MILTON KEYNES Sports Development, Leisure Facilities and Playing Pitch Strategy - REPORT - Milton Keynes Council
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
MILTON KEYNES
Sports Development, Leisure Facilities
and Playing Pitch Strategy
REPORT
SECTION THREE
LEISURE FACILITIES
October 2008
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Syzygy Leisure
The Granary 6 Church View
West Haddon Grange Moulton
Yelvertoft Road, West Haddon Northants NN3 1FZ
Northants NN6 7NY
Tel: 01788 510057 Tel: 01604 670222
Email: info@nortoft.co.uk Email: syzygy@syzygyleisure.co.uk
Web: www.nortoft.co.uk Web: www.syzygyleisure.co.uk
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 2 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Sports facility proposals ............................................................................................. 7
Introduction ......................................................................................................... 7
Active Places Power – the tools .......................................................................... 8
Nortoft Calculator ................................................................................................ 9
Pools ........................................................................................................................ 10
Introduction ....................................................................................................... 10
Current provision ............................................................................................... 10
Future proposals ............................................................................................... 12
Current standards of provision .......................................................................... 14
Proposals .......................................................................................................... 20
Justification ....................................................................................................... 20
Recommendations ............................................................................................ 23
Sports Halls .............................................................................................................. 24
Introduction ....................................................................................................... 24
Current provision ............................................................................................... 24
Current standards of provision .......................................................................... 29
Proposals .......................................................................................................... 31
Justification ....................................................................................................... 31
Recommendations ............................................................................................ 32
Community Halls ...................................................................................................... 33
Current provision ............................................................................................... 33
Current standards of provision .......................................................................... 35
Justification ....................................................................................................... 37
Recommendations ............................................................................................ 38
Synthetic Turf Pitches .............................................................................................. 39
Introduction ....................................................................................................... 39
Current provision ............................................................................................... 39
Current standards of provision .......................................................................... 41
Proposals .......................................................................................................... 44
Proposed standards .......................................................................................... 44
Justification ....................................................................................................... 44
Recommendations ............................................................................................ 44
Other Sports Specific Facilities ................................................................................ 46
Introduction ....................................................................................................... 46
General recommendations ................................................................................ 47
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 3 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008
Athletics.................................................................................................................... 49
Current provision ............................................................................................... 49
Current standards of provision .......................................................................... 50
Proposals .......................................................................................................... 53
Justification ....................................................................................................... 53
Recommendations ............................................................................................ 54
Health and fitness .................................................................................................... 55
Current provision ............................................................................................... 55
Current standards of provision .......................................................................... 55
Proposals .......................................................................................................... 58
Justification ....................................................................................................... 59
Recommendations ............................................................................................ 60
Indoor Bowls ............................................................................................................ 61
Current provision ............................................................................................... 61
Current standards of provision .......................................................................... 62
Proposals .......................................................................................................... 67
Justification ....................................................................................................... 67
Recommendations ............................................................................................ 68
Outdoor Bowls .......................................................................................................... 69
Current provision ............................................................................................... 69
Justification ....................................................................................................... 70
Recommendations ............................................................................................ 71
Indoor Tennis ........................................................................................................... 72
Current provision ............................................................................................... 72
Current standards of provision .......................................................................... 72
Proposals .......................................................................................................... 75
Justification ....................................................................................................... 75
Recommendations ............................................................................................ 75
Outdoor Tennis ........................................................................................................ 77
Current provision ............................................................................................... 77
Current standards of provision .......................................................................... 79
Proposals .......................................................................................................... 79
Proposed standards .......................................................................................... 79
Justification ....................................................................................................... 79
Recommendations ............................................................................................ 80
Golf........................................................................................................................... 81
Current provision ............................................................................................... 81
Current standards of provision .......................................................................... 85
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 4 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008
Proposals .......................................................................................................... 87
Justification ....................................................................................................... 88
Recommendations ............................................................................................ 88
Ice rinks .................................................................................................................... 89
