NATURAL TURF
Adopting sports development principles to underpin the playing field’s programme of use will assist in the creation of effective school club links
with non-existent or very poor chang- ing accommodation and inadequate drainage, which renders the pitches unplayable for many weeks of the year. • The skills shortage in ground staff , precipitated by compulsory competi- tive tendering in the 1990s, has led to an inexorable decline in the quality of publicly-owned playing fields, which in turn has made them less attractive to market to local schools and clubs. • Inadequate protective measures and easily circumvented legislation were mainly to blame for the wholesale losses in the 1990s. Since then, revisions to PPG 17 and the School Standards and Framework Act have closed most of the loopholes. • Lack of political support allied to the historic non- statutory nature of leisure within local authority ser- vices has led to a lack of recognition of the contribu- tion that playing fields can make in improving the quality of life of local communities. In the past, many local authorities have seen playing fields as a burden and an easy source of a one off capital receipt rather than facilities worthy of long term investment. • Increasing demand for housing has placed enormous pressure on the available land and some local au- thorities have been content to leave a playing field unused for five years, (thus avoiding any intervention from Sport England as a statutory consultee)
before identifying it as a site for po- tential housing development. • Lack of joined up working between local partners such as planning, parks, education and leisure has resulted in the under utilisation of playing fields.
The remedy Aside from a regular Sport England bul- letin on planning applications on sports grounds there is no early warning system that identifies playing fields under threat. The London Playing Fields Foundation (LPFF) maintains a Fields at Risk Register (FARR) based on local intelligence and as a result has taken pre-emptive action that has helped secure the long-term fu- ture of 15 threatened sites in the capital in the last year. Further- more, the London Marathon Charitable Trust sets aside a proportion of the income gen- erated by the race for playing
field protection and has purchased five threatened sites since 1999.
Increasing participation As the best form of playing fields pro- tection is full use, it’s important that operators are able to offer facilities that are accessible, affordable and attrac- tive in order to provide a fulfilling leisure experience for their customers. The po- tential user base can be divided into four main categories: • Schools where a love of sport begins, or does not – depending on the quality of experience
56 Read Sports Management online
sportsmanagement.co.uk/digital
• Clubs where this participation can be continued into a life long association • Disadvantaged and under-represented groups who, for a number of reasons, cannot gain access to mainstream provision • Inactive people who have either dropped out or never been involved in organised sport
Adhering to the four Ms of playing field success The successful operation of multi-sport playing fields depends on four main themes (the four Ms).
MODERNISING Although the golden age (1995 – 2005) of capital investment in grassroots facilities seems like a long time ago, it is essential that what money is available is spent with a clear vision in mind. Good quality facilities should provide
clubs with a home base that helps their membership to grow. Offering a mix of natural turf and artificial turf pitches, coupled with decent social facilities, will give clubs what they need to flourish – somewhere for their club members to play the game as well as somewhere to practice. In designing new facilities three key
factors need to be considered: a) Design for maximum use b) Design for efficient and effective management and maintenance
c) Design for an additional income stream to support the core activity
Issue 3 2011 © cybertrek 2011
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84