries private fitness / sports clubs health centres The sport of gymnastics includes the disciplines of Women’s Artistic Gymnastics (WAG), Men’s Artistic Gymnastics (MAG), Rhythmic Gymnastics (RG), Trampoline Gymnastics (TRA), Double Mini Tramp (DMT), Acrobatic Gymnastics (ACRO), Tumbling (TUM), Aerobic Gymnastics (AERO), General Gymnastics (GG), TeamGym (TG) and Gymnastics and Movement for People with Disabilities (GMPD). There are also activities such as Cheerleading and Freestyle Gymnastics that have been incorporated into the gymnastics family. Each gymnastics discipline has its own facility requirements. The scope of current facility provision is vast, ranging from foundation level activities taking place in nurseries and crèches; local development level facilities of 400-500m2; facilities of regional and national significance of 800-1000 m2 and operations affording access to regional, national and international specification facilities of 1100-1800m2.

9.1 Supply

There are nine main gymnastics clubs in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. All make use of sports halls and multipurpose rooms in schools and sports centres. There are no dedicated gymnastics or trampolining facilities in the area. Potential facility developments

There has been discussions with the school at Netherhall Community Sports Centre regarding the development of a dedicated gymnastics facility on site, however this is currently an aspiration. The Manor Community College Sports Centre was built in 2006. It is on the site of Manor Community College, renamed as North Cambridge Academy in September 2013. As part of the Priority Schools Building Programme the school is due to be knocked down imminently and rebuilt. The Sports Centre will not be demolished; however there is an



opportunity for the redevelopment of an old building on site (The Brickworks) into a dedicated gymnastics facility for the ever expanding club on site. This project does not have funding secured and is currently an aspiration. 9.2 Demand

Junior demand

Almost all the community clubs in the study area are limited by the current stock of facilities available. The majority have expressed a desire and a need to expand, to satisfy existing waiting lists. This is summarised below. Table 9.1: requirements of gymnastics clubs in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Cambourne Comets Trampoline Club

This is a relatively new club based at Cambourne Sports Centre. Established in 2012, the Club has developed quickly and has already rapidly expanded sessions. It is currently searching for additional venues to expand, there are very few suitable with suitable height and storage. The Club is keen to develop additional sessions, including freestyle gymnastics, should a facility become available.

Cambridge Aspire Trampoline Club

The Club is based at Comberton Village College, hiring facilities in the sports centre. There is limited equipment due to lack of storage. The Club has been looking for another more appropriate venue, however the height and storage facilities, plus access at a convenient time are an issue.

Cambridge Gymnastics Academy

The Academy is a club formed in 2012 and based at the Manor Community College Sports Centre. The Club train every evening, plus Saturdays. There are competitions or additional training sessions should facilities be available on Sundays. The membership is limited by facility time available.

The School and Club are currently developing the necessary plans and applications for permission to transform the onsite Brickworks building into a dedicated gymnastics facility. An Inspired Facilities bid will be submitted. This is a priority development for British Gymnastics East.

Cambridge Cangaroos Trampoline Club

The Cangaroos are based at a number of school sites across the study area. The Club continues to expand but cannot find any suitable sites for satellite clubs; it is currently looking for a dedicated facility to develop.

Cambridge Gymnastics and Trampolining Club

This Club use various facilities across the area, primarily school facilities. The Club has a waiting list and could accommodate more members should facilities be available.



Cambridge University Gymnastics Club

This University based club is a smaller club, based at the University’s Sports Centre, and exists primarily for the students. The Club also travel to Marriott’s Gym in Stevenage once a week, to access a purpose built venue

Cambridge University Trampoline Club

This is a well-equipped large trampoline club based at the University of Cambridge, primarily, but not limited to students.

High Flyers Gymnastics Club

Starting in January 2013, this club has developed quickly. Sessions have expanded to three times per week and the club is now limited by available facilities. The Club has a waiting list and cannot find suitable facilities to accommodate demand.

Netherhall Gymnastics Club

The Club is based at Netherhall School and has approx. 100 members. The Club has been expanding the number of sessions and would like to develop further, although it cannot find a suitable venue. The school has discussed a potential dedicated facility on site for gymnastics.

National governing body The British Gymnastics Facility Strategy 2013-2017 identifies that gymnastics clubs in the UK cannot currently cope with the demand to participate in gymnastics. According to recent survey (British Gymnastics, 2010) gymnastics clubs have an average waiting list of 35 people. 87% of the clubs who took part in the research said they found it difficult to increase capacity. Clubs highlighted lack of available space as the main reason for being unable to increase capacity. The vast majority of clubs wanting an increase in participation, wanted to do so at a recreation level. An audit of clubs and coaches revealed the variety of venues where gymnastics coaching takes place. Respondents indicated that the most used venues for gymnastics coaching are leisure centres (32.9%), schools (21.4%) and dedicated gymnastics centres (26.2%). Dedicated gym centres hosted considerably more activity in the following disciplines: preschool, team gym, women's and men's artistic, sports acrobatics, aerobic gymnastics and tumbling. Dedicated facilities allow a club to grow the variety of disciplines they can offer. Having a facility throughout the day allows a club to diversify e.g. offering pre-school activity during mornings and afternoons, and having the capacity to deliver ‘less’ well-resourced disciplines such as team gym, rhythmic and aerobics. In general, having access to a facility throughout the day enables more activity to take place. A facility such as this in the Cambridge City/South Cambridgeshire area would increase the capacity for gymnastics provision hugely, bringing a wider range of gymnastics activity to a larger potential audience.



Challenges Unlike many other parts of the country Cambridge does not appear to have had the range of opportunities for gymnastics clubs to develop bespoke gymnastics centres in unused industrial units or warehouses. This has been the trend in other parts of the country where the local economy has seen more space become available. Therefore, any solution for the Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire area needs to be considered outside of these parameters. A potential challenge in the area is that there appears to be a relatively large number of smaller clubs. If dedicated provision is developed in the area there may need to be some re-alignment of the club infrastructure in order to ensure that a co-ordinated and cohesive gymnastics offer is developed. 9.3 Summary There are nine gymnastics clubs in the area, who all currently hire or rent facilities from local providers. Almost all clubs express a desire to expand the number of sessions but cannot secure additional time at suitable facilities. The demand for gymnastics in the area is high and there is a lot of unmet demand, particularly in the junior clubs, who have long waiting lists. There are two clubs in the area with aspirations to develop a dedicated gymnastics facility; however neither project has yet secured funding. The national governing body identify the potential for additional activity with dedicated facilities. There appears to be a large unmet demand for gymnastics across the study area. This is a trend echoed nationally. A dedicated gymnastics facility could provide an outlet for a large number of new participants to engage in either gymnastics or trampolining and help to address the waiting lists found in many clubs.



PART 11: INDOOR BOWLS

Indoor bowls requires a standard bowling green, which is a flat area 34-40 m long. It is divided into a number of playing areas called rinks. The number of these varies, depending on the width on the green. An indoor bowling centre typically comprises a single green with a number of rinks, and ancillary accommodation such as changing rooms, lounge/bar, viewing area, kitchen, office/meeting rooms and stores. In addition it will usually have designated car parking spaces. The size of the ancillary accommodation will normally vary depending on the number of rinks. Many indoor bowling centres were built or converted in the 1980s and 1990s, with comparatively few built before 1970. The majority are purpose-built, particularly the more modern ones, with the remainder usually found on industrial estates in converted units. 10.1 Supply

A successful indoor bowls centre requires a combination of the right location, design, and financial and general management. The following Sport England1 guidelines on catchment for indoor bowls centres must be interpreted in the light of local circumstances: Assume the majority of users will live locally and not travel more than 20 minutes. Assume 90% of users will travel by car, with the remainder by foot. As a guide, demand is calculated as one rink per 14,000-17,000 of total population. A six-rink green, therefore, is required for a population of 85,000-100,000. This will

be dependent upon the population profile of the area. The number of rinks required can be related to the estimated number of members,

assume 80-100 members per rink. Quantity

There are two indoor bowling facilities located within Cambridge City. The facilities are home to Cambridge & County Indoor Bowls Club and Cambridge Chesterton Indoor Bowls Club, both of which are affiliated to the Cambridgeshire Indoor Bowling Association. In addition, however, there are a further eight indoor bowling facilities located within the County. Such facilities are used by eight clubs, all of which are also affiliated to the Cambridgeshire Indoor Bowling Association. The location of all facilities is shown in Figure 10.1 below.

1 Sport England Design Guidance Note Indoor Bowls 2005



Figure 10.1: Indoor bowls facilities in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

As indicated in Table 10.1, there are two bowls facilities (equating to ten rinks), namely Cambridge & County Indoor Bowls Club and Cambridge Chesterton Indoor Bowls Club, located in Cambridge City. Although there are a further eight indoor bowls facilities within the County, there is no indoor bowls provision within South Cambridgeshire. Table 10.1: Indoor bowls facilities in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Map ID

Site Name Number of Rinks Local Authority

1 Cambridge & County IBC 2 Cambridge

2 Cambridge Chesterton IBC 8 Cambridge

3 City of Ely IBC 6 East Cambridgeshire

4 Huntington IBC 6 Huntingdonshire

5 March IBC 4 Fenland

6 Peterborough & District IBC 9 Peterborough

7 Ross Peers IBC 4 East Cambridgeshire



Map ID

Site Name Number of Rinks Local Authority

8 St Neots & District IBC 8 Huntingdonshire

9 Whittlesey Indoor Bowls Complex 5 Fenland

10 Wisbech IBC 4 Fenland

Both Cambridge clubs lease their respective facilities. Although both facilities are said to be in good working order, there is a potential tenant issue for Cambridge & County Indoor Bowls Club as it is unclear as to whether the facility will be retained by the University/College in the future. The biggest issue for clubs is costs. Rent for their respective facilities is said to be increasing but many clubs struggle to generate income given the decreasing membership. Accessibility

A 20 minute drive time has been adopted to analyse the adequacy of coverage of indoor bowls provision across the study area. This helps to identify areas currently not serviced by existing facilities. Figure 10.2 shows the current stock of indoor bowls centres across the County with a 20 minute drive time catchment. It illustrates that only a small proportion of residents located in the southern part of South Cambridgeshire are outside a 20 minute drive of an indoor bowls centre. As there are two indoor bowls facilities located within Cambridge City, it is perhaps unsurprising that all residents within Cambridge City are within a 20 minute drive of indoor bowls provision. The maps also indicates that a large proportion of the County, including East Cambridgeshire, Fenland, Huntingdonshire and the City of Peterborough, are within a 20 minute drive of indoor bowls provision.



Figure 10.2: Indoor bowls facilities and standard catchment of a 20 minute drive

10.2 Demand

Current demand

The adult (14+) participation rate in sport, of at least once a week, in Cambridge is 42.9% and in South Cambridgeshire is 40.6%. (Active People Survey 7- 2012/13). These are both greater than the regional participation rate of 36.1% and national rate of 36.7% respectively. Local sports participation

Cambridgeshire Indoor Bowling Association currently has ten affiliated clubs (although eight are located outside of Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire). It appears that all clubs have witnessed a decline in membership numbers in recent years, some more so than others. As such, many clubs are struggling to retain a healthy membership and a number of clubs have been forced to close due to insufficient membership. The key issue for all clubs, therefore, is recruitment and retention of members.



On average, each club has approximately 400 members. As an example, Peterborough and District Indoor Bowls Club currently has 450 members but it has previously had in the region of 900 members. Due to declining membership, the majority of clubs are said to have rinks that are not used. It is believed, therefore, that there is currently an oversupply of indoor bowls rinks across the County and clubs would be able to accommodate any increases in membership within existing provision. Local latent demand

The figures below are taken from the Sport England Segmentation tool to enable the identification of ‘the percentage of adults that would like to participate in bowls but are not currently doing so’. There is a latent demand of 163 people wanting to play bowls in Cambridge City. 17.8% of the population that would like to participate in bowls is the segment ‘retirement home singles’. In addition, however, the segments ‘ twilight year gents’ (17.2%), ‘early retirement couples’ (14.7%) and ‘comfortable retired couples’ (13.5%) would also like to participate in bowls. In South Cambridgeshire the latent demand is 241 people. 27.4% of the population that would like to participate in bowls is the segment ‘comfortable retired couples’. In addition, however, the segments ‘early retirement couples’ (19.9%), ‘twilight year gents’ (13.3%) and ‘retirement home singles’ (12.9%) would also like to participate in bowls. Sport England guidance

Sport England guidance suggests one indoor bowls rink per 14,000-17,000 of total population. The table below outlines the number of rinks required to meet demand from the Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire population. Table 10.2: Current and future demand for bowls rinks in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Population No. of bowls rinks required

Current (2012) 276,223 17*

Future (2024) 301,743 18*

Future (2037) 325,853 20*

*Population divided by 17,000 and rounded up to nearest full number of rinks Table 10.2 suggests that 17 indoor bowls rinks are required to meet current demand (2012) in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. This increases to 18 rinks and 20 rinks in 2024 and 2037 respectively based upon future population projections. There are currently only ten indoor bowls rinks in existence across Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire (two rinks at Cambridge & County Indoor Bowls Club and eight rinks at Cambridge Chesterton Indoor Bowls Clubs), suggesting a current deficit of seven indoor bowls rinks.



Health

It is recognised that indoor bowls is a six month operation (during the winter months) and many facilities have found it difficult to sustain income throughout the remaining six months of the year. That said it is also true that indoor bowls provides older people with the ability to participate in bowls throughout the whole year and, as such, the governing bodies are emphasising the wider health and well-being benefits to older people that can be attributed to the sport. The HM Government’s 2010 Strategy for Public Health in England, Healthy Lives, Healthy People, states that all western countries are experiencing rapidly ageing populations. This is a major challenge for health and care systems typically geared to treating short-term sickness, not preventing and managing long-term mental and physical conditions in later life. As individuals grow older, key moments such as retirement or bereavement can be a catalyst to decline.2 This information, combined with the knowledge regarding the aging population demonstrates how important it is to provide the facilities to support appropriate activity for the older age group to participate, for health, social and mental development and well-being. National Governing Body

The national organisations involved directly and primarily for the development of bowls include: British Crown Green Bowling Association (BCGBA) English Short Mat Bowling Association (ESMBA) English Indoor Bowling Association Ltd (formerly EIBA and EWIBA) Bowls England (BE) All the NGBs wish to develop grassroots opportunities and increase participation over the coming years. The main aims are to develop bowls and increase participation in the sport, in all its forms, across the country through joint recruitment and retention projects designed for over 65’s. The English Indoor Bowls Association (EIBA) is the NGB for indoor bowls. Its stated objectives are: A growth in participation across the adult population in local communities. Targeted work to increase female participation. A growth in participation in the 14-25 age range, plus working with primary schools

(Year 3 & 4 – age 7 to 9). The provision of an excellent sporting experience for new and existing participants. A growth in indoor bowls participation by people who have disabilities.

2 3.57 Healthy Lives, Healthy People



Club consultation

The majority of clubs play throughout the year and, therefore, do not have a summer break The NGB is not in a position to be able to support any club financially so any

investment is likely to come from other sources such as Sport England’s Inspired Facilities fund.

Many clubs are thought to be preparing to apply for funding to enable refurbishment of facilities. The City of Ely Indoor Bowls Club has recently received approximately £50,000 funding to replace the roof and lighting.

Peterborough and District Indoor Bowls Club are seeking funding as it suggests that a new carpet will be required within the next 12-24 months at an estimated cost of £45,000.

Trumpington Bowling Club is seeking funding to build an indoor bowls hall at its current site within the next 12 months.

Although calculations based on Sport England guidance suggest a current deficit of seven indoor bowls rinks within Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire, discussions with Cambridgeshire Indoor Bowls Associations suggests that a development such as the one proposed at Trumpington Bowling Club is not necessary. Indeed, it is suggested that although both clubs within Cambridge City are in a reasonable shape currently, the biggest issues that clubs have is not facilities, but the recruitment and retention of members. As such, a new facility located in Trumpington, or South Cambridgeshire more generally, would only result in existing members of both clubs migrating to Trumpington. Any new development would, therefore, exacerbate the struggles of both Cambridge & County and Cambridge Chesterton indoor bowling clubs with regard to membership recruitment and retention. Equally, the same is likely to apply to other clubs within the County should any new developments arise. Future demand

As discussed previously, the population is predicted to increase by 2037, providing the following differences in age profile of the population: +4,762 (+9.6%) more 0-15 year olds; and -2,386 (-5.7%) fewer 25-34 year olds; and +6,216 (+21.6%) more 55-64 year olds; and +11,294 (+25.6%) more people aged 65+. The age group with the biggest increase is the 55-64 year olds and the 65+ age group. Bowls is a particularly popular sport amongst older age groups. According to Sport England’s Market Segmentation data, the segments ‘twilight year gents’ and ‘retirement home singles’ are most likely to participate in bowls. These segments account for 8.33% of the population in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. The following maps show the percentage of population that are either ‘twilight year gents’ and ‘retirement home singles’, and therefore have a higher propensity to participate in bowls.



Figure 10.3: Percentage of the population from ‘twilight year gents’ and ‘retirement home singles’ segments in Cambridge

© Crown copyright and database rights 2011 Ordanance Survey All rights reserved Sport England 100033111

There are areas of Cambridge City where 10.1-20% of the population is made up of

segments most likely to participate in bowls. The green area ( ) highlights 10.1-20% of the population is a ‘twilight year gents’ or ‘retirement home singles’ profile.



Figure 10.4: Percentage of the population from ‘twilight year gents’ and ‘retirement home singles’ segments in South Cambridgeshire

© Crown copyright and database rights 2011 Ordanance Survey All rights reserved Sport England 100033111

There are areas of South Cambridgeshire where 10.1-20% of the population consist of ‘twilight year gents’ or ‘retirement home singles’ profiles, these are highlighted in green

( ). The turquoise area ( )shows 5.1-10% of the population made up of these profiles.



10.3 Summary

Bowls is a particularly popular sport amongst older age groups. EIBA is targeting increasing participation in younger people (14-25), women and girls

and people with disabilities as part of its Whole Sport Plan strategy. The projected population growth (up to 2037) of 65+ is expected to outstrip other age

group growth in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. This age group is projected to increase from 15.0% of the population to 22.7% by 2037.

The wider health and well-being benefits of indoor bowls facilities to the older generations should not be missed as the financial benefits of extended independent living are significant.

There are two indoor bowling facilities (equating to ten rinks) located within Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. The facilities are home to Cambridge & County Indoor Bowls Club and Cambridge Chesterton Indoor Bowls Club, both of which are affiliated to the Cambridgeshire Indoor Bowling Association.

Although there are a further eight indoor bowls facilities within the County, there is no indoor bowls provision within South Cambridgeshire.

