WCC Leisure Centre Provision Continuum Final Report 290513€¦ · Winchester City Council: Leisure Centre Provision Options Appraisal and Feasibility Study Final Report, May 2013

Winchester City Council: Leisure Centre Provision Options Appraisal and Feasibility Study Final Report, May 2013

www.continuumleisure.co.uk 1

Prepared by:

Continuum Sport & Leisure

Prepared for:

WINCHESTER CITY COUNCIL

LEISURE CENTRE PROVISION OPTIONS APPRAISAL AND FEASIBILITY STUDY

FINAL REPORT

MAY 2013



DOCUMENT CONTROL

Amendment History

Version

no.

Date Reference Author(s) Comments

1 10/05/13 Initial Draft Report W.Tucker and N.Trim 2 17/05/13 Final Draft Report W.Tucker and N.Trim 3 29/05/13 Final Report W.Tucker and N.Trim

Client Distribution List

Name Position

Steve Tilbury Corporate Director (Operations) Amanda Ford Head of Sport and Physical Activity



CONTENTS 1. Introduction and Background 4

2. River Park Leisure Centre 8

3. Local Profile, Needs and Competitor Analysis 11

4. Strategic Overview 32

5. Stakeholder Consultation 39

6. Development Options 53

7. Options Appraisal 64

8. Summary and Next Steps 81

Appendices Appendix 1 – Winchester Market Segmentation Profile Appendix 2 – Facilities within Winchester and Hampshire Appendix 3 – List of Project Consultees Appendix 4 – Development Option Concept Designs Appendix 5 – Capital Cost Schedules Appendix 6 – Outline Operational Business Plans



1. Introduction and Background 1.1 Introduction In January 2013, Continuum Sport and Leisure were commissioned by Winchester City Council (WCC) to undertake a needs analysis, feasibility study and options appraisal for the future provision of leisure centre facilities within Winchester. WCC were keen to be armed with detailed and robust information to help inform their planning and decision making in relation to any potential future developments of facilities within the city. A key part of the brief provided to the Consultant Team was the fact that the work should not focus on specific sites within the city that have the potential to be the location of any future development. The Consultant Team were asked to consider the scope, scale and facility mix involved with any possible future leisure centre scheme, with WCC engaging third party Planning Consultants to review and assess the viability of sites within Winchester (to be then assessed alongside this study report). In order to explore the feasibility of developing any leisure centre facility in the future, highlight the demand for facilities, illustrate the impact that they can have in the local area, identify appropriate facility mixes and to explore the potential financial issues and opportunities that are associated with any scheme, the Consultant Team have developed this detailed report to assist WCC with their decision making regarding the long-term provision of leisure facilities. Continuum is a Sport England Strategic Framework Partner company which underlines the national recognition that the company has received for its work in relation to the strategic planning for sport and the development of facilities. This report presents the results of Continuum’s research and consultation process and provides an objective, third party assessment of the opportunities and demands for sports and leisure facilities within Winchester. It also provides an accompanying evidence base to support this. The report also includes a qualitative and quantitative review and analysis of development options for the site and their associated financial implications for WCC to consider. 1.2 Methodology To ensure the development of a detailed and robust options appraisal and associated recommendations, the Consultant Team deployed a multi-stage methodology that sought to meet the needs of WCC in relation to identifying the options available to the authority for improving provision and the community offer in relation to sports and leisure facilities within the city. It has built upon and takes into account our expertise and experience of conducting research and consultation in relation to projects of this type and has ensured an objective and outcome focussed review. 1.2.1 Desk Based Review A significant amount of research, statistical information and strategic documentation has been analysed and reviewed by the Consultant Team during this project. This information has provided background data and context about the population and demographic make-up, current participation trends and the existing supply of sports facilities within Winchester and neighbouring areas.



This background research also includes the review of strategies and action plans that have been published by a range of national, county-wide and local bodies and organisations. It has been undertaken as a way of highlighting the strategic relevance of Winchester, as a city and location for facilities, to a wide range of partners and stakeholders. Information has also been provided by the centre’s operator DC Leisure that relates to the current and historical management of the River Park Leisure Centre, the key local authority owned leisure centre within the city at the current time. This data has been reviewed and analysed and used to inform the consultation sessions as well as the possible facility mix and financial options for any future development within the city. This information provides the Consultant Team with background data on how that facility is currently performing in terms of what the local community are utilising at the site, membership numbers and current revenue generation from this leisure centre site. 1.2.2 Consultation with Key Stakeholders A key part of this study has been a detailed consultation process with key partners and stakeholders. The Consultant Team undertook a number of face-to-face and telephone interviews with a range of stakeholders, a list of whom were agreed with the Winchester Client Team during the initial phases of this study. These interviews centred around a number of standardised and bespoke questions for each of the consultees in order to gain their insight and opinions on current provision within the city, the potential development of facilities and future opportunities that exist for sport and leisure within Winchester. The list of key consultees included individuals from WCC, Hampshire County Council (HCC), Sport Hampshire and the Isle of Wight (the County Sports Partnership), Sport England, the University of Winchester, the local Sport and Physical Activity Alliance, Winchester Disability Sports Forum, DC Leisure, the Winchester Fit for the Future Group, Winchester Business Improvement District, officers from neighbouring local authorities and a number of National Governing Bodies of Sport. In order to gain the views and opinions of a wider range of partners and potential users of any facilities within the city, the Consultant Team also developed online surveys which were sent to a number of locally based sports clubs/organisations, and local schools. The findings of the consultation process and the responses to the online questionnaires have been analysed and are incorporated into the consultation findings presented in Section 5 of this report.

1.2.3 Concept Designs, Options Appraisal, Business Case and Affordability Following on from the detailed analysis of the findings from the consultation process, the Consultant Team identified a number of options, discussed them with the WCC Project Team and then developed concept designs and indicative cost plans for each of them. Continuum has worked with their Associate Architects, Faulkner Browns, to develop potential development options for WCC and a number of initial concept designs and



spatial plans have been prepared to illustrate the different options proposed by the Consultant Team. Cost Consultants EC Harris have also been an integral part of the Consultant Team and they have prepared outline indicative capital costs for each of the options presented for consideration. Following on from this the Consultant Team has undertaken an options appraisal of each option. A key element of the options appraisal exercise that has been undertaken as part of this project is the development of outline business plans that illustrate the associated revenue implications for each of the options. The options are then subject to qualitative and quantitative financial analysis to present a series of initial recommendations for WCC to discuss. The results of the options appraisal can be found within Section 7 of the report. It is important to note that the analysis and recommendations contained within this report are those of the Consultant Team and reflect the findings and research within this study. The recommendations and facility mix options presented will require further refinement and scrutiny. Any reference to consultation with key partners, in particular DC Leisure, should not be interpreted as those parties being in agreement with the information presented within this study report at this stage. 1.3 Report Structure This report is structured under 8 key sections. Section 2 provides an overview of the River Park site and gives an overview of the findings of the Consultant Team’s initial assessment of facilities currently available at the site. It also gives some high level information about visitor and member numbers and the current performance of River Park. Section 3 provides a market appraisal and sets out a local needs and competitor analysis. It comprises of a number of sub-sections which provide a review of the population and demographic make-up of Winchester, current participation rates and trends, key market segments within the district and the existing supply of specific sports facilities within the local area. Section 4 presents a review of the key national, county and local strategies, plans and policies and highlights the contribution that the redevelopment of leisure facilities in Winchester can make to a range of key stakeholders and partners. Section 5 summarises the outcomes of the thorough consultation process undertaken and identifies the leading issues and considerations that have helped to inform the development of the leading options for the site. Section 6 contains concept plans for each of the short listed options for the site and also provides the outline capital costs associated with each option. Section 7 provides a detailed options appraisal and business case for the potential developments. It also provides outline revenue implications and qualitative and quantitative analysis for each project option reviewing the overall capital costs and longer term financing options for WCC to consider. Finally, Section 8 provides WCC with a summary of the report and concluding commentary that includes the recommendations and key critical steps to be taken. Appendices attached to the report include a comprehensive breakdown of the 19 different Market segments and their prevalence within Winchester, information about the current supply of specific types of sport and leisure facility within the area, a series of development option concept drawings and accommodation schedules prepared by the Consultant Team, capital cost schedules for each option



that have been prepared by EC Harris and detailed 10 Year operational income and expenditure forecasts for each development option.



2. River Park Leisure Centre As detailed within Section 1 of this report, the Consultant Team were asked not to consider specific sites within Winchester as part of this study. However, it is important to explore the current community offer that is available at the River Park Leisure Centre (RPLC). This facility and the further consideration (by WCC) of the long-term future for the centre will have an influence on WCC’s considerations for investment into any sport and leisure facilities in the future. It is also important to set in context the current visitor numbers and financial performance of RPLC as a way of ascertaining current demand for access to such facilities within the city. RPLC currently offers the following facilities: o An 8-court sports hall o 25m 6-lane main swimming pool with seating and a smaller teaching pool o A health and fitness suite with circa 100 stations and studio space for sessions

and classes o 4 squash courts o 4 tennis courts o A small Artificial Grass Pitch (AGP) Figure 2.1 illustrates the RPLC site and shows its proximity to the North Walls Recreation Ground, Winchester Indoor Bowls Centre and neighbouring residential dwellings.

Figure 2.1: River Park Leisure Centre

2.1 Current Usage and Membership Numbers DC Leisure has provided the Consultant Team with visitor information for RPLC over the past 5 years and Figure 2.2 shows this data, also illustrating membership numbers during each respective year. The visitor numbers are for a 12 month



calendar year period whilst the membership number is taken from March of the year in question. Figure 2.2: RPLC Visitor and Membership Numbers (DC Leisure)

Year No. of Visitors No. of Members (As in March of the year)

2008 479,879 3,307 2009 517,125 3,182 2010 500,484 3,004 2011 487,301 2,909 2012 530,872 3,037

This information shows that the facility has an average of circa 500,000 visits each year. 2012 saw a 9% increase in visits to the site in comparison to 2011 as a direct result of the investments made into the gym and other facilities at the site. The data also shows that membership numbers have been relatively stable at circa 3,000. Figure 2.3 highlights where RPLC members over the past 5 years reside based on information provided by DC Leisure. It shows that the largest number of members live within the postcode sectors that are closest to the facility itself. This illustrates that the facility predominantly serves the local community within Winchester. Figure 2.3: Residential location of RPLC Members (DC Leisure)

RPLC appears to be a well used facility which has a consistent level of annual visitors and membership numbers. Local research and analysis that was undertaken during this project, and referred to within this report, suggests that the facility is reaching capacity and in order to



increase visitor and membership numbers further in the future serious consideration should be given to increasing the current offer within the city. 2.2 Financial Information DC Leisure has also provided the Consultant Team with an operational income and expenditure summary for RPLC for the financial years 2009/10, 2010/11 and 2011/12. Figure 2.4 summarises the operational income and expenditure associated with the management of the site across these years. The figures for 2012/13 are currently in the process of being finalised. It must be noted that the surplus figure is not DC Leisure’s profit on the operation of the facilities at RPLC because it excludes allocations towards company management costs and interest charges. Figure 2.4: RPLC Operational Income and Expenditure (DC Leisure)

Year Operational Income Operational Expenditure Surplus after Depreciation Costs

2009/10 £2,456,785 £1,968,455 £376,365 2010/11 £2,393,346 £1,859,788 £482,325 2011/12 £2,289,360 £1,807,522 £420,905

This financial information shows that the site is operating in a financially sustainable manner with key income streams being generated by the health and fitness facilities and the swimming pools at the site. Health and fitness income represents 48% of turnover for River Park, which is slightly higher than other similar facilities, showing both a strong market within Winchester and highlighting the lack of other competing fitness offers within the city. 2.3 Summary Whilst RPLC continues to attract circa 500,000 visits per year and generate an operational surplus many people feel that the facility is showing its age. Whilst the Consultant Team have not undertaken any Condition Survey or Site Assessment during this project, there does appear to be a feeling that the centre is no longer meeting the needs of the local population in Winchester in terms of being able to facilitate further growth in levels of participation in sport and physical activity. Whether or not WCC decides to develop a new facility within Winchester or continues to invest in RPLC is an important issue that requires careful consideration. The potential development of a new facility within the city must be informed by a detailed needs analysis, consultation process and options appraisal as set out in the following sections of this report.



3. Local Profile, Needs and Competitor Analysis When developing or improving facilities for sport and physical activity it is important to consider the demographic characteristics of the local area and the population the facilities will serve. This helps to ensure that the facility in question best meets the needs of local people and provides a viable and sustainable offer. Ensuring that any decisions about investment and the development of new or improved facilities are based on a robust needs and evidence base also allows for long-term strategic planning for facilities and their future usage and helps to engage partners and stakeholders by demonstrating the potential impact of new or improved facilities on a wide range of outcomes. This section of the report provides a detailed analysis of the local population and existing facility provision for sport and physical activity within Winchester. It sets out a summary of the demographic breakdown of the local area, current levels of participation in sport and physical activity and the existing provision of certain facilities within the district area, with reference to facilities in neighbouring authorities where relevant. This information is used to examine the potential need for new or improved facilities for sport and physical activity and also helps to inform financial planning with regards to potential income which could be generated by particular facility types. A range of research tools have been used to fully understand the needs of a local population and the extent to which these needs are being met by existing facility provision. These include the latest research from the Office of National Statistics, and Winchester’s 2012 Health Profile as well as sports specific tools which give information on participation levels and influencing factors, including Sport England’s Active People Survey and Market Segmentation tool. These research tools allow us to understand what activities people in Winchester have a particular propensity to take part in, what barriers might prevent people from being active and what would help to motivate greater activity levels amongst all age groups. In addition to understanding the local population it is also important to fully understand the current situation in relation to facility provision. Sport England’s Active Places Power database, Sports Facility Calculator tool and Facilities Planning Model research allow for an understanding of what facilities are provided within a specific area and where they are located as well as an appreciation of the extent to which existing facility provision is likely to be meeting local needs. These tools consider facility provision and local demand for facilities. Sport England’s tools provide the most up to date method of assessing facility provision within a local authority area. The Consultant Team have analysed the available research and data and the outcomes are presented within this section of the report. This information has been used to help inform potential options for Winchester City Council to consider so that future provision can help to meet the needs of local people in the long term. This evidence base is important both to inform decisions which need to be made by Winchester City Council and to engage potential funders, partners and stakeholders to support the potential development of new or improved facilities within the city. 3.1 Location Figure 3.1 shows the location of Winchester within Hampshire. Winchester is bordered by Test Valley, Eastleigh, Fareham, Portsmouth, Havant, East Hampshire



and Basingstoke and Deane. Winchester covers an area of 661km2 and is the 59th largest local authority in England in terms of area covered. Figure 3.1: Map of Hampshire showing the location of Winchester

3.2 Demographic Profile Demographic and social indicators such as population change, prosperity and deprivation levels and health outcomes are important considerations when profiling a local area and determining needs associated with sport and physical activity. This section provides an overview of these issues in Winchester, highlighting areas in which potential facility developments can contribute to improving the overall quality of life for local people as well as identifying demographic groups with a propensity to be active and pay to access facilities for sport and physical activity. 3.2.1 Population Any facilities which are newly developed or improved in Winchester will need to meet the needs of Winchester’s future population as well as its current population. The Office of National Statistics (ONS) produces population projections which help to enable future planning for local populations. Projections up to 2021 have been produced based on the latest 2011 Census Data. Projections from 2022 onwards were most recently produced in 2010 and were based on mid year population estimates. Figure 3.2 summarises the most up to date population projections which are available for Winchester. The information contained within Figure 3.2 demonstrates that Winchester’s population grew by 8.9% between the 2001 and 2011 census. The South East’s population grew by 8.2% and the national population by 8.1% during the same period. Winchester’s population is projected to grow by a further 6.7% between 2011 and 2021, compared to projected growth of 9.3% in the south east region and 8.6% nationally. While Winchester’s projected population growth is below the regional and national



average, an increase in the population will nonetheless place greater pressure on existing facilities. Figure 3.2: Projected Population Growth – Winchester, South East Region & England (ONS)

Area 2001

(census) 2011

(census) 2018

(projection) 2021

(projection)

2030 (projection – pre 2011)

Winchester 107,220 116,820 121,680 123,909 132,700 South East 8,000,645 8,652,784 9,218,302 9,453,452 9,863,100 England 49,138,831 53,107,169 56,383,132 57,687,784 59,738,300

It is important to note that 32% of the local authority’s population live within the city area of Winchester and it is particularly important to ensure that there are sufficient high quality leisure facilities, both indoor and outdoor, to meet the needs of local people in and around the city. Improving the quality of facilities can help to ensure that people are able to access quality opportunities to take part in sport and physical activity for years to come. 3.2.2 Age Profile When planning for the development of new facilities for sport and physical activity it is important to consider the age profile of the catchment population. Participation preferences and facility requirements vary across different age groups, and it is essential that these requirements are fully understood to ensure that any new and improved facilities meet identified needs. Figure 3.3 shows both the age breakdown in Winchester in 2011 and the projected age breakdown in 2021, with national figures for comparison. Figure 3.3: Age breakdown of Winchester’s Population (2011 and 2021)

0‐9 10‐19 20‐29 30‐39 40‐49 50‐59 60‐69 70‐79 80+ Winchester 2011 11.24% 12.84% 11.29% 11.7% 14.69% 12.82% 12.02% 7.71% 5.69% Winchester 2021 12.07% 12.96% 8.98% 10.63% 12.53% 14.06% 11.42% 10.19% 7.16% National 2011 11.9% 12.04% 13.66% 13.28% 14.64% 12.1% 10.77% 6.99% 4.63% National 2021 12.67% 11.1% 12.89% 13.7% 12.2% 13.14% 10.34% 8.51% 5.45%

The data within Figure 3.3 shows that in line with national trends, Winchester’s population is expected to age with the proportion of the population aged 70-79 increasing from 7.71% to 10.19% and 80+ increasing from 5.69% to 7.16% for example. Winchester’s working age population (including those aged 20-29, 30-39 and 40-49) is predicted to represent a smaller proportion of the population in the district. This goes against the forecast national average figures. For example, in 2021 8.98% of Winchester’s population is forecast to be aged 20-29 compared to 12.89% nationally. It will be important for sports facilities in Winchester to continue to meet the needs of the local population as it grows and as its age profile changes. Greater consideration may need to given to the provision of accessible facilities and opportunities which meet the needs of older people as well as facilities which cater to children, young people and younger adults. While the proportion of the population which is younger may be getting smaller, these age groups have a greater propensity to be active and as such continue to be a key consideration for facility provision. 3.2.3 Local Economy Local employment levels and the local economy can also have an influence on the population of an area’s propensity to participate and can also influence the ability of individuals to pay to access particular facilities for sport and physical activity. As



such this is an important consideration when planning new and improved facilities both in terms of the facility mix which should be provided and the specific programmes of activity which could be offered. Winchester is relatively prosperous in comparison to neighbouring areas and the nation as a whole. Winchester City Council’s Economic Strategy (2010-2020) states that Gross Value Added (GVA) per head of resident population is £28,700 in Winchester, compared to the south east regional average of £22,700. Winchester has the highest GVA per head of resident population of any local authority in Hampshire. The average gross weekly full-time pay for residents in Winchester in 2009 was £520, compared with £514 in the south east and £490 in the UK as a whole. This indicates that people in Winchester are generally likely to be in a position where they have access to higher levels of disposable income and are able to pay to access facilities for sport and physical activity. Winchester also has relatively low levels of unemployment compared with the region and the country as a whole. 42% of those of working age in Winchester are qualified to NVQ level 4 or above, compared to 31.5% in the rest of the south east and 29% in the UK as a whole. Again, this suggests a population which is relatively likely to be employed in a relatively higher paying job and have access to disposable income. 3.2.4 Deprivation When considering local needs with regards to the provision of facilities for sport and physical activity it is also important to consider deprivation levels within the local authority area. Deprivation affects the propensity and ability of the catchment population to access and use such facilities and these facilities can also form an important element of the regeneration of deprived areas. An awareness of how deprivation affects a local population can also influence how activities are delivered and what initiatives are launched to try and increase levels of participation. Figure 3.4 illustrates where Winchester was ranked nationally according to the 2010 Indices of Multiple of Deprivation (IMD). It also compares Winchester’s overall IMD rank with that of the other local authorities within Hampshire. Local authorities are listed in order of their 2010 IMD rank from most deprived to least deprived. Figure 3.4: Deprivation in Winchester in Comparison with Other Hampshire Local Authorities (IMD 2010)

Local Authority Rank Nationally 2010 City of Portsmouth 76/326

City of Southampton 81/326

Havant District 101/326

Isle of Wight 126/326

Gosport District 155/326

Rushmoor District 244/326

New Forest District 263/326

Basingstoke and Deane District 270/326

Eastleigh District 275/326

Test Valley District 286/326

East Hampshire District 301/326

Winchester District 309/326

Fareham District 311/326

Hart District 326/326

This information shows that deprivation levels within Winchester are relatively low with the authority having a rank of 309 out of the 326 local authorities within



England, placing it within the least deprived quartile. Winchester is also the third least deprived local authority in Hampshire with only Fareham and Hart having lower levels of deprivation than Winchester. However, it is important to note that levels of deprivation across Winchester itself do vary. Figure 3.5 illustrates the relative levels of deprivation within Winchester compared to national levels (on the left) and relative deprivation within Winchester itself (on the right) based on 2010 IMD rankings. On both maps, the darker the shading, the higher the levels of deprivation within that specific area. These maps reiterate that fact that whilst Winchester is not particularly deprived in national terms, there are pockets of deprivation within the local authority area when the whole district is analysed. Figure 3.5: Deprivation in Winchester: National Comparison and Local Comparison (DoH 2012 Health Profile)

These maps show that there are more deprived areas within Winchester across the northern and southern parts of the district area. It is important to remember those who are adversely affected by higher levels of deprivation when planning facilities and activities relating to sport and physical activity. It will be beneficial if facilities for sport and physical activity in Winchester can accommodate and cater for those who are relatively prosperous as well as those who may have lower levels of disposable income available to them, providing activities which can improve the health and wellbeing of these communities and provide them with new opportunities in a range of areas. 3.2.5 Health It is useful to have an understanding of the health profile of Winchester both with regards to identifying any particular health issues which new or improved facilities can contribute to addressing and also to get an initial understanding of the propensity of the local population to be active. Winchester’s 2012 Health Profile states that the health of residents is generally better than the England average, with above average life expectancy for both men and women. Figure 3.6 provides an overview of the performance of Winchester across a number of Department of Health key indicators in comparison with national averages. All of



Winchester’s scores across each of the indicators are significantly better than the national averages. Figure 3.6: Health indicators for Winchester and England (DoH 2012 Health Profile)

Health Indicator Winchester England Children in poverty 9.2% 21.9%

Obese children (Year 6) 13.8% 19% Healthy eating adults 33.2% 28.7%

Physically active adults * 18.2% 11.2% Obese adults 18.9% 24.2%

People diagnosed with diabetes 4.1% 5.5% Life expectancy: male 81.1 78.6 Life expectancy: female 84.4 82.6

Early deaths: heart disease & stroke 42 67.3 Early deaths: cancer 90.7 110.1

* The Department of Health baseline definition for ‘physically active’ relates to participation in 5 or more sessions of physical activity per week. This differs from the Sport England indicator for ‘participation’ (widely used in conjunction with results from the Active People Surveys), which defines the minimum requirement as 3x30 minute sessions of sport or physical activity per week. While it is encouraging that Winchester’s profile indicates a relatively healthy population it is still important that issues such as obesity, diabetes and early deaths from heart disease, stroke and cancer are continually combated against. Whilst the information shows that 18.2% of the adult population in Winchester are physically active, this suggests that there is still a significant proportion of the population that are not physically active. Increasing levels of physical activity, and particularly targeting those that are currently inactive, can contribute to further improving the health and the quality of life of those living within Winchester. 3.2.6 Summary Winchester’s population is predicted to grow in the coming years and this growth will continue to place additional pressure on facilities and services in the area such as those that provide opportunities for sport, leisure and physical activity. It will be important that the facility offer within Winchester continues to meet the needs of the local population as it grows and as its profile changes. For example, consideration needs to be given to the provision of accessible facilities that offer a range of suitable activities for older people as this proportion of Winchester’s population grows, including low impact sports and activities. It is also important that families and younger adults are accommodated at any facilities that are developed and improved. The provision of indoor and outdoor facilities that are family friendly and flexible at any new facility development will make the site more attractive and promote participation in sport and physical activity across all parts of the community. As discussed within this section of the report, it is also important that any leisure centre facilities which are developed provide affordable activities and opportunities that are accessible to all. This will help to ensure that any facility can help to improve the health and wellbeing of Winchester’s community and provide them with new opportunities in a range of areas. 3.3 Participation Overview Any new or improved facilities for sport and physical activity in Winchester should be planned with careful consideration given to current participation levels as well as barriers and motivating factors which affect the local population. It is important that community facilities for sport and physical activity target those who are currently



inactive as well as catering for those with a higher propensity to be active and support sustained participation levels among those that are active. An overview of local participation levels based on Sport England’s Active People Survey results is provided to give an insight into current participation levels within Winchester at the current time. This information is supplemented with data from Sport England’s Market Segmentation research which offers useful information about the potential barriers to participation, motivating factors and the sports and activities that the population within Winchester are most likely to want to participate in. As well as informing decisions about potential facility needs, this analysis can also be utilised to develop and promote specific activities at the site. 3.3.1 Sport England’s Active People Survey Sport England’s Active People Survey provides the most comprehensive assessment of levels of sports participation across the country at a local authority, county, regional and national level. It measures a range of performance indicators including participation levels, volunteering and satisfaction with local sports provision. It also measures participation in particular sports and activities and allows for an analysis of participation according to gender, disability, ethnicity and other demographic indicators. It is also possible to measure non-participation using Active People Survey results which makes it possible to identify those sections of the population most in need of intervention in order to increase their participation in sport and physical activity. The following analysis utilises data from six surveys that have been conducted by Sport England: APS 1 (2005/6), APS 2 (2007/8), APS 3 (2008/9), APS 4 (2009/10), APS 5 (2010/11) and APS 6 (2011/12). This evolving body of data allows for a comparison of performance over time across a range of sport and physical activity participation indicators. Figure 3.7 illustrates Winchester’s performance in terms of participation in moderate intensity sport for at least 30 minutes once a week and compares this with regional and national figures. Figure 3.7: Participation in moderate intensity sport at least once a week in Winchester, South East and England (APS1-6)

