FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A PROPOSED 3G PITCH AT JENNER … Reports/Cabin… · FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A PROPOSED 3G PITCH AT JENNER PARK, BARRY FINAL REPORT 6 Just Solutions Leisure Consultants

FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A PROPOSED 3G PITCH AT JENNER PARK, BARRY FINAL REPORT

2 Just Solutions Leisure Consultants

16th December 2014 (Revised 20

th February 2015)

Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 3

MAIN REPORT ............................................................................................................................................ 12

INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 13

BACKGROUND CONTEXT - THE UNDERPINNING RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY .................... 15

BACKGROUND CONTEXT - JENNER PARK ........................................................................................ 17

WIDER CONTEXT - VALE OF GLAMORGAN AND BARRY STRATEGIC ISSUES ......................... 20

REVIEW OF STRATEGIC LEISURE ISSUES ........................................................................................ 25

SPORTS NEEDS ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................... 29

DEVELOPING A 3G COMPETITION PITCH – SOME IMPORTANT LOGISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................................................................... 38

3G PITCH OPTIONS APPRAISAL............................................................................................................ 40

TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY STUDY – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................... 45

FACILITY CONSTRUCTION COST PLAN .............................................................................................. 47

THE BUSINESS CASE ............................................................................................................................... 49

PITCH MANAGEMENT FEASIBILITY ...................................................................................................... 51

SUMMARY DECISION CONSIDERATIONS - PRINCIPLE OPTIONS AND SUGGESTED NEXT STEPS .......................................................................................................................................................... 57

APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................................. 59

APPENDIX A ................................................................................................................................................ 60

SUMMARY OVERVIEW OF PROJECT ................................................................................................... 60

APPENDIX B ................................................................................................................................................ 63

CONSULTEES INTERVIEWED AS PART OF THE FIRST STAGE FEASIBILITY ............................ 63

APPENDIX C................................................................................................................................................ 64

3G PITCH TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY REPORT .................................................................................... 64

APPENDIX D................................................................................................................................................ 65

3G PITCH DESIGN SPECIFICATION ...................................................................................................... 65

APPENDIX E ................................................................................................................................................ 66

COMPACT ATHLETICS FACILITIES – SUMMARY DESCRIPTION................................................... 66

APPENDIX F ................................................................................................................................................ 68

A JENNER PARK - FOOTBALL IN THE COMMUNITY / CLUB HUB .................................................. 68




th February 2015)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

This is the executive summary of a report on the feasibility and potential business case for

the installation of a 3rd Generation (3G) synthetic sports pitch at Jenner Park Stadium,

Barry.

Background

One of the critical drivers for the feasibility study was the need to reduce the cost to the

Council of maintaining the facility - currently up to £100,000 pa. This annual cost must also

be set in context with the pressure on the Council to achieve savings of £32 million over

the next 3 years - having already removed a significant leisure subsidy as a result of

awarding the leisure management contract to a private sector operator.

The annual Jenner Park subsidy is also considered high in relation to the number of

footfalls; the low income from the ‘track’ users; and with use of the grass pitch naturally

limited by the impact of prolonged wet weather conditions coupled with localised poor

drainage.

The history and public affection for Jenner Park is significant and the desire to improve its

use alongside considering options for maximising the value of the club house is strong.

The scale of the stadium also gives opportunity for a senior football team to compete in the

Welsh Premier League.

In this difficult financial climate, the fact that the Council has set aside a capital allocation

of up to £795,000 to invest in a 3G stadium pitch is significant and the importance of

getting the final investment decision right is considered to be crucial.

There is however a widespread presumption that 3G pitches generate a significant net

profit – but the right location necessary to maximise footfalls and income is required to

offset the cost of maintenance and carpet replacement. There is no doubt an all-weather

competitive football pitch will support significant activity levels and generate considerably

more income. However the maintenance regime must be rigorously upheld to manage the

integrity of the carpet and avoid pile flattening (c 1hour for every 4 hours of use) –

furthermore a stadium pitch must pass a 4 yearly FIFA 1 Star test if it is to be licensed for

competitive games, or annually if it is to meet the FIFA 2 Star requirements for European

competition. Depending on use and maintenance it is likely the pitch will need to be

replaced every 6-8 years at a cost of no less than £180,000, excluding VAT.

The feasibility study does identify a number of income generating and logistical challenges

to the successful installation of a 3G pitch within a stadium that also provides an athletics




th February 2015)

track. However the development would undoubtedly generate better use of the adjacent

club house and significantly increase income from footballing activities, albeit more limited

if a shared football/athletics facility.

Sports Needs

Football

Football would be the principle beneficiary of a Jenner Park 3G, however currently there is

a lack of any distinctive and shared vision for football in the Vale to underpin the

development, indeed the review process uncovered a wide range of conflicting views.

The different football perspectives:

The Football Association of Wales and Welsh Football Trust wish to see Football

Clubs become stronger and successful with more clubs from south Wales

supported to secure a place in the Welsh Premier League. Whilst Barry Town

United is the closest to achieving this aim, it does not need a 3G pitch to secure a

place in the top flight

‘Ownership’ and management of their own club facilities is undoubtedly one of the

keys to the success of football clubs and a number of significant changes are

required for Barry Town United to achieve that objective. If it were to be responsible

for the stadium and a 3G pitch, it needs to generate the business capacity to take

on the management, maintenance and running costs including a 6-8 year, £180k

replacement liability for the carpet

There is a case for better facilities for football training and junior development in the

area. However Jenner Park is not considered to be the best location for a 3G pitch

to impact on these objectives and a ‘stand-alone’ facility will generate only limited

day time/term time use

Barry Town United are the only club in Barry who have advised that they consider a

3G pitch located at Jenner Park is the best option to support football development in

the town

In 2006 and 2012, two independent reviews both recommended that consideration

be given to further investment at Colcot for football development, including the

funding of a 3G pitch to replace the current ATP. The vast majority of the footballing

community continue to consider this to be a priority development to best serve

football in the area.

Athletics

The development of a 3G pitch at Jenner Park will undoubtedly weaken what is already a

relatively small voluntary sports club. It will remove the ability to host competitions, and




th February 2015)

training for field events will be impossible within the Stadium. If the 3G facility were to be

constructed at the end of the football season this could result in a 12 week shutdown of the

Athletics Club, significantly undermining the Club’s long term viability. Detailed discussions

will be required with the pitch contractor if a series of mitigation measures are to be

established, with the aim of reducing the negative impact on the Athletics Club.

The Club are firmly of the view that there is insufficient appropriate space to develop a

throwing area adjacent to the current Jenner Park Stadium and if a 3G pitch were to be

developed with the throwing area relocated off-site, this would effectively destroy the ethos

and effectiveness of the Club.

Rugby

Barry RFC is a self-sufficient club with a good club house, adequate facilities and no

desire to relocate its training or match playing to another facility – this would only divert

footfalls, customers and business away from the Club base.

There are however a number of important issues which are a priority for the Rugby Club

and it would welcome a supportive partnership approach with the Council, working towards

a vision for the development of the game in the town.

Logistical Considerations

Getting the Approach to a 3G Stadium Pitch Right

Artificial Turf Pitches have generally only been constructed, managed and maintained in

the public or education sector and historically money has always been found to replace

carpets as and when they have reached the end of their life – a business case for the

replacement of carpets has rarely been required to secure capital funding or ‘grant’.

Planning for the future cannot be based on this historical model and business plans must

now show how sufficient income will be generated to fully cover, not only the maintenance

and management costs but also the replacement liability.

Depending on the intensity of use and maintenance, a ‘stadium’ 3G pitch is unlikely to last

beyond 6-8 years before the carpet will need to be replaced in order to pass the 1-4 yearly

FIFA testing necessary to retain a league license to play competitive matches. The

operator of a new 3G stadium pitch will need to be confident that they can generate the

income to set-aside no less than £25,000 pa in a sinking fund ( carpet disposal and

replacement – years’ 6-8 and 12-16; plus new shock pad in years’ 12-16).

Accommodating a Pitch within the Jenner Park Stadium

The FAW would not consent to a playing area for Welsh Premier League matches which

measured less than 100m x 64m.




th February 2015)

A 3m run-off to all sides is also required to meet industry standards and whilst a temporary

covering of the track when football is played may be permitted - this would be subject to

the design detail and confirmation that the covering would be extant when matches are

played.

Clearly the introduction of a temporary covering of the track in the football season, from

August to May, is likely to have an additional impact on the use of the stadium for athletics,

as it is unlikely that the seasonal 3G run-off would wear well if lifted and replaced every

week – if the inside lane is not required for athletics training during the football season, the

temporary covering could remain extant.

