indoor sport and leisure facility strategy a report...

Indoor Sport and Leisure Facility Strategy

A Report Supported through the Facilities Improvement Service (FIS)

May 2010

CONTENTS

Page

Section 1 Introduction and Background 1

Section 2 Strategic and Participation Context 12

Section 3 Facility Needs Overview 31

Section 4 Conclusions and Way Forward 70

Appendices

Appendix 1 Scoping Methodology

Appendix 2 Scoping Report

SECTION 1– INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Introduction to Sport England’s Facility Improvement Service

Background

1.1 Sport in England finds itself in times of change, faced with both significant challenges and opportunities.

1.2 Sport England’s new strategic vision and plan focuses back on the strategic development of sport, working closely with national governing bodies and local authorities. A key strand of work, is a renewed focus on facility development and strategic planning.

1.3 This has been prompted by several national reports, most notably the 2006 Audit Commission Report, which challenged the sport sector to take a more strategic approach to the planning and development of sports facilities and criticism about the lack of a strong need and evidence base for sports facility provision from various Government Departments.

1.4 Recent publicity surrounding run down and closing local sports facilities, highlighted in media campaigns around the condition of our local swimming facilities and the state of grass roots football provision, has fuelled the need to act.

1.5 The need for a renewed focus on facilities comes at a time when the stock of sports facilities across England is reaching a critical condition. A study carried out by Sport England in 2002 highlighted that the cost of replacing the existing stock would be £4.5 billion with £550m needed in the next five years simply to ensure that existing facilities remain open. This was without any upgrading to take account of modern trends in sports participation, future levels of demand or public expectations for quality environments. More recent estimates in 2007 indicate that the backlog of investment is actually more in the region of £10bn.

1.6 Indeed of the 1,642 local authority owned or managed facilities in England, only 33% were under 20 years old. Further, the average age of facilities across all sites is 25 years and yet their typical planned economic life is 25 years. Ageing stock leads to poor quality, reductions in attendance and participation and higher maintenance costs which in turn puts pressure on budgets and the ability to refresh facilities.

1.7 With diminishing lottery investment into sport and challenging targets of increasing participation by 1% per annum and widening access to target groups, the challenge for the sport is a significant one.

Opportunities

1.8 There is however opportunities to break this cycle. The focus on sport through the catalyst of the 2012 Games and the national focus on the health and obesity epidemic provide sport with a platform for action. Sport is being urged to do things differently in the future in terms of provision of sporting opportunities. Local authorities must follow suit in terms of how they engage with new partners and opportunities, to ensure investment into sport is maximised to the full.

Indoor Sport and Leisure Facility Strategy 1


1.9 The new watch words already in common use are commissioning, innovation, partnership working, co-location, Social Enterprise, Building Schools for the Future (BSF), Local Improvement Finance Trust (LIFT), Public Private Partnership (PPP),Private Finance Initiative (PFI), Planning Gain Supplement (PGS). These and other transformational programmes, are the new opportunities for sport and leisure, but to maximise their impact sport needs to join-up and be clear about its needs. Developing a strategic approach to sport and leisure facility planning is critical to this.

1.10 The ability to influence investment through either BSF, Local Strategic Partnership or the planning system will be heavily dependent on local authorities having a clear strategic vision in terms of facility provision and a clear strategic view on priorities across the local authority area and as a consequence how opportunities presented by education or health partnerships can meet these identified priorities. Without this clarity of vision and priorities, sport and leisure, be it through the auspices of the local authority sport and leisure department, the County Sports Partnerships or Sport England offices will struggle to be effective in any discussions.

Facilities Improvement Service (FIS)

1.11 To support this strategic drive Sport England launched the Facilities Improvement Service (FIS) in 2007. The FIS provides strategic planning support to local authorities in respect of its sport facility stock. This is a 3-year programme, to work with local authorities to increase skills and capacity and enable authorities to develop a robust and corporately agreed needs and evidence base for sports facility provision in their area, which can be passported for different uses across the authority as illustrated in the diagram below.



1.12 Over the 3-year programme consultants will provide hands on support, of up to 20 days per local authority, to around 100 local authorities across England to ensure they have a strong needs and evidence base in place to underpin future facility provision. Over the 3-years consultants will also deliver generic training and good practice guidance across the sector to raise the standards of facility planning for the benefit of sport. Common themes emerging through the Service are the need to get leisure and planning departments working in a co-ordinated way, the training of authorities in the Sport England planning tools (Active People, Active Places and FPM) and the development of strategic planning across the local estate to support the needs of the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme.

1.13 St Helens was accepted onto the FIS programme in 2007 and the authority has been working with the appointed consultants and Sport England over the past 3-years to develop the needs and evidence base and strategic facility direction for the development of sport and leisure provision across the authority. The work has gained momentum over the past 6-months with a re-structure at the Council and a re-fresh of the Active St Helens Strategy. The facility strategy work will support the Council’s new strategy along with an updated playing pitch and outdoor sport strategy.

1.14 One of the key elements of the FIS and the needs and evidence base work has been the use of Sport England planning tools. The sports sector is now rich in terms of data sources to support local authorities in their decision making, enabling objective decisions to be made. As part of the FIS intervention key officers from St Helens Council undertook Active Places Power training.

1.15 The specific datasets utilised in the St Helens FIS are set out at Appendix 1

Aims and Objectives

1.16 Within St Helens the scoping was completed in February 2008 and identified the need for a number of areas of work as set out below. The full scoping report is included within the appendix 2 One of the recurring themes of the scoping work and a barrier to strategic development was the disparate nature of sport and leisure across the authority structures and the lack of a voice at the ‘top table’ to make the case for sport. Part of the FIS intervention was to prepare a paper for senior management within the Council to address this issue. A copy of the report is included as and appendix 3. The key strands of work identified were as follows:

Positioning of sport within the Sustainable Community Strategy

• Influence process / position sport more coherently

• Structural changes, Sport and Culture Trust?

• Future delivery vehicle for BSF community use



Develop an Indoor Sport Facility Strategy utilising PPG17 methodology, utilising and including

• Pro-active vision about St Helens needs

• Participation led; start with Active People, market segmentation

• Across the estate; quality, quantity and accessibility

• Utilising new planning tools

• Local consultation based on neighbourhood planning

• Standards and gaps

• Opportunity to link to wider regional strategy; sub-regional opportunities

Updated Playing Pitch Strategy, incorporating

• FA local strategy and data

• Support to BSF programme

• Better standards to support SPD and S106 policy

Develop Planning Policy around indoor sport to support

• BSF implementation

• Standards for indoor sport for inclusion in core strategy and subsequent SPD

• Needs and evidence for S106 contributions to indoor sport

1.17 The first two pieces of work are now complete. The authority has undertaken the development of an updated playing pitch strategy and outdoor sport strategy in-house. The outdoor elements in the original work plan are now dealt with in this document. The focus of this



work is on indoor and major built provision. The pps work is nearing completion but now needs to be tested against the ‘fit for purpose framework’. The planning policy work needs to follow satisfactory completion of the 2nd and 3rd elements in the priority list.

1.18 It was therefore agreed by the steering group set up to manage the FIS process that in terms of priority the FIS intervention should focus on driving forward the long-term built facility strategy looking at the big public sector stock, in the context of BSF, sports participation profiles and population changes across the authority. This focus was agreed at the first steering group meeting.

Methodology

1.19 Based on the scoping work and the vision a detailed work programme was developed, which set out the purpose, scope and methodology adopted, this is set out in the appendix. The work has been developed and overseen by a Council wide steering group including representatives from Leisure, Children and Young People, Planning and Sport Development. The work was led in the Council by David Pugh, Leisure Investment Manager and Dave Boocock, Head of Sports Development.

1.20 This report therefore provides an overview of the Facilities Improvement Service (FIS) outputs; needs and evidence base and outline strategy for indoor sport and leisure provision in St Helens. The vision set for the strategy work was to:

‘develop a network of accessible facilities to support the creation of a healthy, physically active borough, where all members of the community can take part in physical activities and sport in a wider range of activities.’

1.21 The FIS provides an evidence base and a rationale for making decisions about the future of indoor facilities used for sport and recreation (such as swimming pools and sports halls). The report compliments the updated Active St Helens strategy, setting out the strategic facility priorities, which will address the Active St Helens aims and should be read alongside this, it will also help to inform future decision making both in terms of provision and access being driven forward through the BSF work-stream. This strategic overview should be read alongside the Council’s emerging community use and lettings policy.

1.22 This report is intended to flag up some of the high level conclusions, based on robust needs and evidence and describe some of the strategic broad options. The FIS will consider all built facilities, but this report focuses on the facilities that are the highest priority for decision making in terms of investment and Council commitments (both leisure and education), including:

• Swimming Pools

• Sports Halls

• Synthetic Turf Pitches

• Health and Fitness Provision

• Other indoor / major built facilities



1.23 Further work will be required to establish the Business Case behind each of the options, as illustrated in the next section.


SECTION 2– STRATEGIC AND PARTICIPATION CONTEXT

Strategic and Participation Context

Introduction

2.1 In order to make sense of future facility needs it is critical to understand the wider strategic and policy context. Clearly all local authorities must seek to prioritise services and provision which meet the stated community priorities as set out by the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) within the Sustainable Community Plan and subsequent Council plans.

2.2 This section therefore sets out the strategic context and comments on what it means for facility provision going forward across St.Helens.

National Sports Policy

2.3 Sport England’s overarching aim is to build the foundations of sporting success through the creation of

‘a world leading community sport system in England.’

The strategy is based on the delivery of three key outcomes which, when combined, will form the basis of a world-leading community sport system.

Excel - Approximately 25% of Sport England’s investment will focus on developing and accelerating talent..

Sustain - Approximately 60% of Sport England’s investment will focus on sustaining current participants in sport by ensuring that people have a high quality experience and by taking action to reduce the ‘drop-off’ in sports participation between 16 and 18.

Grow - Approximately 15% of Sport England’s investment will be focused on increasing regular participation in sport by 200,000 adults per annum (1m in total by 2012-13).

2.4 In summary, Sport England is committed to delivering:

o 1m people doing more sport by 2012-13.

o A reduction in post-16 drop-off in at least five sports by 25% by 2012-13.

o A quantifiable increase in satisfaction (actual measure to be determined5).

o Improved talent development systems in at least 25 sports.

o A major contribution to the delivery of the Five Hour Sport Offer engaging more 5-19 year olds in sport.



2.5 Developing quality facilities, which meet increasing levels of satisfaction amongst residents and in turn encourage people to participate in sport will be critical. Through the original Active St Helens, St Helens Council and its partners have made a commitment to undertake initiatives which increase overall participation in sport and physical activity by 1% per annum. The development of new and improved facilities forms a key action in addressing this.

Demographic Profile

2.6 St Helens is part of the Merseyside area in the North-West of England. It includes the town of St Helens itself and the surrounding settlements of Newton-le-Willows, Haydock, Rainhill, Rainford, and Billinge. 177,500 people live in the borough in 75,000 households. The population is stable, with little change in the last 10 years. Two per cent of residents are from black and minority ethnic (BME) groups. St Helens has an ageing population with about one in five people aged 65 or over. The local economy has undergone significant change in the last 30 years. The traditional industries of coalmining and chemical manufacturing have now largely disappeared and jobs in St Helens are now mostly in services, distribution and manufacturing.

2.7 66.4 per cent of working age people in St Helens are in work but some areas have high levels of unemployment. 22.3 per cent of people of working age people are on benefits. There is a high level of deprivation in St Helens. One quarter of people live in the most deprived neighbourhoods. The poorest housing tends to be older properties in urban areas. Crime levels are reducing year-on-year and are lower than the national average. The health of local people is worse than the national average. Male life expectancy is 75 years and female life expectancy is 80 years. Men in the most deprived areas of St Helens live an average of nine and a half years less than men in the wealthier areas and women in deprived areas live six years less.

2.8 Partners work together in the St Helens Local Strategic Partnership (see later) which delivers programmes targeted at specific areas of the Borough and communities at greatest risk. This is clearly an important consideration in terms of sport and leisure facility provision.

2.9 The maps overleaf set out the key areas of health deprivation across the borough and the relationship with current sport and leisure provision.

2.10 The correlation between deprivation and participation is clear and the need for St Helens to develop a facility network, which delivers to resident needs and encourages more healthier lifestyles is evident. The focus should be on good quality, local accessible provision. This is highlighted when looking at the participation profile across the borough.



Map Health and Disability Domain Rankings



Map Health and Disability Domain Rankings and Leisure Provision



Participation in St Helens

Active People

2.11 The Active People Survey is a nationwide survey of participation amongst adults aged 16+ living in England. The survey is the largest of its kind ever to be conducted in this country. A total of 363,724 adults living in England have taken part in the survey. The Active People Survey gathers data on the type, duration and intensity of people's participation in different types of sport and active recreation, as well as information about volunteering, club membership, and receiving tuition from an instructor or coach, participation in competitive sport and satisfaction with local sports provision.