Current provision ............................................................................................... 89
Current standards of provision .......................................................................... 89
Proposals .......................................................................................................... 90
Recommendations ............................................................................................ 90
Other Sports ............................................................................................................. 91
American Football ................................................................................................. 91
Recommendation .............................................................................................. 91
Archery ................................................................................................................. 91
Recommendation .............................................................................................. 91
Badminton ............................................................................................................ 91
Recommendation .............................................................................................. 92
Basketball ............................................................................................................. 92
Recommendation .............................................................................................. 92
Cricket .................................................................................................................. 92
Recommendation .............................................................................................. 92
Cycling .................................................................................................................. 92
Recommendation .............................................................................................. 94
Goalball ................................................................................................................ 94
Gymnastics ........................................................................................................... 94
Recommendation .............................................................................................. 95
Judo ...................................................................................................................... 95
Korfball ................................................................................................................. 95
Recommendation .............................................................................................. 95
Rowing .................................................................................................................. 95
Recommendation .............................................................................................. 95
Sailing ................................................................................................................... 95
Snowsports ........................................................................................................... 96
Squash ................................................................................................................. 96
Recommendation .............................................................................................. 96
Table Tennis ......................................................................................................... 96
Volleyball .............................................................................................................. 96
Recommendation .............................................................................................. 96
Summary of built facility proposals and costs........................................................... 97
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 5 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008
FIGURE CONTENTS
Figure 1: Swimming pools by use and size .......................................................... 11
Figure 2: Current water space across Milton Keynes .......................................... 13
Figure 3: Personal share of pool space in m² per 1000 population ...................... 17
Figure 4: Travel time to nearest pool by car ........................................................ 17
Figure 5: Participation rates and swimming water area ....................................... 18
Figure 6: Calculating the provision per 1000 population of water space .............. 22
Figure 7: Sports halls in MK ................................................................................. 25
Figure 8: Sports halls by use and size ................................................................. 27
Figure 9: Sports halls by ownership and size ...................................................... 28
Figure 10: Personal share of sport hall space: sq m per person........................... 29
Figure 11: Travel time to nearest Sports Hall by car .............................................. 30
Figure 12: Calculating the need for future sports hall space. ................................. 31
Figure 13: Community centres owned by Milton Keynes Council .......................... 34
Figure 14: Synthetic turf pitches with community use by size and ownership........ 40
Figure 15: Selected Sports Specific Facilities ........................................................ 48
Figure 16: Travel time to nearest athletics track by car ......................................... 50
Figure 17: Facility Objectives ................................................................................. 52
Figure 18: Health and fitness suites with 20+ stations ........................................... 56
Figure 19: Health and Fitness Current Provision – number of stations per 1000 ... 57
Figure 20: Indoor Bowls in Milton Keynes - Number of Rinks per 1000 population 61
Figure 21: Indoor bowls provision – personal share ............................................. 63
Figure 22: Travel time by car to indoor bowls sites ................................................ 64
Figure 23: Sub-area population change from 2007 to 2026................................... 66
Figure 24: Aging population ................................................................................... 66
Figure 25: Location of Bowls Clubs in Milton Keynes ............................................ 69
Figure 26: Indoor Tennis – travel time by car ........................................................ 73
Figure 27: Location of Tennis Courts in Milton Keynes.......................................... 78
Figure 28: Current golf provision in Milton Keynes ................................................ 82
Figure 29: Travel time to a standard golf course (18 holes) by car ........................ 83
Figure 30a: Standard courses – Provision per 1000 ............................................ 84
Figure 30b: Par 3 courses – Provision per 1000 .................................................. 84
Figure 30c: Driving ranges – Provision per 1000 ................................................. 85
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 6 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008
SECTION THREE
LEISURE FACILITIES
SPORTS FACILITY PROPOSALS
Introduction
1. This section considers each type of built leisure facility, and proposes both
standards for the future and short-medium term priorities. The assessment for
each facility is based on:
• The existing facilities and their location
• Determination of the current standards of provision per 1000 population
• Location of facilities on the boundaries, and future proposals
• Benchmarking against ONS comparator authorities in relation to provision
per 1000 population
• Implications of likely demographic trends
• Trends in the relevant sports
• Results of consultation – in relation to quantity, quality and accessibility
• Sports specific proposals and issues
• Implications in relation to planned growth of Milton Keynes
2. These are then brought together into:
• A simple set of standards for quantity, quality and accessibility
• Proposals for the location and phasing of new facilities
Each facility proposal is then costed, based on Sport England latest figures.
3. In relation to benchmarking, the ONS comparator group has been used for the
purpose of setting the standards, as this is a more select group of authorities
than the IPF grouping used to benchmark participation in different sports. The
group is:
Peterborough
Swindon
Telford and Wrekin
Thurrock
Warrington
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 7 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008
Active Places Power – the tools
4. Sport England has developed a number of strategic planning tools for sports
facility assessment, which have been used in this strategy. The assessment
results are reviewed alongside other local information, including consultation
findings (the views of local residents and clubs), strategies of the national
governing bodies of sport, and sports development priorities.
5. A brief summary of the analysis tools is provided below.
A general note – the population figures for Active Places Power are based on
the 2001 census.
Provision per 1000 population
6. This tool is available for most built sports facilities, and is an estimate of the
number or area of facilities against the number of residents within an
administrative area. This is expressed as a unit of a facility, e.g. pools are
expressed as square metres of water space per 1000 population, and athletics
tracks by the number of lanes. It is a simple tool which is a useful starting
point for assessing the provision of facilities within an authority.
7. The disadvantage is that the tool treats each authority as an island. No
account is taken of facilities just over the border of the authority, nor of any
movement of people in and out of the authority. It also takes no account of
commuter or tourist demand.