Cambridgeshire Indoor Bowling Association currently has ten affiliated clubs (although eight are located outside of Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire).

The biggest issue for clubs is the recruitment and retention of members. Calculations based on Sport England guidance suggest that 17 indoor bowls rinks

are required to meet current demand (2012) in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. This increases to 18 rinks and 20 rinks in 2024 and 2037 respectively based upon future population projections. There are currently only ten indoor bowls rinks in the area, suggesting a current deficit of seven rinks.

Due to declining membership, the majority of clubs are said to have rinks that are not used. It is believed, therefore, that there is currently an oversupply of indoor bowls rinks in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire and clubs would be able to accommodate any increases in membership with existing provision.

Consultation suggests that Trumpington Bowling Club is seeking funding to build an indoor bowls hall at their current site within the next 12 months.



PART 12: INDOOR TENNIS

The Lawn Tennis Association (LTA) is the National Governing Body (NGB) for all tennis provision within the UK and administers the sport on both a national and a regional level. The LTA uses two terms to describe indoor building types: Traditional A permanent structure made of traditional materials using traditional construction techniques. This commonly takes the form of steel or timber portal frame spanning the full length of the court (including run backs) clad in a material to suit local conditions e.g. metal cladding, brickwork or timber boarding. Non traditional A permanent or non-permanent structure made of non-traditional materials using non-traditional construction techniques. Three types of structure fall into this category: Air supported structures (air halls) Framed fabric structures Tensile structures 11.1 Supply

There are two sites in the study area that provide indoor tennis courts among the facilities. These are both located in Cambridge City. Hills Road Sports and Tennis Centre

Four indoor acrylic courts Two outdoor acrylic courts Two macadam courts (floodlit) Two new outdoor 'Conipur' clay courts, opened in May 2014. David Lloyd Club Cambridge

8 indoor courts 5 outdoor courts, of which three are covered to covert to indoor in winter. Hills Road Sports and Tennis Club opened in September 1996 and is a members run club, operating on both a Pay and Play and a Sports Club/Community Association basis David Lloyd (Cambridge) opened in 2004 and is a commercial operator providing Registered Membership use options. There is no recorded refurbishment of either since they opened, however both are reported to be of either above average or good quality. There are 19 LTA High Performance Centres across the Country. There is one located at the Hills Road Sports and Tennis Centre. This also offers the opportunity for the player to continue with education, and works in partnership with Culford School in nearby Bury St Edmund’s. The school also has four indoor courts.



Figure 11.1: Indoor tennis facilities and standard catchment of a 20 minute drive

The figure above shows both indoor tennis facilities, plus those within a 20 minute drive time of Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire, regardless of ownership and access arrangements. It illustrates that the majority of residents are within the catchment of an indoor tennis facility. There is a potential development of new indoor courts at Cambridge University Sports Centre. The facility has planning permission and the courts would form Phase 2 of the development. The facility plans have been developed with Cambridge LTC. This would provide an additional 4 indoor courts in the study area. Table 11.1: Indoor tennis courts in Cambridge City, South Cambridgeshire and nearby

Map Ref Site Name

1 Hills Road Sports and Tennis Centre

2 David Lloyd (Cambridge)

3 Culford School

4 Newmarket Lawn Tennis Club



11.2 Demand


The adult (14+) participation rate in sport, of at least once a week, in Cambridge is 42.9% and in South Cambridgeshire is 40.6%. (Active People Survey 7- 2012/13). These are both greater than the regional participation rate of 36.1% and national rate of 36.7%, indicating that both authority areas, and Cambridge City residents in particular, are more active than regional and national counterparts. The LTA does not recognise Cambridgeshire as a priority area, however the process is ongoing to identify whether it will be a priority area in the future. The following clubs are highlighted as important to the locality. Hills Road Tennis Club also ruins the High Performance Centre, receiving players

from the local area to provide high quality coaching and competition. Cambridge LTC is one of the largest tennis clubs in the area with about 800

members, offering a full menu of opportunities to meet the needs of members. The club has 13 outdoor courts and acts as a feeder club for Hills Road High Performance Centre for the more talented players. Cambridge LTC is currently working with Cambridge University regarding the potential development of indoor court provision.

Cambridge University Tennis Club is based at Fenners Tennis Ground, which is owned by the University. There are three hard courts and six grass courts, all outdoors. Cocks and Hens Tennis Club have six grass and four hard courts and are still accepting new members.

Great Shelford Tennis Club is an LTA accredited club with four hard courts. The Club is still accepting new members.

David Lloyd Cambridge is a commercial operator hosting a tennis club. The club plays on both indoor and outdoor courts based at the facility. A potential reflection of the demand for tennis in the area is the decision by the club to provide a temporary cover for three courts in the winter months. This is unusual given that it already has eight indoor courts.

Local latent demand

In South Cambridgeshire there is a latent demand of 2,948 people wanting to play tennis. 17.2% of the population that would like to participate in tennis is the segment ‘settling down males’. Of the 2,948 people, 1,456 (49.4%) are females; the largest segment of which is ‘fitness class friends’. In Cambridge City the latent demand is 2,560 people. 11.9% of the population that would like to participate in tennis is the segment ‘sports team lads’. Of the 2,560 people, 1,304 (50.9%) are females; the largest segment of which is ‘fitness class friends’. A detailed description of these different segments can be found in Appendix G.



11.3 Summary

There are currently two sites with indoor courts in the study area (David Lloyd - Cambridge and Hills Road Sports and Tennis Centre). David Lloyd is a commercial operator and Hills Road STC is home to an LTA High Performance Centre, providing opportunities for talented local players. Hills Road works in partnership with Culford School in Bury St Edmund’s to offer scholarships for talented players, where there are four indoor courts. The planned Phase 2 of the development at Cambridge University’s sports centre will include four indoor and two outdoor tennis courts. Plans are that this will be developed in conjunction with Cambridge LTC and will provide the club with access to much needed indoor facilities. However, the funding for Phase 2 of the University’s development has not been secured at this stage. The LTA does not currently view Cambridge as a priority area for the development of additional indoor courts in the area. This is potentially due to the high performance facility at Hills Road. However, the LTA does have additional funds available for capital investment and is in the process of developing its investment strategy which will undoubtedly see the development of additional indoor tennis provision.



PART 13: COMBAT SPORTS

Fencing

There are a number of fencing clubs in the area including Anglia Ruskin University Fencing Club, Cambridge University Fencing Club, Cambridgeshire Fencing Club, Cambridge Cadets and Cambridge Sword Club (includes All for One junior fencers). Each club uses a mix of facilities across the area including: ARU use Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre and Cambridge University uses its own

facilities at the University. Cambridgeshire FC is a large club based at Netherhall School. The facility is

adequate for the Club, however there is a waiting list and the Club could utilise more hall space if it were available.

Cambridge Sword is also a large club using multiple sites for training including Comberton Village College, Netherhall School, and Perse Upper School.

Cambridge Cadets use Abbey Meadows Primary for its training. Consultation identified that Cambridgeshire Fencing Club is the key club with a waiting list and requirement for additional training facilities. The NGB identified that the sport is buoyant in the area, but that there are no critical issues facing the sport. In general it is of the opinion that clubs have sufficient access to facilities to meet their current needs. Boxing

In general, boxing clubs have developed as small businesses, operated by the head coach at the club. They tend to operate out of small community centres or industrial sites (e.g. arches) which are run down and in need of investment. More established and forward thinking clubs accommodate older participants who want to use boxing training as a method of keeping fit while others have developed a wider female user base by incorporating sessions such as boxercise. There are a number of boxing clubs in the area, operating out of a range of facilities as described above. Many clubs in surrounding areas have their own purpose built facilities; however this is not the case in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. Other clubs in the area use a range of facilities and appear to be catered for. As is the national picture, boxing clubs need investment to secure and refurbish facilities; however all continue to make do with what facilities they have available. Trumpington Boxing Club is in need of a new facility and home for the club. The club currently uses the Thomas A Becket Gym and Romsey Labour Club and does not appear currently to have a central home base. The Club and the NGB have been in discussion with Cambridge University to investigate the potential to develop a purpose built boxing facility within the sports centre developments. However, it does not appear that this will be accommodated within the current plans for the sports centre. Therefore, there is a potential need for this club to find a permanent home within any potential developments in the area.



Judo

Judo appears to be a buoyant sport within the area with a wide range of clubs. There is also the added dynamic that Anglia Ruskin University delivers a degree in Judo (European Judo Union Performance Coach Award Levels 4 and 5); although it should be noted that this is in partnership with the European Judo Union as opposed to the UK NGB Clubs offering judo activity in the area include: Chesterton Judo Club (Tora Judo Kwai) Cambridge Judo Club

Comberton Judo Club HappiDoJo Judo Club

Melbourn Judo Club

The venues used by the above clubs include Great Shelford Rugby Club, Chesterton Sports Centre, University of Cambridge Sports Centre and Comberton Village College. Clubs hire a combination of sports halls and activity rooms for training. All clubs hire sports halls or activity rooms at facilities, none of the clubs have access to or own their own dojo. Consultation with the NGB locally indicated that clubs have access to sufficient facility space to deliver their training programmes and coaching. However, clubs use temporary matting for their club sessions with some having difficulty storing and accessing the right matting. Even though ARU delivers a Degree in Judo it does not have a bespoke Dojo. The University uses Comberton Village College to deliver its practical sessions. It has been suggested that ARU is considering developing a bespoke Dojo at the University; however consultation did not identify this as a priority within its capital investment programme. Consultation with the NGB at a national level did identify that many combat sports are pooling their resources to determine the combined need for facilities. The NGB did identify that there may be an opportunity with Cambridge to consider the clustering of combat sports clubs to provide an opportunity for all sports to have increased access to improved facilities. This is on the basis that no new development will have sufficient demand from the individual sports to justify facility development. Other martial arts

There are a range of other martial arts organisations in the area. The nature of these disciplines is that they are often small businesses and not aligned to any specific NGB; therefore, there is no lead organisation with which to discuss the local strategic need. However it is clear that there is a healthy mix of clubs in the area: CARISMA – A kickboxing club, which uses a mix if facilities at North Cambridge

Academy, Kelsey Kerridge and ARU facilities. Cambridge Academy of Martial Arts – a mixed martial arts club which uses St Bede’s

School, Coleridge Community College and Netherhall School Pro Martial Arts Schools - A kickboxing club, which uses Chesterton Sports Centre.



Fujian White Crane Kung Fu – the club uses the dance studio facility at Homerton College.

Bujinkan Cambridge Dojo – a Bujinkan Budo Taijutsu club which uses Wolfson College, Meadow’s Community Centre, St. Augustine’s Church

Just Karate – the club uses facilities at Impington Sports Centre and Meadows Community Centre.

Cambridge Zanshin Black Belt Karate Academy - the club uses facilities at St Luke's School, Abbey Meadows School and Cherry Hinton Village Centre.

Axis Jiu Jitsu – use facilities at the Cambridge Combat and Fitness Centre It is clear from the above that many clubs are required to train at different venues across the area in order to achieve the number of training sessions they require. Clubs are required to negotiate with different providers and often need to work flexibly around the needs of that organisation and alter their sessions to accommodate activities such as events, parents evenings, seasonal bookings etc. Summary

If the demand for facilities for individual combat sports is assessed it identified the following: Fencing Some demand for additional facilities exists, but in general

club’s needs are accommodated

Boxing Demand for additional facilities has been identified by Trumpington Boxing Club. However the club currently uses two facilities across the area and may wish to retain a presence at these.

Judo In general clubs needs are accommodated across a number of sites although there may be an opportunity for ARU to require improved access to bespoke Judo facilities.

Other martial arts Wide range of clubs and organisations many of which use multiple venues to accommodate their needs. Growth in these clubs will require additional venues across different days of the week.

As a result of the above it is clear that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. As such there does not appear to be sufficient and sustainable demand for facilities by individual sports but the potential exists to consider a combined facility within the area. This would not only accommodate the mainstream combat sports but also the smaller martial arts organisations which are using a mix of schools and community centres to meet their needs.



PART 14: ATHLETICS

Athletics is unique in that it encompasses many different disciplines. This means that training provision for individual disciplines has often, by necessity, been developed in an innovative way, adapting whatever facilities exist to meet the needs of local athletes. Similarly, the needs of a whole club and the disciplines within it can often be difficult to fulfil without considerable compromise. This need to compromise has proven that training areas for athletes do not necessarily require a full 200m (indoor) or 400m (outdoor) track. Many events can be simulated indoors or outdoors for training purposes. Since the specialist use of athletics facilities may change over time, track operators need to be aware of the implications of multi-use. It may not always be possible to provide the large spaces required for full throwing fans. Whether indoors or on a restricted outdoor site, throwing walls and cages can enable athletes to learn, practise and improve technique in a safe enclosure. The most important aspects of the design of such areas are their structural stability and their ability to safely stop projectiles. The exact requirements for a specific site will relate to local needs and as such will be bespoke. All layouts must be designed to allow easy supervision with ample safety margins for each event. The training area will be used simultaneously by different groups for different activities, so it is essential that the facilities be designed with supervision and control in mind. Some track operators have chosen to place an artificial surface in the infield. This makes the athletics track a much more financially viable facility. However, it does eliminate the use of the infield for field events and creates programming issues between footballers and athletes if not managed appropriately. UK Athletics is seeking to develop an artificial surface that also accommodates field events, however this is not materialised yet.

13.1 Supply

Quantity

There is one athletics track within Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. The track is located at the Wilberforce Road Sports Ground (University of Cambridge).

Quality

Site assessments

Wilberforce Road Sports Ground has an eight lane 400m synthetic running track (10 lane 100m) with training floodlights. The track is in good condition and is equipped to host competition for junior to senior elite level. The clubhouse is also good quality and has changing provision including toilets and showers. There is also car parking facilities available.



UK Athletics (UKA) quality standard

UKA operates a quality standard which is categorised into different classes. Class A is the highest standard, however, this only relates to quality and does not necessarily reflect the specification of facilities at the site. Consultation with UK Athletics confirmed that the track at the Wilberforce Road Sports Ground has Class A track certification. The current track certification will expire on 31 October 2017. Refurbishment

Sport England’s Active Places Tool indicates that the track at the Wilberforce Road Sports Ground was built in 1994 and subsequently refurbished in 2003.

Developments

Although there are no planned developments identified in Cambridge City or South Cambridgeshire, consultation suggested that there is a proposed all weather athletics track (as part of a wider sports complex) in nearby Saffron Walden. Ownership and management

Athletics facilities can be categorised on the basis of ownership/management type definitions as stated by Sport England on Active Places Power. Wilberforce Road Sports Ground is owned by the University of Cambridge and, therefore, ownership/management type is defined as higher education institution.

Accessibility

This section considers the accessibility of facilities in relation to both the physical (i.e. built environment) and human (i.e. management of entry to facilities) elements. Physical

Catchment mapping based on a 20 minute drive time has been adopted to analyse the adequacy of coverage of athletics provision across Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. Figure 13.1 illustrates that a large proportion of Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire is within a 20 minute drive of Wilberforce Road Sports Ground. Nevertheless, there are areas on the outskirts of South Cambridgeshire that are outside of the 20 minute drive catchment. Although many of these areas are unpopulated, there are small populated areas to the West (Gamlingay) and East (Linton) of South Cambridgeshire that are in excess of a 20 minute drive from Wilberforce Sports Ground.



Figure 13.1: Athletics tracks with a 20 minute drive time catchment, over population density

Human

Wilberforce Road Sports Ground is the training and competitive base for the University Athletics Club and also the Cambridge and Coleridge Athletics Club for the residents of the area. The track welcomes bookings from University, school, club and private groups. Individuals may also use the facility via a track user card (£18 per month). Cambridge and Coleridge Athletics Club access the facility for training for eight hours per week during the summer and ten hours per week in the winter. The Club also host various competitions at the facility, particularly during the summer months. Although the Club is the preferred user of the facility and shares a good relationship with the University, it is suggested by the Club that there is limited additional time available to access the facility. That said, consultation with the University suggests that additional time could be created through a closer working relationship between the club and University club.



13.2 Demand

Current demand

Consultation with Cambridge and Coleridge Athletics Club indicated that the Club currently has approximately 1,000 members (52% male and 48% female). Of the 1,000 members, there are 850 competitive members, 400 of which are junior members. The Club is said to have grown rapidly in recent years with a 50% increase in membership since the London 2012 Olympic Games. Consultation with the Club suggests that, although there is currently no waiting list, the Club is at capacity and will be unable to accommodate additional growth based on the provision available at the University. As such, the Club suggests that it will require an additional facility to service any future growth, particularly given the projected population increase within Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. However, this needs to be put into perspective as the club trains for 10 hours per week with the University club training for approximately 4 hours. Furthermore, during the athletics season the University has fewer students attending courses, thus less demand; therefore during the peak season the Club is the primary user. 13.3: Summary

Wilberforce Road is the sole athletics track in the study area. It is an eight lane 400m synthetic running track (10 lane 100m) with training floodlights and is heavily used by both Cambridge and Coleridge Athletics Club and Cambridge University. The facility is host to a number of competitions and events throughout the year but especially in the summer months. The track was built in 1994 and subsequently refurbished in 2003. It is good quality and has Class A track certification which is valid until 31 October 2017. The track is heavily used and Cambridge and Coleridge Athletics Club is currently operating at capacity with approximately 1000 members, The Club has grown rapidly in recent years with a 50% increase in membership since the London 2012 Olympic Games. Consultation with the Club suggests that, although there is currently no waiting list, the Club is at capacity and will be unable to accommodate additional growth based on the provision available at the University. The Club suggests that it will require an additional facility to service any future growth, particularly given the projected population increase within Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire. The club asserts that there is limited additional time available to access the facility. Consultation with the University suggests that additional capacity within the track is available if there was a combined club and university approach to training. Furthermore, the club only appears to be considering accessing the track during the evenings, whereas within the sport of swimming competitive training is often undertaken early mornings. Consultation suggests that there is a proposed development to include a new athletics track in Saffron Walden (North Essex).



PART 15: OTHER SPORTS There are a number of other sports worth a mention in the development of this study. In many circumstances provision is planned or in place to address future needs; however this needs to be confirmed. Rowing The strategic need for the rowing facility has already been made within the Cambridge Sports Lakes Trust development. This is reinforced and supported by British Rowing but to date there are insufficient funds to develop this facility. It would appear that the facility will be reliant on a wide combination of funding sources such as Sport England, British Rowing, local authorities and commercial partners. However, no successful funding applications appear to have been submitted to date. Consultation with British Rowing identified widespread support for the facility, but with no guarantees of funding. The NGB reported that access to the river is difficult with the need to programme specific clubs and colleges at specific times of the day. The NGB reported that in total there can be as many as 1,500 users of the river per day from the wide range of clubs and organisations. In spite of this level of demand it is foreseen that there will be challenges in transferring some use from the river to the proposed lake. This is on the basis that many Colleges have invested in their own boat houses on the river and there is the perception that these will need to be either ‘relocated’ to the lake or replicated. This in turn puts added pressure on the Colleges to invest further in rowing.