KPI WCC (APS1)

WCC (APS2)

WCC (APS3)

WCC (APS4)

WCC (APS5)

WCC (APS6)

Hants (APS6)

SE (APS6)

England (APS6)

At least 1 day a week x 30 minutes per week moderate

intensity participation in sport (all adults)

40.2% 42% 39.8% 43.2% 41.1% 42.3% 37.6% 37.4% 36.0%

Winchester has consistently been performing well in terms of regular participation in sport, scoring above the South East and national average every year from APS1 to APS6. 42.3% of Winchester respondents to APS6 participate in sport for at least 30 minutes per week compared to 37.4% in the south east and 36% nationally. This indicates a local population that has a propensity to take part in regular sport. In addition to regular participation in sport, it is also possible to use APS data measure additional indicators related to sport and physical activity. Figure 3.8 shows Winchester’s results for four additional measures which give an indication of levels of



volunteering in sport, club membership, receiving tuition from a coach or instructor and participation in competitive sport. Figure 3.8: KPI 2-5 in Winchester, Hampshire, South East and England (APS 1-6)

KPIs WCC (APS1)

WCC (APS2)

WCC (APS3)

WCC (APS4)

WCC (APS5)

WCC (APS6)

Hants (APS6)

SE (APS6)

England (APS6)

KPI 2 – At least 1 hour a week

volunteering to support sport (all adults)

6.6% 7.7% 5.3% 4.4% 12.5%* 10.2%* 7.7% 8.3% 7.6%

KPI 3 – Club Member (all adults)

28.9% 32.6% 26.1% 31.7% 25.5% 26.8% 24.9% 25.5% 22.8%

KPI 4 – Received tuition from an

instructor or coach in last 12 months

(all adults)

23.9% 21.2% 21.5% 24.5% 23.3% 19.9% 17.3% 18.7% 16.8%

KPI 5 – Taken part in organised

competitive sport in last 12 months (all adults)

18.3% 18.1% 20% 15.8% 16.6% 24.3% 17.2% 15.6% 14.4%

*Note that at the start of APS5 the volunteering question was changed to incorporate a wider definition of sport volunteering. Therefore, comparisons to previous years’ data should not be made. Figure 3.8 shows that Winchester also performs well in terms of volunteering, club membership, receiving tuition and participation in competitive sport when compared to regional and national figures. Winchester’s score for volunteering is high at 10.2% compared to 7.6% nationally, although it has dropped from 12.5% in APS 5. Participation in competitive sport also appears to be high and has increased significantly between APS5 and APS6. The figure of 24.3% is much higher than the national average of 14.4%. It is important that facilities in Winchester continue to cater for this relatively active and involved population and build on current trends. As well as considering activity and participation levels, it is useful to consider levels of inactivity within Winchester. The Active People Survey also measures the proportion of people who had not participated in 30 minutes of moderate sport and physical activity on any day in the four weeks prior to the survey. Results for Winchester are provided in Figure 3.9 along with county, regional and national results. This data is currently only available up to APS 4 (2009/10). Figure 3.9: Level of Inactivity in Winchester, Hampshire, South East and England (APS 1-4)

KPI WCC (APS1)

WCC (APS2)

WCC (APS3)

WCC (APS4)

Hants (APS4)

SE (APS4)

England (APS4)

Zero days moderate participation in sport &

physical activity (all adults) 42.1% 43.1% 38% 36.4% 44.3% 45.2% 48.2%

Figure 3.9 shows that the inactivity levels in Winchester were below the county, regional and national averages which is encouraging. However, the most recent data shows that 36.4% of people in are not taking part in any regular sport and physical activity. It will be particularly beneficial if new and improved facilities in Winchester can address inactivity and offer programmes of activity which reach those who are not currently taking part in any sport and physical activity.



Demographic Breakdown of Participation When analysing participation in sport and physical activity it is important to take into account variations in participation levels between demographic groups in order to ensure that participation opportunities are appropriately planned and, where necessary, targeted at those most in need of intervention. Figure 3.10 illustrates how sport and physical activity participation rates in Winchester differ between demographic groups. This data is available for APS 1-4 only. Figure 3.10: Demographic breakdown of participation in moderate intensity sport and physical activity in Winchester, Hampshire, South East and England (APS 1-4)

Population W’chstr (APS1)

W’chstr (APS2)

W’chstr (APS3)

W’chstr (APS4)

Hants (APS4)

SE (APS4)

England (APS4)

All 25.6% 25.2% 22.8% 29.4% 23.4% 22.8% 21.8%

Male 27.8% 27% 28% 33.6% 26.6% 25.1% 24.8% Female 23.6% 23.6% 25.4% 25.6% 20.4% 20.7% 19% 16 to 34 34% 36% 26.4% 44% 32.1% 30.3% 29.7% 35 to 54 30.3% 28% 29% 34.3% 27.5% 26.1% 24.3%

55 and over 14.7% 15.3% 14.8% 14.6% 13.8% 13.6% 12.4% White 25.9% 26% 23.4% 29.1% 23.5% 22.9% 22.1%

Non white * * * * 22% 22% 19.2% Limiting disability

8.9% 7.2% 13.1% 12.5% 10.5% 9.7% 9.4%

No limiting disability

28.1% 28% 24.1% 31.7% 25.7% 25% 24.2%

NS‐SEC 1, 2 (A) – Managerial and Professional

29.8% 27.6% 23.4% 29.1% 28.1% 26% 25.6%

NS‐SEC 3 (B) – Intermediate Occupations

27.1% 27% 26.6% 15.4% 17.3% 18.2% 19.2%

NS‐SEC 4 (C1) –Small employers and own account

workers

26.4% 21% 16.6% 25.4% 22.2% 24.9% 21.8%

NS‐SEC 5, 6, 7, 8 (C2,D,E)

18.9% 18.7% 26.2% 30.4% 17.6% 17.8% 17%

* Indicates that a sample size for this response was less than five. In these cases a percentage is not provided in order to protect respondent confidentiality. As overall participation in Winchester is above the national average, we would expect participation among particular demographic groups to also be average as it is in the vast majority of cases. Key issues from the information presented in Figure 3.10 are set out below: Gender While both male and female participation rates are above the national average, it is notable that male participation has consistently been above female participation. While this is in line with national trends facility operators and providers could look to try and address this with a range of activities and opportunities to attract female participation and this is something that a new facility can support. Age In line with national trends, participation decreases with age in Winchester. While it is encouraging that participation is above average for each individual age group, it would be beneficial if older age groups in particular could be targeted for increased



participation. This is particularly important with regards to older people given the projected changes to Winchester’s age profile. Disability Regular participation by people with a limiting disability has increased in Winchester over the course of APS 1-4 and is above the county, regional and national averages. This is encouraging and indicates that there is a local population of disabled people with the propensity to be active. As with gender and age, further work is needed to address the gap in participation levels between non-disabled people and disabled people. This will include inclusive as well as disability specific sessions and it will be important to ensure that any facilities are well planned and fully accessible. Socio-Economic Status Participation for groups A, C1 and C2DE in Winchester is above average. As the population is relatively affluent it will be important to cater for those with higher incomes and with a relatively high propensity to be active. However, it is also important that those within group B are catered for at any new facilities which may be developed as APS4 results indicated a reduction in participation amongst this group. Sport England’s Market Segmentation data can support a greater understanding of barriers and motivating factors which may be affecting the local population and how these can be addressed by improved facilities for sport and physical activity. 3.3.2 Sport England Market Segmentation In order to develop the Market Segmentation Tool, Sport England analysed their own research and data on the English adult population (aged 18+) and produced 19 Market Segments, each with distinct sporting behaviours and attitudes. The 19 different segments provide a range of information including specific sports and activities that people want to take part in as well as identifying leading motivating factors for participating in sport and the barriers to doing more sport for particular groups. Market Segmentation data is useful to consider alongside the findings of the Active People Survey, as it allows an assessment of people’s propensity to participate in certain sports and activities. Market Segmentation can also give an indication of why some groups may not be participating, and what could encourage them to participate more. Figure 3.11 provides a breakdown of Winchester’s population in terms of the percentage of the 16+ population that falls within each segment. Information for Hampshire, the South East and a national breakdown is also provided by way of comparison. The five largest segments in Winchester are highlighted for ease of reference. Appendix 1 provides further information on each of the 19 segments. Figure 3.11: Market Segmentation information and breakdown in Winchester, Hampshire, South East and England (Sport England)

Segment % in Winchester % in Hampshire % in South East % Nationally 01 7.7% 5.3% 6% 4.9% 02 2.7% 4.6% 3.9% 5.4% 03 8.7% 5.1% 6.1% 4.7% 04 2.3% 3.6% 3.1% 4.3% 05 5.9% 4.6% 5.2% 4.5% 06 12.6% 10% 11.4% 8.8% 07 7.2% 5.6% 6.3% 4.4% 08 2.9% 5.1% 4.6% 4.9% 09 2.2% 4.1% 3.5% 5.9%



Segment % in Winchester % in Hampshire % in South East % Nationally 10 2.2% 3.2% 2.7% 3.7% 11 9.6% 9.8% 9.7% 8.6% 12 7.8% 6.6% 6.8% 6.1% 13 5.6% 7.7% 7.3% 6.8% 14 1.6% 3.3% 2.8% 4.9% 15 1.7% 2.8% 2.4% 3.7% 16 1.1% 1.4% 1.3% 2.1% 17 11.1% 5.9% 6.5% 4.2% 18 2.2% 4% 3.5% 4% 19 4.9% 7.5% 6.8% 8%

Figure 3.11 shows that Winchester’s market segmentation profile is significantly different to the national profile with Chloe (segment 3), Tim (segment 6), Philip (segment 11), Elaine (segment 12) and Ralph and Phyllis (segment 17), Ben (segment 1) and Alison (segment 7) all being above national average in relative segment size. These are all relatively affluent segments as you would expect given Winchester’s relative prosperity in comparison to the rest of the country. Figure 3.12 shows how segments in Winchester are geographically distributed with the dominant segment in each area highlighted in the relevant colour. Figure 3.12: Dominant Market Segments in Winchester (Sport England)

Figures 3.11 and 3.12 illustrate that the key market segments for Winchester, based on segment size and geographical dominance, are as follows:

o Segment 1, Ben: Competitive Male Urbanites (18-25) o Segment 3, Chloe: Fitness Class Friends (18-25) o Segment 5, Helena: Career Focussed Females (26-45) o Segment 6, Tim: Settling Down Males (26-45) o Segment 7, Alison: o Segment 11, Philip: Comfortable Mid-Life Males (46-55) o Segment 12, Elaine: Empty Nest Career Ladies (46-55) o Segment 17, Ralph and Phyllis: Comfortable Retired Couples (66+)



The key barriers and motivating factors for each of the market segments which are dominant within the site catchment area are summarised below. This, together with the information presented in Appendix 1, provides a useful overview of the local population’s propensity to be active and take part in particular sports as well as barriers and motivating factors that should be considered when planning new or improved facilities and devising particular activity programmes at any new facilities which are developed in Winchester. Segment 1 – Competitive Male Urbanites: Ben (18-25) Ben is the most sporty of the segments and whilst he is not dominant in any of the areas within Winchester, this segment does make up 7.7% of the district’s population. This proportion is well above county, regional and national averages. Football, keep fit/gym, cycling and swimming are the most popular sports with this segment. The main barrier for Ben is work commitments. 62% of this segment would like to do more sport compared to 52% of all adults. Segment 3 – Fitness Class Friends: Chloe (18-25) Chloe is the fourth largest segment in Winchester. This is a relatively active segment compared to the average across all segments. She is also more likely to be a member of a club, take part in competitive sport and have received tuition than most adults. Keep fit/gym, swimming, cycling and athletics are the top sports for participation for this segment and she also has above average levels of participation in equestrianism, tennis, badminton, netball and hockey. 70% of this segment would like to do more sport compared to 52% of all adults. Motivations for this segment include enjoyment, keeping fit, socialising and losing weight. Barriers include work and family commitments and lack of time. Segment 5 – Career Focused Females: Helena (26-45) Helena is fairly active and takes part in sport on a regular basis. Whilst she is not dominant in any of the areas within Winchester, this segment does make up 5.9% of the district’s population. This is well above county, regional and national averages. Keep fit/gym, swimming, cycling and athletics are the most popular sports with this segment. 68% of this segment would like to do more sport compared to 52% of all adults with a particular desire to take part in more swimming and keep-fit activity. The main barrier for Helena is her work commitments. Segment 6 – Settling Down Males: Tim (26-45) Tim is the largest segment in Winchester, accounting for 12.6% of the population. He is also the dominant segment for large parts of the local authority. Tim is an active segment who is likely to be a member of a health and fitness club. Popular activities including cycling, keep fit/gym and swimming. Sports such as football, badminton and tennis are also popular with this segment. Tim is motivated by opportunities to improve his performance, keep fit and meet friends. This segment will benefit from group activities and opportunities to receive coaching and instruction. Segment 7 – Stay at Home Mums: Alison (36-45) Helena has above average levels of participation in sport. Whilst she is not dominant in any of the areas within Winchester, this segment does make up 7.2% of the district’s population which is well above county, regional and national averages. Keep fit/gym, swimming and cycling are the most popular sports with this segment. 72% of this segment would like to do more sport compared to 52% of all adults with a particular desire to take part in more swimming and keep-fit activity. The main barrier for Helena is her family commitments and her motivations are keeping fit and taking her children with her.



Segment 11 – Comfortable Mid-Life Males: Philip (46-55) Philip is the third largest segment in Winchester, accounting for 9.6% of the population. This is also the dominant segment in a large part of the north of the local authority area. This is another segment with above average levels of participation. Particularly popular activities including cycling, keep fit/gym, swimming, football and racket sports. The main motivations for this segment are keeping fit, enjoyment and socialising. Barriers include work commitments and lack of time. This can be addressed in part by providing opportunities to be active at a range of times including early mornings, evenings and weekends. Segment 12 – Empty Nest Career Ladies: Elaine (46-55) Elaine accounts for 7.8% of Winchester’s population. This segment’s activity levels are generally in line with the national average. Popular sports for this segment include keep fit/gym, swimming, cycling and athletics. Equestrianism also has above average levels of participation. Motivating factors for this segment include enjoyment, keeping fit and weight loss. Being less busy, people to go with and cheaper admission would help to encourage this segment to be more active. Segment 17 – Comfortable Retired Couples: Ralph and Phyllis (66+) Ralph and Phyllis account for 11.1% of Winchester’s population and are the second largest segment in the local authority. They are also the dominant segment in the east and west of the local authority. Ralph and Phyllis are less active than the general adult population but more active than other segments of their age group. They have above average participation for bowls and golf and other popular activities include keep fit/gym, swimming, cycling and tennis. Motivating factors for this segment include enjoyment, keeping fit and socialising. Market Segmentation Summary Generally, Winchester’s market segmentation profile includes relatively affluent segments across a range of ages, all of whom have an above average propensity to be active. The range of activities that the main segments are likely to enjoy includes keep fit/gym, cycling and swimming as well as football, netball, badminton and tennis – all of which are key sports that could be catered for within a new leisure centre development. Older segments also have a propensity to take part bowls and low-impact exercise. Enjoyment and keeping fit are motivating factors for several segments while work and family commitments are barriers for a large proportion of Winchester’s population. Offering activities at a range of times throughout the day, offering shorter exercise and sport sessions and providing sessions for adults concurrently with activities for children will help to address some of these barriers. Admission costs should also be carefully considered with regards to those segments that are particularly likely to be affected by cost. 3.4 Facility Provision In addition to considering the local population, it is important to consider the current level of supply and location of facilities in the local area. This will influence decisions about what to provide within any new improved facilities in Winchester. The provision of swimming pools, sports halls, artificial grass pitches and health and fitness suites are particularly considered in this section, in line with what is currently provided at RPLC and the potential facility mix associated with any new development. 3.4.1 Provision of Swimming Pools Swimming provision is an important consideration given that the pool at River Park is a key facility for the local area which is currently well-used by the community, local



clubs and other groups. It is important to consider existing water supply in the local area as part of determining the scale of swimming provision that should be available as a result of the potential development of new facilities for sport and physical activity in Winchester. Consultation findings relating to the provision of swimming facilities at RPLC clearly show that the current offer is felt to be dated and in need of investment with a common desire to see an increase in the amount of water space provided at any leisure centre development. As such it is important to fully consider the scale of swimming provision that should be provided should a new facility be developed in Winchester. At the current time there are 17 different sites within the district that provide swimming pool facilities. The location of these sites is illustrated within Figure 3.13. Information about each of these sites can be found within Appendix 2. Figure 3.13 Swimming Pools within Winchester

The cluster of pools that can be found within and around Winchester itself includes River Park Leisure Centre, the Army College facility, Kings School, Winchester College and St Swithun’s. A number of these facilities have limited access, making the water space at RPLC a key community resource. Sport England’s Sports Facility Calculator Tool can be used to assess the current supply of swimming pools within the local area. This tool considers the age profile and size of a local population and provides an estimate of the level of provision which should be available to meet the needs of that population. It is worth noting that the



tool does not take into account actual usage levels of facilities in a local area, the quality of any facility, accessibility of a site or any demand which is imported from or exported to neighbouring local authorities. Figure 3.14 provides a summary of relevant findings from the Sports Facility Calculator for Winchester. Population projections for 2021 are based on 2011 census data while projections for 2030 were produced in 2010 and are based on prior mid-year population estimates. Figure 3.14: Comparison of Sport England Recommended Supply and Actual Supply of Water Space in Winchester (Sport England)

Year SFC

Recommended Supply

Actual Supply

Difference Supply with Exclusions*

Difference

2011 1,116.54m2 3,087.25m2 +1,970.71m2 1,305.25m2 +188.71m2

2021 1,184.29m2 3,087.25m2 +1,902.96m2 1,305.25m2 +120.96m2

2030 1,268.31m2 3,087.25m2 +1,818.94m2 1,305.25m2 +36.94m2 * Pools which are less than 100m2 in area, lidos, pools which are for private use only and pools which are only accessible to registered members excluded. Including all swimming pools on the Active Places Power database, there is currently 3,087.25m2 of water space in Winchester. Based on the size of Winchester’s current population, this indicates a surplus of 1,970.71m2. However taking account of which pools are suitable for regular participation and allow for the development of aquatic activities significantly reduces this apparent surplus. Removing lidos, pools which are less than 100m2 in area and pools which are for private use only, pools that cater to members only and those that do not allow pay and play usage or hire by sports clubs and community associations reduces the surplus in Winchester to 188.71m2 for the 2011 population and 36.94m2 for the projected 2030 population. This data suggests that Winchester is reasonably well provided for in terms of water space based on the Sports Facility Calculator recommendations, although as mentioned above this does not take into account demand which may be imported or exported from neighbouring authorities, the quality or accessibility of a facility. These findings certainly suggest that the scale of pool provision currently offered at River Park Leisure Centre is likely to be very much required within any new facility as a minimum in order to continue to meet the needs of Winchester’s growing population. Sport England have also carried out analysis of swimming pool provision in Winchester using their Facilities Planning Model tool. This tool takes into account hours that pools are available as well as supply and demand which is imported and exported. For the purposes of this research Sport England consider there to be 1,307.6m2 of publicly available water space available, when hours available for community use are taken into account and a comfort factor is applied. There is demand for 1,231m2 of water space, indicating an over-supply of 76.6m2 in Winchester. Further key findings from Sport England’s 2013 Facilities Planning Model tool data include:

o 93.1% of demand for access to swimming facilities among Winchester residents is met, above the national average of 91.1%.



o Of demand which is met, 64.4% is retained in Winchester and 35.6% is met outside the local authority. This means that a number of people have to leave the district to access water space that meets their demand.

o Of the total number of visits to Winchester’s pools 26.2% are imported from neighbouring authorities.

o 93.3% of unmet demand is caused by people living outside the catchment of suitable facilities and 6.7% is caused by lack of capacity at facilities.

o 53.5% of overall capacity at pools in Winchester is used, below the national average of 61.2%.

o Sport England’s research shows that RPLC has the lowest percentage of capacity used of any facility in Winchester, with 32%.

Sport England’s facility tools indicate that while existing provision in Winchester appears to be largely meeting demand, there is an evident supply of extra capacity across the sites that could be utilised. It is notable that RPLC was found to have a low percentage of capacity used by Sport England’s Facilities Planning Model research. It could be suggested from this information, and this certainly correlates with some of the consultation findings, that the low used capacity could be due to the quality of the facilities available within Winchester and/or the fact that a number of facilities are located at sites with accessibility issues, which results in the swimming pools being under utilised. One of the facility types that has been mentioned as a consideration for Winchester is the provision of a 50m swimming pool as part of any new leisure development. Figure 3.15 illustrates the current location of 50m pool within England. Figure 3.15: Location of 50m pools within England



Figure 3.15 and the information included within Appendix 2 illustrates that there are currently two 50m pools within Hampshire at the current time – Aldershot Garrison and the Mountbatten Centre within Portsmouth. 3.4.2 Provision of Sports Halls It is also possible to consider the supply of sports halls within the local area. An 8 court hall is provided at River Park Leisure Centre at the current time and it is important that consideration is given to the scale of sports hall provision that should be included within any newly developed facility. Sport England’s Active Places database indicates that there are 27 different sites with sports halls within Winchester at the current time. The only large hall space that has in excess of 6 courts is the facility at RPLC. Figure 3.16 shows the location of all sports halls in Winchester. Figure 3.16: Sports Halls within Winchester

As with swimming pools, the cluster of sports hall sites that are located within the city of Winchester are evident. Sport England’s Sports Facility Calculator Tool can also be used to measure the supply of sports halls within Winchester. As with swimming pools, it is again crucial to remember that it does not take account of the quality or accessibility of any facility or any imported demand from neighbouring authorities. Sports Facility Calculator findings relating to sports hall provision in Winchester are summarised in Figure 3.17 below. As previously, population projections for 2021 are



based on 2011 census data while projections for 2030 were produced in 2010 and are based on prior mid-year population estimates. Figure 3.17: Comparison of Sport England Recommended Supply and Actual Supply of Sports Hall provision in Winchester (Sport England)

Year SFC

Recommended Supply

Actual Supply


Difference

2011 31.5 courts 80 courts +48.5 courts 53 courts +21.5 courts

2021 33.4 courts 80 courts +46.6 courts 53 courts +19.6 courts

2030 35.8 courts 80 courts +44.2 courts 53 courts +17.2 courts * Halls which are for private use only or are not at least 3 courts in size excluded. When all halls on Sport England’s Active Places Power database are considered there are 48.5 courts more than the Sports Facility Calculator recommended amount for Winchester’s 2011 population, decreasing to 44.2 additional courts by 2030. When halls that are only available for private use and those that are not at least three courts in size are excluded this reduces supply in Winchester to 53 courts. This reduces the difference between supply and the Sports Facility Calculator recommended amount to 21.5 courts for Winchester’s 2011 population and 17.2 courts for Winchester’s projected 2030 population. This indicates a surplus of courts in Winchester when using Sport England’s Sports Facility Calculator tool, but as mentioned previously, a number of these sites are located on schools and college sites, limiting their accessibility significantly. Sport England’s Facilities Planning Model allows for a more in-depth examination of supply and demand for sports halls in Winchester as it takes into account demand which is imported and exported as well as the actual hours that suitable halls are available for community usage. Sport England’s 2013 FPM data consider there to be 51.97 publicly available courts in Winchester, when hours available for community use are taken into account and have identified a demand for 31.48 courts, indicating an oversupply of 20.49 courts in Winchester. Further key findings from Sport England’s 2013 Facilities Planning Model data relating to sports halls in Winchester are as follows:

o 95.4% of demand for access to sports hall facilities among Winchester residents is met, above the national average of 91.5%.

o Of demand which is met, 70.6% is retained in Winchester and 29.4% is met outside the local authority.

o Of the total number of visits to Winchester’s sports halls, 18.8% are imported from neighbouring authorities.

o 99.8% of unmet demand is caused by people living outside the catchment of suitable facilities and only 0.2% is caused by lack of capacity at facilities.

o 40.2% of overall capacity at halls in Winchester is used, below the national average of 67.8%.

Sport England’s FPM data indicates that existing facilities in Winchester do have some capacity to meet further demand from within the local authority area as well as from neighbouring authorities. While there appears to be a surplus of courts in Winchester based on Sports Facility Calculator results and Facility Planning Model research, this does not take into account the unique value of the larger sports hall facility currently available at RPLC which is used to support expanding grass roots community activity. Retaining, improving and even increasing the size of any flexible sports hall space within a new facility, in comparison to that currently offered at



RPLC can ensure that the needs of the local community, sports clubs and other organisations can be met and that the provision of opportunities for a wide range of indoor sports and activities can be offered. A number of the facilities available within the district are on school sites which restricts their usage and accessibility during certain times. Providing a new facility with better quality indoor sports hall space will further increase the ability of a leisure centre to provide a quality venue for community activity, provide a home for community sports club and attract competitions and events. 3.4.3 Artificial Grass Pitches Outdoor Artificial Grass Pitch (AGP) provision is another important facility type for consideration at any new development. The facility at RPLC has grown in popularity and is currently being upgraded to a 3G surface. There are a total of eight sites with AGPs in Winchester according to Sport England’s Active Places Power database. Four of these sites are schools and one of them is an MOD site (Southwick Park) so community access at certain times is limited as a result of curricular and extra-curricular usage. Two of the sites, which will soon become three once the resurfacing work at RPLC is completed, provide 3G surfaces. Figure 3.18 shows the location of all artificial grass pitches in Winchester. Further details of these facilities are provided in Appendix 2. Figure 3.18: Artificial Grass Pitches in Winchester (Active Places Power)

Findings from Sport England’s Sports Facility Calculator relating to AGPs in Winchester are provided in Figure 3.19.