If the Council were to develop a 3G pitch with less than a 3m artificial turf run-off, and the

FAW considered allowing the pitch to be used for competitive purposes with 1.5m to all

sides (before the existing track surface), in the event of an injury sustained as a result of a

player moving from a secure footing on the turf to the vagaries of a hard, different surface,

liability would be targeted at the Council and perhaps the FAW too – the decision to

sanction such an approach is for the FAW to make.

3G technology is new, and its introduction to a grass playing area within an athletics

stadium is a challenge - this report advises that the design approach must be fully

explored, with agreement to the design criteria and operational requirements secured from

the FAW in advance of any procurement process.

The Cost of Constructing a 3G Pitch Within the Stadium

The estimated cost to construct a 3G pitch is between £417,395.00 and £573,022.60

excluding VAT.

There is a large range in the earthworks estimates stated as it is hard to predict the off-site

disposal cost of subsoil and topsoil. This is very much dependent on local demand for soils

during the construction period.

There is also a large range in the cost estimate of the carpet and shockpad system. This is

because there are numerous systems on the market of varying quality and depth, plus

varying warranties.

There may also be a requirement to install a water attenuation system depending on the

capacity of the drainage outlet. The cost of this system could be up to £50,000.00

excluding VAT.

An automatic irrigation system is in place and this could be used to irrigate the new 3G

pitch, but the system would need to be modified. The ability to water the pitch during the

summer could be useful to help cool the playing surface, and to produce a surface with

improved ball roll properties. The cost to modify the irrigation system could however be




th February 2015)

high as perimeter water cannons would most probably need to be installed. The decision

to retain and modify the irrigation would therefore need careful consideration.

The costs given do not include: additional environmental site investigation; onsite soak-

away testing; drainage study; planning consent fees; professional fees (Design, Contract

Management, Construction Monitoring & CDM Planning Co-ordinator).

The additional site investigation, soak-away testing and drainage study could cost between

£7,000 and £10,000 excluding VAT. The planning consent fee could be in the order of

£1,500.00 excluding VAT. Professional fees could be between 5 and 10% of the

construction costs.

Athletic throwing events could possibly be relocated to land directly behind the western

stand (restricted area and not considered feasible by the Athletics Club), but the work

required to make the area suitable could be extensive and this could result in a high cost.

Managing a 3G Stadium Pitch and Shared Use with Athletics

There would be a number of logistical consequences from a shared facility which would

have a bearing on management and the ‘business’ i.e.:

Impacting on the success of a 3G facility and the ability to maximise the income

necessary to pay for the management, maintenance and necessary £25,000 pa set

a-side account for the carpet replacement sinking fund:

Shared use with athletics for at least 2 nights a week when the 3G pitch could

not be used because athletics training/cycling was occurring

5-a-side across the pitch use would be affected by the lack of ball-catch

fencing and of course players would be always running over the track in

studded boots to recover footballs

The development of additional five-a-side courts alongside Devon Avenue

could be considered as an alternative small-sided games offer. The current

estimated cost of such a facility is £375,000 for a six court floodlit facility plus

fees and any general infrastructure improvements (3 court construction pro

rata)

A detailed investigation is required to take account of access, planning

matters in respect of noise and light pollution and ground conditions. The

above costs do not take account of any design premiums.

There would be a migration of rubber crumb from the 3G across the athletics track

which would demand additional maintenance.

Other Factors

A 3G pitch development at Jenner Park will have only a limited level of use during the day

– schools do not have curriculum time or budgets to travel off-site to facilities, except

where there are no other options available.




th February 2015)

There are also issues in terms of car parking for Jenner Park and greater use of the site on

a more commercial basis, particularly with the addition of 3G 5-aside courts on the far side

of the Stadium, would demand that further consideration be given to access and parking

arrangements.

Facility Options Considered

Given the range of issues emerging from the feasibility review, a number of facility options

have been appraised, in the full report, to help inform the Council’s thinking.

Developing a 3G Pitch at Jenner

It is considered that any significant new developments at Jenner Park should be appraised

in context with other wider development opportunities in the immediate vicinity, including

all configuration and logistical options.

If the development of a 3G pitch at Jenner Park were to proceed, the stadium’s

effectiveness as an athletics venue would be compromised - with no field events and a

likely reduction in ‘running track lanes’. Shared use would also compromise the business

case for the 3G pitch, in which case further consideration should also be given to an

alternative location for athletics, perhaps creating the opportunity to scope the

redevelopment of the ’whole area’, including the Council Depot, achieving a more efficient

and effective sport and recreation use, alongside housing and other community

developments.

Maintaining the Grass Pitch at Jenner

The conversion of the stadium pitch to a 3G surface would have a significant ongoing

impact on the success of the Athletics Club.

Furthermore the quality of the existing grass pitch appears to be generally satisfactory,

with good grass cover and surface evenness. It is recognised that the pitch may not drain

adequately, especially during the wetter periods of the year, and this may result in an

increased rate of grass loss. Nevertheless it will be one of the best grass pitches in the

Vale and any issues with its performance can be significantly improved with a relatively

small investment in drainage improvements.

If the grass pitch is not converted to a 3G synthetic pitch then the playing quality and

drainage properties could and should be improved – the study recommends that this could

be achieved for an estimated cost of £50,000 exc VAT.

Regardless of the decision of the Council, Jenner Park has supported a Welsh Premier

League team in the past and could continue to do so into the future, without the conversion

of the pitch to 3G.




th February 2015)

No different to other Welsh League and Premier League Clubs, the current facility could be

successfully managed by a Club or Community Interest Company which would deliver the

required Council running costs savings.

The Club House and Changing Rooms

It is recommended that any wider and longer term use of the facility should be the subject

of a local community needs assessment i.e. demand for playgroups; community spaces;

healthy living suite including consultation with Parkwood Leisure Ltd in order to consider

the potential for complementary developments which would not compete with the existing

leisure facilities in Barry .

Management Options Considered

Given the range of issues emerging from the feasibility review, a number of management

options have also been considered in the full report.

3G Pitch Options

Direct management by Council

Not considered appropriate as it would be seen as competition for Parkwood and

would not achieve the desired running costs savings

Add the stadium to the Parkwood contract

The development of a 3G pitch at Jenner Park, with the intended increased level of

community football, would have an impact on the current use of the Colcot ATP and

Sports Hall, as well as the Sports hall and 5-a-side ATPs at Holm View, and

perhaps Barry Leisure Centre as well.

Therefore, the development of a 3G pitch at Jenner Park alongside the

reconfiguration of the existing club house for more multi-purpose uses as well as

giving consideration to better use of other redundant space around the ground

should be offered to Parkwood Leisure Ltd as a development opportunity.

Parkwood Leisure may be interested in considering this business opportunity,

perhaps in a partnership with the clubs, leading to the development of a community

sports hub.

In this model Parkwood would have to accept the liability for the carpet replacement

in years 6-8.

However, there will be a loss of social and off-pitch income potential to user clubs




th February 2015)

Management by Barry Town Utd FC

Alternatively the retention of the Park as a sporting hub with the primary Football

Club leading the operation of the facility, perhaps as part of a co-operative/mutual

could help it achieve its aspirations of achieving Welsh Premier League status. It

would make sense to consider such partnerships as the management model for the

future.

However, if the pitch is converted to 3G the Club would be exposed to significant

risk (carpet test failure) and the Council may have to accept the future replacement

liability.

Control of the stadium vested in Community Interest Company (as above)

However, neither club is currently considered to be robust enough to take on the

management

Grass Pitch Retained Options

Direct management by Council - not considered appropriate as it would not

achieve the desired running costs savings

Management by Barry Town Utd FC – a workable option but may lead to conflict

with the existing ground share club

Control of the stadium vested in Community Interest Company (CIC) –

everyone has a ‘say’ and profits can be distributed by activity levels

Add the stadium to the Parkwood portfolio –not considered appropriate with

the retention of a grass pitch due to insufficient income

Summary Decision Considerations – Principle Options

3G at Jenner

The FIFA testing regime and potential carpet failure before year 8 puts a big liability in the

hands of the chosen ‘operator’. In which case the operator option scenarios would be as

follows:

The Local Authority would be unlikely to take on the liability

Parkwood Leisure would be unlikely to take on the liability

The Clubs (CIC) would be exposed to enormous risk and would require Local

Authority underwriting

Athletics would be compromised by the loss of a throwing facility

The business plan for the 3G would be compromised by the athletics use




th February 2015)

The development of additional five-a-side courts could offset some of the stadium

3G pitch inefficiencies, but the overall commercial benefits of such an approach

would be questionable as it is considered that the capital investment required to

develop a facility to offset the inefficiencies of the stadium pitch, and hopefully

create a profit to finance the renewal of the carpet, is the same as the cost of

replacing the stadium pitch carpet in years 6 to 8. Furthermore, it is considered that

attractive small-sided games courts would be better located where their use can be

maximised alongside the Schools at Colcot Sports Centre.