Squash As part of its Phase 1 sports centre development Cambridge University has just (October 2014) opened its new squash centre. This is a new 5 court facility which will accommodate a wide range of development programmes for the University and community. This development is a partnership between the University, England Squash and the Cambridge Squash Club. As part of the development the NGB will have a squash development officer located within the new facility. Ice The University of Cambridge has been given over £1 million of funding by millionaire alumnus David Gattiker to develop an ice rink. The University has a number of students from America and Eastern Europe who play ice hockey and as such has three ice hockey teams who are required to train and play fixtures at Planet Ice in Peterborough. The teams play in the British Universities Ice Hockey Association League. In order to administer the funding the University has established a separate company – The Cambridge Leisure and Ice Centre – which is seeking to develop the facility. However, the company is facing a number of challenges including the funding package and land availability for the development. To date a number of options have been



considered which have resulted in a potential funding gap of up to £2 million; with the current fund available to the University standing at circa £1.5 million. The University PE department has resisted allocating part of its wider development site for the facility as it views the development of the tennis and 50m pool as a priority.



PART 16: THE CASE FOR CO-LOCATED SPORTS PROVISION Introduction In considering the best approach to providing sports facilities in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire it is important to assess the financial viability and longer term sustainability of each of the options. The following section considers some of the important factors for the sports facilities where there is identified need and opportunity for development and how these may need to be considered within a hub or dispersed model of provision. However, a key consideration for both councils, NGBs and stakeholders is the need to ensure that facilities are sustainable for the longer term. From our analysis of the priorities for sporting investment across the Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire study area, we have considered the case for co-location or dispersal across the following areas of provision as representing the top five priorities for strategic investment. Whilst rowing also featured as one of the top five areas of strategic need, we have excluded it here given its high cost of development and that a development site has already been separately identified and planning permission achieved. Sand dressed hockey AGP The need for both of these to be co-located is clear as it is a key requirement of the Cambridge City Hockey Club and will enable it to develop a home and to increase the number of teams it can accommodate. However there is no identified cross over with other sports that requires these pitches to be co-located with other facilities. The location will impact on the business model for each (i.e. trust managed as opposed to club managed). However, with the latter model there is a need to ensure that an appropriate sinking fund is developed for future pitch replacement. Therefore, if it is proposed that the club operates the pitches on its own it will need to provide circa £50k per annum towards a sinking fund to replace the carpets in circa 10 years time. There will also be a challenge as to how it achieves this level of surplus income from its wider management of the pitches as in most circumstances clubs would hire out pitches for football use in order to generate sufficient income levels. The option also exists to provide one additional hockey pitch at the University’s Wilberforce Road site; thus providing a double pitch site. The University has already secured planning permission for the development of a second pitch and has the infrastructure (i.e. parking, clubhouse, power supply, etc.) to support this. Given that Cambridge City Hockey Club already uses the University site for some of its fixtures and training this would be a natural addition to the wider community hockey infrastructure and provide the club with a home base. However, it is also recognised that this may not fully meet the club’s pitch requirements. 3G AGP The need for the indoor and outdoor football facilities (and 5-a-side pitches) to be co-located is clear. The use by CUFC and the community needs to be managed in a way that access to all facilities is programmed for the benefit of both. We would see that this needs to be programmed independently by the facility operator (e.g. trust). The income



from a commercial 5-a-side facility and community football club use of the 3G pitches provide the financial underpinning for the football facilities. That is, they pay for the cost of maintaining the grass pitches and ancillary facilities at the site. It should also be assumed that the use by CUFC contributes positively to the wider cost base of the facility (i.e. it is not fully subsidised by community use). Through the provision of an IRB compliant 3G pitch (with football markings) this has the ability to accommodate both community rugby and football training and fixtures, thus meeting a wider community need. There will be a need to ensure that circa £63k per annum towards a sinking fund to replace the 3G pitch carpets in circa 10 years time is identified. Therefore, the facility needs to operate at sufficiently high levels of use to ensure that enough surplus income is achieved to ensure that the longer term replacement of facilities can be achieved. Although there is a clear need for additional community 3G pitches across the study area this also conflicts with the core needs of Cambridge United. The club requires 3G provision (indoor and outdoor) for the delivery of its academy and foundation programmes. These will be intensively used for both football development squads and fixtures (at a similar time to the main community use). However, this will also be interspersed with school and community football club sessions and a range of FA initiative developments (e.g. football in the community, Just Play, Girls programmes, Mash up, etc.). Therefore, in order to achieve a Cambridge United and community solution (for this part of the study area) a hub site development is required rather than a dispersed approach. Cycling There is a strong case for co-location of any cycling facilities developed across the area. This is on the basis that it facilitates cross over between disciplines and drives the development of the sport in the area; therefore dispersing provision is not a sensible option. This is reinforced by British Cycling’s decision to cluster disciplines at sites; as an example the Manchester Cycle Centre, Middlesbrough Sports Village, Redbridge and Olympic Park. Where a strong cycling club is established it is not uncommon for the facility to be directly managed by the club and for it to work with the NGB and other cycling clubs throughout the county and region to facilitate use by other clubs. However, in many instances the development of cycling facilities has been supported by a combination of local authority and NGB revenue funding to support the operation of the facility and the development of the sport. As identified by British Cycling this would be the requirement for the BMX facility in Cambridge. Therefore, it is likely that new cycling facilities would require revenue funding to support the operating costs of the facility in the initial years of the development. Therefore, co-locating the facility with other surplus income generating facilities makes economic sense and provides a longer term sustainable solution to the provision of cycling facilities.



Combat sports Many combat sports facilities (e.g. judo, boxing, etc.) operate as small businesses and the lead coach is often the entrepreneur that makes his/her living through coaching the sport. There is a strong network of combat sports clubs in the area, some of which have identified the need for additional facilities. However, there does not appear to be the demand for a specialist facility which is purely a (e.g.) boxing or judo facility; but combined there is a need for a wider multi-combat sports facility. Therefore, this facility will require sensitive programming across a range of users as well as ‘in-fill’ programming (e.g. fitness activities) to maximise the use of the facility. As such it would be a high risk strategy to provide this as a stand-alone facility but it would complement a wider health and fitness offer at a larger facility. Health and fitness Alongside the 5-a-side facilities, health and fitness is the key income generator to cross subsidise the use of the other activity areas. This is especially true when considering the ongoing maintenance of facilities and the future replacement of pitch surfaces. Therefore, a high quality fitness offer is instrumental to the financial sustainability of the other facilities. Summary In summary, it is clear that the development of a cluster of sports facilities is the most financially sustainable option. In essence, the development of high income generating facilities cross subsidises those which potentially require greater sports development input to get them to a sustainable level. Furthermore, the longer term need to replace facilities and refresh the offer means that funds need to be set aside to deliver these, and this can only be done from cross subsidising across a wider network. The potential exception to this is the development of additional hockey facilities which could realistically be located at the Wilberforce Road site rather than at a hub site. Using this analysis we have developed the following indicative facility mix within a co-located facility which would address our top five areas of strategic sporting need:



60m x 40m indoor 3G pitch (half size) 100 station health and fitness facility 2 x studios – both 10m x 10m 1 x multi sport combat facility 10m x 10m 2 x full size floodlit 3G pitches 2 x full size floodlit sand dressed pitches (potential for location at Wilberforce Road,

although this will only result in one additional pitch) 6 x 5-a-side cages 5 x natural turf pitches – levelling and drainage 2.5 k Closed road circuit – 6m wide tarmac circuit which needs to be fully fenced. Competition BMX track 12 x 16 person team changes to serve outdoor pitches Health and fitness changing We estimate that the total cost of this provision would be in the region of £17.5million, and a breakdown of this cost analysis is contained at Appendix E We have also set out the likely staffing structure and estimated costs and these are included at Appendix F. Economic benefits of co-location The development of a new co-located sports facility (a "Sporting Village") in Cambridge has the potential to secure notable economic benefits for Cambridge and the wider sub-region. The purpose of this section is to begin to identify, and where possible quantify, the nature and scale of these benefits and impacts. At this early stage in the process, the assessment is at a high level as it seeks to provide a broad overview of the range of potential benefits that could result from investment in a Sporting Village. This analysis identifies the potential benefits to be derived from focussing delivery through one co-located facility. Clearly economic benefits may also be delivered through individual sports developments but it is unlikely that these would be delivered at the same time and there is no certainty that they would be all be funded and delivered. As such co-location offers the opportunity to drive the delivery of benefits and, as we note later, the potential to increase them through additional visitor numbers. Over time, and as the scheme progresses, it will be necessary to explore in more detail the potential for these benefits to be realised and their expected quantum. This high level assessment draws on a range of different sources including information on the construction costs, the likely staffing levels and anticipated visitor numbers; alongside nationally recognised and approved multipliers. The analysis begins with an exploration of the potential direct economic benefits looking at both the construction and operation of a Sporting Village. Following on from this, the analysis then looks more broadly at the indirect benefits and wider benefits that may accrue as a result of a Sporting Village. The analysis concludes by quantifying the total economic benefits that may result along with a series of notes and observations to aid consideration of the project.



Direct economic benefits of building a sporting village The overall value of an local economy is best measured in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA) which simply put relates to the sum of wages plus profits within a particular area. A key driver of economic growth and in turn GVA is therefore employment (and preferably employment in higher paid, higher skilled and more productive jobs). As such, one of the most significant impacts of a Sporting Village is its potential to create new jobs. Using a Labour Coefficient developed by ConstructionSkills3 (and endorsed by HM Treasury) it is possible to estimate the employment requirements for different kinds of construction activity. These labour coefficients express the number of workers needed over a year to deliver £1m of output and relates to local 'on the ground' jobs. ConstructionSkills estimate that £1m output on an infrastructure project will require 14.8 workers in a given year. With estimated construction costs to deliver the core elements of a Sporting Village of circa £17.5 million, and taking this coefficient at face value, it would suggest that the construction of a Sporting Village has the potential to create approximately 259 'job years' – of which about 60% would be in construction trades as opposed to professional service roles. Adjusting this number to reflect the estimated timescales of the construction programme (2 years) suggests that the scheme has the potential to create/sustain around 129.5 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) construction jobs. Taking the average GVA per job in the construction sector of £54,5434 and multiplying this by the potential number of FTE jobs created gives an approximate GVA figure of £7.06 million per annum or a total of £14.13 million over the two year construction period. These benefits are summarised in the table below.

Jobs (FTE) GVA (£m)

Total (per annum) 129.5 7.06

Total (Construction programme) 259 14.13

Direct economic benefits of operating a sporting village Alongside the jobs created through the construction of the sporting village a number of additional jobs will be created in order to manage and operate it. Based on the co-location of the facility mix we have identified the staff structure required to manage the use of a site of this size at Appendix F. The operational structure proposed is focused on delivering community programmes and meeting the operational needs of partners. Although, it should be noted that the staff structure does not currently take account of other additional staff that may be employed by partners (eg Cambridge United Academy, British Cycling, Cambridge City Hockey Club, ARU, etc) to deliver their bespoke services at the facilities. At this stage we are unaware what staff are currently employed by these organisations and have therefore assumed that no new posts will be created.

3 See: http://www.cskills.org/

4 ONS (2013) Annual Business Survey 2012. And ONS (2013) Business Register and Employment

Survey 2013



Operational staffing Based on the operational structure proposed it is estimated that 23.5 full time equivalent jobs will be created to operate the site. Based on the estimated salary for each of these posts this equates to a direct economic benefit of £446,000 GVA per annum. Given the permanent nature of these jobs this benefit will be sustained for a number of years. It should be noted that the average salary has been used to estimate GVA per job rather than a specific GVA per job figure (as with the construction jobs) because it is not possible to obtain GVA per job figures at the fine level of granularity required. This does however mean that this is likely to be a conservative estimate as the salary is only one part – albeit of the largest – of GVA. Instructors and sessional staffing Alongside the operational staff, it is estimated that there will be requirement for 6,156 hours of instructor and sessional staff time (including coaches, referees, children's parties and event staff). Based on the estimated hourly rate for each role this equates to a direct economic benefit of £79,752 GVA per annum. Again this is a benefit that will persist over a number of years and is a conservative estimate of GVA. Holiday camps Finally, it is estimated that there will be a requirement for 940 hours of staff time for holiday camps throughout the year. Again based on the estimated hourly rate for each role this equates to an economic benefit of £9,400 GVA per annum. As with the other two types of jobs this benefit will also persist over a number of years and is a conservative estimate of GVA. These benefits are summarised in the table below.

Jobs (FTE)5 GVA (£m)

Operational staffing (per annum) 23.5 0.446

Instructors and sessional staffing (per annum)

3.38 0.079

Holiday camps (per annum) 0.5 0.009

Total 27.38 0.534

Indirect economic benefits of a sporting village Drawing on a relatively conservative composite multiplier effect of 1.256 it is possible to estimate the indirect economic benefits that would result from both the supply chain and local expenditure effects resulting from the direct economic benefits noted above. Applying this multiplier effect to the economic benefits arising from the construction of a Sporting Village suggests that a further 32 indirect or induced jobs could be

5 FTE has been calculated on the basis of 35 hours per week

6 The average between the neighbourhood and regional multiplier effects identified under English

Partnership's 'medium' multiplier effect scenario in their "Additionality Guide".



created/sustained per annum. Taking the average GVA per worker of £41,2047 and multiplying this by the number of indirect or induced jobs created/sustained, gives an additional GVA benefit of £1.33 million per annum or a total of £2.66 million over the two year construction period. In terms of the operation of a Sporting Village, a further 6.8 indirect or induced jobs could be created/sustained. Again, multiplying this by the average GVA per work suggests and additional GVA benefit of £0.28 million; a benefit that would persist over a number of years. These indirect benefits are summarised in the table below.

Jobs (FTE)8 GVA (£m)

Construction programme (2 years) 32 2.66

Operation (per annum) 6.8 0.28

A note of caution In considering this analysis, it should be noted that both the estimate of construction jobs and the potential direct and indirect jobs that could be created through the operation of a sporting village take no account of: Deadweight – e.g. jobs that would have been created without investment in a

Sporting Village, an issue that is particularly pertinent for the indirect jobs. Substitution – e.g. construction workers who would have found employment

elsewhere or employees moving from elsewhere in the East of England to take up jobs in the operation of a Sporting Village

Displacement – e.g. the reduction of GVA elsewhere in the East of England. It is not possible to estimate the likely levels of deadweight, substitution and displacement at this early stage in the process as they depend on a wide range of external factors but it should be noted that the 'net impact' (ie taking account of additionality) could potentially be between 30% and 40% lower than the 'gross impact' (which are identified above). Wider benefits Alongside these quantifiable benefits there are also a number of wider benefits which may help drive significant value for the local and regional economy, although at this early stage it is not possible to fully quantify the benefit. Visitor numbers Given the scale and nature of a Sporting Village it has the potential to attract between 150 to 250 visitors per week, although the exact number will be closely linked to the ability of the facility to attract performance clubs (ie Cambridge United FC, Cambridge City Hockey Club or visiting cycling clubs).

7 BIS (2013) Business population estimates for the UK and regions: 2013 statistical release. And

ONS (2013) Annual Business Survey 2012 8 FTE has been calculated on the basis of 35 hours per week



By way of illustration, assuming that 25% of the upper end of the visitors per week come from outside of the region that could result in approximately 3,000 visitors per year. If each of these visitors spent £25 in the local economy during their visit this is an additional £75,000 in visitor expenditure or £33,000 in GVA9 per annum. Social benefits It may be appropriate to place a requirement that a proportion of the new jobs created need to be taken up by those resident in the 'local area' and/or by those previously unemployed. Supporting an unemployed person into work would also have a further economic benefit to national and local government of moving them off benefits. The exchequer saving of moving an unemployed person into work is approximately £100 a week (depending on the individual's situation). Therefore, assuming that 25% of the 23.5 operational jobs created went to unemployed people that could result in an exchequer saving in excess of £30,000 per annum. Health and well-being benefits Wider health and well-being benefits are difficult to quantify. However research by the British Heart Foundation and County Sports Partnership Network summarises a number of health and social benefits that result from physical activity. This research highlights the role that sport plays in preventing ill health and reducing the number of people dying prematurely; enhancing mental health, quality of life and self-reported wellbeing; delaying the need for care in older adults; and reducing health inequalities and improving wider factors influence health and wellbeing10. In addition Sport England estimates that taking part in regular sport can save between £1,750 and £6,900 in healthcare costs per person11. Summary This section of the report analysed the potential direct and indirect economic benefits that may result from the construction and operation of a sporting village. Taken together this analysis suggests that: The construction of a Sporting Village could create 291 direct and indirect jobs and

£16.79 million GVA; with The operation of a Sporting Village creating approximately 34 direct and indirect jobs

and 0.81 million GVA per annum. In considering these economic benefits it is important to note the following:

9 This calculation has been made using a GVA to tourism expenditure ratio of 44% used by

Scottish Enterprise in its work on "Developing SE Destination Monitoring and Baseline

Measurement (2010). 10

BHF National Centre and County Sports Partnership Network (No Date) Making the Case for

Physical Activity 11

http://www.sportengland.org/research/benefits-of-sport/).



That a number of the calculations are based on conservative estimates of both indirect and induced benefits and that they take no account of additionality; and

That given the longer term nature of this development it would be feasible to assume that the jobs and GVA benefits arising from the operation of a Sporting Village will persist for a significant number of years – a prudent assumption for appraisal purposes may be to assume a 10 year period.

To put this into context, the annual GVA for Cambridgeshire is £14.8bn and for the East of England region is £116bn. Whilst a Sporting Village provides a relatively small contribution by comparison it does highlight the potential to drive the delivery of economic benefits through larger co-located facilities.