Figure 3.19: Comparison of Sport England Recommended Supply and Actual Supply of Artificial Grass Pitch provision in Winchester (Sport England)

Year SFC Recommended

Supply Actual Supply


Difference

2011 3.5 pitches 8 pitches +4.5 pitches 6 pitches +2.5 pitches



* Small sided pitches excluded. The Sports Facility Calculator recommends a supply of 3.5 pitches for Winchester’s 2011 population, increasing to 3.97 pitches for its projected 2030 population. This suggests a surplus of 2.5 pitches for Winchester’s 2011 population when only full sized pitches are included; decreasing to 2.03 pitches when considering Winchester’s projected 2030 population. Sport England’s Facilities Planning Model allows for a more in-depth examination of supply and demand for AGPs in Winchester as it takes into account demand which is imported and exported as well as the actual hours that suitable facilities are available for community usage. Sport England’s 2013 FPM data consider there to be 5.1 pitches publicly available in Winchester, when hours available for community use are taken into account and have identified a demand for 3.4 pitches, indicating a small oversupply of 1.7 pitches in Winchester. Further key findings from Sport England’s 2013 Facilities Planning Model data relating to sports halls in Winchester are as follows:

o 90.7% of demand for access to AGPs among Winchester residents is met, above the national average of 80.6%.

o Of demand which is met, 68.7% is retained in Winchester and 31.3% is met outside the local authority.

o Of the total number of visits to Winchester’s sports halls, 49.6% are imported from neighbouring authorities.

o 83.4% of overall capacity of AGPs in Winchester is used, below the national average of 91.7%.

As mentioned previously, the fact that the majority of AGP facilities currently available are located on school sites means that their usage and access by the community is restricted. AGPs within the district are also appearing to attract high levels of usage from people in neighbouring authorities. 3.4.4 Health and Fitness Suites There is currently a health and fitness suite with 107 stations at River Park. This is an important and popular aspect of the facility and it is necessary to consider the scale of health and fitness provision which will be required at any new facility which is developed in Winchester. It is not possible to use Sport England’s Sports Facility Calculator and Facilities Planning Model tools with regards to health and fitness provision. There are a total of 497 health and fitness stations at twenty sites in Winchester according to Sport England’s Active Places Database. 100 of these stations at five sites are available for private use only. 231 (46.5%) are at eleven sites which are accessible to registered members only. One site which has 38 stations is available for use by sports clubs and community associations and the remaining three sites, including RPLC, are accessible on a pay and play basis. 128 stations are located at these pay and play sites, 25.8% of the total stations provided in Winchester.



The gym facility at RPLC is a very popular part of the facility offer and it will be important to ensure that sufficient pay and play health and fitness stations continue to be available in Winchester, alongside opportunities for registered members at commercial facilities, as these offer affordable and accessible opportunities to be active. 3.5 Summary and Conclusion As identified within this section of the report, the population of Winchester is predicted to grow within the coming years, which will place additional pressure on community facilities and services currently available within the district. Research has shown that in general, the population of Winchester already has a relatively high propensity to be active. This is encouraging and indicates that new or improved facilities which offer quality opportunities to take part in sport have the potential to be popular and well-used for many years to come. The market segmentation analysis also suggests that there are also high levels of latent demand within Winchester’s population, which a new facility can help to address. It is vitally important to ensure that any facility has the ability to support Winchester residents that are currently active but also to attract the large proportion of the population that have been identified as being inactive. Supplying a range of flexible and accessible facilities that provide opportunities for formal and recreational activity can help to ensure that any new leisure centre development offers more to meet the needs of Winchester’s population as it grows and as the profile changes. The analysis of current facility provision has highlighted that Winchester as a district currently has a good supply of facilities that would appear to have the capacity to support more usage. However, it must be noted that a large number of the facilities identified within this research are located on school/college sites and a number are also sited at MOD facilities too. As a result of this fact, their usage and access by the wider community is significantly restricted and also means that when they are available for public use, the demand for the available space is high. The findings from this research suggest that there is the potential for expanding the community offer within Winchester to meet the needs and demands of a growing and active population. A large proportion of the district’s residents are shown to be inactive and this further underlines the importance of offering a range of quality facilities and opportunities for both formal and informal activity and the need to incorporate an enhanced community facility mix. The Consultant Team are of the opinion that the City Council has an opportunity to provide a community facility that significantly increases the scale of the offer currently available at River Park Leisure Centre. This information has been supplemented by a strategic analysis and the consultation process that has been a key part of the project to inform the emerging development options for Winchester City Council that are presented within Section 6 of this report.



4. Strategic Overview When considering the potential development of new facilities within Winchester, it is vital that the strategic priorities and policy objectives of relevant local, sub-regional, regional and national organisations are taken into account. Ensuring that any newly developed facility within the city is strategically aligned and meets the needs of key stakeholder organisations will be important in determining the project’s success and ensuring that it continues to operate sustainably and meet the needs of the local community. It is clear that facilities for sport and physical activity can support outcomes across a wide range of agendas including health, education and skills, economy and regeneration. Considering how the potential development of new facilities in Winchester can support identified key priorities across these areas will help to maximise the positive impact of any new facility and engage partners from these sectors in the long term. As part of the review which is presented in this section, a range of strategies, policies and plans have been examined and the actions and outcomes that the potential development of new facilities for sport and physical activity in Winchester can support have been identified. This process helps to demonstrate that the potential development of improved facilities for sport and physical activity is of strategic relevance to a wide range of groups and organisations and can result in a facility which is well-used and of great benefit to a wide range of community users. This can also help to generate investment to support capital development and revenue costs as well as long-term partners who will use the facility. 4.1 National Strategies The following strategies provide national level strategic guidance and direction in relation to the development of sport, physical activity and healthy lifestyle initiatives. ‘A Sporting Habit for Life: Sport England Strategy 2012-2017’, Sport England Through its new strategy, ‘A Sporting Habit for Life’, Sport England will invest over £1 billion of National Lottery and Exchequer funding between 2012 and 2017 with the aim of creating a meaningful and lasting community sport legacy by growing sports participation at the grassroots level. By 2017 Sport England aims to have transformed sport so that it becomes a habit for life for more people and a regular choice for the majority. The strategy sets out the following overarching aims:

o See more people taking on and keeping a sporting habit for life. o Create more opportunities for young people. o Nurture and develop talent. o Provide the right facilities in the right places. o Support local authorities and unlock local funding. o Ensure real opportunities for communities.

The key targets which Sport England will be working towards up to 2017 are:

o A year-on-year increase in the proportion of people who play sport once a week for at least 30 minutes.

o Raise the percentage of 14-25 year olds playing sport once a week and reduce the proportion dropping out of sport.

Around 60% of funding made available to NGBs for their Whole Sport Plans is expected to benefit young people aged 14-25 with the remaining 40% expected to



benefit the adult population. NGB investment will start at age 14 to ensure a better transition from school sport and create a sporting habit for life through increasing participation overall. The development of new community facilities for sport and physical activity in Winchester can contribute to Sport England’s outcomes and support its strategic vision at a local and sub-regional level. New facilities for sport and physical activity can provide opportunities for key stakeholders such as national governing bodies of sport to develop new sporting activities which attract and engage new participants. The local sporting infrastructure can also benefit particularly if clubs and community partners are offered the opportunity to base themselves at the new facility. ‘Start Active, Stay Active: A report on physical activity for health from the four home countries’ Chief Medical Officers’, Chief Medical Officers for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, 2011 This document recognises that there is strong scientific evidence to suggest that being physically active can help people to lead healthier and happier lives and that inactivity is a particular health risk. It establishes a UK-wide consensus on the amount and type of physical activity which should be achieved for particular age groups, providing guidelines for early years, children and young people, adults and older people. Improved facilities for sport and physical activity in Winchester can support the following recommended activity levels:

o Children and young people: Moderate to vigorous intensity physical activity for at least 60 minutes per day.

o Adults: Physical activity to improve muscle strength on at least two days a week and 30 minutes activity on at least 5 days a week or 75 minutes vigorous intensity activity per week.

Dedicated facilities for sport and physical activity in Winchester can play an important role in improving the health and wellbeing of local people. They can help to bring about lasting health benefits for people of all ages in Winchester, particularly if those that are currently least likely to be active are targeted. 4.2 County Strategies Strategies which specifically relate to Hampshire are considered in the section which follows. The specific impact that any potential new facilities for sport and physical activity within Winchester can have on achieving county-wide priorities is highlighted within this section. ‘Shaping our Future Together: Hampshire Sustainable Community Strategy 2008 – 18’, Hampshire County Council and Hampshire Strategic Partnership This strategy sets a vision ‘that Hampshire continues to prosper, providing greater opportunity for all without risking the environment’. Enhanced facilities within Winchester can help to contribute to this vision, specifically relating to the following long-term ambitions:

o Hampshire provides excellent opportunities for children and young people. o Hampshire’s communities are cohesive and inclusive, and vulnerable people are

safeguarded. o Infrastructure and services are developed to support economic and housing

growth whilst protecting the environment and quality of life. o Hampshire’s communities feel safe and can expect not to suffer violence or

anti-social behaviour. o Hampshire’s residents can make choices to improve their health and wellbeing. o Hampshire’s environment and cultural heritage are enjoyed and celebrated.



o Hampshire’s residents receive excellent public services and value for money. Quality facilities for sport and physical activity in Winchester can contribute to the area’s local economy and provide skilled, sustainable employment opportunities as well as allowing local people to volunteer, gain new qualifications and improve their health and wellbeing. Local charities, clubs and community groups can also benefit from access to quality facilities which they can use to deliver activities which benefit local people. Consultation to inform the strategy, via the quality of life survey, took place across the county and highlighted a number of important issues for local people. Key issues that were identified as being things that matter to people include:

o Safe and strong communities with a strong community spirit where people can get involved in what is going on and make a positive contribution.

o Providing the best possible start in life for children. o People expecting a long and healthy life. o The provision of facilities for recreation; enjoyment and celebration of local

culture. o Support and protection for vulnerable people and maintaining independence for

older people. o A diverse range of training opportunities to develop skills. o Low levels of crime and antisocial behaviour, enabling people to go about their

lives without fear. o Cities, towns and villages where people enjoy living and are happy to bring up

their children. o High-quality, accessible and local public services providing value for money and

responsive to communities’ needs. The facilities currently available within Winchester contribute to the local economy in the city as well as providing cohesive and inclusive opportunities for local people to improve their health and wellbeing, develop new skills, socialise and mix with other members of the community and tackle specific issues such as anti-social behaviour. Any project that enhances and improves the facility offer and the provision of opportunities and services available must help to support the quality of life for local people. New leisure facilities within Winchester would be able to support a number of ambitions that have been identified for the wider Hampshire area. ‘Hampshire's Children and Young People's Plan 2012 – 2015’, Hampshire Children’s Trust The Children and Young People's Plan (CYPP) is the overarching strategy for Hampshire's Children's Trust, setting the direction and priorities for services for children, young people and families in the county over the next three years. The vision of Hampshire’s Children’s Trust for 2012-15 is: “Making Hampshire an even better place for children and young people, where all of them, including those who are vulnerable or disadvantaged, have the best possible start in life and are supported by the whole community to reach their potential.” Key priorities that the development of quality facilities for sport and physical activity can particularly support include:

o Securing children and young people’s physical, spiritual, social, emotional and mental health, promoting healthy lifestyles and reducing inequalities.

o Providing opportunities to learn, within and beyond the school day, that raise children and young people’s aspirations, encourage excellence and enable them to enjoy and achieve beyond their expectations.



o Promoting vocational, leisure and recreational activities that provide opportunities for children and young people to experience success and make a positive contribution.

The plan is also focussed on removing barriers to access, education and achievement for disadvantaged and vulnerable children and young people in Hampshire. Improved facilities and opportunities for sport and physical activity within Winchester can help to support these specific priorities and aims. Opportunities which focus on children and young people who are likely to be disadvantaged and affected by health inequalities will particularly support this strategy. Children and young people will also benefit from opportunities to volunteer and gain qualifications related to sport, as well as chances to progress in competitive sports as the result of the provision of improved facilities within the city itself. ‘Sport Hampshire and Isle of Wight Strategy 2010–2013’, Hampshire and IOW County Sports Partnership Sport Hampshire & IOW is one of the 49 County Sports Partnerships across England that are committed to working together with partners to increase levels of participation in sport and physical activity and reduce inactivity, recognising the wider health benefits associated with sport and physical activity. This strategy sets out four strategic aims, all of which can be supported by the provision of improved facilities and opportunities for sport and physical activity within Winchester. These four aims are:

o To inspire and sustain greater participation in physical activity and sport, enabling all to fulfil their potential.

o To support activity at all levels through the development of a quality workforce; coaches, instructors, leaders, volunteers, officials and administrators.

o To plan strategically and provide a range of high quality, active environments and appropriate facilities supporting introductory activities, participation and performance sport.

o To implement a strategic and coordinated approach to marketing and communications, enabling information to be communicated more effectively.

Plans for investment into quality facilities can provide significantly enhanced opportunities for all members of the local community to take part sport and physical activity at all levels. This can support a reduction in levels of inactivity, increase participation levels and help to improve the sport and physical activity infrastructure for local sports clubs, organisations and community groups. ‘Hampshire Legacy Strategy’ Draft Document, Hampshire County Council HCC is currently in the process of finalising its Legacy Strategy for the coming years. The Consultant Team has been provided with excerpts from the Draft Strategy that relate to the county-wide sports facility aims and aspirations for the coming years. The document states that HCC’s strategic aim is to: “Strategically plan and provide a range of high quality, active environments and appropriate facilities supporting introductory activities, participation and performance sport.” In addition to specialist facilities, the strategy recognises that active environments are also important and should include spaces and places in both the natural and built environment that make sport and physical activity an accessible lifestyle choice. For example, cycling and walking routes, parks and open spaces, waterways, and any other space where people can engage in an active lifestyle.



The document also proposes that HCC considers the possibility of investments into relevant facilities as they emerge and that, in addition, HCC through its land development interests may wish to consider supporting the development of facilities that are capable of providing sub regional spaces for people to participate, train and compete. The key proposals contained within the document include the following:

o Continue to develop and improve facilities for cycling and walking. o Explore opportunities to further develop country parks’ facilities for sport and

physical activity. o Explore the opportunity for the development of a ‘high performance centre’ with

the 4 universities and the military in the county, providing high quality facilities for specific sports and the hub for the Hampshire Institute of Sport.

The draft document also includes a specific reference to Winchester with the following identified as a priority: “Explore the potential of entering into a partnership with Winchester City Council and the University of Winchester to build a ‘world-class’ Sports Park.” Any plans for facility developments within Winchester can help to meet and support the aims and proposals contained within the outline document that is currently being finalised. This serves to highlight the potential role that any new facilities in the city can have in terms of supporting the development of quality sport and physical activity opportunities within Winchester and Hampshire in the coming years. 4.3 Local Strategies Specific Winchester strategies which quality facilities for sport and physical activity can support are referenced in the section which follows. Winchester District Community Strategy 2010–2020, Winchester City Council This document sets out how WCC and its partners intend to work together to achieve the following vision: “Our vision for the Winchester District is of diverse and dynamic communities where people work together to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to lead a fulfilling life now and in the future.” The strategy recognises that the local authority includes a number of diverse and distinct geographical areas including market towns, urban and rural areas. The strategy sets out three specific outcomes, all of which the development of quality facilities for sport and physical activity in Winchester can support. These outcomes, along with specific priorities that this project can contribute to, are set out below. Outcome 1: Active communities:

o Reduce health inequalities that exist between different communities. o Improve access to services and make sure that partners are able to manage

the increase in the usage of their services that an ageing population will bring. o Protect children and young people and help them fulfil their potential, focussing

on who are not achieving or who are living in relative poverty. o Provide opportunities for everyone to become more active through organised

sport, walking, cycling and other recreational activities, making the most of our natural environment and countryside.

o Protect people from discrimination and harassment and ensure they receive the support they need to participate fully in community activities.

o Support and encourage community planning and volunteering.



Outcome 2: A prosperous economy: o Exploit the District’s cultural strengths, heritage and historic environment,

alongside its good transport and communication links and its excellent education facilities, to stimulate a modern and creative approach to business.

o Build a low carbon economy, seeking competitive advantage and long term employment opportunities for local people.

o Make the most of local opportunities to enhance the skills and ambitions of those who live in the District.

Outcome 3: A high quality environment:

o Reduce the District’s greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to a changing climate.

o Ensure new development is sensitive and appropriate to the local environment. This document also states that older people are currently a particular priority for Winchester, particularly with regards ensuring older people have optimal health and have the opportunity to participate in their communities, for example through social and cultural activities. Developing quality new facilities for sport and physical activity in Winchester can contribute to these outcomes in the long term. Winchester District Sport and Physical Activity Legacy Framework 2013-2018, Winchester Sport and Physical Activity Alliance The Winchester SPAA have developed this strategic document to try and ensure that the district maximises the benefits and opportunities that have evolved as a result of the 2012 Games. 8 key strands have been identified which will be used to drive forward sport and physical activity. The document has explained that legacy within the Winchester District will mean the following:

o Improvements in facility provision, o Increased levels of grass roots participation o A new generation of talented athletes o An increased number of active well trained coaches and volunteers o An increased number of high quality sporting events o More high quality clubs o More school club links o More opportunities for disabled sport

Clearly, the provision of new, enhanced facilities for sport and physical activity within Winchester can support the aspirations that have been published within the framework and help to underpin the aim of creating a sustainable legacy for the city and the wider district area from the 2012 Games. 4.4 Sport Specific Strategic Objectives National Governing Bodies of Sport (NGBs) are often key partners for capital development projects. They can provide useful guidance on technical specifications for facilities and suitable development programmes for their sport and can also provide a much needed source of funding for projects, for both capital and revenue streams. It will be beneficial for any development of facilities to be aligned with the strategic aims and objectives of key NGB partners. NGBs have recently been informed how much funding they are receiving from Sport England for their 2013-17 Whole Sport Plans. The funding will be used by each respective NGB to support the development of their sport across the country. Discussions regarding the contents of Whole Sport Plans have formed a key part of the consultation process with NGBs and the relevant strategic development priorities can be found referenced within Section 5 of this report.



4.5 Conclusion It is clear from the strategic analysis presented in this section that the development of improved facilities for sport and physical activity in Winchester has the potential to support a number of specific outcomes for local and national strategic partners. Ensuring continued strategic alignment with appropriate objectives will help to retain and engage partners and secure support for the development of new facilities for sport and physical activity in Winchester as well as the delivery of quality programmes of activity which meet the needs of the local community. The potential development of new sports and leisure facilities represents an exciting opportunity for WCC, its residents, the local sports infrastructure and a range of wider key partners. When determining the most appropriate facility mix for the development of a new facility within the city it will be important to consider the strategic impact of particular options with regards to meeting long-term identified priorities relating to health, wellbeing, community development and physical regeneration as well as the sporting impact that any project can have. This will have an influence on the long term sustainability and viability of any facility as well as ensuring it provides the best possible option with regards to meeting local needs and demands. Whilst any decisions regarding the potential development of a new facility will be governed by financial viability and affordability, the wider community benefit and the ability of the site to play an increased role in helping WCC to meet aspirations across a wide range of agendas should not be overlooked. It will support WCC’s work against its own corporate aims and ambitions and also provide a site that can have a long term impact on strategic objectives which have been identified by a number of key partners. Whilst existing facilities, such as River Park Leisure Centre, already provide important offers and opportunities within Winchester, it is essential to ensure that any new facility can continue to support the work of a range of local and national partners. Any new site has the potential to support a sustained increase in sport and physical activity participation amongst local people and bring about a range of benefits to the local population as well as being a facility that can have a wider impact across the county and region. Engaging a wide range of partner organisations that can potentially support aspects of the capital development as well as the delivery of quality opportunities at the redeveloped facility will be of great benefit to the sport and physical activity landscape as well as improving the health, wellbeing and life opportunities that are available to local people.



5. Stakeholder Consultation This report has already presented detailed information about the current supply of facilities, the demographics of the local area and the strategic needs for facilities that support sport and physical activity in Winchester. In order to further identify and measure the existing need and demand for the development of sport and physical activity facilities within Winchester, as well as ensure all leading partners contributed towards this initial feasibility assessment, a process of consultation was undertaken with a range of agreed stakeholders and partners. These key partners include WCC, HCC, DC Leisure, the SPAA, Winchester Disability Sports Forum, Sport England, the County Sports Partnership, National Governing Bodies of Sport, neighbouring local authority areas, local sports clubs and organisations, local schools and the Winchester Fit for the Future group. This section of the report provides a summary of the outcomes of the consultation and highlights the emerging recommendations, issues and opinions related to potential options for the development of new facilities within Winchester The consultation outcomes are presented by “consultee group” within this section of the report for ease of reference. 5.1 Winchester City Council Officers o The Legacy Framework 2013-2018 is an important document that has identified

key priorities for the coming years and references the important role of sport and physical activity within the city.

o A number of key residential developments are planned for the district which will increase the population, further increasing the demand for quality, accessible community facilities.

o Identified that there is a limited private leisure offer within the city which has increased the importance of RPLC as a community venue of choice for lots of activity including health and fitness, swimming and indoor sports.

o RPLC is showing its age and requires significant investment, particularly the roof. Usage at the site is also high and there is a need to increase provision to meet current and latent demand and increase participation levels further.

o Key challenges are going to be the identification of a suitable site that could be used for a new development and funding any scheme.

o Capital funding from WCC at the current time is limited with a number of projects already committed to in the coming years. Any finance that could be accessed by WCC will be considered carefully by members. There is however a will and a desire to see the development of new sports and leisure facilities within Winchester.

o There is a need for more indoor sports hall space in the city which can be used to support an increase in participation and provide a home for local clubs. Such a facility should include the provision of seating which will make an ideal venue for competitions and events too. Sports that use sports hall space, such as netball, table tennis and basketball, are increasing in popularity in the city and the local clubs are expanding. There is an evident need for more space to support their aspirations.

o Swimming pool provision – if the development of a 50m pool is feasible, this would be a well received option for the city. A larger 25m pool (8-10 lanes) with a better quality flexible teaching pool would also be an improvement on the current offer at RPLC. WCC have had discussions with the Amateur Swimming Association about the development of new swimming pools in the city and are keen to see the development of a county aquatics strategy, led by the NGB.



o The tennis courts at RPLC need to be used more to support the development of the sport and there is scope for a larger number of courts to be provided as part of any future development.

o Other facility considerations – there is a need for additional flexible indoor space that can also support demand from martial arts clubs. A growing demand exists for access to 3G AGPs that can be utilised for football and other sports. There is also potential for a dedicated gymnastics facility to support local clubs.

o There is a desire to see the provision of new cycling facilities within the city, particularly a closed-road circuit. Positive discussions have take place with British Cycling and WCC would like to see this as part of a new facility development, offering synergies with other usage at the site.

5.2 Hampshire County Council Officers o Confirmation that the county-wide Olympic legacy priorities focus on key

aspirations that include the opening up of MOD facilities in the county, funding talented athletes, supporting new facilities, providing more opportunities for sport and enhancing the use of parks and open spaces in Hampshire. A new legacy strategy has been drafted and this will potentially be finalised and published by HCC in early summer.

o Winchester has been identified as a preferred site for a new regional sports hub based on the overall aspirations for the city.

o The lack of available space in the city is a key challenge for any large scale development that would be considered.

o Need to be confident that Winchester’s population is able to sustain a large development – the fact that the city is well located in terms of people being able to get to Winchester from across the county is very positive.

o Current facility offer – RPLC is showing its age now, the athletics track provides a good facility and school facilities are ok. The general feeling is that the quantity of provision is good but that the quality of the facilities overall is not really the standard that HCC and WCC are aspiring to provide.

o Recognition that the size of any future swimming pool development is a key area for consideration – the hope is that the ASA and this study report will help to clarify this.

o The Fit for the Future group appear to have put together an intelligent case that has raised the profile of future provision and this needs to be considered seriously.

o HCC are unlikely to have finance to support any development and would recommend discussions about land ownership as any scheme progresses, particularly if the Bar End site is recognised as a potential location for any new development.

o Identified a need for WCC to discuss any future developments with HCC throughout any planning process, for example issues with highways and traffic will be a key consideration. This will be an important consideration for progressing any scheme in the future.