Local Supply and Demand Balance
8. This tool is available from Sport England for swimming pools, sports halls and
indoor bowls. It is a calculation of the capacity available against the expected
demand from the residents.
9. As with the above assessment of provision per 1000, this tool also treats the
authority as an island and takes no account of commuter or tourist demand, nor
cross border movements.
10. This figure compares total demand against total supply and expresses it as a
percentage of supply. In order to calculate this figure, the capacity of the
facilities is assessed as the number of visits per week in the peak period. The
capacity takes account of the size and opening hours of each of the facilities,
and the results can be provided by different facility ownership and management
regimes. For the purposes of the strategy, we have generally only included
those facilities with community use.
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 8 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008
Personal share of facilities
11. This tool is available from Sport England for swimming pools, sports halls and
indoor bowls.
12. This figure shows the relative availability of the facilities for the residents of
each super output area. It takes into account the amount of facility space at
peak time, the characteristics of the authority’s population, and the distance to
facilities. This is a more sophisticated tool than the local supply and demand
balance, and is particularly useful for mapping.
13. This assessment does not treat the authority as an island – it takes account of
facilities over the border, and demand coming into the authority from
surrounding areas. However, it is still unable to take account of commuter or
tourist demand.
Nortoft Calculator
14. For those facilities other than swimming pools and halls Nortoft has developed
a Calculator which forecasts future need for each facility type based upon both
changes in the population and the anticipated growth in participation. A copy of
the detailed calculations is provided in Appendix 7.
15. The Nortoft calculator is again a simplistic tool, treating each facility type on a
‘provision per 1000’ basis. The authority is treated as an island and no account
has been taken of facility quality or opening hours as this information is difficult
to extract from the Active Places Power database.
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 9 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008
POOLS
Introduction
16. The provision of swimming pools is probably the most challenging sports facility
issue facing Milton Keynes. The demand for swimming is clearly outstripping
supply and the existing pool network is unable to respond. Even if all of the
facilities were brought up to modern standards, there is simply insufficient
space to meet the needs of the population. There needs to be a long term
review of the network of public pools, with new provision particularly in the
north-south central area of the city, and in the expansion areas. This has major
implications for the sports facilities budget, and will need to be addressed as a
matter of priority.
Current provision
17. There are currently 15 swimming pools in Milton Keynes, of which 6 offer ‘pay
and play’ type access. These are: MKC please check management
arrangements are correct
Site Length (m) No lanes Ownership Date Management
built
Woughton 20 4 MKC 1980 Dual-use facility
Watling Way 20 4 MKC 1973 MKC
Leon Leisure 25 4 Community 1970 Dual-use facility
Centre school
Middleton 33.3 4 MKC 1989 Newport Pagnell
Town Council
Bletchley MKC 1973 MKC
Leisure Leisure pool (528 sq m)
Centre
Stantonbury 25 6 Stantonbury 1976 Dual-use facility
Campus College
Leisure
Centre
18. The pool at Bletchley Leisure Centre is due to be superseded by a 25m x 8
lane pool, which is expected to open as part of a new leisure centre in late
2009.
19. The small pool at the Bladerunner Sports Complex (8 x 16m size) also offers
‘pay and play access’.
20. The other commercial pools are for use by registered members only. These
are: Bannatynes Health Club, Bourton Mill Health and Leisure, David Lloyd
Club, LA Fitness, Living Well, Quality Living Health Club, Spirit Health Club
and Virgin Active Club.
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 10 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 200821. In addition there is the 33m x 6 lane outdoor pool at Wolverton which is owned
by Milton Keynes Council (and which is due to be closed), plus a seasonal
leisure pool at Woburn Golf and Country Club, which is for the use of registered
members. The assessment of water space excludes these pools as they are
not available all year.
Figure 1: Swimming pools by use and size
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 11 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008Future proposals
50m pool at Radcliffe
22. A 50m pool will be developed at Radcliffe, and is due to open in
2011. The pool will primarily provide for community and school usage and elite
training and competition use will be secondary to this. The level of
competitions which can be provided for on site will be such that no separate
warm up / warm down facility is required.
23. The pool will be 50m x 8 lane with a moveable boom and a maximum depth of
2m. It will therefore not be suitable for diving or synchronised swimming.
Around 300-350 spectator seats are proposed, and some pool-side storage will
be available.
24. The pool will be part of a much larger leisure complex comprising
• 100 station health and fitness facility
• 6 court sports hall with 550 spectator seats
• 10 grass pitches
• 6 lane grass athletics track
• Baseball and softball diamonds
• Full size flood lit all weather pitch
• 4 flood lit tennis courts
• 2 dance/fitness studios.