2.12 The first Active People survey in 2006 measured sports participation (at least 3 days a week x 30 minutes moderate participation), in St Helens at 19.5% which was in line with the Merseyside average but below the regional and national average for England of 21%. Male participation was higher than the national average at 24.9% compared to female participation at 14.6%, which was below the national average for females of 18.5%. St Helens demonstrated the highest drop-off in participation after leaving school at age 16-19 just 22.2% achieving 3 x 30.

2.13 Taking into account levels of deprivation, St Helens performs slightly better than the expected level in KPI1 when results are weighted according to IMD levels of deprivation. There is therefore a suggestion that if and when provision and opportunities are developed and delivered in line with residents needs then people can be encouraged to participate. Current groups of people could be encouraged to be active more often and clearly facility provision can have a role to play.

2.14 The map below illustrates the participation distribution across the authority based on the 2006 Active People survey findings. The white areas are the areas of low participation, illustrating the large areas of low participation across the central areas and south of the borough.

2.15 These correspond with the earlier health deprivation findings. If the Council is to address health issues through sport and physical activity the priority areas of focus should therefore be:

• Blackbrook• Bold • Haydock• Parr

• Sutton• Thatto Heath• Town Centre


SECTION 3 – FACILITY NEEDS OVERVIEW

2.16 Active People survey 3 updated the 2006 survey and recorded an increase in overall participation from 19.5% to 21.1%, which is now above the Merseyside average.

2.17 Since the initial drafting the Active People 3 survey has been published. The table below highlights the overall results for St Helens. From this analysis it is evident that indicators are improving. Participation is now above the CSP average but still below the regional and



national average. NI8 is also improving. Health is recognised as a key priority for the Borough. Improved facility provision has a key role to play in supporting the delivery of improved performance and therefore driving the health agenda of the authority.

KPI Active People 3 (Merseyside Average)

KPI 1 - At least 3 days x 30 minutes, moderate intensity participation (sport and recreational walking and cycling) per week (all adults)

⇑ 21.1% (20.7%) Increase from 19% at AP2

KPI 2 - At least 1 hour of volunteering to support sport per week (all adults) ⇓ 4.8% (4.3

%) down from 7.1% at AP2 more in line with AP1 at 4.2%

KPI 3 - Member of a sports club (all adults) ⇑ 23.7% (22.47%) increase from 21.9% at AP2

KPI 4 - Received sports tuition or coaching (all adults) ⇑ 16.9% (14.8%) increase from 14.1% at AP2

KPI 5 - Taken part in organised competitive sport (all adults) ⇑ 12.5% (11.5%) down from 14.6% at AP2

KPI 6 - Satisfaction with local sports provision (all adults) ⇑ 57.8% (66.8%) 55.6% AP2 66.7% AP1

NI8 - At least 3 days x 30 minutes, moderate intensity participation (sport and recreational walking and cycling and for those aged 65 years and over - yoga; pilates; indoor and outdoor bowls; archery and croquet) per week (all adults)

⇑ 20.1%

improving

2.18 Participation is still clearly an issue across the borough, which is linked to health and deprivation indices. The 2005 Sport England national survey Understanding Participation in Sport identified poor quality facilities as a limiting factor in participation. The provision of facilities therefore has a key role to play. Providing better and more accessible facilities can play and important role in driving increased participation. If authorities are to deliver on the health agenda and NI8, the future development of the Council facility assets have a crucial role to play in order to make participation more socially equitable.

2.19 Recent survey work by Ipsos MORI on swimming further emphasised this point. The Ipsos MORI poll on swimming found that the domains (issues), which had the most impact on overall satisfaction with swimming were (in order):


http://www.webreport.se/apd/4/rt1_kpi_scorecard.aspx?l=100&e=344#qid_1













• Exertion and fitness • Release and diversion • Facilities and playing environment • Ease of participating • Value for money • People and staff

• Social aspects • Performance • Officials • Coaching

2.20 Further analysis of the survey work highlighted that the highest impact area in terms of ease of participating was access to facilities; ‘the time it took to get to where people participate / compete…’ Quality of facility provision was a high impact area in terms of facilities and the environment. It is clearly evident therefore that access to high quality facilities has a clear impact on swimming participation and in turn health inequalities.

2.21 Certainly in terms of quality factors there would appear to be concerns. The data in the table below highlights low satisfaction levels with the current facility stock and sports provision across St Helens taken from national data sources, equally significant is the priority placed on residents to improve provision and see investment in sports facilities across St Helens. In short there is clearly a need to increase levels of satisfaction with sports facility provision in St Helens to provide a positive experience of sport and a desire from residents to prioritise investment.

2.22 These accords with the authorities own survey work undertaken by Ipsos MORI in 2009, which found that only 39% are satisfied with sports and leisure facilities, a decline from 2006 (53%). Users are more satisfied with the experience but again this has declined from 66% in 2006 to only 45% in 2009.


St Helens

KPI 6 – Satisfaction with local sports provision (AP3) 57.8% (66.8% Merseyside)

Very or fairly satisfied with sport and leisure facilities (2008 Place Survey) 39% (46.4% North West)

Percentage of residents who identify sports & leisure facilities as something most in need of improvement? (CAA Indicator)

21%

(Nationally - highest 20% quartile)

14

http://oneplace.direct.gov.uk/infobyarea/region/area/areaperformanceindicators/pages/default.aspx?area=376&gearsentid=2721-AC&gearsexpcats=190&region=51&Gkey=282VqIaaVSLC%2BiV6EkzqtvgvKdMUzTs6DFFphGosjsxfZ2B7D%2B7dMbwpUgviBpwKqO%2BRlg%2Fnr0hMWoYq3FsYIpegnaZSorDry%2BjfiVQt%2B9t92lMyCFAgVSGfCdn9PPGgxbpsIYc3Hc3Gycqw5bpmAniNAbW3i775MSx9R7FVHIriq58hOI6vwrtPINVRwgLcB6ONYNpf%2FoA02nTKis0n95sVUXjZppo9Awp%2B1be4xmAw2yIUGVb%2Fgmd5mrybDIeFmuTVPFG5PDEx%2BqTRKsQkjCFLsDuL0guQ2znTdDnvON5ERmdJLCSkeXseWRanmLwqUmm7%2FaKOVp8%3D

http://oneplace.direct.gov.uk/infobyarea/region/area/areaperformanceindicators/pages/default.aspx?area=376&gearsentid=2721-AC&gearsexpcats=190&region=51&Gkey=282VqIaaVSLC%2BiV6EkzqtvgvKdMUzTs6DFFphGosjsxfZ2B7D%2B7dMbwpUgviBpwKqO%2BRlg%2Fnr0hMWoYq3FsYIpegnaZSorDry%2BjfiVQt%2B9t92lMyCFAgVSGfCdn9PPGgxbpsIYc3Hc3Gycqw5bpmAniNAbW3i775MSx9R7FVHIriq58hOI6vwrtPINVRwgLcB6ONYNpf%2FoA02nTKis0n95sVUXjZppo9Awp%2B1be4xmAw2yIUGVb%2Fgmd5mrybDIeFmuTVPFG5PDEx%2BqTRKsQkjCFLsDuL0guQ2znTdDnvON5ERmdJLCSkeXseWRanmLwqUmm7%2FaKOVp8%3D


2.23 Further indicators, particularly NI 57 will place added pressure on schools and the need for them to be able to access quality facilities. NI 57 measures the percentage of 5-16 year-olds participating in at least two hours a week of high quality curriculum time PE and sport at school. This is taken as a floor objective, with equal focus placed on offering 5 hours.

2.24 There would appear therefore to be a clear issue in terms of the perception of quality and satisfaction with the current sport and leisure infrastructure, which in turn is likely to impact on participation and health issues. The development of high quality needs led facilities is therefore a critical strategic priority for the area if the authority is to achieve its priorities. To understand the needs of St Helens residents in more detail we have utilised the market segmentation data.

Market Segmentation

2.25 Sport England market segmentation provides those working in community sport an insight into the sporting behaviours and the barriers and motivations to taking part amongst our existing participants and those we wish to engage in a more active lifestyle.

2.26 Sport England and its appointed consultants, Experian Business Strategies, worked together to analyse data on the English population (18+), producing 19 market segments with distinct sporting behaviours and attitudes. This includes information on specific sports people take part in as well as why people do sport, whether they want to do sport and the barriers to doing more sport. In addition, the segments provide information on media consumption and communication channels, social capital, health indicators including obesity and engagement in the wider cultural sphere. Further information on the market segments, including detailed 'pen portraits' for each of the 19 segments, is available at the Sport England website.

2.27 The power of these sporting segments lies not only in their ability to help us better understand the characteristics of our potential market but also to explore the market base at differing geographic levels. It is possible to analyse the market in a particular street, community, local authority or regions. Each segment has been assigned a name, which reflects the most popular first names for the group.

2.28 Market segmentation allows us to develop a more sophisticated, tailored approach to delivering services. In tailoring the service we provide to the customer’s individual needs, rather than adopting a ‘one size fits all’ approach. It is one of the best tools we have to improve public services and outcomes.

2.29 The chart below shows the proportion of each of the nineteen segments in St Helens (the blue bars) set against the regional (the red bars), County Sport Partnership (the yellow bars) and national average (the green dots).

2.30 52.3% of the adult population in St Helens belong to segments, which are less likely than average to participate in sport and active recreation. In England as a whole, only 40.7% of the population are to be found in these segments.


http://www.sportengland.org/index/get_resources/research/se_market_segmentation.htm


2.31 48.7% of the adult population in St Helens belong to segments, which are more likely than average to participate in sport and active recreation. In England as a whole, 59.5% of the population are to be found in these segments. There are no ‘active’ segments larger in St Helens than in the rest of the country.

2.32 Only four segments 9, 13, 18 and 19-display propensity to participate greater than the England average and these are all low participation segments.The main sports participated in for the top 3 segments in St Helens are set out below:

19 - Elsie and Arnold (66+) widowed /retired walking, bowls, dancing, low impact exercises

9 - Kev (36-45) married / vocational football, darts, karate, snooker, weight training,



fishing, boxing, pool, tenpin bowling, cricket

11- Phillip (46-55) married / professional sailing, gym, football, jogging, badminton, golf, cycling, cricket

2.33 The main conclusion to be drawn from the market segmentation data in St Helens is that the majority of people who live in St Helens belong to segments who are less likely to participate and for whom the sport and active recreation offer has not been right in the past.

2.34 This correlates with the Active People findings and accords with authority findings that found the greatest barrier to participation in sport and leisure at 54.5% was a lack of interest. This is a significant challenge, whilst facilities have an important role to play, as set out, change cannot be impacted through facility provision alone.

Sustainable Community Plan 2008 - 2018

2.35 St Helens Sustainable Community Plan 2008-2018 sets out the vision, objectives and key strategic drivers for the borough. The vision is:

‘To make St Helens a modern, distinctive, economically prosperous and vibrant borough’

2.36 The key objectives to deliver this vision are:2.37

• Economic Development and Enterprise• Healthier Communities and Older People• Communities and Neighbourhoods

• Safer Communities • Children and Young People

2.38 The Community Plan also sets out three key strategic drivers, namely:

• Liveability – deliver a cleaner, greener and safer Borough and improve the quality of life for all residents• Health – improve health particularly in priority areas, reduce health inequalities and increase independence• Worklessness – reduce worklessness thorough culture change, improved skills and greater opportunity

2.39 Active St Helens the joint sport and physical activity strategy produced by St Helens Council and NHS Halton and St Helens follows this golden thread and acknowledges the health challenges across St Helens are significant as set out by both the LSP and the Council. Sport and leisure activity has a significant contribution to make to the health and well-being of communities across St Helens and in contributing to tackling health inequalities.



Active St Helens 2010-15

2.40 The aim set out in the strategy is to get ‘more people, more active, more often.’ The strategy sets out the benefits of sport and physical activity and the costs of an inactive population.

2.41 The strategy reflects on the achievements of the previous strategy, which aimed to support inactive people to become more physically active, and raise awareness of the benefits of physical activity to the local population and stakeholders.

2.42 Whilst there have been a number of significant achievements since the last strategy, it is also acknowledged that there remain some significant challenges, including:

• 70% of Women and 50% of men in St Helens are unlikely to be achieving the government’s recommendations for physical activity

• An increase in the proportion of the borough’s population who are over 50 years of age and physically inactive

• A lower proportion of the female population in St Helens are physically active than the national average

• An increasing proportion of the borough population is overweight or obese

• Inequalities in employment, which result in a large proportion of the community not in education or employment who most need physical activity but cannot afford it or chose to lead alternative unhealthy lifestyles.

• There is a marked decline in sporting participation and levels of physical activity once young people reach their teenage years; this declines more steeply after they leave full time education

• To design new schools for the future (BSF), which create the maximum opportunity for sporting excellence, participation and community access in a sustainable and affordable way

• Inequalities in health in relation to physical activity exist in St Helens, much of the inequality is clustered within the south of the borough but pockets occur elsewhere within different sections of the community

• Provision of facilities and opportunities for physical activity appears to be inequitable

• The local culture and environment needs to better promote and enable local people to lead more active lives



• There is a lack of co-coordinated access to all sports facilities; public, private and education which would encourage further opportunities for physical activity

2.43 The Strategy sets out two key aims over the next five years to deliver on these challenges, as set out in the tables below.