APPENDIX A: BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS

1. National Context Sport England: A Sporting Habit for Life (2012-2017) In 2017, five years after the Olympic Games, Sport England aspires to transform sport in England so that it is a habit for life for more people and a regular choice for the majority. The strategy will: See more people starting and keeping a sporting habit for life Create more opportunities for young people Nurture and develop talent Provide the right facilities in the right places Support local authorities and unlock local funding Ensure real opportunities for communities

National Planning Policy Framework The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out planning policies for England. It details how these changes are expected to be applied to the planning system. It also provides a framework for local people and their councils to produce distinct local and neighbourhood plans, reflecting the needs and priorities of local communities. It states that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. It identifies the need to focus on three themes of sustainable development: Economic Social Environmental A presumption in favour of sustainable development is a key aspect for any plan-making and decision-taking processes. In relation to plan-making the NPPF sets out that Local Plans should meet objectively assessed needs. The ‘promoting healthy communities’ theme identifies that planning policies should be based on robust, up-to-date assessments of need for open space, sports and recreation facilities and opportunities for new provision. Specific needs and quantitative and qualitative deficiencies and surpluses in local areas should also be identified. This information should be used to inform what provision is required in an area. Investment in school sport In March 2013 the Government announced funding for school sport (Sport Premium) which sees £150 million per annum invested over the next two years. This will be made up of funding from various Government departments including Department for Education (£80m), the Department of Health (£60m) and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (£10m). The Government’s strategy will see funds go directly into the hands of primary school head teachers for them to spend on sport.



Schools will be measured by Ofsted on how well they use their Sport Premium to improve the quality and breadth of PE and sporting provision, including increasing participation in PE and sport so that all pupils develop healthy lifestyles and reach the performances levels they are capable of. 2. Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire Context This section is split into two separate parts in order that a review of both local authorities can be undertaken. However, there has been a previous assessment of sporting need undertaken across the area within the Cambridgeshire County Sports Facilities Strategy (2008) which also included an analysis of the Cambridge Horizons Major Sports Facilities Strategy (2006). The following summary can be determined from this strategy: Cambridgeshire Sports Facilities Strategy 2008 In summarising the priority investment needs from this report, it is made clear that: There is an overwhelming need for additional facilities In order to meet population

growth; in addition participation increases will require additional provision. Although the identified needs for additional provision can, to a certain extent, be delivered through the potential opening up of some existing facilities, the scale of the population growth means that there is also likely to be a requirement for new build provision.

Investment in future sports facility provision may not, as stated above, be about additional provision alone; there may also be opportunities to open up access to existing education facilities (private and state schools), or to refurbish and extend existing sports facilities. Rationalisation of provision and replacement with fewer better quality facilities, whilst reducing facility quantity, may actually have a greater impact on increasing participation, and be more sustainable to operate, because the facilities will be fit for purpose. If existing facilities are unfit for purpose, or cannot be opened up for community use, there will, however, be a need to develop replacement facility provision. Where this cannot be achieved in growth areas, there will be a need to develop additional facilities to meet demand.

The delivery of the identified priorities; community and sports specific facilities, and the development of a quality, ‘fit for purpose’ network across Cambridgeshire will require significant resources; its achievement will also be dependent on partners in sport and leisure, across the relevant sectors, working to a common purpose, focused on improving and developing sports facilities provision, to address identified needs for both a growing, and more active population. Whilst some identified facility needs e.g. additional sports halls, can be provided through existing facility stock, and through future developments, there is still likely to be a need for new additional provision, given the scale of the population growth in the County. Specific needs include:



Additional facilities, as identified, to meet specific demands of population growth in the County

Addressing the identified priority needs for sport specific facilities where they will also provide opportunities to develop, establish and increase wider community participation

Investment in older facility stock in the County, to improve its accessibility and usability, given that existing levels of provision are sufficient to meet current and future needs based on both population growth and increased participation

Negotiated access to, and availability of, an increased number of existing facilities for community use

Further innovative but realistic partnerships for provision Increased facilitation and a stronger lead role on the part of strategic sports

stakeholders Strengthening of the role of the voluntary sector e.g. local clubs Recommendations that were made from the report are as follows: Recommendation 1- Develop new facility provision- includes the development of

provision of specialist sports facilities, replacement of aging facilities, modernisation of provision

Recommendation 2- Invest in sport specific facility provision, including equestrian facilities, a community football stadium, gymnastics training facility, ice rink, martial arts facilities, rowing at Cambridge Sport Lakes, RFU model 2 venue in each district, indoor tennis centre in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire. The report covers Cambridgeshire County and recommendations also include a regional cycling centre and 50m pool in Peterborough.

Recommendation 3- Invest in existing facilities- ensuring all refurbishments ensure facilities are fit for purpose

Recommendation 4 - Planning Framework- Integrating local needs into Section 106 priorities and in Development Plan Documents and CIL requirements

Recommendation 5 - Address Unmet Demand- with the provision of additional STPs and investigate access issues with existing facilities

Recommendation 6 - Negotiate increased Accessibility/Availability to Existing Facilities- with particular reference to schools

Recommendation 7 - Resourcing future Sports Facilities Provision BSF- Developing a County wide approach for the integrated provision of sports facilities, developing communication between education and leisure. Ensure Community Use Agreements are appropriate and in place.

Recommendation 8 – Partnership- Ensure communication between education, leisure and planning and develop partnerships with the commercial sector

Recommendation 9 - Harness benefits of 2012- Prioritise development of sports facilities which will contribute to provision for both elite athletes and increased community participation in the region

Recommendation 10 - Multi -Sport Hubs- Develop sports hubs to be more economically sustainable and link to other local facilities



Cambridge City context The Council has a clear vision to lead a united city, ‘One Cambridge - Fair for all’, in which economic dynamism and prosperity are combined with social justice and equality. One Cambridge – Fair for all Caring for our environment and our people Creating a great place to live, learn and work Priority areas of work will be focused on six themes: “Protecting essential services” including: reinstating the pest control service,

protecting community grants to prioritise the disadvantaged and conducting an audit of all council spending to assess its impact on those in greatest need

“Sharing the city’s prosperity and making Cambridge a Living Wage city” including: working to extend the Living Wage city-wide, expanding the council’s apprenticeship programme, assisting credit unions, promoting energy-saving schemes and supporting those in need with water bills.

“Tackling the housing crisis” including: maximising new council and affordable house building, working with partners to deliver more social housing, reviewing housing finance, increasing the fencing budget, increasing the number of repairs apprentices, reviewing policies on houses in multiple occupation, investigating the possibility of a social lettings agency and reviewing policies on homelessness.

“Safety and quality of life” including: introducing public spaces protection orders to tackle problem drinking, working with the police to proactively use licence reviews of premises, introducing a “reduce the strength” campaign to tackle high-strength, low-cost alcoholic drinks, reviewing options for tackling domestic violence and action against punt touts, supporting the A14 upgrade, the City Deal and 20mph zones for residential streets, making improvements for cyclists and pedestrians and employing a Chesterton co-ordinator.

“Making Cambridge greener and cleaner” including: doubling the public realm enforcement team, carrying out a “clean it up” anti-dog fouling campaign, doubling the programme of community clear out days, implementing a “cleaner Cambridge blitzes” campaign, tackling cigarette litter and improving maintenance and cleanliness in public places and parks.

“Transforming the council” including: actively consulting with residents, improving area committees, supporting organisational transformation such as sharing services and other alternatives, reviewing financial processes and supporting a successful commercial property portfolio.



Cambridge Local Plan: 2006 – 2016 The Cambridge Local Plan sets out policies and proposals for future development and land use to 2016. It sets out a vision for Cambridge and objectives for achievement. It provides a means of guiding change over long periods of time. Planning decisions will be made in accordance with it. The Local Plan:

Interprets national and regional planning policies and relates them to Cambridge; Provides a framework of policies and proposals against which Planning applications can be assessed; will enable infrastructure providers to plan for the future; and brings planning issues before the public for debate. Review of the Local Plan: 2014

The Cambridge Local Plan will set out the planning framework to guide the future development of Cambridge to 2031. It will be one of the development plan documents which comprise the City Council's Local Development Framework. Within the framework the details below in relation to new facilities and new or enhanced community, sports or leisure facilities will be permitted if: The range, quality and accessibility of facilities are improved; There is a local need for the facilities; and The facility is in close proximity to the people it serves. New city-wide or sub-regional community, sports or leisure facilities should also: Be permitted if they are provided in sustainable locations; Comply with the National Planning Policy Framework’s sequential approach 33; Demonstrate the need for the proposal within the catchment area it is expected to

serve; Demonstrate that it would not have a negative impact upon the vitality and viability of

the City Centre, including its evening economy; and Where possible include in the proposal facilities open to the wider community, to

enhance both accessibility and the range of facilities available.

Proposals for new and improved sports and leisure facilities will be supported where they improve the range, quality and access to facilities both within Cambridge and, where appropriate, in the sub-region. This policy is relevant to a wide range of facilities from health clubs that serve parts of the city to leisure and sports provision that serves the city and sub-region, such as a concert hall, community sports stadium and sports complex. In securing a suitable location for city-wide or sub-regional facilities, developers will be expected to demonstrate use of the sequential test in considering sites for development.



Loss of facilities

The loss of a facility or site that was last in use as a community, sports or leisure facility will only be permitted if it is demonstrated that: The facility/site can be replaced within the new development or relocated to at least

its existing scale, range, quality and accessibility for its users. For leisure uses, it should satisfy peak period need; or the facility/site is no longer needed.

In providing evidence that a facility / site is no longer needed, the guidance in Appendix K of the plan should be adhered to. The redevelopment of school sites for other uses will be permitted only if it can be demonstrated that they are not required in the longer term for continued educational use.

Facilities provided as part of development

Mixed-use development proposals which provide on-site community and/or leisure facilities will be permitted where these are of a type appropriate to the scale of the development and to meeting the needs of future residents, employees and visitors. In the case of urban extensions and large-scale regeneration schemes, this should be in the form of a new, dedicated community centre and, where necessary, education and childcare facilities. For medium and smaller-scale developments in the city, the facilities required will be at the neighbourhood or local level, usually a community house or room. Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire “Improving health plan”: 2008 – 2011 Vision The vision for the Improving Health Plan is illustrated by these excerpts from Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire Sustainable Community Strategies: The purpose of this strategy is to provide a plan to take forward and monitor the Health priorities and objectives that are identified in the sustainable community strategies (SCS) for Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. Cambridge City Sustainable Community Strategy (2008 -2011) was launched in January 2008 and the South Cambridgeshire Strategy is currently being completed. The IHP also has a role in maintaining an overview of local health improvement initiatives and partnership arrangements to ensure that appropriate delivery mechanisms are in place to address local priorities.



The Cambridge City Council paper for the Sport and Physical Activity Plan 2014-

2017

The plan outlines the key themes for consultation regarding the plan:

Adult & young people’s obesity levels Tackling low levels of activity The growing demand by local people for informal sport Helping those unable to swim Supporting the City’s community groups and sports organisations

As part of the Sport & Physical Activity Plan it is proposed that the Council:

focuses the use of developer contributions for outdoor and indoor sports on capital projects to improve existing sports facilities in order to encourage greater participation in sports and physical activity. This would include facilities run by sports organisations, schools and community groups in Cambridge as well as those run by the Council.

continues to actively pursue dialogue with Cambridge University and the Amateur Swimming Association about the University’s proposals for a 50m pool at the West Cambridge site; and

is mindful of the suggestions made in the recent Sport and Physical Activity Plan consultation

The Cambridge Olympic Plan: 2010 – 2013 The Cambridge Olympic Plan has been co-ordinated by Cambridge City Council and represents the aspirations of key partners and stakeholders in the City. It brings together a city-wide response to capitalise on the enthusiasm generated by London hosting the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. The plan aims to create opportunities, support infrastructure and deliver legacy initiatives through work linked to the Olympic Games, Paralympics and Cultural Olympaid. Key priorities of the plan include raising the profile of sport and volunteering, providing opportunities for people with a disability, empowerment of local communities, enabling young people to have access to opportunity, and bringing culture and sport together. Development of Cambridge Future Champions Programme – grant funding scheme

for athletes aged 11-25 living in the city competing at county or regional standard. Launch of the FANS Scheme – Free Access for National Sports People enables city

residents who are competing at national or international standard to access sports facilities for training at free or reduced rates.

New sports development led Generation Games project – family sport project that encourages parents and carers to take part in sport with their family – awarded Inspiremark 2010.

Contribution towards Open Weekend celebrations – National countdown to mark countdown to start of the Games.

Commitment to hosting of Torch Relay on 7 July 2012. Development of the Aspire Volunteering Scheme – linking with clubs and volunteer

organisations to encourage more volunteers in the city.



Hosting the Chance to Dance festival – a series of performances from local dancers will be followed by the opportunity to take part in an array of taster sessions.

Supporting work on the Disability Sport & Arts Festival – open to children and adults with a disability to try new sports and arts activities.

Establish Cambridge City Youth Games – supporting the work of the local school sports partnership.

Development of Street Games activity sessions for young people - working with community safety partners to develop informal sport.



South Cambridgeshire context Local Plan 2011-2031 Underpinning the whole of the Plan is the Government’s commitment to sustainable development. Taking account of local circumstances, the new Local Plan’s development and other proposals aim to meet the 3 overarching principles of sustainability: Economic – contributing to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy by

ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth and innovation; and by identifying and coordinating development requirements, including the provision of infrastructure;

Social – supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations and by creating a high quality built environment, with accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural wellbeing;

Environmental – contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; and, as part of this, helping to improve biodiversity, prudent use of natural resources, minimising waste and pollution, and mitigating and adapting to climate change including moving to a low carbon economy.

The local plan covers the following areas and will include: Spatial Strategy sets out the vision and objectives and development needs for South

Cambridgeshire to 2031 together with the spatial strategy which focuses development on the edge of Cambridge, at new towns/new villages; and in selected villages. It also has policies for small scale development in villages. It includes a policy about phasing, delivering and monitoring of the Plan to ensure that it continues to meet its objectives.

Strategic Sites contains the strategic sites that will contribute most to the delivery of sustainable development in South Cambridgeshire.

Climate Change is concerned with sustainable development, climate change, water resources and flooding.

Delivering High Quality Places is concerned with design, landscape, and public realm.

Protecting and Enhancing the Natural and Historic Environment contains proposals to protect and enhance the historic built and the natural environment.

Delivering High Quality Homes is concerned with delivering high quality housing and includes village housing sites.

Building a Strong and Competitive Economy deals with building a strong and competitive economy, including sections on employment, retail and tourism and development sites.

Promoting Successful Communities is concerned with creating successful communities, including the provision of open space, leisure facilities and community facilities.

Promoting and Delivering Sustainable Transport and Infrastructure deals with promoting and delivering sustainable transport and other kinds of infrastructure.

Creating a high quality built environment, with accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural wellbeing; and



Environmental – contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; and, as part of this, helping to improve biodiversity, prudent use of natural resources, minimising waste and pollution, and mitigating and adapting to climate change including moving to a low carbon economy.

Corporate plan: 2014-2019 Vision South Cambridgeshire will continue to be the best place to live, work and study in the country. Our district will demonstrate impressive and sustainable economic growth. Our residents will have a superb quality of life in an exceptionally beautiful, rural and green environment. The Council has agreed an updated Corporate Plan containing 12 key objectives to keep South Cambridgeshire as one of the best places to live, work and study in the country. The plan builds on the work carried out over the last twelve months, as part of our current strategic plan, to deliver good value services to residents and help businesses prosper. Key priorities are around further investment in economic development to create jobs and reduce bureaucracy, continuing to increase the amount of good quality and affordable homes – including more homes as part of the biggest building programme of new council-owned homes since the 1950s, and taking an innovative approach to drive down Council costs to protect front line services Transport Strategy for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire: 2011 – 2016 The Transport Strategy for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire (TSCSC) was adopted by Cambridgeshire County Council on March 4th 2014 and ensures that local councils plan together for sustainable growth and continued economic prosperity in the area. It is predicted that approximately 44,000 new jobs and 33,000 new homes will be created in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire by 2031. The strategy will provide a plan to cope with the rising population and increase in demand on our travel network by shifting people from cars to other means of travel including cycling, walking and public transport. It provides a detailed policy framework and programme of schemes for the area, addressing current problems, and is consistent with the Cambridgeshire Local Transport Plan 2011-26. It is part of how the Council manages and develops the local transport network of the County as a whole



The strategy has two main roles: It supports the Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire Local Plans, and takes

account of future levels of growth in the area. It details the transport infrastructure and services necessary to deliver this growth The strategy contains details of the major schemes proposed in the short, medium and longer term. The programme will be regularly reviewed given the extent of growth and development in the area. What the Strategy does: States the Council's aim for more journeys to be made by bus, train, bike and on foot

so that traffic levels aren't increased. Extra capacity for traffic to travel round the outskirts of Cambridge, so that road

space into and across the city can be prioritised for buses, cyclists and pedestrians. Additional Park and Ride options on the fringes of Cambridge, to reduce the amount

of unnecessary traffic travelling through the City. Ensuring public transport, cycling and walking are the best ways of getting around

and across the area, since they will be quicker and more convenient than by car. Reducing car traffic by using a variety of techniques, which may mean limiting the

available road space for cars. Enabling people to use public transport for at least some of their journey into

Cambridge or surrounding towns, by creating a frequent, quality service across major routes.

Developing local transport solutions with communities, which link to public transport along key routes.

Priorities: Encourage more people to walk, cycle and use public transport for journeys into, out

of and within the city Promote bus routes that connect key economic hubs and link to the new train station

at Cambridge Science Park Railway Station Persuade more people to car share Prioritise pedestrian, cycle and bus trips across the city and make these methods of

transport more convenient than using a car Maintain general traffic at current levels



Living Sport Strategic Plan: 2011-15 This is the Strategic Plan of the Cambridgeshire County Sports Partnership and covers the wider Cambridgeshire area, but includes both authorities within the study area. Neither authority has its own strategic plan for sports facilities although both have jointly commissioned a playing pitch strategy for the study area. The strategic plan provides definition and focus for the work of the partnership. At the heart of the plan is the desire to find new ways of promoting and delivering new sporting activity, enabling more people to become more active. These aspirations produce a number of clear principles and priorities for Living Sport. Partnership is central to the work and the partners are fundamental to that success. Key objectives: Strengthen partnerships and value to partners. Working alongside regional and national partners, in demonstrating the powerful

impact that sport makes across a wide range of local delivery agendas, underlining the contribution of sport to improving health and well-being and the vitality and cohesiveness of our communities.

Living Sport will play a full role in positioning sport and physical activity closer to key policy areas to increase awareness of the benefits case for enhanced investment to promote a healthier, more active population.



APPENDIX B: DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE

Study area The study area comprises of Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire local authority areas. The area is unique in that South Cambridgeshire completely surrounds the City of Cambridge. Located in the East of England, the area is dissected by a series of A roads, the main north/south link being the M11, while in an east/west direction the A14/A428 and A505 play key roles. The River Cam runs through the centre of Cambridge. Figure B1: Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire with road networks

The data used to describe the area is taken from a range of nationally recognised sources such as the Office for National Statistics, NOMIS, Sport England and Experian. Wherever possible it represents the most up to date information available at the time of the report’s preparation. New data is, however, published regularly and at different intervals. Unemployment data is, for example, released every month while population projections and deprivation data tend to be produced every three to four years and the census of population is conducted once every decade. Within this context, it is noteworthy that a new Index of deprivation is to be published in 2015.



