SCRUTINY COMMISSION No.1
DATE
-
1 April 2003
REPORT OF
-
Director
Services
SUBJECT
-
Gloria Way Play Area
STATUS
-
Open
CONTACT OFFICER
-
Derek
Edgerton,
Divisional
Manager, Safer Environment
BACKGROUND DOCUMENT
-
Petition presented to Scrutiny
Commission 1 on 23rd April 2002.
Report
from
Director
of
th
Environmental Services 14 May
2002 in response to petition.
Review received by Commission
on 15th October 2002.
of
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
None at this stage
WARD IMPLICATIONS
Freshney Ward
Environmental
SUMMARY
A consultation exercise showed that there was a split
response on whether the play area at Gloria Way should be
retained. 42.1% of responded wanted the area retained whilst
55.8% wanted it removed.
RECOMMENDATION
There is no overwhelming desire on the estate for the removal
of this facility and members are invited to instruct officers on
what further action they would wish officers to undertake.
1. Background
1.1
Residents in the vicinity of Gloria Way play area presented a petition
calling for its removal claiming that it is no longer used and is attracting
youths who are causing a nuisance (23rd April 2002).
1.2
The Director of Environmental Services presented a comprehensive
report (10th May 2002) in response to the petition recommending “That
the removal of the play area at Gloria Way cannot be supported
without a comprehensive review of the need for and provision of the
recreational facilities within North East Lincolnshire.”
D:\81897265.doc
1.3
It was expected that this review would be one of the items undertaken
within the Indoor and Outdoor Recreation Best Value Review which
was programmed to be carried out from October 2002 to Spring 2003.
1.4
In December 2002, due to capacity problems within the Council, the
Indoor and Outdoor Review was curtailed.
1.5
It was resolved that the request of the petitioners should no longer be
deferred and that a formal consultation process be undertaken with all
households likely to make use of the facilities.
2. Consultation
2.1
On Wednesday 8th January 2003 a consultation leaflet (Appendix 1)
was hand delivered to 515 properties in an area bordered by St
Nicholas Drive in the south, Aylesby Road to the north and including
Candlesby Road and Cormorant Drive. Another 150 were deposited at
both Wybers Wood Schools and the Post Office on St Nicholas Drive
together with posters advertising the exercise.
2.2
The closing date for return was 31st January, however those received
during the first week in February were also considered in the analysis.
2.3
197 returns were received with
 110 (55.8%) wishing the play area be removed
 83 (42.1%) wishing the play area be retained
 4
(2.0%) providing an ambiguous answer
2.4
Analysis of the returns are shown as follows
Appendix 2 - Suggested alternative sites
Appendix 3 - Additional Comments
Appendix 4 - Analysis by address
2.5
In addition to the consultation exercise the comments of the Police
were sought. There response is shown as Appendix 5.
3. Comments on suggested alternative sites
3.1
Appendix 3 lists the sites suggested by respondents as alternatives to
Gloria Way.
3.2
Old Community Centre near shops – St Nicholas Drive
This was suggested by 24 respondents.
The site would be dangerous in that it is on a busy road adjacent to the
entrance to the car park for the shops and pub. Additionally as it is also
within close proximity to housing the problem would only be displaced.
It has a positive benefit in that parents with children could the park with
visits to the shop or from school.
D:\81897265.doc
3.3
Freshney Parkway
This was suggested by 14 respondents.
It is too distant from the estate for young ones. River Freshney running
through the wood is a hazard. It is a nature reserve.
3.4
Wybers Wood school playing field, suggested by 7 respondents.
This would be an ideal alternative however the school are jealous of
their facilities and may not wish to lose any land or open it up to public
access. Additionally the area is also bordered by houses.
3.5
The Willows Estate, suggested by 2 respondents.
Willows Estate is separated from Wybers Wood by the Great Coates
Road and should not be considered a realistic alternative.
3.6
Mayfair Drive, suggested by 1 respondent.
This borders Great Coates Road which is unsafe.
3.7
Gloria Way was chosen at the time the site was designed. It is still the
ideal site. Although other possible sites have been identified they either
have the same environment as Gloria Way and would lead to the same
complaints or they are inherently dangerous to young children.
3.8
The cost of relocating the play area has been estimated in excess of
£20,000.
4. Monitoring
4.1
Since the petition has been received Grounds Maintenance have been
visiting the site daily to inspect and remove litter etc. They have also
responded to calls from members of the public.
4.2
They report that residents’ complaints regarding excessive litter have
been proved unfounded. As an example following a recent call
informing them of discarded litter, cans and bottles the attendant who
visited found 1 can, 1 bottle, 2 empty packets of crisps. A similar call
complaining about excessive glass over the playing area resulted in the
attendant recovering two small pieces of glass.
4.3
Officers, who are responsible for the maintenance of the play areas
throughout the Authority, find that the level of vandalism and abuse at
this site is no greater than similar areas across the Borough.
4.4
Complaints regarding drug and alcohol abuse have resulted in
attendance by officers and the Police. No evidence of drug abuse has
yet been found.
4.3
The Police confirm they also receive a large number of complaints from
the residents concerning anti-social behaviour of teenagers and
confirm that this is alcohol related and not drug taking.
D:\81897265.doc
5. Planning Considerations
5.1
The planning issues that need to be considered before removing the
play area were given in detail in a report to Scrutiny Commission 1 on
14th May 2002.
5.2
The key considerations from that report were
 Condition 6 of the planning consent for the Estate required the
developer to provide an area of “public open space” together with
an equipped play area
 The land is licensed to the Council for the stated use with the
Council being responsible for it’s upkeep.
 Planning Policy Guidance (PP17) states
“it is part of the planning authorities’ responsibilities to take full
account in their development control decisions of the community’s
need for recreational space, to have regard to current levels of
provision and deficiencies, and to resist pressures for the
development of open space which conflict with the wider public
interest.”
 The land was always identified as a play area in the development
brief and plans originally considered for this estate. The estate was
planned and laid out with the provision of the play area being an
integral part of it.
 Policies in both the adopted Great Grimsby Local Plan and the 2 nd
Deposit Draft of the North East Lincolnshire Local Plan seek to
protect existing play areas and indeed reduce the current
deficiencies within the Borough.
 It has been suggested that six bungalows could be accommodated
on the site. Whilst no detailed survey has been carried out it is not
considered that such a density on this site given the character of the
surrounding area would be either achievable or acceptable. Full
consideration of the acceptability of new residential properties on
this site could only occur if a plan was submitted as consideration
would have to be given to the affect on amenity of surrounding
residents.
6. Conclusion
6.1
The consultation exercise demonstrated that there was a need for a
play area within this estate and that a significant minority (42%)
considered the facility should be retained.
6.2
Residents adjacent to the area are suffering from antisocial behaviour
from youths gathering at the play area.
6.3
It is clear from Appendix 5 that residents from Gloria Way are almost
unanimous in wanting the play area removed (20 for removal 1 for
retention). Elsewhere the views are not so polarised (90 for removal 82
for retention).
D:\81897265.doc
6.4
Alternative sites within the estate would probably attract the same level
of opposition or be less safe.
7. Recommendations
7.1
There is no overwhelming desire on the estate for the removal of this
facility and members are invited to instruct officers on what further
action they would wish officers to undertake.
R J Oxby
Director of Environmental Services
D:\81897265.doc
Appendix 1 Consultation Leaflet
Gloria Way – Play Area
The play area in Gloria Way was installed in 1991 as a requirement of the
planning consent for the development of the adjacent residential
properties. It is designed to cater for 4 to 10 year olds in an area that is
“supervised” by local residents and passers by. The estate was
planned and laid out with the provision of the play area being an integral
part of it.
The Council received a petition earlier this year from residents neighbouring
the play area calling for its removal. They claimed it attracted youths resulting
in anti-social activities and creating a nuisance.
Officers of the Council prepared a report on the situation setting out the
situation of the play area in the context of planning consideration and national
guidelines on the provision of play areas. Following consideration of the
issues the Council’s Scrutiny Commission 1 has instructed that a consultation
exercise be carried out with all the residents of the estate to determine the
current need for the play area.
I would be grateful, therefore, if you would fill in the Freepost reply at the
bottom of this sheet and return it to me by 31 December 2002.
Ray Oxby
Director of Environmental Services
Name ___________________________________
Address ___________________________________
The play area at Gloria Way should be retained
The play area at Gloria Way should be removed
An alternative site for the play area should be
_____________________________
Comments:
D:\81897265.doc
Appendix 2 Suggested alternative
Albatross Drive
Away from a residential area that could be locked and unlocked
Away from local residents
Build on it
Definitely not between Oakwood Drive
Freshney Parkway
Is there one?
It won’t make any difference
No other alternative? /None/Not known/Unsure
Not needed
Not required in area – due to vandalism
Nowhere, as nobody uses it anyway
Nowhere as the same problem will happen again and again
Old Community Centre near shops
Opposite Mayfair Drive on green
Peoples Park
Wherever you build a site it will be abused, waste of time
Willows Estate
Wybers Wood
Wybers Wood school playing fields
You will only move the problem elsewhere
TOTAL
D:\81897265.doc
1
2
1
1
1
14
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
24
1
1
1
2
1
7
1
68
Appendix 3 Additional Comments


