Aim 1 : To encourage and increase participation in Sport and Physical Activity by all members of the community

Lead Partner

1. Increase the number of young people between the ages of 14-24 years who regularly participate in physical activity

Primary Care Trust

2. Increase the number of people over 50 years of age who regularly participate in physical activity Primary Care Trust Health Improvement

3. Increase the number of women and girls who regularly participate in physical activity St Helens Council Sports Development

4. Increase physical activity levels amongst children under 7 years of age St Helens Council Healthy Schools Team

5. Establish services designed and available to meet the capabilities of all communities All Partners

6. To coordinate and implement a range of interventions to address overweight and obesity within the population

Primary Care Trust

7. To increase the use of sport and physical activity as a tool for youth and community development. St Helens Council Sports Development

8. To increase the number of people who use walking and cycling as a method of transport or leisure activity

Primary Care Trust Health Improvement

9. 9. To effectively deploy the marketing, promotional and communication resources of all partners to increase levels of physical activity

St Helens Council Leisure Investment

19


Aim 2: To create a quality infrastructure and facilities to support physical activity

Lead Partner

1. To encourage schools and other providers to make their facilities available to the community and maximise their use for sport and physical activity

St Helens Council Sports Development / Healthy

Schools team

2. Ensure where possible that price is not a barrier to participation St Helens Council Sports Development

3. To improve the knowledge and skills of practioners to enable them to motivate individuals to exercise

Primary Care Trust Healthy Schools team

4. To increase the number of qualified coaches and leaders working in both a paid and voluntary capacity within the borough, with a specific focus on training young people. St Helens Council Sports

Development

5. Increase the percentage of adults volunteering in sport and physical activity Voluntary Sector

6. Increase the number of Accredited clubs and groups delivering sport and physical activity within the borough and develop an incentives package for accredited clubs

St Helens Council Sports Development

7. Work to improve the range and quality of facilities available to the public St Helens Council Leisure Investment

8. Improve the Cycling and Walking infrastructure within the borough St Helens Council

Urban Regeneration

2.44 The Council’s Sport and Physical Activity priorities focus on participation and health. There are limited aspirations to develop sporting pathways and talents. The focus is sport as a tool for health and community development with a focus on priority areas, women and



girls, over 50s and 14-24 year olds. Improving the range and quality of facilities, focussing investment in areas of low participation and poor health will be key areas of focus. The opening up and use of school facilities under the BSF programme will be a key area of focus and strategy.

2.45 The map below summarises health indicators rating those wards with the poorest health outcomes red.



2.46 The map above illustrates access to range public and private sports facilities and green flag parks with the areas highlighted in green having the greatest access.

2.47 If St Helens is to deliver on these aims a fit for purpose network of facilities to meet residents needs and encourage participation in sport thus contributing to the health agenda the quantity, quality, location and access to provision will be key. The next section will consider the facility issues in more detail and set out the strategic priorities to deliver on the Active St Helens aims.

2.48 Sets out in the next section is an analysis of the current indoor facility infra-structure, the needs and evidence base and key strategic priorities for delivery over the next five-years.



Summary

2.49 At strategic level the authority have a clear focus on health, older people and young people. The focus on priority deprived areas is also clear.

2.50 Participation is clearly an issue across the authority and a key priority going forward. Current participation levels are improving but there are still high levels of inactivity and obesity across St Helens. This is clearly linked to health and deprivation indices. Female participation and teenage drop-off are clear priorities and participation in the south of the borough is a particular challenge.

2.51 The focus for the authority going forward is clearly on sport as a vehicle to deliver on the health agenda. There are limited objectives to deliver on the wider sports development agenda in terms of the focus sport development and the development of talent pathways. A facility infra-structure to deliver in the priority areas and with the low participant groups will therefore be critical in terms of delivering to strategic priorities and residents needs.

2.52 As set out, the 2005 national survey Understanding Participation in Sport identified poor quality facilities as a limiting factor in participation. The provision of facilities therefore has a key role to play. Providing better and more accessible facilities can play and important role in driving increased participation. If the authority is to deliver on its health agenda the future development of the Council facility assets have a crucial role to play in order to make participation more socially equitable in St Helens.

2.53 Local consultation, support the national analysis and suggests the quality of facility provision is impacting on participation, it is evident from this consultation that people’s perceptions in terms of the current facility infra-structure are poor. There is clearly significant work to do on improving the facility stock for the long-term to meet the participation challenges.

2.54 It is also clear that issues of low participation are grounded in lifestyle issues and lack of interest and will not be met by facility provision in isolation. Education, programming and marketing with a focus on low participant groups will be critical interventions alongside filling gaps and improvements in the facility stock.

2.55 Building Schools for the Future (BSF) will undoubtedly improve the quantity and quality of provision across St Helens but it is not the panacea and it is critical that it is planned alongside the Council stock and a coordinated approach is developed across the authority. BSF facilities must be affordable and accessible for wider community use. The issues and opportunities are set out in the next section.

2.56 How the current stock is performing and located to meet these needs is assessed in the next section. Whilst the focus will be on the Council stock, this is looked at in the context of wider opportunities e.g. BSF, club developments etc. The next section will look at future needs in the context of quantity, quality, location and access to provision and set out key strategic recommendations to support the demographic and policy context set out.



Facility Needs Overview

Introduction

3.1 As set out the focus of the analysis is on the key Council provision; in the context of the wider network. The key facilities include:

• Parr Swimming Pool and Fitness Centre

• Sutton Leisure Centre

• Selwyn Jones Sports Centre

• Queens Park Leisure Centre (Scheduled to reopen Nov 2010 following a major refurbishment)

3.2 In terms of the analysis of needs this has focussed on the following core facility types:

• Swimming Pools

• Sports Halls

• Synthetic Turf Pitches

• Health and Fitness Provision

• Other indoor / major built facilities

The audit of facilities is set out alongside the mapping in the individual analysis of needs.



Audit Overview

3.3 A more detailed overview of the performance and costs of the key Council facilities is set out below.

Parr Swimming and Fitness Centre

3.4 Parr was opened in 1979 to provide community swimming facilities, comprising of a 33m x 6 lane pool, 19m x 3 lane teaching pool, viewing facilities for 100 spectators, vending area, male and female changing facilities. In 2007, a successful Neighbourhood Regeneration Fund application led to the opening of 35-station fitness and changing facility. A further grant application to the Free Swimming Capital Fund has resulted in a half million pound scheme work to reconstruct the swimming changing rooms as two village changing rooms. Other improvement work has included energy saving schemes, office improvements, and installation of ultra violet disinfection system, spectator and vending area improvements.

3.5 Parr is located in a deprived ward (Bottom 5% National Multiple Deprivation Index) with considerable social and economic challenges. There is considerable partnership work in progress linked to the local Neighbourhood Management Framework.

3.6 This facility provides the principal borough venue for delivery very the largest swimming club, performance squad and education learn to swim programme.

3.7 Investment in energy conservation projects is ongoing. The current Building Energy Rating is C(60). At an annual energy cost of £51.62 per square metre (2008/2009) the costs are significantly above the national average for a public building of this type.

3.8 The Whole Life Cost Plan has identified work requirements to the value of £500,000 in the next five years and further £700,000 over the next twenty-five years. The value of the building to rebuild would be 3.5 million pounds

3.9 The facility is expected to achieve over 150,000 visits per annum. Gym membership is currently 600, with an anticipated capacity for 800 members.

3.10 The centre is Quest accredited (76% - 2009) and holds Investors in People accreditation (Gold Standard - 2009).

3.11 A trend of increasing usage reflects the capital and revenue investment in Parr to improve the facilities, combined with the closure of Queens Park Leisure Centre for reconstruction in April 2009.



2009/2010 2008/2009 2007/2008 2006/2007 2005/2006 2004/2005

Parr Swimming and Fitness Centre 141,209 121,521 128,552 115,578 105,411 101,008

3.12 Improved attendance has also resulted in improved financial performance. Contribution from the fitness facility has reduced the net deficit per visit by 37% since 2004/2005.

Net Deficit 2009/2010 2008/2009 2007/2008 2006/2007 2005/2006 2004/2005

Parr Swimming and Fitness Centre £411,841 £417,284 £378,757 £383,192 £463,367 468,448

Per Visit £2.91 £3.43 £2.94 £3.31 £4.39 £4.63

3.13 The Challenges and solutions going forward for Parr Swimming and Fitness Centre include:

• Increased pressure on the car parking facilities: use vacant land around the centre to increase car park capacity.• Confined space in reception: extend the front entrance of the building to create a more practical and secure entry space.• Flat roof structure reaching the end of practical life: replace the roof within five years.• There is no indoor activity hall provision: investigate capacity to provide small activity hall/dance studio facility adjacent to the current

building.



Sutton Leisure Centre

3.14 Sutton Leisure Centre is located on a shared campus with Sutton Academy. There is a ‘dual – use’ arrangement in place, which provides Sutton Academy with access to all the sports and swimming facilities, Monday to Friday, 9am – 5pm, during term time. Sutton is the largest public leisure facility in St Helens and has regional significance as a venue for a variety of leisure and sports events.

3.15 The facilities comprise of: an eight badminton court sports hall, 2 badminton court activity hall, 25 metre x 5 lane swimming pool, 2 squash courts, training room, cafeteria, full size floodlit STP, 6 lane (floodlit) athletic track, 2 Tarmac netball/tennis courts (floodlit), IT Training Room, Indoor and Outdoor changing.

3.16 The campus is likely to undergo a significant transformation, with the School’s recent transfer to a new academy. The academy is likely to rebuild the present education facilities on the site, but there are no plans to make alterations to the sports facilities. The Council considered an option to transfer full management and operation of the sports facilities to the new academy but in light of the significance of the asset chose not to.

3.17 Sutton is located in the south west of the borough, and occupies land on the edge of Sherdley Park, in a comparatively poor ward. Some of the highest levels of poverty, poor health and participation are situated within 20 minutes walking distance of the Centre. The centre is very close to the M62 and adjacent to a railway station. The excellent transport links have contributed to an excellent reputation for hosting events of all shapes, sizes and interests, including; televised boxing events, computer fairs, dog shows and martial art events. Sutton is also registered as an approved Training Camp for the 2012 Olympics. General attendance at the site is principally drawn from the communities of Sutton, South Parr, Bold and Thatto Heath.

3.18 The site provides extensive facilities, with the exception of modern fitness facilities which is the only element of the facility strategy adopted in 2004 that has not been achieved.

3.19 The Whole Life Cost Plan (2005) has identified work requirements to the value of £1,875,488 (£75,019 per annum) over the next 25 years. The value of the building to rebuild would be 6.5 million pounds. The general condition of the building fabric is considered to be of a satisfactory standard, however, given the size and range of facilities, there are some significant replacement items.

3.20 Investment in energy conservation projects is ongoing. The current Building Energy Rating is D (80). The annual energy cost is £40.25 per square metre (2008/2009). This is above the national average for a public building of this type. The facility is expected to achieve over 320,000 visits per annum. Go Active membership is currently 150.


3.22 A trend of increasing usage reflects the standard of the facility and development of the ‘Go Active’ membership package.



3.23 Improved attendance has also resulted in improved financial performance. The net deficit per visit has reduced by 17% from £1.60 (2004/5) to £1.32 (Forecast 2009/10).

Net Deficit 2009/2010 2008/2009 2007/2008 2006/2007 2005/2006 2004/2005

Sutton Leisure Centre £424,656 £377,270 £376,117 £370,135 £405,480 £459,921

Per Visit £1.32 £1.11. £1.34. £1.20 £1.38 £1.60

3.24 The Challenges and solutions going forward for Sutton Leisure Centre include:

• Maintaining quality of service and delivery ensuring effective communication between leisure services and the academy.• A lack of a fitness facility: Progress the development of a fitness facility on the site.• The track and Field facilities only have ‘training’ status: Complete track and field project to achieve competition status for all track

and field activities.• The whole life cost plan requires significant investment to protect the asset: plan and identify resources to implement the whole life

cost plan and maintain the asset to a good standard.


2009/2010 2008/2009 2007/2008 2006/2007 2005/2006 2004/2005

Sutton Leisure Centre 320,000 338,878 280,525 306561 293,508 286,206

28


Selwyn Jones Sports Centre

3.25 The swimming pool facilities at Selwyn Jones Sports Centre opened in 1970, comprising of a single 25metre five-lane swimming pool. In 1997 the facilities were extended to include, a four badminton court sports hall, fitness facility (35 stations), a full size floodlit Synthetic Turf Pitch and associated changing facilities. In 2004, some of the changing accommodation was converted to a sauna and steam facility.

3.26 The Centre forms parts of the Newton Le Willows High School Campus, but both services are operated independently. The High School book out the facilities they require on an annual basis, the remaining facilities being available to the public. This does create an interesting model, whereby public use and school lessons take place at the same time.