3G at Colcot

A solution to the pressing need for better artificial surfaces for football

Not an additional facility, just better (assuming replacement of the current ATP) –

carpet life expectancy up to 12 years as FIFA testing not required

Would demand a partnership with Parkwood to secure access for football

development/juniors etc.

Grass at Jenner

Most appropriate way forward to establish a CIC and test the management ability

for one year

Would deliver significant savings to the Local Authority if the CIC were able to

secure mandatory/discretionary NNDR relief

Would demand investment in the region of £50k to improve the grass pitch

Athletics would remain 'as is'.

Suggested Next Steps

Discussions with Parkwood Leisure reference Colcot and formal consideration of

Jenner Park options – business case for club house and 3G alongside other

development opportunities on site to maximise income and impact

Discussions with clubs to test the appetite to establish a CIC Stadium Company

Calculate the prudential borrowing capacity following the establishment of a CIC

and the reduction in Jenner Park running costs

Consider relocation of athletics and wider range of site redevelopment options to

maximise overall impact and all round gains.




th February 2015)

MAIN REPORT




th February 2015)

INTRODUCTION

This is a report for the Vale of Glamorgan Council, commissioned in July 2014 to review

the feasibility of and potential business case for the installation of a 3rd Generation (3G)

synthetic sports pitch at Jenner Park Stadium, Barry.

The commission of such a feasibility study was approved by the Council’s Cabinet in June

2014 with the purpose of evaluating all costs and income opportunities related to the

construction, management and use of a 3G facility - including consultation with

stakeholders and an assessment of demand.

The rationale was to determine whether a 3G pitch would be both appropriate and cost

effective at Jenner Park Stadium, with a view to proceeding with such a development in

2015/16, if recommended and agreed.

The development would demand a 3 month construction period and further

consideration would be required as to whether this would have to disrupt the

summer Athletics or winter Football season.

A summary of the brief for the project is attached. APPENDIX A

The Feasibility Study

The feasibility study is made up of two principle components:

1. The technical and ground condition investigations, including drainage, together with

an examination of the floodlighting informing any recommendations with regards to

construction options and maintenance.

This work has been undertaken by Geo Turf Consulting Limited. A consultant with

27 years of experience in the business; engaged by the Football Association of

Wales and Welsh Rugby Union on artificial and natural turf pitch developments at

their national centres and responsible for all the current FAW 3G project feasibility

studies being undertaken across Wales.

2. Overall contract management, usage potential, user needs, options appraisals,

impact assessments etc. undertaken by Just Solutions Leisure Consultants.

Consultants with over 30 years of experience and currently responsible to the FAW

and all the Welsh Premier League Clubs in respect of the UEFA Hat Trick funded

3G programme; responsible for designing and producing the All Wales Vision and

Guidance for Artificial Turf Pitches for the Welsh Rugby, Football, Hockey and Sport

Wales Collaborative Sports Group.




th February 2015)

A summary analysis of the technical feasibility study is presented later in this report with

the full technical feasibility report and pitch specification available separately and referred

to as APPENDICES C AND D.

The initial consultation informing this feasibility study involved: the four main current user

groups; the Governing Bodies of Football and Athletics; Barry Rugby Club; Officers of the

Council responsible for future school developments, Leisure and Parks; Parkwood Leisure

Ltd. All were met to discuss their needs and the implications of any development and

issues arising. Findings from these interviews are reflected throughout the report,

particularly in the options appraisal and needs assessment sections.

APPENDIX B contains a schedule of the consultees who have contributed to the review.

Any further survey work with a wider range of potential user groups, schools and clubs

should be undertaken by the Council, subject to the outcome of this first stage feasibility

review.




th February 2015)

BACKGROUND CONTEXT - THE UNDERPINNING RATIONALE FOR THE

STUDY

“Jenner Park is the Council’s premier sporting venue with considerable history and a

prominent place within the local community and wider Vale. Management of the entire

facility now rests with the Council and consideration needs to be given to attracting wider

use, to promote Jenner Park as the Vale’s centre of sporting excellence”1.

Some of the underpinning considerations appertaining to this study are as follows:

The history and status of Jenner Park and its importance to the Council and

communities of Barry and the Vale together with a desire to protect this into the

future, particularly in the context of increasing financial pressures and potential

future local government reorganisation.

The 2006 Vale of Glamorgan and Leisure Centres review undertaken by Torkildsen

Barclay which identified Jenner Park, and its 2,500 seated stadium, as ‘lacking a

football club of sufficient stature to maximise the use and value of the stadium’.

However it was recognised as ‘a prestigious focal point for competition and finals,

international events and one which needed more detailed consideration, taking into

account wider property and legal issues’. The Stadium does generate some

income from mobile phone masts but requires on-going investment to improve the

grass pitch, grandstand, athletic track and club house.

The Council’s need to reduce the operating costs of the facility, which currently

range between £50,000 and £100,000 depending on issues of maintenance and

repair arising in any year. The annual subsidy is considered high in relation to the

number of users; income from the ‘track’ users which is low; and with usage of the

grass pitch naturally limited by the impact of prolonged wet weather coupled with,

localised poor drainage.

The annual costs should be considered in context with the Council’s need to

achieve savings of £32 million over the next 3 years, together with the fact that the

Jenner Park facilities are the only strategic, Council run, ‘built’ sports facilities

outside of the Parkwood Leisure Management contract. Despite this financial

climate, the Council has set aside a capital allocation of up to £795,000 which has

been transferred to the Visible Services Reserve to provide for the funding of any

agreed Jenner Park improvements2.

1 Report of the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Parks, Culture and Sports Development. Cabinet Meeting 16

June 2014

2 Cabinet Meeting - Closure of Accounts 2013/14. 28 July 2014.




th February 2015)

Despite the introduction of a drainage system, the current natural turf pitch suffers

damage as a result of excessive use and when football matches are played in quick

succession, during prolonged periods of wet weather. Pitch postponements over the

last 11 years were identified by Barry Town to be only 3-4, although these were

reported to have increased in 2013 to 12 games. Rhoose Football Club considered

the frequency of poor playing conditions to be less of a problem.

The presumption that 3G pitches generate a net profit. A synthetic football pitch

would allow for significantly increased use of the facility, providing an all-weather –

all-hours surface, which would allow a larger number of footfalls and increased

income to help offset costs.

Aspirations to have a senior football team return to the Welsh Premier Football

League, with the most likely club to achieve this status being Barry Town United,

currently competing at the top of Division 2 in the Welsh League.

The need to consider options for the future use of the Club House – providing

significant social facilities as well as 2 team changing rooms. A building which more

recently has been suffering from a lack of care and attention, although structurally

sound. There is an urgent need to review the configuration, management and use

of the building to maximise footfalls and community benefit, in a way which is

complementary to the use of the Stadium.




th February 2015)

BACKGROUND CONTEXT - JENNER PARK

Jenner Park Stadium has been in existence since the early 1900’s. During the 1980s, the

Council invested significantly in upgrading the stadium installing a synthetic running track,

floodlights and a new grandstand. In 1996, in order to bring Jenner Park up to UEFA

standards, a second stand was built increasing the seating capacity to 2,500.

In addition, a new club house with changing rooms, bars and hospitality space was

constructed. 2 of the 4 changing rooms were later converted into a skittles alley.

The Stadium athletics facility includes a 6 lane, 400m track with a 7 lane straight together

with all of the required jumping and throwing areas. (The steeplechase track is currently

out of action.)

Behind the south-west corner of the Stadium, backing onto Gladstone Road/Devon

Avenue, additional macadam areas measuring c 500m2 and 1000m2 respectively, are

currently unused zones which could be converted to create more effective car parking or

considered for alternative sporting uses in the event that the Stadium were re-developed

as an all-weather outdoor sports hub.

The Grass Pitch

The pitch is well orientated but appears to have suffered from a reduction in maintenance

since the period before the demise of Barry Town Football Club.

Although no performance quality tests were undertaken on the existing natural turf facility

as part of this study, from observations made, the quality of the pitch appears to be

generally satisfactory - good grass cover and surface evenness.

The quality of the topsoil appears to have been improved over the years by the addition of

sand topdressing which has resulted in a good depth of sandy loam topsoil being present.

It is understood that in the past, a pipe drainage system was installed by DW Clarkes, and

this was supplemented with secondary slit drains.

From the investigations made into the pitch drainage system as part of this

feasibility study, it appears that the existing pipe lateral and carrier drains may be in

poor condition and not functioning satisfactorily. Also the secondary slit drains

which have been installed now appear to have been capped off. The combination of

these two factors means that the pitch may not drain adequately, especially during

the wetter periods of the year. This may result in an increased rate of grass loss,

promoting reduced traction and poor ball rebound and roll characteristics.