Population profile12 Age and gender The total population, from the 2012 Mid-Year Estimates, in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire is 276,225. This is 139,200 males and 137,025 females. This equates to 151, 068 people in South Cambridgeshire and 125, 157 in Cambridge. There is a relatively even distribution across most population cohorts, paying due regard to the natural effect of ageing, although, there are noticeably more 15-39 year olds (Cambridge City and South Cambridge = 38.0%, East of England = 30.8%) – see Figure B2. Figure B2: Comparative age/sex pyramids for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire and the East region

Within this grouping, however, there is a significant bulge in the number of 18-24 year olds, as might be expected of any of the country’s larger University towns/cities. As the area covered by Cambridge City Council forms a core to the overall study area the effect of the student population is far more pronounced within this area, see Figure B3 and B4.

12

2012 Mid Year Estimate, ONS



Figure B3: Age and gender in Cambridge Figure B4: Age and gender in South Cambridgeshire

The rationale for this is borne out by the location of the respective University campuses (see Figure B5). It is not possible (at this point in the exercise) to specifically determine whether or not the students actually live within Cambridge, South Cambridgeshire or commute in from further afield. However, on the presumption that the majority live within Cambridge, while attending University, the scale of this population is outlined below. c.19,500 students attend Cambridge University (2013-14) 11,905 Undergraduates, 6,592 Postgraduates, Part time 971) c.10,300 students attend Anglia Ruskin University (2013-14) 7,725 (75%) UK home addresses, 2,575 (25%) EU and Overseas

It does not seem unreasonable to assume that three quarters of the UK students originate from outside Cambridgeshire plus all EU/overseas students, thereby boosting the ‘normal’ population in this age group (for the Cambridgeshire area) by around 22,000; if two thirds of these are resident in Cambridge itself this would increase the 16-24 years age group by up to 14,500 (quite clearly the apportionments are at best approximations at this point, however, they would suggest a significant boost to this particular age group, over and above the norm for the area).

3.2%

3.3%

3.0%

3.0%

2.3%

2.6%

3.0%

3.4%

3.8%

3.9%

3.5%

3.0%

2.9%

2.9%

1.9%

1.6%

1.1%

0.6%

0.3%

3.0%

3.0%

2.9%

2.9%

2.1%

2.6%

3.2%

3.5%

3.9%

4.1%

3.6%

3.1%

2.9%

3.0%

2.1%

1.7%

1.4%

0.9%

0.6%

10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%

0-4

5-9

10-14

15-19

20-24

25-29

30-34

35-39

40-44

45-49

50-54

55-59

60-64

65-69

70-74

75-79

80-84

85-89

90+

Percentage

Ag

e r

an

ge

South CambridgeshireFemale %

Male %

2.9%

2.4%

2.1%

3.7%

8.1%

5.7%

4.8%

3.7%

3.2%

3.0%

2.5%

2.2%

1.9%

1.6%

1.2%

1.0%

0.7%

0.5%

0.3%

2.7%

2.3%

1.9%

3.6%

6.9%

4.6%

4.2%

3.3%

2.9%

2.8%

2.4%

2.2%

2.0%

1.8%

1.3%

1.2%

1.1%

0.8%

0.6%

10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%

0-4

5-9

10-14

15-19

20-24

25-29

30-34

35-39

40-44

45-49

50-54

55-59

60-64

65-69

70-74

75-79

80-84

85-89

90+

Percentage

Ag

e r

an

ge

CambridgeFemale %

Male %



Figure B5: Cambridge University and Anglia Ruskin University campuses

Ethnicity13 In broad terms, Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire’s ethnic composition closely reflects that of England as a whole. According to the 2011 Census of population, the largest proportion (88.4%) of the local population classified their ethnicity as White, this is higher than the comparative England rate of 85.4%. The next largest population group (by self-classification) is Asian, at 7.0% this is close to the corresponding national equivalent (7.8%). Table B1: Ethnic composition – Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire; and England

Ethnicity Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire England

Number Percentage Number Percentage

White 240,992 88.4% 45,281,142 85.4%

Mixed 6,468 2.4% 1,192,879 2.3%

Asian 19,158 7.0% 4,143,403 7.8%

Black 3,365 1.2% 1,846,614 3.5%

Other 2,639 1.0% 548,418 1.0%

Total 272,622 100.0% 53,012,456 100.0%

13

2011 Census of population, ONS



Crime14 During the 12 months to September 2013 the rate for recorded crimes per 1,000 persons in Cambridge & South Cambridgeshire was 53.1; this is markedly lower than the national equivalent for England and Wales which was 61.7. In both instances the crime rate has fallen since 2010, by around 24.8% for Cambridge & South Cambridgeshire and 15% for England & Wales. Table B2: Comparative crime rates - Cambridge & South Cambridge and England & Wales

Authority Recorded crime

(Oct ‘12 – Sept ‘13) Population 2012 MYE

Recorded crime per 1,000 population

Cambridge & South Cambridge 14,646 276,223 53.1

England & Wales 3,491,816 56,567,800 61.7

Car and van ownership Figure B6 illustrates that in South Cambridgeshire there is a high rate of car or van ownership across the wards. In Cambridge City the car and van ownership levels are also high, however there are a small number of wards in the centre that have a lower car or van ownership rate. Figure B6: Car and van ownership levels in Cambridge City and South Cambridge

14

2014 Recorded Crime, Home Office



Deprivation15 The following deprivation maps illustrate the ranking of super output areas (SOAs) in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire based on the Department for Communities and Local Government’s (DCLG) ‘Indices of Multiple Deprivation 2010’ (IMD 2010). The IMD ranks 32,482 SOAs throughout England16, with a rank position of one indicating the most deprived SOA in the Country. Table B3 shows Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire’s population in relation to 10 bands of relative deprivation. It indicates that 0.0% of the local population live in areas within the bottom 10% of SOA’s nationally, i.e. in the most deprived parts of the country. More noticeably, however, a further 5.9% are in the next two cohorts; consequently, only 5.9% of Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire’s population are in the ‘lowest’ three bands compared to a national average of 29.8%. Table B3: IMD cohorts - Cambridge & South Cambridgeshire

IMD cumulative norm

Multiple deprivation Health deprivation

Population in band

Percent of population

Population in band

Percent of population

Most deprived

Least deprived

10.0 0 0.0% 0.0% 1,428 0.5% 0.5%

20.0 2,864 1.1% 1.1% 15,007 5.5% 6.0%

30.0 13,027 4.8% 5.9% 5,446 2.0% 8.0%

40.0 19,706 7.2% 13.1% 28,649 10.5% 18.5%

50.0 11,249 4.1% 17.2% 15,571 5.7% 24.2%

60.0 18,097 6.7% 23.9% 25,627 9.4% 33.6%

70.0 37,279 13.7% 37.6% 38,310 14.1% 47.7%

80.0 50,028 18.4% 56.0% 15,610 5.7% 53.4%

90.0 50,736 18.6% 74.6% 49,884 18.3% 71.7%

100.0 69,137 25.4% 100% 76,591 28.1% 100%

Conversely, despite a generally similar pattern, comparison of Figure B7 and Figure B8 highlights a higher level of health deprivation than that of multiple (causes of) deprivation. This is borne out by the comparative rates which show 62.4% of Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire’s population to be in the three bands with the lowest levels of multiple deprivation while only 52.1% are in the equivalent three bands for health deprivation (see Table B3 and Figure B8).

15

2010 indices of deprivation, DCLG 16

SOAs relate to the geography used for the 2001 Census.



Figure B7: Index of Multiple Deprivation

Figure B8: Index of Multiple deprivation- Health Deprivation



Figure B9: IMD and Health domain comparisons – Cambridge & South Cambridgeshire and England.

Health data17 In 2012 there were 3,285 live births in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire; there were also 1,974 deaths; consequently there were 1,311 more births than deaths in 2012. Population change combines these factors alongside internal and international migration statistics. In keeping with patterns of health deprivation, life expectancy in both Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire is higher than the national figure; the male rate is currently 79.9 in Cambridge and 82.8 in South Cambridgeshire, compared to 79.2 for England. For females the average life expectancy is 84.5 and 85.9 respectively, the national average is 83.0.

17

ONS births and deaths, NCMP and NOO



Weight and obesity Obesity is widely recognised to be associated with health problems such as Type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer. At a national level, the resulting NHS costs attributable to overweight and obesity18 are projected to reach £9.7 billion by 2050, with wider costs to society estimated to reach £49.9 billion per year. These factors combine to make the prevention of obesity a major public health challenge. Figure B10: Adult and child obesity rates in Cambridge City

18

In adults, obesity is commonly defined as a body mass index (BMI) of 30 or more. For children in the UK, the British 1990 growth reference charts are used to define weight status.



Figure B11: Adult and child obesity rates in South Cambridgeshire

Adult and child obesity rates in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire are both below the national and regional averages. However in Cambridge City, child rates for obesity are noticeably higher than South Cambridgeshire. Furthermore, as with many other areas, obesity rates increase significantly between the ages of 4 and 10. Just under 1 in 10 (7.4%) of children in Cambridge are obese in their Reception Year at school and 12.2% are overweight; by Year 6 these figures have risen to just under 1 in 5 (16.6%) being obese and 14.6% being overweight. In total, by Year 6, over a third (31.2%) is either overweight or obese.



Figure B12: Comparative child weight measurements in Cambridge City

The same analysis for South Cambridgeshire reveals that just over 1 in 20 (6.4%) of children are obese in their Reception Year at school and 11.4% are overweight; by Year 6 these figures have risen to just over 1 in 10 (12.0%) being obese and 12.3% being overweight. In total, by Year 6, over 1 in 5 (24.3%) are either overweight or obese. Figure B13: Comparative child weight measurements in South Cambridgeshire

Health costs of physical inactivity The British Heart Foundation (BHF) Promotion Research Group has reviewed the costs of avoidable ill health that it considers are attributable to physical inactivity. Initially produced for the Department of Health report Be Active Be Healthy (2009) the data has subsequently been reworked for Sport England. Illnesses that the BHF research relates to, include cancers such as bowel cancer, breast cancer, Type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease e.g.:



stroke. The data indicates a similar breakdown between these illnesses regionally and nationally. The annual cost to the NHS of physical inactivity in Cambridge City is estimated at £1,572,148; whereas in South Cambridgeshire the figure is £2,256,024. Jointly this equates to the cost of an affordable swimming pool as outlined by Sport England. When compared to national costs per 100,000 Cambridgeshire as a whole (£1,572,148) is 13.5% below the national average (£1,817,284) and 12.0% (£1,785,965) below the regional average. It should also be noted that in addition to the NHS costs there are also significant costs to industry in terms of days of productivity lost due to back pain etc. These have also been costed in CBI reports and are of similar magnitude to NHS costs. Figure B14: Health costs of physical inactivity in Cambridge City

Figure B15: Health costs of physical inactivity in South Cambridgeshire



Economic activity In Cambridge City, 8 in 10 (79.7%) of 16-64 year olds are economically active (in or seeking employment - Dec 2013) compared to a national figure of 77.4%. The unemployment rate19 in Cambridge is 5.0%; this is below the East figure (6.1%) and below the national rate (7.5%). Of the 20.3% who are economically inactive, over 1 in 2 are students. 8 in 10 (80.3%) of South Cambridgeshire’s 16-64 year olds are economically active (in or seeking employment - Dec 2013) compared to a national figure of 77.4%. The unemployment rate20 in South Cambridgeshire is 3.8%; this is below the East figure (6.1%) and below the national rate (7.5%). Of the 19.7% who are economically inactive, over 1 in 4 are students. Income and benefits dependency The median figure for full-time earnings (2013) in South Cambridgeshire is £33,009; the comparative rate for Cambridge City is £29,728. In the East region, this figure is £28,220 and for Great Britain is £26,941. The breakdown of benefits claimants by type are outlined for both Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire in Figure B16 and B17 respectively. In Cambridge City 19% of claimants are receiving Job Seekers Allowance, suggesting they are out of work and actively seeking employment. In South Cambridgeshire this figure is 14.2%.

19

Note the unemployment rate is modelled by the Office for National Statistics 20

Note the unemployment rate is modelled by the Office for National Statistics



Figure B16: Benefits by type of claimant in Cambridge City

Figure B17: Benefits by type of claimant in South Cambridgeshire



In May 2014 there were 1,062 people in Cambridge claiming Job Seekers Allowance (JSA); this represents a decrease of 25.6% compared to May 2006 (1,428). However, people claiming JSA only represent 19.0% of benefits claimants in Cambridge, a further 52.3% are claiming ESA21 and incapacity benefits while 7.1% are carers. For the same period there were 690 people in South Cambridgeshire claiming Job Seekers Allowance (JSA); representing a decrease of 9.4% compared to May 2006 (755). However, people claiming JSA only represent 14.2% of benefits claimants in South Cambridgeshire, a further 47.6% are claiming ESA22 and incapacity benefits while 11.4% are carers. Economic Growth A strong knowledge economy is a critical driver of productivity and economic growth. Figure 5.18 assesses Cambridge/South Cambridgeshire from this knowledge economy perspective, with a darker shading indicating a greater proportion of workers employed in Knowledge intensive sectors. Both districts perform particularly well, with knowledge intensive sectors accounting for 26.85% and 33.4% of all employment in 2012 in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire respectively. This compares to a national average of 21.4% placing both areas in the top 20% of districts nationally. Figure B18: Proportion of workplace employment in Knowledge intensive sectors (201223)

We can also distinguish between knowledge-based production (aerospace, electrical machinery manufacture, printing and publishing, and chemicals and energy) and knowledge-based services (telecommunications, computing, R & D, finance and business

21

Employment and Support Allowance is directly targeted to support those who are ill or disabled. 22

Employment and Support Allowance is directly targeted to support those who are ill or disabled. 23

Source: Place Analytics



services, and recreational and cultural services). Employment in knowledge-driven production is high in both these areas with South Cambridgeshire ranking in the top 20% of districts. It has 4.78% of employment in this sector which compares to 2.96% in Cambridgeshire and 2.6% nationally. In terms of Knowledge-driven services both districts perform in the top 20% of districts nationally, with proportions well above the national median. Figure 5.19 shows that the proportion of people employed in knowledge driven sectors has fluctuated in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire between 1998 and 2012. Over the last year South Cambridgeshire has seen a decline, whilst in contrast, Cambridge is experiencing a growth in knowledge intensive employment with an increase of 9.1% between 2011 and 2012. This places Cambridge in the top 20% of districts nationally. By comparison the sector changed nationally by -0.5%. Figure B19: Change in Knowledge driven employment (1998-201224

A dynamic local enterprise culture is vital for the long-term competitiveness and overall success of any local economy. Our business and enterprise score assesses the extent of an enterprise culture in Cambridgeshire. The score is composed of new business formation rates, business death rates and long-term growth in business stock. As can be seen in the map (Figure B20), Cambridge performs very well within the sub-region, with a score of 113.06, placing it in the top 20% of districts nationally. By comparison South Cambridgeshire has a slightly lower score, at 105.8, but this is still higher than the Cambridgeshire and national average.

24




Figure B20: Business and Enterprise score (2012)25

Cambridge's high performance on this composite measure reflects its high business formation rate, high business density and very high business survival rates. A large proportion of enterprises are classified as 'professional, scientific and technical' or 'information and communication', indicating the significant presence of high value, knowledge-intensive businesses which is conducive to the success and growth of places. The growth rate in total number of VAT registered business stock is very high, with the area seeing a 83.05% increase in business stock between 1998 and 2013. Innovation is also crucial for business growth and can be approximated by looking at patent applications per 100,000 population. Using this indicator, Cambridge comes out 3rd nationally with 869 applications per 100,000 population over a 10 year period, closely followed by South Cambridgeshire in 4th place with 752 applications indicating the areas entrepreneurial strength over other areas. Figure B21 illustrates the change over time of businesses per 1000 population for all districts within Cambridgeshire. All places have experienced an increase over the past 10 years, although with intermittent fluctuations. Between 2012 and 2013 Cambridge has continued along its path of growth but South Cambridgeshire has seen a slight plateauing.

25




Figure B21: Change in businesses per 000 population (2003-2013)

Growth in the total number of people in employment provides a good indication of economic growth. Figure B21 shows that Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire have both experienced growth between 1998 and 2012. South Cambridgeshire has seen the greatest rate of growth of the two, at 18.8% compared to 10.87% in Cambridge. However, between 2011 and 2012 the total number of employees declined slightly in South Cambridgeshire, whilst Cambridge experienced an increase of 0.97%, representing a relatively strong level of growth by national standards. Figure B22: Growth in total number of employees26

26




The analysis clearly demonstrates that Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire are both growing and dynamic places with high levels of enterprise and innovation by national standards. The prevalence of employees in knowledge- intensive sectors will induce further productivity and economic growth over the coming years, subsequently attracting further highly skilled people to the area. Of the two areas Cambridge has seen more positive growth over the last year, but despite this South Cambridgeshire is still performing strongly by national standards. Employer Survey Given the strong business growth in the study area, and the potential to offer sports provision to employees and their families as part of a corporate "well-being" package, we have consulted some of the largest employers in the study area (by employee numbers) on the sports and recreation needs of their employees, the extent of the companies' own initiatives to address them, and their perception of local sports and recreation provision. We approached twenty of the largest employers (by employee numbers) and secured interviews with seven companies. In addition we have met with Cambridge Ahead, a group with a membership of over 20 businesses and academic organisations focussed on the long-term successful growth of Cambridge and its region, who were able to facilitate a number of these interviews through their business contacts. The survey was undertaken through interviews with the person with responsibility within the company for staff well-being, recruitment and retention - in most cases this was the HR Director. The companies consulted were: Aveva Group plc Arm Holdings plc Astra Zeneca plc Cambridge Education Group Domino-Printing plc Marshalls of Cambridge Ridgeon Group Limited These companies individually employ between 750 and 4,500 people in total and account for around 12,000 employees in the study area (currently or planned in the next 2-3 years). Our sample covered a range of industry sectors, these included pharmaceuticals, information technology, automotive and aerospace manufacturing, construction, property, engineering and education. With the exception of one employer, all of the employers surveyed have been based in the Cambridge area for over 10 years. All those employers surveyed noted an ambition to expand over the next 5 years. None indicated an intention to relocate staff away from the Cambridge area; two employers did cite a potential move into a new location but still within the Cambridge and South Cambridge area. Both of these employers saw outer Cambridge as a better place to re-locate to and expressed interest in opportunities for



corporate membership of new sporting facilities. Avoiding traffic congestion within central Cambridge area was an important factor both in considering relocation options and accessing sporting facilities. The factors influencing these employers to stay in Cambridge vary but three respondents noted the availability of a skilled workforce as important. As noted above Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire are in the top 20% of knowledge intensive districts nationally, and a skilled workforce is likely to remain a key factor in influencing employers to stay in the area. The employers offer a variety of 'wellbeing packages' for their staff ranging from private medical insurance to health checks, and membership of sports and social clubs, the scale and variety of the offer typically reflecting the size of the organisations. All interviewees were aware of sports and social provision in the area, and most offered some form of subsidised gym membership, with one offering access to a free on-site gym. The employer did not generally hold details of the percentage of their employees who take up subsidised gym membership although one employer estimated a take-up of less than 10%. Four of the seven employers surveyed stated that there was not adequate sporting provision in the study area; five noted that traffic congestion was an important issue and was a disincentive to accessing sports facilities particularly to locations in the centre of Cambridge. Six of the interviewees said that accessible sports/leisure/social provision, whilst not critical to a business decision to locate in the Cambridge area, was important to recruiting and retaining employees as part of their "quality of life" offer. Where sports facilities were to be provided the interviewees identified the following as key factors in participation on an individual/corporate basis: Location and transport accessibility – access and particularly road congestion was a repeated issue; one employer who was interested in the provision of new sporting facilities stated cycle routes would be important and their new premises were being planned with an even split of staff travelling to work by cycle, car and public transport. A 'public facility', one that offers a membership for the whole family at a reasonable cost; crèche facilities would also be welcomed. Open on a 24 hours a day, 7 days a week basis. A sporting facility that provide a wide range of choice: A variety of facilities that include football, tennis, cycling, gym, walking, and running

and which consider the interests of a mixed workforce in terms of gender and age. Alternative health and therapy provision e.g. massage, specialist classes e.g. zumba,

yoga, meditation, pilates. A place that offers a social centre Some factors appeared to be more important that others in taking up membership to some sports facilities with location and accessibility most often mentioned. One interviewee suggested the most important factor for members was that the gym was onsite and that it was open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Another employer stated that there was a gym across the road from their offices which the employer did not offer a concessionary membership but its convenience means that it is popular with employees.