3.27 The campus is undergoing a significant transformation, with the High School being transferred in to a new academy (Hope Academy), resulting in the merger of two local high schools and an increase in pupils from 1000 to 1600. The new facilities are under construction on the current playing fields with completion anticipated for September 2011. The new facilities will include a four badminton court sports hall and associated changing rooms. The design has allowed for access to the sports and changing facilities independent from the main school buildings. This will create the potential for third party management of the sports facilities, with Selwyn Jones Sports Centre being best placed to provide this support.

3.28 Selwyn Jones Sports Centre is located to the east of the borough, in a comparatively affluent ward. The site is adjacent to the M6 and East Lancashire Road interchange, creating beneficial road transport links. This also provides the border for the borough, with Wigan and Warrington adjacent to the community of Newton. The centre is located six miles from the centre of St Helens, so historically and culturally is positioned outside the main areas of population. Attendance at the site is principally from the communities of Newton, Haydock and Ashton (Wigan)

3.29 This facility is well presented and has a modern ‘club’ feel when entering. The site provides a balanced offer of a Sportshall, Swimming Pool, Fitness facility, Training Room and STP. The facility strategy adopted in 2004 was to create four venues of similar quality and provision across the borough of St Helens, at: Parr, Sutton and the town centre (Queens).

3.30 The Whole Life Cost Plan (2005) has identified work requirements to the value of £821,000 (£32,840 per annum) over the next 25 years. The value of the building to rebuild would be 4.5 million pounds. The general condition of the building fabric is considered to be of a good standard.

3.31 Investment in energy conservation projects is ongoing. The current Building Energy Rating is C. At an annual energy cost of £39.11 per square metre (2008/2009) the costs are below the national average for a public building of this type. The facility is expected to achieve over 250,000 visits per annum. Gym membership is currently 850, with an anticipated capacity for 1000 members.




3.33 A trend of increasing usage reflects the standard of the facility and development of the ‘Go Active’ membership package.

2009/2010 2008/2009 2007/2008 2006/2007 2005/2006 2004/2005

Selwyn Jones Sports Centre 260,000 258,159 243,434 210,160 220,990 221,319

3.34 Improved attendance has also resulted in improved financial performance. Contribution from the fitness facility has reduced the net deficit per visit by 37%.

3.35 The Challenges and solutions going forward for Selwyn Jones Sports Centre include:

• Maintain quality of delivery while undergoing major site transformation: good communication with customers on impact of changes.• Capacity of the Centre to grow attendance, particularly within the fitness facilities: complete investigation of extending the current

fitness facility. • Condition of the STP surface: plan replacement in the next two years.• Financial impact of the academy developing sports facilities; investigate options to provide management services to the academy

outside core school hours.


Net Deficit 2009/2010 2008/2009 2007/2008 2006/2007 2005/2006 2004/2005

Selwyn Jones Sports Centre £185,384 £184,374 £237,736 £309,894 £337,172 £236,982

Per Visit £0.71 £0.71 £0.97 £1.47 £1.52 £1.07

30


Queens Park Leisure Centre

3.36 Boundary Road baths, as it was formerly known opened in July 1890. The pools built were of a traditional Victorian design at a cost of £11,310, measuring 31m x 9m and 14.5m x 6.9 m. In 1979 a four badminton court sports hall was attached to the building. In the 1980’s a floodlit all weather playing surface was added to the park. 118 years of community service came to an end on 31st March 2009, when the building became uneconomical to repair.

3.37 In 2005 a project started to investigate the feasibility of replacing Queens Park Leisure Centre. The Council approved a £4 million scheme in 2009 to replace the swimming pools with a single 25m x 12.5m pool, fitness facility (50 station), changing accommodation and refurbishment of the sports hall. The project is groundbreaking for St.Helens in the method chosen to fund the project. Using the ‘Prudential Borrowing Code’ a business case was developed to demonstrate that the savings generated from a new building would fund the cost of capital borrowing over twenty years.

3.38 The new facility forms part of a strategy to develop and provide quality facilities and affordable services within four locations across the Borough. The new Queens Park Leisure Centre serving the Town Centre district and providing the nearest facilities for people in the rural areas of the Borough, to the north of the town centre.

3.39 The condition of the building in comparison with other modern facilities resulted in a steady decline in participation.

Attendance New 2008/09 2007/08 2006/07 2005/06 2004/05

Queens Park Leisure Centre 240,000 81,029 114,006 119,739 127,957 124,866

3.40 The decline in attendance and increasing maintenance issue are also reflected in the operating costs. The new centre column indicates the predicting net operating cost for the new facility excluding borrowing costs.

Net deficit New 2008/09 2007/08 2006/07 2005/06 2004/05

Queens Park Leisure Centre £348,000 £823,877 £678,453 £536,541 £602,989 £476,678

Per visit £1.45 £10.16 £5.95 £4.48 £4.71 £3.81



3.41 The challenges and solutions going forward for Queens Park Leisure Centre include:

• Completing reconstruction on time and on budget.• Effective opening plan to attract users back to the new facility.• Repositioning Queens Park as predominantly a ‘fitness and well-being centre’ and not a traditional sports centre, in order to remain

competitive with private sector service providers.• Delivering the business plan to demonstrate affordability of the capital borrowing option chosen.

• Consider the future use of the former STP surface, which is now an unfenced hard play area within Queens Park Recreation Ground.

3.42 Ensuring that the Council’s Swimming Pools and Leisure Centres are fit for purpose is a key aspiration of the Council going forward as these will remain pivotal to the facility infra-structure across St Helens. It is evident from the analysis above that the facilities are generally performing well although the age of the buildings means an inevitable struggle to maintain and control energy costs. There are also some individual site challenges and opportunities, which will be explored in the wider strategic context.

3.43 Across St Helens other providers also have a key role to play.



Other Sectors

Education Sector

3.44 Building Schools for the Future (BSF) is the biggest single government investment in improving school buildings for over 50 years. The aim is to rebuild and renew the whole secondary school stock in England over a 10-15 year period to the cost of £45 billion. The Government’s aim is:

‘working together to create world-class, 21st century schools – environments which will inspire learning for decades to come and provide exceptional assets for the whole community’ (DfES)’

3.45 BSF heralded a new form of working relationships between schools, Council and its partners, which is focussed on serving the community. The BSF programme is charged with ‘putting schools at the heart of the community.’ Sport has been a big beneficiary, with over £10-£15m worth of investment in PE and sport facilities across a typical local Council area. Physical Education is one of the two subject specialisms within the BSF programme.

3.46 The BSF programme in St Helens was advanced and the sport and leisure proposals on the Schools sites are set out below. However with the change in government following the general election a decision was taken to review BSF. At this point in time it is uncertain if St. Helens will complete its planned programme.

Complete or progressing:

• Lansbury Bridge Special School – 4 court sports hall, fitness studio, teaching and hydro-therapy pool but with limited community access

• Cowley High School – existing 4-court hall and activity hall to remain, planning application has been approved for a full-sized 3G floodlit pitch, although funding is not currently secured

• Newton High School (Hope Academy)1 – new 4 court sports hall and activity hall for the school, shared site with Selwyn Jones Sports Centre

• Rainford High School – refurbished 4-court sports hall, new activity hall with designated community access, existing full-size sand-based floodlit STP and outdoor changing rooms will remain

1 The Hope Academy replaces St Aelred’s and St Augustine’s which had a 4-court and 3-court hall respectively. The proposal represents a like for like replacement. St Augustine’s was a small hall with little or no community use



• De la Salle High School – new 4 court sports hall and activity hall with designated community access, recent new full-sized sand based STP (not floodlit) will remain

• Sutton Sport College – no improvements proposed to the sports facilities

Under review:

• St Cuthbert’s Catholic High School– existing 4 court sports hall to be retained, new activity hall is proposed but not yet finalised, 60m x 40m floodlit STP will remain

• Haydock Sports College – existing 4-court hall and 60m x 40m sand based floodlit STP to be kept

• Rainhill High School – existing sports hall and activity hall, no STP provision planned

3.47 BSF will undoubtedly improve the quantity and quality of provision across St Helens and whilst efforts have been made to plan developments in a strategic way the timing of developments have made this difficult. What is critical to understand is how the existing Council provision alongside planned new developments can work in a co-ordinated basis and explore the impacts and gaps in provision. This is addressed in the next sections.



3.48 What is evident is that BSF developments will form a critical part of the overall network, particularly in terms of sports hall provision (see above) and must be affordable and accessible for wider community use. School sports hall usage in peak times is currently limited with the exception of Haydock and St Cuthbert’s. With a number of school halls having little or no community usage between the non-school hours of 5pm – 10 pm. The chart above illustrates the current usage patterns.

3.49 Flexibility in design, management and access will be critical in order to maximise community benefit from the BSF programme.

3.50 Other providers and significant built facilities across St Helens include a mixture of further education, private and voluntary sectors providers:

Further Education

• St.Helens College – Sports Hall at the Beacon Building and Fitness Facility on Main Campus

• Carmel College – Sports Hall



Private Sector

• The new St Helens RFL Stadium although the new stadium will not have any community sport provision

• Ruskin Leisure Limited –Health and Fitness provision

• Central Fitness (the old YMCA club) which offers extensive training programmes

• Football Fives Ltd – Soccer Centre

• Billinge Community Sport and Soccer Centre

• DW Fitness Centre

Voluntary Sector

• SKK Judo Centre of Excellence

• St Helens Gymnastics Centre

• Thatto Heath Amateur Rugby League Club – Indoor Training Barn (construction scheduled for November 2010)

3.51 To understand the challenges and opportunities across St Helens it is necessary to assess the levels and location of provision, understand the gaps in provision and strategic priorities by applying the various strategic planning tools set out in the earlier section of the report.



Overview of Needs

3.52 The analysis therefore looks at the key facility types – pools, halls, health and fitness and STPs before the impacts of BSF and helps us to understand the current surpluses and deficiencies and therefore provide the needs and evidence for future decision making. The analysis set out in the table below looks at quantitative issues and uses Sport England Active Places Power analysis tool.

St Helens Regional Average

England Average

Sports Halls Supply and Demand Balance 114.55 139.25 134Sports Hall Supply and Demand Balance (local authority owned) 18.71 34.57 30.66Swimming Pool Supply and Demand Balance 145.65 181.58 173.48Swimming Pool Supply and Demand Balance (local authority owned) 85.73 92.88 86.48Sports Hall Facilities per 1,000 67.06 82.69 80.5Swimming Pools per 1,000 12.4 16.88 18.84STPs per 1,000 (all) 0.02 0.04 0.04STPs per 1,000 (3G) 0 0.01 0.01Health and Fitness Stations per 1,000 3.98 6.12 5.59

3.53 St.Helens falls below the regional averages for all facility types, which indicates the authority area has levels or facility provision levels, which are below the benchmark for the region and where action may be required. In terms of supply and demand balance for sports halls, provision is considered to be comfortable at 120% or above and in terms of swimming pools; the comfort level is 130%. Where authorities fall significantly below these levels, there are considered to be potential deficiencies.

3.54 The key headlines are:

• There appears to be a theoretical deficiency in sports hall provision; particularly provision owned and managed by the Council

• There appears to be potential to develop additional Synthetic Turf Pitch (STP) provision to bring St Helens up to benchmark standards; there are no third generation STP in St Helens

• There appears to be significant under provision in relation to health and fitness stations



3.55 These findings accord with the Council’s Leisure Needs Study undertaken by PMP Consulting on behalf of the Council , which was completed in 2005 and identified a number of potential priorities;

• a deficiency in health and fitness of circa 150 stations,

• a new town centre swimming pool,

• an indoor bowls centre,

• an indoor tennis centre,

• a commercial 5 a’side centre

• an ice skating facility

The report also concluded that the existing Council sites were in good strategic locations and supported continued investment, one of the recommendations was to develop health and fitness provision at Sutton Leisure Centre. The issue of potential sports hall deficiency was identified and it was recommended to address it through partnership working with schools via the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme.

3.56 Analysis of quantitative issues needs to be set against issues of accessibility and location. This is particularly significant in St Helens given the number pockets of deprivation.

3.57 In terms of accessibility to indoor sport the standard set by the Council was a 20-minute walk time. This is in line with Audit Commission and Sport England recommendation for provision in urban areas. This standard also reflects the need for local provision as set out in the context. It will be important to consider locations, which maximise accessibility based on the 20 minute/ 2km walk to catchment. If St.Helens is committed to driving forward participation the emphasis on local provision is key. This profile is broadly the same for sports halls.

3.58 This accessibility standard has been used to assess the spatial distribution of facilities, which is set out later in map form under each individual analysis section. The next section considers the key needs and evidence and strategic priorities under each typology and considers the type and location of provision to best meet Active St Helens aims.



Swimming Pools

3.59 The analysis set out is based on the Active Places data sets, which as part of the FIS process was signed-off and agreed by the Council as an accurate picture of provision across St Helens.

