18.01.2013 Views

Planning for Sport and Active Recreation Facilities ... - Brent Council

Planning for Sport and Active Recreation Facilities ... - Brent Council

Planning for Sport and Active Recreation Facilities ... - Brent Council

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Chapter Six Indoor <strong>Sport</strong>s Facility Provision<br />

Capacity Ratios<br />

Table 15 sets out the current supply of sports hall space<br />

across the borough, firstly including all facilities <strong>and</strong><br />

secondly just publicly accessible facilities (i.e. those<br />

facilities that are accessible to the public on a pay <strong>and</strong><br />

play basis <strong>and</strong>/or to clubs / groups)<br />

Table 15: Capacity ratio’s – sports halls<br />

Facility<br />

Type<br />

All <strong>Sport</strong>s<br />

Halls<br />

Publicly<br />

Accessible<br />

Current<br />

Provision<br />

As can be seen, this distinction between accessibility has<br />

a significant impact upon the borough-wide capacity<br />

ratio. For all facilities the current capacity ratio is 68.23<br />

m2 of sports hall per 1000 population. This is higher than<br />

the current London average of 59.77 m2, but lower than<br />

the Engl<strong>and</strong> Average of 74.54m². This calculation shows<br />

that the existing level of sports hall provision across <strong>Brent</strong><br />

is marginally in excess of the London average. However,<br />

this presumes that the London average is adequate,<br />

which may not be the case. Compared to the national<br />

average <strong>Brent</strong> would require an extra 1,661 m2 of sport<br />

hall space in 2001 <strong>and</strong> 4785 m2 of sport hall space by<br />

2016 to meet the national average. When the private<br />

use facilities are removed from the equation, the capacity<br />

ratio drops significantly. However, it is not possible to<br />

provide London or Engl<strong>and</strong> average data <strong>for</strong> publicly<br />

accessible facilities only <strong>and</strong> there<strong>for</strong>e there can be no<br />

comparisons upon which to make an assessment of capacity.<br />

Although the capacity ratio calculations above are<br />

useful in assessing capacity against London <strong>and</strong> national<br />

averages, it is vital that dem<strong>and</strong> is assessed at a local level<br />

<strong>and</strong> hence the calculations above should be used only<br />

as an indication <strong>and</strong> The <strong>Facilities</strong> <strong>Planning</strong> Model results<br />

which will be analysed shortly should take precedence.<br />

It is possible to use the Capacity ratios tool to look at<br />

square metreage provision per 1000 population at a<br />

ward level. However, as most facilities are not located<br />

within the centre of a ward, <strong>and</strong> generally people don’t<br />

recognise ward boundaries, this in<strong>for</strong>mation is of limited<br />

use other than to highlight significant deficiencies or<br />

areas of high provision. Analysing all sports hall facility<br />

provision at a ward level shows that Mapesbury, Dudden<br />

Hill <strong>and</strong> Harlesden wards have a capacity ratio of ‘0’ as<br />

there are no sports halls <strong>and</strong> that the highest capacity<br />

ratios (greatest square metreage per 1000 population) are<br />

in the wards of Barnhill, Wembley Central <strong>and</strong> Willesden<br />

Green.<br />

CAPACITY RATIO ( Facility type per 1000 population) - DEFICIENCY / + SURPLUS<br />

(In comparison with<br />

London average)<br />

TOTAL<br />

(m²)<br />

2001<br />

(263507)<br />

2001<br />

(293900)<br />

2016<br />

(305400)<br />

London<br />

average<br />

(2001)<br />

Engl<strong>and</strong><br />

average<br />

(2001)<br />

Current<br />

(2001)<br />

(m²)<br />

Mid<br />

(2011)<br />

(m²)<br />

Quality<br />

The majority of the Borough’s sports halls are over<br />

30 years old <strong>and</strong>, as a consequence, they tend to<br />

be less efficient to operate, have increased levels of<br />

maintenance, <strong>and</strong> customer satisfaction is lower as public<br />

expectations increase. This can result in fewer bookings<br />

<strong>and</strong> there<strong>for</strong>e fewer people utilising the facilities the<br />

borough has on offer.<br />

Accessibility<br />

<strong>Active</strong> Places power website enables a detailed map (map<br />

31) to be drawn that shows actual walking travel time<br />

to a <strong>Sport</strong> Hall (all sports halls), taking into consideration<br />

facilities that may be located in neighbouring Boroughs.<br />

The areas in red represent the parts of the Borough<br />

where residents have the greatest distance to walk to<br />

reach a sports centre. The areas in blue show the areas<br />

where people have the shortest travel time to a sports<br />

hall. It shows that the Dollis Hill, Mapesbury <strong>and</strong> Dudden<br />

Hill wards are outside a 20 minute walk time of a publicly<br />

accessible sports hall.<br />

Chapter Six - Indoor <strong>Sport</strong>s Facility Provision<br />

Future<br />

(2016)<br />

(m²)<br />

28 17,980 68.23 61.18 58.87 59.77 74.54 +2230 +414 -274<br />

19 12,466 47.31 42.42 40.82 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A<br />

56

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!