The pitch also includes an automatic irrigation system which helps to maintain turf quality

and is useful for establishing grass after summer, pitch renovation works.




th February 2015)

If the pitch is not converted to a 3G synthetic pitch then the playing quality and

drainage properties could and should be improved by installing new piped and

secondary drainage systems, which should be protected by several sand

topdressings following drainage installation. The cost to install such a system and

to top-dress and over-seed the pitch would be in the order of £50,000 exc VAT.

Annual maintenance costs would be in the range, £7,500-12,500 plus wages,

equipment and water charges.

User Groups

The current arrangements for the selection of the Stadium’s primary football club user

were established in 2011. The annual process demands that a minimum bid price is

established – most recently this has been £280 – but the exercise has never secured the

amount of income required to cover the operating cost of the facility. However, the

underpinning rationale for the bidding process has been the Council’s desire to safeguard

‘equal opportunities’ giving all organisations the chance to compete for use of the facility.

Jenner Park is the primary outdoor sports arena in the Vale of Glamorgan and the Council

wishes that it be used in an appropriate and effective manner. In the future, if the facility

were to be managed by a community interest company, this view would need to be

relaxed.

In April 2013 Barry Town FC supporters club, supporting Barry Town United AFC, and

Rhoose FC were approved as the primary and secondary users for Jenner Park, with both

clubs paying £288 per game for the annual licence agreement.

In addition to football club use, Barry and the Vale Harriers, in existence since the 1890s,

have been licensed as a tenant at Jenner Park since the athletics track was developed.

Between October 2013 and October 2014 the stadium pitch was used for 74 football

matches and the track was used for a total of 73 athletics meetings and training sessions.

However, in September 2013 the tenant of the club house, Barry Town AFC Limited, gave

notice that it wished to surrender the lease to the building, ‘with immediate effect’, and the

keys were returned to the Council.

In April 2013 the Council also approved the request for a licence, at a peppercorn rent, for

an Adaptive Cycle Club at Jenner Park - with the Inter-Sensory Club subsequently

providing access to adaptive bikes for disabled people and investing in storage containers

alongside those provided for the Athletics Club equipment.




th February 2015)

Many of the schools in the Vale of Glamorgan use the athletics track for sports days and

the Vale Football League also use the pitch for cup finals.

Summary Assessment of the Background Context

Whilst the above issues are no doubt good reasons for the consideration of change, it

should be noted that the facility is already a valued and significant community asset, which

is both popular and well used by two ground-sharing Welsh League Football Clubs, both of

whom are prepared to pay a significant fee per a game, plus the cost of the referee and

floodlights when required. This is compared with a price of £36.50 for the hiring of grass

pitches for matches elsewhere in the Vale (with an additional £12.50 for changing room

use), and £80 for hiring the artificial 3G pitch for matches in Cowbridge, with an additional

£10 for changing rooms.

Jenner Park is the only stadium facility within the Vale, and Barry Town Utd is the only

Club attracting attendances of 150 – 170. The stadium has also been well used for

International and Welsh Premier League games, as well as many Cup Finals.

The grass pitch is of a good quality, although there are current issues with drainage – and

some of these have been identified later in this report. It should also be noted that whilst

the FAW endorse the use of 3G pitches for clubs and leagues, at international level the

coaches continue to prefer natural turf pitches for all fixtures and team preparation.

Clearly the number of fixtures lost due to bad weather is a concern; however a

similar situation applies to all football clubs and all grass pitches across the Vale.

Regardless of the decision of the Council, Jenner Park has supported a Welsh

Premier League team in the past and could continue to do so into the future, without

the conversion of the pitch to 3G.

However, the conversion of the stadium pitch to 3G would have a significant impact

on the Athletics Club, not least during the period of construction, if this took place

in the summer months - the football closed season - without any considered

mitigating approaches established by the pitch contractor. However the

development would undoubtedly generate greater and better use of the adjacent

club house and significantly more income from footballing activities, albeit more

limited if remaining a shared football/athletics facility.




th February 2015)

WIDER CONTEXT - VALE OF GLAMORGAN AND BARRY STRATEGIC

ISSUES

A Changing Population Profile

The current population of the Vale of Glamorgan is 126,831, with approximately 50,000

living in Barry and the next four larger towns supporting a population of 46,000 between

them. The population in the Vale is set to rise over the next 5 years to over 132,000, with

a projected increase of 8% in children under 18 and even more significantly by 37% in the

number of people of retirement age.

Barry a Priority

In Barry, the 5 Welsh Government Multiple Deprivation Lower Super Output Areas are

amongst the top 10% most deprived in Wales. The principle areas of concern being in

respect of employment, income, education, health and community safety. As a result of

these factors the Welsh Government has designated the town of Barry as a Strategic

Regeneration Area.

In contrast, many of the other towns and villages in the Vale are amongst the least

deprived in Wales.

Planning Priorities

With its close proximity to Cardiff and the M4, the Vale of Glamorgan is a popular area for

housing development, with above average property prices and a particular need for more

starter homes. In terms of increasing the housing stock, there is a particularly high level of

need for affordable housing in Barry.

In the Local Development Plan the CMG 2 housing allocations specify proposed locations

for residential developments. To meet these housing requirements the biggest key

settlement area is in Barry and the Court Road Depot, next to Jenner Park, is identified for

the development of over a 1.6 hectare area for potentially 50 units together with possibly a

supermarket. It is recognised that further assessment of this option is still needed in

respect of the value, function, and whether it would be cost effective for the Council

to relocate current services. The site is also designated as ‘brownfield’ having been the

location of an old slaughter house and incinerator – undoubtedly this will add costs to any

development as remediation will be required.

There are also issues with the Jenner Park campus in terms of car parking. Whilst

there are ‘pockets’ of car parking space - for example potential parking off Gladstone

Road/Devon Avenue, currently designated for Social Services offices, but not used - any




th February 2015)

future development encouraging greater use of the site on a more commercial basis would

demand that further consideration be given to access and parking arrangements.

For these reasons, it is considered that any significant new developments at Jenner

Park should be appraised in context with other wider development opportunities in

the immediate vicinity, including all configuration and logistical options.

Council Priorities for New Community Facility Developments

The Local Development Plan (2011-2026) identifies many priority objectives for Barry,

including: giving importance to providing new opportunities for enhanced community

services, facilities, public realm and infrastructure to support the important role of Barry as

a “key settlement and its designation of a regeneration area”3.

Strategic Policy 1 - delivering the strategy in the LDP specifies the importance of favouring

developments that promote healthy living.

Policy MG7 – the provision of community facilities specifies the importance of meeting the

identified need for developments with new and enhanced community facilities. For the ten

major settlements, headed up by Barry, the expected proposals should provide new or

enhanced “multi-use community facilities including the co-location of health care,

school, library and leisure facilities and other community services in accessible

locations”.

Furthermore, the Community Facilities Background Paper 2013 4 provides an assessment

which highlights deficiencies, and identifies the nature of demand for additional community

facilities arriving from planned and windfall housing developments and where new or

enhanced facilities are required to accommodate future growth. The paper makes the case

for an additional 740sqm of sports hall in Barry to satisfy future housing growth (0.23sqm

per dwelling for a total of 3,216 dwellings). The provision of 3G pitches provide an

alternative model for serving this need and also take account of a more practical

view that any more built sports facilities are just not sustainable in the current

financial climate. Furthermore, the informal view of the Leisure operator is that there

should be less, not more facilities. With only 27% of the adult population using

Leisure and Fitness Centres (Sport Wales Adult Surveys 2013) it is recommended

that this guidance be reviewed and modified.

Current ‘Stock of Football Facilities’

As well as Jenner Park, the current facilities in Barry that can be used for different forms of

football include:

3 Vale of Glamorgan Local Development Plan 2011-2026. 4 Local Development Plan (2011-2026) Community Facilities Background Paper (September 2013)




th February 2015)

15 senior grass football pitches and 10 ‘mini’ pitches - all Council provided and

nearly 50% of the total across the Vale. These figures do not include School pitches

Barry Leisure Centre – 4 court Sports Hall

Holm View Leisure Centre - 3 Court Sports Hall and 2x 5-a-side ATPs

Colcot Sports Centre – 4 court and 1 court sports hall and 1 ATP (sand-filled carpet)

Bryn Hafren ATP

Sir Richard Gwyn School ATP

Any development at Jenner Park serving football development in the Vale should

consider the ‘whole’ mix of facilities - what would make the most difference and

where.

The Google Earth image shows the relationship between Jenner Park and other Football

Training Facilities/Centres in Barry (direct line measure only for indicative purposes):

Colcot indoor 5-a-side and ATP and Colcot/Buttrills grass pitches - 0.8miles;

Holm View indoor 5-aside and 2 5-aside ATPs – 0.65miles;

Bryn Hafren ATP – 1mile

Sir Richard Gwyn RC School ½ sized ATP – 1.3 miles

Barry LC – indoor 5-a-side - 0.5 miles.




th February 2015)

The Future – New Management Options

The Re-shaping Services and New Change Programme for the Council is a strategy only

recently considered by the Cabinet (August 2014). It provides the basis for a future change

programme to help the Council deliver the £32 million required savings over the next 3

years. The programme is set in context with the increasing pressures on Council

services, particularly as a result of an ever increasing ageing population and

compounded by the Authority having a traditionally low public sector funding base

(20th out of the 22 authorities in terms of funding per head of population).