3.60 Analysis of swimming facilities in St Helens indicates that there are currently eleven swimming pool sites across St Helens. Four of these sites are Council managed facilities which offer full public access. Post BSF Sutton Leisure Centre will transfer to Sutton High Academy. Queens Park Leisure Centre is currently being re-developed to provide a modern 25m x 6-lane pool. Parr Pool has benefited from recent refurbishment of the changing rooms via the free-swimming initiative.

3.61 The Sport England Calculator (SFC) sets out the demand for pool water space in St Helens as 1,804 sqm or 8.49 pools. Supply and demand would therefore appear to be broadly in accord based on the SFC. The earlier table highlights that supply and demand balance and facilities per thousand are below the regional and national averages but not below comfort levels.

3.62 It should be noted that the refurbishment of Queens Pool will reduce the pool area, thus reducing the supply.

3.63 The Facilities Planning Model (FPM) analysis across Merseyside reveals the % of unmet demand in terms of swimming pool provision is not significant enough in one place to justify a requirement for a new pool within the Merseyside area. Any new investment into swimming pools should prioritise enhancement of existing facility stock and look at opportunities for rationalisation or replacement with better facilities to improve participation rates through better quality and more attractive facilities.

3.64 This is very much in line with the Council’s current policy.

3.65 Travel time analysis provides information on personal access to the nearest facility in terms of travel time and provides a spatial dimension to the provision pattern. The map sets out illustrate travel times to swimming pools in St Helens based on walk catchments.



Time to the Nearest site

3.66 The analysis illustrates that over 40% of residents are within a 20 minute walk time of a pool, nearly 80% are within a 30 minute walk-time. Areas to the north of the borough around Rainford and Billinge (red and orange triangles) represent the areas of greatest need, where residents are outside these walk catchments.

3.67 In terms of school swimming a significant amount of ongoing work is being done to support the primary swim programme, to raise standards and increase the number of Year 6 children achieving the KS2 target of swimming (25m unaided). Schools are now recognising and valuing the programme more than previously and, as a result, are sending more children at a younger age. The public pools currently in the borough are struggling to support the programme, if the pool space and costs are not protected for the swim programme this may have a detrimental effect. This is particularly important in terms of protecting access at school sites, particularly critical in terms of the current discussions at Sutton.


Facility type: Swimming PoolSub Facility Type: AllLocal Authority: St. Helens DistrictTravel Type: Travel TimeMode of Travel: By Walk

Symbol Range (minutes) Site count 2.05 - 17.756 218

17.757 - 33.462 262 33.463 - 49.168 62

49.169 - 64.874 24 64.875 - 80.58 21

40


3.68 The mapping overleaf illustrates the spatial dimension to the challenges ahead.

3.69 Map 1 shows the 4 Council Public Pools with a 20-minute walk catchments and the pools in neighbouring authorities at Scotch Barn Swimming Pool, Knowlsey, and Ashton Leisure Centre, Wigan. The map illustrates a good geographical spread of pools and highlights the area of accessibility deficiency to the North West of the borough in the Rainford and Billinge area.



3.70 Map 2 shows the impact of other pools on the distribution across St Helens.



3.71 The final map (Map 3) shows the pool provision post BSF. When Scotch Barn Leisure Centre is closed by Knowlsey Council, what is evident is the critical strategic importance of Sutton Leisure Centre in the south of the borough, and the need to ensure the pool is fully accessible for community use.



Swimming Pool Summary

3.72 Strategic priorities for future swimming pool development are therefore:

• Continue investment in the key Council sites at Parr, Sutton and Selwyn Jones, which are well located to serve key priority areas

• The new Queens Park Leisure Centre and refurbished Parr Pool meets the previously identified need for new town centre provision

• Ensure the opening of the New Queens Park Leisure Centre is programmed and marketed to deliver increases in participation across priority areas and key target groups

• Seek to protect access for school swimming within swimming pool programmes

• Consider the use of temporary pools to address access to school swimming in the areas not served by permanent pool facilities and be part of the strategy to deliver school swimming alongside the programming issues set out above

• Any additional need for provision to be explored to serve the north and north west of the borough (Rainford, Billinge and Seneley Green) through partnership and co-location opportunities. Although it should be noted the lower levels of population in the areas (only 4%) and relative low priority in terms of health, participation and deprivation indices (higher levels of car ownership)



Sports Halls


3.74 Across St Helens there are 19 facilities containing sports halls with three badminton courts or more. The total number of courts provided is circa 79. There are further sites containing a sports hall of one or two badminton courts in size. While these sites are excluded from demand modelling as they are unsuitable for many sports, they remain important community facilities. Activities in these halls may reduce demand for the larger halls across St Helens. Three of the facilities are owned and managed by the local authority and offer full public access. These facilities provide a total of 16 courts.

3.75 The BSF programme will see changes and improvements to both the quality and the quantity of facilities and this will be returned to later in this section.

3.76 The Sport England Calculator (SFC) sets out the demand for sports halls in St Helens as 50.09 courts or 12.52 sports halls. Again on the basis of the SFC supply and demand would appear to be in balance.

3.77 The Facilities Planning Model (FPM) analysis across Merseyside reveals the % of unmet demand with comfort factors applied as number of courts is the highest in Liverpool (8), Sefton (5) and Wirral (5); but this demand is spread across the local authority areas. Any investment in sports halls should prioritise enhancement of existing facility stock and look at opportunities for rationalisation or replacement with better facilities to improve participation rates. The FPM analysis also notes BSF will play a major role in addressing provision.

3.78 What is significant in St Helens is the age of provision with nearly all existing halls over 30-years old. The only new hall built in the last 20-years is at the YMCA Beacon Building in 2007, Lansbury Bridge School in 2005 and Selwyn Jones Sports Centre in 1995. All halls apart from Sutton Leisure Centre (8-courts) and Broadway (6 courts) are 4-courts or smaller, which restricts the activities and flexibility. Cowley Language College- Broadway Campus was built in the 1960s.

3.79 In terms of the analysis it is evident that provision in St Helens is below regional and national averages and slightly below the comfort levels. When just looking at the public sector provision; it is evident that this is way below the comfort level, thus illustrating the importance of the network of halls provided by the education, voluntary and private sectors and the importance of ensuring these are accessible to the wider community.

3.80 84% of the sports hall space is controlled by education. As set out earlier current community access to school sport facilities is patchy. Age is critical across the sports hall stock and the new halls coming on-stream through BSF can improve this picture. BSF presents a significant opportunity but also a threat if not delivered to maximise community use.



3.81 Travel time analysis provides information on personal access to the nearest facility in terms of travel time and provides a spatial dimension to the provision pattern. The maps set out illustrate travel times to halls based on walk times.

3.82 The analysis illustrates that over 70% of residents are within a 20 minute walk time of a sports hall. Virtually 100% of the population are within a 33 minute walk-time. Areas to illustrated by the red and orange triangles represent the areas of greatest need outside these walk catchments.



Time to the Nearest siteFacility type: Sports HallSub Facility Type: AllLocal Authority: St. Helens DistrictTravel Type: Travel TimeMode of Travel: By Walk


8.957 - 17.092 232 17.093 - 25.228 124

25.229 - 33.364 40 33.365 - 41.5 2

46


3.84 Map 4 shows the Council managed facilities with a 20-minute walk catchment. The map illustrates gaps in provision.



3.85 Map 5 shows the other halls currently available for public use and the impact on spatial distribution.



3.86 Map 6 shows the provision pattern post BSF and illustrates the importance of the BSF network to providing a full and accessible network of sports halls across St Helens. The map highlights the key strategic school sport sites to serve the priority areas from Haydock, Blackbrook, Parr, Sutton, Rainhill and Bold and the importance of Rainford Technology College. The analysis also highlights the gap in Bilinge and Seneley Green.



3.87 Map 7 shows the impact of smaller activity hall provision, particularly in meeting gaps in the Billinge and Seneley Green area.



Sports Hall Summary

3.88 Strategic priorities for future sports hall development are therefore:

• Explore the future of Broadway Leisure Centre and seek to protect access to the 6-court facility for sport

• In addition ensure community use is maximised at key strategic schools sites (which meet critical community gaps) to deliver accessibility, namely; Rainford High Technology College, Haydock Sport College, St Cuthbert’s Catholic High School and Rainhill High School

• As part of the BSF programme seek to deliver smaller flexible hall spaces / dance studios to provide programming opportunities to meet needs of key target groups; 16-24, women and girls and the over 50s. Ensuring these facilities have adequate storage so equipment can be safely stored to maximise available activity space and protect valuable assets.

• In order to support schools and take a more strategic approach develop a centralised booking system to allow the community to access all halls to ensure facilities are programmed and marketed to deliver on a co-ordinated basis to key target groups and priority areas

• Seek to develop school / club partnerships around key school hub sites to deliver activity and participation programmes

• Seek to work with schools to develop day-time access and deliver day-time use on school sites to meet the needs of key target groups; particularly women and the over 50s

• Ensure the network of smaller activity halls are accessible to provide flexible opportunities to meet the needs of key target groups identified in Active St Helens

• Monitor community use and access to school sites post BSF and address any future deficiencies arising from a lack of community access



Synthetic Turf Pitches


3.90 Across St Helens there are 5 full-sized sand based pitch sites currently in operation across St Helens at Selwyn Jones Sports Centre, Rainford High Technology College, Sutton Leisure Centre, Ruskin Leisure Limited and De La Salle High School although this is not floodlit, which limits the impact.

3.91 Based on this current level of provision Active Places Power analysis sets out a ratio of pitch provision across St Helens of 0.02 STPs per 1,000 population. This compares with a ratio of 0.04 at regional and national level. To bring St Helens in line with regional and national ratios would require a further 3 pitches.

3.92 In recent years technological advancements has seen a new type of synthetic pitch developed, known most commonly as third generation (3G). The main difference with these surfaces is that the surfaces have a longer carpet pile and rubber infill with similar characteristics to grass pitches in terms of ball roll and bounce. The surface is suitable for football and rugby but less so for hockey.

3.93 The top range 3G surfaces have now been approved by both UEFA and FIFA for high level competitive play. It is also important to note that in future years it is considered likely that these surfaces will be officially sanctioned for amateur football league play. Indeed there are examples of leagues across the country already being played on 3G surfaces. This will have significant implications in terms of patterns and levels of usage on such pitches and should be factored in when developing a full Playing Field Strategy. In light of such developments the FA have set out a working demand parameter of:

• 1 x third generation pitch per 60,000 people or 100 teams within a reasonable catchment area.

3.94 Based on the population of St Helens of 177,500 this equates to circa 3 x 3g pitches. There are 259 senior and junior football teams, which equates to 2.6 pitches, there are also 82 rugby league teams, which would be a key user of 3g pitch provision. There are currently no 3g pitches in St Helens.

3.95 It is worth noting what community uses synthetic turf pitches are likely to be used. Full sized pitches are needed for two principal purposes:

• Hockey – usually played on a sand based surface. The higher levels of hockey are still played sometimes on water based pitches but these are now becoming less popular due to cost and environmental impact

• Football - 11 a side football (where leagues permit). Also used in sub-divided form for training and five / six a side matches.



• Schools - STPs can be of significant benefit in curriculum delivery. Sand based pitches are probably more flexible in terms of a teaching and experiencing a range of sports. However if to be used as a community facility it is important to protect the pitch and ensure it does not become part of the hard play provision of the School.

New fourth generation pitches 4G are being developed and coming on to the market to meet the needs of both hockey and football.

3.96 Within St Helens there is only one hockey club, Newton Ladies with one adult team, which play at Selwyn Jones therefore increasing supply of pitches for hockey would not be a sensible strategic approach. Development of 3G provision, in line with FA guidance and the development of smaller flexible spaces would appear a more sensible strategic direction to meet the theoretical gaps in provision.

3.97 Travel time analysis provides information on personal access to the nearest facility in terms of travel time and provides a spatial dimension to the provision pattern. The maps set out illustrate travel times to STPs based on walk times.

3.98 Over 61% of the St Helens population are within a 30 minute walktime of a STP. Areas down from Billinge, through Haydock, Blackbrook and Parr (red and orange triangles) represent the areas of greatest need outside these walk catchments.


Time to the Nearest site

Facility type: Synthetic Turf Pitch

Sub Facility Type: All

Local Authority: St. Helens DistrictTravel Type: Travel TimeMode of Travel: By Walk


16.575 - 31.098 223

31.099 - 45.622 137 45.623 - 60.146 66

60.147 - 74.67 25

53


3.99 The mapping below illustrates the spatial dimension to the challenges ahead.

3.100 Map 8 shows the existing full-size floodlit STP provision and highlights the gaps in the Blackbrook, Parr, Haydock, Billinge areas of the borough.



3.101 Map 9 shows the provision pattern with the addition of the existing smaller 60m x 40m pitches, which help to meet some of the provision gaps.