It is not a question of ‘claiming’ it attracts youths, they are there 20-30 at a
time – ask the police- they are there too!
Could something be done to the design of the play ground to prevent the
“teens” spoiling it for the children e.g. broken bottles, e.g. locked up at
night?
I feel that removing the play area will not resolve the problem, only put it at
someone else’s doorstep. The drink and drugs related problem with these
children/youths should be addressed by other means.
Although in theory this kind of play area is good, it does inevitably
encourage older youths to use it as a gathering ground which can also
involve alcohol, bad behaviour and even drugs.
Youths already hang out at the shops, so feel that play area could be
moved there.
We do take our 3 year-old to play there occasionally, but we can see what
problems the neighbouring houses have with the youths. So therefore we
will support its removal. But would the youths still congregate there on an
empty space?
My grandchildren have that play area. Their ages are 1 and 3. Where else
is there a treat nearby that does not cost anything? Council tax excluded.
I take my grandchildren there on nice days. It is convenient. Removing it
will not remove the youth problem at night.
Youths causing problems in this area have always been a problem. The
answer is not to deprive the youngsters of somewhere to play in safety,
but to police the area more diligently with a view to dispersing these
gangs.
Play area should be locked up on a evening and cleaned up, i.e. glass and
litter.
A youth club should be found to stop youths making a nuisance of
themselves here and other areas on the estate
This problem will not be alleviated by only removing the equipment and relandscaping. Gloria Way is not a suitable site for a play area and the
space should be developed for residential use.
The park was to cater for 4 – 8 year olds.
Summer and winter, youths come from all over town. They make such a
noise on their way past, throwing cans and bottles as they go. When you
take young children you are intimidated by their language and behaviour.
I suggest that to build on it because it is the only way to keep youths off it.
I use the path through the play area practically every day, but have not
had the confidence to face the barrage of insults and foul language after
dark-my age is 74.
What is the point of having a play area for 4-12 year olds when they
cannot use it because of broken glass etc?
If there is a problem regarding youths causing the outline problems, then
deal with the problem and not take the easy fix of removing what is a well
used play area.
D:\81897265.doc
Appendix 3 (cont.)




