Middleton Pool, Newport Pagnell
25. A 25m x 8 lane pool with teaching pool has been proposed to replace Middleton
Pool, and this would provide 625 sq m of water space. The site is owned by
MKC and managed by Newport Pagnell Town Council, who are currently
considering the options available, and whether there are sufficient funds for the
development. The net impact on water space will be an increase of 242 sq m,
but it is also proposed to make the facility part of a larger leisure
centre, with possibly a 4 court sports hall and health suite.
Closures
26. The Watling Way indoor pool and the Wolverton open air pool are proposed to
be closed when the 50m pool at Radcliffe is complete.
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 12 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008Figure 2: Current water space across Milton Keynes
Number Size Ownership Management
Site Name Access Type
of Lanes (sq m) Type Type
Registered
BANNATYNES HEALTH Commercial
4 200 Commercial Membership
CLUB (MILTON KEYNES) Management
use
BLADERUNNER SPORTS Commercial
0 128 Commercial Pay and Play
COMPLEX Management
EXISTING BLETCHLEY Local
0 528 Pay and Play Commercial
LEISURE CENTRE Authority
Registered
BOURTON MILL HEALTH Commercial
4 262.5 Commercial Membership
& LEISURE Management
use
Registered
DAVID LLOYD CLUB Commercial
6 325 Commercial Membership
(MILTON KEYNES) Management
use
Registered
LA FITNESS (MILTON Commercial
1 120 Commercial Membership
KEYNES) Management
use
School/
Community College/
LEON LEISURE CENTRE 4 180 Pay and Play
school University (in
house)
Registered
Commercial
LIVINGWELL 0 48 Commercial Membership
Management
use
MIDDLETON SWIMMING Local Local Authority
4 333 Pay and Play
POOL Authority (in house)
Registered
QUALITY LIVING HEALTH Commercial
0 32 Commercial Membership
CLUB Management
use
Registered
SPIRIT HEALTH CLUB Commercial
0 112 Commercial Membership
(MILTON KEYNES) Management
use
School/
STANTONBURY CAMPUS Foundation College/
6 300 Pay and Play
LEISURE CENTRE School University (in
house)
Registered
VIRGIN ACTIVE CLUB Commercial
3 240 Commercial Membership
(MILTON KEYNES) Management
use
Sports Club /
Local
WATLING WAY CENTRE 4 160 Community Trust
Authority
Association
Community
WOUGHTON CENTRE 4 160 Pay and Play Trust
school
TOTAL WATER SPACE 3128.5
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 13 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008There are a number of proposed changes to the network, which are:
Water space Water Change
current space (sq m)
(sq m) proposed
(sq m)
Bletchley
528 425 -103
– replacement pool on nearby site
Newport Pagnell/ Middleton
333 625 +292
– replacement pool on nearby site
Radcliffe 50m
0 925 +925
– new pool
Watling Way
150 0 -150
- closure when 50 m pool opens
Total water space following
3118.5 4082.5 +964
proposed changes
Current standards of provision
27. Milton Keynes Council commissioned a Sport England Facilities Planning
Model run in 2007 to assess its swimming provision, and the options for the
future. The following are extracts from the summary of that report
(unpublished).
Overall swimming provision in Milton Keynes is no better than
adequate compared with the national average. Comparing the outputs
of the current study with information provided in connection with a
national run of Active Places Power Plus in April 2007, Milton Keynes
has 10.4m2of water space per 1000 population in all pools compared
with an England average of 13.1m2 and a regional average of 14.2m2.
Commercial pools currently provide .. about one-third of total water
area. …. [However] … they will not in reality be [fully] available to the
local catchment because of expensive membership or entrance fees,
and in some locations may actually operate above comfortable
capacity, as they may cater for after-work use…..Nevertheless the
presence and influence of commercial health and fitness pools, and
others on schools sites with significant community access must be
carefully considered as part of overall provision.
…The main areas of unmet demand are in the more densely populated
areas of the built up part of the borough that takes up much of the new
city, where those without a car are unable to access pools outside their
walking catchment. There is no one location in the borough where
there is sufficient aggregated unmet demand to justify the provision of
an additional pool at the present. … A new pool …. is therefore not
feasible at the present time.
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 14 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008However the current throughput of existing pools in the borough is
approaching their comfortable capacity, and this is exceeded in some
instances. In addition, Milton Keynes is at present a net exporter of
demand to surrounding districts, - that is it currently relies on
surrounding areas to meet a significant proportion of its own demand.
For this reason therefore a new pool might be considered in the
near future.
….a significant proportion of demand by residents of Milton Keynes is
….met outside the borough, particularly in Aylesbury Vale. If a new
pool can be justified, it is not for the impact it will make on existing
levels of unmet demand….. Instead it will provide for residents of the
borough who currently use pools outside, and indeed it will drag
demand in from residents of Bedford and Mid Beds, who will find it
easier and more attractive to gain access to a pool in Milton Keynes
than visit pools in Bedford........