3.102 Map 10 shows the provision of STPs post BSF.



STP Summary

3.103 Strategic priorities for future STP development are therefore:

• Seek to deliver increased STP provision through a combination of 3G and smaller 60m x 40m provision

• This should be up to a maximum of 3 additional full-size pitches or equivalent and should focus on areas of accessibility deficiency

• The authority should seek to deliver one new full-sized 3g pitch as a minimum to deliver the identified shortfall

• Provision should be focussed on school sites to maximise daytime and evening usage and provide a critical mass of provision for community use

• Potential new provision should focus on either side of the town centre potential sites to the north are; Cowley Language College, Queens Park or Ruskin Leisure Limited, to the south Sherdley Business Park, and a 60m x 40m provision at Rainhill High School

• Priority to protect existing provision at Rainford High School, Haydock Sports College and St.Cuthberts Catholic High School

• Selwyn Jones is a key strategic site and replacement of the existing surface should be prioritised, with consideration of the surface dependent on other developments (above)

• Seek to address the gap in provision in the Billinge and Seneley Green and Moss Bank areas of the borough



Health and Fitness


3.105 Across St Helens there are 20 health and fitness sites but only 4 key public sites. This equates to a ratio of 3.98 facilities per 1,000 population, which compares to a regional average of 6.12 and a national average of 5.59. In order to bring St Helens up to the regional average would require an additional 406 stations.

3.106 The balance between commercial sector provision and public provision in terms of sites and number of fitness stations it is heavily skewed to the private sector. To get a good balance a ratio of 50:50 is desirable, this helps to deliver greater public accessibility and helps to ensure price as a barrier can be better overcome.

3.107 Given the participation and demographic / health issues in St Helens and the popularity of health and fitness as an activity the large dependence on the private sector is a critical issue. Potential exists to increase supply in the public and education sectors; providing small-scale local accessible provision to meet participation needs. Increase in provision at Parr and the new Queens Park Leisure Centre will help this position but potential exists to increase public supply further.



3.108 Travel time analysis provides information on personal access to the nearest facility in terms of travel time and provides a spatial dimension to the provision pattern. The maps set out illustrate travel times to health and fitness facilities based on walk times.

3.109 Because of the extensive provision 80% of St Helens residents are within a 20-minute walk-time catchment of a health and fitness facility. Areas in the south of the borough around Sutton and Bold and in the north at Billinge and Rainford (red and orange triangles) represent the areas of greatest need outside these walk catchments.



Time to the Nearest siteFacility type: Health and Fitness SuiteSub Facility Type: AllLocal Authority: St. Helens DistrictTravel Type: Travel TimeMode of Travel: By Walk

Symbol Range (minutes) Site count

1.18 - 13.814 263

13.815 - 26.448 210

26.449 - 39.082 57

39.083 - 51.716 35

51.717 - 64.35 22

59


3.111 Map 11 shows all existing health and fitness provision, with 20 minute catchments around the key public facilities and highlights the lack of provision to serve the priority areas of Sutton, Bold and Thatto Heath and Rainford, Billinge and Seneley Green in the north and north-west.

3.112 In summary there is potential for modest additional health and fitness provision located at key strategic sites through both the BSF programme and as part of any long-term rationalisation of the Council’s stock. The new Sutton Academy would be a clear priority for development of health and fitness provision. Adding health and fitness at Rainford would also help with the viability and sustainability of the school / community facilities and make this a key strategic sport site to deliver to the Rainford community.



Other Specialist / Built Facilities


3.114 The clear focus and drive for St Helens as set out in Active St Helens and reflected in the vision for this strategy is a focus on health, physical activity and community delivery as opposed to wider talent development and pathways.

3.115 The previous Leisure Needs Study of 2005 set out various aspirations in terms of indoor tennis, bowls, ice skating etc. the context and focus for the borough has now changed.

3.116 The Regional Needs and Evidence base has now also been developed for the north-west region. This highlights the priorities on a sub-regional basis for Merseyside. St Helens only features in the context of the new Rugby League stadium. The authority has no aspirations to deliver on a sub-regional basis for sport, neighbouring authorities most notably Liverpool provide the acknowledged home for a number of specialist provisions.

3.117 The location of St Helens to neighbouring Liverpool and Manchester with its specialist facility network and the access of the borough to performance facilities across Merseyside and Greater Manchester means the focus of provision in St Helens is less on the delivery of sporting excellence but as clearly articulated in terms of strategic priorities on health and community based provision.



3.118 Active Places Power analysis for specialist / built provision reveals the following.

Facility Typ

e

St Helens Provision

St Helens Ratio

Regional

National

Comment

Indoor Bowls

• No provision the nearest facility is Ellesmere Port

• SFC suggests need for 11 rinks, 1.84 centres

• 0 per 1,000

• 0.01

• 0.04 • Key sport for some of St Helens high market segments

• Potential exists to develop an indoor bowls facility

• Potential opportunities to develop a partnership project at Victoria Park

Indoor Tennis

• No provision • 0 per 1,000 • 0.02

• 0.03 • No aspirations to develop indoor tennis

Ice Rinks

• No provision • 0 per 1,000 • 0.33

• 1.06 • No aspirations to develop

Athletics Tracks

• Sutton Leisure Centre 6-lane synthetic track

• 0.03 per 1,000 • 0.05

• 0.05 • Level of provision in line with needs.

• Regional training and competition needs met in Manchester and Merseyside

• Importance of protecting



Facility Typ

e

St Helens Provision

St Helens Ratio

Regional

National

Comment

access to and further investing in Sutton for borough wide athletics development

3.119 As set out throughout, sport and physical activity also has a significant role to play in tackling health inequalities. Interventions at school are critical in developing lifelong participation the BSF programme is therefore critical and the need to develop flexible spaces for more informal activities is a vital role. Sport, physical activity and community access are therefore a key element of the BSF programme. The BSF programme and the increase in sports spaces, enables the authority to strategically programme provision between schools and Council provision. Both will remain a crucial element of the provision mix.

3.120 At national level if the sports sector is to meet the participation challenge the need to do things differently is evident. Recent research by Loughborough University has called for a move away from team games and the National Competition Framework and to focus on health related exercise in schools. This has caused much debate within the sport and leisure sector and what is emerging is a consensus that is not just about traditional sport and neither is it about health related exercise – it is about all of this. Both BSF provision and the Council stock have a role to play.

3.121 In summary the focus for St Helens is on the provision of flexible, non specialist provision to deliver in priority areas and to target groups. This has been the focus of the BSF programme. Wider NGB needs are met in Merseyside and Manchester and given the geographical location of St Helens and travel accessibility this should not negatively impact on St Helens residents accessing performance opportunities.

3.122 The authority should build on the current strengths in terms of the club infra-structure. Football, Rugby League, Gymnastics, Martial Arts and Boxing will remain important and should be invested in to deliver sustainable club based developments and opportunities. Links to the outdoor sport pitch strategy will be important to identify specific opportunities. Indoor Bowls presents a potential opportunity but further feasibility work will be required. The growing interest in Dance is also an activity that should be considered as facility planning is progressed.

Summary



3.123 The needs analysis sets out a clear way forward for St Helens to deliver a facility network which addresses issues of participation and health across the borough. There appears sufficient provision in terms of sports hall and swimming pools however it is critical that the current stock continues to be invested in and the opportunities set out for school based provision to enhance the network are maximised through on-going investment and management arrangements which protect and enhance community use. Opportunities exist to develop STP provision, particularly third generation pitches and flexible community based health and fitness opportunities. St Helens is unlikely to attract any additional significant private sector operators.


SECTION 4 – CONCLUSION AND WAY FORWARD

Conclusions and Way Forward

Introduction

4.1 This report set out the needs and evidence for indoor sport and sets out the key strategic priorities for St Helens. The report should be read in conjunction with Active St Helens, the playing pitch and outdoor sport strategy and the community access policy. Together they chart a way forward to meet the key strategic priorities and needs of residents in terms of sport and physical activity across St Helens.

4.2 The indoor sport and leisure facility strategy has been developed on the basis of what is important to St Helens, the strategic, participation and demographic priorities; the current profile of participation and challenges; the current facility infra-structure and the gaps in provision based on quantitative and accessibility assessments.

Key Principles

4.3 The key principles under which the indoor sport and leisure facility priorities will be taken forward and delivered are:

• The Council will seek to work with all partners to ensure existing provision is maximised to the full

• It will be critical to maintain and enhance existing provision, particularly on school sites in line with needs and evidence set out

• Better community access to the existing infra-structure will be critical to achieve, particularly in respect of school based provision coming on stream through BSF

• Investment in the Council’s own leisure stock should continue to be prioritised as it is well established, well used and located to serve priority areas

• Investment should focus on areas of the greatest health and participation deprivation in line with the needs and evidence set out

• Investment should be targeted to deliver on the authorities health agenda to key target groups; women and girls, 14-24 year olds and over 50s. Any project should include an equality impact assessment to ensure the facility addresses equality in both its design and operation

• Facility development alone will not meet the challenges of St Helens and any developments should seek to address critical issues of programming and marketing for hard to reach groups



• Identified gaps in provision should be delivered through partnership working, co-location and hub developments

4.4 The vision set for the strategy work was to:

‘develop a network of accessible facilities to support the creation of a healthy, physically active borough, where all members of the community can take part in physical activities and sport in a wider range of activities.’

4.5 Adopting the principles outlined and delivering on the specific priorities identified will enable St Helens to achieve its vision and the priorities set out in Active St Helens.

4.6 The key priorities identified, ‘what the report says’ are as follows:

• Levels of sports hall and swimming pool provision across St Helens are good, in order to maintain this the Council must continue to invest in their stock on an on-going basis

• Access to school sites is critical to maintain the integrity of the facility network; design, access and management of school sport facilities must be developed to maximise community use

• Continue investment in the key Council sites at Parr, Sutton and Selwyn Jones, which are well located, with good catchments to serve key priority areas

• Ensure the opening of the New Queens Park Leisure Centre is programmed and marketed to deliver increases in participation across priority areas and key target groups

• Ensure community use is maximised at key strategic schools sites (which meet critical community gaps) to deliver accessibility, namely; Rainford High Technology College, Haydock Sport College, St Cuthbert’s and Rainhill High School

• Seek to deliver increased STP provision through a combination of 3g and smaller 60m x 40m provision, This should be up to a maximum of 3 additional full-size pitches or equivalent and should focus on areas of accessibility deficiency:

Potential new provision should focus on either side of the town centre potential sites to the North are Cowley Language College, Queens Park or Ruskin Leisure Limited and to the south Sherdley Business Park, and a 60m x 40m provision at Rainhill High School



• New health and fitness provision to be developed to meet local community needs; priorities for development at Selwyn Jones Sports Centre and in the south, north and north west of the borough

4.7 The specific priorities identified are in line with the anticipated new PPG17 guidance and highlight future requirements and where appropriate strategic site locations. It will be important that these are in turn reflected in the Council’s evolving planning policy.

Conclusions

4.7 This report will now go through a process of consultation as follows:

• Report to the Chief Officers Group

• Report to the Council Cabinet


Appendix 1 – Introduction to FIS

Introduction to FIS

Facility Planning Model

A strategic modelling tool used to estimate the level of demand for sports facilities within the local population, comparing this with the supply of facilities within a given local area. Taking account of the size and location of the facilities, the model highlights any inadequacies in facility provision. The model is the most sophisticated sports facility planning model and accounts for:

• the age and attractiveness of facilities

• comfort factor

• affluence factors

• travel times

• cross border migration and competing facilities

It is important to understand how the model works. It sets out the following:

• current supply and demand for the Local Authority area and relativity to the county and regional levels

• the level of demand for the facility type

• the scale of satisfied and unmet demand

• how full the facilities are estimated to be and level of utilisation

• level of demand met by provision within the LA area as opposed to neighbouring authority provision

• how much demand is imported into the LA area from neighbouring authority residents

• travel profile for each facility type

The analysis is presented in detail in the main body of the report. When understanding the analysis it is important to note the following definitions:



• Visits Per Week in the Peak Period (VPWPP) – this is how demand is expressed. For pools a peak period of 52 hours per week is used and it is estimated that 63% of the total weekly throughput occurs during this focussed time of the week. For halls the respective figures are 40.5 hours per week and 60%.

• Comfort Factor – this in essence is applied to the assessment of demand and takes into account that if the facilities were full to their capacity there would not simply be the space to undertake the activity comfortably. To account for this the capacities of facilities are reduced to 70% for pools and 80% for halls.

• Included and not included – there are a number of facilities not included in the run of the model. Any facilities with no community access at all are excluded. In addition small scale facilities are excluded. For pools this means pools with areas less than 160m² and/or less than 20m in length and for sports halls less than 459m² (i.e. less than a 3 court sports hall). Where there are small pools or halls on the same site as larger pools and halls these are included as they provide added capacity to the main provision.

Sport England Calculator

The Sports Facilities Calculator (SFC) is a planning tool which helps to estimate the amount of demand for key community sports facilities that is created by a given population. The SFC has been created by Sport England to mainly help local planning authorities quantify how much additional demand for the key community sports facilities (swimming pools and sports halls), is generated by populations of new growth, development and regeneration areas. It’s important to remember that the SFC looks at demand for facilities and does not take into account any existing supply of facilities.