Wherever it is put the teenagers will spoil it. Find somewhere for them.
It is nice to take the grandchildren for a swing. But the area is always
messy. Maybe it should be removed and have a nicer area built on
Freshney Walkway and closed after 6 p.m.
Where I live is not really affected by the play area, so I cannot really
comment.
I regularly take my 6 year-old daughter to the play area. Most of the time,
the children there are older than 12 years. Also the play area is always
dirty, with rubbish all over. It is still useful though.
If it cannot be removed, I think it should be fenced and locked at night by
?????
Residents knew of the plans for or of the presence of the play area before
purchasing their property.
I have a 3 year-old daughter who loves the park. Also, yes, the area or
park could be improved and maybe clean up the glass and monitored
regularly.
The passage-ways are also a waste of space and filthy – just quick getaways for vandals.
Why should residents around Gloria Way have to put up with these youths
Remove the yobs not the play area.
The play area was originally intended for up to 8 year olds not 12.
There is little provided for young people in this area. Perhaps those with
the objections could offer some alternatives.
I fully agree that the play area does attract youths and many times last
summer. The area was littered with broken glass, beer cans etc. However.
My 7-year-old daughter spent a lot of time there, playing with her friends
during the day. If the area could be kept clean and safe at all times, I
would be in favour of retaining it. I would also suggest play equipment to
suit all ages up to 12 year olds, not just baby seat swings, but normal
sized seats(swings) as well.
If moved away from houses residents would not suffer. Although the site
would not be viewed by residents the council no doubt would still have to
maintain the area due to vandals.
I can see both points of view, but small children need a play area.
CCTV could be installed to stop anti-social behaviour or the police should
take action if required. Young children should not suffer because of
actions of others.
Ways should be found to make the play area safe for small children and
discourage anti-social youths.
Find a place for the older teenage kids to go.
Both my children enjoy playing in the park, weather permitting, community
policing and control of the youth problem, or CCTV to target problem
individuals or groups.
As we do not live near to the facility and not affected by it, I feel it would
be wrong to give an opinion that may affect people who are (Defender
Drive).
D:\81897265.doc





