The situation up to 2016 is significantly different. If no further pools
were provided in Milton Keynes before 2016 (with the exception of a
replacement Bletchley Leisure Centre pool), the additional demand
brought about by a significant population increase and higher
participation in swimming would exceed capacity. This would lead to
existing pools reaching and exceeding their comfortable and absolute
levels of use. The main effect would be that all pools in the borough
would be crowded, with the result that significant export of Milton
Keynes’s demand to surrounding LAs and further afield would
continue. Unmet demand in Milton Keynes would now arise not only
from the location of residents outside catchments, but from lack of
capacity at pools i.e. there would be people who could not access
pools within their catchment because they were full. A new pool in
the period up to 2016 could therefore be justified not only to meet
unmet demand, but also provide additional capacity to meet MK’s
own needs……
The Borough Council specifically requested the application of the
model to assess the feasibility of developing a new 50m pool at
Radcliffe School. 50m pools have a different usage profile to standard
25m pools, which tend to cater for most of the community’s swimming
needs throughout the country at present. 50m pools can serve as
regional training centres, provide venues for senior competition, act as
development centres or training centres, as well as being a venue for
recreational swimming in the wider community or a base for local club
use. As such they require to be planned strategically, particularly in
view of the high costs of initial provision and subsequent maintenance,
upkeep and revenue. The ASA has a national facilities plan for
swimming, and any proposals for new 50m pools should conform to
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 15 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008this. According to available information, there are 17 50m pools in
England at present with two others under construction. The nearest
50m pools to Milton Keynes are in Coventry and High Wycombe.
Because of this distribution, the good transport links from Milton
Keynes, the burgeoning population and the history of innovation and
modern thinking in the borough, it may well be that Milton Keynes is an
appropriate location for a 50m pool to meet the wider swimming needs
outlined above (though not necessarily Wolverton). However in terms
of meeting local community needs, which is the main focus of the
APP+ model, while this scenario was not tested, it may be that the
best means of meeting the additional water space required,
certainly in the longer term up to 2016, would be the provision of 2
or 3 smaller 25m pools in locations of greatest need in the
borough. This would have the effect of providing additional water
space to increase capacity required in Milton Keynes, but in more local
venues would also help to meet some of the local demand which is
currently and in the future unmet because residents live outside
walking catchments.
28. The comments above relating to swimming pool provision are illustrated by
Figures 3 & 4 below, which show the current position by ‘personal share’ of
water space. The personal share map demonstrates that the area with worst
provision or poorest access to a pool is in the west – the blue area, and the
best provision is in the Bletchley area (red).
29. The much welcomed new pool at Bletchley will however have a slightly smaller
capacity which will result in a reduced level of water space compared to
present. The FPM report suggests that even with the planned new provision,
the increased population and participation in swimming is expected to increase
the throughput in pools at Milton Keynes by 30%.
30. Figure 4 maps the travel time by car from each part of Milton Keynes to the
nearest pool. Quite clearly, everyone has access to a pool in less than 20
minutes by car, the accepted ‘maximum’ time most people will travel to swim.
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 16 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008Figure 3: Personal share of pool space in m² per 1000 population
Range (sq m of
water space per
Symbol
1000 population)
[rounded]
1.4 - 1.5
1.6 - 1.7
1.8 - 1.9
2 - 2.2
Figure 4: Travel time to nearest pool by car
Range
Symbol
(minutes)
3–5
6-8
9 - 11
11 - 14
14- 17
31. The key question arising from the above analyses is how to address the issues
identified. The following Figure 5 illustrates the point being made in the FPM
report, that simply increasing the amount of pool space will not necessarily
result in increased participation. There needs to be sufficient accessible, good
quality pool space, coupled with sports development initiatives and sensitive
pricing policies. The sports development issues are addressed within the
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 17 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008Sports Development section of this suite of strategies, but the location issue
and balance between the commercial (with restricted memberships) and public
pay and play provision need to inform the future recommendations for
swimming provision across Milton Keynes.
Figure 5: Participation rates and swimming water area
32. The graph above plots the rate of participation in swimming against the total
amount of water space in each authority. It is important to note that the total
amount of water space per 1000 does not directly compare to the FPM
report figure as it includes all indoor pools, rather than only those over 160 sq
m. The FPM report also excluded Bourton Mill. It is also worth noting that MK
appears with a higher percentage of water space than the England average,
well up on its comparator authorities.
.
Adopted standards and ONS comparator authorities
33. Unlike any of its ONS comparator authorities, Milton Keynes has set out a
standard for pools in Appendix L3 of its Local Plan. This stands at one pool of
at least 25m x 13m per 30,000 population. This provision for new pools would
however only provide 10.8 sq m per 1000 population.
34. Since the 2007 national average for provision is 13.1 sq m, this standard would
appear to be insufficient.
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 18 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008Trends in the sports
35. Swimming is the third most popular activity amongst all adults. It attracts all
ages with slightly more women than men taking part. The vast majority of
participants are white and largely from socio economic groups ABC1.