Whilst the SFC can be used to estimate the swimming and sports hall needs for whole area populations, such as for a whole local authorities, there are dangers in how these figures are subsequently used at this level in matching it with current supply for strategic gap analysis. The figure that is produced is a total demand figure for the chosen population. It is important to note that the SFC does not take account of, facility location compared to demand, capacity and availability of facilities; opening hours, cross boundary movement of demand, travel networks and topography, attractiveness of facilities.

For these reasons total demand figure generated by the SFC should be treated with caution and not simply be compared with facilities within the same area or indeed as an ultimate measure of need. The current community facilities that the SFC can be used for are; Swimming pools, Sports halls, Indoor bowls centres

Active Places Power

The most comprehensive online database available of sports facilities allowing the user to plan more strategically for sport by using a number of tools. Active Places Power provides a planning tool for sports facilities. It is designed to assist in investment decisions and the development of infrastructure improvement strategies for sport. Active Places also allows us to benchmark the sports provision in



local authority areas within the same Office of National Statistics (ONS) family cluster. Through Active Places it is possible to use catchment maps to examine provision against a wide variety of Census variables, and carry out simple supply and demand analysis for pools, halls and indoor bowls.

The strategic planning tools within Active Places use a database of facilities agreed by the local authority, which reflects provision on the ground. The tools within Active Places are many and varied, typically we have used the following, with the results set out in the report:

• Facilities per 1,000 Population – calculates how many people there are compared with how much facility space there is within a given area and gives an estimated ‘unit per 1,000 population’. The units are different depending on what type of facility is selected.

• ONS Comparison & Classification Report – this provides benchmarks for the number of facilities provided against other ‘similar’ local authorities around the country. ONS have taken all local authorities and compared them using various indicators with each other, producing a list with their ‘similar’ authorities.

• Travel Time (Catchments) – Provides information on personal access to the nearest facility in terms of travel time of users (using output area centroids). Travel time is based on OS Oscar data and ignores local authority boundaries.

• Supply & Demand Balance (Indoor Bowls Only) - Examines local supply and demand, using capacity (visits per week during the peak period) within the local authority area. It compares the total demand against the total supply in the area, and expresses it as a percentage of supply. This does not look at location of facilities, or supply and demand across administrative boundaries. Therefore the FPM model is far better to use than this tool and given it can only be used for pools, halls and indoor bowls.

NOTE: the analysis is reliant upon the Active Places database being up to date part of the FIS process and legacy has been to review the database and sign off the accuracy of the provision.

Data Sources - Participation

The focus of the FIS is to encourage local authorities to develop a facility infra-structure, which meets the needs of sport and is participation led not. Getting away from the notion of providing facilities for facilities sake.

Therefore to provide critical context the following data sources have been used:

Active People



The Active People Survey provides by far the largest sample size ever established for a sport and recreation survey. This allows detailed analysis of participation, volunteering and satisfaction levels and to establish positive and negative trends to high levels of precision for Local Authority areas and even for the relatively small participant sports.

Market Segmentation

Sport England has developed a segmentation model, made up of nineteen ‘sporting’ segments which will help us to understand the attitudes, motivations and perceived barriers to sports participation – i.e. the propensity for the local population to take part in certain sports.

By reviewing this against facility need assessment and looking at the spread of the dominant segments within the local authority area against the supply of facilities we can begin to assess whether there are any potential mismatches in the levels of supply and demand for certain sports in order to inform any priorities, interventions and investment plans for the local area.

The segmentation model therefore enables us to develop tailored interventions, communicate more effectively with our target market and to better understand participation in the context of life stage and lifecycles. Created by Experian Business Strategies, the segments are based on survey data (Active People and Taking Part Surveys) and external data sources (e.g. neighbourhood statistics, census data and health data).

Whilst these tools have been important in compiling the needs and evidence they are not the panacea and have been balanced with local intelligence and a range of qualitative data sources, consultation and the local policy context. This balance of local analysis and objective data sources provides a robust needs and evidence base on which authorities can plan future facility needs.

Scoping

The FIS works on the basis that no two authorities are the same and therefore their support needs will differ. The first stage of the FIS intervention is therefore to get and understanding of where the authority are, the challenges faced and how the service can best support taking the Council forward. This is done via scoping.

The scoping work was undertaken over 2/3 days, and consisted of the following elements:

Document review

Consultation with key officers

Scoping report and presentation



The document review analysed the existing strategic documents within the authority and identified the golden thread linking community planning documents through to statutory planning. Seeking to ask the questions; are strategies and policies aligned? Do they use the same needs and evidence base? Are the aims for sport and recreation clear and appropriate are they consistently applied throughout documents? The document review comments on the links between documents identifying any inconsistencies and gaps.

1.24 Alongside the desk exercise the next critical stage is to interview the key local authority officers; leisure, planning policy, regeneration and education (where BSF is a factor) to understand how well the authority is connected. Documents may look to have the golden



thread but what is it like in reality? Do officers share a common sense of vision for sport and recreation and have a common understanding and application of the needs and evidence base. As part of the consultation it is also critical to get a sense of the role of sport within the LSP, is sport represented, by whom and what is its influence?

1.25 In addition the scoping also comments on the quality of the existing documents and the needs and evidence base that has been used to arrive at the existing outcomes. The purpose of the FIS is to raise the quality of strategic sport and leisure planning within the sector and a key role is therefore to challenge and support authorities to improve existing and future strategic work.

1.26 So for instance if a Playing Pitch Strategy (PPS) is in existence, is it robust? Has it used the up to date methodology and future population projections? In terms of a PPG17 study has it looked at both indoor and outdoor facilities can it demonstrate a clear linked between consultation and local standard setting? If Sport England tools have been used; Active People, Active Places, Sport England Calculator (see above) have they been used correctly and appropriate conclusions being drawn. Within the appendix is the full scoping methodology, which sets out what makes a good and bad strategy.

1.27 The final element of the scoping is a report back (short bullet point report) and presentation to the Steering Group based on the findings of the document review and consultation, this then forms the basis of the work programme for the FIS work.


Appendix 2 – SCOPING METHODOLOGY

Scoping Methodology

Introduction

1. The purpose of this paper is to set out a standard methodology and approach for the initial scoping work with an authority, which forms part of Stage 1 – Setting the Vision.

2. The scoping work should be the first task undertaken once the authority has formally signed-up to the programme and the Steering Group has been established. It should therefore follow the set-up. The work should help to define the status of strategic planning within the authority, identify how joined up the work is, where any gaps exist and where the FIS should focus its activities.

3. The work should be undertaken by the Genesis consultant with the support of the authority and reported back to the Steering Group. The findings should in-turn become the agenda and action plan for the FIS work.

Methodology

4. The scoping work should take circa 3/4 days, depending on the size of the authority and should consist of the following elements:

• Document review

• Consultation with key officers

• Scoping report and presentation

5. The document review should seek to analyse the existing strategic documents within the authority and identify the golden thread linking community planning documents through to statutory planning. Are strategies and policies aligned? Do they use the same needs and evidence base? Are the aims for sport and recreation clear and appropriate are they consistently applied throughout documents? The document review should comment on the links between documents identifying any inconsistencies and gaps using the framework identified by Sport England, see overleaf.

6. The identification of gaps and drivers can in turn help to begin to shape the FIS work.



7. In addition the review should also seek to comment on the quality of the existing documents and the needs and evidence base that has been used to arrive at the existing outcomes. The purpose of the FIS is to raise the quality of strategic sport and leisure planning within the sector and a key role will be to challenge and support authorities to improve existing and future strategic work.

8. So for instance if a Playing Pitch Strategy (PPS) is in existence, is it robust? Has it used the up to date methodology and future population projections? In terms of a PPG17 study has it looked at both indoor and outdoor facilities can it demonstrate a clear linked between consultation and local standard setting? If Sport England tools have been used (Active People, Active Places, Sport England Calculator) have they been used correctly and appropriate conclusions being drawn. The table below sets out in simple bullet form what makes a good strategy; from the sustainable community strategy, through sport specific strategies to statutory documents.

9. The table below sets out a starting point for the type of issues we should be addressing.

Document Review Key Issues to Explore

Sustainable Community Strategy • Does sport feature?

• Does it demonstrate the role of sport to shared priorities, is a clear vision set out?

• Do the new PSA targets (21 and 22) feature; participation and the 5 hour offer

Local Development Framework • Does it adopt a robust needs and evidence base linked to the priorities for sport?

PPG17 • Does it include indoor and outdoor sport?

• Has quality, quantity and accessibility considerations been addressed in arriving at local standards

• Do local standards reflect consultation, are their clear links?

Playing Pitch Strategy • Has the up to date methodology been used?




• Have future population projections been factored in?

Sport and Physical Activity Strategy • Has relevant and up to date baseline data been used; Taking Part Survey, Active People and Market Segmentation?

• Does the work reflect (as appropriate) regional and county (CSP) priorities?

• Does the strategy link into local CSN networks?

Open Space Strategy • Does the strategy reflect and build on high level priorities set out in the PPG17 study?

• Does the strategy address standards of provision for outdoor sport?

• How does the strategy support the evidence base for developer contributions

Facilities Strategy • Does the strategy use relevant local planning tools; Active Places, Active Places Power and Sport England Calculator?

• Have these tools been used correctly?

• Has reference been made to national FPM runs?

• Do the strategic needs reflect and build upon the PPG17 findings?

• Does the strategy explore wider than local authority provision?

• Are the finding consistent with the LDF and PPG17?

Race, Gender and Age Equality schemes • How will the Council’s equality schemes inform the provision of facilities, is there an evidence base for participation against race, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation etc?

Local Area Agreements • What are the generic outcomes for the LAA which would be supported through facility




provision? (e.g. Health)

• Are there any outcomes specifically related to sport which may be delivered through facilities planning?

CPA reports • Has the Authority been the subject of a Cultural services inspection?

• If so, what were the findings / actions required in relation to facility planning?

• Are there ant findings from corporate inspection that may impact on the Facilities planning approach?

10. This part of the work will have to be handled sensitively as it may impact on existing consultant work however we need to address this within the scoping to ensure we deliver high quality consistent advice.

11. As part of the Sport England budget process £50,000 exists for the regions to fund work identified as being a gap and indeed to fund additional work to improved existing documents. This should be seen as the sell and positive way of getting buy-in to the outcomes of the scoping review.

12. The document review should take 1-2 days depending on the size of the authority.

13. Alongside the desk exercise the next critical stage will be to interview the key local authority officers, this is likely to be; leisure, planning policy, regeneration and education (where BSF is a factor) to understand how well the authority is connected. Documents may look to have the golden thread but what is it like in reality? Do officers share a common sense of vision for sport and recreation and have a common understanding and application of the needs and evidence base. As part of the consultation we should also seek to get a sense of the role of sport within the LSP, is sport represented, by whom and what is its influence?

14. The consultation should seek to be delivered in one-day and officers should be challenged on the findings and emerging issues from the document review.



15. The final element of the scoping should be a report back (short bullet point report) and presentation to the Steering Group based on the findings of the document review and consultation.

Conclusion

16. This paper provides an outline approach for discussion and amendment. Once we have an agreed approach it is intended that the scoping exercise will be the gateway into the authority and set the agenda for the FIS work.

17. With some authorities the scoping exercise may be the extent of the service offered e.g. within Manchester and Liverpool in the north-west we may offer the service as a health check on their strategic planning work with the offer of potential Sport England funding to plug any identified gaps or add further detail to existing work.


Appendix Three – FACILITY IMPROVEMENT SERVICE

Facilities Improvement Service - Genesis Consulting for St Helens

Introduction

St Helens entered the Facilities Improvement Service (FIS) in December 2007. The first stage of the service was to undertake a scoping exercise to identify the key areas of focus for the service in the authority.

The scoping identified the need for a number of areas of work:

• Sustainable Community Strategy

o Influence process / position sport more coherently

o Structural changes, Sport and Culture Trust?

o Delivery vehicle for BSF community use?

• Indoor Sport Facility Strategy utilising PPG17 methodology

o Pro-active vision about St Helens needs

o Participation led; start with Active People, market segmentation

o Across the estate; quality, quantity and accessibility

o Utilising new planning tools

o Local consultation based on neighbourhood planning

o Standards and gaps

o Opportunity to link to wider regional strategy; sub-regional opportunities?

• Strategy Identifies BSF opportunities



o Cross-Council planning and development opportunity

o Feed in school based opportunities and sub-regional sporting issues to BSF process; SfC2 and OBC

• Updated Playing Pitch Strategy

o Utilising FA local strategy and data

o Support to BSF programme

o Better standards to support SPD and S106 policy

• Develop Planning Policy around indoor sport

o BSF implementation

o Standards for indoor sport for inclusion in core strategy and subsequent SPD

o Needs and evidence for S106 contributions to indoor sport

This report is concerned with driving forward the main facility strategy work linked to the development of planning policy. This report sets out the background and need for the work and a methodology for undertaking the assessment and formulation of the strategy / planning policies.



Background and Overall Vision

The provision of suitable, accessible and readily available sports facilities underpins participation in sport and physical activity and helps to deliver the social and economic beneficial by-products that can be attributed to an active community.