Into the future the Council recognises that more radical solutions will have to be

considered, including different management and partnership arrangements, as well

as delivery by external partners in the commercial/third sector or separate Council owned

trading companies, together with joint provision alongside other public sector bodies.

Any management options for Jenner Park should be considered in this context and

be designed to deliver the model most ‘fit for the future purposes’ for the Stadium.

Summary Review

The significance of Barry as the largest settlement in the Vale and area of strategic

importance for regeneration, together with the potential for future development, coupled

with the importance of addressing issues of health, communities and making the town

attractive to live work and visit are all key indicators that provide important rationale

for future development priorities in Barry.

The potential redevelopment of the Jenner Park facility also presents an opportunity

to consider a wider reconfiguration of the whole site – taking into account the scale of

the stadium and the size of events it is likely to attract.

If the development of a 3G pitch were to proceed then there are questions to be

considered about whether it would work cost effectively with shared athletics use.

Given this to be the case perhaps consideration should also be given to an alternative

location for athletics, which in turn would allow for further reflection to be given to the

scope for the redevelopment of the ’whole area’, including the Council Depot,

achieving a more efficient and effective sport and recreation use, alongside housing

and other community developments.

The Council strategy, as set out in the Local Development Plan, focuses on the need for

consideration to be given to the future co-location of facilities - schools, libraries, leisure

facilities and other community amenities. Investment in Jenner Park would not satisfy

this policy, and as a stand-alone facility it will always generate only limited day

time/term time use.




th February 2015)

Neither does the development of strategic specialist sports facilities particularly contribute

to the growing issue emerging from the activity needs of an increasingly ageing

population.

Jenner Park has a chequered history in terms of management and relationships. However,

looking forward, the Council has declared the need to look at alternative partnership

solutions. Into the future the development of Jenner Park with a 3G pitch, alongside the

reconfiguration of the existing club house for multi-purpose uses could be considered of

development interest to Parkwood Leisure Ltd. Alternatively the retention of the Park

as a sporting hub with the ‘primary’ Football Club leading the operation of the facility,

perhaps as part of a co-operative/mutual could help it achieve its aspirations of

achieving Welsh Premier League status. It would make sense to consider such

partnerships as the management model for the future.




th February 2015)

REVIEW OF STRATEGIC LEISURE ISSUES

Leisure Management

Informed in part by a strategic review by Torkildsen and Barclay in 2006, the Council

moved from a position (2009/10) where the net cost of running its Leisure Facilities was in

the region of £2.5 million per annum to the procurement of a private sector partner to

operate its leisure facilities. As a consequence Parkwood Leisure Ltd. successfully won

the Leisure Management contract under a 10 year leasehold arrangement (2012-2022

agreement).

Following a £1 million capital investment from the Council, the contract has resulted in the

Authority no longer incurring leisure management revenue costs. Set in this context,

Jenner Park is not only the most expensive leisure facility per user for the public

purse, but it is also viewed as a potential yet untapped source of income generation.

The management of Jenner Park was listed in the advertised leisure management tender,

although this was subsequently removed. Parkwood Leisure have since reviewed the Club

House at Jenner Park and given some initial consideration to ideas for its future use.

However the scope for any significant commercial activity is likely to be limited and

any development would be more likely to work as a community and sporting hub

model and not one that should detract in any way from the business and income

received at Holm View, Colcot or Barry Leisure Centres.

Colcot Sports Centre was identified in the 2006 review as a very “dated and dilapidated

structure” that contains changing provision for sports pitches that lie offsite, together with a

heavy weights gym. The 2006 Review recommended that consideration be given to the

funding of a new pavilion development, more fit for purpose, to satisfy the users of the

existing grass pitches with the focus of the Colcot Sports Hall being on sports development

use, operated in partnership with the sports clubs. This is considered to remain as a

priority area for development to serve football development needs.

The Need for a Shared Council/Governing Body and Clubs’ Vision for Football

The 2006 review also identified the lack of any overarching sport and leisure strategy

setting out clearly the role of the Council’s Leisure Services and linkages with the

Community Strategy and Council’s Corporate Plan. In the context of this feasibility study,

the same principle applies to Football.

Undoubtedly football would be the principle beneficiary of a Jenner Park 3G

development, however currently there is a lack of any distinctive and shared vision

for football in the Vale to justify/underpin such a development.




th February 2015)

However, there exists a very strong network of senior football clubs – as well as Barry

Town United - Llantwit Major, Rhoose, Dinas Powys, Cogan Coronation and Sully together

with a significant number of junior football teams and activities. It is also evident that there

exist a large number of conflicting views, frustrations, as well as the ‘natural

sporting rivalries’. Indeed, only one stakeholder interviewed was supportive of a 3G

development at Jenner Park as a priority for football in Barry.

Future School Developments

As part of the feasibility investigation, a meeting was held with Strategic Managers for

Education and Property so as to understand future school development plans and any

related issues. Such discussions also opened up the opportunity to consider the relocation

of athletics facilities - the development of a 3G pitch at Jenner Park is expected to have a

detrimental and potentially ‘devastating’ impact on the Athletics Club.

Two considerations emerged from this element of the review.

The need to take account of the likely future number of 3G pitches on School Sites. Only

one exists at the moment (Cowbridge) and therefore demand for its use is high. However,

into the future two could be built in Penarth, one is planned for Llantwit Major and

undoubtedly the future replacement of the carpet at Colcot should be 3G, given the

strength of football in that area, and with the sand-filled carpet at Bryn Hafren satisfying

any hockey requirements.

The current consultation on a future co-educational provision presents a range of options

for consideration. The coming together of the Boys and Girls schools enables the

reconfiguration of campuses, consideration of a co-located, multi-use and strategic

sports campus, serving the biggest school in the area. A significant impact – a very

large school, housing the majority of young people from the town and a highly

visible site, adjacent to an important access road.

Any investment delivering a shared community and school sporting hub would

secure maximum impact, consistent with Council Planning policies as well as

inspiring young people and physical activity lifestyles and providing for the

sporting community.

Any developments in the Colcot area are accessible to the College, Welsh Medium

Schools, Comprehensive Schools, as well the largest infrastructure of football

pitches and sports halls. There is also a significant land holding designated for

additional housing and associated community investment.




th February 2015)

In addition, the UK Athletics strategy, hopefully soon to be converted into a Wales

strategy, introduces the concept of the development of ‘compact athletics’ facilities (See

APPENDIX E). The model presents an opportunity to consider the creation of a new

community athletics hub which could serve the development of athletics,

supporting the family and social ethos of the Club as well as creating a multi-

disciplined community resource which would serve the engagement of young

people during the school day.

Finally, it should be noted that Cardiff Council is advertising for operating partners to

manage a number of different ‘leisure facility parcels’ – Leckwith Stadium is included.

Consideration could therefore be given to the extension of a new consortium and

social interest company which would involve Cardiff and the Vale College, Welsh

Athletics and Cardiff City Football Club. Such a model lends itself for further

consideration in terms of the overarching approach to the development of athletics.

Parkwood Leisure Ltd

The contrasting performance of the different leisure centres is understood to be stark.

Barry Leisure Centre is undoubtedly the most successful with Colcot and Holm

View more difficult to sustain.

The potential impact of a new facility – a 3G pitch at Jenner Park - on existing facilities

operated by Parkwood Leisure Ltd is difficult to predict but current facility bookings for

football are as follows:

Barry Leisure Centre - Indoor 5-a-side, 17hrs a week - 884 hours a year

Colcot Sport Centre - Indoor 5-a-side, 15hrs a week - 780 hours a year

Colcot ATP - 19 Hours a week - 494 hours over 6 months.

Holm View Leisure Centre - Indoor 5-a-side 9 hours a week - 468 hours a year

The development of a 3G pitch at Jenner Park, with the intended increased level of

community football, will have an impact on the current use of the Colcot ATP and

Sports Hall, as well as the Sports hall and 5-a-side ATPs at Holm View, and perhaps

Barry Leisure Centre as well. Thus, the income for at least 3 out of 4 of these

Centres would undoubtedly be affected by a new 3G pitch.

Generally the informal view of ‘the operator’ is that there are already too many

strategic facilities in the Vale, added to which competition also exists from facilities

run by Schools.




th February 2015)

Furthermore, generally speaking, Schools are ‘good at doing their own thing’ regardless of

the wider strategic position - there are frequently reported issues from community

groups who have contrasting experiences when it comes to accessing school

facilities and in many cases it is very difficult (football clubs and junior football, athletics,

hockey and disabled groups).