Swimming nationally is predicted to increase in participation up to 2013, and
Milton Keynes participation will grow more strongly than the national average
because of its relatively young population.
36. As part of a national scheme to increase levels of participation in physical
activity the government is encouraging all local authorities to offer free
swimming to under 16s and over 60s. Whilst MKC has agreed to take part in
the scheme the subsidy it provides will only be used to meet the cost of existing
levels of participation and it is not intended that this will be used to significantly
increase numbers/throughput.
Consultation results
37. The household survey asked what specific facilities were used by residents for
their sport and active recreation. Swimming pools are used the most, with
walking and cycling routes being less used. This contrasts with the Active
People Survey which shows that walking and cycling activities are the most
popular, with swimming coming third – suggesting that people use lots of
different places for walking and cycling, including the road network.
38. Of concern within the household survey results is a relatively high percentage
of people who are dissatisfied with swimming pool provision in Milton Keynes –
about a third of all those who swim. Of those, approximately half would like to
see improvements to existing provision or new pools being provided.
39. The governing body for swimming, the ASA is in the process of developing a
new strategy, for the period 2009-2013. The draft is not yet available, but the
key points are:
• MK has a high number of Swim 21 clubs, but swimming was dropped as a
‘focus sport’ in MK due to a lack of facilities.
• ASA supports the proposal for a 50m pool, especially if it was a
competition pool.
• There is a lack of flexible pool space which can accommodate different
aquatic sports.
• There is a very proactive swimming group, and all clubs are now working
together.
• Participation amongst some groups in the community is being hampered
by lack of female lifeguards, pool time and tutors.
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 19 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 200840. In facility terms, water polo and synchronised swimming require a minimum
depth of 2m. Research indicates that there is currently limited demand from
these disciplines in MK, however, if it is possible to provide the appropriate
depth when designing new pools this option should be borne in mind.
Proposals
Proposed standards
41. Provision at a rate of 15 sq m of water space per 1000 population up to 2021,
and 15.6 sq m per 1000 thereafter in relation to pools of 160 sq m and over in
size.
42. Public pools to be treated as strategic facilities, to attract developers’
contributions from the whole of the Borough.
43. Private pool space should be encouraged by positive planning policies, and is
expected to remain at about 30% of total water space in Milton Keynes.
44. Design standards should meet Sport England specifications.
Refurbishment
45. Woughton Pool requires significant investment although it is not clear how this
will be funded as earlier proposals to link a refurbishment to the adjacent school
redevelopment have now been shelved.
46. The two other pools which will require refurbishment to maintain their quality
and their value in the network are Leon and Stantonbury. However, the
responsibility for these facilities is not with Milton Keynes Council directly, as
Leon and Stantonbury are both foundation schools. Opportunities to draw in
funds from external sources such as Building Schools for the Future
programme, and the Learning and Skills Council (and its successor) should be
taken, and long term community use of these facilities should be maintained.
Justification
47. The proposed standards and phasing address the following key policy issues:
• The need for MK to provide for more of its residents’ needs within its
boundaries, to reduce outflows to adjoining authorities.
• The need to provide for performance and excellence with appropriate 50m
pool facilities for high level training and some competition.
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 20 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008• The need to enable a higher proportion of people to reach affordable and
accessible pools on foot or by public transport, especially in those areas
with the lowest car ownership.
• The wish to provide sufficient pools to cater for a 1% pa increase in
swimming in addition to the increase in population in the period up to
2026.
• The need to maximise the mix of providers (commercial and public sector)
by retaining a proportion of commercial pool space, but no more than at
the present percentage.
• The need to reduce revenue costs at public facilities by providing fewer
larger pools rather than a larger number of smaller pools.
48. The FPM analysis suggested that no new pool was justified in 2007 but that
2-3 pools new would be justified by 2016, if located in key areas of need. The
50m pool will increase the water space total for Milton Keynes, but is not
predicted to have a dramatic impact upon the areas of greatest community
need, especially for those areas with the highest levels of deprivation and
lowest car ownership such as Eaglestone, Coffee Hall and Netherfield in
Central MK, and Water Eaton and Newton Leys in the South. The 50m pool
has therefore been treated as a 25m x 8 lane pool with teaching space i.e. it is
treated as a ‘community pool’.
49. The implications of treating the 50m pool both as a full 50m pool (option 1) and
then as a 25m pool (option 2) can be seen in the table below (Figure 6). Option
1 results in a very high rate of provision per 1000 population, well above the
national average. Option 2 brings the level of provision much more into line
with the national average, and is a more realistic level of provision for Milton
Keynes.