Through Active St Helens, St Helens Council and its partners have made a commitment to undertake initiatives which increase overall participation in sport and physical activity by 1% per annum. The development of new and improved facilities forms a key action in addressing this objective.

Current Status (Inputs)

Through the availability of nationally calculated planning tools such as Active People, Active Places Power, and the Sports Facilities Calculator, and local strategies and information tools such as the newly established audit information, we are able to provide a case by case assessment about:

• How well the borough provides for sport and recreation

• The need for future provision

• The opportunities for potential investment

• Influencing planning decisions, which relate to sport and physical activity.

There is now a need to translate the vast research and information tools available into a strategy by which we can measure success and plan for the future provision of sports facilities in St Helens.

What are we going to achieve? (Outputs)

The work should seek to achieve the following outputs:

• Establishment of a Steering Group and Project, led by St Helens Council’s, Facilities Investment Officer, to guide an understanding of current facility provision and future facility needs of St Helens

• A bringing together of the knowledge and data held by different services of the Council, to provide a comprehensive understanding of facility provision in St Helens

• Training and understanding of Sport England planning tools to inform the outcomes of the work



• Use of this information to identify gaps in provision.

• Use of this information to identify future needs for increased or improved sports provision.

• Priorities for future development in facilities for sport and recreation.

• A strategy which can be adopted by the Council and its partners to guide future investment and planning for sport and recreation facilities.

• An understanding of how a Sports Facilities Strategy fits within an overall strategic and policy framework for St Helens

Why are we going to do this? (Outcomes)

Achieving the outputs listed above will potentially allow St Helens Council and its partners to achieve the following outcomes:

• To guide potential investment available through new projects

• To inform Active St Helens partners of the key priorities for facility development in the borough, supported by an evidence-based approach to identify need and demand for new or improved sports facilities.

• To demonstrate the need for new facilities when considering requests for investment from external funders e.g. Ruskin Leisure

• To promote and influence the provision of new sports facilities designed to meet community need through school capital developments such as the Building Schools for the Future programme.

• To influence and benefit from new developments in St Helens by informing planning policy and allowing an update of supplementary planning guidance relating to the development of Community Facilities.

Ownership

This Vision has been approved by the FIS Steering Group and Project progress will be monitored through key Gateways to ensure the established Vision is being met by the Project.

Context and Approach



The Government’s Planning Policy Guidance 17 ‘Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation’ (PPG17), stresses the importance of local authorities undertaking an audit of existing facilities and a detailed analysis of future need, derived from evidence-based standards and local priorities.

This piece of work is intended to be the basis for St Helens to develop a robust Facilities Strategy, which will in turn inform planning policies along the lines of the open space work. The Strategy produced should comprise defensible supplementary planning guidance (SPG) for sport, including an improved evidence base for the identification of the level of developer contributions required to meet strategy sports provision.

By pulling together existing work, and addressing the gaps needed to complete a robust policy, the following areas of work are anticipated;

• To establish and agree with St Helens the current public and private built sports and leisure facilities provision in St Helens. In particular the impact of BSF and works sports facilities. This will be examined in terms of the effect on the overall offering of sport provision, its effect on the capacity of the council to continue to support other publicly funded facilities through revenue funding and its impact on the viability of facilities currently provided by the other sectors.

• Develop quality assessment criteria for existing facilities, based upon current and predicted guidelines from the governing bodies of sport, Sport England, Youth Sports Trust and the Government. The criteria should consider issues such as fitness for purpose, meeting local need, physical access, management and ownership and be categorised into facility type and type of use.

• To produce a quality assessment score sheet, with guidance notes, to assess if existing facilities are fit for purpose and to assess, whether through physical and/or access improvements, if existing facilities could be improved to meet current or future shortfalls in provision. This will include the consideration of possible quality and performance management tools to be applied to future management arrangements.

• To investigate current and future expectations and requirements for the facility types included in the assessment by considering the views of strategic sports bodies like Sport England. In particular to establish the key sports which the facilities strategy will need to support

• Using Sport England planning tools (Active People, Active Places, FPM), matching the current and future requirements against the existing and projected population, identifying shortfalls or surpluses of provision across the area as a whole.

• Using GIS mapping, to identify sub-areas based upon identified local catchments, to identify shortfalls or surpluses of provision at more local level. This will be against the need for improving general levels of activity and engagement with sport, and their capacity to act as feeders for the development of the key priority sports for the area. This part of the work will feed directly into the Building schools for the Future programme by identifying community use requirements to be balanced against individual school curriculum based needs.

• Identifying how the facilities and population of neighbouring local authorities might affect supply and demand in St Helens. The Strategy will take into account current and future demand, particularly from any major housing development in adjoining local authorities.



• To consider and agree how the identified and predicted shortfalls could be met, through the provision of new or refurbishment of existing facilities, improving access and other options.

• To consider the predicted housing development and based on this recommend a cost per dwelling to allow those shortfalls that are attributable to the growth in population to be met through a more robust approach to Section 106 contributions.

• To produce a final Facilities Strategy document.

The facilities proposed for inclusion in the Strategy, subject to the agreement of the steering group, are as follows:

• Sports halls • Indoor swimming pools

• Squash courts • Bowling greens (indoor and outdoor)

• Multi-use Games Areas

• Outdoor adventure

• Health and fitness facilities

• Outdoor all weather pitches

• Golf courses • Athletics tracks



a) General approach to the work

Project approach: The approach to the work will be based on identifying work streams to fill the gaps from work already undertaken e.g. the audit. Using the PPG17 framework, these will complete the following elements for a robust facilities Strategy;

a) Identifying local needs:

• Reviewing the implications of existing strategies.

• Reviewing existing policies and standards of provision.

• Consulting local communities.

b) Auditing local provision:

• Determining the scope of the audit and identifying existing information.

• Planning and undertaking the audit.

• Analysing the audit.

c) Setting provision standards:

• Determining quantitative standards.

• Determining qualitative standards.

• Determining accessibility standards.

• Determining minimum acceptable size standards.

d) Applying provision standards:



• Identifying deficiencies in accessibility.

• Identifying deficiencies in quality.

• Identifying surpluses and deficiencies in quantity.

e) Drafting policies:

• Identifying strategic options.

• Evaluating the strategic options.

• Drafting policy.

• Consulting with relevant stakeholders.

f) Planning for new facilities:

• Considering the impact of the neighbourhood planning model in St Helens

• Promoting accessibility by walking, cycling, public transport and ensure that facilities are accessible for people with disabilities.

• Locating more intensive sports and recreational uses in sites where they can contribute to town centre vitality and viability.

• Avoiding any significant loss of amenity to residents, neighbouring uses or biodiversity.

• Improving the quality of the public realm through good design.

• Considering security and personal safety, especially for children.

• Meeting the regeneration needs of the area.

• Considering the scope for using any surplus land for open space, weighing this against alternative uses.

• Assessing the impact of new facilities on social inclusion.



• Considering the recreational needs of visitors and tourists.

Work stream one - Local needs

Overall participation rates & frequency: The Active People survey shows that local participation rates are well below the national and regional average. Work is required to identify the extent to which there are differences from national trends including rates of participation amongst disabled people and the differential in rates between different socio-economic groups. A key starting point will be detailed interrogation of the Active People data.

Accessibility issues: Accessibility is a key consideration in planning sport facility provision, and a borough wide impact assessment of accessibility to a hierarchy of sports facilities, and local provision through direct investment by the public and private sectors, and through the BSF programme, is needed. Work has already been undertaken through the Leisure Needs analysis but this needs to be reviewed and expanded, to look at all provision, as part of the work.

Catchment issues: Establish the importance of providing a network of locally available facility provision based on the neighbourhood model and knowledge of modes of travel and time taken to access facilities used by type.

Quantitative issues: Establish the views of the community on current levels of provision and whether, and the extent to which, the provision of more local facilities would encourage current non-participants to play sport in the future. Review of existing empirical data will be critical here.

Qualitative issues: Establish the key factors likely to lead to improved satisfaction with local sports facility provision to a level which is close to, or exceeds, the national and regional averages. Establish the least favourably rated aspect by users. Establish the impact of club accreditation schemes on quality of coaching, inclusivity and player support. This information is available through Active People.

Engagement issues: A Community Sport Network for St Helens is in the process of establishment. To support this, the strategy should address the reasons why club membership and formal competitive sports activity in St Helens is below regional and national averages. It should establish why the percentage of people contributing voluntary time to sport is also below the regional and national average.

Schools issues: Schools are significant providers of sports and play facilities, some of which are already subject to community use. In the majority of case this entails pre-booked use by organised groups only, rather than managed ‘pay and play’ usage. To facilitate more open use of schools facilities current management arrangements and the role of Schools Sports Coordinators to engage with the wider community needs to be explored. Extending community use in this way, as a means of increasing facility provision in the future will be a requirement in meeting the overall mix of future provision. This will be partially achieved through BSF, but will also need a policy change at local primary, secondary and community school level.



Work stream Two - Audit of local provision

Although there have been a number of audits undertaken in the past there is a need to bring current information up to date with particular reference to establishing the following:

Effective catchments: Establish the effective catchment for most types of facility (e.g. 20 minutes walking time), based upon surveys of the travel patterns of local users. This will define sub-areas of the borough, to conduct a more local level analysis of deficiencies.

Quantitative audit: The quantitative audit should identify per capita levels of provision at City and neighbourhood level. The analysis will shows the distribution of provision at neighbourhood level for different types of facility.

Qualitative audit: The qualitative audit should reveal which aspects of facilities e.g. customer service, changing provision and disabled access are poor, average or above.

Work Stream Three - Setting standards of provision

Future proposed standards of provision should be developed for different facility types, based upon one of more of the following, for approval and adoption by St Helens. These will supplement, confirm or replace those currently used to calculate section 106 contributions.

• A qualitative component

• A quantitative component (i.e. x facilities by type per x’000 population).

• An accessibility component (distance thresholds, internal accessibility).

• A responsive component, based on customer and non user feedback and learning from good practice elsewhere.

• Establishing the “Top Ten” sports for support through planning facilities

• Establishing levels of provision through development of “Hub” sites across the District.

Work Stream Four - Applying standards of provision



The agreed standards of provision may be applied on the following basis:

• Quantitative standards (to identify surpluses or deficiencies).

• Qualitative standards.

• Accessibility standards (including the spatial distribution of unmet needs).

• Forecast needs (based upon demographic change).

Under the Council’s proposals for neighbourhood management St Helens is likely to have five areas each of which will be in a position to establish local provision standards. The facility Strategy will need to set broad strategic direction for the support of sport across the borough, and, to a degree, at regional and sub regional level, whilst allowing local provision to be determined locally.

Having established provision standards within the Facilities Strategy these will need to feed into a long-term borough wide investment programme, funded through identified income streams, including developer contributions through Section 106.

Work Stream Five - Policy options:

Improving the status of sport within the Council’s Corporate Plan will, to an extent, be dependant on the ability of the Facilities Strategy to demonstrate the effectiveness of active participation in delivering other priorities e.g. diversionary activity for Crime and disorder. Policies will therefore be both outward looking – links to other agendas, and inward looking – delivery of outcomes.

Model of provision: A hierarchical model of provision, with centrally located development (or hub) centres, a geographical spread of smaller local sites in neighbourhoods may be one such approach to emerge. Evidence needs to be gathered to support this and other model approaches.

Options for meeting deficiencies: Deficiencies can be either accepted, as in the case of non priorities, or met through a combination of new provision, upgrades, improved capacity, integrated provision and the dual use of education facilities through BSF. The role of the private sector and works sports grounds will also need to be factored into the Council’s plans for meeting deficiencies.

Funding opportunities: Several external funding opportunities exist to help meet the costs of additional provision, including Sport England’s Community Investment Fund and Building Schools for the Future and Section 106. An essential part of this work will be to identify future funding streams to support a sustainable service.



Developer contributions: Developer contributions can be used to help meet the costs of additional facilities needed to provide for the population of new housing. Policies are in place to support future investment but these are not well evidenced. A more robust approach would be for the facilities Strategy to assess the predicted housing development in the borough and based upon this, a cost per dwelling to allow those shortfalls that are attributable to the growth in population to be met, both for St Helens as a whole and the local neighbourhood-areas.

Policy change: Because sport is a dynamic environment St Helens will regularly monitor facility supply and demand factors and will amend the provision proposed in this strategy if it needs to respond to changing needs and changing priorities. Politically sport seems not to be part of the Council’s main concerns, and the policies contained in the facilities Strategy will need to be robust and sustainable in order to ensure consistency of provision and future funding.

Next Steps

To move the work forward the following should now be developed:

• FIS Steering Group to agree the vision and the approach to the work set out in this paper

• Genesis to arrange training in Sport England tools for Council officers, in partnership with other FIS authorities

• Set out Active People / Places data to set the context for the work

• St Helens Council to begin to draw together existing information and data from across the Council to inform the process; Audit, conditions survey work, survey data etc

• Review audit work to ensure it embraces all provision and begin to develop qualitative aspects

• Agree dates and schedules for future Steering Group meetings.