5.3 DC Leisure During the course of the consultation process the Consultant Team have had a number of meetings and discussions with DC Leisure members of staff who have been extremely cooperative in providing information on the current facility. The following bullet points provide a summary of the main issues and comments on any potential development from a DC Leisure perspective: o DC has a contract with WCC until 2023 and the most recent negotiations

removed the £90k management fee that the operator was receiving from WCC. o The relationship with WCC is very positive – DC has had a presence in the city for

20 years and they have exceeded targets and expectations.



o DC has spent £1.2m-1.5m at the site over the years. For example, significant investment has been made into the health and fitness suite and changing facilities in the past 2 years.

o There remains a need for further investment at the site, particularly at the front of house areas with a better image of the centre required.

o A key issue is the maintenance requirements of the site which necessitate WCC investment as part of the contractual relationship. For example, the roof has major issues, the air handling system needs investment and the wet changing facilities are problematic and a source of many customer complaints.

o Customer perception of the centre is poor and there are high expectations in Winchester from the community. DC does not feel that the centre meets the needs of local people in its current condition but that the facility mix is about right.

o The gym facility and wider health and fitness offer (such as studio classes) works well at RPLC and is a popular element of the facility mix, something that could be expanded further in the future.

o The sports hall is also a popular element of the site and there is scope for increasing the size of the space provided at any new or improved facility.

o Swimming Pool – there is high demand for accessing the water space at the current site and it is difficult to meet everyone’s expectations so there has had to be compromise and flexibility. The Penguins are a growing club and DC continues to accommodate and work with them as much as possible. More needs to be done in terms of discussions and agreement on activity provision and service offer between the different parties in any new facility to ensure that any duplication of provision is removed and a more formal partnership is put in place.

o There is a need for increasing the supply of water space that is available but DC is unsure about the development of a 50m pool in the city. A larger 25m pool with a good sized flexible teaching pool would be of benefit to the swimming club and other users in the city.

o The current AGP performs well and is being resurfaced – the provision of AGP facilities should be a consideration for any development. The same applies to the tennis courts with the opportunity to increase usage and provision as part of any new centre. It is suggested that line markings for netball are considered for some courts so that this can take place outside which would provide more opportunities within the sports hall space at certain times.

o Gymnastics – RPLC currently has a recreational club that uses the sports hall and has a relationship with Basingstoke Gymnastics Club which provides coaches as well as exit routes for more serious performers. Not sure that there is a need for a dedicated gymnastics centre as part of any future development as such facilities are highly dependent on staff and qualified individuals and provide a dedicated space which offers no flexibility.

o Activities for children and young people are popular at the site and the removal of the crèche facility has not caused any issues at all given the profile of the local population.

o The current café facility at RPLC is not in the best location as it is tucked away which limits its revenue generating ability somewhat. Would like to see this have more prominence in a facility to support secondary spend.

o The current car parking and road access is a key problem for the site and any development project would need to consider these two issues very carefully.

o DC is aware of the Winchester Fit for the Future group but has not been formally engaged by them. Feel that there is an opportunity for WCC to tap into the enthusiasm of the group and harness this support moving forward.

o A refurbishment/remodel of the current RPLC would not provide a very viable solution – limited space for increasing capacity and funds would need to be spent primarily on areas behind the scenes that the public would not really see. The centre currently operates as efficiently as it can given its age.



o If a new facility is to be developed there are mixed views on the most suitable location with opinions split between a site adjacent to the current centre and the Bar End site. There is a recognition that there are pros and cons associated with both and DC drew comparisons with the successful Excel Centre in Elmbridge that is located slightly out of town (similar to the Bar End scenario) and a desire to retain a city centre location (whilst acknowledging parking and traffic issues).

o DC is open to discussions about any future contract arrangements that would be impacted upon with any new investment as well as longer term consideration of capital investment into any facility development within the city.

5.4 Other Key Stakeholders o Sport England - Confirmed that the identification of county and regional facility

priorities is work in progress with NGBs, County Sports Partnership and local authorities.

o Aware of high levels of interest from local authorities within the county in relation to investment in sport and leisure facilities and feel that there needs to be more co-ordination between authorities to meet the needs of a growing population.

o Whilst some NGBs are able to clarify their local WSP delivery plans and priorities, the ASA are still working to define theirs, which makes it difficult to prioritise any planned pool development project within Hampshire. Hopefully a piece of work being commissioned by the ASA and CSP will help to clarify what should happen in the county in terms of water space as a number of authorities are considering options for their swimming pool stock.

o Confirmed that Sherfield School (in Sherfield on Loddon, north of Basingstoke) is on the shortlist for a re-locatable Olympic Legacy pool which would provide another 50m in the county.

o Hampshire and IOW County Sports Partnership – The CSP do not have a facility strategy for the county due to the fact that NGB priorities change and that a lot of projects are down to opportunities that arise.

o Winchester has been identified within the HCC county-wide legacy strategy as it is felt to offer a location that gives an ideal opportunity for a high level multi-sports hub including 50m pool, indoor athletics and a large sports hall space. A hub would also provide a critical mass of sports clubs together at one venue which could enhance the club infrastructure in the city significantly.

o Explained that HCC have invested in sub-regional facilities in the past such as Rushmoor Netball Centre, Winchester School Badminton Centre and Hamble Gymnastics Centre.

o Confirmed that they have had discussions with the ASA regarding the development of an aquatics strategy for the county on the back of the number of local authorities currently looking at water space needs. CSP are keen to see this as soon as possible because it should help with plans across the county.

o There is a reasonable level of provision in Winchester at the current time but that the quality is variable. For example, RPLC is very tired and needs investment or redevelopment.

o Keen to see school facilities being used more to support the development of community activity.

o Confirmed that they have no strong views on the development of a 50m pool or not. Recognise that the current water space available in the city does limit the aspirations and ambitions that the Penguins Swimming Club have. A high quality larger 25m pool could also act as a regional centre for the sport too.

o There is a demand for more quality indoor sports hall space that can be used to develop a range of different sports and activities and there is also a gap in the market for a gymnastics centre.

o Challenges – planning issues, land ownership and finding a suitable location and space in the city. The Bar End site has real transport issues and it is questionable if people would be happy to travel there if they are used to using RPLC.



o Finances – concerned about the availability of funding from WCC and it is clear that any scheme will need to be done in partnership with the University and HCC.

o University of Winchester - the University has circa 6,000 FTE students and growth over the next 5-7 years is only likely to be small with 1500-2000 more students potentially.

o Keen to expand their offer by introducing sports related Masters Degrees and offering sports research and consultancy services.

o Sporting priorities for the University in general terms focus on getting more students physically active.

o The number of SU Teams has doubled over the last 10 years with up to 48 different sports teams across a range of sports, particularly indoor sports and activities.

o Current University facility offer – current indoor 3-court sports hall is poor as it is too small and is used to capacity by SU Teams which means recreational activity is minimal at the current time. The stadium is viewed as a good facility but it is acknowledged that daytime use is a little limited and they would like to see this increase in the future. The AGP at the site is well used by students and Winchester Hockey Club.

o Facility provision in Winchester – University finds it hard to access facilities in the city, particularly water space and sports hall space. There is not enough provision in the city at the current time. Outdoor facilities – drainage at 2 main grass pitch sites (North Walls and Garrison Ground) is poor, there are not enough tennis courts and there is a need for a 3G surface in the city.

o RPLC – students use the facility for swimming and also use the sports hall. The site is felt to be dated and the view is that it needs to be replaced.

o Future plans – the University is opening a new gym in September with 50-60 stations which will also offer community memberships. They are looking at plans to increase the size of their sports hall to potentially a 6 court facility. They have also had informal discussions with HCC regarding land at Bar End and the possibility of obtaining it for another AGP at the site.

o Keen on a sports-hub concept and feel that enhancing the mix at the stadium site would be very beneficial. Feel that the site is accessible and can provide a larger amount of car parking that is not used that much at weekend (the park and ride car park).

o The university indicated that they are supportive of the proposals that have been raised by the Winchester Fit for the Future group as they feel that the students would benefit from the project proposals. Can see the case for a 50m pool but insist that this must be for the community too and not just the swimming club. Would also like to see a sports hall that is as large as possible.

o The University would like to see WCC and HCC accessing funding to enable the development of new facilities.

o Winchester Sport and Physical Activity Alliance (SPAA) – feel that there is not enough community accessible water space in the city – need for more.

o AGPs – feel that there is also a shortage of these and those that do exist are extremely difficult to get onto, particularly at school sites. Sparsholt College are planning to develop a new 3G pitch to support the work of its academy that has links with Southampton FC. However, this pitch is unlikely to have floodlights due to planning constraints meaning that it will have limited community impact throughout the year.

o Grass pitches are heavily used and also require investment. o Would like to see facilities spread across the district rather than just within the

city. o RPLC – the gym and the sports hall are a decent size and offer reasonable quality

facilities, the swimming pool is tired and there are significant parking issues during peak times.



o The case for providing more facilities should be driven by need as opposed to being driven by the desire of a number of clubs looking for higher standard competition venues in the city. For example, the view is that higher level performers that want to access to a 50m pool should be prepared to travel to Portsmouth or Guildford as these locations are not too far away.

o Any new development should focus on developing participation opportunities rather than focussing on performance sport.

o Aware of plans that have been discussed in the media and not sure whether everything should be located at one site. Feel that there is a case for spreading the facilities out. However, no one can argue with the notion of developing new facilities.

o Winchester has serious transport issues and investing in a couple of sites may be beneficial as they should be able to be accessed by people across the city and district.

o Winchester Disability Sports Forum – aspirations are to see the development of activities across Winchester for disabled people.

o Facilities are a key barrier at the current time as they vary in quality and accessibility a great deal, including schools, village halls and other sites.

o RPLC is ok but it has a number of issues – the reception area is too small and narrow, the layout is not great for wheelchair users and there is an overall feeling that it is not as good as it could and should be. The central location means that people have to travel into the city centre in order to access the site, which represents a barrier for some due to traffic congestion and parking issues.

o Would like to see a facility that provides a large, accessible and flexible indoor space that can be used for a range of activities and a site that is welcoming and accessible with lots of parking and good connectivity between outdoor and indoor areas.

o The Forum is conducting its own research at the current time in terms of disabled sport in the district and results from this survey should be available in June.

o Keen to see disable people being included in the design stages for any new development rather than being seen as an afterthought.

o Winchester BID – priorities are to “make Winchester a better place to live, work and play”.

o Explained that staff at local businesses want to be able to utilise facilities during the daytime – such as a gym, swimming pool, exercise classes and so forth. RPLC is an important facility in the city as it is walkable for many which allows people to use it during lunch breaks. It offers the type of facility and activities that people want to use.

o Local businesses want a centrally located community facility and not what the Winchester Fit for the Future group is proposing, which they feel too focused on the elite end of sport. The view is that the Bar End site is too far out of town to be a viable option.

5.5 Neighbouring Local Authorities The Consultant Team spoke to a number of neighbouring authorities as way of ascertaining their respective facility priorities for the coming years. o Test Valley Borough Council – explained that the main priority is the

development of Andover Leisure Centre. This will be either a new build or redevelopment of the current site depending on the associated costs.

o The council are investing circa £750,000 into Romsey Rapids at the current time. Romsey is a priority area and a Romsey Futures project is looking at whether or not there should be provision of dry-side facilities and an AGP at the site/another site in Romsey in the future.

o Not aware of the full strategic demand for a 50m pool in the area but think it would be great if one was developed.



o Keen to be involved in any development within Winchester and open to exploring any future opportunities for collaborative working.

o Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council – key priority is to maintain and enhance the current supply of sport and leisure facilities in the coming years.

o Potential for a large leisure park in the town centre but that will be commercially led.

o A hub that is located within the centre of Hampshire would be a good concept. o Confirmed that the council are supportive of plans that Sherfield School have for

becoming a centre for sport with a 50m pool and other facilities. o East Hampshire District Council have not responded to the requests from

Continuum to be consulted about this project. The Consultant Team are aware that East Hampshire District Council is undertaking a review in relation to new leisure provision including water space.

o Eastleigh Borough Council have also not responded to initial consultation requests. However, the Consultant Team are aware that detailed plans are being discussed by Eastleigh for Fleming Park Leisure Centre. The Council are looking to develop a new centre with a new enlarged 25m pool facility.

5.6 National Governing Bodies of Sport o Amateur Swimming Association (ASA) – Explained that 9 different local

authorities in the county are looking at plans for swimming pool investment. The ASA are working with the CSP to look at a county-wide aquatics strategy but it has not started yet. In the absence of this the ASA are finding it difficult to identify priorities for themselves in terms of water space needs and requirements, including any 50m pool plans.

o Of the opinion that a 50m pool would be sustainable within Winchester and the ASA would like to see one in the city.

o The Penguins are becoming a performance club and the ASA feel that a spine of 50m pools in the county at Aldershot, Winchester and Portsmouth would be great for the sport.

o Any 50m pool has to be well designed as it provides much more flexibility to a site if it is designed and built correctly, including moveable floors and booms.

o Explained that Sherfield School (in Sherfield on Loddon just north of Basingstoke) is likely to get one of the re-locatable 50m legacy pools or build their own. This may be of limited benefit to WPSC as the school is likely to have Basingstoke or Reading Swimming Clubs in the facility as club partners.

o The ASA Facilities Team are gathering data about other 50m pools in the country but this is very much work in progress.

o Southampton caters for diving activity in the south of the county so do not see a need for a dedicated high board diving pit in Winchester. Water polo is an activity that could prove to be attractive within Winchester.

o Acknowledged that Penguins are a growing club and that they are doing all of the right things in terms of development. Highlighted the fact that the club is currently in the process of recruiting a full-time Aquatics Manager to help drive them further forward.

o If a 50m pool is not achievable then indicated support for a 10 lane pool with 20m teaching pool to support the club and development of the sport in the city.

o ASA have no capital funding available to support any scheme. o British Gymnastics (BG) – explained that there are no clear specific priorities

for the development of the sport in the city. o However, the NGB confirmed that Winchester Gym Club (which has Gymmark

accreditation) is a growing club with 250+ members and a waiting list with over 100 people on it. The club uses a school hall at Henry Beaufort School 4 nights a week and this poor quality facility is restricting their growth. The NGB are of the opinion that the club has the potential for significant growth to one that offers activities and opportunities on a full-time basis.



o The Regional Development Manager is surprised that there is only really 1 gym club in the city. They would like to see more clubs but feel that facilities are a key barrier to this.

o There is a strong need for a dedicated gymnastics facility in the city. This facility should be able to cater for as many different disciplines as possible but this is likely to be determined by any clubs that are based at the site. The space at K2 with Hawth Gym Club as an anchor tenant is a good example.

o The NGB feel that Winchester Gym Club and another local club that also need a home, Treasure Gymnastics Club, could co-exist at a dedicated facility in the city.

o RPLC does cater for some gymnastic and trampolining activity but this is mainly recreational activity only as it is not really able to cater for higher levels of activity.

o England Badminton – confirmed that the Badminton Performance centre at Westgate School has a long-term future with NGB investment until at least 2017. It is a good facility with a strong background in the sport and the partnership is working well.

o The NGB does not have any other real priorities for the city although they would like to see more Badminton activity in Winchester.

o The NGB have a good relationship with DC Leisure across the country but this has not led to work being undertaken at RPLC to date. They would like to see this rectified in the future with the site hosting ‘No Strings Badminton’ sessions.

o RPLC is a good site but it is now beginning to show its age. o The city is lacking the quantity and quality space it needs to support grass roots

sports development activity and would welcome more indoor sports hall space that is as large as possible.

o Aware of the proposals from Winchester Fit for the Future and questions whether or not Bar End is too far out of town bearing in mind that RPLC is a good central location.

o England Hockey – Confirmed that development priorities for the sport focus on ‘Back to Hockey’ (particularly for females), ‘Rush Hockey’ which is an indoor programme aimed at involvement and retention, and ‘Quick Sticks’ which aims to develop the sport in secondary schools.

o Winchester is not a priority area as it is relatively well provided for. o Should any new indoor sports hall space be provided it should be sufficiently

large enough to accommodate indoor hockey. Fleming Park in Eastleigh is the only suitable space in the area and would like to see more sites.

o Winchester Hockey Club is fairly strong and well catered for although the NGB is aware that they want to make the case for another pitch.

o Winchester is a good central location for a large-scale facility that could support county events.

o The Football Association - Hampshire County FA – Winchester is not particularly a priority for the county FA but there are development officers focused on football in the city.

o There is a need to improve football facilities in the city – changing facilities at Garrison and King George V sites need refurbishment/replacement, the AGP at River Park is ok but its size limits football development activity. The county FA feel there is a need for another full-sized 3G pitch in the city.

o A hub site which can incorporate existing facilities such as the stadium and grass pitches, could work well.

o Potentially have funding available subject to plans and further discussions. o British Cycling – Explained that there is a strategic need for cycling facilities

within the area, with the highest priority being the development of a closed road circuit. The NGB want to see a closed road circuit developed as a priority and Winchester has been identified as a viable site for this.

o Winchester has a strong club infrastructure and the City Council are supportive of cycling which is good – this makes it a good option for a circuit.



o A multi-sport facility that incorporates a closed road circuit would be very welcome. Winchester is a good location given it is central and accessible.

o The circuit could also be used for skating and running too and locating it at a multi-sport site would help with other usage too such as triathlon.

o British Cycling would consider funding the circuit 100% as part of a WCC funded multi-sport hub project. The NGB generally look at 50% funding but if it was part of a larger scheme they would consider funding all of it.

o England Squash and Racketball – Development priorities for the region are getting more women and more people aged 50+ involved in the sport. The NGB is aiming at getting people into sport and retaining them.

o The sport is well developed in Winchester with reasonable facilities – the Tennis and Squash Club (private facility) has 6 courts with approximately 120 junior members. RPLC is an important facility with 4 courts that are accessible and this number provides enough for development activities aimed at growing the sport. The only issue is the fact that the courts are not visible enough at RPLC. Glass backed visible courts would make a significant difference.

o Future provision – a minimum of 3/4 glass backed courts with visibility within a facility. The Tennis and Squash Club has 6 courts and can cater for competitions/events but the offer at RPLC is important for recreational and community activity for all as not everyone wants to take part in a private club.

o The NGB are pushing facilities and clubs towards Sport England capital funding rounds as NGB capital funds are minimal.

o England Basketball – Hampshire is a strong area for basketball and priority area in terms of trying to increase participation within the sport and increasing membership numbers at clubs.

o The key barrier faced by the sport is the lack of quality two-court spaces available in the area. There is a need for a site that can provide a home to the sport.

o Solent Kestrels Basketball Club is one of the largest in the country and are based in Eastleigh although they have to utilise school facilities. Winchester Basketball Club are a good club and have aspirations for further growth. A site that could be utilised by both clubs would be good and Winchester is a good option.

o The sport needs better facilities to support competitive and recreational activity. RPLC is extremely limited as there are not enough hoops or line markings.

o Supportive of a large hub site that provides indoor space that is a minimum of 2 basketball courts in size.

o England Athletics – explained that the development of an athletics track in Winchester was a priority for a number of years. Now that this has been achieved the priorities for the city are the development of indoor facilities and a stand at the stadium too.

o The track is reasonably well used and is a success. o The Winchester and District Athletics Club is strong and leads development of the

sport at the track. o Aware of the Winchester Fit for the Future group and supportive of their

aspirations. The development of a hub site would help synergy between different facilities which is good.

o Would like to see enhanced strength and conditioning facilities and indoor spaces provided to support the development of the sport at any site.

o England Netball – explained that the development of ‘Back to Netball’ sessions is the leading priority for the NGB. Sessions do take place at RPLC at the current time and the facility does meet the requirements of the participants.

o Not aware of any facility issues for the sport in the city as there does appear to be reasonable supply of indoor space. A number of clubs use Kings School predominantly.



o Winchester provides a good location for a larger facility that could be used for county and regional activities too. Such a facility would require seating so that the sports hall could be used for coaching courses, competitions and events.

o The Lawn Tennis Association– currently working to support the development of plans and priorities for specific areas and Winchester is one of these. The All Play Tennis programme is a key priority for the city.

o Whilst current facility provision for the sport in Winchester is good, there are not many courts that are available on a pay and play basis and this is likely to be a barrier for some.

o RPLC – courts are available on a pay and play basis but the perception is that they are only available for members/people involved with Osman Tennis that develops activity at the site. These need to be marketed and used more effectively. The tennis provider needs to work more closely with DC Leisure and signage is needed to help highlight that the courts are part of the leisure centre. These courts are needed for community activity.

o The LTA would not want to see the number of community accessible court reduced. Would like to see tennis courts as part of any new development.

o Hampshire County Cricket Board – do not have any specific priorities for Winchester.

o There is reasonable provision in the city – local authority squares have some maintenance issues and the HCCB have offered advice and guidance on how better to maintain these.

o Keen to see 2 squares retained at North Walls, along with the net provision and investment into the pavilion is needed too.

o Would like to see indoor cricket nets included within any sports hall development scheme as this can support the growth of the sport.

o Rugby Football Union - Winchester is a priority area due to the presence of Winchester RFUC – a large club that drives a lot of development work in the city.

o The club are a under resourced in terms of facilities – need to improve changing facilities, pitch drainage and need to gain access to a 3G surface to support their training activities too.

o The club have a commercial enterprise called First Contact Sports which undertakes development work in the community and generates revenue that help to sustain the club.

o The RFU use facilities at WRFUC too due to its central location within the county. o RFU could potentially have funds available that could be used to support any

development of facilities that can be used for rugby activity. o England Triathlon – Hampshire is a priority area for the sport. o Access for triathlon clubs to swimming pools is a big issue at the current time.

This is reflected in Winchester with the expanding club struggling to access water space.

o The NGB are also keen to see the development of closed road circuits as they offer facilities that are much safer for clubs to use for training and competitions.

o Would like to see a facility that provides a closed road circuit alongside a swimming pool venue as this would give a good opportunity for developing the sport further within the city and beyond.

o NGB are aware of the Winchester Fit for the Future group and have seen their proposals. Feel that the proposed location is unsuitable as it would be difficult to run or cycle from Bar End site in events without closing major roads which would be an issue.

o England Volleyball – Hampshire is a priority area for the sport with good clubs in Southampton, Portsmouth and Bournemouth.

o Winchester Eagles currently use RPLC and they are a relatively strong club in terms of developing the sport and offering opportunities for the community.

o Southampton and Portsmouth are more suitable location for large higher-level competition venues.



o Canoe England – NGB funds a development officer who is based in the county sport partnership offices in the city.

o The club has a fairly high profile and has access to a clubhouse and part of the river although the water is pretty flat/slow which means that its use is limited as it is not ideal for disciplines such as slalom. The club have been pursuing a project to try and create a stretch of white water.

o Would like to see the club build more of a relationship with RPLC so that they can access water space at the site as this does not really happen at the moment. The club would benefit hugely from accessing swimming pool space for sessions.

o In terms of any future developments, would like to see the club considered for swimming pool access and usage. RPLC has an excellent location and is good for its adjacency to the river where the club are based.

o The club is well developed, has some world class paddlers within their membership and the NGB would like to see them supported more.

o British Judo – explained that the county association is desperate for access to a suitable competition venue in the centre of the county and Winchester is ideal for this. The Mountbatten Centre in Portsmouth is currently used for this type of activity and is not an ideal central location.

o River Park Judo club has 75+ members and a waiting list – they would certainly benefit from additional space for their activities. There are also a number of other clubs in the city and a quality facility would be of benefit to all.

o Would like to see a competition facility that provides seating and enough space for two matted areas. A permanently matted facility would be great for the sport.

o Aware of plans within the local media and support the notion of a larger scale facility with a judo venue in it.

5.7 Local Community Sports Clubs and Organisations Another key element of the process involved discussions and consultation with sports clubs, organisations and groups that are based in the local area. A series of face to face meetings, telephone discussions and online surveys were used to collate the comments and opinions of these local partners. The Consultant Team met with the Winchester Fit for the Future group and a couple of their member clubs (Winchester City Penguins Swimming Club and Winchester Basketball Club) to discuss the outline proposals that they have publicised and their aspirations for facility provision within the city. The following provides a summary of the discussions: o The group has been in existence since April 2011 and from their research they

feel that there are not enough opportunities for participating in sport and physical activity in the city, there is a limited offer in the range of sports and activities that are offered, there are a lack of dedicated facilities (no gymnastics centre for example) and there is a lack of high quality facilities that can be used for both training and the hosting of competitions/events.

o As a result of these issues, many clubs involved with the group feel that they cannot expand their activities and that the facilities are also restricting the development of performance levels/talent within individuals and the clubs.

o The group want to see a 12-court sports hall with seating that can be used for sport and non-sporting events, a flexible 50m pool with booms and moveable floor, a dedicated gymnastics centre and an indoor straight that can be used by the athletics club and other individuals too. The group has visited a number of sites and feel that the facilities at K2 in Crawley are a good model that could be replicated within Winchester.

o A 50m pool is a key inclusion, as the group and the club do not feel that an expanded 25m pool will suffice. They feel that a 50m pool offers much more flexibility for swimming and other aquatics activities such as diving, synchro and



water polo, provides more space for the introduction of more swimming lessons for children and adults and will also help to the club to develop talented swimmers.

o A 50m pool will also significantly raise the profile of the city as a venue for hosting high level competitions and events.

o Bar End has been identified as the preferred site by the group as it is perceived to offer good access with proximity to the M3 and park & ride facilities, would provide synergies with the facilities already at the Stadium and offers space to support such a development too.

o Views on current provision in the city: o Sports Halls – quite a number of them but access is limited as a number are

at schools and the quality is mixed. o Pools – extremely high levels of usage and demand for access to water space.

The current supply is also of mixed quality. For example, the pool at Kings School caters for high levels of usage and as a result of this the pool and changing facilities require investment.

o AGPs – reasonable supply but high demand and it is difficult to get access to these pitches. WRUFC desperately want to be able to access a quality 3G space that can be used for training.

o State Schools – 3G pitch at Henry Beaufort is good as is the Badminton Centre facility at Westgate School. Sports Halls are the general 4-court offer but tend to be shut during school holidays and taken out of use for school events/usage at short notice.

o Private Schools – Winchester College and St Swithun’s both have good facilities but offer limited community usage.

o The group are of the opinion that their research shows that there are high levels of demand for more in the city. A number of quality clubs are carrying waiting lists and want to expand their operations, such as the swimming club that wants to offer adult learn to swim lessons and more masters sessions, Treasure and Winchester gymnastics club needs for a dedicated space. The main barrier to developing sport in the city is access to good facilities.

o RPLC is showing its age and is unappealing and in their view inefficient. For example, the group feel that the pool plant and filtration need investment as they are impacting on the water quality. There is recognition that DC Leisure has invested into facilities at the site but a feeling that the focus has been on the commercial revenue drivers such as the gym as opposed to those aspects that have a wider community benefit which seem to get overlooked. Also feel that the current site does not offer the space to provide facilities that would support significant increases in participation in sport and physical activity.

o The group are of the opinion that the River Park area has a very important role to play, presuming that there is a new facility development at Bar End, as an open space offering informal recreation space for the city offering walkways, community café and cultural offer (such as a moveable bandstand for example).

o Any project should be funded by significant investment from WCC (accessed by PWLB and asset disposal) NGB funding with the group of the opinion that a number of bodies have indicated their support and that the University as a key partner should also invest. Other sources could include HCC and commercial sponsorship.

