|
| 6.9 |
Playing pitches are areas of formal open space, available
to the public, specifically for the playing of pitch sports including
rugby, football, hockey and cricket.
|
| 6.10 |
An Assessment of Playing Pitches in the Rochford District1
shows that the supply of pitches is currently meeting expressed demand.
Suggested new standards for each of the sub areas are shown in Table
6.3. It is intended that these standards will probably meet the long
term structural changes in demand, as well as short term fluctuations.
|
| 6.11 |
A playing field survey was carried out across the district in 2002,
and as a result a revised playing field standard has been adopted.
One of the objectives of the playing field study was to research and
recommend appropriate standards of provision for playing pitches to
inform Council planning and investment decisions. Clearly it may be
necessary to recommend not one, but several standards to reflect the
characteristics of and needs arising from the different sub areas.
|
| 6.12 |
Sub areas are not exclusive and there is no doubt that people will
travel reasonable distances to use the available pitches. The survey
was carried out using the subareas identified in Table 6.1 but the
booking evidence shows that these areas should not be considered as
mutually exclusive for the purposes of pitch availability and provision.
|
|
| Rayleigh |
Grange & Rawreth, Lodge, Rayleigh, Central, Trinity, Wheatley, Whitehouse |
| Hockley |
Hockley East, Hockley West, Hawkwell West |
| Hullbridge |
Hullbridge Riverside, Hullbridge South |
| Canewdon |
Canewdon |
| Rochford |
Ashingdon, Rochford Eastwood, Rochford Roche, Rochford St Andrews |
Great
Wakering |
Barling & Sutton,
Foulness & Great Wakering East, Great Wakering Central,
Great Wakering West |
|
| 6.13 |
In looking at these Sub Areas and testing against the previous Local
Plan Standards and those recommended by the National Playing Field
Association it became apparent that it was necessary to dis-aggregate
the required standards of provision for sports pitches from those
relating to other forms of open space. It was also concluded reasonable
to adopt a set of standards, that best reflects existing
potential demand within the individual sub areas.
|
| 6.14 |
Revised local standards must embrace provision of all pitches in
community use. If they are to be effective, they must include a tolerance
to cater for unpredictable upswings in demand and also the loss of
access to pitches not in secured community use. However, they should
not set too high a target as this will risk wasteful over provision,
a key consideration, given static population levels within a
small district with teams able to travel short distances to other
sub areas to access playing pitches. It is also unlikely further developable
land will come forward in certain other sub areas.
|
| 6.15 |
As can be seen from in Table 6.2, there is a variation in the level
of provision between the individual sub areas. Areas like Hockley
are relatively poorly provided for, compared with Canewdon and Rochford.
Notwithstanding the deficiencies in some sub areas the study has identified
that the supply of pitches is currently meeting demand across the
district, and in two sub areas (Hockley and Canewdon)
there is a little capacity to cater for any upturn in demand.
|
| 6.16 |
As stated above, it is unrealistic for the Council to test open
space standards against population levels/intensity if an assessment
is not also made of:-
|
| |
| • |
the age of the population within the sub areas; |
| • |
the level of likely demand; |
| • |
the suitability of the pitches; |
| • |
floodlighting; |
| • |
changing rooms and other support facilities; and |
| • |
travel distances to available facilities. |
|
| 6.17 |
For the above reasons it has been concluded that the use of the
National Playing Field Standard of 1.2Ha / 1000 people is discontinued,
and instead the Council adopts the following standards for the sub
areas which reflect the achievable aims for playing pitch provision
within the plan period.
|
|
| Rayleigh |
31,410 |
0.99 |
|
| Hockley |
17,164 |
0.7 |
1.20 hectares |
| Hullbridge |
7,425 |
1.34 |
per |
| Canewdon |
1,491 |
2.23 |
thousand |
| Rochford |
16,317 |
1.95 |
population |
| Great Wakering |
7,694 |
1.77 |
|
|
|
| Rayleigh |
1.15 |
|
| Hockley |
0.7 |
1.20 hectares |
| Hullbridge |
1.34 |
per |
| Canewdon |
1.68 |
thousand |
| Rochford |
1.36 |
population |
| Great Wakering |
1.77 |
|
|
| 6.18 |
These standards are intended to meet the long term structural changes
in demand, as well as short term fluctuations. All the formal areas
of open space are protected by policy LT7. In the survey it is also
evident that there is a need for an All Weather Playing Pitch within
the District, this need is addressed in policy LT2.
|
| 6.19 |
The survey also identified that for the existing areas of formal
open space and the support buildings and infrastructure to continue
to provide an adequate long term range of facilities, there will be
a need for investment into their long term maintenance and support.
The survey has sought to identify priority areas for investment, as
shown in Table 6.4.
|
|
Rawreth
Recreation Ground |
Rayleigh |
Council/club |
Improve pitch
drainage |
High |
John Fisher
Playing Field |
Rayleigh |
Council |
Improve pitch
drainage |
High |
Grove Playing
Field |
Rayleigh |
Council |
Improve pitch
drainage |
High |
Clements Hall
Playing Field |
Hockley |
Council |
Improve pitch
drainage and
carry out
levelling |
Medium |
Ashingdon
Recreation Ground |
Rochford |
Council |
Improve pitch
drainage |
Medium |
Hullbridge Playing
Field |
Hullbridge |
Council |
Improve pitch
drainage |
High |
Fairview Playing
Field |
Rayleigh |
Council |
Improve pitch
drainage to
pitch 4 |
High |
|
|
| |
|