Finally, if a 3G pitch were to be developed, Parkwood Leisure would be interested and

should be give the first option to consider the operation at Jenner Park. However,

only a small range of potential adaptations to the existing space exist - possibly a

small fitness offer, but not one that would compete given the closeness of the facility to the

3 other centres in Barry. Parkwood would also be interested in considering an option

for the establishment of a partnership with the clubs, leading to the development of

a community sports hub – as a company they are keen to demonstrate a commitment to

achieving the right outcome for the community.




th February 2015)

SPORTS NEEDS ANALYSIS

Stakeholder meetings were held with a number of existing users and Governing Bodies.

Football

Welsh Football Trust/FAW and Vale of Glamorgan Junior and Senior Leagues

The following points emerged from this consultation:

There was a widespread disappointment in the lack of consultation or discussion

with the key people ‘running’ football in the Vale before the Council determined the

best place to invest in a 3G facility in Barry. A request that further consideration

be given to all options for the location of a 3G pitch before making a final

decision.

The greatest need in terms of football participation and healthy living is to serve the

considerable participation demand, particularly amongst minis and juniors.

There are not enough facilities for training, and where they exist there are poor

access arrangements and high cost issues. The range is significant, for example

Barry Boys encourage and support junior football on their pitches and provide

access with no charge. The cost for hire in Colcot is £52 an hour for the full pitch,

Cowbridge is £70 an hour and can be difficult to access, Bryn Hafren School ATP is

difficult to access. A smaller ATP is used at Richard Gwyn at the cost of £60 for 3

hours.

There is undoubtedly a shortage of venues for training and competition. A large

number of games were lost last season at junior level through bad weather - over 9

weeks -which had a significant impact on participation levels with many young

people lost to the sport. There is a high level of support for artificial surfaces for

young footballers to play and train, as opposed to grass where activities are so

easily cancelled in poor weather.

Currently only the under 7’s are allowed by the League to play on artificial pitches -

something which would need to be considered into the future, as the FAW endorses

the use of 3G pitches for all club and junior football.

There is a need for a football hub venue in Barry with good access to schools,

visible to the community and providing a venue for the whole of the Vale league to

use. The ‘preferred’ location would be Colcot, where there are a significant number

of grass pitches, a need to improve the changing pavilion, the current artificial pitch

is well used and important for football, and the conversion of the railed grass pitch




th February 2015)

to a 3G surface would make a significant difference to the game.

Other clubs have a concern that a 3G pitch at Jenner Park would primarily favour

Barry Town Utd and could even have a negative impact on grass roots junior

football. It is however recognised that it would be good for the Vale to have a

successful senior team, playing in the Welsh Premier League, ‘but is a 3G stadium

pitch necessary to achieve that’.

There is a considerable interest amongst the football community for a shared vision

and subsequently a football ‘co-operative’ or ‘social interest company’ to run a

football hub at Colcot, including use of the indoor hall for Futsal. Use of the venue

would be maximised in the day by schools/College and the facility would have a

much wider impact on football development and the wider community throughout

the Vale than Jenner Park.

Barry Town United (BTUFC)

Barry Town United is the highest performing football club in the Vale of Glamorgan,

currently competing in Welsh League Division 2 and holding a position at the top of the

division, indeed pressing for promotion to League One.

It is a successful football club (albeit new) which attracts players from Barry, Cardiff and

further afield. Its aspiration over the next 5 years is to increase its average crowd size to

350, secure promotion to the Welsh Premier League, develop women’s and disability

football teams, achieve the UEFA domestic licence, increase the number of junior teams to

full academy status - from under 9’s to 14’s, take over the running of the club house,

secure a long term ground lease and develop training facilities at Jenner Park or a 3G

pitch surface.

BTUFC is keen to further ‘professionalise’ the performance standards with the

appointment of an academy director and paying bonuses to players.

The Club aspire to play a far greater, respected and valued role in the community,

becoming a central hub for sport in Barry and the Vale.

The Club is supporters owned and a Company Limited by Guarantee, but it is looking into

establishing a Community Interest Company.

Jenner Park is used under the terms of an annual licence, at the cost of £288.50 a game,

plus £80 for lights and £100 for the referee. The ground is shared with a secondary user -

Rhoose Football Club - a successful ground share arrangement.




th February 2015)

The club has reported that the current state of the grass pitch is such that an increasing

number of games are being cancelled - last year 12 games were reported to have been

postponed.

Barry Town United have recently taken over the running of the Vale of Glamorgan Football

Development Centre for 45 8-13 year olds.

The Club has a strong drive and ambition, having recently emerged from legal battles

which undoubtedly galvanised local support. However, like many other senior football

league clubs across Wales, it does not have strong relationship with other local clubs and

is even considered with animosity by some.

The turnover of the club has increased from £27,500 to £44,000 over the last year.

The club attracts an average crowd of between 150-170 per game, who pay £3-£5 to

attend.

The 1st and Youth team play at Jenner Park.

The Club now runs under 12’s and under 14’s, as well as the under 19’s youth team.

In terms of training the following takes place:

1st team train Tuesday and Thursday evenings, University of South Wales, Treforest

3G

U19s train Tuesday and Thursday evenings – an ‘indoor sports hall type facility’ at a

local school

U14s train Wednesday evening at St Richard Gwyn School

U12s train Wednesday evening - an ‘indoor sports hall facility’ Holm View Leisure

Centre

BTUFC Dev Centre - indoor sports hall type facility’ was Colcot Sports Centre, but

due to error in booking moved to Victoria Park Community Centre

The cost is £6,000 per season for training facilities across 4 teams - Junior teams have

around 25 sessions and the 1st team have around 40-45 sessions

The development of a 3G pitch at Jenner Park, with Barry Town United taking the lead role

in the whole stadium, replicates the position currently being pursued by other Welsh

Premier League clubs such as Newtown, Carmarthen, Aberystwyth and Airbus. These

clubs have been able to access UEFA funding from the FAW. However, the clubs already




th February 2015)

have annual turnovers of £100,000 to £250,000 pa and are established businesses with

successful club houses and social facilities - in some cases even education, learning and

community programmes. The current footballing infrastructure in Barry does not

currently match this business profile.

Given the arrangements for managing community leisure facilities throughout the Vale, the

Council is not considered to be best placed to operate a 3G stadium and social centre - it

does not directly operate facilities, with Parkwood Leisure the chosen delivery model and

most likely potential operating partner for a ‘Council run facility’.

The establishment of a new community interest company could be an alternative model - a

genuine partnership with ownership vested in more than one club.

Rhoose Football Club

Like the other clubs, Rhoose is a long established Football Club, with a successful track

record and now making good progress through the Welsh League - currently in Division 3.

The Club team is currently made up of a mix of Barry and Cardiff players.

It used to play at Rhoose where there are 2 senior pitches and changing rooms.

However the land was held by trustees and is a protected green space with no capacity to

develop, restricting the club’s ability to improve its status and standard of play.

Rhoose FC has been playing for 3 seasons at Jenner Park and is ‘comfortable’ paying the

current licence fee. It uses TyNewydd Inn as its after match social centre.

The side has 25-26 players but is currently adopting the Cadoxton Imps over 17’s to create

a youth team, who will play at Jenner Park on Sundays. This will increase its coaching

force from 4-7, with teams training together.

The Club aspire to be a Welsh Premier League club, but would accept the reasonable

target of being a successful League One team.

Rhoose would be happy to work as part of a co-operative arrangement for Jenner Park

bringing good expertise, management skills and a successful track record in terms of

financial performance. Its current turnover is £26,000 a year generating an operating

surplus of £6,000.

The club trains at Colcot ATP on Wednesday evenings and on Tuesday’s and Thursday’s

in the summer on grass pitches.




th February 2015)

It has explored the potential to use other facilities as a home ground, including Severn

Avenue, but none have proved suitable.

Rhoose Football Club’s preferred competitive playing surface would be grass and does not

consider that the pitch at Jenner Park is in need of replacement with a 3G surface.

Athletics

Welsh Athletics

Welsh Athletics is made up of just over 100 clubs grouped into 16 networks across Wales,

with facility hubs at the heart of each. A third of the membership of Welsh Athletics are

running clubs - not track and field, however club membership has recently grown by 12%

and most clubs are at a capacity, and some with a waiting list.

The Governing Body is looking to develop a facility strategy in the near future similar to

that produced by UK athletics.

Given the current financial climate, and the size of many clubs, potentially there could be

fewer strategic track and field facilities across Wales in the future.

In the 2014 championships and Commonwealth Games trials held at Cardiff International

Sports Stadium over 200 athletes participated, of which 72 were from Cardiff Athletics

Club, 57 from Swansea Harries, 24 from Newport Harriers, 14 from Bridgend, 10 from

Carmarthen, 9 from Cwmbran, 6 from Wrexham and 1 or 2 from the remainder of clubs

across Wales, with the rest of the athletes coming from over 25 clubs in England.