5.7.1 Online Survey Responses Online surveys were sent to 122 local sports clubs and organisations as part of the consultation process with individual contact information for the clubs sourced via Winchester City Council, the Winchester Fit for the Future group and the County Sports Partnership club database. The surveys gave the clubs the opportunity to give their views on current provision for sport and physical activity within Winchester and asked them about future needs and aspirations. 42 responses were received from



clubs across a wide range of different sports and activities, giving a response rate of 34%. A full list of those clubs and groups that responded can be found within Appendix 3. o Clubs were asked about their current membership levels and plans for the coming

years. Membership numbers within the clubs that responded range between 25 up to 750. 47.6% of respondents confirmed that their membership had increased over the past two years while membership had fallen for 14.3% and remained at a similar level for 38.1%. This indicates a growing demand for the services offered by clubs within the city.

o Clubs were also asked about their priorities for the coming years. 64.3% of respondents confirmed that they are currently looking to increase junior membership and 69% intend to increase adult membership. There is potential for any development of new facilities to meet the needs of these clubs and organisations and support their long-term priorities for growth.

o Interestingly, 59% of clubs also indicated that the recruitment of volunteers is a key priority for them, which is something that new facilities can support by providing more clubs with a quality home and facilities to use.

o Clubs were asked to rate the quality and quantity of sports facilities within Winchester at the current time. The highest number of response indicated that the both the quantity (38%) and quality (47%) are average.

o When asked about the quality of the facilities available at RPLC, 33% indicated that they were average and 21% described them as being poor. Only 15% described them as being good or excellent.

o Clubs were also asked what kind of facilities they feel that there is demand for more of within Winchester. The most popular answer was cycling facilities with 51% of respondents indicating a need for these types of facilities. Sports Halls was the next most popular facility type (43%) followed by Multi-Use Games Areas, AGPs and swimming pools.

o 63.4% of respondents stated that strongly agree that there is a need to redevelop and enhance the provision of facilities within Winchester whilst another 20% indicated their agreement.

Example feedback provided by clubs and groups within the survey includes the following, which are provided for information: o “We would like to increase membership but this is impossible as we do not have

any further access to indoor facilities”; o “We are a club in one of the fastest growing sports in the county and we would

like to grow the club. However, the facilities within Winchester are extremely limited – its very hard to get pool time for example”;

o “Whist we try to get access to AGPs, they all seem to be booked most of the time, suggesting a shortage of supply in the city”;

o “There is a desperate need for a sports hall that offers at least 2 netball courts for training, matches and hosting local and regional events’;

o “River Park Leisure Centre is out of date, too small for a growing city and not fit for the community it is supposed to support. It is time for a new multi-sports facility”.

5.8 Local Schools and Colleges An online survey was also designed and sent by officers from WCC to an agreed list of local secondary schools as part of the consultation process. The survey was sent by council officers to 5 schools and 3 of them responded. A list of those that responded can be found within Appendix 3. The following gives a brief summary of the responses that were received from the schools:



o All of the schools indicated that they are trying to enhance links with local clubs and broaden the range of activities that they offer in the future.

o When asked about the quality of the facilities available within the city, the consensus was that quantity is average whilst quality is poor.

o The schools were also asked what kind of facilities they feel that there is demand for more of within Winchester. The most popular answers were gymnastics facilities and swimming pools with all three schools indicating a need for these facilities.

o 2 of the 3 schools stated that they strongly agree that there is a need to redevelop and enhance the provision of facilities within Winchester whilst the other school indicated that they agree with this too.

5.9 Summary The consultation findings show that local partners and stakeholders acknowledge that whilst the city currently offers a range of facilities at leisure centres, open spaces, school sites and other locations, there is a desire to see investment into new facilities that will provide a better quality of facility within Winchester for the long-term future of sport and physical activity. Consultees have confirmed that the facilities currently available at River Park Leisure Centre are now showing their age and there is a feeling that the site is no longer meeting the needs of the local community or the sporting landscape that exists in the city. There does appear to be high levels of interest in the provision of opportunities for sport and physical activity that is encouraging and supportive. Sport appears to have a high profile within the city at the current time and it is evident that many people recognise the value of physical activity. All of the consultees that have been engaged within this process are keen to see this momentum capitalised upon. It is encouraging that there is a broad consensus on what type of facilities people would like to see provided within Winchester in the future, with the main issues appearing to be the scale of any new facility and possible location for any development. These are key issues that need to be considered and explored further. Another significant challenge for Winchester City Council is clearly going to be funding any development within the city. The aspirations of a number of key consultees suggest a demand for a large-scale facility that can support a wide range of sports at one site. This multi-sport hub site concept is popular across the country but any facility has to be viable from both a capital and a revenue perspective and this issue is explored further in the following sections of the report. Findings from the consultation with key stakeholders as presented here have been used to inform the emerging conceptual design options that are presented within Section 6.



6. Development Options

6.1 Background The Consultant Team’s detailed needs analysis research and consultation process has identified a number of facility requirements that provide opportunities for the development of new facilities for sport and physical activity within Winchester. These requirements are set out in a range of options within this section of the report. Whilst the option designs presented are outline and conceptual at this stage, the ethos of the project remains that any development of new facilities allows for additional space and services that extend the offer and attraction of community facilities within Winchester and also support the development of the sporting infrastructure, including enhancing the quality of community sports clubs within the city. 6.2 Leading Options Following the direction of the Winchester Client Team and the Client Brief for this work the ‘do minimum’ option that would see a refurbishment or enhancements to the current River Park Leisure Centre has not been considered within this study report. Instead, the focus has been on the development of potential new build options that meet the needs of the local community and key partners, based on an analysis of the findings of our desk-based research and consultation exercise. As can be seen from the desk based research and consultation process that have been undertaken as part of this project, there does appear to be a need and clearly identified demand for the provision of a leisure/sports centre that provides facilities on a larger scale than that currently available within the city and the wider district area. Such a centre would be able to cater for higher levels of usage and the latent demand identified within Winchester’s population, help to support aspirations to increase levels of community participation within sport and physical activity, provide new opportunities for a wider range of activities that can be accessed by all and also support a growth in the thriving network of community clubs and organisations that operate within Winchester. A shortlist range of options that incorporate the findings of the Consultant Team’s research and involving varying levels of investment have been considered and developed. A summary of the short listed options that are considered and evaluated in this section is presented in Figure 6.1. Figure 6.1: Development Option Summary

Option Detail

1.

Development of a new leisure centre facility that incorporates an increased amount of water space via the provision of a 10 lane 25m pool and 20m teaching pool, a large 12 court indoor sports hall, larger health and fitness

suite and outdoor AGP and tennis court areas. 1a. As with Option 1 this provides increased levels of water space and larger

indoor facilities. The notable difference between Options 1 and 1a is that this option includes a dedicated gymnastics centre.

This option also includes investment into new AGPs and tennis court areas.



Option Detail

2. Development of a new leisure facility that provides an increase in the amount of water space via the provision of a flexible 8‐lane 50m swimming pool, a larger indoor 12 court sports hall, larger health and fitness offer and

outdoor AGP and tennis court areas. 2a. As with Option 2 this provides increased levels of water space via the

development of a 50m pool and larger indoor facilities. Option 2a includes provision of a dedicated gymnastics centre as part of the facility mix.

This option also includes investment into new AGPs and tennis court areas. It should be noted that each of the options presented involves a new build development scheme, the location of which, as requested by the Winchester Client Team, has not been taken into consideration during the concept design phase presented within this report. As a result of this, there are no site constraints that have influenced any of the outline drawings that have been prepared. The following components of the report provide a short description of each of the proposed new build development options. Full concept design drawings and schedules of accommodation are provided within Appendix 4. 6.2.1 Option 1 Option 1, presented in Figure 6.2, provides enhanced water space, an indoor sports hall, health and fitness facilities and outdoor provision. Figure 6.2: Option 1



This option includes: o 25m 10-lane main swimming pool o 20m x 8m teaching pool with a moveable floor o Spectator seating for 400 people within the pool hall o Poolside spa facilities including sauna, steam room and a plunge shower o 12 court sports hall with bleacher seating and storage space o 4 glass backed squash courts o Health and Fitness gym with space for 120-150 stations o 4 dance studios, located in pairs with moveable dividing walls o Café space o 2 meeting rooms/club rooms o 2 treatment/physio rooms o Full size 3G AGP o 3 small-sided 3G pitches o 8 tennis courts o Wetside and dryside changing facilities with dedicated changing accommodation

for the outdoor areas. 6.2.2 Option 1a Option 1a, presented in Figure 6.3, builds on the facility provision included within Option 1 by adding a dedicated gymnastics hall to the facility mix. Figure 6.3: Option 1a

This option includes: o 25m 10-lane main swimming pool o 20m x 8m teaching pool with a moveable floor



o Spectator seating for 400 people within the pool hall o Poolside spa facilities including sauna, steam room and a plunge shower o 12 court sports hall with bleacher seating and storage space o 4 glass backed squash courts o Health and Fitness gym with space for 120-150 stations o 4 dance studios, located in pairs with moveable dividing walls o Café space o 2 meeting rooms/club rooms o 2 treatment/physio rooms o Full size 3G AGP o 3 small-sided 3G pitches o 8 tennis courts o An 800m² gymnastics hall that provides sufficient space for a range of equipment

including a tumble run and two floored areas. o Wetside and dryside changing facilities with dedicated changing accommodation

for the outdoor areas. 6.2.3 Option 2 Option 2, presented in Figure 6.4, provides a similar facility mix to Option 1. However, there is one significant difference – this option includes the addition of a 50m swimming pool to the development. Figure 6.4: Option 2

This option includes: o 50m 8-lane swimming pool with moveable boom/bulkhead and floor for flexibility. o Spectator seating for 500 people within the pool hall



o Poolside spa facilities including sauna, steam room and a plunge shower o 12 court sports hall with bleacher seating and storage space o 4 glass backed squash courts o Health and Fitness gym with space for 120-150 stations o 4 dance studios, located in pairs with moveable dividing walls o Café space o 2 meeting rooms/club rooms o 2 treatment/physio rooms o Full size 3G AGP o 3 small-sided 3G pitches o 8 tennis courts o Wetside and dryside changing facilities with dedicated changing accommodation

for the outdoor areas. 6.2.4 Option 2a Option 2a, presented in Figure 6.5, provides a building with a larger footprint due to the addition of a dedicated gymnastics hall to the facility mix that has been included within Option 2. Figure 6.5: Option 2a

This option includes: o 50m 8-lane swimming pool with moveable boom/bulkhead and floor for flexibility. o Spectator seating for 500 people within the pool hall o Poolside spa facilities including sauna, steam room and a plunge shower o 12 court sports hall with bleacher seating and storage space o 4 glass backed squash courts



o Health and Fitness gym with space for 120-150 stations o 4 dance studios, located in pairs with moveable dividing walls o Café space o 2 meeting rooms/club rooms o 2 treatment/physio rooms o Full size 3G AGP o 3 small-sided 3G pitches o 8 tennis courts o An 800m² gymnastics hall that provides sufficient space for a range of equipment

including a tumble run and two floored areas. o Wetside and dryside changing facilities with dedicated changing accommodation

for the outdoor areas. 6.2.5 Other Facility Type Considerations During the development of the proposed design concept options for a new facility within Winchester three other specific facility types were considered as a result of analysing the findings from the consultation exercise that has been undertaken. These have not been included within the options that have been presented but the Consultant Team have included the following commentary that relates to each of them. Closed-Road Cycling Circuit – British Cycling have developed a strong working relationship with WCC in recent years. As a result of WCC’s commitment to the development of cycling activity, the NGB has identified Winchester as a priority location for the development of a closed-road cycling circuit. British Cycling has also indicated that they have capital funding available to support such a facility. These facilities usually provide a tarmac circuit with fencing and lighting and are most commonly at least 1km in length. Such circuits are proving to be extremely popular across the country. They can be used for recreational and competitive cycling activity and also be used to support other activities such as running and triathlon. Following discussions regarding the inclusion of such a facility within the design options, the WCC Client Team requested that the Consultant Team omit the circuit from the concept drawings at this time given the further decisions that Council have to make regarding any future site needs. It must be noted that closed-road circuits have been developed at a number of sites in the UK with a variety of layouts so such a facility can be designed to work around a new leisure centre development at any future site. The following image shows how such a track is able to integrate with other facilities at a sports centre facility in the Midlands. Figure 6.6: An example closed-road cycling circuit at a sports centre site



Indoor Athletics Facilities – the development of an indoor facility that can cater for a range of indoor activities has been raised as something that England Athletics, Winchester and District Athletics Club and other stakeholders would like to see considered as part of any new facility. The Consultant Team feel that such a facility would only be a feasible consideration if a new leisure centre scheme was to be developed adjacent to the existing athletics track at Winchester Stadium. This would still need to be explored further by WCC if it is something that they want to include within any final facility mix design for a new centre. As the Consultant Team have been asked to not explore specific sites for any development, the addition of indoor athletics facilities has not been included within any of the concept design options presented within this report. Dedicated Martial Arts Dojo – consultation feedback from martial arts clubs within the city suggested that there is a demand for a space that is dedicated to martial arts activity. The Consultant Team have provided more flexible space within the concept designs that can cater for martial arts classes and clubs. The inclusion of two pairs of adjacent dance studios with moveable walls that can be opened to provide larger spaces that can be used for a range of activities, including martial arts, is the solution that the Consultant Team have provided within these initial concept designs. These dance studios can also be used to support the health and fitness offer and expanded programme that could be delivered within the new facility, as opposed to providing a dedicated space that offers less flexibility for other uses. Spa Facilities – the Consultant Team have included, within each of the Options, the provision of pool-side spa facilities including steam room, sauna and plunge pool/shower. These are provided on pool side in an area that is easily accessible from the wet-side changing areas and they enhance the offer at the site for both members and casual users of the facilities. Consideration was given to the inclusion of a significant spa and beauty offer due to the population mix and wider market within the city for such a facility. This would be another way to generate revenue at any new development via direct employment of staff and service provision or renting out space to a commercial third party. However, the consultation findings did not provide any demonstrable need for such provision within a new leisure centre scheme from the consultation undertaken to date. Further work in the form of some market testing with dedicated spa providers (and potential partners) would be required following on from this study. 6.3 Capital Costs The designs set out in Section 6.2 identify the leading options for any new leisure centre facility could be developed within Winchester. Each option is a variation on a core facility mix offer resulting from the detailed consultation and needs analysis and all seek to improve the quality of the service currently available to the community within the city. The options do not vary significantly from one to the next given the clear themes and needs arising from the consultation process. The variation between the evident need to consider the 50m or 25m pool options as well as the dedicated gymnastics facility are the leading influences and changes presented. Each option includes facilities that can support aspirations to drive up levels of participation in sport and physical activity, enhance the quality of the facilities available in the area, and provide a new centre that will offer a quality venue for both recreational and competitive sporting activity and bring more of a multi-use hub approach to any site that is chosen. Having identified the leading facility needs and the variations therein, it is imperative that WCC considers both the capital costs and revenue implications associated with each option. The following section of the report



identifies the capital costs, revenue considerations and likely impact of each of the options presented. 6.3.1 Capital Cost Schedules The cost schedules for each option are set out in Appendix 5. These costs are based on the scheme drawings provided in Appendix 4 and associated accommodation schedules and commentary from the Consultant Team’s architects, Faulkner Browns. It should be noted that given the level of information available at this early stage of the project, the range of costs provided must be viewed as indicative only. They will need to be subject to further scrutiny at the detailed design stage (following this Feasibility Study). Should the development of a project be considered further by the Council, the cost consultants (EC Harris) recommend that the scope and extent of the works is confirmed by any appointed Design Team, including input from Structural and Services Design Engineers and that a detailed Cost Plan is then produced accordingly. No input from services or structural engineers has been used to inform the costs set out in this report. Allowances are therefore based on typical costs per square metre rates for works of similar type and nature. This cost per square metre is set at a range typical for leisure build at the time of this report being produced. In view of the level of information detailed at this feasibility stage, attention is drawn in particular to the assumptions and exclusions that are listed in Appendix 5. These define the allowances and scope of works contained within the respective Cost Reports. The costs identified are based on traditional construction processes associated with new build leisure facilities. As no specific site has been identified for any potential development, the costs do not make any provision for a range of factors that will need to be considered during the next stages of any project. These include the demolition of any structure already in place at a site and any potentially required road and highways works that could be associated with such a significant development. The costs associated with each option are set out in the sections that follow. Option 1 Option 1 provides a 10-lane 25m main pool, a 20m teaching pool, 12 court sports hall and significant health and fitness offer alongside AGP and tennis court provision outdoors. The costs associated with Option 1 are set out in Figure 6.7. Figure 6.7: Option 1 Cost Summary

CONTENT £

Capital Costs Leisure Centre o New build Leisure Centre with swimming pools, sports hall

and health and fitness areas, including allowances for the fit out of functional areas.

External Areas o AGPs – full size 3G pitch and 3 small‐sided pitches o 8 tennis courts o Provision for 350 parking spaces

£18,837,250

£2,085,000

COST £20,922,250

Fees (12.5%) Contingency (10%)

£2,615,300 £2,353,800



TOTAL £25,891,350

Option 1a Option 1a provides a facility similar to that included within Option 1, except for the addition of a dedicated gymnastics hall as part of the facility mix. The costs associated with Option 1a are set out in Figure 6.8. Figure 6.8: Option 1a Cost Summary

CONTENT £

Capital Costs Leisure Centre o New build Leisure Centre with swimming pools, sports

hall, health and fitness areas and a dedicated gymnastics hall, including allowances for the fit out of functional areas.


£20,676,000

£2,085,000

COST £22,761,000


£2,845,100 £2,560,600

TOTAL £28,166,700

Option 2 This option provides an 8-lane 50m swimming pool, 12 court sports hall, significant health and fitness facilities and outdoor pitches and courts. The costs associated with Option 2 are set out in Figure 6.9. Figure 6.9: Option 2 Cost Summary

CONTENT £

Capital Costs Leisure Centre o New build Leisure Centre with 50m swimming pool, sports

hall and health and fitness areas, including allowances for the fit out of functional areas.


£20,448,000

£2,085,000

COST £22,533,000


£2,816,600 £2,535,000

TOTAL £27,884,600

Option 2a Option 2a includes the facility mix that is proposed with Option 2 and adds the development of a dedicated gymnastics hall to the scheme. The costs associated with Option 2a are set out in Figure 6.10 that follows.



Figure 6.10: Option 2a Cost Summary

CONTENT £

Capital Costs Leisure Centre o New build Leisure Centre with 50m swimming pool, sports

hall, health and fitness areas and dedicated gymnastics hall. Includes allowances for the fit out of functional areas.


£22,241,750

£2,085,000

COST £24,326,750


£3,040 ,800 £2,736,800

TOTAL £30,104,350

6.4 Summary The options presented within this section of the report represent a mix of the successful facilities that are currently provided at River Park Leisure Centre (swimming pool, sports hall and health and fitness space) alongside significant enhancements and improvements that have been identified as a result of analysing the findings of the research and consultation process that has been undertaken as part of this study. The table contained within Figure 6.11 provides a summary that highlights the proposed facility mix of each development option in comparison to the facilities that are currently provided at River Park Leisure Centre. Figure 6.11: Facility Mix at RPLC and Identified Development Options

Facility Type RPLC Option 1 Option 1a Option 2 Option 2a 25m 6‐lane Main Pool 25m 10‐lane Main Pool 15m Teaching Pool

20m Teaching Pool with Moveable Floor

50m 8‐lane Swimming Pool with Moveable Floor and Booms

Pool‐side Spa Facilities including Sauna and Steam

Gym space for circa 100 stations Gym space for 120‐150 stations

8 Court Sports Hall 12 Court Sports Hall Full Size 3G AGP

Small‐Sided 3G pitches 4 Tennis Courts



Facility Type RPLC Option 1 Option 1a Option 2 Option 2a 8 Tennis Courts

4 traditional squash courts 4 glass‐backed squash courts Dedicated Gymnastics Hall

Each concept design offers the opportunity to support and improve the opportunities for both recreational and competitive sport and physical activity within Winchester, something that is a key aspiration of leading partners and stakeholders.



7. Options Appraisal Having reviewed the facilities and capital costs associated with the options presented for consideration by Winchester City Council, it is essential that each option is reviewed in terms of the respective advantages and disadvantages that they offer. This section provides a general overview of the advantages and disadvantages of each option and also provides a scored evaluation of each of the options set against financial and non-financial criteria in order to support the identification of a preferred option for the city. It must be noted that as the respective options have been prepared without a specific site in mind (as the original Client Brief sets out) the Consultant Team have not been able to assess key considerations that would usually be issues for development projects that are appraised in this nature by Continuum. For example, the Consultant Team are not able to gauge whether or not there would be any significant planning issues associated with the development of a proposed facility on a particular site, it is not clear what the scale of associated issues relating to highways and traffic linked to a specific site are likely to be and it is also not clear whether or not a development would have any impact on the continuation of service provided by River Park Leisure Centre. Issues such as these have not been included within the appraisal but all need to be carefully considered by WCC as they are likely to impact on final design and capital costs needed for any final and future development. As each option is a new build scheme there is a strong degree of commonality between the advantages and disadvantages associated with each of them. One key common advantage is that a new facility can be designed to create a very positive “wow factor” within Winchester. The building is likely to become a flagship facility within the area and will ensure that WCC provides high quality leisure and health facilities for residents for many years to come. 7.1 Advantages and Disadvantages of the Development Options Option 1 Advantages o Lower capital costs than the other options presented. o Offers the ability to redesign and provide a facility that meets modern day

requirements and caters for the expressed needs of the community and NGBs. It provides the opportunity to address all the shortcomings of the current RPLC as well as build upon elements of that site that are well established.

o This option will improve revenue generating potential by offering a larger gym space, larger water space with added flexibility, larger sports hall and new AGP facilities.

o Creating a large 12-court sports hall that offers greater flexibility in terms of its usage for a range of activities and sports meets the needs of stakeholders and consultees. The fact that the sports hall will also have bleacher seating makes it a suitable venue for competitive matches, competitions and events for a number of sports.

o The provision of a 10-lane 25m pool and 20m teaching pool (with a moveable floor) offers water space that is a significant increase and improvement of the quality of the facilities currently available at RPLC. This water space can support a quality swimming programme including the provision of lessons and the activities of the Penguins Swimming Club and other clubs in the city, such as Tri Team Wessex Triathlon Club. The increased levels of water space can help to reduce the current programming constraints that are experienced at RPLC and provide more opportunities for all and an expanded range of users.



o The provision of 400 seats, meeting ASA requirements for hosting regional standard competitions, is also included within the proposed development.

o New Artificial Grass Pitch will be a third/fourth generation surface offering a more appropriate surface for football and other sports such as rugby to meet demand throughout the year.

o Re-provision of small-sided 3G surfaces to maintain demand for this market at the site and provide a complimentary offer to the full sized AGP.

o Increases the number of tennis courts in comparison to those that are available at RPLC which should enhance the ability of the site to support the development of tennis and pay and play community activity.

o The proposed squash courts are glass-backed competition standard which will raise their profile within the centre and support the development of the sport and the club in the city.

o The proposals include four separate flexible dance studios which also have moveable dividing walls that can be utilised to create larger spaces to cater for large classes and sports such as martial arts.

o There are two club/meeting rooms included within the designs that can be used by community clubs, further enhancing the concept of providing a club hub site for sport in the city.

o A number of the sports areas include the provision of seating which will enhance the site’s ability to host NGB courses and other educational sessions that are aimed at developing coaches, officials and volunteers.

o A facility that can be designed to interact more effectively with the outdoor pitch and court areas. For example, the concept designs indicate a café that will open onto a terrace that overlooks the AGPs and courts, making it more attractive for people to visit.

o The footprint of the site and the scale of the facilities results in the new centre providing higher levels of capacity, attracting more annual visits and providing opportunities for more people to take part in sport and physical activity at the site.

o New build facility provides a notable opportunity with DC Leisure’s new company structure to look at investment opportunities and potential partnerships.

Disadvantages o As with all options, new build results in significant capital investment

requirements. o The scale of the development and car parking requirements necessitate the

identification of a large site to support such a development by WCC. This could limit the sites that are potentially available for such a development. For example, the proposed options would (appear to) need a site that is larger than the current space occupied by RPLC.

o This options does not provide a 50m swimming pool at the site, something that has been identified as a priority by swimming stakeholders and clubs, including the ASA and Winchester City Penguins Swimming Club. The water space therefore does not offer the ability for training and competitions in a 50m pool. However, it does offer a significantly increased level of water space that can be used for recreational and competitive swimming activities.

o Does not provide a dedicated gymnastics centre which is another facility that has been identified as being a desirable inclusion within any development by some stakeholders and local clubs.

Option 1a Advantages As included within Option 1 plus:



o Provides a dedicated gymnastics facility that can house a quality local community club or group of clubs and widen the range of activities that can be offered at the site.

o The inclusion of a dedicated gymnastics facility also provides an additional revenue stream and increases footfall at the site.

o Additional secondary spend opportunities related to increased usage and visitors to the site.

o The facility would provide a competition venue for gymnastics and widen the ability of the site to hold competitions/events across a number of different sports.

o Providing a dedicated gymnastics facility means that gymnastics activity would not need to take place within the main sports hall, resulting in this space being released for other activity.