AstraZeneca – Case Study AstraZeneca is planning to establish its new global Research and Development centre on the Cambridge Biomedical Campus (CBC) by 2016. The CBC is currently undergoing a major expansion and will eventually have a population in excess of 18,000 including the Laboratory of Molecular Biology (opened in March 2013), an extended Rosie Hospital, the new Papworth Hospital and a new private hospital and hotel development. AstraZeneca's new site at the CBC will house a workforce of approximately 2,000 employees through relocation from existing sites including 550 employees currently located at Granta Park in South Cambridge and from new recruitment. AstraZeneca's current "well-being" package includes Club AZ which acts as a sports and social club and provides employees access to various activities including a 5-a-side football league, gym, tennis, squash, and after hours club and summer club for children; running and cycling are also identified as important to a leisure offer. Accessibility is also seen as key. The target for AstraZeneca's new offices is for a third of employees to drive to work, a third to cycle and a third to use public transport. Proximity and ease of transport to and from any sports facilities including cycle routes and public transport access would therefore be important. There was also a strong interest in a "community-based" sports facility allowing family access and possibly crèche facilities.



Population Density The 2012 mid-year estimates suggest that the population of Cambridge City is 125,155 and in South Cambridgeshire is 151, 068, giving a total of 276,223 in the study area. The population density map allows residential and non-residential areas to be easily identified. Figure B23: Population density: Cambridge & South Cambridgeshire super output areas

It is clear that the more densely populated areas are in Cambridge City, specifically in the centre of the authority. The less populated areas are generally the areas around the outskirts of South Cambridgeshire. Rural/urban areas The Rural/Urban definition as identified by the ONS in 2004, defines the rurality of very small census based geographies. Census output areas forming settlements with populations of over 10,000 are urban, while the remainder are defined as one of three rural types: town and fringe, village or hamlet and dispersed. This definition also applies to Wards and Super Output Areas.



Figure B24: Rural and urban classification in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Figure B24 shows that the whole of Cambridge City plus some surrounding wards in South Cambridgeshire are classed as urban; whereas the rest of South Cambridgeshire is classed as rural. Population projections Strategic planning: Change from 2012 to 203727 At strategic and operational levels plans to increase levels of physical activity must not be set in stone, they should be flexible and respond to predictable changes in age structure, gender and ethnic composition. The most recent ONS projections indicate a rise of 18.0% in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire’s population (+49,630) over the 25 years from 2012 to 2037. Over this extended timeframe fluctuations are seen across the majority of age groups with population change acting more like a wave than a straight line (see Figure B25). For example the number of 16-24 year olds falls by c.4.4% between 2012 and 2021 before rising again to 11.7% more than its 2012 baseline by 2037.

27

Office for National Statistics 2012-based population projections (data released May 2014)



Figure B25: Projected population change (2012 -2037)

Table B4: Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire - ONS Projected population (2012 to 2037)

Age (years)

Number Age structure % Change from 2012

2012 2024 2037 2012 2024 2037 2024 2037

0-15 48,322 54,469 52,769 17.5% 18.1% 16.2% 112.7% 109.2%

16-24 40,769 39,917 45,520 14.8% 13.2% 14.0% 97.9% 111.7%

25-34 42,308 39,487 40,475 15.3% 13.1% 12.4% 93.3% 95.7%

35-44 38,665 40,416 38,525 14.0% 13.4% 11.8% 104.5% 99.6%

45-54 36,023 37,130 39,580 13.0% 12.3% 12.1% 103.1% 109.9%

55-64 28,630 34,976 35,129 10.4% 11.6% 10.8% 122.2% 122.7%

65+ 41,506 55,347 73,855 15.0% 18.3% 22.7% 133.3% 177.9%

Total 276,223 301,743 325,853 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 109.2% 118.0%



Population projections are based on straightforward process which models observed trends in fertility and mortality rates plus migration factors. Nevertheless they can illustrate a relatively complex picture of change. Several key points are outlined below: One of the most notable points is the progressive rise in the number of 0-15 year

olds, rising by +6,147 (+12.7%) over the first half of the projection (to 2024) and stabilising thereafter up to 2037. This will place pressure on differing types of sporting, educational and cultural provision (facility and services) by age, gender and sub-groups of the cohort.

In contrast, there is predicted to be decline in the number of 25-34 year olds, -6.7% in the first period, followed by slight growth back to -4.3% in the second period. This young professional age group are often the key target for health and fitness providers.

There is a continuous increase in the numbers of persons aged 65+ and a need to consider varying sports offers for this age group. This represents an increase of +33.3% (+13,841) in the first period continuing to rise to +77.9% (+32,349) between 2012 and 2037. While the age group represented 15.0% of Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire’s population in 2012 it is projected to be 22.7% of the total by 2037 - this is over 1 in 5 of the population. The challenge here is to accommodate the needs of a population base that is time rich.

Service planning: Significant change over the coming decade In service planning terms specific groups tend to age from one period to another; consequently, the number of 0-4 year olds in 2014 becomes the 5-9 year olds in 2019 (notwithstanding the effects of mortality and in/out migration). However, in a ‘university town’ the 18-24 years age group remains relatively stable and higher than the national norm to reflect the inward and outward flow of students. In general terms nationally, around 7.9% of the population are aged 19-23 years, however in Cambridge c.16.1% (20,387) are in this age group. This implies an extra 8.2% (+10,340) additional people within this cohort – more than doubling its size locally. This larger proportion of young people also falls within the prime age group for sports participation (14-24 years). Consequently it has the potential to creates a higher than average level of demand. The impact on services can, however, take a number of forms; it can be: Neutral – as the universities involved have their own provision and this satisfies all

student demand. Negative – it can place additional pressure on local services generally or for

specialist activities as these are not catered for sufficiently at the universities. Positive – as facilities at the universities may exceed demand and also help cater for

the local community.



While strategic planning needs to consider change over 20 to 25 years, service planning is often more closely aligned to a much shorter time horizon, typically 5 to 10 years. Over the decade to 2024 it is projected that the overall number of people in Cambridge City and South Cambridge will rise by +21,706 (+7.8%). However, significant age specific variations will have implications for different markets, economic and health issues, for example, there will be: +4,762 (+9.6%) more 0-15 year olds; and -2,386 (-5.7%) fewer 25-34 year olds; and +6,216 (+21.6%) more 55-64 year olds; and +11,294 (+25.6%) more people aged 65+. Figure B26: Projected population change in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Facilities planning for increases in the 65+ and 0-15 age groups may determine that these opposing age groups require very different provision at key times of the day and week from other users. However, just as the 65+ age group often requires activities during the day activities for 0-5 year olds often follow similar time patterns. Conversely, activities for 5-15 year olds are focused more closely on after school and weekend activities.



Profiling Mosaic28 Mosaic 2013 is a consumer segmentation product which classifies all 26 million households into 15 groups, 67 household types and 155 segments. This data can be used to paint a picture of UK consumers in terms of their social-demographics, lifestyles, culture and behaviour and tends to be used to draw out population characteristics for the backdrop to affordability and propensity to participate. The following table shows the top five mosaic classifications in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire compared to the country as a whole. The dominance of these five segments can be seen inasmuch as they represent nearly 7 in 10 (68.9%) of the adult population compared to a national equivalent rate of less than half (39.1%). Table B5: Mosaic – main population segments in Cambridge & South Cambridgeshire

Mosaic group description Cambridge & South Cambridgeshire

National % Number %

1 – Liberal Opinions 59,096 22.3% 8.3%

2 – Professional Rewards 53,745 20.3% 8.9%

3 – Careers and Kids 28,420 10.7% 5.9%

4 – Suburban Mindsets 20,998 7.9% 12.5%

5 – Alpha Territory 20,420 7.7% 3.5%

The largest segment profiled for Cambridge & South Cambridgeshire is the Liberal Opinions group, making up 22.3% of households in the area; which is three times the national rate (8.3%). This group is defined as young, professional, well educated people who are cosmopolitan in their tastes and liberal in view views and enjoy the vibrancy and diversity of inner city living. These neighbourhoods also contain a high proportion of the country's students living in term-time accommodation

28

2013 Mosaic analysis, Experian



Figure B27: Word cloud of dominant Mosaic profile in the study area

As Figure B27 above suggests, there is a real difference between the segments found in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire. The Liberal Opinions ( ) dominate the densely clustered Cambridge City, while South Cambridgeshire is more spread out with a predominant mix of Professional Rewards ( ), Career and Kids ( ) and Small Town Diversity ( ).



Figure B28: Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire Mosaic profile

The difference between the two areas is illustrated in Figure B29 and Figure B30. There is a large over representation of Liberal Opinions in Cambridge City and a smaller over representation of Alpha Territory and Ex Council Community. This is unsurprising as the Liberal Opinions can include students living in term time accommodation. The profiles with the smallest and largest underrepresentation are Rural Solitude, Small Town Diversity and Career and Kids. Conversely, in South Cambridgeshire there is a large overrepresentation of Professional Rewards and Careers and Kids; whereas there is a smaller over representation of Small Town Diversity. There is a large underrepresentation of Upper Floor Living, Terraced Melting Pot and Liberal Opinions



Figure B29: Mosaic Profiling- Cambridge City

Figure B30: Mosaic Profiling- South Cambridgeshire



Table B6: Dominant profiles in study area

Liberal Opinions

This group contains young, professionals with a university education, and also a high proportion of students living in term-time accommodation. They are over-represented in jobs involving communications, such as journalism, politics, entertainment and the arts, fashion and design, university education and the Internet. They do not respond to blatant sales exhortation, and demand a high degree of ethical and environment responsibility. Brands which promote a multi-cultural image perform well. They are avid readers, and often read more than one newspaper on the same or different days. The Internet is an important source of product information and many bank and purchase goods using online channels. These people spend more of their income on services and less on products than most other groups. Those living alone often eat out, and visit the cinema and the theatre and attend museums, exhibitions and public lectures. People travel frequently on foreign holidays and are over-represented among those that enjoy extreme physical activities. Quite a few manage without a car. The propensity to shop online amongst this group depends on their income, and those in full-time education spend less than the young professionals. Education and job websites are widely used by this group.

Key features Young singles and students with degree level education, with creative jobs. Favour ethical products and have an interest in theatre and arts, and the cinema.

Professional Rewards

This group is defined as refers to the executive and managerial classes, some of whom may own small or medium sized business whilst others will have risen to senior positions in large multinational organisations. They are often in their 40's to 60's, are married and live in spacious family homes with successful children. The house is likely to have four or more bedrooms, two bathrooms, to be detached and surrounded by other similar houses. It is likely to be located in a quiet residential neighbourhood in the outer suburbs of a large city or in a semi-rural dormitory village from which the husband, and often the wife, travel some distance by car to work. Homes are likely to be well equipped with a wide range of modern appliances and labour saving devices, with homes and gardens maintained in a good condition, and appliances replaced as soon as they become defective. Their properties are well maintained and equipped and their tastes conservative. These neighbourhoods are found in residential areas in the outer suburbs of large cities or in semi-rural villages. Tastes in clothing and furniture are generally conservative, with preferences for good taste over ostentation. Dry cleaning and hairdressing costs are considered essential.

Key features Generally this group have significant equity, are comfortable, have had a good education and hold senior positions.



Career and Kids

These are mostly young married couples and cohabitees who juggle work and pre-school and primary school age children whilst also enjoying material advantages offered by a consumer society. Home is generally on a modern estate, located on the outer edge of a large or medium size city. Homes and gardens are not spacious but are well equipped. Consumers are keen to make the right decisions and are influenced not just by value for money but by ethical and environmental considerations and functional specifications. They rely on their cars to shop at modern out-of-town retail centres, the family and car are the focus of much leisure activity, with trips to parks, theme parks, cinemas, leisure centres and sporting venues. Restaurants and public houses need to make special provision for children to attract these customers. This group makes good use of the Internet to help manage their busy lives. Shopping is often done online – both for the weekly grocery shop and for less frequently purchased consumer goods, plus the occasional luxury. They prefer to purchase from more established brands that offer value for money rather than just the lowest price.

Key features Generally a young family, with good incomes, a home life balance. Ethically aware and use consumer credit, with a reliance on cars.

Sport England Market Segmentation29 Sport England has classified the adult population via a series of 19 market segments which provide an insight into the sporting behaviours of individuals throughout the country. The profiles cover a wide range of characteristics, from gender and age to the sports that people take part in, other interests, the newspapers that they read etc. The segmentation profile for Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire indicates ‘Settling Down Males’ to be the largest segment of the adult population at 12.31% (24,848) compared to a national average of 8.83%.

29

Data source: Market segmentation, Sport England, February 2014



Figure B31: Sport England segmentation – Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire compared to England

Knowing which segments are most dominant in the local population is important as it can help direct provision and programming. Whilst the needs of smaller segments should not be ignored, it is important for Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire to understand which sports are enjoyed by the largest proportion(s) of the population. Segmentation also enables partners to make tailored interventions, communicate effectively with target market(s) and better understand participation in the context of life stage and lifecycles. The following data indicates that Tim, Philip and Chloe are the three dominant groups, representing 28.1% (56,697) of the adult population, compared to 22.2% nationally.



Table B7: Sport England Market Segmentation summaries

Segment

Population in Cambridge

City and South Cambs

% population in Cambridge

City and South Cambs

% population in the East

region

% population in England

Settling Down Males Tim 24,848 12.31% 10.47% 8.83%

Comfortable Mid-Life Males

Philip 16,651 8.25% 9.62% 8.65%

Fitness Class Friends Chloe 15,198 7.53% 5.29% 4.71%

Competitive Male Urbanites

Ben 14,328 7.10% 5.30% 4.94%

Empty Nest Career Ladies

Elaine 14,324 7.10% 6.83% 6.07%

Early Retirement Couples

Roger & Joy

14,132 7.00% 8.19% 6.77%

Comfortable Retired Couples

Ralph & Phyllis

12,930 6.41% 5.05% 4.22%

Career Focussed Females

Helena 12,293 6.09% 4.99% 4.55%

Stay at Home Mums Alison 11,989 5.94% 5.38% 4.39%

Sports Team Drinkers Jamie 11,536 5.72% 3.98% 5.37%

Retirement Home Singles

Elsie & Arnold

11,096 5.50% 7.94% 7.97%

Supportive Singles Leanne 7,708 3.82% 3.22% 4.25%

Middle England Mums Jackie 6,955 3.45% 4.82% 4.88%

Pub League Team Mates

Kev 6,076 3.01% 4.11% 5.93%

Twilight Year Gents Frank 5,708 2.83% 4.25% 4.01%

Stretched Single Mums Paula 4,674 2.32% 2.87% 3.74%

Local 'Old Boys' Terry 4,342 2.15% 2.86% 3.69%

Older Working Women Brenda 4,027 2.00% 3.25% 4.91%

Later Life Ladies Norma 2,989 1.48% 1.57% 2.12%



Table B8: Dominant segments in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire

Segment Summary of key characteristics

Tim- Settling Down Male Mainly aged 26-45, married or single, may have children. Sporty male professionals, buying a house and settling down with partner Top sports: Cycling, keep fit/gym, swimming, football, athletics and running Like to do more: Cycling, swimming, keep fit/gym and athletics, golf Most satisfied with: release and diversion, social and exertion and fitness Least satisfied with: coaching and facilities

Philip- Comfortable Mid Life Male Mainly aged 46-55. married with children, full time employment and owner occupier. Mid-life professional, sporty males with older children and more time for themselves Top sports:, Cycling, keep fit/gym, swimming and football, golf and athletics (running) Like to do more: swimming, cycling, keep fit/gym and golf Most satisfied with: release and diversion, social aspects, exertion and fitness, and people and staff Least satisfied with: facilities and coaching levels

Chloe- Fitness Class Friends Mainly aged 18-25, single, graduate professional. Young image-conscious females keeping fit and trim Top sports: Like to do more: swimming, Keep fit and gym, cycling, athletics or running and tennis. Most satisfied with: release and diversion and social aspects Least satisfied with: performance, facilities, officials and value for money aspects



Sport England Active People Survey Sports participation in any area is significantly influenced by its demographic characteristics, primarily age, gender, socio-economic characteristics and ethnic composition. The Active People Survey (APS) is the largest survey of sport and active recreation in Europe and is in its seventh year (APS7 October 2012 – 2013). It collects data on the type, duration, frequency and intensity of adult participation by type of sport, recreation and cultural activity. The survey also covers volunteering, club membership, tuition as an instructor or coach, participation in competitive sport and overall satisfaction with local sports provision. It is the primary source for participation data. The following outlines the Active People results for each of the authorities. Cambridge City Table B9: Active People Survey 7 results for all adults – Cambridge and nearest neighbours 2012/13 KPIs

KPI National

% East

% Cambridge

%

Nearest neighbours %

Crawley Exeter Oxford Watford

1x30 Indicator - Participation in 30 minutes moderate intensity sport per week

35.7 35.1 42.0 33.4 30.8 35.0 37.3

KPI 2 - At least 1 hour per week volunteering to support sport.

