Playing Pitch Strategy - London Borough of Richmond upon Thames

THE LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
AUGUST 2015
Integrity, Innovation, Inspiration
1-2 Frecheville Court off Knowsley Street Bury BL9 0UF
T 0161 764 7040 F 0161 764 7490 E [email protected] www.kkp.co.uk
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
CONTENTS
PART 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 3
PART 2: VISION ............................................................................................................... 6
PART 3: OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................................... 6
PART 4: STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. 7
PART 5: LBRUT SPORTS SUMMARY AND KEY ISSUES ............................................ 20
PART 6: SPORT SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................... 25
PART 7: ACTION PLAN ................................................................................................. 27
PART 8: CONCLUSION ................................................................................................. 46
PART 9: DELIVER THE STRATEGY AND KEEP IT ROBUST AND UP TO DATE......... 47
APPENDIX ONE: SITE LOCATIONS.............................................................................. 51
APPENDIX TWO: STRATEGIC CONTEXT .................................................................... 57
APPENDIX THREE: FUNDING PLAN ............................................................................ 63
APPENDIX FOUR: DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES .................................. 65
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
PART 1: INTRODUCTION
This is the Playing Pitch Strategy (PPS) prepared by Knight Kavanagh & Page (KKP) for the
London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (LBRuT). Building upon the preceding
Assessment Report it provides a clear, strategic framework for the maintenance and
improvement of existing outdoor sports pitches and ancillary facilities between 2015 and
2020. This study replaces a previous set of reports, referred to as the Sport, Open Space
and Recreation Study 2008.
The PPS covers the following playing pitches and outdoor pitch sports:







Football pitches
Cricket pitches
Rugby pitches
Hockey
Tennis courts
Bowling greens
Artificial Grass Pitches (AGPs)
The Strategy is capable of:
 Providing adequate planning guidance to assess development proposals affecting
playing fields;
 Informing land use decisions in respect of future use of existing outdoor sports areas
and playing fields (capable of accommodating pitches) across the Borough;
 Providing a strategic framework for the provision and management of outdoor sports
across the Borough;
 Supporting external funding bids and maximise support for outdoor sports facilities;
 Providing the basis for on-going monitoring and review of the use, distribution, function,
quality and accessibility of outdoor sport.
1.1: Structure
The Strategy has been developed from research and analysis of playing pitch provision and
usage within LBRuT to provide:
 A vision for the future improvement and prioritisation of playing pitches (including
ancillary facilities).
 A series of strategic recommendations which provide a strategic framework for the
improvement, maintenance, development and, as appropriate, rationalisation of the
playing pitch stock.
 A series of sport by sport recommendations which provide a strategic framework for
sport led improvements to provision.
 A prioritised area-by-area action plan to address key issues.
The Strategy and Action Plan recommends a number of priority projects, which should be
implemented from 2015 to 2025. It is outlined to provide a framework for improvement and,
although resources may not currently be in place to implement it, potential partners and
possible sources of external funding will be identified.
The recommendations that come out of this strategy should be translated into local plan
policy so there is a policy mechanism to support delivery and secure provision/investment
where opportunities arise.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
3
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
There is a need to build key partnerships between the Council, National Governing Bodies of
Sport (NGBs), Sport England, schools, further education providers, community clubs and
private landowners to maintain and improve playing pitch provision. In these instances, the
potential for the Council to take a strategic lead is more limited (except in terms of Section
106 Agreements). This document will provide clarity about the way forward, and allow key
organisations to focus on the key issues that they can directly influence and achieve.
There are also a handful of sites and clubs technically outside of the LBRuT but which are
within close proximity that have been included within the study. This is in order to recognise
their role and use by clubs/people from the LBRuT area; as local authority boundaries are
not often a significant concern of the general public. However, the level of administrative and
planning control the Council has on such sites is restricted.
1.2 Context
The Strategy forms part of a wider Open Space, Sport and Recreation Needs and
Opportunities Assessment for the Council including the open space and indoor built sports
provision.
This will form part of the evidence base for the Council’s Site Allocations Plan DPD
(Publication and Submission) and any subsequent Local Plan updates (e.g. review of the
adopted Core Strategy). It will also act as the evidence base for any other individual site
proposals (such as the Richmond upon Thames College site), where there could potentially
be a loss of a playing field space. In addition, the Study is also likely to be used to inform the
commissioning process of the Council’s Sport & Fitness services (anticipated for 2016). The
document therefore looks to:
 Inform planning policy relating to the National Planning Policy Framework and provide
an evidence base for responding to planning applications affecting playing fields.
 Act as an evidence base for the Councils Site Allocation Plan and any subsequent Local
Plan updates.
 Where possible to help inform redevelopment of existing education sites such as
Richmond upon Thames College and any other individual sites (particularly schools)
where there could potentially be a loss of playing field space.
 Establish a clear strategic pathway for improvement, investment and protection of
playing pitches.
 Have robust evidence base upon which to be able to apply for external funding such as
Sport England’s Protecting Playing Fields Fund.
LBRuT Sports and Fitness Strategic Principles
The strategic principles monitor the general level of participation and trends particularly
indoor built sports facilities. It sets out that the Council has adopted the following strategic
principles for the service:




Provide more opportunities for adults to take part in sport.
Provide more opportunities for young people to take part in sport.
Widen participation by targeting provision at low participant groups and villages.
Develop more opportunities for people to learn new skills through sport and fitness, both
as participants and volunteers.
 Support competitive sport and work with locally based clubs to identify and develop
effective pathways to support talented sports people.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
4
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
 Increase opportunities for Sport and Fitness Services to improve the health and
emotional well-being of participants and volunteers.
 Retain and improve existing sports facilities and develop new facilities where there is
need.
 Ensure there is legacy benefit from major events such as the 2015 Rugby World Cup.
 Improve the quality of services, develop the quality of the workforce and volunteers and
achieve external quality accreditation.
 Enhance partnership working and consultation to improve the delivery and effectiveness
of sport and fitness services
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
5
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
PART 2: VISION
2.1 Vision
This study has been developed on the basis of the above strategic drivers in order to ensure
that it reflects the Council’s wider ambitions. A vision has been set out followed by objectives
to provide a clear focus with desired outcomes for the borough:
“Produce a robust and comprehensive Strategy which will provide the essential evidence
base for informing decisions on planning and investment in order to provide appropriate
opportunities to provision for everyone.”
PART 3: OBJECTIVES
The following overarching objectives are based on the key issues emerging from the
Assessment Report (summarised in Part 5). It is recommended that the following are
adopted by the Council and its partners to enable it to achieve the overall vision of the
Strategy and Sport England planning objectives:
OBJECTIVE 1
Seek to protect playing pitches and ancillary facilities from loss as a result of
redevelopment
OBJECTIVE 2
To enhance existing playing pitches and ancillary facilities through improving their
quality, accessibility and management
OBJECTIVE 3
To provide new playing pitches and ancillary facilities that are fit for purpose to meet
demands for participation now and in the future.
Figure 1: Sport England themes
Source: Sport England 2015
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
6
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
PART 4: STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations for the Strategy have been developed via the combination of
information gathered during consultation, site visits and analysis which culminated in the
production of an assessment report, as well as key drivers identified for the Strategy.
Implementation must be considered in the context of financial implications and the need for
some proposals to also meet planning considerations.
OBJECTIVE 1
Seek to protect playing pitches and ancillary facilities from loss as a result of
redevelopment
Recommendations:
a.
Ensure, through the use of the Playing Pitch Strategy, that sports facilities are
protected through the implementation of local policy.
b.
Secure tenure and access to sites for high quality, development minded clubs,
through a range of solutions and partnership agreements.
c.
Maximise community use of outdoor sports facilities where there is a need to do so.
Recommendation (a) – Ensure, through the use of the Playing Pitch Strategy, that
sports facilities are protected through the implementation of local policy.
This is based on the outcomes of the playing pitch strategy, the requirements of the National
Planning Policy Framework (NPPF paragraph 73) and Sport England’s statutory consultee
role on planning applications that affect playing field land.
A number of Development Management policies are already in place which set out the
protection and provision of open space (including playing pitches) and therefore help with
compliancy with paragraph 73 and 74 of the NPPF.
Spatial Policy CP10 Open Land and Parks as well as Policy DM OS 2, 3 and 8 set out the
precedent for the protection of sites. These reference a number of other land designations
which relate specifically to existing playing pitch provision. Expanded versions of the policies
can be found in the Appendix.
For further information regarding the considerations when assessing applications involving
development on playing fields please refer to Sport England’s Playing Fields Policy - ‘A
Sporting Future for the Playing Fields of England’ Policy Exceptions E4 and E5; found at:
http://www.sportengland.org/media/123579/policy-exception-4.pdf
http://www.sportengland.org/media/123588/policy-exception-5.pdf
In terms of mitigation it is important this takes place to an equivalent or better quality,
equivalent or greater quantity, in a suitable location and is subject to equivalent or better
management arrangements. This is to avoid a scenario where playing fields may be lost
and/or replaced to a lesser/unsuitable quantity, quality, location or management term.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
7
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Policy Exception E5 is if the proposed development is for sports, which would be of sufficient
benefit to the development of sport as to outweigh the detriment caused by the loss, or
prejudice to the use, of the playing field in question.
Furthermore, it is worth recognising that (if) any school sites become redundant over the
lifetime of the Strategy they may offer potential for meeting community needs on a localised
basis (if required).
There are currently no dormant school sites within LBRuT. Given the likely demand for future
school places identified in the LBRuT School Place Planning Strategy it is unlikely that any
schools will be closed during the lifespan of this Strategy.
If, although highly unlikely, any schools do close the following should be considered when
assessing the suitability of conversion of former school playing fields for community use:
 Location and willingness of the Council or a club (or other party) to take on
ownership/lease/maintenance
 Size
 Quality
 Physical accessibility
 History of community access
 Availability of ancillary facilities
School Place Planning Strategy 2014
The document sets out the Councils approach to providing additional school places within
the borough up to 2024. A initial phase has already been approved which will see three free
schools open and one primary school approved for permanent expansion:




Sheen Mount Primary - permanent expansion
Richmond Bridge Primary (to open September 2015)
Twickenham Primary (to open September 2015)
Richmond upon Thames College free school (to open September 2017)
More places will be required to meet longer term forecast demand, particularly at primary
places. The report therefore considers when secondary phase places will be required and
how such demand could be met.
None of the sites identified are highlighted as currently having any marked playing pitch
provision other than the Richmond upon Thames College site; scenario testing is provided
later in the document for this site. Furthermore, only two sites (Sheen Mount and
Meadlands) are identified as having outdoor grassed areas. The potential expansion of
existing primary schools may provide opportunities to invest in the current offsite stock of
playing pitches or creation of additional pitch provision on the sites identified; if there is a
need or intention to use such pitch provision for curriculum and/or extra curriculum uses.
Schools identified in the SPPS as having the potential to offer expanded school places are
set out below alongside the pitch sites located nearby which may have the ability to be
utilised by the school if needed and subject to any investment/improvements required. Any
requirement for their potential curriculum and extra-curriculum use in the future needs to be
established and monitored.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
8
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Schools sites identified for creation or expansion
School
Phase one
Sheen Mount Primary
Richmond Bridge Primary
Analysis area
Potential sites for use
Richmond
Richmond
Twickenham Primary
Twickenham
Richmond upon Thames
College free school
Phase two
St Marys CoE Primary
(Hampton)
Barnes Primary
Twickenham
Richmond Park
Old Deer Park, North Sheen Recreation
Ground
Twickenham Green open space, Kneller
Gardens, Craneford Recreation Ground
Craneford Recreation Ground
The Russell Primary
Meadlands Primary
Richmond
Richmond
Hampton & Teddington
Richmond
Orleans
Park
School,
Craneford
Recreation Ground, Marble Hill Park
Barnes Common, Vine Road Recreation
open space
King Georges Field, Ham Common
Ham Common, King Georges Field
Recommendation (b) – Secure tenure and access to sites for high quality,
development minded clubs and/or organisations through a range of solutions and
partnership agreements
Local sports clubs should be supported by partners including the Council and NGBs to
continue to achieve sustainability across a range of areas including management,
membership, funding, facilities, volunteers and partnership working. For example, supporting
club development and encourage clubs to develop evidence of business and sports
development plans to generate an income through their facilities. All clubs could be
encouraged to look at different management models such as registering as Community
Amateur Sports Clubs (CASC). Clubs should also be encouraged to work with partners
locally, such as volunteer support agencies or linking with local businesses.
As well as ensuring the quality of local authority sites, there are a number of sites which
have poor quality (or no) ancillary facilities. Consideration should be given to granting
security of tenure (minimum 25 years as recommended by Sport England and NGBs) to the
clubs playing on these sites, if not already in place, so the clubs are in a position to apply for
external funding to improve the ancillary facilities. Sites where poor changing facilities may
be restricting use include Old Deer Park, Marble Hill Park and Heathfield Recreation Ground;
only the latter is Council owned and managed.
There are also examples of clubs on the border of the borough, such as Richmond HC,
Twickenham RFC and some teams at Barnes HC, using provision just outside of the
borough. Despite being outside the clubs service a number of LBRuT residents and have
therefore been included. The need to work closely with such clubs, NGBs and neighbouring
Local Authorities is recognised to ensure they do not fall between the gaps of administrative
boundaries.
In instances where long term leases might be put into place for the continued use of a site,
clubs should be required to meet service and/or strategic objectives. However, an additional
set of criteria should be considered, which takes into account the quality of the club, aligned
to its long term development objectives and sustainability.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
9
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
In the context of the Comprehensive Spending Review, which announced public spending
cuts, it is increasingly important for councils to work with other sector organisations in order
that they may be able to take greater levels of responsibility and support the wider
development and maintenance of facilities. Where appropriate the Council should therefore
support and enable clubs to generate sufficient funds to allow this.
Recommended criteria for lease of sport sites to clubs/organisations:
Club
Site
 Clubs should have Clubmark/FA Charter
Standard or equivalent accreditation.
 Clubs commit to meeting demonstrable
local demand and show pro-active
commitment to developing school-club
links (if appropriate).
 Clubs are sustainable, both financially and
via their internal management structures
in relation to recruitment and retention
policy for both players and volunteers.
 Ideally, clubs should have already
identified (and received an agreement in
principle) any match funding required for
initial capital investment or have a
credible funding plan endorsed by an
NGB. Councils should seek to partner
capital project prior to executing terms to
help lever external investment.
 Clubs have processes in place to ensure
capacity to maintain sites to the existing,
or better, standards.
 Sites should be those identified as ‘Club
Sites’ (recommendation d) for new clubs
(i.e. not those with a Borough wide
significance) but which offer development
potential. For established clubs which
have proven success in terms of selfmanagement ‘Key Centres’ are also
appropriate.
 As a priority, sites should acquire capital
investment to improve (which can be
attributed to the presence of a
Clubmark/Charter Standard club).
 Sites should be leased with the intention
that investment can be sourced to
contribute towards improvement.
 An NGB/Council representative should sit
on a management committee for each
site leased to a club.
 Council should not execute the legal
terms until a sustainable solution has
been agreed and achieved.
The Council can further recognise the value of Clubmark/Charter Standard by adopting a
policy of prioritising the clubs that are to have access to these better quality facilities. This
could be achieved by inviting clubs to apply for an initial trial lease on a particular site before
committing to a longer term arrangement.
Club outcomes for lease agreements
The Council should establish a series of core outcomes to derive from clubs taking on a
lease arrangement to ensure that the most appropriate clubs are assigned to sites. As an
example outcomes may include:




Increasing participation.
Supporting the development of coaches and volunteers.
Commitment to quality standards.
Improvements (where required) to facilities, or as a minimum retaining existing
standards.
In addition, clubs should be made fully aware of the associated responsibilities/liabilities
when considering leases of multi-use public playing fields.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
10
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
The council should also devise a transfer process that is the most effective way of realising a
sites potential whilst protecting and safeguarding the clubs and community interest.
Early engagement with NGB’s and Sport England to identify the priorities should be adopted
to ensure strategic priorities are aligned.
Recommendation (c) Maximise community use of outdoor sports facilities
Education sites
In order to maximise community use of educational facilities it is recommended to establish a
coherent, structured relationship with schools, regardless of ownership, i.e. academies,
independent schools, etc. The ability to access good facilities within the local community is
important to any sports organisation, yet accessing schools for match play but also for
training can sometimes be difficult. In LBRuT, physical access and resistance from schools,
especially academies, can be a barrier to accessing provision.
A number of sporting facilities are located on education sites and ensuring the availability to
sports clubs can offer significant benefits to both the school/college and the local clubs. The
Council and other key partners must work with schools and colleges to develop an
understanding of the issues that restrict or affect community access. Support should be
provided, where appropriate, to address any underlying problems. Education sites with the
need or potential for greater community use are set out in the Action Plan.
It can be common for school pitch stock to not be fully maximised for community use. Even
on established community use sites, access to outdoor sports facilities to the community
may be limited. Consultation identified several issues relating to the use of school facilities:
 Schools report that pitches cannot be accessed by the community due to being unable
to staff the opening/closing of facilities.
 Many school sites do not have dedicated marked pitches due to limited space and/or a
need for flexibility of use.
 Some schools report limiting community use in order to try and allow some respite and
recovery time of provision; due to heavy use for curriculum activities.
 There are management issues inherent in developing, implementing and managing
community use agreements. Advice and guidance can be obtained from Sport
England’s Schools toolkit and Sports organisations toolkit.
(www.sportengland.org/facilities-planning
Where appropriate, it will be important for schools to negotiate and sign formal and long-term
agreements that secure community use. This needs to be examined against the following:
 The analysis provides a clear indication of the future pitch requirements and provides a
basis for partners to negotiate.
 Community use should not impact on the needs of schools to deliver curricular and
extracurricular activities.
Sport England has also produced guidance, online resources and toolkits to help open up
and retain school sites for community use and can be found at:
http://www.sportengland.org/facilities-planning/accessing-schools/
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
11
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Housing growth often leads to an increase in school places. These places usually result in
an extension to a school, sometimes on playing fields. Where applicable this should be
identified early in the process and embraced in policy that any replacement of playing fields,
due to school expansion, should be negotiated. This is particularly pertinent in LBRuT with
the possibility for a number of school expansions and a new school as part of the Richmond
upon Thames College site redevelopment.
It is recommended that any future decisions regarding the strategic direction in relation to the
increase/better use of school facilities is undertaken with regard to the continuing LBRuT
School Place Planning Strategy.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
12
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
OBJECTIVE 2
To enhance existing playing pitches and ancillary facilities through improving their
quality, accessibility and management
Recommendations:
d.
Improve pitch quality and changing facilities.
e.
Adopt a structured approach to the management and improvement of sites.
f.
Work in partnership with stakeholders to secure funding
g.
Secure developer contributions.
Recommendation (d) – Improve pitch quality and changing facilities
There are a number of ways in which it is possible to increase pitch quality, including for
example, addressing overplay and improving maintenance. These are explored in more
detail below. Improving quality at currently used sites improves capacity and makes the best
use of existing pitches.
Addressing quality issues
Priority in the short term (dependent upon resources) should be directed to sites that have
standard or poor quality pitches and that are over played. These sites can be seen in the
table below.
Sites overplayed with pitch quality issues:
Sport
Site
Analysis Area
Pitch type
Football
King Georges Field (Kew & Ham
Sports Association)
Richmond
Adult
Kneller Gardens
Twickenham
Youth 9v9
1
North Sheen Recreation Ground
Richmond
Youth 9v9
2
Richmond upon Thames College
Twickenham
Adult
1
Bushy Park
Hampton
Teddington
Richmond
Richmond
Richmond
Richmond
&
Senior
2
Senior
Senior
Senior
Senior
1
2
6
1
Hampton
Teddington
&
Senior
1
Rugby
Union
Christ’s School
Old Deer Park Partnership
Richmond Athletic Ground
Richmond Athletic Ground
(training pitch)
Teddington Lock Playing Fields
Number
of pitches
3
For the purposes of the Quality Assessments, this Strategy will refer to pitches and ancillary
facilities separately as Good, Standard or Poor quality. For example, some good quality sites
have poor quality elements i.e. changing rooms or a specific pitch.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
13
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Good quality refers to pitches that have, for example, good grass cover, an even surface,
are free from vandalism, litter etc. In terms of ancillary facilities, good quality refers to access
for disabled people, sufficient provision for referees, juniors/women/girls and appropriate
provision of showers, toilets and car parking.
Standard quality refers to pitches that have, for example, adequate grass cover, minimal
signs of wear and tear, goalposts may be secure but in need of minor repair. In terms of
ancillary facilities, standard quality refers to adequately sized changing rooms, storage
provision and provision of toilets.
Poor quality refers to pitches that have, for example, inadequate grass cover, uneven
surface and damage. In terms of ancillary facilities, poor quality refers to inappropriate size
of changing rooms, no showers, no running water and old dated interior.
Please refer to the Sport England/NGB quality assessments. Sites played beyond capacity
may require remedial action to help reduce overplay.
Sites with changing facility issues:
Site
Old Deer Park
I.D
38
King Georges Fields
Heathfield Recreation Ground
Marble Hill Park
28
24
32
Sheen Common
49
Sports
Cricket
Football
Rugby Union
Football
Football
Football
Rugby Union
Cricket
Analysis Area
Richmond
Richmond
Twickenham
Twickenham
Richmond
Without appropriate, fit for purpose ancillary facilities pitches, including good quality pitches,
may be underutilised. Changing facilities for some sports can form the most essential part of
this offer and therefore sites such as those in the table should be given priority for
improvement where possible.
Addressing overplay
In order to improve the overall quality of the playing pitches stock; it is necessary to ensure
that pitches are not overplayed beyond recommended weekly carrying capacity. This is
determined by assessing pitch quality (via a non-technical site assessment) and allocating a
weekly match limit to each. Each NGB recommends a number of matches that a good
quality pitch should take:
Sport
Football
Rugby
union*
August 2015
Pitch type
Adult pitches
Youth pitches
Mini pitches
Pipe and Slit Drained and a good level of maintenance
(D3/M2)
Pipe drained and a good level of maintenance (D2/M2)
Natural (adequate) drainage and a good level of maintenance
(D1/M2)
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
No. of matches
3 per week
4 per week
6 per week
3.5 per week
3.25 per week
3 per week
14
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Sport
Cricket
Pitch type
One grass wicket
One synthetic wicket
No. of matches
5 per season
60 per season
* Please note that RFU guidance bases the calculation of pitch capacity upon an
assessment of the drainage system and maintenance programme afforded to a site.
There are also sites that are poor quality but are not overplayed. These sites should not be
overlooked as often poor quality sites have less demand than other sites; however demand
could increase if the quality was to also increase. Improving pitch quality should not be
considered in isolation from maintenance regimes.
Whilst it works both ways, in so much as, poor pitch condition is a symptom of pitches being
over played, potential improvements may make sites more attractive and, therefore, more
popular; which in the long run can lead again to poor quality pitches if they are not
maintained properly.
There is also a need to balance pitch improvements alongside the transfer of play to
alternative pitch sites. Therefore, in some instances it may be possible to work with clubs to
ensure that sites are not played beyond their capacity and encourage play, where feasible,
to be transferred to alternative venues which are not operating at capacity.
Increasing pitch maintenance
Standard or poor grass pitch quality may not just be a result of poor drainage. In some
instances ensuring there is an appropriate maintenance for the level/standard of play can
help to improve quality and therefore increase pitch capacity. Each NGB can provide
assistance with reviewing pitch maintenance regimes.
For example, the FA has introduced a Pitch Advisor Scheme and has been working in
partnership with Institute of Groundmanship (IOG) to develop a Grass Pitch Maintenance
service that can be utilised by grassroots football clubs with the simple aim of improving the
quality of grass pitches. The key aim behind the service is to provide football clubs with
advice/practical solutions on a number of areas, with the simple aim of improving the club’s
playing surface.
In relation to cricket, maintaining high pitch quality is the most important aspect of cricket. If
the wicket is poor, it can affect the quality of the game and can, in some instances, become
dangerous. The ECB recommends full technical assessments of wickets and pitches
available through a Performance Quality Standard Assessment (PQS). The PQS assesses a
cricket square to ascertain whether it meets the Performance Quality Standards that are
benchmarked by the Institute of Groundsmanship. Please note that PQS assessments are
also available for other sports.
Recommendation (e) – Adopt a structured approach to the management and
improvement of sites
To allow for facility developments to be programmed within a phased approach the Council
should consider an organised approach to the management and improvement of playing
pitch sites and associated facilities. Please refer to Part 7: Action Plan for the proposed
approach.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
15
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Recommendation (f) – Work in partnership with stakeholders to secure funding
Partners, led by the Council, should ensure that appropriate funding secured for improved
sports provision are directed to areas of need, underpinned by a robust strategy for
improvement in playing pitch facilities.
In order to address the community’s needs, to target priority areas and to reduce duplication
of provision, there should be a coordinated approach to strategic investment. In delivering
this recommendation the Council should maintain a regular dialogue with NGBs and local
partners through the Playing Pitch Steering Group.
Some investment in new provision will not be made by the Council directly, it is important,
however, that the Council seeks to direct and lead a strategic and co-ordinated approach to
facility development by education sites, NGBs, sports clubs and the commercial sector to
address community needs whilst avoiding duplication of provision.
Please refer to Appendix Two for further funding information which includes details of the
current opportunities, likely funding requirements and indicative project costs. London Sport,
the CSP, is also a source of advice, guidance and ‘critical friend’ for clubs and organisations
seeking funding.
Recommendation (g) –Secure developer contributions
It is important this strategy informs planning policies and subsequent Local Plan updates.
The guidance may also help form the basis for negotiation with developers to secure
contributions to provision and/or enhancement of appropriate playing fields and its
maintenance. Developer contributions (e.g. Section 106 contributions or Community
Infrastructure Levy) could be used to improve the condition and maintenance regimes of the
pitches in order to increase pitch capacity to accommodate more matches. To enable this:
 Planning consent should include appropriate conditions and/or be subject to specific
planning obligations. Where developer contributions are applicable, a Section 106
Agreement or equivalent must be completed specifying the amount which will be linked
to Sport England’s Building Cost Information Service from the date of the Planning
Committee, and timing of the Contribution(s) to be paid.
 Contributions should also be secured towards the first ten years of maintenance on new
pitches. NGBs/ Sport England can provide up to date information on such costs.
 External funding should be sought/secured to achieve maximum benefit from the
investment into appropriate playing pitch facility enhancement and its maintenance.
 Where new multiple pitches are provided, appropriate changing rooms and associated
car parking should be located on site.
 All new or improved playing pitches on school sites should be subject to community use
agreements. For further guidance please refer to Sport England:
http://www.sportengland.org/facilities-planning/planning-for-sport/planning-tools-andguidance/community-use-agreements/
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
16
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
OBJECTIVE 3
To provide new playing pitches and ancillary facilities that are fit for purpose to meet
demands for participation now and in the future.
Recommendations:
h.
Rectify quantitative shortfalls in the current pitch stock.
i.
Identify opportunities to add to the overall stock to accommodate both current and
future demand.
Recommendation (h) - Rectify quantitative shortfalls in the current pitch stock
The Council and its partners should work to rectify identified inadequacies and meet
identified shortfalls as outlined in the Assessment Report and the sport by sport specific
recommendations (Part 6).
For instance, in terms of football there is not enough provision to meet current and future
demand in LBRuT across all formats of the game unless current levels are protected.
It is essential that the current levels of pitch provision (grass and artificial) are protected,
maintained and enhanced to secure provision now and in the future. Key to this is for all
provision to be retained. For most sports the future demand for provision identified in the
borough can be overcome through maximising use of existing pitches through a combination
of:
 Improving pitch quality in order to improve the capacity of pitches to accommodate more
matches.
 The re-designation of pitches for which there is an oversupply.
 Working with partners and clubs to address any inadequacies with ancillary provision
such as changing facilities and/or access to training provision.
 Where possible securing long term community use at school sites.
There is a requirement to protect adult football pitches as they provide the flexibility to
provide adult, youth or mini pitches (through different line markings/coning areas of the
pitch). Furthermore, relying solely on the re-designation of adult pitches that are not currently
used may lead to a deficiency of adult pitches in the medium to longer term as younger
players move up the ages.
Any changes to unmet demand, participation and trends, and proposed housing growth
should be recognised and factored into future facility planning. Assuming additional future
increases in participation and housing growth occurs, it will impact on the future need for
certain types of sports facilities. The following table highlights the main development trends
in each sport and their likely impact on facilities. However, it is important to note that these
may be subject to change.
In addition, retaining an amount of spare capacity allows some pitches to be rested to
protect overall pitch quality in the long term. Therefore, whilst in some instances it may be
appropriate to re-designate a senior pitch where there is low demand identified a holistic
approach should be taken to re-designation for the reasons cited above. The site-by-site
action planning will seek to provide further clarification on where re-designation is suitable.
Retaining spare capacity should be considered in the context of secured community use, in
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
17
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
that spare capacity which is retained for future growth, pitch improvements, etc. should be
established at existing or potentially any new sites/facilities that are provided for use.
Likely future sport-by-sport demand trends
Sport
Future development trend
Possible Strategy impact
Football
Demand for adult football is likely to be
sustained with the FA focusing on
retention. There is likely to also be some
movement towards small sided football
for adults as well as mid-week 11 aside
matches.
Additional need for 3G pitches that meet the
performance standards and listed on the FA
3G register.
http://3g.thefa.me.uk/?sort=countyfa
Demand for youth football is likely to
increase based on TGRs
A need for more youth pitches and/or
exploration of utilising 3G facilities to help
accommodate mini and youth formats.
An increase in women and girls football
following £2.4m investment over the two
years (2014-2016) from Sport England
to increase the number of women and
girls taking part in football sessions.
A potential need to provide self contained
ancillary facilities.
Increase in disability programmes, in
particular those led by pro clubs.
A need to ensure facilities that are DDA
compliant.
Women’s and girls’ cricket is a national
priority. Target is to establish two girls’
and one women’s team in every local
authority. LBRuT already meets target.
Continued support to ensure access to
appropriate changing and toilet provision and
access to good quality cricket pitches.
Expansion of Last Man Stands (LMS) in
the Borough.
Additional need for non-turf wickets.
Establishing a disability section within
LBRuT within the next five years.
Need for appropriate match and ancillary
facilities.
The Rugby World Cup (2015) is
predicted to see a further increase in the
demand for rugby provision.
Clubs likely to field more teams in the future,
and therefore have demand for more pitches
and floodlit training provision. Important,
therefore, to work with clubs to maintain the
current pitch stock and to support facility
development where appropriate.
Cricket
Rugby
union
Strong junior sections.
AGPs
Demand for 3G pitches for football
exists and will likely continue to increase
as currently there is only one full size
pitch in the LBRuT. It is likely that future
demand for the use of 3G pitches,
especially for training, will increase.
Provision of 3G pitches which are IRB
compliant will help to reduce overplay as
a result of training on rugby pitches.
Requirement for new 3G pitches to be
provided and a need for community use
agreements to be in place for any new
pitches.
Utilise Sport England/NGB guidance on
choosing the correct surface:
Hockey
Continued potential to increase
participation.
Requirement to retain existing hockey
provision in use where there is clear
evidence of demand.
Tennis
It is likely that future demand for access
to tennis courts in LBRuT will remain
reasonably static.
Provision of tennis courts in LBRuT is
considered able to accommodate current and
future demand. Clubs should be supported
to ensure courts are well maintained.
August 2015
http://www.sportengland.org/media/30651/Selectin
g-the-right-artificial-surface-Rev2-2010.pdf
http://www.thefa.com/my-football/footballvolunteers/runningaclub/yourfacilities/~/media/8D5
FAB86576549B8BAAEA37DC6037C68.ashx
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
18
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Sport
Future development trend
Possible Strategy impact
Bowls
General trend of demand for bowling
greens remaining static or slightly
decreasing.
Likely to result in the need for less outdoor
bowling greens. However, at this moment in
time, given dispersed nature of provision it is
not appropriate to suggest disposal.
Recommendation (i) - Identify opportunities to add to the overall pitch stock to
accommodate both current and future demand
The Council should use, and regularly update, the Action Plan within this Strategy for
improvements to its own pitches whilst recognising the need to support partners. The Action
Plan lists improvements to be made to each site focused upon both qualitative and
quantitative improvements as appropriate for each area.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
19
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
PART 5: LBRUT SPORTS SUMMARY AND KEY ISSUES
As identified in the Assessment Report, below are the key issues and summaries on a sport
by sport basis:
5.1 Football
 The audit identifies a total of 110 football pitches in LBRuT. Of these, 107 are available,
at some level, for community use
 Most football pitches available for community use are assessed as being of good quality
(74%) followed by standard quality (25%); less than 1% are assessed as poor.
 314 teams are identified as playing on pitches within LBRuT. A small amount of
matches take place on FA certified AGP pitches.
 Demand for better quality changing facilities is noted at some sites.
 There is unmet demand1 from some clubs for additional training provision; often
referenced as being for floodlit 3G surface facilities.
 Displaced demand2 is highlighted by three teams. Latent demand3 is also expressed for
five adult teams and four teams in the 7v7 pitch format.
 Future demand based on TGRs is most significantly noted for the youth formats of the
game (11v11 and 9v9) with a total of an additional 40 teams predicted to be generated.
 There is a total of 76 match sessions of actual spare capacity across the LBRuT, of
which 36 are on adult pitches. There are nine sites within LBRuT that are available for
community use but are unused (this includes school sites)
 Seven sites are overplayed by a total of 19 match sessions per week, most of which is
on adult pitches (16 match sessions). This is a result of nearly all youth 11v11 matches
taking place on adult pitches.
 There is a shortfall of one match equivalent session to accommodate current demand
for youth 11v11; this increases to 14 match equivalent sessions in the future (based on
TGRs and club plans), In addition, increases in future demand would cause a shortfall at
the youth 9v9 format (equivalent to 0.5 match equivalent sessions).
 Overall, there is a need to rebalance sites overplayed and future demand for youth
11v11 with sites showing spare capacity.
5.2 Cricket
 There are 40 cricket squares in LBRuT located across 28 sites, all of which are
available for community use, although two school sites are currently unused due cost of
hire or lack of interest.
 The audit of squares identifies 14 to be good quality and 24 to be standard quality and
the remaining two to be poor.
 There are a total of 131 teams playing within LBRuT; 65 senior and 66 junior. Within this
number there are one women’s and three girls’ teams.
 Five clubs report an increase in senior teams and six clubs report an increase in junior
teams over the previous three years. One club report a decrease in senior teams and
one club report a decrease in junior teams.
 Team generation rates suggest that a further one senior and 17 junior teams will be
created in the future. Eight clubs expressed plans to increase their number of teams.
1
Unmet demand is existing demand that cannot access pitches.
Displaced demand refers to LBRuT registered teams that are currently accessing pitches outside of
the LBRuT for their home fixtures but would prefer to play within LBRuT.
3
Latent demand is defined as the number of additional teams that could be fielded if access to a
sufficient number of pitches (and ancillary facilities) was available.
2
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
20
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
 One club, Bushy Park Girls CC, express latent demand due to a lack of available
pitches.
 A lack of training facilities and coaches are other factors limiting membership growth
within clubs.
 Last Man Stands expects to continue to grow in LBRuT in the future.
 There is actual spare capacity equating to four squares for grass wicket sites during
peak time (includes Old Deer Park square assessed as poor quality). This is reduced to
two squares due to latent demand and aggregated future demand. In the Analysis Area
summaries the aggregated future demand does not show but is accounted for in the
commentary. If quality of the square at Old Deer Park cannot be improved it could
become discounted; further reducing spare capacity. Subsequently sites with spare
capacity should look to be retained.
 Five clubs/sites are at or close to capacity; Kew CC, Barnes CC, Sheen Park CC,
Richmond CC and Twickenham CC. However, Richmond CC is developing a second
ground at Christ’s School.
 There are currently several squares with standalone non turf wickets that are available
for community use but with spare capacity. These squares have the capacity to
accommodate future demand for junior cricket (up to the age of 13) and increased
participation in Last Man Stands.
 Overall, the current number of squares can accommodate demand for senior and junior
cricket. However, preventing some pitches from becoming overplayed is required (e.g.
ensuring adequate training provision and increasing use of non-turf wickets particularly
for junior cricket).
5.3 Rugby Union
 There are 15 clubs in LBRuT; only three of these identify having a lease or licence
agreement in place for their home ground. All other clubs rent pitches.
 Richmond RFC with London Scottish RFC and Richmond Athletic Association identify
aspirations to submit a planning application to redevelop the Richmond Athletic Ground.
 The pitch at Richmond upon Thames College may be replaced by an all-weather surface
pitch as part of the college sites redevelopment.
 Demand for improved or increased training facilities is common with several clubs
signalling a need for greater midweek floodlit provision off match pitches. A number of
clubs utilise designated training pitches and these are all heavily used.
 In total, 42 rugby union pitches are located across 20 sites in LBRuT. Of these, 14
pitches are located at educational sites for community use. All are available for
community use. To reflect curriculum/extra curriculum usage at schools the carrying
capacity has been adjusted at these sites.
 The majority of pitches in LBRuT are assessed as standard (30 pitches) quality. Three
pitches are assessed as poor quality and nine as good.
 There is spare capacity at eight sites in LBRuT. Four of these are considered to have
genuine spare capacity in the peak period (equivalent to 11 match sessions per week).
This can help to meet current demand shown by the five sites identified as being
overplayed (equivalent to 6.75 match sessions per week).
 The Imperial College, Richmond upon Thames College and Orleans Park School sites
are not currently in use. Scenario testing has been used to determine recommendations.
 Supply and demand analysis shows if these sites were not available, overall in LBRuT
there would be a shortage of match equivalent sessions in the future. Therefore there is
a need to retain identified spare capacity at the Imperial College, Orleans Park School
and Richmond upon Thames College sites (including football pitch). An opportunity to
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
21
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
replace the rugby pitch at the latter (as part of the college redevelopment) with a rugby
compliant AGP could help to better meet club training demand.
 For clubs the biggest demand is in accessing midweek floodlit training provision.
 Overall, there is a need to address shortfalls and issues of overplay through retention of
sites with spare capacity and addressing access to midweek training provision.
5.4 Hockey
 There are six AGPs suitable for hockey within LBRuT (i.e. sand based). However, only
five are suitable for competitive hockey play.
 There are four hockey clubs within the LBRuT. In addition, St Mary’s University also
fields three senior teams which currently play in the midweek BUCS leagues.
 Richmond HC is based outside of the LBRuT and plays all its matches at the Quentin
Hogg Memorial Ground in Hounslow. Similarly, Barnes HC also has teams playing
outside of the LBRuT in Hounslow at the Dukes Meadow site. Both clubs prefer access
to water based surfaces for their higher ranked teams.
 Barnes HC highlights a desire for all teams to play within the LBRuT if appropriate AGP
provision was available.
 All clubs report increasing membership levels over the previous three years. In
particular, Richmond HC identifies being at capacity in terms of junior levels on
Sundays.
 AGP provision is generally viewed as standard to good quality. However, the carpet on
the AGP at Shene Sports & Fitness Centre is reaching the end of its lifespan.
 Spare capacity is identified at Hampton Sports & Fitness Centre and on Sundays at
Shene Sports & Fitness Centre.
 Overall, provision meets current club demand. The continuing use of existing sites for
hockey should be ensured.
5.5 Artificial Grass Pitches (AGPs)
 There are seven full size AGPs in LBRuT made up of one 3G surface and six sand
based. There is one AGP compliant to IRB 22 standard in the borough (Whitton Sports).
However, funding agreements mean it is only available for 1-2 hours per week for rugby
training.
 In the main, availability of provision in the peak period is generally good with the
exception at Orleans Park School which has no floodlighting
 Two of the seven pitches in LBRuT are assessed as good quality, both at Teddington
Sports Centre Edge. The remaining sites are assessed as standard quality, with no poor
quality pitches.
 The carpet of an AGP usually lasts for approximately 10 years. AGPs at Shene Sports
& Fitness Centre and Orleans Park School are approaching the end of their remaining
lifespan. The AGP at Hampton Sports & Fitness Centre was resurfaced in 2001 and will
need replacing by end of 2016.
 The FA model4 estimates that one full size AGP can service 56 teams. On the basis
there are 310 teams playing competitive football in LBRuT, there is a recommended
4
The FA standard is calculated by using the latest Sport England research "AGPs State of the Nation
March 2012" assuming that 51% of AGP usage is by sports clubs when factoring in the number of
training slots available per pitch type per hour from 5pm-10pm Mon-Fri and 9am-5pm Saturday &
Sundays. It is estimated that one full size AGP can service 56 teams.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
22
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY





need for five full size 3G pitches to cater for football demand, currently there is one.
Also, FPM Unmet Demand shows 22% of the demand from LBRuT residents to use an
AGP is not being met. This equates to 1.2 full size floodlit pitches.
Almost a third (30%) of football clubs which submitted views express additional demand
for training facilities; with 3G pitches specified as desirable.
The existing 3G AGP at Whitton Sports & Fitness Centre is identified as operating at
capacity.
There are four hockey clubs in the area; although Richmond HC and several teams from
Barnes HC play matches outside of the borough. St Mary’s University also fields three
teams which play midweek.
Richmond upon Thames College and St Richard Reynolds Catholic College highlight
aspirations to create an additional AGP provision. The latter specifically cites looking at
the possibility of a 3G facility. Both are at a very early stage of exploring possible
options.
In summary, supply and demand analysis (including FPM findings) highlights that the
LBRuT is currently under served for 3G pitches. FPM suggests Unmet Demand
equivalent to an additional 1.2 pitches whilst The FA Model supports the suggestion for
additional AGP provision (i.e. an additional four AGPs as one already exists).
5.6 Tennis
 There are a total of 168 tennis courts provided in LBRuT across a range of sites
including private sports clubs, parks and schools, all of which are available to the
community.
 Of provision, 131 courts (78%) are assessed as good quality and 22 courts (13%)
assessed as standard quality. The remaining 15 courts (9%) are assessed as poor
quality.
 Christ’s School, Barnes Tennis Club, Richmond Lawn Tennis Club and Pensford Tennis
Club all have plans to resurface and/or redevelop their courts.
 Will to Win report that most courts under their control have quality issues and believe
that an investment programme for court resurfacing is necessary.
 Floodlighting to maximise winter play should be explored at appropriate locations only
and in accordance with development management policies.
 There are 11 tennis clubs located in Richmond, nine of which were consulted and
assess their courts as either good (6) or standard (3).
 One club, Teddington Lawn Tennis Club report an increase in senior membership over
the last five years whilst Pensford Tennis Club reports a decrease.
 All clubs report an increase in junior membership with the exception of Priory Park
Tennis Club and Sheen Lawn Tennis & Squash Club, which report no change.
 All courts available for pay & play purposes are deemed to be under-utilised and plenty
of spare capacity exists. Recording of casual usage is difficult to gauge with the only
form of measurement being from the 50 courts managed by Will to Win.
 As no unmet or latent demand is identified within LBRuT, it would appear that there are
enough courts available for community use to accommodate both the current and future
demand. The focus is on ensuring a sufficient standard of public courts.
5.7 Bowls
 There are ten flat green bowling greens in LBRuT servicing ten bowling clubs. Of these,
four greens are provided by the Council.
 There are disused bowling greens at Barnes Sports Club and Vine Road.
 In general the quality of bowling greens in LBRuT is considered good with 55% of clubs
reporting that the quality of their home green has improved from the previous season.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
23
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY




Two clubs state that the quality of their green has worsened recently, mainly due to poor
maintenance.
Analysis of club membership shows that demand has general decreased or remained
static over the previous three years. A third of clubs report declining membership and
such a decline is threatening the existence of NPL Ladies Bowling Club.
Four clubs are operating below the average club/green membership and have capacity
to increase green usage.
It is likely that Carlisle Park Bowling Club and Cambridge Bowling Club are both
operating at capacity although neither club reports enough demand for additional
outdoor greens to be provided.
Therefore it would appear that there are enough greens available for community use to
accommodate both the current and future demand.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
24
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
PART 6: SPORT SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations look to address the issues identified from the summaries in
Part 5. Site specific actions falling out of the sport by sport recommendations outlined below
are detailed within the action plan.
FOOTBALL RECOMMENDATION
Seek to address current overplay and future demand at sites, including improvement of
changing facilities and explore creation of new 3G AGPs.
Grass pitches
 Ensure the protection of existing provision is maintained.
 Where pitches are assessed as standard or poor quality, review maintenance regimes
to ensure it is of an appropriate standard to sustain/improve pitch quality and therefore
increase carrying capacity.
 Consider reconfiguration of some adult pitches to youth pitches in order to meet current
but in particular future demand for youth 11v11.
 Retain all spare capacity in Hampton & Teddington and Twickenham to help meet
shortfalls identified across LBRuT and particularly in Richmond.
 Seek to provide a sufficient quality of changing provision at sites where necessary.
 Look to transfer play on sites which are played to capacity or overplayed to alternative
venues which are not operating at capacity.
 Work with clubs to accommodate latent and future demand on sites which are not
operating at capacity.
3G pitches
 Opportunities to provide 3G AGPs to meet identified needs should be explored; FA
modelling suggests a need for a total of five facilities (i.e. an additional four facilities as
one already exists) with Unmet Demand from the FPM an equivalent to 1.2 floodlit
pitches.
 Ensure such provision is fully utilised and available for community use at peak times,
including weekends. All new pitches should be FIFA tested and on FA 3G register.
 Ensure that sinking funds are in place to maintain any new 3G pitches in the long term.
 Partner accredited football clubs should have priority access at peak times and partner
rates, where they can demonstrate growing the game and access for all players.
CRICKET RECOMMENDATION
Ensure access of existing provision is maintained and work with partners to provide
appropriate range of ancillary facilities
 Monitor future demands of growing Last Man Stands programme.
 Support clubs to develop and improve ‘off pitch’ practice facilities to meet demand for
training facilities.
 Retain sites with spare capacity in order to meet latent and future aggregated demand.
 Ensure that any facilities developed support opportunities for women’s and girl’s
competitive cricket.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
25
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
RUGBY RECOMMENDATION
Work towards meeting identified current and future deficiencies and increase the quality
of pitches and ancillary facilities as required.
 Need to address overplay of training pitches at club sites.
 Look to improve the quality of pitches (and therefore capacity) in order to address
overplay of pitches at sites and to meet future demand.
 Need to retain the spare capacity identified to help meet future shortfalls.
 Ensure all clubs have access to training areas which are either dedicated floodlit
grassed areas or through access of an International Rugby Board (IRB) AGP.
 Support appropriate improvements to ancillary facilities at club sites where there is a
need to do so.
HOCKEY RECOMMENDATION
Ensure access of existing provision is maintained and work with partners to
accommodate current and future need where demand is evidenced.
 Work with England Hockey to ensure priority hockey sites are protected and quality is
sustained or where necessary improved.
 Liaise with clubs, NGBs and neighbouring boroughs of Hounslow to create a structured
facilities development plan.
 Ensure that sinking funds are in place to maintain AGPs quality in the long term.
OTHER SPORTS RECOMMENDATION
Ensure access to existing provision is maintained and look to improve quality when
opportunities arise.
Tennis
 As a minimum ensure court quality is maintained and that users can access the
appropriate standard of courts to allow for play.
 Explore possibility of floodlighting courts provision in appropriate locations only and
which comply with Development Management policies.
 Consider option of outsourcing management of sites on long term basis in order for
court improvements and investment to potentially be secured. This may also help to
monitor casual usage levels.
Bowls
 Maximise the availability of bowling greens for pay and play in order to raise the profile
of the game, increase levels of membership and the revenue generated by sites.
 Where demand exists, ensure that quality is sustained.
 Current need to retain existing greens. Long term if membership levels continue to
decrease on council sites, re-evaluation of provision may be required. This should form
part of future review of the Playing Pitch Strategy (with all Steering group members
invited).
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
26
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
PART 7: ACTION PLAN
7.1 Introduction
The site-by-site action plan seeks to address key issues identified in the accompanying
Assessment Report. It provides recommendations based on current levels of usage, quality
and future demand, as well as the potential of each site for enhancement. The action plan is
for all stakeholders and is a document that should be delivered in partnership and not by one
organisation alone.
It should be reviewed in the light of staff and financial resources in order to prioritise support
for strategically significant provision and provision that other providers are less likely to supply.
Below 7.2 explains the approach to implementing the actions on the list.
7.2 Adopt a structured approach to the management and improvement of sites
To allow for facility developments to be programmed within a phased approach the Council
should consider a structured approach to the management and improvement of playing pitch
sites and associated facilities.
The borough has a number of ‘key centres’, which are sites that are considered to be the most
popular and used. They therefore need to be of a high standard in order to accommodate a
sufficient number of matches per week. This applies mostly to football pitch hire but also
includes a number of multi-sport sites. This provision model is extended to recognise the
supply and demand issues identified throughout the Assessment Report (i.e. current levels of
overplay) and any potential investment necessary to improve sites based on current levels of
usage. The designation of sites is based on their ability and evidence of use in a Borough-wide
context i.e. they accommodate a large amounts of play.
In the context of developing a structured model approach to the improvement of sports
facilities there are a number of sites which are owned and maintained by clubs or other
providers. These sites are recognised as the ‘home ground’ of some clubs with the
management responsibility, in terms of maintenance and allocating teams to pitches,
transferred to the individual club or provider. Such sites are fundamentally different from
those which can be hired on a regular basis by a club (from the Council) but which do not
carry a responsibility in terms of allocating or maintaining pitches.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
27
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Proposed site structure criteria
Criteria
Strategic sites
Key centres
Club or education
sites
Reserve sites
Site location
Strategically
located within
analysis area.
Accommodates
two or more
grass pitches.
Services the local
community.
Site layout
Strategically located
in the Borough.
Priority site for NGB.
Accommodates three
or more grass
pitches, may include
AGP provision.
Potential to
service the local
community.
Likely to be
single-pitch site.
Type of sport
Multi-sport provision.
Single or multisport provision.
Management
Management control
remains within the
local authority/other
provider or with an
appropriate lease
arrangement.
Management
control remains
within the local
authority or with
an appropriate
provider on a
lease
arrangement.
Maintenance
regime
Maintenance regime
aligns with NGB
guidelines.
Maintenance
regime aligns
with NGB
guidelines.
Ancillary
facilities
Good quality
ancillary facility on
site, with sufficient
changing rooms to
serve the number of
pitches.
Good quality
ancillary facility
on site, with
sufficient
changing rooms
to serve the site.
Accommodates
more than one pitch.
Likely to include
other income
streams in terms of
viability.
Single or multi-sport
provision.
Club either has longterm lease/hires the
pitch for the entire
season or owns the
site.
Education owned or
management control
may remain with the
local authority/other
provider.
Standard
maintenance regime
either by the club or
in house
maintenance
contract.
Appropriate access
to changing for both
senior and junior use
concurrently (if
required).
Supports informal
demand and/ or
training etc.
Management
control remains
with the Council
or existing
management
body.
Basic level of
maintenance i.e.
grass cutting and
line marking as
required.
No requirement
for access to
changing
accommodation.
Strategic sites are of borough wide importance, where users are willing to travel to access
the range and quality of facilities offered which are likely to be multi-sport. These have been
identified on the basis of the current role and impact that the site will have on addressing the
issues identified in the assessment.
The financial, social and sporting benefits which can be achieved through development of
strategic sites (also known as hub sites) are significant. Sport England provides further
guidance on the development of community sports hubs at:
http://www.sportengland.org/facilities__planning/planning_tools_and_guidance/sports_hubs.
aspx
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
28
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Key centres. Although these sites may be more community focused and cater to alternative
non-sporting needs (i.e. wider recreational uses), some are still likely to service a whole
analysis area (or even further afield). There may also be more of a focus on a specific sport.
From a football perspective, these sites already seek to accommodate the growing emphasis
on football venues catering for youth and mini-soccer football matches. The conditions
recommended for mini and youth football are becoming more stringent. This should be
reflected in the provision of a unique set of pitches for mini and youth football that can
ensure player safety, as well as being maintained efficiently. Such sites will need to continue
to reach a certain standard and may require investment in order to do so. The Action Plan
identifies any sites of this kind.
Additionally, it is considered that some financial investment will be necessary to improve the
ancillary facilities at both Strategic sites and Key Centre sites to complement the pitches in
terms of access, flexibility (i.e. single-sex changing if necessary), quality and that they meet
the rules and regulations of local competitions.
Club/Education sites refer to those sites which are hired to clubs for a season, or are sites
which have been leased or secured on a long-term basis. Primarily they are sites with more
than one pitch. It is important to recognise that such sites provide an important role to the
area and local communities.
It is possible that sites could be included in this which are not currently hired or leased to a
club, but have the potential to be leased to a suitable club. Consideration should be given,
on a site-by-site basis, to the feasibility of a club taking a long-term lease on the site (if not
already present), in order that external funding can be sought and achieve the required site
improvements. Such sites often require some level of investment, either to the pitches or
ancillary facilities.
The Council should consider a partnership approach based on sports development
outcomes as opposed to restrictive property leases that condition leases to unrealistic
requirements. Instead the Council could consider providing support (e.g. project
managers/grant funding), small grants for feasibility/professional fees, competitive rent;
procure capital works and capital investment as a lever for external investment. Invest to
save whilst also reducing the risk to the club will likely achieve a longer term saving to the
Council and be attractive to external funding partners.
Reserve sites could be used as overspill for neighbouring sites and/or for summer
matches/competitions, training or informal play. They are most likely to be single-pitch sites
with no ancillary facilities.
7.3 Management and development
The following issues should be considered when undertaking sports related site development
or enhancement:






Strategic priorities and policies influencing the site
Assessment of current use and anchor tenants
Financial viability.
Security of tenure.
Planning permission requirements and any foreseen difficulties in securing permission.
Community consultation
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
29
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
 Site conditions, building surveys, security, insurance and any restrictive covenants (i.e.
rights of way or rights of access)
 Adequacy of existing finances to maintain existing sites.
 Business Plan/Master plan – including financial package for creation of new provision
where need has been identified.
 Analysis of the possibility of shared site management opportunities.
 The availability of opportunities to lease sites to an external, fit for purpose,
organisation.
 Options to assist community groups to gain funding to enhance existing provision.
 Negotiation with landowners to increase access to private strategic sites.
 Football investment programme development in line with the strategic priorities of The
FA and other strategic bodies.
7.4 Action plan
Timescales
The action plan has been created to be delivered over a ten year period. The information
within the Assessment Report, Strategy and Action Plan will require updating as developments
occur. The timescales relate to delivery times and are not priority based.
Timescales: (S) -Short (1-2 years); (M) - Medium (3-5 years); (L) - Long (6+ years).
Partners
The column indicating partners refers to the main organisation(s) that the Council will liaise
with in helping to deliver the actions. The next stage in the implementation of the action plan is
for the council and NGBs to agree a Lead Partner to help deliver the actions.
Level
Column shows the ‘level’ of a site in terms of the criteria set out in the site structure table on
p28. For partner guidance the column also indicates any sites considered as being of
particular high priority. LBRuT are keen to stress that all sites are of priority and importance.
Aim
In order to ensure that the actions are delivering one of the three strategy aims of Protect,
Enhance, Provide the final column relates each action back to one or more of the aims.
The action plan is broken down by sport in each analysis area within the LBRuT. For a
summary of needs and issues on a borough level by each sport please refer to Part 5. Maps
showing the location of sites and those being overplayed are set out in Appendix One.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
30
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
HAMPTON & TEDDINGTON AREA
Football
Summary of pitches required to meet current and future demand
Pitch type
Actual spare
5
capacity
Overplay
Demand (match equivalent sessions)
Latent
Current
Future
Total
demand
total
demand
-14
-14
0.5
+7
6
+1
-1
3
-4
Adult pitches
Youth pitches 11v11
18
-
3.5
1
Youth pitches 9v9
4
-
Mini pitches 7v7
16
-
-
-16
0.5
-15.5
Mini pitches 5v5
5
-
-
-5
0.5
-4.5
 Current and future demand is being met on all pitch types with the exception of youth
11v11 pitches.
 The demand is most significant for future provision of this kind due to population
increase; seven match equivalents (equal to four pitches).
 There is actual spare capacity on most other forms of provision in particular adult
pitches. This should be retained, as strategic reserve, in order to accommodate future
demand for Youth 11v11 as well as shortfalls from across LBRuT but particularly from
analysis areas such as Richmond.
 Overplay of adult provision (equivalent to two pitches) is attributed to a single site
(Teddington Lock Playing Fields).
 Teddington Athletic FC and Hearts of Teddlothians FC are significant providers of teams
in analysis area; both signal trend of growing membership levels.
 Consider creation of an additional 3G pitch as a way to reduce shortfalls and demand.
Conversion of the existing AGP at Hampton Sports & Fitness Centre should be explored
Scenario – Exclusion of Imperial College:
Scenario does not include the pitches located at Imperial College (two adult and two mini
7v7 pitches) to reflect any uncertainty over availability and genuine spare capacity.
Pitch type
Actual spare
6
capacity
Overplay
Demand (match equivalent sessions)
Latent/
Current
Future
Total
unmet
total
demand
demand
-10.5
-10.5
1.0
+7
6
+1
Adult pitches
Youth pitches 11v11
15
-
3.5
1
Youth pitches 9v9
4
-
-
-4
3
-1
Mini pitches 7v7
12
-
-
-12
0.5
-11.5
Mini pitches 5v5
5
-
-
-5
0.5
-4.5
 Current and future demand can still be met on all pitch types with the exception of youth
11v11 pitches.
5
6
In match equivalent sessions
In match equivalent sessions
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
31
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
 However, spare capacity should still be retained, as strategic reserve, in order to
accommodate future demand for Youth 11v11 as well as shortfalls from across LBRuT
particularly from Richmond analysis area.
Cricket
Actual spare
capacity (pitches)
2
Overplay
-
Demand (pitches)
Latent demand
Future demand
1
-
Total
-1
 Spare capacity on cricket pitches should be retained to accommodate demand
(expressed as latent demand) in Hampton & Teddington Analysis Area as well as
aggregated forms of future demand (equivalent to one pitch) across LBRuT.
 Bushy Park Girls CC nomadic club with no secured home venue.
 Clubs such as Hampton Wick Royal CC, Teddington Town CC and Twickenham CC
highlight desire for better net training facilities.
Scenario – Exclusion of Imperial College:
Scenario does not include the pitch located at Imperial College (one pitch) to reflect any
uncertainty over availability and genuine spare capacity.
Actual spare
capacity (pitches)
1
Overplay
-
Demand (pitches)
Latent demand
Future demand
1
-
Total
-
 Scenario highlights need for spare capacity on cricket pitches to be retained to
accommodate demand (expressed as latent demand) in Hampton & Teddington
Analysis Area as well as aggregated forms of future demand (equivalent to one pitch)
across LBRuT.
Rugby union
Actual spare
7
capacity
Overplay
6
3.25
Demand (match equivalent sessions)
Current
Latent
Future
demand
demand
demand
1
1.5
-2.75
Total
-0.25
 Spare capacity should be retained as it is able to accommodate current overplay and
expressed latent and future demand (as well as low total figure).
 Resolving demand for training, such as the heavy use of the floodlit training pitch at
Twickenham RFC, may also help to free some capacity of pitches in order to also help
meet future demand. Additional lighting is being installed.
 Overplay could be satisfied by improving pitch quality at Bushy Park and Teddington
Lock Playing Field sites.
 Potential for rugby use at Imperial College site should be retained due to low total figure
as well as in order to meet any additional demand and/or in case of difficulties in
improving quality of existing sites.
7
In match equivalent sessions
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
32
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Scenario – Exclusion of Imperial College:
Scenario does not include the pitches located at Imperial College (two pitches) to reflect any
uncertainty over availability and genuine spare capacity for rugby.
Actual spare
capacity
Overplay
2
3.25
Demand (match equivalent sessions)
Current
Latent
Future
demand
demand
demand
1.25
1
1.5
Total
3.75
 Scenario highlights importance of retaining site in order to meet any additional future
demand and/or in case of difficulties in improving quality of existing sites.
 There is also a need to retain spare capacity at sites with a view to the impact of the
Rugby World Cup 2015.
Hockey
 Four full size sand based AGPs in the area. Three used for competitive hockey should
continue to be retained for future.
 Teddington Lock site is used by St Mary’s University teams and NPL HC; Teddington
Sports Centre home to Teddington HC.
3G pitches
 Based on the FA model there is a need for two full size 3G pitches in the Area.
 Potential for resurfacing of sand based AGP to 3G at Hampton Sport & Fitness Centre.
Consider World Rugby compliant surface; could help to meet demand for rugby as well
as football training in analysis area but also for wider LBRuT.
Tennis
 There are 10 courts across three sites assessed as poor quality. One site containing
four poor quality courts is council owned; Carlisle Park
Bowls
 No significant issues to address regarding bowls in Hampton & Teddington Area.
However, NPL Sports Club identifies continuing decrease in membership.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
33
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
ID
Site
Sport
Management
6
Broom Road
Recreation Ground
Cricket
Council
Football
8
Bushy Park
Cricket
Club/ Royal
Parks
Football
Royal Parks
Rugby
10
Carlisle Park
Cricket
Council
Football
12
Clarendon School
18
Hampton and
Richmond Borough
FC
Hampton Rangers
Junior FC
Hampton School
19
21
Tennis
Football
School
Football
Council
Football
Council
Cricket
School
Rugby
Hampton Sport &
Fitness Centre
26
Imperial College
(Teddington Sports
Ground)
AGP
Council/
Education
Cricket
University
Football
Rugby
Recommended actions
Standard quality. Twickenham CC rent as home
ground. Club has desire for permanent training
net facilities.
Rented by Hearts of Teddlothians FC
predominantly. Club reports demand for
additional pitches. Site has genuine spare
capacity to three match equivalents.
Teddington Town CC lease on an annual basis.
Club has desire for permanent non-turf training
net facilities.
Used by Teddington Athletic. Club reports
growing demand for additional pitches
Explore option of club securing a long term lease
agreement for site. Could help club in securing funding
for creation of dedicated training provision.
Ensure site quality is maintained.
Work with club to fully utilise spare capacity. Explore
option of club securing a long term lease.
Teddington RFC has licence agreement for use of
site. Club notes issues with other site uses (i.e.
dog foul/litter). Is seeking installation of drainage
on second pitch.
Used for friendly matches by Woodlawn CC and
as overspill for Hampton Hill CC.
Rented by Hearts of Teddlothians FC. Club
reports growing demand for additional pitches.
Football
22
Current status
Four poor quality courts.
Adult pitch not currently used but available.
Club leases site from LBRuT. Training occurs on
dedicated pitch but considered poor due to
drainage and maintenance.
Club leases site from LBRuT. Standard quality of
adult and 9v9 pitches due to uneven surfaces.
No club use identified.
Old Hamptonians predominantly use. Spare
capacity identified in peak time for the four adult
pitches marked on site.
Used for friendly matches by Teddington RFC
Vets.
Sand based floodlit AGP. Used predominantly for
football training, little hockey usage. Council
considering resurfacing with 3G.
Used predominantly by Richmond CC. Spare
capacity identified.
Spare capacity identified in peak time on two
adult pitches.
No club use identified.
Support exploration of club securing a long term lease
with a view to creating training facility on site. Alternative
option may be to access provision off site.
Ensure site quality is maintained.
Opportunities to relocate any future growth to sites such
as Teddington Sports Ground should be explored.
Improve pitch quality and therefore increase capacity
through drainage installation. However, recognise this
may be difficult given pitches set within Royal Park.
Quality should be maintained. Site may help to meet
latent demand expressed by Bushy Park Girls CC.
Ongoing capacity should be checked.
Ensure site quality is maintained.
Secured use of Broom Road (site ID 6) should be
explored.
Explore opportunities for court improvement.
Work with the School to explore possibilities of
increasing community use. May help to meet club
demand and/or some future demand for youth 11v11.
Explore opportunities for club to access better training
provision within area such as 3G AGP at Hampton Sport
& Fitness Centre.
Explore ways to increase pitch quality and maintenance.
Retain site; may be able help to meet any changes in
future demand for cricket.
Work with school and interested clubs in site helping to
meet future demand for youth 11v11.
Site may help to meet any changes in future demand for
rugby.
Resurfacing to 3G would help meet demands for training.
World Rugby compliant surface should be considered as
would help meet demands for rugby and football whilst
also working towards FA Model.
Potential improvements should be explored in order to
increase site quality.
Explore potential creation and/or re-designation of
pitches to meet current demand expressed by clubs and
future population demand particularly for youth 11v11
pitches.
Potential for site to be used for rugby in the future should
be retained as a reserve option.
Partners
Club, Council,
ECB
Level/ priority
(if high)
Club
Council
Timescales
Objective
M
Protect,
Enhance
S
Protect,
Provide
M-L
Club, ECB,
Royal Parks
Club
M
Protect,
Enhance
Club, Council,
Royal Parks
Key Centre
M-L
Enhance,
Provide
Club, RFU,
Royal Parks
Club
S
Enhance
Club, Council,
ECB
Key Centre
S
Provide
S
M-L
Provide
Club, Council
Council
Council,
School
Education
M
M-L
Enhance
Protect,
Provide
Club, Council
Club
M
Provide
Club, Council
Club
S
Enhance
Council,
School
Education
L
Provide
M-L
Protect,
Provide
L
Protect,
Provide
Protect,
Provide,
Enhance
Council,
Education
Key Centre
(High priority)
S
Club
Strategic
(High priority)
L
Council, FA,
RFU,
University
S
S
M
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
Protect,
Enhance
Protect,
Provide,
Enhance
Protect,
Provide,
Enhance
34
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
ID
Site
Sport
Management
37
NPL Sports Club
Bowls
Club
Cricket
Football
58
Teddington Lock
Playing Fields
AGP
University
Cricket
Football
Rugby
Union
59
67
Teddington Sports
Centre
AGP
Current status
Recommended actions
Decreasing membership which club reports is
leading to uncertainty in long term.
Club reports no issues with current capacity.
Overplay on youth 11v11 by 1 match equivalent.
Club aspirations for a 3G AGP on site to help
meet expanding number of teams.
Ensure site quality is maintained.
Ensure site quality is maintained.
Current overplay considered able to be absorbed by
existing site quality. A priority site for the FA as it is a
Charter Standard Community Club. If demand continues
to grow may need to accommodate additional sites to
accommodate increased demand.
Ensure site quality is maintained.
Sand based floodlit AGP predominantly used by
NPL HC and University.
Good quality ground used by St Mary’s
University. Club use after 2015 uncertain.
Changing facilities has no showers.
Overplay on three adult pitches by 3.5 match
equivalents.
Quality should be maintained. Site may help to meet
latent demand expressed by Bushy Park Girls CC.
Ongoing use/capacity should be checked.
Opportunities to relocate some matches to existing sites
such as Teddington Sports Ground should be explored.
Two pitches of standard quality; currently
overplayed. St Marys University home site but
also used by Harlequin ARFC teams for training
purposes.
Council
Look to improve pitch quality and therefore increase
capacity.
Provision of a World Rugby 3G AGP in area would
release pressure from training for use of site.
Continue to support club/facility arrangement.
Addition of floodlights on second pitch should be
explored for any growing hockey demand.
Two sand based AGPs (one floodlit). Home of
Teddington HC.
Partners
Club
Level/ priority
(if high)
Club
Club
Club, FA,
Royal Parks
Timescales
Objective
L
Protect
L
S
Protect
Protect,
Provide
M
University
L
Protect
University
S
Protect,
Provide
Council,
University
S-M
Protect,
Enhance
Club, Council,
RFU,
University
S
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
Club, Council
Strategic
(High priority)
M
Key Centre
S-L
L
L
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
Football
Council
Site contains a 5v5 pitch of good quality.
Retain for informal use and as strategic reserve.
Council
Reserve
68
Holly Road
Recreation Ground
Langdon Park
Football
Council
Provide
Cricket
Council
Reserve/
potential Club
Key Centre
S
The King’s Field
Explore reconfiguring 7v7 to youth 11v11 to meet
overplay and future demand.
Opportunities to improve site quality should be explored.
Ongoing capacity should be checked. Support any
expansion of changing room provision. Also site ID 80.
Ensure site quality is maintained.
Work with club to fully utilise spare capacity.
Site quality should be maintained.
Council
69
Standard quality 7v7 pitch not in use (equivalent
to two matches).
Poor quality. Hampton Wick CC use as overspill
home ground.
M
Enhance
Protect
Club, ECB,
Royal Parks
Club
S
L
L
Club, ECB,
Royal Parks
Club
L
Protect
Club, Council,
ECB, Royal
Parks
Club, Council,
RFU
Club
M
Protect,
Provide
Club
S
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
Football
Good quality site with variety of pitches; used by
Hampton YFC.
77
Bushy Park –
Hampton Hill CC
Cricket
Royal Parks
Main home ground for Hampton Hill CC. Secured
long term lease.
78
Bushy Park –
Teddington CC
Cricket
Royal Parks
Main home ground for Teddington CC. Long term
lease secured.
Site quality should be maintained.
80
Bushy Park Hampton Wick
Royal CC
Twickenham RFC
Cricket
Royal Parks
Rugby
Union
Club
(located in LB
of Hounslow)
Main home ground of Hampton Wick Royal CC.
Three practice nets on site considered poor. Club
only has a rolling contract for use.
Overplay of provision on site from matches and
demand for (floodlit) training. Additional
floodlighting is being installed in time for 2015
season.
Explore option of club securing a long term lease
agreement for site. Could help club in securing funding
for creation of dedicated training provision.
Consideration to relocating some matches to Imperial
College should be explored.
Provision of a World Rugby 3G AGP could release
pressure for match use on site and free other sites for
different uses (i.e. football at Imperial College).
Explore opportunities for greater club uses to meet
overplay or youth 11v11 demand.
Ways to increase pitch quality should also be explored:
as well as consideration to long term lease.
85
89
Hampton Common
August 2015
Football
Council
Standard quality with spare capacity of two match
equivalents.
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
Club, Council
Protect
Protect
L
Council
Potential Club
M
Protect,
Enhance
35
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
RICHMOND AREA
Football
Summary of pitches required to meet current and future demand
Analysis area
Actual
spare
8
capacity
Demand (match equivalent sessions)
Overplay
Latent
Current
Future
Total
demand
total
demand
+7
12
1.5
+5.5
1.5
+6
6
0
Adult pitches
Youth pitches 11v11
8
-
Youth pitches 9v9
6
1
-
-5
7
+2
Mini pitches 7v7
-
-
1
+1
2.5
+3.5
Mini pitches 5v5
4
-
-
-4
2.5
-1.5
 There is a current and future shortfall for adult pitches. Current shortfall is of 5.5
match equivalents (equal to three pitches). In the future demand is further noted with
a shortfall of 7 match equivalents (equal to four pitches)
 Furthermore, there is a future shortfall for nearly all other pitch types with the
exception of mini 5v5. For youth 11v11 the shortfall is 6 match equivalents (equal to
three pitches), youth 9v9 its 2 match equivalents (equal to one pitch) and at mini 7v7
the future shortfall is 3.5 match equivalents (equal to two pitches).
 Overplay of 9v9 pitches can be satisfied by improving quality. Similarly so can future
demand for mini 7v7.
 Overplay on adult pitches (Barn Elms, King Georges, North Sheen Rec) can be
addressed through a combination of relocating some matches (e.g. North Sheen
Rec) and improving/ensuring quality (e.g. King Georges, Barn Elms) through
ensuring evenness of surfaces and sufficient maintenance regimes.
 Future demand for Youth 11v11 may need to be met by sites outside of analysis area
such as Orleans Park School in Twickenham.
 Poor changing facilities at King Georges and Old Deer Park
Cricket
Actual spare
capacity (pitches)
2
Overplay
-
Demand (pitches)
Latent demand Future demand
-
Total
-2
 Spare capacity should be retained in order to accommodate any future changes for
cricket in Richmond Analysis Area and aggregated forms of future demand
(equivalent to one pitch) across LBRuT.
 Current provision should be retained to its existing quality as a minimum.
 Clubs such as Barnes CC, Kew CC and Ham & Petersham CC highlight desire for
better dedicated training facilities.
 Difference in management and club direction is highlighted at Barnes CC and its
umbrella organisation at Barnes Sports Club.
8
In match equivalent sessions
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
36
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Rugby union
Actual spare
9
capacity
Overplay
5
3.5
Demand (match equivalent sessions)
Current
Latent
Future
demand
demand
demand
1
4
-1.5
Total
3.5
 Spare capacity is able to accommodate current overplay. However, latent demand
expressed and future demand results in a potential future shortfall.
 Overplay could be satisfied by improving pitch quality at sites currently overplayed
such as Christ’s School, Old Deer Park Partnership and Richmond Athletic Ground.
 Training on match pitches (Old Deer Park Partnership) and need for greater off site
training (Richmond Athletic) should be a priority for area.
 Resolving demand for training may also help to free some capacity of match pitches
in order to meet future demand.
 Richmond RFC and London Scottish RFC have ambitions to improve ancillary
facilities (including changing accommodation) at Richmond Athletic Ground.
Hockey
 One full size sand based AGPs in the area at Sheen Sports & Fitness Centre should
be retained. Used for competitive hockey by Barnes HC.
3G pitches
 Based on the FA model there is a need for three full size 3G pitches in the Area.
Currently no forms of provision exist.
 Potential for any future new provision in analysis area is limited.
 However, potential resurfacing of sand based AGP to 3G at Hampton Sport & Fitness
Centre (in Hampton & Teddington Analysis Area). In addition to the potential of
creating new AGP provision at two sites in Twickenham would help meet need for
training. World Rugby compliant surfaces should be considered as could help to
meet demand for rugby as well as football training in wider LBRuT.
Tennis
 Only one court, located at Palewell Common, is assessed as poor quality.
 Courts at Old Deer Park are a main focus of provision for WtW.
Bowls
 Total of five bowling greens within analysis area. Includes disused green at Barnes
Sports Club which cricket club is interested in using as training provision.
 No significant issues to address regarding bowls in Richmond Area.
9
In match equivalent sessions
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
37
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
ID
Site
Sport
Management
Current status
Recommended actions
Partners
1
Barn Elms Playing
Fields
Cricket
Trust
Good quality ground; currently used as second
site by Barnes CC.
Five adult pitches on site are overplayed by 3.5
match equivalents.
BEST cite desire to provide additional changing
facilities in order to allow greater use for play.
Council,
Trust
Used by Barnes Common CC. Spare capacity
highlighted.
Main home ground for Barnes CC. Club is looking
at potential to create training facility on abandoned
bowling green on site.
Ensure maximum usage of site by clubs. Ongoing
capacity should be checked.
Quality should be maintained as current amount of
overplay appears to be able to be absorbed by quality and
maintenance of existing provision.
Additional changing facilities should only be considered if
pitches can accommodate matches.
Site quality should be retained. May help to meet latent
demand expressed by clubs.
Quality of site should be maintained in order to help meet
overplay.
Site may also help meet any increases in curriculum use
from Barnes Primary School.
Site quality and spare capacity should be retained in order
to meet any future changes in demand.
Opportunity to provide dedicated training provision should
be encouraged as long as long term use of facility for
cricket club can be secured.
Richmond CC has established a wicket on site for
use in 2016.
Wicket is in place and ready for use in 2016. Club will
undertake future maintenance.
Football
A standard adult pitch. No community use; school
considers at capacity due to curriculum use.
Work with school to explore opportunities to improve pitch
quality and therefore increase capacity.
Rugby
Poor quality senior pitch used by London Welsh
RFC and for curriculum use.
A standard adult pitch. No community use; school
considers at capacity due to curriculum use.
Standard senior pitch available but not in use.
Standard quality ground. Club rents from Crown
Estates. Club has desire for permanent training
net facilities.
Two standard quality adult pitches. Overplayed in
terms of capacity. Site also has pitches for each
smaller sided format of game.
Work with school to explore opportunities to improve pitch
quality and therefore increase capacity.
Work with school to explore opportunities to improve pitch
quality and therefore increase capacity to help meet future
demand. Long term lease agreement with club may help.
Used by Richmond CC juniors. Teams will
relocate to Christ’s school in 2016.
Standard quality adult pitch. Played at capacity.
Overplayed by three match equivalents.
Changing facilities viewed as dated.
Football
Rugby
3
Barnes Common 1
Football
Council
4
Barnes Common 2
Cricket
Council
5
Barnes Sports Club
Bowls
Private
Cricket
11
Christ’s School
Cricket
School
15
Grey Court School
Football
School
27
Kew Cricket Club
Rugby
Cricket
Club
28
Kew & Ham Sports
Association
Football
Trust
91
King Georges Field
Cricket
Council
Football
36
North Sheen
Recreation Ground
August 2015
Football
Council
Two good quality senior pitches. Spare capacity
on Sunday PM identified.
Adult pitch of good quality. Leased by Fulham
Compton FC. Spare capacity identified.
Site contains one good quality adult pitch and a
5v5 pitch. Also 2x 9v9 and 2x 7v7 pitches of
standard quality. Adult and 9v9 are overplayed.
Leased to Kew Park Rangers FC
Level/ priority
(if high)
Strategic
(High priority)
Objective
M
Protect,
Provide
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
S
L
Council
Club
L
Protect
L
Protect
L
Council
Club/ Reserve
L
Protect
Club,
ECB
Club
M
Protect,
Provide
Club,
Council,
School
Education/
Club
S
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
M
L
Council,
School
Education/
Club
Explore option of club securing a long term lease
agreement for site. Could help club in securing funding for
creation of dedicated training provision.
Quality should look to be improved to increase capacity
and further reduce impact of overplay.
Club,
Crown
Estates
Trust
Club
Site should be retained in order to meet any future
changes in demand for cricket.
Quality should look to be improved to increase capacity
and prevent overplay.
Consider relocating single team clubs to sites such as Old
Deer Park to reduce overplay.
Long term site may help meet any increases in curriculum
use from Russell and Meadlands Primary Schools.
Monitor condition of changing facilities.
Consider option of relocating some matches for instance
to Sheen Common (ID 49) to resolve overplay.
Look to improve quality of 9v9 pitches to rectify overplay.
Club
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
Timescales
S-M
L
M
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
Protect,
Enhance
Club
(High priority)
S
Protect,
Enhance,
Club
(High priority)
M
Protect
S
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
Club,
Council
M
L
L
Club,
Council
Club
(High priority)
S
S
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
38
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
ID
Site
Sport
Management
38
Old Deer Park
Cricket
Council
Football
Rugby
39
Old Deer Park
Partnership
Tennis
Cricket
Club
Rugby
44
Palewell Common
Cricket
Council
Football
45
Richmond Athletic
Ground
46
Richmond Park
48
Rocks Lane Multi
Sports Centre
Sheen Common
49
Tennis
Rugby
Shene Sports &
Fitness Centre
57
St Richards with St
Andrews Primary
School
August 2015
Recommended actions
Poor quality ground with turf and non-turf wickets.
Usage is only identified on non-turf wicket. Spare
capacity noted but quality of pitch & changing
facilities considered to be deterring clubs
Two good quality adult pitches with spare capacity
identified.
Consists of two standard quality senior pitches.
Changing facilities also viewed as poor.
Site quality needs to be to an improved standard.
Key site for tennis in area. Total of 11 courts.
Richmond CC has a lease until 2016. Club in
process of extending agreement. Site also used
by Middlesex County Cricket.
Two standard quality senior pitches and a midi.
Home of London Welsh RFC. Senior pitches
overplayed.
Good quality ground used as second site by
Sheen Park CC. Club is looking to establish a
second pitch on site.
Site contains 3x adult, 1x 9v9 and 4x 7v7 pitches.
Good quality. Rented by Sheen Lions FC.
Four courts on site; one is poor condition.
6x standard quality senior pitches plus a dedicated
floodlit training pitch. Overplay occurs; training
pitch is used particularly heavily. Demand for
further floodlit training facility is likely to grow.
Clubs have ambitions to improve ancillary facilities
Rugby
Royal Parks
AGP
Private
Cricket
Council
Football
50
Current status
Four standard quality pitches used by junior and
mini teams from Rosslyn Park RFC.
3x 5v5 3G floodlit AGP
Home ground of Sheen Park CC. At capacity.
Changing facilities on site viewed as poor.
Standard adult pitch not in use but available.
Partners
Club,
Council
Level/ priority
(if high)
Strategic
(High priority)
Timescales
Objective
S
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
Clubs at site with overplay should be encouraged to
relocate to pitches. May also help meet any increases in
curriculum use from Richmond Bridge Primary School.
S
Opportunities to improve the quality of changing facilities
on site should be explored. This may increase clubs
willingness to use the site.
Site quality should be maintained to a good standard.
Long term lease agreement for club should be supported;