Disadvantages o Higher levels of capital investment required in comparison to Options 1 and 2. o This option does not provide a 50m swimming pool at the site, something that

has been identified as a priority by swimming stakeholders and clubs, including the ASA and Winchester City Penguins Swimming Club. The water space therefore does not offer the ability for training and competitions in a 50m pool. However, it does offer a significantly increased level of water space that can be used for recreational and competitive swimming activities.

o The addition of a gymnastics centre potentially necessitates the identification of a larger site to support such a development by WCC in comparison to Option 1.

Option 2 Advantages As included within Option 1 plus: o Provides a flexible 50m pool at the site, something that has been identified as a

priority by a group of stakeholders and clubs, including the ASA and Winchester City Penguins Swimming Club. The water space offers the ability for people to swim Olympic distance long-course at the site, which is a key aspiration for WCPSC.

o The provision of a 50m pool adds a different and unique selling point and marketing focus to the facility and for Winchester itself.

o The proposed option also includes the provision of 500 spectator seats within the pool hall, in accordance with ASA requirements, so that the venue can be used for regional 50m competitions.

o The 50m pool would be designed in such a way that it would incorporate moveable floor and booms which provide the ability to divide to the pool space in a range of configurations that could support a very comprehensive aquatics programme at the site.

Disadvantages o Higher levels of capital investment required in comparison to Option 1. o The addition of a 50m pool increases the size of the facility in comparison to

Option 1 which could have an impact on the identification of a suitable site. Option 2a Advantages As included within Options 1 and 2 plus: o Provides a dedicated gymnastics facility that can house a quality local community

club or group of clubs and widen the range of activities that can be offered at the site.

o The inclusion of a dedicated gymnastics facility also provides an additional revenue stream and increases footfall at the site.



o Additional secondary spend opportunities related to increased usage and visitors to the site.

o The facility would provide a competition venue for gymnastics and widen the ability of the site to hold competitions/events across a number of different sports.

o Providing a dedicated gymnastics facility means that gymnastics activity would not need to take place within the main sports hall, resulting in this space being released for other activity.

Disadvantages o Higher levels of capital investment required in comparison to all the other options

presented within this report. o The increased scale of the facility in this option in comparison to other options

could have an impact on the identification of a suitable site. 7.1.1 Summary As highlighted above, there are only subtle differences between the advantages and disadvantages associated with each of the options presented. The focus for each is the provision of a facility mix that meets the needs and aspirations of the key stakeholders and the wider community within Winchester and the surrounding areas. In terms of swimming pool provision, the difference between Options 1 and 2 in terms of advantages and disadvantages is minimal bearing in mind that Option 1 includes the provision of a large 25m pool and a separate 20m teaching pool which could offer a similar level of flexibility to the 50m pool included within Option 2. The key determinant between the two is likely to be the associated capital costs, with Option 2 providing a more expensive scheme. Each of the options would have a significant impact on the quality of the facilities provided within Winchester and provide a leisure centre that could support a wide range of activities and users. It would also provide a venue that could be utilised as a host facility for a range of competitions and events, further raising the profile of the city within the sporting landscape at local, county, regional and national levels. 7.2 Business Planning and Revenue Projections In order to further assess the long-term viability and sustainability of each proposed option the Consultant Team have developed 10 Year operational income and expenditure models for each option. These projections serve to highlight the potential revenue generating impact that the respective proposed facility mixes could have in the future. The information that is presented can be used for the following purposes:

i. To illustrate that the options presented build on the current financial stability and success at RPLC, in terms of income against expenditure, and have the ability to generate higher levels of annual operational surplus.

ii. To provide financial data that Winchester City Council can reference and analyse to help with any future discussions about potential capital investment associated with future contractual arrangements and any possible revised operational profit share arrangements linked to any new facilities.

iii. Supplying financial projections that can help Winchester City Council with their planning for anticipated financing costs that they are likely to need to meet in the years ahead (discussed further in Section 7.4).

In order to develop realistic operational income and expenditure forecasts for each option, the Consultant Team have utilised current operational information and running costs for RPLC that have been provided by and discussed with DC Leisure. This information has been used alongside the Consultant Team’s experience of



preparing business plans for similar leisure facilities, guidance from NGB documents and the findings of the consultation process that has been undertaken. Utilising actual financial information for the RPLC site has helped to provide a base from which anticipated operational growth, as a result of investment into new facilities, can be built upon within the city. It shows which components of the current offer at RPLC are working well or not. The forecasts do aim to show a cautious and gradual approach to growing new business, both in terms of direct sporting and indirect secondary use and are therefore based upon conservative assessments of income growth and full-scale estimates of expenditure. Each of the forecasts should be read in conjunction with the stated assumptions that have been prepared for each Option (see Appendix 6). Each of the financial projections includes an annual allocation towards the lifecycle costs that are associated with each development option. These costs have been included at a level that equates to 1% of the total capital cost for each option. The full detailed 10 Year Operational Income and Expenditure Forecasts for each of the options, including the assumptions utilised by the Consultant Team and the exclusions, can be found within Appendix 6. Figures 7.1-7.4 that follow provide a summary of the financial forecasts for each of the development options. Figure 7.1: Option 1

Year Income Expenditure Surplus / Deficit 1 3,137,480 2,473,178 664,302 2 3,240,910 2,544,305 696,605 3 3,347,007 2,617,416 729,590 4 3,441,310 2,687,556 753,754 5 3,552,983 2,764,815 788,168 6 3,659,572 2,841,482 818,090 7 3,769,359 2,920,450 848,909 8 3,882,440 3,001,787 880,653 9 3,998,913 3,085,564 913,349 10 4,118,881 3,171,854 947,026

Figure 7.2: Option 1a




Figure 7.3: Option 2


Figure 7.4: Option 2a

Year Income Expenditure Surplus / Deficit 1 3,275,451 2,678,690 596,761

2 3,383,020 2,754,962 628,059

3 3,493,380 2,833,371 660,009

4 3,592,075 2,908,968 683,106

5 3,708,270 2,991,847 716,423

6 3,819,518 3,074,305 745,213

7 3,934,104 3,159,236 774,868

8 4,052,127 3,246,715 805,412

9 4,173,691 3,336,819 836,872

10 4,298,901 3,429,625 869,276

As can be seen within each of the summary tables presented, the Consultant Team forecast that each of the options will support the generation of healthy annual revenue surpluses. These reflect the current levels of usage at RPLC and additional forecast attendances linked to the associated increases in facility quality, capacity and opportunities for delivery linked to the enhanced offer for each option. The 10 year cumulative surplus figures for each of the options are presented in Figure 7.5. This shows that Option 1 provides the highest level of forecast surplus over the 10 year period that has been analysed by the Consultant Team. Figure 7.5: 10 Year Cumulative Operational Surpluses

10 Year Operational Surplus Option 1 £8,040,447 Option 1a £7,488,168 Option 2 £7,828,173 Option 2a £7,316,000

7.2.1 Key Operational Income and Expenditure Streams For each option, itemised operational income and expenditure forecasts are explained in detail within Appendix 6. Within the facility mixes there are core facility elements across each of the options which lead to commonalities between key operational income and expenditure strands at the site. These are further explained as follows. Income Swimming Pool(s)



The proposed provision of a larger water space is a key outcome within all of the options. Options 1 and 1a include the provision of a 10-lane 25m main pool and a 20m teaching pool with a movable floor that can offer more flexible use of the water space. Options 2 and 2a include the development of a 50m pool with moveable floor and booms that provide the opportunity to divide up the water space as required, also providing flexibility within this facility. An effective and efficient pool programme, that follows the guidelines and protocols of the National Plan for Teaching Swimming (alongside the swim programme from DC Leisure, Winchester City Penguins Swimming Club and other clubs), will offer a better balance between lane swimming, casual swimming opportunities, formal learn to swim lessons, school usage and club activity at the site. This will offer the ability to generate significantly increased levels of income in comparison to the current pool facilities that are available at RPLC. Health and Fitness Suite A large proportion of the income generated at RPLC and at many leisure centre facilities across the country is from fitness membership fees. The income generated from this revenue stream often underpins other areas within leisure facilities. At the current time, RPLC has in excess of 3,000 members. All options presented include an enlarged space for the health and fitness offer. The current gym space provides circa 100 stations whilst the proposed options increase this by up to 50% and provide a space that can accommodate up to 150 stations. This provides the opportunity to increase membership numbers and the number of customers that use the facilities on a pay and play basis. AGP Provision Each of the options includes the provision of both a full-sized 3G/4G AGP and 3 smaller sized 3G pitches. Whilst the primary market for these facilities will be football, they can also be used for other activities such as the Rugby Club using the full-sized area for training sessions. There is demand for more AGPs within the city with Sport England Facility Planning Model analysis identifying that the pitches at the Winchester Stadium, Henry Beaufort School and Kings School are all used at over 90% of their capacity. Sports Hall Space The current hall at RPLC is 8 badminton courts in size and is extremely popular for a range of activities. Each of the options proposed include a larger sports hall that is 12 courts in size with built-in bleacher seating provided. This increases the capacity of the sports hall space available and significantly enhances the suitability of the site for hosting a wide range of events and competitions alongside the ability to cater for more community grass roots sports activities. Food and Beverage Offer Attracting secondary spend from visitors to the site is of key importance for any facility. It is envisaged that footfall will increase within each of the options and, as such, there are greater opportunities for the centre to attract secondary spend. DC Leisure has acknowledged that the current café facility at RPLC is limited in its appeal, primarily due to its location and design. In each option the café is a more prominent feature on the ground floor near to the main reception area of the new facility with a terrace area that would look out over the outdoor facilities. It is felt that these developments would enhance the café offer at a new facility and therefore further improve secondary spend opportunities and enhance revenue generation. Expenditure Staffing



Staff costs are the largest single item of expenditure included within each of the business planning forecasts. Each of the options will increase the scale of the facility offered and the opportunities that it presents for activities to take place in comparison to RPLC. It is anticipated that there will be a need to increase staffing and instructor costs in line with increased levels of usage and the enhanced service offer. Approximately 33% of annual turnover has been spent on direct staffing costs at RPLC each year over the past 4 years and this figure has been utilised within the forecasts presented. However, the Consultant Team acknowledge that these figures will need to be subject to further scrutiny and assessment based on any final agreed facility mix for any new facility development. Utilities As the facilities at the centre, both indoor and outdoor, are used more intensively it is likely that there will be an increase in expenditure on utilities. Measures can be put in place to make buildings more energy efficient (and any new facility would look to improve energy efficiency) but there is still an expectation that expenditure on gas, electricity and water will increase. These likely rises are presented within the business plans. The utilities market remains extremely volatile and subject to notable changes. The Consultant Team therefore note that the costs included are based on current prices only. Lifecycle Costs Each of the forecasts includes an annual allocation towards the lifecycle costs associated with the respective schemes. These have been factored in as an item of expenditure at a cost of 1% of the total capital cost of each option. These funds will generate an ongoing and increasing financial resource that can be utilised to maintain and improve the quality of the facilities available at the site and major capital replacements required such as changing room refurbishments, AGP resurfacing and so forth. The Consultant Team feel that it is prudent to include these costs within the business planning process and this has also been discussed with WCC’s Chief Finance Officer who agreed that such costs should be considered from the outset of any project. 7.2.2 Summary It is essential that any leisure centre site is managed in an effective and sustainable manner to ensure growth of the business, continued efficient operation and the maximisation of long-term benefits generated by investment into any new facilities. Creating reliable revenue streams that can help to deliver a surplus at a new site has been a key consideration for the financial modelling process. The potential options aim to maximise the opportunities to build on the successful elements of RPLC and to provide new components that can further enhance any facility offer and revenue generation potential at a site. The forecasts clearly show that the proposed facility options do have the ability to generate surpluses that can go some way to meeting the overall development and finance costs associated with funding any potential development project within Winchester. 7.3 Analysis and Evaluation of Options Having reviewed the general advantages and disadvantages of each of the options presented, alongside the operational revenue implications, the options are now reviewed against an evaluation framework which looks to establish which of the options is the most viable and sustainable solution for WCC and the local community.



Each option has been evaluated according to a set of weighted financial and non-financial criteria. These are set out below and cover a number of the strategic priorities, consultation headlines and the aims and aspirations of the key consultees and stakeholders. 7.3.1 Criteria for Evaluation Each option has been evaluated and scored against a set of weighted financial and non-financial criteria to ensure a consistent approach to appraising them. The criteria that have been utilised are as follows:

1. The extent to which the development will lead to an increase in the levels of participation in sport and physical activity within Winchester.

2. The extent to which the development significantly enhances the capacity of River Park Leisure Centre and the overall sports and leisure facility mix available within Winchester.

3. The extent to which the investment will provide a long-term solution for enhanced sports and community facilities in Winchester and Hampshire.

4. The financial affordability of the development option. 5. The long-term financial sustainability of the option. 6. The potential development time-scales and deliverability associated with the

respective option.

7.3.2 Assumptions The construction period is assumed to be 15-18 months for the new build schemes, with construction expenditures spread evenly over these periods. However, it must be noted that any demolition works that may be required once a site is identified is going to add to the construction timeframe. A key focus for WCC should be to ensure as much as possible that the current RPLC remains open, ensuring continuation of service delivery whilst any new build centre is being developed. This is also dependent on the identification of a development site for any future leisure centre scheme. Alongside the detailed operational revenue planning that has been undertaken for each option, the capital delivery programme for funding the project has also been set out using the Consultant Team’s financial modelling process. Each option has been modelled with funding provided through borrowing. The new build options have been factored over a 50 year period with an interest rate of 3.5% for the remaining period. 7.3.3 Results In order to compare the options in a consistent manner, we have scored the criteria out of 5, using the scale that is indicated in Figure 7.6. Figure 7.6: Scoring Criteria

Criteria Score

Requirements met, no reservations at all 5

Requirements met, but with some reservations 4

Requirements met adequately, but with reservations 3

Requirements only partially met 2

Significant reservations and unlikely to be acceptable 1

Fails to meet requirements 0



Figure 7.7 sets out the analysis of the options against the evaluation criteria. Figure 7.7: Evaluation of the Options

Evaluation Criteria Weighting %

Option 1

Option 1a

Option 2

Option 2a

1. Increased facility capacity that can support increases in the levels of

participation in sport and physical activity within Winchester.

20 4 5 4 5

2. The extent to which the development significantly enhances the sports and leisure facility mix available within Winchester.

20 4 5 5 5

3. Provide a long‐term solution for sports and community facilities in Winchester and

Hampshire.

10 4 4 5 5

4. Affordability and Cost 20 3 2 2 1

5. Long term financial sustainability 20 5 3 4 2

6. Timescale and Deliverability 10 4 3 3 3

TOTAL SCORE 100 400 370 380 340

7.3.4 Scores and Evaluations Commentary and evaluation of the score received by each option is provided below. Option 1 – Score of 400 This is the highest scoring of all of the options presented in this appraisal, scoring marginally higher than Option 2. As with each of the options it provides a leisure centre that offers increased levels of water space, a large sports hall, a significant health and fitness offer and a range of outdoor facilities. It scores slightly lower than Options 1a and 2a on the first evaluation criteria as it does not include a gymnastics hall and it also scores lower than each of the other options in relation to the second and third criteria due to the fact that the facility offer does not include the same extent of facilities for the city and county when compared to the options providing a 50m pool and/or a gymnastics facility. However, in comparison to each of the other options, it also provides the smallest building footprint at 8,820m² and the lowest capital costs. This option also creates the ability to generate higher levels of revenue over the 10 year period that has been modelled by the Consultant Team due to the fact that levels of expenditure are lower. It has therefore outscored the other options in the final three evaluation criteria as it is cheaper, provides a greater level of surplus over the forecast period and with a smaller footprint should be deliverable in a slightly shorter timescale. Option 1a – Score of 370 This option scores more than Option 1 in terms of the first two criteria. This is due to the fact that the capacity of the site and the mix of facilities are enhanced via the provision of the gymnastics facility. However, this option scores lower within the other criteria due to the fact that it is more expensive than Options 1 and 2, provides



a lower 10 year income surplus than both of these options and also has a larger footprint than both options 1 and 2. Option 2 – Score of 380 This option scored the second highest total across all of the options. It provides a 50m pool which can offer a unique selling point for the scheme. This is why it scores higher than Option 1 for criteria 2 and 3. It does also offer lower capital costs than Options 1a and 2a but they are higher than those for Option 1. It also has a larger footprint than Option 1 too which has impacted on the revenue generation (e.g. utilities and maintenance costs) over the 10 year period. This is why it scores slightly lower than Option 1 within this appraisal. Option 2a – Score of 340 Despite this option offering a 50m pool and gymnastics centre (and therefore scoring highly against the first three criteria), it is the lowest scoring of the respective options due to the fact that it is the largest development, the most expensive and the one that generates the lowest level of revenue surplus over the 10 year period. 7.3.5 Option Scoring Summary The appraisal of the options has highlighted the fact that three of the options are closely matched in terms of their scoring against the evaluation criteria. Given the results of the evaluation, it appears that Option 2a is the least viable due primarily to the scale of the scheme and the associated capital costs which are higher than the other options. Options 1 and 2 do score higher than 1a and 2a and provide a solution for the site at a lower cost but they do not include the provision of a gymnastics hall as part of the offer. Of the two leading Options, Option 2 provides a larger amount of water space (925m²) when compared to Option 1 (735m²) but this comes at a cost, both in terms of capital costs and also the levels of expenditure associated with operating the larger site which have had an impact on the financial forecasts prepared as part of this study. Option 1 appears to present the leading solution for any new development in that it meets the vast majority of the needs identified within our consultation and desk based research. It offers the ability to provide a new and enhanced leisure centre with greater capacity for growth and revenue generation whilst also having the lowest associated capital costs of the options due to the fact that it has a smaller footprint whilst maintaining the flexibility of the water space that is available. 7.4 Financial Analysis – Overall Cost of Delivery to Winchester City Council This report has so far considered the capital costs associated with each option, the outcomes of the detailed business planning exercise and the wider evaluation of the benefits of each of the options. At the present time, WCC have confirmed that they have limited capital resources available to support any future development of facilities. Therefore, debt financing any development option will need to be considered in order to realise the capital funding required.



This section therefore seeks to analyse the costs of delivering each option once capital costs, borrowing rates, repayments and income receipts have been taken into account. The figures provided are based on the following assumptions: o The financial models used by Continuum only allow for one annual figure to be

programmed in relation to annual income received (to be used to offset the costs). For the purpose of this analysis the Consultant Team have used the Year 5 figure from the business plans for each option which is considered the mature year. This allows for some income elements to build up within the new facilities. This figure has been multiplied to provide a sum for a 50 year period. The income figure used is then set at 50% with the assumption (for this outline financial analysis) that the Council could obtain a 50/50 operational profit share agreement via contractual arrangements for any new development. This would give WCC a share that totals £394,084 pa.

o Borrowing rates are based upon rates of 3.5% pa across the full 50 year term, as discussed with and advised by WCC.

o The annual cost to WCC is presented as the overall cost across the repayment term of 50 years for the new build capital schemes.

Figure 7.8 below sets out the full cost of delivering each of the options once all forms of expenditure and a percentage of income (50%) have been accounted for. Figure 7.8: Full Financial Cost to Winchester City Council 50 years Option Indicative

Construction Costs £

Total Finance Cost over full

repayment term £

Assumed Income(WCC share@

50%) £

Net Cost/Benefit

£

Annual Cost to WCC

£

Option 1 25,891,350 48,999,380 19,704,200 ‐29,295,180 585,904 Option 1a 28,166,700 53,305,480 18,340,275 ‐34,965,205 699,304 Option 2 27,884,600 52,771,606 19,175,850 ‐33,595,756 671,915 Option 2a 30,104,350 56,972,482 17,910,575 ‐39,061,907 781,239 Figure 7.8 indicates that all the short listed options generate an overall cost to WCC. Of the four individual options, Option 1 provides the lower overall full term and annual cost predominantly due to the lower capital costs associated with this option. As previously discussed Option 1 still delivers the significant community and sporting benefit associated with the demand and needs that have been highlighted and identified within this study report. 7.5 Opportunities to Reduce the Cost to the Council In order to assess the viability and affordability of new facility provision within Winchester the business planning process has taken into account the historic operational income and expenditure associated with River Park Leisure Centre and applied industry standard and robust assumptions linked to forecasts on expanded income and associated expenditure. Given the notable costs (capital and finance costs) associated with each of the exciting facility options put forward, the Consultant Team have given consideration to the opportunities to reduce the costs via an initial (up front) capital investment and additional revenue generation that could be associated with such a development. This is first discussed below and then further assessed with regard to the financial impact that these additions may have on the affordability of any scheme to WCC. 7.5.1 Initial Capital Investment



As detailed, the capital costs and the associated financing costs present a significant challenge to WCC. Consideration is therefore given to WCC being in a position to utilise any (to be) identified resources to include as an initial up front capital injection towards this project. This would have the ability to significantly reduce the overall financing costs associated with any new development and reduce the affordability gap that has been identified. During initial discussions with WCC it was made clear that they do not have any unallocated capital funds available to support any significant leisure centre development at the current time. If such a development continues to be deemed a priority for WCC, there could be a review of planned capital allocations in light of the findings and analysis of this report. However, it is recognised by the Consultant Team that this in itself is not a simple process and is constrained by the total amount of usable reserves available. The Consultant Team are of the opinion that WCC should also discuss any development plans with HCC to further explore any potential that may exist for securing financial support from them. This is particularly relevant bearing in mind that Winchester has been identified within their County Legacy Strategy that is due to be published as a potential site for a multi-sports hub site within the county. Further to WCC’s need to both consider and identify any possible capital funding, discussions will also need to take place with any potential operator as to the potential for capital investment into any new facility developments. Given the potential successful partnership that WCC would be looking to pursue with any future operator, this represents an opportunity to lever in funding via discussions and any future contractual agreements. The University of Winchester are also identified as a potential key partner for WCC due to the fact that any new leisure facility provision would be of benefit to the University itself and their student population. It would enhance the student offer and experience and help them with their efforts to attract more students to the city. It is suggested that discussions between WCC and the University take place to explore potential levels of capital funding that may be available from the University too. Finally, consideration should be given to accessing external grant funding. There are a number of sources for external funding support that such a project would be eligible for, however it must be noted that securing external funding for large capital developments remains extremely competitive and it can be difficult to secure grants of all sizes within the current financial climate. The Consultant Team are of the opinion that such a project would be attractive to external funders. Given the National Governing Body interest and support for the project, due consideration should be given to sourcing external capital grants from a range of sources that include the NGBs themselves, although any funding from NGBs is likely to be extremely limited, and Sport England. It is recommended that further discussions are held with key NGB partners and Sport England as any scheme develops. It should be noted however that securing third party grant funding is not considered within any additional calculations that follow in this report. 7.5.2 Car Parking Charges Alongside capital funding, the other most evident opportunity for generating funding to help reduce and address the overall affordability gap is for WCC to consider utilising income generated from car parking charges at any new facility. River Park



Leisure Centre customers that visit the centre by car are used to paying car parking fees and the Consultant Team feel that this is something that could continue at any new leisure centre development as a way of increasing revenue generation at a site. The Consultant Team are aware that the car parking income generated at the RPLC site at the current time goes directly into the WCC’s Car Parking Team (as with all other Council operated car parks) and is not directly available to support the leisure centre itself. The development options proposed include provision for a car park that contains 350 parking spaces. If WCC were to identify that any new leisure centre could be developed on the current RPLC site or land in the adjacent North Walls site then there would be a requirement to provide an extra 183 spaces on top of the 167 currently situated at River Park, to give the 350 spaces in total, presuming that this car parking facility was retained to support the new development. This would provide 183 additional new car parking spaces over the current provision and the additional revenue from these spaces or indeed the entire 350 space car park would generate considerable additional revenue. If the income generated within the whole car park, or even just from the additional 183 spaces, could be utilised to support the finance costs associated with the leisure centre development then this would help to address the evident funding gap and assist in the eventual delivery of any new facility proposed. The Consultant Team recognise that this may be a difficult process to implement internally, however we strongly feel that the affordability gap necessitates some serious consideration of this opportunity. If a development is to take place on another site, away from the current RPLC location, then it is recommended that consideration is given to utilising all of the income from all 350 new car parking spaces to support the leisure centre development costs. This would also leave WCC with an opportunity, depending on what they decide to do with RPLC if a new facility is developed elsewhere, to create a larger city centre car park that could be used to generate even larger revenues for WCC. To illustrate the positive impact that the utilisation of parking charges could have on the business plan, we have undertaken some initial high-level modelling based on the following assumptions: o The current RPLC car park generates circa £100,000 after NNDR costs are met.

For 167 spaces that equates to £598 per space per annum. o If the full 350 spaces income (for example at a new site) is set against the on-

going revenue needs of the River Park development this could provide £209,300 per annum or a figure of circa £10.5 million over 50 years.

o If only the “additional car parking space income” is all that can be considered for usage to support any leisure centre development then the additional 183 spaces generate £109,434 per annum which equates to a figure of circa £5.5 million over 50 years.