Barry and the Vale Harriers

Barry and the Vale Harriers is a club with a long history - over 100 years - although re-

formed a few years ago. Currently the Club has 110 members of whom 18-20 are

disabled and most are under the age of 18. There is a higher proportion of girls to boys

and the club is run by a 9 strong committee with 6 active coaches.

The Club is developing a road running section which will undoubtedly help increase its

membership.

Club training is for one night a week, 52 weeks of the year, but on Monday and

Wednesday evenings between May and August. In the summer evenings up to 75 young

athletes attend training.




th February 2015)

The Club prides itself on providing an important introduction to the development of athletes

through all disciplines, and is considered to be an important feeder club - helping young

athletes capable of reaching higher levels of performance.

The ethos of the club is to provide a ‘social’ sports experience - considered important to

retain young athletes.

Finally, the Club are firmly of the view that there is no scope/insufficient space to

develop a throwing area adjacent to the Jenner Park Stadium – behind the stand,

and if a 3G pitch were to be developed with the throwing area relocated off-site, this

would effectively destroy the ethos and effectiveness of the club.

The Vale Intersensory Club - Adaptive Cycle Club

The Club was started 6 years ago – as a result of the Founder’s personal experience of

looking after a family member with profound disabilities. The club is a registered charity

and all activities are provided free of charge / with a donation of £2.

Over the last few years, the Club has attracted grant funding and invested over £100k on

adaptive equipment including £50-60k on bikes. The equipment enables access to activity

and facilities - including:

Lifts into Cardiff Leisure Pool

A Sledge at Cardiff ice rink

Barry Island - beach wheel chairs - 3 in the Tourist Centre

Interactive activity floor

Boat with wheelchair access

A wheelchair bike – motorised

Side by side bikes

Hand cycles

Adapted tricycles

A trailer

After lengthy negotiations, the Club recently started using Jenner Park - approval was

given by Cabinet in April 2013. The Council installed the access ramp and the Club have

bought the storage container, at a cost of £3k. The Club provide equipment, but not activity

leadership, coaching or support – that is down to the accompanying carers. A retired

aircraft engineer provides maintenance and the Club affiliate to Welsh Cycling, to access

insurance cover.

The Club have a license to operate on Wednesday and Friday afternoons from 12-4pm,

April to the end of September

It attracts up to 60 members with a maximum of 10 -15 attending at any one time.




th February 2015)

Members are recruited from a range of Special Needs Units/Schools Centres/Services in

the Vale which include:

Ysgol Erw'r Delyn Penarth for severe and profound – part of new Learning Campus

Ash Grove for Autism

Ysgol Maes Dyfan for moderate learning difficulties

Beachwood, Sully - 55 residents

Barry supported housing - 12 units provided by one company, 9 by another –

adapted bungalows all profoundly disabled with 1-1 care

2 Day Centres - Barry and Penarth

Future plans and issues:

A need to provide more storage containers at Jenner Park

A desire to change the times to 1pm-5pm and 6pm if the Club can attract a

volunteer to take responsibility for the keys

One of biggest issues for the client group is the need for Hydrotherapy - there are

no facilities in the Vale available for adult community use

Other providers i.e. Touch Trust and Pedal Power in Cardiff employ staff and have

to charge significant sums £15 - £30 an hour

Future opportunities might include:

o Barry Community Water Activity Centre – a new group building a slip way

with funding for specialist dinghies - like a sail-ability club

o Development potential to use the promenade as a cycle way – any facility

has to be flat with no risks associated with traffic.

Rugby

Barry Rugby Football Club

Consideration has been given to the potential for a 3G pitch at Jenner Park to be

developed for both Football and Rugby, competition or just training purposes.

Barry Rugby Football Club is an important sports provider in the town. It is a strong and

successful club running many teams, including 1st, 2nd and 3rd ,youth, ladies and 10 minis

and juniors teams, as well as planning an under 18s ladies team.

The Club performs well in the Welsh Rugby Union leagues and has good sponsorship and

support. Its aspiration is to be promoted, but the arrangements at its current ground

are not suitable for playing at a higher level.




th February 2015)

The Reservoir Fields are owned and maintained by the Vale of Glamorgan and leased to

the Club. There are 3 pitches with a large club house, which has been extensively

developed - a recently developed training pitch is located at the rear of the club house,

with ‘modest’ floodlights.

The Club use Bryn Hafren ATP, maybe one hour a week, for training when the weather is

bad.

It is a self-sufficient club with good club house, adequate facilities and no desire to

relocate its training or match playing to another facility, which would only divert

footfalls, customers and business away from the Club.

As the Club has access to an all- weather pitch at the rear of the club i.e. at Bryn Hafren

as well as which it has its own floodlit training pitch, it would not be attractive to play at

Jenner Park even within a quality stadium, as this would divert players and supporters

away from the club social centre. The use of Jenner for training would also displace

income at Bryn Hafren, where a limited level of Rugby use of the ATP is required.

Furthermore 3G pitch hire costs would be higher than at present.

If Jenner Park was to be developed as a home for rugby competition, this would demand a

more expensive pitch - construction costs and weekly maintenance. Seeking WRU and

FAW league approval for a Rugby/Football ground share (shared use with line markings,

goals, staggered kick offs etc.) is an unprecedented model and would be difficult to

achieve at this time.

Finally, the replacement demands for a shared Rugby/Football competition carpet are

likely to be more frequent with rugby scrummaging and tackling creating a different type of

wear and tear.

There are however concerns which are a priority for the Rugby Club and it would

welcome a supportive partnership approach with the Council, working towards a

vision for the development of the game in the town.

The key issues are as follows:

The first team pitch is little more than a good parks pitch, and an open space, with

public rights of way, dog fouling, broken glass and no scope to control or charge for

admissions. It is on a slope with no floodlights.

The main issues and priorities are therefore to improve the quality of the pitch with

the levelling of the ground and protecting the pitch from dog walkers, maybe

diverting the right of way and being able to control entrants on a match day, at least




th February 2015)

for a 1½ hour period.

If the Club were promoted it would attract more away supporters, better players,

more home support, but all would be hampered or disadvantaged by the quality of

the ground.

Summary Analysis of Principle User Needs (Football and Athletics)

The following footballing priorities were evident from this review:

The Football Association of Wales and Welsh Football Trust wish to see Football

Clubs succeeding, becoming stronger and progressing up the leagues. Given the

current north and west Wales club dominance, it is particularly important that clubs

from south Wales are supported to secure a place in the Welsh Premier League. A

3G pitch at Jenner Park is not essential nor does BTUFC need a 3G pitch to

achieve this aim.

The Football Clubs and particularly BTUFC have ambitious plans to become bigger,

stronger and more successful. Ownership and management of their own club

facilities has been one of the keys to the success of other clubs – a number of

significant changes are demanded to achieve that objective but a 3G pitch is not

the most critical. BTUFC would need to build up the Club business to be in a

position to take on the running costs and 6-8 year £180k replacement liability for a

3G pitch.

There is a need for better facilities for football training and junior development –

Jenner Park is not necessarily the best location for a 3G pitch in Barry if these

objectives are to be met. Furthermore, BTUFC are the only club in Barry who have

advised that they consider a 3G pitch located at Jenner Park is the best option to

support football development in Barry.

From an athletics perspective, a 3G pitch at Jenner Park will undoubtedly weaken what is

already a relatively small voluntary sports club. It will remove the ability to host and train

for field events at the Stadium, and if constructed in the 2015 summer season would

wholly displace the athletics and significantly undermine the Club’s viability. Detailed

discussions will be required with the pitch contractor if a series of mitigation measures are

to be established, with the aim of reducing the negative impact on the Athletics Club.




th February 2015)

DEVELOPING A 3G COMPETITION PITCH – SOME IMPORTANT

LOGISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Getting the Approach to a 3G Stadium Pitch Right

Up until now Artificial Turf Pitches have generally only been constructed, managed and

maintained by Local Authorities, Schools Colleges and Universities. Furthermore, in the

education sector the business case for replacement carpets has been underpinned by the

essential curriculum or student business demands. In the case of Local Authorities there

has never been a demand for the maintenance of set-aside sinking funds and money has

always been found to replace carpets as and when they have reached the end of their life

and are no longer safe to use.

Different to grass, artificial pitches are ‘built facilities’, however unlike buildings their life

expectancy is not expected to exceed 10-15 years and historically a business case for the

replacement of carpets has rarely been demanded. As well as this until recently ATPs

have been sand-based and only used for competition purposes by Hockey with no FIFA

testing to apply.