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 21 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008Figure 6: Calculating the provision per 1000 population of water space
Assumes 50m
pool, replace
OPTION 1 : FULL 50M Bletchley & NP, % extra capacity needed for
POOL AREA TAKEN Current and closures (as participation (increase 1% pa)
INTO ACCOUNT provision report) sq m per 1000
2007 2011 2016 2016 2021 2026
Total population 226581 245855 269982 269982 297844 323749
Water area (sq m) pools
over 160 sq m size 2688.5 3642.5 3642.5
Provision per 1000 (sq
m) 11.9 14.8 13.5 15.6 16.3 17.0
Additional pool space
needed (sq m) 557 1212 1874
Assumes 50m
pool, replace
OPTION 2 : 50M POOL Bletchley & NP, % extra capacity needed for
TREATED AS 25m x 8 and closures (as participation (increase 1% pa)
LANE (625 sq m) report) sq m per 1000
2007 2011 2016 2016 2021 2026
Total population 226581 245855 269982 269982 297844 323749
Water area (sq m) pools
over 160 sq m size 2688.5 3342.5 3342.5
Provision per 1000 (sq
m) 11.9 13.6 12.4 14.3 15.0 15.6
Additional pool space
needed (sq m) 212 812 1419
Note:
25m x 4 lane = 212 sq m
25m x 6 lane + teaching = 463 sq m
25m x 8 lane + teaching = 625 sq m
50. Taking the above Option 2 as the most appropriate for Milton Keynes, this
suggests that:
• The 50m and replacement Newport Pagnell pools should be developed.
• One additional new community pool is required by 2016. Based on the
results of the research, it is suggested that this is located in the Central
area of Milton Keynes, as defined by this strategy. The provision should
be at least a 25m x 6 lane pool with teaching pool of around 463 sq m.
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 22 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008• One additional community pool should be provided between 2017 and
2026 of size 25m x 8 lane plus teaching pool (625 sq m). Possibly
located within the longer term expansion areas of Milton Keynes
(potentially over the border in Aylesbury Vale).
• Additional commercial sector provision equating to around 330 sq m
over the period up to 2026.
51. The commercial sector already has a key role, and it is anticipated that this
will remain. However these facilities are not available to everyone due to price
and other restrictions and the commercial sector cannot be expected nor relied
upon to deliver significantly increased participation rates amongst those people
living in the more deprived areas. The proposals retain the approximate
existing balance between providers; the public and the commercial sectors
(70%:29%). However if the proposals are adopted the commercial sector’s
element will be a slightly lower percentage, at 23% of the additional provision
between 2021 and 2026.
Recommendations
Swimming is likely to remain one of the most, or the most, popular
activity in Milton Keynes as the population will remain relatively young
over the period up to 2026, with large numbers of children and young-
middle age adults. Investing in a network of good quality public pools
which are accessible to all members of the community is therefore a high
priority.
The following standards and proposals should be adopted:
Provision at a rate of 15 sq m of water space per 1000 population up to
2021, and 15.6 sq m per 1000 thereafter.
Public pools to be treated at Strategic facilities, to attract developers’
contributions from the whole of the Borough.
Commercial pool space requires positive planning policies and should
represent a maximum of approx 30% of total water space in Milton
Keynes.
Design standards to meet Sport England specifications.
Proposals for community pools:
Up to 2011
• 50m pool at Radcliffe with moveable floor and boom.
• Closure of Watling Way
• 25m x 8 lane competition pool plus teaching pool at Newport
Pagnell (replacement)
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 23 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 20082012 - 2016
• 1 x 25m pool (6 lanes) + teaching pool in the central north-south
area of the city. Consider options for providing for other aquatic
sports at this facility – deeper water, possibly a diving pool.
• The pools at Stantonbury, Woughton and Leon - refurbished or
replaced
2021 - 2026
• 1 x 8 lane competition pool with teaching pool in south west MK or
expansion area beyond.
SPORTS HALLS
Introduction
52. The standard methodology for measuring sports halls is by the number of
badminton courts contained within the floor area. However it is recognised that
there is extensive use of these types of facility by a wide range of other sports
including basketball, volleyball, handball etc.
53. Sports halls are generally considered to be of greatest value if they are of at
least 3+ badminton court size, and with sufficient height to allow games such as
badminton to be played. However, halls below this size are also valuable, and
are considered later in this section of the report.
Current provision
54. Milton Keynes currently has a total of 20 sites with sports halls of 3+ badminton
court size, including provision by the commercial sector. Altogether, these
provide 86 badminton courts, most of which are available either on a pay-and-
play basis or via club bookings, and a large majority are linked to school sites.
Three sites have much more restricted access; the National Badminton Centre,
and the two commercial clubs at Bladerunner Sports Complex and David Lloyd.
Figure 7 shows the list of current sports halls within MK, Figure 8 shows their
location by use and size, and Figure 9 by ownership and size.