It is recommended that WCC considers further exploration of the potential income generation associated with car parking linked to the wider development of a new leisure centre facility. 7.5.3 Review of Facility Charges and Fees The financial modelling process has been informed by the current financial performance of River Park Leisure Centre and whilst prudent increases, assumptions and forecasts have been made about the potential operational income that each new facility could generate, it was not the purpose of this study to review current pricing



policy at RPLC. Therefore, current charges have been utilised within the financial forecasts that have been developed as part of this study. Another way of trying to increase revenue within a leisure centre is to review and increase the facility charges and fees that are in place at the site. The Consultant Team are aware that current charges at RPLC are lower than they are at facilities within neighbouring authority areas. For example, an adult swim at RPLC currently costs £3.50 whereas the charge at Fleming Park in Eastleigh is £4.25. Hiring a badminton court at RPLC for an hour currently costs £6.30 (off-peak) and £9.30 (peak), whilst the charges at Fleming Park are £6.90 and £10.50 respectively. Whilst the Consultant Team area aware that there has been a political desire by the City Council to try and ensure that prices at RPLC remain affordable for all members of the community it is felt that the opportunity to review and implement a pricing policy that reflects modest increases would have the ability, alongside increased usage and capacity of any new development, to have a marked effect on potential levels of income generation over the longer term. 7.5.4 Impact of Capital and Revenue Injections Having discussed the need to consider additional capital and revenue funding, a series of initial scenarios are presented which consider and illustrate the impact of both capital and revenue injections into any future leisure centre development scheme. The models presented show three scenarios which indicate the impact of three different variant levels of initial capital investment alongside variances in the level of car parking income that WCC commit to any scheme (as described above). Each of the scenarios uses Option 1 as the preferred option to model these potential changes and highlight the impact that they can have on the affordability associated with such a development. As expected, any capital investment from WCC and/or its partners and external stakeholders, allied with increased revenue funding from the utilisation of car parking charges, indicates a very positive change in the net and annual cost to WCC when compared to the information presented within Figure 7.8 previously. It is assumed that all income from the car park is controlled by WCC and is therefore added to the income share assumptions (set at 50% and giving £394,084 pa) from the business plan forecasts set out earlier in this section of the report. It must be noted that the scenario testing included within this section of the report has utilised the financial information that is presented within the 10 Year operational income and expenditure forecasts that have been developed as part of this study. Figure 7.9: Scenario 1 Financial Models with £5m Capital Investment and Car Parking Income at Full and “Additional Spaces Only” over 50 Years

£5m Capital and Full Car Park Income Total Finance Cost ‐

Full repayment term £ Income £

(WCC share at 50%) Net Cost/Benefit

£ Annual Cost to WCC £

39,536,880 30,169,200 ‐9,367,860 187,354

£5m Capital and Additional Car Park Income Total Finance Cost ‐




39,536,880 25,175,900 ‐14,360,980 287,220



Figure 7.10: Scenario 2 Financial Models with £7m Capital Investment and Car Parking Income at Full and Additional





35,751,880 30,169,200 ‐5,582,680 111,654





35,751,880 25,175,900 ‐10,575,980 211,520 Figure 7.11: Scenario 3 Financial Models with £10m Capital Investment and Car Parking Income at Full and Additional





30,074,380 30,169,200 94,820 ‐ 1,896





30,074,380 25,175,900 ‐4,898,480 97,970 The scenarios provided above show that there would be a clear benefit associated with WCC considering the maximum amount of up front capital (£10m) for any new leisure centre development project and the positive impact that this has on the repayment amounts. As illustrated in Figures 7.9 and 7.10 above, the impact of being able to invest £5 million or £7 million capital and being able to utilise the revenue generated from car parking charges also reduces the annual costs to WCC significantly. Even with an operational profit share arrangement assumed to be in place, with the car parking revenue re-directed specifically towards the leisure centre costs and an up front capital injection the development of a new facility shows an on-going cost which needs careful consideration and further scrutiny by WCC. If it is possible to facilitate an up front capital contribution of £10 million and to utilise all car parking income to help meet the costs, then the annual cost to WCC is almost reduced to a situation that is cost neutral. It must be noted that this modelling has been provided to illustrate the positive impact that the introduction of car parking charges and an initial capital investment can have on the overall project costs. It should also be noted that for the purposes of this scenario testing no full scale car parking analysis has been undertaken in relation to the more commercial opportunities of longer stay car park use or higher charges than the initial assumption that car users would generate the current rate of car parking income per space at a level that is similar to the facility at RPLC at the present time. 7.6 Summary This section of the report has presented a number of significant issues in relation to priorities and affordability for consideration by the WCC Project Team. The



Consultant Team’s overarching aim has been to present the options, their respective merits and their true costs to WCC (in line with WCC financial directives). The detailed analysis in this section is the key to understanding the direction of travel for WCC when considering the viability of developing a new leisure centre that offers the community a facility that is a significant enhancement of the current River Park Leisure Centre. The Consultant Team are of the opinion that, through the evaluation of all factors, Option 1 emerges as the leading option to meet the priorities of consultees and the criteria set out in the consultancy brief. It should be noted however that from our initial analysis none of the options presented provide WCC with a cost neutral position. The evident need to enhance the current offer and scale of the facilities at River Park, the need to consider debt finance the development and the assumptions that the operational profits generated from the facility will need to be shared with an operator (who themselves may invest into the facility) lead to an on-going cost to WCC for the provision of new facilities. However, the leading option presented has been subjected to some scenario testing which illustrates that whilst a cost to WCC could remain, the option is likely to be more affordable should it be possible for the authority to secure capital funding that could be invested into the scheme directly. Following on from this, the Consultant Team have also shown that the re-direction of car parking charges at the site has the ability to significantly reduce the costs to WCC, making the development more affordable. Further consideration to reviewing any pricing policy that is put in place at a new facility would also help to support the Council’s ability to meet any finance costs associated with any scheme although this has not been modelled as part of this report. The detailed financial assessment presented within this section of the report highlights that there are some significant and important next steps that the WCC Project Team must take in order to take the project forward. These are discussed in more detail in Section 8 of this report.



8: Summary and Next Steps 8.1 Summary River Park Leisure Centre continues to play an integral role in the community within Winchester providing sport and leisure opportunities for thousands of residents of all ages. The report has identified strong support locally and regionally for the development of a new facility and indeed the Council has identified the desire to consider the development of a replacement facility within the city. However up until the production of this report the detailed business case has not been presented or discussed in detail. As already discussed within this report, this study considers only new build options for the potential replacement of River Park Leisure Centre with Council officers themselves setting out the business case for refurbishment of the current site. This is to be considered alongside this report by Continuum. Whilst the report also does not consider any specific site or any associated issues, it must be noted that any new development will be heavily influenced in terms of its design, layout and importantly final capital costs by the site specific influences and potential constraints. Commentary on this is provided below with regard to generic future considerations for the City Council. This report has identified, considered and analysed local needs based on the research that has been undertaken and translated this information into a series of leading options for the development of a new facility within Winchester. It has also set out the advantages, disadvantages, operational issues, revenue implications and capital costs associated with each of the options that have been presented. The concept design options, set out in Section 6, present a range of very exciting opportunities for Winchester City Council and the local community based on the opportunity to deliver a facility that contains either a 50m pool or a 25m pool and teaching pool, significant sports hall space and a range of other indoor and outdoor facilities. Sections of this study report have highlighted the advantages and disadvantages between the two leading swimming pool options as well as the costs and capital differences associated with this leading facility type given the desire by many stakeholders to see the city provide a new 50m swimming pool. The report has evaluated the relative merits of both of these leading facility types and in keeping with the most cost effective route for the City Council, whilst addressing the clear needs of the consultees and sport within Winchester, the leading option to emerge from both the financial and non-financial evaluation is the leisure centre mix containing the 25m 10-lane pool. It should be noted however that given the most advantageous configuration of a 25m pool includes the 20m learner pool, the difference in water space between Option 1 and Option 2 is relatively small with the main difference lying in the long-course training and competition opportunities associated with a 50m pool. The main difference between the provision of the 50m and 25m pool is the longer term capital and revenue costs associated with financing and operating a larger scale capital development and overall building. Annual costs and overall repayment amounts are noticeably different between Options 1 and 2 as presented within this report. Given the current funding gap identified and the further work that the City



Council Project Team has to undertake following on from this study, the Consultant Team are recommending the more affordable option of the 25m pool facility. Given the evident funding gap, in order to deliver either of the new build leisure centre options the Consultant Team is mindful that Winchester City Council have some significant challenges ahead and further work to assess whether a new build leisure centre can be delivered based on the analysis presented within this report. The costs of pursuing each of the options presented are significant and varied (see Section 6). Whilst the Consultant Team are confident that the proposals for a new leisure centre facility will be attractive to funders, grant funding is likely to have a limited impact on reducing the overall associated cost of delivering each option, and therefore the role of debt financing the development options has been assessed and analysed. Ahead of the next stages of discussion points that the Council must consider, based on the analysis and scenario testing presented in Section 7 of this report, the Consultant Team are of the opinion that the delivery of a new leisure centre will only be viable if Winchester City Council considers the following leading issues:

o Capital Investment - There will need to be some form of capital injection from the Council and potentially other parties (such as DC Leisure / Places for People) in order to reduce some of the costs associated with (and reliance on) borrowing with the aim to reduce these financing costs. At the time of this report, consultation with WCC has indicated that no immediate sources of capital have been identified that could be put towards any new development. Further detailed discussions within the Council are therefore required.

o Operational Income Sharing - The Council will need to have in place a new

contractual arrangement with any management contractor that reflects the proportion of investment made by each party as this income will need to contribute directly to offsetting finance costs.

o Revenue Generation – Given the evident funding gap, the Council must

consider additional revenue generating opportunities at the site (such as the re-direction of car parking receipts as discussed) to contribute directly towards the overall longer term costs of any redevelopment.

8.2 Critical Next Steps There are a number of critical next steps for Council to take ahead of any further decisions being made on the viability of the preferred option. The focus of the Winchester City Council Project Team should now be identifying how the funding gap can be reduced through any up front capital investment by the Council (and any third parties), how revenues to the Council can be improved to help off-set costs and finalising the likely overall investment required from Winchester City Council. The leading next steps are set out in more detail below: 8.2.1 Consideration of Debt Financing and Affordability Winchester City Council must consider their own overall risk profile and how the financial profiling of any new potential leisure centre facility, as presented within this report, currently sits within the overall capital portfolio for the Council. It is clear from this report that some level of debt finance is likely to be required to develop any new leisure centre. Therefore the Council must consider its overall position and impact that this project has on wider capital plans.



8.2.2 Securing and Directing Capital Funding to the Project The delivery of any new leisure centre is predicated on the ability of the Council to finance the project. Following on from the Council’s consideration of their position related to debt finance (and impact on other capital projects) in order to reduce the financial costs and on-going revenue implications (aside from the operational revenue account associated with any new leisure centre) associated with borrowing, an initial up front capital investment will be required from the Council. As part of the financial planning related to this report, the Consultant Team have liaised with the Council’s Chief Finance Officer. These discussions have indicated that at present no capital funding is allocated towards any new leisure centre development project. Capital funding is allocated for essential maintenance and repairs of River Park Leisure Centre. Previously in Section 7, the Consultant Team has shown the impact that various amounts of capital funding can have on the overall capital revenue costs (the positive impact on financing costs). It is therefore recommended that further opportunities for capital funding should be explored given the clear political desire for the development of a new leisure centre facility. Therefore further discussions at senior level within the Council are required as to the availability of capital funding. The Council should investigate whether funding from the development or release of any potential Council assets is realistic or achievable (or indeed desirable) and consider whether these would be appropriate and directed towards any development project. This is a significant consideration for the Council and the Consultant Team is aware of the wider impact that this may have on other capital projects and services provided by the City Council. 8.2.3 Current Management Contract and Partnership with DC Leisure Whilst the details and implications of the existing contract are not dealt with in this report or identified in the brief that has informed it, any discussion related to DC Leisure’s involvement in any potential leisure centre development will be heavily influenced by future contractual arrangements. DC Leisure are only likely to invest into the site if there is a longer term financial benefit and sufficient scope to make a return on their investment. DC Leisure has 10 years left on the current contract. Given the timetable associated with both the next steps that the Council must themselves take and the planning, procurement and build process with such a large-scale project, due consideration will need to be given to the future of this contract. Winchester City Council’s Project Team must understand how these factors will directly influence future provision in the city and this requirement indicates a need to bring initial discussions and negotiations forward. Any costs associated with this process will need to be factored into these next steps. Alongside the length of the contract, the financial arrangements associated with any new contract are an essential discussion point. It is recommended that any new facility development will necessitate a revised operational income share arrangement which is commensurate with the potential levels of investment made by both parties whilst ensuring that each have sufficient incentive and security. 8.2.4 Re-Direction of Car Parking Revenue The Consultant Team have presented some scenario testing as to the impact of any car parking income (over and above the current income generated by WCC at RPLC)



within Section 7 of this report and explained how it could have an impact on offsetting the potential capital repayments associated with any new build leisure centre. Consideration will need to therefore be given as to whether any new car parking income associated with any new development can be channelled directly towards the costs of the leisure centre. Furthermore if the current RPLC/North Walls site is to be vacated, any additional car parking income from a larger city centre car park could also potentially have a very positive impact upon the overall wider financial position for the City Council if this was to become a future consideration. The Consultant Team are aware that this is a step-change in how the income generated by car parks is allocated. However as presented it Section 7 the impact associated with being able to utilise such income streams could be extremely positive and is worthy of further consideration by the City Council. 8.2.5 Site and Location Influences – Transport Impact Whilst this study report has not considered any sites related to any potential new leisure centre development, it is important that this is carefully considered as part of the critical next stages that the Winchester City Council Project Team must undertake. The Consultant Team are aware of the current site review and assessment report that is taking place and that a wide range of issues, including transport and highways will form part of this review to be assessed alongside this report. Any consideration of expansion on the current city centre site clearly requires careful consideration of the impact on the already busy road network and access to the River Park site. This is coupled with the current car parking capacity and the ability of any new centre to attract the uplift in community users and visits associated with new facilities. Any new development on the current site would need careful highway, transport and car parking planning in order to ensure that access to the site is not compromised and new facilities can operate at their maximum potential. Any other site location that is considered, with consultation findings indicating a leading out of town location, would also need to be carefully planned from a highways and transport perspective. The capital costs associated with the leisure facilities already indicate a considerable funding gap and further consideration for the overall delivery of any leisure centre would need to include the associated highways and transport costs which will add to the overall capital delivery cost. Finally any vacation of the current River Park site has the potential to support any further city centre car park requirements as well as the opportunity for further consideration of a new urban park to promote informal physical activity and the promotion of green space within the city. 8.2.6 Communications Plan The consultation process has identified that there are a number of parties that are very interested in the future of leisure facility provision within Winchester as well as this study report itself. At the present time, it is clear that the Council must take stock of the findings of this report, consider the key critical next stages and how best to proceed. However there is a current expectation that the Council will disseminate some if not all of the



information contained within this report and the findings shortly after the report has been produced. The Council Project Team will need to decide upon and agree a communication process following on from this report in order to both manage expectations of key parties as well as to provide sufficient time for the wider considerations that the Council must make regarding overall capital funding for any scheme. 8.3 Delivery Timetable This section of the report has identified the priority next steps for the Winchester Council Project Team to pursue. Following on from these discussions, decisions and further financial analysis, the Council will need to begin to enter into the next phase of project development, detailed design, public consultation and the planning process. Notwithstanding the issues related to any new site needs and considerations (themselves a notable addition to this timetable) the typical durations for the different phases would be as follows:

o Design Development – 4-6 months. o Planning Determination – 3 months. o Prepare Information for Tender – 4 months. o Tender Period and Tender Evaluation – 3 months. o Contractor Mobilisation – 1 month. o Construction – 18 months. o Operator Fit-Out and Training – 1 month.

The period for planning activity assumes that the Local Planning Authority are able to determine the application within statutory periods. These are only indicative dates at this stage noting that any phasing of the project would require careful planning in order to reduce disruption and prevent any potential loss of service. 8.4 Community Value of River Park Leisure Centre and Wider Impact The final consideration for this report is to ensure that the Project Team and Members give due consideration to the wider community value that River Park Leisure Centre offers at the present time and that any future facility will offer if a new centre is developed within Winchester. Annual visitor numbers to RPLC are currently in excess of half a million. The options presented in this study could conceivably see this figure increase above three quarters of a million. Putting this into perspective with other community facilities and destinations within Winchester, the popularity and importance of this facility, to both users and the Council itself, should not be under-estimated. The proposed changes to the facilities will positively impact on health, well-being and enjoyment of many thousands of Winchester residents (who will no doubt be keen to contribute to the process in due course) for many years to come. Reviewing the financial analysis presented within this report and utilising Option 1 as the potential leading option for the Council to consider, the annual subsidy costs to the Council accounting for a modest uplift in users at would range from £0.85 (annual costs of £598,642 for 700,000 visits) down to £0.28 for the £5million capital and car parking scenario costs (annual costs of £197,632 for 700,000 visits acknowledging the assumptions highlighted earlier). The Association for Public Service Excellence (APSE) data on leisure provision identifies the current range of subsidy per head to be £2.91 at the highest level and £1.27 at the lowest level for local authority leisure centres.



The starting point for the City Council is clearly to examine the overall affordability of such a large-scale project. The Consultant Team have demonstrated that the provision of a new leisure centre is a potentially deliverable aspiration for Winchester City Council. Given the evident funding gap the Consultant Team are mindful of the step-change that the City Council must consider financially and have recommended the lower cost option of the 25m pool facility. If the Council are able to address some of the leading critical next stages the Consultant Team are aware that given the prudent nature of the business planning, further scrutiny by the City Council’s Project and Finance Teams may enable further consideration of the delivery a new 50m swimming pool given the potentially manageable differences (between a 50m and 25m main pool) that are presented in this report. The prestige and national recognition of accommodating a 50m pool may well be considered as a leading factor in any final decision that is undertaken by the City Council. However, the Consultant Team at the time of this report, ahead of the further work that is required by the Council Project Team, feel that the more affordable option remains Option 1 with the 25m pool and 20m teaching pool mix. There is now an unprecedented challenge facing councils throughout the UK in both managing reductions in funding as well as greater demand for public services. Local authorities need to develop innovative and imaginative ways of addressing this funding gap, identifying new opportunities for income generation and service improvements as well as demonstrating competitiveness. The future of leisure centre provision within Winchester will require some key actions to be taken by Winchester City Council building on the evidence and initial direction provided within this study. The Consultant Team consider that the main issues and key challenges associated with the project, and the actions that need to be taken to reduce the affordability gap in the first instance represent a real step-change for the Council but do currently remain within the sphere of influence of the Council itself. It is clear that there is a desire to deliver a community offer within Winchester that meets the needs and demands of the local community and sporting partners for many years to come. Finally, before any decision can be made in relation to the water space configuration, due consideration needs to be given as to whether any type of new build scheme is deliverable by the Council. The report highlights the key critical next steps that must be taken in order to address the evident funding gap that exists as well as the longer term financing costs associated with this large scale capital build and the wider capital portfolio of the Council.



Appendix 1

Winchester Market Segmentation Profile



Segment

%

Winchester

%

Hampshire

%

South East

%

England

Forename & description

Gender/age/status Sports Most Interested in

Motivations Barriers How to Increase Participation

Participation Profile

A01 7.7% 5.3% 6% 4.9%

Ben

Competitive Male Urbanites

Male 18‐25 Single

Graduate professional

Rugby, Squash, Windsurfing, Tennis,

Cricket, Climbing, Gym, Football

Improving performance Training for competition

Social Enjoyment Keep fit

Time Interest

Better facilities People to go

with Improved transport

Most active in population Approx. 20% zero days

A02 2.7% 4.6% 3.9% 5.4%

Jamie

Sports Team Drinkers

Male 18‐25 Single

Vocational Student

Basketball, Football, Weight Training,

Badminton, Boxing, Martial Arts

Social Performance Competition

Time

Facilities People to go

with Longer opening

hours

Second highest

participation of all types Approx. 30% zero days

A03 8.7% 5.1% 6.1% 4.7%

Chloe

Fitness Class Friends

Female 18‐25 Single

Graduate Professional

Body combat, Netball, Pilates, Running, Aqua Aerobics, Tennis, Gym,

Swimming

Weight Fitness

Time

Cost Opening Hours

Facilities People to go

with

Active type 30‐35% zero

days

A04 2.3% 3.6% 3.1% 4.3%

Leanne

Supportive Singles


Likely to have children Student / part time vocational education

Swimming, Gym, Aerobics, Ice Skating, Dance Exercise, Body Pump, Utility Walking

Losing weight Activities for children

Health isn’t good enough

Time

Help with child care

Longer opening hours Cost

Least active of A but does participate 40‐45% zero

days

B05 5.9% 4.6% 5.2% 4.5%

Helena

Career Focused Females


Full time professional

Gym, Road Running, Dance Exercise, Horse Riding, Skiing, Tai chi, Body Pump, Yoga

Losing weight Keeping fit Improving

performance

Time People to go with

Longer opening hours

People to go with

Very active type

30‐35% zero days

B06 12.6% 10% 11.4% 8.8%

Tim

Settling Down Males

Male 26‐35

Single / married May have children

Professional

Canoeing, Cricket, Cycling, Squash, Skiing,

Golf, Football

Improve performance

Keep fit Social

Time More free time

Help with childcare

Very active type

25‐30% zero days

B07 7.2% 5.6% 6.3% 4.4%

Alison

Stay at Home Mums

Female 36‐45

Married Housewife Children

Swimming, Badminton, Aerobics, Pilates,

Tennis, Cycling, Horse Riding, Exercise Bike

Taking children Losing weight Keeping fit

Time Help with childcare

Better facilities

Fairly active type

30‐35% zero days



Segment

%

Winchester

%

Hampshire

%

South East

%

England





B08 2.9% 5.1% 4.6% 4.9%

Jackie

Middle England Mums

Female 36‐45

Married Part time skilled

worker, housewife Children

Swimming, Dance Exercise, Body Pump, Ice Skating (with children), Walking, Aqua Aerobics

Taking children Losing weight

Time Cost

Lack of interest

Help with childcare Cheaper

admissions

Average 45‐50% zero

days

B09 2.2% 4.1% 3.5% 5.9%

Kev

Pub League Team Mates

Male 36‐45

Single / married May have children

Vocational

Football, Darts, Karate, Snooker, Weights,

Boxing, Fishing, Pool, Ten Pin Bowling,

Cricket

Competition Social

Enjoyment (ltd) Perform

Time Slight cost factor

More free time Cost

Facilities

Less active within group

B Approx. 50% zero days

B10 2.2% 3.2% 2.7% 3.7%

Paula

Stretched Single Mums


Job seeker or part time low skilled

Swimming, Utility walking, Aerobics, Ice

Skating

Lose weight Take children

Cost Lack of childcare Poor

transport Lack of interest

Improved transport Cheaper admission Help with childcare

Better facilities

Least active type within Group B

Approx. 60% zero days

C11 9.6% 9.8% 9.7% 8.6%

Philip

Comfortable Mid‐Life Males

Male 46‐55

Married Professional Older children

Sailing, Football, Badminton, Cycling, Gym, Jogging, Golf,

Cricket

Social Taking children

Improving performance Enjoyment

Time Lack of childcare

More free time Help with childcare

Most active within Group

C Approx. 40% zero days

C12 7.8% 6.6% 6.8% 6.1%

Elaine

Empty Nest Career Ladies

Female 46‐55

Married Professional

Children left home

Swimming, Walking, Aqua Aerobics, Step Machine, Yoga, Horse Riding, Pilates, Gym

Keeping fit Losing weight Help with injury

Time Lack of interest

Longer opening hours

More people to go with

Reasonably active type 40‐45% zero

days

C13

5.6% 7.7% 7.3% 6.8%

Roger and Joy

Early Retirement Couples

Male / female 56‐65

Retired or part‐time

Swimming, Walking, Aqua Aerobics, Bowls, Sailing, Golf, Shooting, Fishing, Racquet Sports

Keeping fit To help with

injury Enjoyment Taking

grandchildren

Poor health Lack of interest Transport

Better facilities Improved transport

Participate once or twice

a week

50‐55% zero days



Segment

%

Winchester

%

Hampshire

%

South East

%

England





C14 1.6% 3.3% 2.8% 4.9%

Brenda

Older Working Women

Female 46‐55

Single / married May have children Low skilled worker

Swimming, Utility Walking, Dance

Exercise, Aerobics, Step Machine, Keep fit

Weight Bring

grandchildren Help with injury

Lack of interest Time

More free time Longer hours Cheaper

admissions Help with

childcare (for grand children)

Sometimes participates

60‐65% zero

days

C15 1.7% 2.8% 2.4% 3.7% Terry

Local ‘Old Boys’

Male age 56‐65

Single / married Low skilled worker

Job seeker

Fishing, Shooting, Pool, Utility walking, Darts, Snooker, Utility cycling

Help with injury Social

Poor health Lack of

people to go with Cost

Subsidised admissions People to go

with

Some low intensity

participation

65‐70% zero days

C16 1.1% 1.4% 1.3% 2.1%

Norma

Later Life Ladies

Female 56‐65

Single / married Low skilled worker

Retired

Walking, Keep fit, Swimming, Aqua

Aerobics

Help with injury or disability

Poor health Cost

Cheaper admissions People to go

with

Lowest participation of Group C

75‐80% zero

days

D17 11.1% 5.9% 6.5% 4.2%

Ralph and Phyllis

Comfortable

Retired Couples

Male / female 65+

Married Retired

Bowls, Golf, Tennis, Table tennis, Snooker,

Walking, Fishing, Swimming

Social Improve

performance and keep fit Enjoyment

Transport Lack of

people to go with

Improved transport

More people to go with

Highest participation of Group D


D18 2.2% 4% 3.5% 4%

Frank

Twilight Year Gents

Male 66+ Married / single

Retired

Bowls, Golf, Darts, Pool, Snooker, Walking,

Fishing

Social Enjoyment

Poor health

Improved transport Cheaper admission

Medium participation for group D

75‐80% zero

days

D19 4.9% 7.5% 6.8% 8%

Elsie and Arnold

Retirement Home Singles

Male / female 66+

Widowed Retired

Walking, Dancing, Bowls, Low‐impact

exercise

Social Help with injury

Health problems

and disability

Improved transport

People to go with

Lowest participation of Group D




Appendix 2

Facilities within Winchester and Hampshire List of Swimming Pools, Sports Halls and AGPs referred to

within Section 3 of the Main Report



The tables which follow provide more detailed information on the facilities that are included within the facility maps that are included within Section 3 of this report and are based on data held on Sport England’s Active Places Database The following table provides further information about each of the swimming pool sites in Winchester that are included within Figure 3.13 within the report.