6.0 6.8 3.8 4.7 5.0 2.3 4.7

KPI 3 - Club membership in the last 4 weeks

21.5 22.2 25.6 16.8 22.1 17.7 30.1

KPI 4 - Received tuition / coaching in last 12 months.

16.1 16.7 10.7 20.2 22.1 11.3 20.7

KPI 5 - Taken part in organised competitive sport in last 12 months

12.6 13.6 11.8 10.7 15.5 10.4 13.4

Table B9 shows key indicators from APS 7 for Cambridge and compares these to the corresponding rates for the East, England and statistical ‘nearest neighbours’ based on a CIPFA (the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy) model. This type of comparison has been developed to aid local authorities to compare and benchmark. The model applies a range of socio-economic indicators, including population, unemployment rates, tax base per head of population, council tax bands and mortality ratios upon which the specific family group (nearest neighbours) is calculated. Key findings include:



Participation - just under half third (42.0%) of adults participated in at least 1 x 30 minutes moderate intensity sport per week. This was above the national average (35.7%) and the regional average (35.1%). It was above all of its ‘nearest neighbours’ which ranged from 30.8% to 37.3%. However this needs to be assessed in the context of high numbers of young people (i.e. students) who have a higher propensity to participate than any other group.

Volunteering - around 1 in 20 (3.8%) provide at least 1 hour’s volunteering to support sport in Cambridge each week. This is lower than the corresponding national and regional equivalents and is below all but one of its ‘nearest neighbours’.

Sports club membership - just over 1 in 4 (25.6%) are members of a sports club, based on the four weeks prior to the AP survey. This is above the national average (21.5%) and the regional rate (22.2%) and is around the mid-point of its ‘nearest neighbours’.

Sports tuition - around 1 in 10 (10.7%) received sports tuition during the 12 months prior to the AP survey. This was below the regional and national averages. It is also below that of its ‘nearest neighbours’.

Competitive sport – just over 1 in 10 (11.8%) adults had taken part in competitive sport in the previous 12 months, this was around the ‘mid-point’ of Cambridge’s ‘nearest neighbours and also lower the national (12.6%) and regional (13.6%) averages.

Figure B32: Key APS indicators, Cambridge and nearest neighbours (2012/13)



South Cambridgeshire Table B10: Active People Survey for all adults – South Cambridgeshire and nearest neighbours

KPI National

% East %

South Cambs%

Nearest neighbours %

East Hants

South Oxon

Test Valley

West Oxon

1x30 Indicator - Participation in 30 minutes moderate intensity sport per week

35.7 35.1 39.2 35.5 35.2 37.3 39.2

KPI 2 - At least 1 hour per week volunteering to support sport

6.0 6.8 8.2 6.1 6.3 4.3 10.6

KPI 3 - Club membership in the last 4 weeks

21.5 22.2 24.1 22.6 22.8 26.6 18.2

KPI 4 - Received tuition / coaching in last 12 months.

16.1 16.7 22.9 14.3 22.0 25.6 22.6

KPI 5 - Taken part in organised competitive sport in last 12 months

12.6 13.6 13.9 12.5 14.2 16.4 14.3

Table B10 shows key indicators from APS 7 for South Cambridgeshire and compares these to the corresponding rates for the East, England and statistical ‘nearest neighbours’. Key findings include: Participation - just over a third (39.2%) of adults participated in at least 1 x 30

minutes moderate intensity sport per week. This was above the national average (35.7%) and the regional average (35.1%). It was above the majority of its ‘nearest neighbours’ which ranged from 35.2% to 39.2%.

Volunteering - around 1 in 10 (8.2%) provide at least 1 hour’s volunteering to support sport in South Cambridgeshire each week. This is higher than the corresponding national and regional equivalents and is only surpassed by one of its ‘nearest neighbours’. This is significantly higher than Cambridge City and reflects the corresponding difference in Mosaic profile in that there are more ‘Professional Rewards’ and ‘Careers and Kids’; who are more likely to volunteer alongside their children’s’ participation.

Sports club membership – over 1 in 5 (24.1%) are members of a sports club, based on the four weeks prior to the AP survey. This is above the national average (21.5%) and the regional rate (22.2%) and is above all but one of its ‘nearest neighbours’.

Sports tuition - just over 1 in 5 (22.9%) received sports tuition during the 12 months prior to the AP survey. This was above the regional and national averages. It is also above all but one of its ‘nearest neighbours’. This again is reflective of the ‘Careers and Kids’ profile who are likely to attend instructed activities rather than team and individual sports.

Competitive sport – just over 1 in 10 (13.9%) adults had taken part in competitive sport in the previous 12 months, this was above all but one of South Cambridgeshire’s ‘nearest neighbours and also higher than the national (12.6%) and regional (13.6%) averages.



Figure B33: Key APS indicators, South Cambridgeshire and nearest neighbours (2012/13)

Sport England Active Places Power30 The Active Places database contains information on c.60,000 facilities. The focus of this study is to test if the identified facilities on Active Places is accurate and also to determine if these facilities and others are of sufficient quality, accessibility and availability to meet the needs of both authorities’ residents.

30

Active Places Power, Sport England



Clubmark Clubmark is one way of recognising quality sports clubs. Accreditation requires effort and planning; it takes time to complete and involves development planning by the club. There are a number of clubs that cannot or will not become accredited. The role of these should not be underestimated as some are also sustainable and provide an important service to the community. However accreditation is a recommended method of identifying well run clubs. There are 107 sports clubs across Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire that have ensured that they are recognised as an accredited club, and have considered medium to long term planning. These clubs must be considered when facility planning, as it is these clubs that should prove more sustainable. TableB.11: Clubmark accredited clubs in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire31

Clubmark Type South

Cambridgeshire Cambridge City England

Angling 0 1 148

Archery 0 0 34

Athletics 1 0 289

Badminton 0 0 255

Baseball / Softball 0 0 6

Basketball 0 0 122

Bowls / Crown Green 0 0 62

Boxing 0 0 155

Canoeing 0 0 153

Cricket 15 4 2,675

Cycling 0 0 274

Equestrian 1 1 131

Fencing 0 2 88

Football 26 9 4,446

Golf 1 1 502

Gymnastics 2 2 788

Handball 0 0 8

Hockey 0 2 478

Judo 2 2 189

Lacrosse 0 0 36

Netball 5 1 600

Orienteering 0 1 51

Rowing 0 2 116

Rugby Union 1 0 611

Rugby League 0 0 171

SnowSports 0 0 37

Squash 2 1 233

Swimming 1 2 595

Table Tennis 1 0 289

Tennis 6 6 1,038

31

Clubmark, January 2014



Clubmark Type South

Cambridgeshire Cambridge City England

Triathlon 1 0 73

Volleyball 0 1 109

Other 2 2 217

Total 67 40 14,979

Sport England investment in Cambridge City and South Cambridgeshire Sport England use funding from the National Lottery and Exchequer to support hundreds of projects each year. Exchequer The exchequer funding awarded in the local authority areas was all SportsMatch funding. This was awarded to the organisations outlined in Table 5.12 below. Table B12: Sport England Exchequer Funding recipients

Financial Year

Recipient Project Title Award Amount

Main Sport

2009/10 YMCA Sports Outreach to Disadvantaged

£17,625 Exercise & Fitness

2010/11 City of Cambridge Rowing Club

Project Veteran Squad £10,000 Rowing

2010/11 Tennis4Cambridgeshire Cambridgeshire Grassroots Tennis

£8,500 Lawn Tennis

2011/12 Hereward Heat Wheelchair Basketball Club

Club and Regional Development

£3,500 Basketball

2011/12 Sawston Cricket Club Sawston Cricket Academy

£3,429 Cricket

2012/13 Cambridge Cangaroos Trampoline Club

Trampoline purchase £4,000 Trampolining

Lottery Cambridge Regional College, Hills Road Sixth Form College and Long Road Sixth Form College have all received between £37,000 and £68,000 from the Further Education Activation Fund in 2013/2014. There have been five Inspired Facilities awards. One was a grant for £30,000 to Little Shelford Parish Council to invest in the Little Shelford Sports & Recreation Pavilion. The other four were for £50,000 each and awarded to: Cottenham Parish Council – Cottenham Changing Rooms Cambridge Gliding Club Ltd - Glider Winch Upgrade Melbourn Parish Council - Melbourn Pavilion Linton Granta Football Club - Community Sports Development The other projects funded in 2012/13 and 2013/14 are outlined below.



Table B13: Sport England Lottery Funding recipients and programmes

Recipient Project Title Award Amount

Programme Name

Main Sport

Oakington & Westwick Short Mat Bowls Club

Electrowind Machine £4,810 Small Grants

Bowls

Chesterton Community College

Table Tennis Escalator Programme

£6,894 Small Grants

Table Tennis

Ickleton Cricket Club Withernsea Mini Water Polo Course


Cricket

Swavesey Village College

Cycling as a new Extra-Curricular Opportunity


Cycling

Anglia Ruskin Rhinos Anglia Ruskin University Rhinos American Football Team


American Football

Rob Roy Boat Club RRBC Development Plan 2013 - investing in women and juniors


Rowing

Cambridgeshire County Council

Stepping Stone £30,000 Inclusive Sport

Boccia

X-Press Boat Club Purchase of a Quad rowing boat


Rowing

Little Shelford Parish Council

Little Shelford Sports & Recreation Pavilion

£27,000 Inspired Facilities

Multi Sports

Wintercomfort for the Homeless

Fit for the Future £9,952 Small Grants

Multi Sports

Cambourne Comets Trampoline Club

Cambourne Comets - To Sustain and Develop


Trampolining

Hills Road Sixth Form College

Sportaround £9,700 Small Grants

Multi Sports

Comberton Parish Council

Comberton Recreation Ground Extension

£50,000 Protecting Play Fields

Association Football

Willingham Cricket Club

Cricket Covers for Wicket £6,127 Small Grants

Cricket

Cambridge University Trampoline Club

Club expansion £8,867 Small Grants

Trampolining

Camrowers Get Equipped Provision of aids for members with disabilities

£672 Get Equipped

Rowing

Hereward Heat Wheelchair Basketball Club

Get Equipped - Wheelchair Basketball chairs

£9,500 Get Equipped

Basketball

Cambridge Sport Lakes Trust

Get Equipped - You Can Bike Too

£9,554 Get Equipped

Cycling

Government investment in schools Investment in school facilities has been important to both the previous and current Government and each have had different programmes to provide funding to upgrade and renew school facilities across the Country. Investment in sports facilities cannot be guaranteed in schools that are refurbished, but are generally included in new builds.



As it currently stands there are no schools in Cambridge City or South Cambridgeshire that are involved in the Priority Schools Building programme. However the County Council has identified the need for additional education provision as a result of the increased population across the County. Local authority leisure facilities management All authorities have sport and leisure facilities that are available for community use. The type, size, quality and capacity vary by facility and local authority. Table 5.14 outlines the operational management for each area. Table B14: Local authority facility management

District Facility management

Cambridge City Greenwich Leisure Limited

South Cambridgeshire Mixed economy of local providers

GROSVENOR



APPENDIX C: SWIMMING POOLS IN CAMBRIDGE CITY AND SOUTH CAMBRIDGESHIRE

Active Places ref

Site Name Sub Type Access Policy Year Built

Refurb date

Facility Status

No lanes

Width Length Area Min

depth Max

depth Diving board

Movable floor

1004878 Abbey Leisure Complex

Main/ General Pay and Play 1991 2009 Operational 5 12 25 300 0.8 1.8

1004878 Abbey Leisure Complex

Learner/ Teaching/ Training

Pay and Play 1991 2009 Operational 0 12 12 144 0.8 0.8

1000776 Cambridge Fitness & Wellbeing Centre

Main/ General Registered Membership use

1999

Operational 2 8 25 200 1.4 1.4

1004884 Chesterton Sports Centre

Main/ General Pay and Play 2004

Operational 3 7 17 119 1 3

1003149 David Lloyd Club (Cambridge)


2004

Operational 4 10 25 250 1.2 1.2


Lido Registered Membership use

2004

Operational 4 10 20 200 1.2 1.2

1036429 DW Sports Fitness (Cambridge)


2008

Operational 1 9 20 180 1.2 1.2

1036108 Frank Lee Centre Main/ General Registered Membership use

1973

Operational 3 8.5 25 212.5 1 3

1004895 Jesus Green Outdoor Pool

Lido Pay and Play 1923 2013 Operational 3 12 91.4 1096.8 1.2 2.5

1004898 Kings Hedges Learner Pool


Operational 3 6 15 90 0.9 0.9

1000431 Livingwell Health Club (Cambridge)


Pay and Play 1996

Operational 0 5 10 50 1.2 1.2

1004908 Parkside Pools Main/ General Pay and Play 1999

Operational 8 18 25 450 1 1.8

1004908 Parkside Pools Leisure Pool Pay and Play 1999

Operational 0 3 10 30 0.25 0.25

1004908 Parkside Pools Diving Pay and Play 1999

Operational 0 12.5 12.5 156.25 0 3.8 Yes Yes

1014789 Sheeps Green Pool Lido Free Public Access

1975

Operational 0 4 8 32 0.9 0.9

1004899 The Leys Sports Complex


Operational 4 10 25 250 1.3 1.8

1000326 Bourn Health & Fitness Club


1995 2006 Operational 0 7.6 15 114 1.2 2



Active Places ref

Site Name Sub Type Access Policy Year Built

Refurb date

Facility Status

No lanes

Width Length Area Min

depth Max

depth Diving board

Movable floor

1204734 Comberton Village College

Lido Sports Club/ Community Association use

1960

Operational 0 10 25 250

2

1009812 Imagine Health and Spa (Cambridge)


Pay and Play 2003

Operational 0 8 12 96 1.4 1.4

1004894 Impington Sports Centre


Operational 4 10 25 250 1 2.4

1004904 Melbourn Sports Centre

Main/ General Pay and Play 1991 2003 Operational 4 8 20 160 0.9 1.5

1004915 Sawston Village College Sports Centre


Operational 4 7.5 17 127.5 0.9 1.9

1001359 Spirit Health Club (Cambridge)


1984 2011 Operational 1 9 15 135 1.1 1.5

1009354 The Cambridge Belfry


Pay and Play 2004

Operational 0 8.5 12.5 106.25 1.3 1.3

1000426

Waves Health & Leisure Club (Cambridge Hotel and Golf Club)


1974 2006 Operational 0 9 16 144 0.9 2.3

1000426

Waves Health & Leisure Club (Cambridge Hotel and Golf Club)


Registered Membership use

1974 2006 Operational 0 3 7 21 0.5 0.5



APPENDIX D: SPORTS HALLS IN CAMBRIDGE CITY AND SOUTH CAMBRIDGESHIRE

Active Places

ref Site Name Sub Type Access Policy Year Built

Refurb date

No Badminton

courts Width Length Area

Badminton clearance

1004883 Cherry Hinton Village Leisure Centre

Main Pay and Play 1989 2007 4 19 30 570 Yes

1004884 Chesterton Sports Centre Main Pay and Play 2004 2008 4

594 Yes

1004884 Chesterton Sports Centre Activity Hall Pay and Play 2004

1

180 Yes

1204767 Coleridge Community College Activity Hall Sports Club/Community Association use

1935 1985 1 10 18 180


Main Registered Membership use

2004

4

594 Yes

1036056 Fenners Cricket And Tennis Ground

Activity Hall Sports Club/Community Association use

1950

1

180 Yes

1036108 Frank Lee Centre Activity Hall Registered Membership use

1975 2009 1

180 Yes

1005919 Hills Road Sports & Tennis Centre

Main Pay and Play 1996

4

594 Yes

1005919 Hills Road Sports & Tennis Centre

Activity Hall Pay and Play 1996 2008 0 8 8 64

1004896 Kelsey Kerridge Sports Centre


8

1221 Yes

1004902 Manor Community College Sports Centre


4

486 Yes

1004902 Manor Community College Sports Centre

Activity Hall Pay and Play 1960

1 10 18 180 Yes

1043527 Nci Sports And Social Club Activity Hall Sports Club/Community Association use

1885

0

1007977 Netherhall Community Sports Centre

Main Pay and Play 1990 2009 4

594 Yes



1

180 Yes



Active Places


Refurb date

No Badminton


Badminton clearance



1

180 Yes

6004015 Parkside Community College Activity Hall Sports Club/Community Association use

2004 1

180 Yes

1204746 St Bedes Inter Church School Main Pay and Play 2006

4

594 Yes

1204746 St Bedes Inter Church School Activity Hall Pay and Play 1985

1 10 18 180

1039181 St Faiths School Activity Hall Sports Club/Community Association use

1

180 Yes

1039181 St Faiths School Main Sports Club/Community Association use

2011

6

918 Yes

1043725 St Georges Club Activity Hall Sports Club/Community Association use

0

1004899 The Leys Sports Complex Main Pay and Play 1995

5

810 Yes

1004909 The Perse School Main Sports Club/Community Association use

2000

6 22.7 38 862.6 Yes

1204633 The Perse School For Girls Activity Hall Sports Club/Community Association use

1965

0

180 Yes

1204647 Bassingbourn Sports Centre Main Sports Club/Community Association use

2008

4 18 33 594 Yes

1014577 Cambourne Fitness And Sports Centre


4

594 Yes

1004882 Cambridge Regional College Sports Centre

Main Pay and Play 1993 2005 4 17 28 476 Yes

1004882 Cambridge Regional College Sports Centre


4 20 30 600 Yes

1006778 Comberton Leisure Centre Main Pay and Play 1980 2005 4

594 Yes

1006778 Comberton Leisure Centre Activity Hall Pay and Play 2003

1

180 Yes



Active Places


Refurb date

No Badminton


Badminton clearance

1204734 Comberton Village College Activity Hall Sports Club/Community Association use

2011

2

324 Yes

1004886 Cottenham & District Sports Centre


3

486 Yes

1004886 Cottenham & District Sports Centre


1

180 Yes

1036415 Cottenham Primary School Activity Hall Sports Club/Community Association use

1960 2003 1 12 19 228

6017127 Fowlmere Recreation Ground Activity Hall Sports Club/Community Association use

1984

1

180

1004890 Gamlingay Village College & The Fitness Workshop


1995

1

180 Yes

1044472 Hardwick Community Primary School


1980

0

1044130 Hexcel Holdings (Uk) Ltd Activity Hall Sports Club/Community Association use

0

6004161 Ickleton Village Hall Ground Activity Hall Pay and Play 1999

1

180 Yes

1004894 Impington Sports Centre Main Pay and Play 1995

4

594 Yes

1004894 Impington Sports Centre Activity Hall Pay and Play 1995 2006 1

180

1044129 Johnson Hall Activity Hall Sports Club/Community Association use

0

1002945 Linton Community Sports Centre


3 17 27 459 Yes

1002945 Linton Community Sports Centre


2

324 Yes

6004124 Lynton Way Recreation Ground


0

1007978 Meadows Community Centre Activity Hall Pay and Play 1997

1

180 Yes

1004904 Melbourn Sports Centre Main Pay and Play 1991

3

486 Yes



Active Places


Refurb date

No Badminton


Badminton clearance

6017201 Milton Recreation Ground Activity Hall Pay and Play 1989

2

324 Yes

1207159 Over Community Centre Activity Hall Pay and Play 1995 2008 1

180 Yes


Main Pay and Play 1970 2004 3

486 Yes


Activity Hall Pay and Play 1970 2004 2

324

1043743 Stow-Cum-Quy Village Hall Activity Hall Sports Club/Community Association use

0

1004920 Swavesey Village College Sports Centre


3 15 22 330 Yes

1009918 University of Cambridge Sports Centre

Main Sports Club/Community Association use

2013 8 1221 Yes



APPENDIX E: SPORTS VILLAGE STAFF ESTIMATES

Sports Village Staffing

Operational hours Hours

Monday to Friday 6.00 am to 10.15 pm 67.5

Saturday & Sunday 8.45am to 6.15pm 19

Total 86.5

Holiday and sickness cover rate

Leisure Assistant rate 15,000

Weeks 52

Hours 37

Cover rate 7.80

Operational Staffing

Designation Number/ fte

Salary Total National insurance @12.8%

Pension @ 6%

Sickness @ 3 weeks

Holidays @ 6 weeks

Training @ 2%

Total

Site Manager 1 40,000 40,000 5,120 2,400 0 0 800 48,320

Health and Fitness Manager 1 27,000 27,000 3,456 1,620 0 0 540 32,616

Marketing and commercial Football Manager 1 27,000 27,000 3,456 1,620 0 0 540 32,616