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 24 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008Figure 7: Sports halls in MK
Site Name Number Ownership Access Management Year Refur-
of Type Built bished
Type Type
Courts
RADCLIFFE SCHOOL 4 Foundation Sports Club / School / College / 1961 No
SPORTS CENTRE School Community University (in
Association house)
RADCLIFFE SCHOOL 3 Foundation Sports Club / School / College / 1962 No
SPORTS CENTRE School Community University (in
Association house)
BLADERUNNER 4 Commercial Pay and Play Commercial 1992 No
SPORTS COMPLEX Management
BLETCHLEY LEISURE 8 Local Pay and Play Commercial 1973 2002
CENTRE Authority Management
COURTSIDE SPORTS 4 Further Pay and Play School/ College/ 2004 No
& FITNESS @ Education University (in
MILTON KEYNES house)
COLLEGE
DAVID LLOYD CLUB 4 Commercial Registered Commercial 1997 2005
Membership Use Management
LEON LEISURE 4 Community Pay and Play School/ College/ 1970 2004
CENTRE school University (in
house)
LORD GRAY SCHOOL 4 Foundation Pay and Play School / College / 2007
SPORTS HALL School University (in
house)
NATIONAL 8 Other Registered Trust 2000 No
BADMINTON CENTRE Membership Use
OAKGROVE LEISURE 4 Foundation Pay and Play Trust 2005 No
CENTRE School
OUSEDALE SCHOOL 3 Foundation Sports Club / Local Authority (in 1963 No
(NEWPORT PAGNELL School Community house)
CAMPUS) Association
SHENLEY BROOK 4 Foundation Sports Club / School / College / 2002 No
END SCHOOL School Community University (in
Association house)
SHENLEY BROOK 3 Foundation Sports Club / School / College / 2003 No
END SCHOOL School Community University (in
Association house)
SHENLEY LEISURE 4 Foundation Pay and Play Trust 1991 2006
CENTRE School
ST PAULS CATHOLIC 3 Voluntary Sports Club / Local Authority (in 1984 No
SCHOOL Aided School Community house)
Association
STANTONBURY 6 Foundation Pay and Play School / College / 1976 2004
CAMPUS LEISURE School University (in
CENTRE house)
STANTONBURY 4 Foundation Pay and Play School / College / 1976 2004
CAMPUS LEISURE School University (in
CENTRE house)
THE HAZELEY 4 Foundation Sports Club / School / College / 2005 No
SCHOOL School Community University (in
Association house)
WALTON HIGH 4 Foundation Pay and Play Local Authority (in 2003 No
SCHOOL SPORTS School house)
HALL
WOUGHTON CENTRE 4 Community Pay and Play Trust 1980 No
School
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 25 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 200855. In addition to those facilities within Milton Keynes, account needs to be taken of
the larger, more strategic facilities located in the authorities adjoining the
borough. There are 11 sites within a drive time of 35 minutes of the centre of
Milton Keynes, and a further two sites within 45 minutes. These are all likely to
have over-lapping catchments with sites in Milton Keynes.
District Facility No. of Distance Drive time
courts
Aylesbury Vale Stoke Mandeville 12 22 miles 45 mins
Stadium
Northampton Benham Sports Arena 10 24 miles 35 mins
Northampton Lings Forum LC 6 16 miles 30 mins
Northampton Northampton School for 6 22 miles 35 mins
Girls
Bedford Alexander Sports 8 16 miles 30 mins
Stadium
Bedford Bedford International 8 14 miles 35 mins
Athletics Stadium
Bedford Bedford School 7 16 miles 35 mins
Bedford Bunyan Centre 8 12 miles 30 mins
Mid Beds Biggleswade 6 25 miles 45 mins
Recreation Centre
Mid Beds Cranfield University 8 7 miles 15 mins
South Beds Dunstable Leisure 6 15 miles 25 mins
Centre
South Beds Houghton Regis LC 6 15 miles 25 mins
South Beds Tiddenfoot LC 6 15 miles 25 mins
56. Planned sports halls within and near Milton Keynes include:
• Bletchley Leisure Centre - 6 badminton courts (replacement facility)
• Kingsbrook Specialist Business and Enterprise College – 3 court hall
(over western border)
• Radcliffe – 6 court hall (replacement of existing provision at Radcliffe
School), as part of the creation of a new leisure complex incorporating
a 50m pool.
• The proposed redevelopment of The Sir Frank Markham School to
create Milton Keynes Academy will result in the creation of a new 4
court sports hall which, it is understood, will have community use.
57. In the period up to 2016 two additional secondary schools are planned, one for
the Western Expansion Area (start date 2010), and one for the Eastern
Expansion Area (start date 2012), both of which are planned to have
community use. School facilities beyond this date are yet to be determined, but
again would have community use.
Nortoft Partnerships Ltd Milton Keynes Page 26 of 99
Syzygy Leisure Sports Development, Leisure Facilities & Playing Pitch Strategy
Leisure Facilities Section
October 2008You can also read