Map no.

Site Name Lanes Access Type Ownership Type

Management Type

1 River Park Leisure Centre 6+0 Pay and Play Local Authority

Commercial Management

2 Army Technical Foundation College

6 Sports Club / Community Association

(weekend only)

MOD MOD

3 Bishops Waltham Junior School

0 Private Use Community school

School/College/University (in house)

4 Brockwood Park School 0 Private Use Other Independent

School


5 De Vere Leisure Club (New Place)

0 Registered Membership use

Commercial Commercial Management

6 Kings School Sports Centre

5 Pay and Play Community school


7 Marriott Leisure & Country Club (Meon Valley)



8 Southwick Park 3 Sports Club / Community Association

MOD MOD

9 Norton Park 0 Registered Membership use


10 Quindell Golf And Country Club



11 Solent Hotel Spa 0 Registered Membership use


12 St Swithuns School 6+0 Registered Membership use

Other Independent

School


13 The Health Club (Winchester)



14 The Pilgrims School 5 Private Use Other Independent

School


15 Winchester College P.E. Centre


Other Independent

School


16 Zsa Zsa Spa Leisure Club (Marwell Hotel)



The following table provides further information about each of the 50m pool sites that are included within Figure 3.15 within the report.

Map no. Facility

Local Authority Lanes Ownership Management Built

1 Aldershot Garrison Sports Centre

Rushmoor 8 MOD MOD 2000

2 Basildon Sporting Village

Basildon 8 Local Authority Commercial Management

2011



Map no. Facility

Local Authority Lanes Ownership Management Built

3 Corby East Midlands International Pool

Corby District 8 Local Authority Local Authority (in house)

2009

4 Coventry Sports & Leisure Centre

Coventry 8 Local Authority Trust 1966

5 Crystal Palace National Sports Centre

Bromley 8 Local Authority Trust 1964

6 Grand Central Pool Stockport 8 Local Authority Trust 1993 7 Gurnell Pool & Leisure

Centre Ealing 6 Local Authority Trust 1981

8 Hengrove Park Leisure Centre

Bristol City 10 Local Authority Commercial Management

2012

9 Hillingdon Sports And Leisure Complex

Hillingdon 8 Local Authority Trust 2010

10 John Charles Centre For Sport

Leeds 10 Local Authority Local Authority (in house)

2007

11 K2 Crawley Crawley 8 Community school

Trust 2005

12 Liverpool Aquatics Centre

Liverpool 8 Local Authority Local Authority (in house)

2008

13 Loughborough University

Charnwood 8 Higher Education Institutions

School/College/University (in

house)

2002

14 Manchester Aquatic Centre

Manchester 8 Local Authority Commercial Management

2000

15 Millfield Senior School Mendip 8 Other Independent

School


1985

16 Mountbatten Leisure Centre

Portsmouth 8 Local Authority Commercial Management

2009

17 Olympic Aquatic Centre Newham ‐ Community Organisation

Community Organisation

2011

18 Plymouth Life Centre Plymouth 10 Local Authority Commercial Management

2012

19 Ponds Forge International Sports

Centre

Sheffield 10 Other Trust 1991

20 SportsPark ‐ UEA Norwich 8 Higher Education Institutions


house)

2000

21 Sunderland Aquatic Centre

Sunderland 10 Local Authority Local Authority (in house)

2008

22 Surrey Sports Park Guildford 8 Higher Education Institutions


house)

2010

23 University Of Bath Sports Training Village

Bath & NE Somerset

8 Higher Education Institutions


1997

24 Wycombe Sports Centre

Wycombe 6 Local Authority Commercial Management

1975



The following table provides further information about each of the sports hall sites within Winchester that are included within Figure 3.16 within the report.

Map No.

Site Name No. of Courts

Access Type Ownership Type Management Type

1 River Park Leisure Centre

8 Pay and Play Local Authority Commercial Management

2 Army Technical Foundation College

3+3 Private Use MOD MOD

3 Colden Common Community Centre

1+0 Pay and Play Local Authority Community Organisation

4 Henry Beaufort School

4+0+0 Sports Club / Community Association

Community school


5 IBM Hursley Club 3 Sports Club / Community Association

Industry (for employees)

Industry Sports Club

6 Jubilee Hall 2 Pay and Play Local Authority Local Authority (in house) 7 Kings School Sports

Centre 4 Pay and Play Community

school School/College/University

(in house) 8 Knowle Community

Centre 1 Pay and Play Local Authority Community Organisation

9 Marwell Activity Centre

0 Pay and Play Commercial Commercial Management

10 Meadowside Leisure Centre

3 Pay and Play Local Authority Commercial Management

11 Southwick Park 2 Sports Club / Community Association

MOD MOD

12 Perins Community School

4 Pay and Play Community school


13 Peter Symonds College

4 Private Use Further Education


14 Princes Mead School 3 Sports Club / Community Association

Other Independent

School


15 Priory Park Club House


Local Authority Local Authority (in house)

16 Shepherds Down Special School

1 Private Use Community Special School


17 Sparsholt College Hampshire

4+1 Private Use Further Education


18 St Swithuns School 4 Registered Membership use

Other Independent

School


19 Swanmore College Community

4+1 Sports Club / Community Association

Community school

Local Authority (in house)

20 The Meon Hall 1 Pay and Play Local Authority Community Organisation 21 University Of

Winchester Sports Centre

3 Pay and Play Higher Education Institutions


22 Westgate Secondary School Hall &

Badminton Centre

5+1 Pay and Play Community school

Other

23 Wickham Community Centre

2 Pay and Play Community Organisation

Community Organisation

24 Winchester College P.E. Centre


Independent School




Map No.

Site Name No. of Courts

Access Type Ownership Type Management Type

25 Winchester Lido Sports Association

2+0+0 Pay and Play Community Organisation

Other

26 Worthy Down 2 Sports Club / Community Association

MOD MOD

27 YMCA (Fairthorne Manor)


Other Community Organisation

The following table provides further information about each of the artificial grass pitch (AGP) sites within Winchester that are included within Figure 3.18 within the report.

Map No.

Site Name Surface Size Access Type Ownership Type

Management Type

1 River Park Leisure Centre

Sand Filled (Now being resurfaced to 3G)

Small Pay and Play Local Authority


2 Henry Beaufort School

Rubber crumb pile

(3G)

Full Sports Club / Community Association

Community school


3 Kings School Sports Centre

Sand Filled Full Pay and Play Community school


4 Southwick Park Sand Filled Full Sports Club / Community Association

MOD MOD

5 Perins Community School

Rubber crumb pile

(3G)

Full Pay and Play Community school


6 Swanmore College

Community

Sand Filled Small Sports Club / Community Association

Community school

Local Authority (in house)

7 Winchester Sports Stadium

Sand Dressed

Full Pay and Play Higher Education Institutions


8 Worthy Down Water Based Full Sports Club / Community Association

MOD MOD



Appendix 3

List of Project Consultees



List of Project Consultees

The following individuals were consulted with as part of this project: Key Stakeholders Winchester City Council Steve Tilbury, Director of Operations

Alexis Garlick, Chief Finance Officer Amanda Ford, Head of Sport and Physical Activity Chris Peach, Sports Development Officer

Hampshire County Council Nicola Horsey, Assistant Director, Community Tony Davison, Strategic Manager, Assets and Development

DC Leisure Richard Millard, Sports Development Director Pete Leamore, Area Manager Sarah Morgan, RPLC Manager

Sports Hampshire and IOW Julie Amies, Partnership Director Sport England Nick Lockwood, Facilities and Planning Relationship

Manager University of Winchester Justin Ridgment, Director of Campus Facilities and

Alex Trumble, Sports Facilities and Development Manager

Winchester SPAA Stuart Barlow, Chair Winchester District Disability Sports Forum

Richard Uren, Chair

Winchester BID Chris Turner, Executive Director National Governing Bodies of Sport ASA Keith Sutton, Regional Director and Tom Neale,

National Facilities Officer British Cycling Mark Adams, Regional Development Manager England Basketball Bev Guymon, Regional Development Manager British Gymnastics Hayley Buckman, Area Manager England Athletics Christine Benning, Club Support Officer British Judo Peter Beard, Regional Development Officer England Netball Anna Young, Regional Manager Hampshire LTA Zoe Bambridge, Tennis Development Manager Hampshire FA Sacha Nicholas, County Development Manager England Squash Amanda Robinson, Regional Manager Triathlon England Adel Tyson Bloor, Regional Development Manager Volleyball England Stuart Johnson, Head of Development Rugby Football Union Kieran Spencer, Rugby Development Officer Badminton England Paul Bickerton, Regional Manager England Hockey Lucy Moore, Relationship Manager Canoe England Samantha Jones, Development Officer Hants CCB Ben Thompson, Cricket Development Director Other Stakeholders Winchester Fit for the Future Emma Back, Campaign Director Test Valley Borough Council Dave Tasker, Head of Community and Leisure

Services Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council

Marion Short, Wellbeing and Community Manager

Winchester City Penguins Swimming Club

Sue Falconer, Chair



Winchester City Basketball Club Eddie Owusu, Development Officer

Local Community Clubs and Organisations that completed the online survey Kings Somborne Football Club Squall Junior Netball Club

Andover Triathlon Club Bishops Waltham Dynamos FC Tri Team Wessex Droxford Cricket Club

West Meon & Warnford Sports Club CTC Winchester Velo Club Venta Littleton Junior FC

Winchester and District Athletics Club Littleton & Westhill Cricket Club Swan Centre Netball Club Kingsgate Lawn Tennis Club River Park Squash Club Winchester Netball Club

South Wonston Table Tennis Club Winchester Gymnastics Club Winchester Badminton Club Weston Park Blades Netball Club

Winchester and District Canoe Club Whiteley Wanderers Youth FC Winchester City Flyers Girls FC Solent Thrashers American Football Team

Lewis-Allsopp School of Dancing Compton and Chandlers Ford CC Winchester Hockey Club St.Cross Symondians CC Meon Valley Bowls Club Winchester Kings Roller Hockey Club

Winchester Judo and Martial Arts Club Winchester Castle FC SOFA Colden Commons Bowls Club

Winchester Eagles Volleyball Club Southampton Triathlon Club Winchester Youth FC Winchester Juniors FC River Park Judo Club Winchester City Basketball Club Krav Maga at RPLC Treasure Gymnastics Club

Secondary schools that completed the online survey

Prince’s Mead School King’s School

Peter Symonds College



Appendix 4

Development Option Concept Designs

WINCHESTER - Future Leisure ProvisionStrategic LayoutMay 2013

The enclosed sketches represent a strategic layout of how the new sports facility at Winchester might be organised, though clearly these diagrams have been developed without any specific site contextual constraints.

Access

Sports HallPool

DrysideWetside

Car Park

Views to AGPs and Tennis Courts

The different Options share some key objectives:

Entrance located between wet & dry accommodation•

Reception & office overlooking entrance and the car park at the ‘front’•

Reception provides control of access to wetside and overlooks / controls access to dry activities•

Reception provides control of access to upper level Health & Fitness activities•

Central café space overlooking pool and to terrace with views of outdoor AGP’s and tennis courts•

Access through to outdoor changing with outdoor AGP’s and tennis courts beyond on the opposite • side to the entrance

Upper level access to spectator seating for the pool and Health & Fitness•

Possible Gymnastics Hall as an extension to the sports hall•

WINCHESTER - Future Leisure ProvisionOption 1May 2013

L1

L2

Pool

Plant

Support

Gymnastics Hall

Pool Surround

Sports

Entrance / Café / Circulation

Wet Change

Dry Change

10 Lane25m Pool


Wetside

Dryside

Entrance

WINCHESTER - Future Leisure ProvisionOption 1a - 10 Lane 25m Pool OptionMay 2013

L1

10 Lane25m Pool

L2

Pool

Plant

Support

Gymnastics Hall

Pool Surround

Sports


Wet Change

Dry Change

Wetside

Dryside

Entrance


WINCHESTER - Future Leisure ProvisionOption 2May 2013

Pool

Plant

Support

Gymnastics Hall

Pool Surround

Sports


Wet Change

Dry Change

L1

L2Views to AGPs and Tennis Courts

8 Lane50m Pool

Wetside

Dryside

Entrance

WINCHESTER - Future Leisure ProvisionOption 2a - 8 Lane 50m Pool OptionMay 2013

L1

L2

Pool

Plant

Support

Gymnastics Hall

Pool Surround

Sports


Wet Change

Dry Change

8 Lane50m Pool

Wetside

Dryside

Entrance




Appendix 5

Capital Cost Schedules


COST OPTIONS

Cost Report No.1 - 8 May 2013

COST OPTION 1.

Indicative Construction Costs

qty unit rate £

Demolitions exclNew building shell & core 8,820 m2 £1,500 £13,230,000Extra for 25m x 10 lane pool 910 m2 £1,600 £1,456,000Extra for 20m x 8 m Training Pool 325 m2 £1,600 £520,000

£15,206,000

Fitting out functional areasSpectator Seating - pool, 400 seats 1 item £60,000 £60,000Pool Changing 475 m2 £700 £332,500Pool Toilets 50 m2 £500 £25,000Pool Timing 15 m2 £500 £7,500First Aid room 15 m2 £450 £6,750Pool Storage 100 m2 £300 £30,000Spa - Sauna & Steam rooms & Plunge shower 45 m2 £2,000 £90,00012 Courts Sports Hall 2,350 m2 £500 £1,175,0004 No glass-backed competition squash courts, includes 2 rows of spectator seating (fixed walls)

1 item £100,000 £100,000

Health & Fitness Gym office, Consultation & Store 50 m2 £350 £17,500Health & Fitness Gym for 120+ stations 600 m2 £500 £300,0004 No Dance Studios 360 m2 £500 £180,000Dry Changing Accommodation and Toilets 250 m2 £550 £137,500Outdoor Changing Accommodation and Toilets 100 m2 £550 £55,000Main Entrance / Foyer / Reception 150 m2 £450 £67,500Café / Kitchen / Stores 150 m2 £350 £52,500Retail 1 item £10,000 £10,000Staff Offices & Staff Facilities 150 m2 £400 £60,000Meeting Room / Club Rooms 100 m2 £400 £40,000Treatment / Concession Room 30 m2 £400 £12,000Heating / Water Treatment / Ait Handling / Electrical Plant rooms 1,350 m2 £150 £202,500Circulation 500 m2 £300 £150,000

sub total £3,111,250

FF&E allowancesFitness stations - operator provided exclPool equipment - eg pool covers, lane ropes, timing board, starting blocks etc

1 item £200,000 £200,000

Studio equipment 1 item £20,000 £20,000Sports Hall equipment 1 item £25,000 £25,000Catering equipment to café exclSpa / treatment equipment exclRetail fixtures & fittings 1 item £25,000 £25,000Club room 1 item £50,000 £50,000general FF&E allowance 1 item £200,000 £200,000AV equipment excl

FF&E sub total £520,000

External AreasFull size 3G AGP 1 item £700,000 £700,0003 No small AGPs for 6-a-side 3 nr £100,000 £300,0008 No Tennis Courts - macadam 1 item £475,000 £475,000Car parking - surface car parking 350 nr £1,600 £560,000Landscaping allowance 1 item £50,000 £50,000

£2,085,000

Construction Cost - indicative £20,922,250

Professional fees @ 12.5% 12.50% £20,922,250 £2,615,300

Contingency allowance @ 10% 10.00% £23,537,550 £2,353,800

TOTAL INDICATIVE COST - Option 1 £25,891,350

WINCHESTER-RIVER PARK LEISURE CENTRE COST REPORT No.1 Option 1 Estimate Page 1 of 9


COST OPTIONS


COST OPTION 1.

Indicative Construction Costs

Notes:

Costs based on outline brief area schedule provided by Faulkner Brown Architects.Costs current at Q2 2013. No allowance for inflation is included.

Costs excludes any operating costs such as staffing, utilities, administration, finance charges etc.Excludes site specifics as these are unknown at this stage.Excludes site works to achieve site levels, planting and landscaping works as no details are available at this stage.No allowances included to reconfigure existing roads and car parks.Excludes new incoming services, upgrades of existing or existing diversions.Excludes costs for staff and equipment decant / relocation moves of existing facility.Costs excludes land purchase, legal fees and finance charges.

Costs exclude VAT.

echarris.com

Costs above are for indicative purposes only, subject to further review when detailed scheme drawings, facilities specification are made available. Mid range specification assumed for costing purposes.

Cost excludes fitness stations, FF&E to café, AV equipment, assume to be tenant provided items.

Demolition of existing or relocation of existing facility, no allowance included as no sufficient detail or scope of works known at this stage.No allowances included for bulk earthworks, retaining structure or any requirement for site remediation works. Site details unknown at this stage.

WINCHESTER-RIVER PARK LEISURE CENTRE COST REPORT No.1 Option 1 Estimate Page 2 of 9


COST OPTIONS - SCHEDULE OF AREAS


COST OPTION 1a.Indicative Construction Costs

qty unit rate £

Demolition exclNew building shell & core 9,695 m2 £1,500 £14,542,500Extra for 25m x 10 lane pool 910 m2 £1,600 £1,456,000Extra for 20m x 8 m Training Pool 325 m2 £1,600 £520,000

£16,518,500


1 item £100,000 £100,000

Health & Fitness Gym office, Consultation & Store 50 m2 £350 £17,500Health & Fitness Gym for 120+ stations 600 m2 £500 £300,0004 No Dance Studios 360 m2 £500 £180,000Gymnastic Area 800 m2 £500 £400,000Dry Changing Accommodation and Toilets 300 m2 £650 £195,000Outdoor Changing Accommodation and Toilets 100 m2 £550 £55,000Main Entrance / Foyer / Reception 150 m2 £550 £82,500Café / Kitchen / Stores 150 m2 £350 £52,500Retail 1 item £10,000 £10,000Staff Offices & Staff Facilities 150 m2 £400 £60,000Meeting Room / Club Rooms 100 m2 £400 £40,000Treatment / Concession Room 30 m2 £400 £12,000Heating / Water Treatment / Ait Handling / Electrical Plant rooms 1,375 m2 £150 £206,250Circulation 500 m2 £300 £150,000



1 item £200,000 £200,000

Studio equipment 1 item £20,000 £20,000Sports Hall equipment 1 item £25,000 £25,000Catering equipment to café exclSpa / treatment equipment exclRetail fixtures & fittings 1 item £25,000 £25,000Club room 1 item £50,000 £50,000Gymnastics equipment 1 item £50,000 £50,000general FF&E allowance 1 item £200,000 £200,000AV equipment excl



£2,085,000




TOTAL INDICATIVE COST - Option 1a £28,166,700

WINCHESTER-RIVER PARK LEISURE CENTRE COST REPORT No.1 Option 1a Estimate Page 3 of 9





Notes:



Costs exclude VAT.

echarris.com


Demolition of existing or relocation of existing facility, no allowance included as no sufficient detail or scope of works known at this stage.


No allowances included for bulk earthworks, retaining structure or any requirement for site remediation works. Site details unknown at this stage.

WINCHESTER-RIVER PARK LEISURE CENTRE COST REPORT No.1 Option 1a Estimate Page 4 of 9




COST OPTION 2.Indicative Construction Costs

qty unit rate £

Demolition exclNew building shell & core 9,575 m2 £1,500 £14,362,500Extra 50m x 8 lane pool 1,460 m2 £1,600 £2,336,000

£16,698,500


1 item £100,000 £100,000

Health & Fitness Gym office, Consultation & Store 50 m2 £350 £17,500Health & Fitness Gym for 120+ stations 600 m2 £500 £300,0004 No Dance Studios 360 m2 £500 £180,000Dry Changing Accommodation and Toilets 250 m2 £550 £137,500Outdoor Changing Accommodation and Toilets 100 m2 £550 £55,000Main Entrance / Foyer / Reception 150 m2 £550 £82,500Café / Kitchen / Stores 150 m2 £350 £52,500Retail 1 item £10,000 £10,000Staff Offices & Staff Facilities 150 m2 £400 £60,000Meeting Room / Club Rooms 100 m2 £400 £40,000Treatment / Concession Room 30 m2 £400 £12,000Heating / Water Treatment / Ait Handling / Electrical Plant 1,485 m2 £150 £222,750Circulation 510 m2 £300 £153,000


FF&E allowancesFitness stations - operator provided exclPool equipment - eg pool covers, lane ropes, timing board, starting 1 item £175,000 £175,000Studio equipment 1 item £20,000 £20,000Sports Hall equipment 1 item £25,000 £25,000Catering equipment to café exclSpa / treatment equipment exclRetail fixtures & fittings 1 item £25,000 £25,000Club room 1 item £50,000 £50,000general FF&E allowance 1 item £200,000 £200,000AV equipment excl



£2,085,000




TOTAL INDICATIVE COST - Option 2 £27,884,600

WINCHESTER-RIVER PARK LEISURE CENTRE COST REPORT No.1 Option 2 Estimate 5 of 9




COST OPTION 2.Indicative Construction Costs

Notes:



Costs exclude VAT.

echarris.com



Demolition of existing or relocation of existing facility, no allowance included as no sufficient detail or scope of works known at this stage.

No allowances included for bulk earthworks, retaining structure or any requirement for site remediation works. Site details unknown at this stage.

WINCHESTER-RIVER PARK LEISURE CENTRE COST REPORT No.1 Option 2 Estimate 6 of 9





qty unit rate £

Demolition exclNew building shell & core 10,450 m2 £1,500 £15,675,000Extra 50m x 8 lane pool 1,460 m2 £1,600 £2,336,000

£18,011,000


1 item £100,000 £100,000

Health & Fitness Gym office, Consultation & Store 50 m2 £350 £17,500Health & Fitness Gym for 120+ stations 600 m2 £500 £300,0004 No Dance Studios 360 m2 £500 £180,000Gymnastic Area 800 m2 £500 £400,000Dry Changing Accommodation and Toilets 300 m2 £550 £165,000Outdoor Changing Accommodation and Toilets 100 m2 £550 £55,000Main Entrance / Foyer / Reception 150 m2 £550 £82,500Café / Kitchen / Stores 150 m2 £350 £52,500Retail 1 item £10,000 £10,000Staff Offices & Staff Facilities 150 m2 £400 £60,000Meeting Room / Club Rooms 100 m2 £400 £40,000Treatment / Concession Room 30 m2 £400 £12,000Heating / Water Treatment / Ait Handling / Electrical Plant 1,510 m2 £150 £226,500Circulation 510 m2 £300 £153,000



1 item £175,000 £175,000

Studio equipment 1 item £20,000 £20,000Sports Hall equipment 1 item £25,000 £25,000Catering equipment to café exclSpa / treatment equipment exclRetail fixtures & fittings 1 item £25,000 £25,000Club room 1 item £50,000 £50,000Gymnastics equipment 1 item £50,000 £50,000general FF&E allowance 1 item £200,000 £200,000AV equipment excl



£2,085,000




TOTAL INDICATIVE COST - Option 2a £30,104,350

WINCHESTER-RIVER PARK LEISURE CENTRE COST REPORT No.1 Option 2a Estimate 7 of 9





Notes:



Costs exclude VAT.

echarris.com



Demolition of existing or relocation of existing facility, no allowance included as no sufficient detail or scope of works known at this stage.No allowances included for bulk earthworks, retaining structure or any requirement for site remediation works. Site details unknown at this stage.

WINCHESTER-RIVER PARK LEISURE CENTRE COST REPORT No.1 Option 2a Estimate 8 of 9




Wetside25m x 10 Lane Pool 910 91020m x 8 m Training Pool 325 32550m x 8 lane pool 1,460 1,460Spectator Seating 230 230 460 460Pool Changing 475 475 575 575Pool Toilets 50 50 75 75Pool Timing 15 15 15 15First Aid room 15 15 15 15Pool Storage 100 100 125 125Spa - Sauna & Steam rooms & Plunge shower 45 45 45 45

Sub-total 2,165 2,165 2,770 2,770

Dryside12 Courts Sports Hall 2,350 2,350 2,350 2,350

4 No glass-backed competition squash court350 350 350 350

Health & Fitness Gym office, Consultation & Store

50 50 50 50

Health & Fitness Gym for 120+ station 600 600 600 6004 No Dance Studios 360 360 360 360Dry Changing Accommodation and Toiletts 250 300 250 300

Outdoor Changing Accommodation and Toiletts100 100 100 100

Main Entrance / Foyer / Reception 150 150 150 150Café / Kitchen / Stores 150 150 150 150Retail 15 15 15 15Staff Offices & Staff Facilities 150 150 150 150Meeting Room / Club Rooms 100 100 100 100Treatment / Concession Room 30 30 30 30Gymnastics Area 800 800Sub-total 4,655 5,505 4,655 5,505

SupportHeating / Water Treatment / Ait Handling / Electrical Plant

1,350 1,375 1,485 1,510

Circulation allowance 500 500 510 510Internal Walls allowance 150 150 155 155Stores + allowance for increase in changing accommodation

0 0

Sub-total 2,000 2,025 2,150 2,175

BUILDING TOTAL (m2) 8,820 9,695 9,575 10,450

External / OutdoorFull size 3G AGP 7,526 7,526 7,526 7,5263 No small AGPs for 6-a-side 1,240 1,240 1,240 1,2408 No Tennis Courts 5,350 5,350 5,350 5,350

EXTERNAL AREAS TOTAL (m2) 14,116 14,116 14,116 14,116

NOTES:Areas taken from schedule of accomodation provided by Faukner Brown Architects - 30th April 2013.

Area Schedule

Accommodation Schedule / Functional Floor Area

Floor / Area Type

Op

tio

n 1

Op

tio

n 1

a

Op

tio

n 2

Op

tio

n 2

a

Documents

WCC Leisure Centre Provision Continuum Final Report 290513€¦ · Winchester City Council: Leisure Centre Provision Options Appraisal and Feasibility Study Final Report, May 2013