this may help in securing future funding opportunities.
M
Relocating training off match pitches will help reduce
overplay.
Explore opportunities to improve quality of pitches to
address overplay.
Site quality should be maintained.
Creation of second pitch on site should be encouraged.
Explore option of club securing a long term lease
agreement for site.
Spare capacity should be retained to accommodate future
demand from population growth.
Site quality should be maintained to a good standard.
Opportunities to improve pitch quality should be explored
as this will help to address overplay.
Need for additional floodlit training provision is needed
and could also help alleviate pressure on match pitches.
Any plans should be in context of capacity of pitches.
Site quality should be maintained.
Club
Club
L
S
Club,
RFU
Club
S
Council
Club
Club,
Council
S
M
Protect
M
Protect,
Enhance
L
Key Centre
(High priority)
Royal
Parks
Private
Work with club about exploring options of improving
carrying capacity and changing facilities.
Explore option of relocating some matches from North
Sheen Rec (ID 36) in order to address issues of overplay.
Quality should look to be improved if possible.
Club,
Council
Club,
Council
M
S
M
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
Club
L
Protect
Club
L
Protect
Club
(High priority)
M
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
S
AGP
Council
Full sized sand dressed AGP with floodlights.
Used by Barnes HC.
Monitor need to upgrade surface in 2-3 years based on
annual investigations.
Council
Key Centre
M
S
Football
School
Site has an unused poor quality mini 7v7 pitch.
Retain site as reserve. May help to meet future demand if
quality can be improved.
Council
Reserve
L
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
Protect,
Enhance
M
Council
Club,
Council,
RFU
No action required.
Protect
Protect,
Enhance
Protect
39
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
ID
Site
Sport
Management
72
Ham Common
Cricket
Council
73
Richmond Green
Cricket
Council
76
Suffolk Recreation
Ground
Cricket
Council
Current status
Recommended actions
Partners
Leased by Ham & Petersham CC. Club has
demand for non-turf practice wicket.
Establishing a long term lease agreement may assist club
in exploring options of developing dedicated training
wicket.
Site may also help meet any increases in curriculum use
from Russell and Meadlands Primary Schools.
Quality of site should be retained. Spare capacity could
help meet any future changes in demand for cricket.
Retain site as reserve.
Explore potential for site to be marked out with adult pitch
and/or 7v7 to meet demand in future.
Club,
Council,
ECB
Standard quality turf wicket site used by single
team clubs.
Non-turf artificial wicket used by Barnes CC. Club
interested in long term lease for site.
Level/ priority
(if high)
Club
Timescales
Objective
M
Protect,
Enhance
L
Council
Club/ Reserve
L
Protect
Council
Reserve
S
Protect,
Provide
Barn Elms PF 2
Cricket
Trust
Standard quality ground with non-turf and turf
wickets. Used by Barnes CC, schools and LMS.
Ensure site quality is maintained.
82
Barn Elms PF (nonturf)
Cricket
Trust
Ensure site quality is maintained.
L
Protect
83
Barn Elms PF 4
(non-turf)
Cricket
Trust
Good quality standalone non-turf wicket. Limited
adult use due to boundary size but accommodates
school usage. Spare capacity noted.
A standalone non-turf wicket of good quality.
Accommodates LMS and school use. Spare
capacity noted.
Ensure site quality is maintained. Should be able to
accommodate any future expansion of LMS.
M
Protect,
Provide
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
Strategic
(High priority)
Protect
81
August 2015
Trust
L
L
40
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
TWICKENHAM AREA
Football
Summary of pitches required to meet current and future demand
Analysis area
Actual
spare
10
capacity
Demand (match equivalent sessions)
Overplay
Latent
Current
Future
Total
demand
total
demand
-9
0.5
0.5
-9
+1
1
0
Adult pitches
Youth pitches 11v11
10
-
Youth pitches 9v9
3
1
-
-2
1.5
-0.5
Mini pitches 7v7
1
-
1
0
0.5
+0.5
Mini pitches 5v5
2
-
-
-2
-
-2
 Current and future demand is being met on all pitch types with the exception of youth
11v11 and mini 7v7 pitches.
 There is actual spare capacity on most other forms of provision in particular adult
pitches. This should be retained in order to accommodate current overplay and future
demand. May also help meet shortfalls across LBRuT but particularly future demand
from other analysis areas such as Richmond.
 Prominent clubs in the analysis area such as Twickenham Tigers FC express
demand for additional training provision.
 Poor quality changing facilities at Heathfield Recreation Ground deter site usage.
Scenario – Exclusion of Orleans Park School and Richmond upon Thames College:
To reflect any uncertainty over availability and genuine spare capacity scenario does not
include the pitches located at Orleans Park School (two adult pitches not in use) or single
adult pitch at Richmond upon Thames College (accounts for 2.5 match equivalent
sessions of which 0.5 was attributed to overplay. Play taking place at site has been
included in the displaced column.
Analysis area
Adult pitches
Youth pitches 11v11
Actual
Demand (match equivalent sessions)
spare
Overplay
Displaced
Latent Current Future Total
11
capacity
demand
total
demand
-3
6
2.5
0.5
-3
+1
1
0
Youth pitches 9v9
3
1
-
-
-2
1.5
-0.5
Mini pitches 7v7
1
-
-
1
0
0.5
+0.5
Mini pitches 5v5
2
-
-
-
-2
-
-2
 Current and future demand can still be met on all pitch types with the exception of
youth 11v11 and mini 7v7 pitches.
 However, spare capacity should still be retained, as strategic reserve, in order to
accommodate future demand as well as shortfalls from across LBRuT; particularly
from Richmond analysis area. Therefore both scenario sites should be retained.
10
11
In match equivalent sessions
In match equivalent sessions
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
41
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Cricket
Actual spare
capacity (pitches)
-
Overplay
-
Demand (pitches)
Latent demand Future demand
-
Total
-
 No spare capacity or overplay is identified for cricket in Twickenham Analysis Area.
 Current provision should be retained to its existing quality as a minimum.
 Twickenham CC highlights desire for better dedicated training facilities.
Rugby union
Actual spare
12
capacity
Overplay
12
-
Demand (match equivalent sessions)
Current
Latent
Future
demand
demand
demand
-12
Total
-12
 No current overplay or expressed latent and future demand is identified.
 Spare capacity should be retained in order to meet shortfalls in the Richmond
Analysis Area and/or as strategic reserve (including for other sports such as football).
However, scenario testing shows that due to spare capacity at Richmond upon
Thames College, one rugby pitch at the site could be converted to a rugby compliant
AGP to better meet training demand.
Scenario – Exclusion of Orleans Park School and Richmond upon Thames College:
Scenario does not include the pitches located at Orleans Park School (three pitches) and
Richmond upon Thames College (one pitch) to reflect any uncertainty over availability
and genuine spare capacity for rugby.
Actual spare
capacity
Overplay
4
-
Demand (match equivalent sessions)
Current
Latent
Future
demand
demand
demand
-4
-
Total
-4
 Highlights that some spare capacity is still available in a worst case scenario.
 Whilst scenario testing demonstrates some spare capacity within the Twickenham
area, it is recommended that provision at Orleans Park School and Richmond upon
Thames College are retained as strategic reserve for the whole of the LBRuT.
 There is also a need to retain spare capacity at sites with a view to the impact of the
Rugby World Cup 2015.
 Opportunity for the rugby pitch at Richmond upon Thames College to be replaced by
a rugby compliant AGP (as part of College redevelopment and expansion). Football
pitch on site should be retained. Replacement of rugby pitch (currently not used by
clubs) with a rugby compliant AGP could importantly help to meet some demand for
additional training facilities across LBRuT.
12
In match equivalent sessions
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
42
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Hockey
 No hockey clubs based in analysis area; in addition the two AGPs in the area not
being ideally suitable for hockey use.
 Two AGPs; Orleans Park School is narrow and not suitable for competitive hockey
use and Whitton Sports & Fitness Centre has 3G surface.
3G pitches
 Based on the FA model. There is a need for one full size 3G pitches in the Area. This
is being met by Whitton Sports & Fitness Centre.
 Opportunity to provide further AGP provision at Richmond upon Thames College and
St Richard Reynolds Catholic College; both should be explored to meet wider LBRuT
need and demand particularly for training purposes.
Tennis
 There are six courts across two sites assessed as poor quality; Moormead
Recreation Ground and Whitton Park Sports Association.
 Moormead Recreation Ground contains four poor quality courts. Site is council
owned and highlighted as a focus site for Will to Win (WtW).
Bowls
 No issues to address regarding bowls in Twickenham Analysis Area.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
43
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
ID
Site
24
Heathfield
Recreation Ground
29
32
Kneller Gardens
Marble Hill Park
Sport
Management
Football
Council
Football
Tennis
Cricket
Council
English
Heritage
Football
Moormead
Recreation Ground
43
Orleans Park
School
St Marys University
62
The Royal Military
School of Music
Twickenham
Cricket Club
64
August 2015
Partners
Consider options for improving site quality, including
changing facilities. If quality cannot be improved retain as
reserve site.
Long term exploration of a long term lease for a club should
be given.
Pitch quality should look to be improved.
Explore option of club securing a long term lease
agreement for site. Could help club in securing funding for
improving pitch quality.
Explore opportunities for court improvement.
Quality should be maintained. Site may help to meet any
growth in demand expressed by LMS.
Council
Ensure site quality is maintained.
Explore option of converting adult pitch to Youth 11v11 to
meet demand.
Retain site and quality should be maintained.
Opportunities to improve changing facilities may need to be
explored if demand for football or rugby grows.
Club,
Council
Council
Council,
ECB,
English
Heritage
Council,
English
Heritage
Council
Council
AGP
Council
Limited community use as facility is narrow with
no floodlights.
Site has one non-turf wicket; no community use.
Two good quality adult pitches not currently in use
due to recent management change.
Three standard quality pitches; two of which hare
over marked with football.
Adult pitch of standard quality. Overplayed by 0.5
match equivalents.
Site is due to undergo major redevelopment and
expansion with addition of a school. Creation of
an AGP has been suggested.
Standard senior pitch with no community use.
Site should be retained as reserve.
Narrow width of facility means floodlighting is not a priority.
Work with school to explore opportunities to establish
community use in the future. Could specifically help to meet
future demand for Youth 11v11 pitches from Richmond
Analysis Area and any increases in curriculum use from St
Marys CoE Primary School.
Council
Explore ways to increase pitch quality and therefore
capacity of football pitch to resolve overplay.
Expansion of educational element of site will create more
demand and use of existing provision. In addition, along
with scenario testing, there is therefore a need to retain
provision. Furthermore, opportunities to replace rugby pitch
with a floodlit rugby compliant AGP on site should be
considered. Would help meet curriculum demand (including
nearby primary schools) as well as wider community use.
Site quality should be maintained.
Council
Rugby
University
Football
School
Cricket
Club
Good quality senior pitch including training area.
Used by University and Harlequins ARFC.
Standard quality adult pitch. Minimal spare
capacity.
Good quality. Twickenham CC rent as home
ground from LBRuT. Club has desire for
permanent training net facilities.
Site quality should be maintained.
Explore option of club securing a long term lease
agreement for site. Could help club in securing funding for
creation of dedicated training provision.
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
Objective
S
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
potential Club
S
Protect,
Enhance
Key Centre
(High priority)
M
L
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
S
M-L
S
Retain site as reserve in order to meet future demand.
Explore opportunities for court improvement. Consider long
term lease agreement with operator.
College
Timescales
M
Mini 7v7 pitch not currently used but available.
Four poor quality courts located on site.
Football
Level/ priority
(if high)
Reserve
M-L
Council
Rugby
55
Contains four average quality courts.
Standard quality non-turf wicket. Used by LMS.
Recommended actions
Football
Tennis
Rugby
Richmond upon
Thames College
Standard quality 9v9. Rented by Teddington
Tigers FC. Overplayed by one match equivalent.
Two standard quality senior pitches. Spare
capacity noted. Changing facilities poor.
Cricket
Football
47
Not currently in use. Single adult pitch viewed as
poor quality due to informal use.
Changing facilities on site also poor.
Four adult pitches and a Youth 9v9 of standard
quality. Spare capacity highlighted.
Rugby
34
Current status
Reserve
(High priority)
Education/
Reserve
L
L
S-M
S
L
Education
S
Protect
Enhance
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
M
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
Council,
University
Education
L
Protect
Council,
School
Club,
Council
Education
L
Protect
Club
M
Protect,
Enhance
44
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
ID
Site
66
Whitton Sports &
Fitness Centre
70
81
82
90
New
Whitton Park
Sports Association
Cambridge
Gardens
York House
Gardens
Chase Bridge
Primary School
St Richard
Reynolds Catholic
College
August 2015
Sport
Management
AGP
Football
Council
Cricket
Trust
Current status
Recommended actions
Full size floodlit 3G AGP. Well used; minimal
spare usage available.
Adult pitch of good quality. Minimal spare
capacity identified.
Home of Chiswick & Whitton CC. Standard
quality.
Football
Youth 9v9 and two mini pitches on site.
Rugby
Union
Tennis
Council
Two senior pitches of standard quality; over
marked with football. Spare capacity identified.
Four courts on site of average condition.
Tennis
Council
Football
AGP
Partners
Ensure site quality is maintained.
Council
Site quality should be maintained.
Club, Trust
Level/ priority
(if high)
Key Centre
(High priority)
Timescales
Objective
L
Protect
Club
L
Protect
Provision should be retained in order to meet any future
changes in demand.
Site quality should be maintained.
L
L
Quality should look to be maintained to a good standard.
Council
-
L
Four courts on site of average condition.
Quality should look to be maintained to a good standard.
Council
-
L
Council
Youth 9v9 pitch of poor quality with no community
use but is available.
Council
Education
L
School
Relatively new school with new Years being
introduced annually. Will create more demand and
school has suggested future creation of an AGP.
Retain site as reserve in order to meet any future demand.
Work with school to establish community use if required
whilst exploring ways of improving quality.
Consideration to the requirement of a floodlit AGP on site is
needed. Would help meet curriculum need as well as
growing demand for additional training facilities across
LBRuT (particularly for rugby).
Council,
FA, RFU
School
Education
M-L
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
Protect,
Enhance,
Protect,
Enhance,
Protect,
Provide
Protect,
Enhance,
Provide
45
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
PART 8: CONCLUSION
Overall the current stock of playing pitch and ancillary facility provision in the LBRuT is to a
good standard. In most instances there is a sufficient amount of provision to an acceptable
level of quality in order to meet current demand and, at the time of writing, predicted future
demand.
However, some examples and actions are required to help address certain trends and site
specific issues. One of the common themes across all sports is the need for greater access
to floodlit training facilities. Training is a key factor for many clubs. A lack of access to such
provision can impact on the development and practices of clubs as well as the participation
of individuals to sports.
Within the area there are also a number of sites currently underused which offer potential
opportunities for greater usage if, for example, concerns regarding pitch or ancillary facility
quality can be addressed. Such sites can also help to address any instances of overplay at
other sites identified in the borough as well as meeting instances of future demand.
Cases of spare capacity are needed to be retained in order, for example, to meet future
demand and demand from other analysis areas. Therefore the key message from this
strategy and action plan is for current levels of pitch provision (grass and artificial) to be
protected, maintained and enhanced to ensure a sufficient level of pitch and ancillary
facilities both in terms of quality, capacity and accessibility.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
46
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
PART 9: DELIVER THE STRATEGY AND KEEP IT ROBUST AND UP TO DATE
Delivery
The Playing Pitch Strategy seeks to provide guidance for maintenance/management
decisions and investment made across the borough. By addressing the issues identified in
the Assessment Report and using the strategic framework presented in this Strategy, the
current and future sporting and recreational needs of th borough can be satisfied. The
Strategy identifies where there is a deficiency in provision and identifies how best to resolve
this in the future.
It is important that this document is used in a practical manner, is engaged with partners and
encourages partnerships to be developed, to ensure that outdoor sports facilities are
regarded as a vital aspect of community life and which contribute to the achievement of
Council priorities.
The production of this Strategy should be regarded as the beginning of the process. The
success of this Strategy and the benefits that are gained are dependent upon regular
engagement between all partners involved and the adoption of a strategic approach.
Members of the steering group should take the lead to ensure the PPS is used and applied
appropriately within their area of work and influence. The role of the steering group should
not end with the completion of the PPS document. In addition to this new partnerships
should be formed. It would be beneficial to approach education colleagues and look to set up
dialogue for delivery of key education actions such as access to schools and universities.
To help ensure the PPS is well used it should be regarded as the key document within the
study area guiding the improvement and protection of playing pitch provision. It needs to be
the document people regularly turn to for information on how the current demand is met and
what actions are required to improve the situation and meet future demand. In order for this
to be achieved the steering group need to have a clear understanding of how the PPS can
be applied and therefore delivered. Key uses for the PPS include evidence for supporting
funding bids, guidance to inform planning decisions and planning applications and decision
making for capital investment.
The process of developing the PPS will hopefully have already resulted in a number of
benefits that will help with its application and delivery. These may include enhanced
partnership working across different agendas and organisations, pooling of resources along
with strengthening relationships and understanding between different stakeholders and
between members of the steering group and the sporting community. The drivers behind the
PPS and the work to develop the recommendations and action plan will have also
highlighted, and helped the steering group to understand, the key areas to which it can be
applied and how it can be delivered.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
47
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Monitoring and updating
It is important that there is regular annual monitoring and review against the actions
identified in the Strategy. This monitoring should be led by the local authority and supported
by all members of, and reported back to, the steering group. Understanding and learning
lessons from how the PPS has been applied should also form a key component of
monitoring its delivery. This should form an on-going role of the steering group. It is possible
that in the interim between annual reviews the steering group could operate as a ‘virtual’
group; prepared to comment on suggestions and updates electronically when relevant.
It is agreed that the Council will be responsible for keeping the database and background
supply and demand information up to date in order that area by area action plans can also
be updated. Partnership working is essential in enabling the Council to keep the supply and
demand data up to date. This should be carried out in consultation with the NGBs,
particularly around affiliation time when information is updated.
As a guide, if no review and subsequent update has been carried out within three years of
the PPS being signed off by the steering group, then Sport England and the NGBs would
consider the PPS and the information on which it is based to be out of date.
The nature of the supply and in particular the demand for playing pitches is likely to have
changed over the three years. Therefore, without any form of review and update within this
time period it would be difficult to make the case that the supply and demand information
and assessment work is sufficiently robust.
Ideally the PPS could be reviewed on an annual basis from the date it is formally signed off
by the steering group. This will help to maintain the momentum and commitment that has
been built up when developing the PPS. Taking into account the time to develop the PPS
this should also help to ensure that the original supply and demand information is no more
than two years old without being reviewed.
An annual review should not be regarded as a particularly resource intensive task. However,
it should highlight:
 How the delivery of the recommendations and action plan has progressed and any
changes required to the priority afforded to each action (e.g. the priority of some may
increase following the delivery of others)
 How the PPS has been applied and the lessons learnt
 Any changes to particularly important sites and/or clubs in the area (e.g. the most used
or high quality sites for a particular sport) and other supply and demand information,
what this may mean for the overall assessment work and the key findings and issues
 Any development of a specific sport or particular format of a sport
 Any new or emerging issues and opportunities.
Once the PPS is complete the role of the steering group should evolve so that it:
 Acts as a focal point for promoting the value and importance of the PPS and playing
pitch provision in the area
 Monitors, evaluates and reviews progress with the delivery of the recommendations and
action plan
 Shares lessons learnt from how the PPS has been used and how it has been applied to
a variety of circumstances
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
48
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
 Ensures the PPS is used effectively to input into any new opportunities to secure
improved provision and influence relevant programmes and initiatives
 Maintains links between all relevant parties with an interest in playing pitch provision in
the area;
 Reviews the need to update the PPS along with the supply and demand information and
assessment work on which it is based. Further to review the group should either:
 Provide a short annual progress and update paper;
 Provide a partial review focussing on particular sport, pitch type and/or sub area; or
 Lead a full review and update of the PPS document (including the supply and
demand information and assessment details).
Alongside regular steering group meetings a good way to keep the strategy up to date and
maintain relationships may be to hold annual sport specific meetings with the pitch sport
NGBs and other relevant parties. These meetings could look to update the key supply and
demand information, if necessary amend the assessment work, track progress with
implementing the recommendations and action plan and highlight any new issues and
opportunities.
These meetings could be timed to fit with the annual affiliation process undertaken by the
NGBs which would help to capture any changes in the number and nature of sports clubs in
the area. Other information that is already collected on a regular basis such as pitch booking
records for local authority and other sites could be fed into these meetings. The NGBs will
also be able to indicate any further performance quality assessments that have been
undertaken within the study area. Discussion with the league secretaries may also indicate
annual league meetings which it may be useful to attend to pick up any specific issues
and/or enable a review of the relevant club details to be undertaken.
The steering group should regularly review and refresh area by area plans taking account of
any improvements in pitch quality (and hence increases in pitch capacity) and also any new
negotiations for community use of education sites in the future.
It is important that the Council maintains the data contained with the accompanying Playing
Pitch Database. This will enable it to refresh and update area by area plans on a regular
basis. The accompanying databases are intended to be refreshed on a season by season
basis and it is important that there is cross-departmental working, including for example,
grounds maintenance and sports development departments, to ensure that this is achieved
and that results are used to inform subsequent annual sports facility development plans.
Results should be shared with partners via a consultative mechanism.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
49
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Checklist
To help ensure the PPS is delivered and is kept robust and up to date, the steering group
can refer to the new methodology Stage E Checklist: Deliver the strategy and keep it robust
and up to date:
http://www.sportengland.org/facilities-planning/planning-for-sport/planning-tools-andguidance/playing-pitch-strategy-guidance/
Tick
Stage E: Deliver the strategy and keep it robust and up to date
Yes
Requires
Attention
Step 9: Apply & deliver the strategy
1.
Are steering group members clear on how the PPS can be applied across a
range of relevant areas?
2.
Is each member of the steering group committed to taking the lead to help
ensure the PPS is used and applied appropriately within their area of work
and influence?
3.
Has a process been put in place to ensure regular monitoring of how the
recommendations and action plan are being delivered and the PPS is being
applied?
Step 10: Keep the strategy robust & up to date
1.
Has a process been put in place to ensure the PPS is kept robust and up to
date?
2.
Does the process involve an annual update of the PPS?
3.
Is the steering group to be maintained and is it clear of its on-going role?
4.
Is regular liaison with the NGBs and other parties planned?
5.
Has all the supply and demand information been collated and presented in
a format (i.e. single document that can be filtered accordingly) that will
help people to review it and highlight any changes?
6.
Have any changes made to the Active Places Power data been fed back to
Sport England?
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
50
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
APPENDIX ONE: SITE LOCATIONS
Football
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
51
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Cricket
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
52
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Rugby
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
53
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
AGPs
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
54
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Tennis
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
55
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Bowls
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
56
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
APPENDIX TWO: STRATEGIC CONTEXT
The recommendations within this Strategy have been developed via the combination of
information gathered during consultation, site visits and analysis. They reflect key areas to
be addressed over its lifetime. However, implementation must be considered in the context
of financial implications and the need for some proposals to also meet planning
considerations.
National context
The provision of high quality and accessible community outdoor sports facilities at a local
level is a key requirement for achieving the targets set out by the Government and Sport
England. It is vital that this strategy is cognisant of and works towards these targets in
addition to local priorities and plans.
Sport England: A Sporting Habit for Life (2012-2017)
In 2017, five years after the Olympic Games, Sport England aspires to transforming sport in
England so that it is a habit for life for more people and a regular choice for the majority.
Launched in January 2012 the strategy sets out how Sport England will invest over one
billion pounds of National Lottery and Exchequer funding during the five year plan period.
The investment will be used to create a lasting community sport legacy by growing sports
participation at the grassroots level following the 2012 London Olympics. The strategy will:






See more people starting and keeping a sporting habit for life
Create more opportunities for young people
Nurture and develop talent
Provide the right facilities in the right places
Support local authorities and unlock local funding
Ensure real opportunities for communities
The vision is for England to be a world leading sporting nation where many more people
choose to play sport. There are five strategic themes including:





Maximise value from current NGB investment
Places, People, Play
Strategic direction and market intelligence
Set criteria and support system for NGB 2013-17 investment
Market development
The aim by 2017 is to ensure that playing sport is a lifelong habit for more people and a
regular choice for the majority. A specific target is to increase the number of 14 to 25 year
olds playing sport. To accomplish these aims the strategy sets out a number of outcomes:
 4,000 secondary schools in England will be offered a community sport club on its site
with a direct link to one or more NGBs, depending on the local clubs in a school’s area.
 County sports partnerships will be given new resources to create effective links locally
between schools and sport in the community.
 All secondary schools that wish to do so, will be supported to open up, or keep open,
their sports facilities for local community use and at least a third of these will receive
additional funding to make this happen.
 At least 150 further educational colleagues will benefit from a full time sports professional
who will act as a College Sport Maker.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
57
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
 Three quarters of university students aged 18-24 will get the chance to take up a new
sport or continue playing a sport they played at school or college.
 A thousand of our most disadvantaged local communities will get a Door Step Club.
 Two thousand young people on the margins of society will be supported by the Dame
Kelly Holmes Legacy Trust into sport and to gain new life skills.
 Building on the success of the Places People Play, a further £100 million will be invested
in facilities for the most popular sports.
 A minimum of 30 sports will have enhanced England Talent Pathways to ensure young
people and others fulfil their potential.
National Planning Policy Framework
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out planning policies for England. It
details how these changes are expected to be applied to the planning system. It also provides
a framework for local people and their councils to produce distinct local and neighbourhood
plans, reflecting the needs and priorities of local communities.
The NPPF states the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of
sustainable development. It identifies that the planning system needs to focus on three themes
of sustainable development: economic, social and environmental. A presumption in favour of
sustainable development is a key aspect for any plan-making and decision-taking processes.
In relation to plan-making the NPPF sets out that Local Plans should meet objectively
assessed needs.
Under paragraph 73 of the NPPF, it is set out that planning policies should be based on
robust and up-to-date assessments of the needs for open space, sports and recreation
facilities and opportunities for new provision. Specific needs and quantitative and qualitative
deficiencies and surpluses in local areas should also be identified. This information should be
used to inform what provision is required in an area.
As a prerequisite paragraph 74 of the NPPF states existing open space, sports and
recreation sites, including playing fields, should not be built on unless:
 An assessment has been undertaken, which has clearly shown that the open space,
buildings or land is surplus to requirements.
 The loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced by equivalent or
better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location.
 The development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the needs for which
clearly outweigh the loss.
In order for planning policies to be ‘sound’ local authorities are required to carry out a robust
assessment of need for open space, sport and recreation facilities.
The FA National Game Strategy (2011 – 2015)
The Football Association’s (FA) National Game Strategy provides a strategic framework that
sets out key priorities, expenditure proposals and targets for the national game (i.e., football)
over a four year period. The main issues facing grassroots football are identified as:




Growth and retention (young and adult players)
Raising standards and behaviour
Better players
Running the game
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
58
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
 Workforce
 Facilities
‘The National Game Strategy’ reinforces the urgent need to provide affordable, new and
improved facilities in schools, clubs and on local authority sites. Over 75% of football is
played on public sector facilities. The leisure budgets of most local authorities have been
reduced over recent years, resulting in decaying facilities that do not serve the community
and act as a disincentive to play football. The loss of playing fields has also been well
documented and adds to the pressure on the remaining facilities to cope with the demand,
especially in inner city and urban areas.
The growth of the commercial sector in developing custom built five-a-side facilities has
changed the overall environment. High quality, modern facilities provided by Powerleague,
Goals and playfootball.net for example, have added new opportunities to participate and
prompted a significant growth in the number of five-a-side teams in recent years.
The FA National Facilities Strategy (2013 – 2015)
The recently launched National Facilities Strategy sets out the FA’s long term vision for
development of facilities to support the National Game. It aims to address and reflect the
facility needs of football within the National Game. The National Game is defined as all nonprofessional football from Steps 1-7 of the National League System down to recreational
football played on open public space. The role of facilities will be crucial in developing the
game in England. One of the biggest issues raised from ‘the Big Grassroots Football
Survey’ by that of 84% respondents, was ‘poor facilities’.
The FA’s vision for the future of facilities in England is to build, protect and enhance
sustainable football facilities to improve the experience of the nation’s favourite game. It
aims to do this by:
 Building - Provide new facilities and pitches in key locations to FA standards in order to
sustain existing participation and support new participation.
 Protecting -Ensure that playing pitches and facilities are protected for the benefit of
current and future participants.
 Enhancing - Invest in existing facilities and pitches, ensuring that participation in the
game is sustained as well as expanded.
The Strategy commits to delivering in excess of £150m (through Football Foundation) into
facility improvements across the National Game in line with identified priorities:






Natural grass pitches improved – target: 100
A network of new AGPs built – target 100
A network of refurbished AGPs – target 150
On selected sites, new and improved changing facilities and toilets
Continue a small grants programme designed to address modest facility needs of clubs
Ongoing support with the purchase and replacement of goalposts
It also commits to:
 Direct other sources of investment into FA facility priorities
 Communicate priorities for investment across the grassroots game on a regular basis
 Work closely with Sport England, the Premier League and other partners to ensure that
investment is co-ordinated and targeted
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
59
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) Champion Counties Strategic Plan 2014 –
2017
The England and Wales Cricket Board unveiled a new strategic plan in 2013 which seeks to
deliver successful England teams at all levels, to produce a vibrant domestic game as well
as increasing participation during the period 2014-17. It builds on the 2005 plan, Building
Partnerships and the subsequent 2009 initiative, Grounds to Play.
The plan will take advantage of local partnerships developed in earlier plans and support
local delivery of priorities through the County network. It targets operational excellence to
make maximum use of scarce resources and facilities during a time of economic austerity.
Among the targets set under the four pillars of Effective Governance, Vibrant Domestic
Game, Enthusing Participation and Successful England teams, which are relevant to the
playing pitch strategy, are:
 An increase in participation as measured by Sport England’s Active People Survey from
183,400 to 197,500
 Expand the number of clubs participating in NatWest CricketForce from 2,000 to 2,200
 Increase the number of cricket’s volunteers to 80,000 by 2017
 Expand the number of participants in women’s and disabilities cricket by 10% by 2017
 To increase the number of TwelfthMan members from 220,000 to 250,000 by 2017
 Complete an approved Community Engagement programme with all 18 First Class
Counties and MCC
 For each £1 provided in facility grants through the ‘Sport England Whole Sport Plan
Grant Programme’ ensure a multiplier of three with other funding partners
 Provide a fund of £8.1m of capital investment to enhance floodlights, sightscreens,
replay screens, power sub-stations and broadcasting facilities at First Class County
venues
 Provide an interest-free loan fund to community clubs of £10 million
 Qualify and engage 50 Level 4 coaches to support the development of professional
cricketers
 Expand the number of coaches who have received teacher level 1, 2 or 3 qualifications
to 50,000
 Provide a fund of £2 million for community clubs to combat the impact of climate change
 Introduce a youth T20 competition engaging 500 teams by 2017
The following actions executed during the duration of Building Partnerships provide a strong
base for this plan. Actions include:
 Streamlining ECB governance
 Building participation by more than 20% per annum (as measured through ECB focus
clubs and County Cricket Boards)
 Developing women’s cricket
 Attracting volunteers
 Expanding cricket’s spectator base
 Introducing grants and loans to clubs
 Developing disabilities cricket
This plan therefore influences ‘Grounds to Play’ in the areas of facilities and coaches, which
is where ECB investment will be focussed. Partnership funding and support will play a key
role in the delivery of actions and maintaining the strength of the pillars.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
60
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
The Rugby Football Union National Facilities Strategy (2013-2017)
The RFU National Facility Strategy 2013-2017 provides a framework for development of
high-quality, well-managed facilities that will help to strengthen member clubs and grow the
game in communities around them. In conjunction with partners, this strategy will assist and
support clubs and other organisations, so that they can continue to provide quality
opportunities for all sections of the community to enjoy the game. It sets out the broad facility
needs of the sport and identifies investment priorities to the game and its key partners. It
identifies that with 1.5 million players there is a continuing need to invest in community club
facilities in order to:
 Create a platform for growth in club rugby participation and membership, especially with
a view to exploiting the opportunities afforded by RWC 2015.
 Ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of rugby clubs, through supporting not only their
playing activity but also their capacity to generate revenue through a diverse range of
activities and partnerships.
In summary the priorities for investment which have met the needs of the game for the
Previous period remain valid:
 Increase the provision of changing rooms and clubhouses that can sustain concurrent
adult and junior male and female activity at clubs
 Improve the quality and quantity of natural turf pitches and floodlighting
 Increase the provision of artificial grass pitches that deliver wider game development
It is also a high priority for the RFU to target investment in the following:
 Upgrade and transform social, community and catering facilities, which can support the
generation of additional revenues
 Facility upgrades, which result in an increase in energy-efficiency, in order to reduce the
running costs of clubs
 Pitch furniture, including rugby posts and pads, pitch side spectator rails and grounds
maintenance equipment
England Hockey (EH) - A Nation Where Hockey Matters (2013-2017)
EH have a clear vision, a powerful philosophy and five core objectives that all those who
have a role in advancing Hockey can unite behind. With UK Sport and Sport England’s
investment, and growing commercial revenues, EH are ambitious about how they can take
the sport forward in Olympic cycles and beyond.
“The vision is for England to be a ‘Nation Where Hockey Matters’. A nation where hockey is
talked about at dinner tables, playgrounds and public houses, up and down the country. A
nation where the sport is on the back pages of our newspapers, where children dream of
scoring a goal for England’s senior hockey team, and where the performance stirs up
emotion amongst the many, not the few”
England Hockey aspires to deepen the passion of those who play, deliver and follow sport
by providing the best possible environments and the best possible experiences. Whilst
reaching out to new audiences by making the sport more visible, available and relevant and
through the many advocates of hockey.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
61
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Underpinning all this is the infrastructure which makes the sport function. EH understand the
importance of volunteers, coaches, officials, clubs and facilities. The more inspirational
people can be, the more progressive Hockey can be and the more befitting the facilities can
be, the more EH will achieve. The core objectives are as follows:





Grow our Participation
Deliver International Success
Increase our Visibility
Enhance our Infrastructure
Be a strong and respected Governing Body
England Hockey has a Capital Investment Programme (CIP) that is planned to lever £5.6
million investment into hockey facilities over the next four years, underpinned by £2m million
from the National Governing Body. With over 500 pitches due for refurbishment in the next
4-8 years, there will be a large focus placed on these projects through this funding stream.
The current level of pitches available for hockey is believed to be sufficient for the medium
term needs, however in some areas, pitches may not be in the right places in order to
maximize playing opportunities
‘The right pitches in the right places13’
In 2012, EH released its facility guidance which is intended to assist organisations wishing to
build or protect hockey pitches for hockey. It identifies that many existing hockey AGPs are
nearing the end of their useful life as a result of the installation boom of the 90’s. Significant
investment is needed to update the playing stock and protect the sport against inappropriate
surfaces for hockey as a result of the rising popularity of AGPs for a number of sports. EH is
seeking to invest in, and endorse clubs and hockey providers which have a sound
understanding of the following:
 Single System – clubs and providers which have a good understanding of the Single
System and its principles and are appropriately places to support the delivery.
 ClubsFirst accreditation – clubs with the accreditation are recognised as producing a
safe effective and child friendly hockey environment
 Sustainability – hockey providers and clubs will have an approved development plan in
place showing their commitment to developing hockey, retaining members and providing
an insight into longer term goals. They will also need to have secured appropriate tenure.
13
http://englandhockey.co.uk/page.asp?section=1143&sectionTitle=The+Right+Pitches+in+the+Right+
Places
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
62
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
APPENDIX THREE: FUNDING PLAN
Funding opportunities
In order to deliver much of the Action Plan it is recognised that external partner funding may
need to be sought. Although seeking developer contributions and other local funding
schemes could go some way towards meeting deficiencies and/or improving provision, other
potential/match sources of funding should be investigated. Below is a list of funding sources
that are relevant for community improvement projects involving sports facilities.
Awarding body
Big Lottery Fund
http://www.biglotteryfund.org.uk/
Sport England :

Improvement Fund

Sportsmatch

Small Grants

Protecting Playing Fields

Inspired Facilities

Strategic Facilities Fund
http://www.sportengland.org/funding.aspx
http://www.sportengland.org/funding/ourdifferent-funds/strategic-facilities/
Football Foundation
http://www.footballfoundation.org.uk/
Rugby Football Foundation - The Grant
Match Scheme
www.rugbyfootballfoundation.org
EU Life Fund
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/funding/in
tro_en.htm
EH Capital Investment Programme (CIP)
National Hockey Foundation
http://www.thenationalhockeyfoundation.c
om/
Community Tennis Fund
August 2015
Description
Big invests in community groups and to projects that
improve health, education and the environment
Sport England is keen to marry funding with other
organisations that provide financial support to create
and strengthen the best sports projects. Applicants are
encouraged to maximise the levels of other sources of
funding, and projects that secure higher levels of
partnership funding are more likely to be successful.
This trust provides financial help for football at all
levels, from national stadia and FA Premier League
clubs down to grass-roots local development.
The Grant Match Scheme provides easy-to-access
grant funding for playing projects that contribute to the
recruitment and retention of community rugby players.
Grants are available on a ‘match funding’ 50:50 basis
to support a proposed project.
Projects eligible for funding include:
1. Pitch Facilities – Playing surface improvement, pitch
improvement, rugby posts, floodlights.
2. Club House Facilities – Changing rooms, shower
facilities, washroom/lavatory, and measures to
facilitate segregation (e.g. women, juniors).
3. Equipment – Large capital equipment, pitch
maintenance capital equipment (e.g. mowers).
LIFE is the EU’s financial instrument supporting
environmental and nature conservation projects
throughout the EU.
The CIP fund is for the provision of new pitches and resurfacing of old AGPs. It forms part of EH’s 4 year
Whole Sport’s Plan.
The Foundation primarily makes grants to a wide
range of organisations that meet one of our chosen
areas of focus: Young people and hockey. Enabling
the development of hockey at youth or community
level. Smaller Charities.
Made up largely of Exchequer Funding, and will be
allocated to projects that grow community tennis, i.e.
park projects and outreach programmes from clubs
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
63
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Awarding body
Club Facility Fund
August 2015
Description
£3m per annum is available in a Club Facility Fund, £2.25m
loan and £750k grant. £1.5m of this is in Easy Access Loan
Funding. Once completed applications receive a decision
within 4 weeks (NB a completed application is likely to
require planning permission and tendered costs). For this,
membership levels to be retained as a minimum but expect
with most projects, the participation rates will increase..
Clubs can apply for a maximum of £100k but any request
has to be match funded 50/50. £1.5m of the Club Facility
funding is allocated via fund called Growing the Game and
this fund is split £750k grant, £750k loan.
 For this fund the projects that best demonstrate a
robust business plan that will grow participation
will be supported.
 This will be allocated in 2 equal funding rounds,
open for 6 weeks April-mid May and Septembermid October. Decisions will be made in May and
October. At each funding round
 The funding for outdoor projects is capped at
£150k and the applicant must provide a minimum
of 25% partnership funding.
 Decisions will either be approved, declined or
declined but with a suggestion to reapply in the
next round.
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
64
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
APPENDIX FOUR: DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES
A number of Development Management policies are already in place which set out the
protection and provision of open space (including playing pitches) and therefore help with
compliancy with paragraph 73 and 74 of the NPPF.
Spatial Policy CP10 Open Land and Parks as well as Policy DM OS 2, 3 and 8 set out the
precedent for the protection of sites. These reference a number of other land designations
which relate specifically to existing playing pitch provision.
Policy DM OS 2
Metropolitan Open Land
The borough’s Metropolitan Open Land will be protected and retained in predominately
open use. Appropriate uses include public and private open spaces and playing fields,
open recreation and sport, biodiversity including rivers and bodies of water and open
community uses including allotments and cemeteries.
It will be recognised that there may be exceptional cases where appropriate development
such as small scale structures is acceptable, but only if it:
1. Does not harm the character and openness of the metropolitan open land; and
2. Is linked to the functional use of the Metropolitan Open Land or supports outdoor
open space uses; or
3. Is for essential utility infrastructure and facilities, for which it needs to be demonstrated
that no alternative locations are available and that they do not have any adverse impacts
on the character and openness of the metropolitan open land.
Improvement and enhancement of the openness and character of the Metropolitan
Open Land and measures to reduce visual impacts will be encouraged where appropriate.
When considering developments on sites outside Metropolitan Open Land, any possible
visual impacts on the character and openness of the Metropolitan Open Land will be taken
into account.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
65
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
PLAYING PITCH STRATEGY
Policy DM OS 3
Other Open Land of Townscape Importance
Other open areas that are of townscape importance will be protected and enhanced in
open use.
It will be recognised that there may be exceptional cases where appropriate development
is acceptable. The following criteria must be taken into account when assessing
appropriate development:
1. It must be linked to the functional use of the Other Open Land of Townscape
Importance; or
2. It can only be a replacement or minor extension of existing built facilities;
3. In addition to 1. or 2., it does not harm the character and openness of the open land.
Improvement and enhancement of the openness and character of other open land and
measures to open up views into and out of designated other open land will be encouraged
where appropriate.
When considering developments on sites outside designated other open land, any possible
visual impacts on the character and openness of the designated other open land will be
taken into account.
Policy DM OS 8
Sport and Recreation Facilities
Public and private sports grounds including playing fields and recreational areas, courts
and greens as well as private open space in recreational use will be protected and
enhanced. Owners of private facilities will be encouraged to make them available for public
access and use.
August 2015
Strategy: Knight Kavanagh & Page
66