Appendix 3 (cont.)
I am sorry for the children, but it is not safe for them to have a play area in
the social climate we have today.
I have heard the noise and bad language on different occasions coming
from these youths.
The cause should be treated and not the symptom, we know the problem,
it needs attention. Wybers Wood is a young estate and we need the play
area.
It would have been on the plans, they should have checked this before
they moved in.
We get sick of it around this area as well, what with football and then
gangs breaking the fences and then groups coming drinking and leaving
bottles by the bag full in the area, also lads coming through on motor
bikes, on the pavement and field. So we get the same aggravation here
too (Oakwood Drive).
The people knew the play area was there when they purchased the
houses, It will lead to more children on the streets, if removed.
Agree that it is attracting youths resulting in anti-social activities.
Agree re the petition.
It was a nice place once, but now it has been ruined by anti-social
activities.
Not required in the area as it only results in vandalism. Most small children
are not allowed to use it without supervision, most are allowed to play in
their own gardens.
If the play area was just landscaped we would still have the same
problems re drinking and motor bikes wrecking it.
Removing the site only has a detrimental effect on kids for the future, the
site should be retained, but measures need to be put in place to prevent
the anti-social behaviour in the park, i.e. good lighting an/or cameras.
I think to move the park will just move the problem. Giving the youth a
place to go is more like addressing the problem; they need a place of their
own to meet.
Closing the play area is giving way to yob culture. Punish the yobs, not the
innocent.
Keep the play area, do not penalise the youngsters. Remove the antisocial youths, we now have the power!!
My daughter who has just turned 1 loves going with me to the park and
playing on the baby swings. I would love to take her there this summer, as
she will be a bit older.
This is not central for a play area, but the only ground available.
The plot of land on St Nicholas Drive between the two shopping areas
should also be a play area.
If you close it, then the streets are the alternative – not desirable.
The area near chemist is an eyesore. Why not develop that for play area?
I have small children and do use the play area, but there is a nuisance
from older children on the night-time. Maybe if the council could change
the park, stopping the children getting in at night.

D:\81897265.doc






















Appendix 3 (cont.)
The ‘cut-through’ from Albatross Drive to Gloria Way is always covered in
dog mess.
If it is moved away from a residential area and could be locked and
unlocked, and no property could then be vandalised.
Why not ask for the rest of the estate to give their comments on the play
area – when the anti-social behaviour only really affects the residents in
Gloria Way.
Build bungalows – waste land will only encourage more youths.
When the houses were bought, they knew about the play area. If residents
are having problems and community police officer or Council security staff
should be checking it regularly.
Some problems/trouble would follow wherever play area was sited.
There is no other play area for the children.
Mainly the residents in the area are now nearing middle age, and whose
children are now grown up. If the situation is not resolved, it will steadily
get worse.
Youths Drinks Noise Rubbish.
Could be retained if able to be enclosed and locked at certain times.
The site is rarely used for children between 4-12 years old. I have a child
2½ years old, I would not take him because of broken glass, needles etc.
It is an eyesore. Build a house on it!
Too much trouble with older children/youths causing problems for
residents.
Without proper control and supervision the park should not be located
where it is.
I have two small children, 2 and 6 years old. I do not allow them in the
park because of glass bottles, cans etc.
Remove the youths not the play area.
Youngsters congregate near the shops, it would be better to site it there.
Have moved here from Aylesby Park 6 weeks ago stopped taking my
children 5 and 3 years old, broken glass, cigarette ends, disgusting foul
language.
Move the play area opposite Mayfair Drive on the green as kids play
football there. If positioned near the top more towards main road the site
would be open and seen by all passing traffic and therefore any problems
would be resolved due to public awareness.
Provide a teenage ‘bus shelter’ like the one on Old Waltham Recreation
ground.
My children regularly use the play area. However, youths do tend to gather
there, so locating might not be a bad idea. Although unless a play area is
under lock and key, youths will gather no matter where it is.
The problem is that youths just hang about on it. I took my friend’s son
and had to ask them to stop swearing. We came away in the end feeling
intimidated.
I think the place is fine, just needs a lot of work and somebody to look
after it.
D:\81897265.doc
Appendix 3 (cont.)
