Duty Managers 3 21,500 64,500 8,256 3,870 2,596 5,192 1,290 85,704

Senior leisure attendants 3 18,000 54,000 6,912 3,240 2,596 5,192 1,080 73,020

Leisure attendants 2 16,000 32,000 4,096 1,920 1,731 3,462 640 43,848

Administrator 1 16,000 16,000 2,048 960 0 0 320 19,328

Receptionist (2 entrances) 3.5 15,000 52,500 6,720 3,150 3,029 6,058 1,050 72,507

Head Groundsman 1 23,000 23,000 2,944 1,380 865 1,731 460 30,380

Ground staff 2 16,000 32,000 4,096 1,920 1,731 3,462 640 43,848

Fitness Instructors 3 18,000 54,000 6,912 3,240 2,596 5,192 1,080 73,020

Cleaner 2 12,145 24,290 3,109 1,457 1,731 3,462 486 34,535



Designation Number/ fte

Salary Total National insurance @12.8%

Pension @ 6%

Sickness @ 3 weeks

Holidays @ 6 weeks

Training @ 2%

Total

Total 446,290 57,125 26,777 16,875 33,750 8,926 589,743

Instructors

Designation Hours Weeks Rate Total

Multi skill coaches 9 36 10 3,240

Group Fitness Instructors 35 48 22 36,960

Mini football coaching 16 36 10 5,760

Children's parties 3 48 10 1,440

Over 60's activities 12 38 12 5,472

Referees 32 48 10 15,360

Event staff / casual 30 48 8 11,520

79,752

Sports Camps

Designation Hours Weeks Rate Total

Easter 80 2 10 1,600

Whitson 80 1 10 800

Summer 100 5 10 5,000

October 100 1 10 1,000

February 100 1 10 1,000

Total 9,400

GROSVENOR



APPENDIX F: SPORT ENGLAND MARKET SEGMENTATION SEGMENTS

Segment name and

description Segment characteristics

Main age

band

Socio econ

1 x 30

3 x 30

% Eng- popn

Media and Communications Key brands Top sports (played at least once a month) and sporting behaviour

Ben Competitive Male Urbanites

Male, recent graduates, with a ‘work-hard, play-hard’ attitude. Graduate professional, single.

18-25 ABC1

69%

4.9%

Ben is a heavy internet user, using it for sports news, personal emails, social networking and buying films, games and tickets. He is highly responsive to internet advertising.

Ben is a very active type and takes part in sport on a regular basis. He is the sportiest of the 19 segments. Ben’s top sports are football (33%), keep fit/ gym (24%), cycling (18%), athletics including running (15%) and swimming (13%). 39%

Jamie Sports Team Lads

Young blokes enjoying football, pints and pool. Vocational student, single.

18-25 C2DE

59%

5.4%

Jamie is a prolific mobile phone user and as uses this as a primary source of information. He likes to text rather than talk, and uses 3G for sports results and sms text information services.

Jamie is a very active type that takes part in sport on a regular basis. Jamie’s top sports are football (28%), keep fit and gym (22%), athletics including running (12%), cycling (12%) and swimming (10%). 31%

Chloe Fitness Class Friends

Young image-conscious females keeping fit and trim. Graduate professional, single.

18-25 ABC1

56%

4.7%

Chloe is a heavy internet and mobile phone user. She uses her mobile to keep in contact with friends and family, preferring this to her landline. Chloe has a new 3G phone which provides internet access but is still likely to use text as her first source of information.

Chloe is an active type that takes part in sport on a regular basis. Chloe’s top sports are keep fit/ gym (28%), swimming (24%), athletics including running (14%), cycling (11%) and equestrian (5%)

23%

Leanne Supportive Singles

Young busy mums and their supportive college mates. Student or PT vocational, Likely to have children.

18-25 C2DE

42%

4.3%

Leanne is a light internet user and a heavy mobile phone user, using this instead of a landline to contact friends. She uses sms text services and also entertainment features on her mobile. Leanne’s mobile is likely to be pay-as-you-go and she responds to text adverts.

Leanne is the least active segment of her age group. Leanne’s top sports are keep fit/ gym (23%), swimming (18%), athletics including running (9%), cycling (6%) and football (4%) 17%

Helena Career Focused Female

Single professional women, enjoying life in the fast lane Full time professional, single.

26-45 ABC1

53%

4.6%

Helena always has her mobile and PDA on hand so that she is contactable for work and social calls. She is a heavy internet user, but mainly from home, and uses this as her primary source of information.

Helena is a fairly active type that takes part in sport on a regular basis. Helena’s top sports are keep fit/ gym (26%), swimming (22%), cycling (11%), athletics including running (9%), and equestrian (3%).

19%

Tim Settling Down Males

Sporty male professionals, buying a house and settling down with partner.

26-45 ABC1 62% 8.8% Tim’s main source of information is the internet -he uses this for information on property, sports and managing his finances. He is a heavy mobile phone

Tim is an active type that takes part in sport on a regular basis. Tim’s top sports are cycling (21%), keep fit/ gym (20%), swimming (15%),



Segment name and

description Segment characteristics

Main age

band

Socio econ

1 x 30

3 x 30

% Eng- popn

Media and Communications Key brands Top sports (played at least once a month) and sporting behaviour

Professional, may have children, married or single. 27%

user and likes to access information 24/7. Tim will often buy things online and is relatively likely to use sms text alerts and 3G services.

football (13%) and golf (7%)

Alison Stay at Home Mums

Mums with a comfortable, but busy, lifestyle. Stay-at-home mum, children, married.

36-45 ABC1

55%

4.4%

Alison is a medium TV viewer and may have a digital package, but is unlikely to respond to TV advertising. She is a medium internet user and is unlikely to respond to internet advertising, but will use it as a source of information to aid her decision-making. She has a pay-as-you-go mobile for emergencies, but prefers to use her landline.

Alison is a fairly active segment with above average levels of participation in sport. Alison’s top sports are: keep fit/ gym (27%), swimming (25%), cycling (12%), athletics including running (11%0, and equestrian (3%) 20%

Jackie Middle England Mums

Mums juggling work, family and finance. Vocational job, may have children, married or single.

36-45 C1C2

D

47%

4.9%

Jackie is a medium TV viewer, enjoying soaps, chat shows and dramas, and has Freeview digital channels. She is a light and cautious internet user, but has been encouraged by her children’s prolific usage and is becoming more confident herself

Jackie has above average participation levels in sport, but is less active than other segments in her age group. Jackie’s top sports are keep fit/ gym (22%), swimming (20%), cycling (9%), athletics including running (6%), and badminton (2%).

16%

Kev Pub League Team Mates

Blokes who enjoy pub league games and watching live sport. Vocational job, may have children, married or single.

36-45 DE

43%

5.9%

Kev is a heavy TV viewer, likely to have a digital or cable package for extra sports coverage. He is a heavy radio listener and is likely to favour local commercial stations. Kev uses his mobile phone for social reasons but will not respond to text advert

Kev has above average levels of participation in sport. Kev’s top sports are keep fit/ gym (14%), football (12%), cycling (11%), swimming (10%) and athletics including running (6%) 17%

Paula Stretched Single Mums

Single mums with financial pressures, childcare issues and little time for pleasure. Job seeker or part time low skilled worker, children, single.

26-45 DE

36%

3.7%

Paula is a heavy TV viewer, enjoying quiz and chat shows, reality TV and soaps. She is likely to have a digital or cable package. Paula does not have internet access at home, and is a heavy mobile phone user, although this is likely to be pay-as-you-go

Paula is not a very active type and her participation is lower than that of the general adult population. Paula’s top sports are keep fit/ gym (18%), swimming (17%), cycling (5%), athletics including running (4%) and football (3%)

13%

Philip Comfortable Mid Life Male

Mid-life professional, sporty males with older children and more time for themselves. Full time job and owner occupied, children, married.

46-55 ABC1

51%

8.7%

Philip is a medium TV viewer, likely to have digital and use interactive services for sports and business news. He is a heavy radio listener. Philip is comfortable purchasing over the phone and internet, but is unlikely to respond to sms text alerts

Philip’s sporting activity levels are above the national average. Philip’s top sports are cycling (16%), keep fit/ gym (15%), swimming (12%), football (9%), and golf (8%)

20%



Elaine Empty Nest Career Ladies

Mid-life professionals who have more time for themselves since their children left home. Full time job and owner occupied, married.

46-55 ABC1

43%

6.1%

Philip is a medium TV viewer, likely to have digital and use interactive services for sports and business news. He is a heavy radio listener. Philip is comfortable purchasing over the phone and internet, but is unlikely to respond to sms text alerts

Elaine’s sporting activity levels are similar to the national average. Elaine’s top sports are keep fit/ gym (21%), swimming (18%), cycling (7%), athletics including running (3%) and tennis (2%).

12%

Roger & Joy Early Retirement Couples

Free-time couples nearing the end of their careers Full-time job or retired, married.

56-65 ABC1

38%

6.8%

Roger and Joy are medium TV viewers and heavy radio listeners. They regularly read the Times of Daily Telegraph, and a local paper. They have increased their use of the internet and may now have access to it at home.

Roger and Joy are slightly less active than the general population. Roger and Joy’s top sports are keep fit/ gym (13%), swimming (13%), cycling (8%), golf (6%), and angling (2%)

10%

Brenda Older Working Women

Middle aged ladies, working to make ends meet Part-time job, married.

46-65 C2DE

29%

4.9%

Brenda is a heavy TV viewer and is likely to respond to TV advertising. She is a medium radio listener, preferring local commercial stations. Brenda rarely has access to the internet, and is an infrequent mobile user. She enjoys reading the Mirror or the Sun.

Brenda is generally less active than the average adult. Brenda’s top sports are keep fit/ gym (15%), swimming (13%), cycling (4%), athletics including running (2%) and badminton (1%)

8%

Terry Local ‘Old Boys’

Generally inactive older men, low income, little provision for retirement. Job Seeker, married or single.

56-65 DE

26%

3.7%

Terry is a high TV viewer, both at home and in the pub, particularly enjoying live sports coverage. He reads the tabloids on a daily basis. Terry does not use the internet, and does not feel he is missing out. He is unlikely to have a mobile phone.

Terry is generally less active than the average adult. Terry’s top sports are keep fit/ gym (8%), swimming (6%), cycling (6%), angling (4%), and golf (4%).

9%

Norma Late Life Ladies

Older ladies, recently retired with a basic income to enjoy their lifestyles. Job seeker or retired, single.

56-65 DE

23%

2.1%

Norma is a high TV viewer, enjoying quiz shows, chat shows, soaps and religious programmes. Most new technology has passed her by, having no internet access or mobile phone, but she uses her landline to call her family.

Norma is generally less active than the average adult. Norma’s top sports are keep fit/ gym (12%), swimming (10%), cycling (2%), bowls (1%) and martial arts/ combat (1%).

6%

Ralph & Phyllis Comfortable Retired Couples

Retired couples, enjoying active and comfortable lifestyles. Retired, married or single.

66+ ABC1

28%

4.2%

Ralph and Phyllis are medium to light TV viewers, preferring to be out and about instead. They are unlikely to have access to the internet, although it is something they are considering. They read the newspaper daily: either the Daily Telegraph or Times.

Ralph and Phyllis are less active than the average adult, but sportier than other segments of the same age group. Ralph and Phyllis’ top sports are keep fit/ gym (10%), swimming (9%), golf (7%), bowls (4%), and cycling (4%).

9%



Frank Twilight Years Gent

Retired men with some pension provision and limited exercise opportunities. Retired, married or single .

66+ C1C2

D

21%

4.0%

Frank is a heavy TV viewer and enjoys watching live sport and notices TV advertising, which he is influenced by. He does not use the internet and is nervous of computers. Frank reads a newspaper most days, either the Daily Mail or Express. He does not have a mobile phone

Frank is generally much less active than the average adult. Frank’s top sports are golf (7%), keep fit/ gym (6%), bowls (6%), swimming (6%) and cycling (4%).

9%

Elsie & Arnold Retirement Home Singles

Retired singles or widowers, predominantly female, living in sheltered accommodation. Retired, widowed.

66+ DE

17%

8.0%

Elsie and Arnold are heavy TV viewers, enjoying quiz shows, religious programmes and old films. They generally do not have access to the internet or use a mobile phone, and only use their landline to call family

Elsie and Arnold are much less active than the average adult. Their top sports are keep fit/ gym (10%), swimming (7%), bowls (3%), golf (1%) and cycling (1%).

5%

GROSVENOR



APPENDIX G: CONSULTEE LIST

Organisation Name Designation

ABAE Naomi Clayphan Club Support Officer

Abbey Leisure Complex Leisure Attendant

Amateur Swimming Association Dennis Freeman- Wright

ASA Facilities Team

Amateur Swimming Association Collette Railton Aquatic Officer

Anglia Ruskin University Martin Beaver Head of Sport

Arm Holdings plc Elspeth Bannister Director, Organisation Effectiveness

AstraZeneca Andy Williams Head of AZ Cambridge Transition team

AstraZeneca Martin Butler Director, European Strategic Sourcing

Aveva Sharon Budworth HR Manager

Badminton England Rhiannon Smith Partnerships Manager

Bassingbourn Sports Centre

Mystery visit

Bottisham Sports Centre

Mystery visit

Bourn Health & Fitness Club Jay Lee Manager

British Cycling Nigel Hampton Regional Development Manager

British Fencing Charlie Miller Workforce and Business Development Manager

British Gymnastics Erin Jolly Club Development Coordinators

British Judo Mark Beacher National Development Manager

British Judo Laurence Kenyon Service Manager (Eastern)

British Rowing Simon Dickie National Development Manager

British Triathlon Carol MacDonald Regional Programme Manager

British Universities and College Sport

Ollie Selfe National Football Development Manager

Cambourne Fitness and Sports Centre

Shane Railley Manager

Cambridge Ahead Jane Paterson-Todd

Chief Executive

Cambridge City Council Ian Ross Leisure Services Officer

Cambridge City Council Bruce Walker Planning Policy Officer

Cambridge and Coleridge AC Neil Costello Chairman

Cambridge City Hockey Club Andy Richardson Committee Representative

Cambridge Cycling Digby Symonds Representative

Cambridge Education Group Gill Rig Group HR Director

Cambridge Nomads Hockey Club

Rachel Gooch

Cambridge Triathlon Club Tim Williams Regional Head Coach

Cambridge University Tony Lemons Director of Physical Activity

Cambridge University Karen Pearce Head of Physical Activity

Cambridgeshire Badminton Association

Daniel Bates Committee

Cambridgeshire County Hockey Association

Sally Tippen County Chairman

Cambridgeshire FA Joe Goude County Development Manager

Cambridgeshire Indoor Bowls Association

Tony Barclay Chairman

Cambridgeshire RFU Bob Mann Youth Rugby Development Programme Manager



Organisation Name Designation

Cherry Hinton Leisure Centre

Mystery visit

Chesterton Sports Centre Hannah Hibble Asst. Manager

Comberton Sports Centre

Mystery visit

Cottenham Sports Centre

Mystery visit

Domino Printing Vicki Sanderson Group HR Director

England Athletics Neil Deans Area Manager

England Hockey Andrew Dale Relationship Manager

England Netball Janette Bowden Regional Manager

Fowlmere Recreation Ground Tom Ginty Michael Bates

Trustee (sports) Chair of the Fowlmere Parish Trust Committee.

Frank Lee Centre Richard Morris Centre Manager

Gamlingay Sports Centre

Mystery visit

Impington Sports Centre Mystery visit

Kings Hedges Learner Pool

Mystery visit

Linton Sports Centre

Mystery visit

LTA Neil Twitchett Tennis Development Manager

LTA Darren Clarke Facilities Project Manager

Manor Community College Sports Centre

Ross Knappett Manager

Marshalls of Cambridge Douglas Cattermole

HR Director

Melbourn Sports Centre Mystery visit

Netherhall Community Sports Centre

Sarah Bull Sports Centre Manager

Parkside Community College Darren Howard Bruce Baldwin

Premises Manager Estates Manager

Parkside Pools

Mystery visit

Ridgeons Ann Corbyn Group HR Director

Royston BMX Club Phil Townsend Club Chairman

South Cambridgeshire District Council

John Dixon Planning Policy Officer

Swavesey Sports Centre

Mystery visit

The FA Mark Liddiard Regional Facilities Manager

The FA Peter Kay National Facilities Investment Manager

The Leys Sports Complex David Dean Sports Facilities Manager

Triathlon England Carol MacDonald Regional Programme Manager

Volleyball England Rohan West Participation Manager

Volleyball England Rachel Laybourne Relationship Manager

Wilberforce Road Sports Ground

Lucy McGennity Bookings Coordinator