The park should be retained as, although it is misused, many children in
the 4-12 age bracket use it. Local residents who are complaining about it
should not have moved to live near a children’s play area in the first place.
I used to take my grandson round there. I never once saw another small
child there. Half the time the swings were broken and the slide covered
with mud.
If the park were to be used properly – I would keep it as I have young
children myself. The problem is on a night- time and in the summer it is
worse – very intimidating and there is nothing you can do. People cannot
take the law in their own hands. It does need locating elsewhere. Please
remove.
It worries me that the area left simply paved may attract similar amounts of
youths.
The void scruffy area between the two sets of shops on St Nicholas Drive
would appear to be the only viable alternative. If irresponsible parents
knew how their children behaved they may act responsibly. The age group
the play area was designed for are not the culprits.
Although we agree with residents that the play area attracts youths and is
poorly maintained, we feel it should be kept, as our children, 4 and 5 years
have had many hours of fun there. What we feel would be more beneficial
to the area is to provide the older children with somewhere of their own to
meet.
I have 2 young children and it is the only play area on a large estate – my
2 year old loves it.
If the play area is removed, will the site turn into a place to dump rubbish,
that is my concern.
This is the only play area on the Wybers Wood estate – but having a play
area on the Freshney parkway would put it away from residents.
As much as I feel it would be a shame for my son if the play area was
removed, it is not in the most sensible place.
If this play area is removed it will deprive the estate’s 4-12 year olds and
simply cause the youths to move elsewhere to cause trouble. The root
cause of the problem (i.e. youth behaviour) is what needs action, not the
closure of a valuable play area. We use it regularly with our 5-year old.
I do not mind it being removed if it can be relocated to an alternative site.
It should be kept for the younger generation to give them something to do.
If this play area is removed, there is nothing on this estate for children and
as it is a family estate, what do you offer as an alternative? I would love to
know.
The play area causes untold misery for local residents, and because of
the state of the park – glass, litter etc, the young children for whom the
park was intended are unable to play safely. It is a congregating area for
youths who drink and cause a nuisance.
Surely if the area is used by older children the answer is to provide
facilities for that age group, possible on the vacant site near the shops.
D:\81897265.doc

We sincerely hope that this playground is removed and replaced with
housing that occupies the whole site.
Appendix 3 (cont.)

The play area could do with a revamp. Also if good lighting was available it
would deter any social activities.
Retained but maintained. It is no good for children covered in glass.
If moved to land between shops, it would be central for all residents, and
more trade for local shops if park is next door to them.
Regular attention from the Council or Police would be beneficial, why spite
the children that enjoy this area.
Have taken my daughter to the play area once, and was shocked by the
shabby, poorly maintained play area. If it is retained it should be properly
maintained by the council to encourage normal people to use it!!
How about a community centre near the shops.
If the play area had better lighting, perhaps with security cameras, then it
would discourage older children and youths from congregating in this area.
It would be nice for our children to have somewhere to play – but if the
council are not going to invest and maintain it, I would rather you just get
rid of it.
There are no play areas local to the estate. It is needed.
It is the only play area on the estate for children to go to.
I would like the play area to be retained. As the mother of a 5-year-old
child we often use it. However I would like it to be cleaned and maintained
in a better condition and possibly patrolled and monitored.
Where else can the kids go. If you provided somewhere for them there
would not be so many problems. You got rid of all other amenities i. e.
Community Centre Youth Centre.
If the play area were to be upgraded to a suitable standard it should be
retained, if not it is neither use nor ornament.
The play area as it stands is not maintained to suffice as a ‘play area’ as it
is unsafe for the use by young children.
The children of this area have nowhere to play and I feel very strongly that
is should be retained. The problem of anti-social behaviour will not be
resolved by closing the play area, but just move it somewhere else.
I have 2 children 6 and 2 and both enjoy going to this playground. All play
areas seem to attract youths on an evening, no matter where they are
situated. So why put the trouble on someone else’s doorstep. The
residents know it was there, so why not buy near it.
I did not even know it was there!
My 4 year old son regularly uses the play area.

















D:\81897265.doc
Appendix 4
Analysis of respondents addresses
Street Name
Albatross Drive
Candlesby Road
Church Way
Cormorant Drive
Cyrano Way
Defender Drive
Faulding Way
Fortuna Way
Gloria Way
Greyfriars
Mayfair Drive East
Oakwood Drive
Old Fleet
Sanctuary Way
St Nicholas Drive
The Cloisters
Timberley Drive
Wybers Way
TOTALS
D:\81897265.doc
Number
responded
50
10
1
3
25
21
3
1
21
4
1
17
1
4
11
1
2
1
197
Retained
18
5
2
13
9
1
1
1
6
1
2
9
1
2
1
83
Removed
Ambiguous
Answer
32
5
1
1
11
11
3
20
3
11
2
1
-
1
1
1
1
4
110
Appendix 5 Letter from Police
D:\81897265.doc
Appendix 5 Continued
D:\81897265.doc