So, planning for the future cannot be based on past experiences as well as which the

development of 3G football competition pitches has emerged at a time of extreme financial

pressure as well as facility closures, all demanding that future facility business plans must

generate sufficient income to fully cover not only maintenance and management but also

replacement costs. The FAW requires that Clubs receiving its funding for a stadium 3G

pitch, establish a protected sinking fund to cover the projected pitch replacement costs.

Sinking Fund Requirements to Cover the Capital Cost of the 3G Pitch Replacement

Unlike a training pitch say on a community or education site, depending on the intensity of

use and maintenance, a stadium pitch is unlikely to last beyond 6-8 years before the

carpet will need to be replaced, to continue to meet the 4 yearly FIFA testing cycles

necessary to retain a league license to play competitive matches (to meet European

competition standards a 3G carpet would require annual certification - FIFA 2 star with the

cost of testing in the region of £3,000).

A current estimate for the resurfacing of a full-size pitch, including the removal and

disposal of the existing surface and fill, could cost up to £180,000 plus vat. In the second

carpet replacement cycle the shockpad may need to be replaced at an additional cost of

up to £60,000. A total investment of £420,000 over 16 years, demanding a ‘net profit’ of no

less than £25,000 pa to fund a sinking fund.

The operator of a new 3G stadium pitch will need to be confident that they can generate

the necessary business to set-aside this fund out of the annual profits.




th February 2015)

Accommodating a Pitch within a Stadium Athletics Track

In terms of meeting the FAW Domestic Licence, the pitch size is confirmed in regulation

1.08(4) which states:

“The field of play must be 105m long and 68m wide. If this is not possible due to stadium

constraints, the minimum allowable is 100m long and 64 metres wide.”

Therefore, a reduced playing area could be considered within the confines of the track at

Jenner Park, but only to the minimum size of 100m x 64m (and subject to the introduction

of an approved temporary track covering).

In relation to run-offs, the industry standard is 3m for artificial turf pitches, but the Domestic

Licence regulation 1.08(5) requires 'a grass verge or alternative artificial turf of the

minimum width of 1.5m between the touch line and the perimeter barrier. It is

recommended that this distance is 3m'.

As Regulation 1.08(5) specifically refers to artificial turf, it could be permitted to install a

temporary 3G covering of the track for the playing season, so long as there is no danger to

the players’ safety.

The FAW would reserve the right to inspect and test this before any firm decision is

made in respect of awarding a Domestic Licence or indeed including the pitch on

the 'approved register of 3G pitches'- which would be a requirement for playing

competitive matches at any age or level of performance.

So in summary the FAW would not consent to a playing area which measured less than

100m x 64m and a 3m run-off to all sides would be required. A temporary covering of the

track when football is played may be permitted - but this would be subject to the design

detail and confirmation that the covering would be extant when matches are played.

Clearly the introduction of a temporary covering of the track from August to May is likely to

have an additional impact on the use of the stadium for athletics, as it is unlikely that the

seasonal 3G run-off will wear well when being lifted and replaced every week – however if

the inside lane of the track were not required for athletics training, then the temporary

covering could remain extant during the football season. The FAW Regulation for the use

of Synthetic Turf in all Competitions states that ‘the synthetic turf pitch, including run-offs,

shall be one continuous playing surface. It shall be green in colour.’

The difference between past ‘exemptions for grass pitches and now is that the Council is

effectively considering a ‘new build’ and as with other construction projects compliance

with the standards of the day are expected. The installation of a 3G pitch is no different.




th February 2015)

The industry standard, that any designer would have to conform to, is a 3m run-off to all

sides.

If the Council were to develop a 3G pitch with less than 3m run-off and the FAW considers

allowing the pitch to be used for competitive purposes with only 1.5m to all sides, in the

event of an injury sustained by a player moving from a secure footing on the turf to a hard

and different surface, liability would be targeted at the Council and perhaps FAW too. The

advice in this report must therefore be to comply with the minimum 3m run-off to all sides

such that the pitch once constructed is approved for competition purposed on the FAW’s

register of 3G facilities.

3G technology is new, and its introduction to a grass playing area within an athletics

stadium is a challenge - this report advises that the design approach must be fully

explored, with agreement to the design criteria and operational requirements secured from

FAW in advance of any procurement process. The temporary covering of an athletic track

is not an approach that has been widely used - we cannot recommend such an approach

without further and detailed investigation.

3G PITCH OPTIONS APPRAISAL

Facility Options

The facility options for Jenner Park arising from the feasibility review are summarised and

appraised in the following matrix.

OPTION DESCRIPTION ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES FINANCIAL

IMPLICATIONS

RISK

IMPLCTATIONS

1 3G facility replacing

grass pitch at Jenner

Park

100x64 playing area

with 3m run-offs to

all sides to meet

Welsh premier

standards

Design subject to

further drainage

review

Upgrade and re-open

the off-pitch social

centre

See APPENDIX D for

Improves the off-

pitch business

Increases pitch

use and income

No games lost to

the weather

Could enable

BTUFC to grow

stronger –

depending on the

management

model

Loss of two track

lanes

Loss of throwing

facilities

Possible break up of

athletics club

If athletics club

survive, restricted use

of 3G by football

(income loss c£16,000)

Competition surfaces

may last only 5-6 years

before a replacement

carpet is required

Construction

costs up to

£600,000 plus

fees and vat

Up to £150,000

for the social

facilities

upgrade plus

£50,000 for

conversions

Loss of athletics

club

Carpet fails FIFA

testing before

the sinking fund

is able to cover

the replacement

cost and football

clubs lose

league

membership

Business plan

weak if athletics

continue

Business plan at

risk when Colcot




th February 2015)

design specification

Consider maximising

suitable redundant

spaces around the

stadium for parking

or other

complementary

sporting uses to

further support the

business case

Work to be done on

football vision and

partnership

arrangements

Loss of good quality

grass pitch

Athletics or football -

one will be affected by

the contract period

No school us of the 3G

during the daytime

converted to 3G

or other facilities

are opened

An additional

artificial pitch

will impact on

the business

plans of other

facilities

Drainage issues

may make the

development of

a 3G difficult /

too costly /

impossible

2 Relocate the

athletics to a new

training facility on a

school site

See APPENDIX E for

summary description

of a Compact

Athletics Facility

Construct 3G pitch

alongside main stand

Release the land

‘gained’ for housing

(flats over parking)

and link with Court

Road Depot

development

Upgrade and re-open


centre

Work to be done on

football vision and

partnership

arrangements

3G football pitch

available 24/7

Better business

plan

Athletics gain a

unique training

facility – a hub -

on a school site

No disruption to

athletics – move

when ready

(subject to

contract

packages)

Land sale gains –

capital receipts

Better

configuration of

whole area –

multiple

improvements,

parking etc. linked

to Planning Policy

Possible break up of

athletics club

Competition surfaces

may last only 5-6 years

before a replacement

carpet is required

Loss of good quality

grass pitch

No school us of the 3G

during the daytime

More complex/difficult

to achieve

Perceived impact on

‘much loved’ Jenner

Park

Dependent on School

plans – timing issues

Construction

costs up to

£600,000 plus

fees and vat

Up to £500,000

for the

athletics

facility

Up to £150,000

for the social

facilities plus

£50,000 for

conversions

Capital

receipts from

housing

developments

Carpet test

failure and

football clubs

lose league

membership

Business plan at

risk when Colcot

converted to 3G

or other facilities

are opened

An additional

artificial pitch

will impact on

the business

plans of other

facilities

3 Retain grass pitch at

Jenner park

Replace ATP at

Colcot with 3G and

make Bryn Hafren

available 24/7

It’s a good grass

pitch that can be

upgraded

Grass pitch

upgrade only

c£50k

No 3G at Jenner may

be seen as a negative

move given

commitment of

Council

Construction

costs for 3G @

Colcot

c£180,000

subject to

survey

£795k capital

allocation may

be lost

Clubs may not

grow/get

stronger and




th February 2015)

(hockey)

Invest in Colcot only

if Parkwood grant a

reduced fee licence

to Vale Football

Upgrade and re-open


centre

Work to be done on

football vision and

partnership

arrangements

Grass pitch

stadium could be

more efficiently

run by Clubs/CIC

Won’t deter

progress towards

WPL

Athletics not

affected

3G pitch carpet

integrity probably

closer to ten years

(training pitches

do not require

FIFA certificate)

Use of Club House

may be more limited –

depending on

Parkwood/CIC options

for wider community

use

Up to £150,000

for the social

facilities at

Jenner Park

plus £50,000

for

conversions

Upgrade of

grass pitch

c£50,0000

The funding of

this option

could be

achieved by

way of

Prudential

Borrowing and

without the

need to use a

set-aside

capital budget

Jenner will

continue to be a

liability

Other Considerations

As a 3G stadium pitch, shared use with athletics and the inter-sensory cycle club means:

there would be a migration of rubber crumb from the 3G across the athletics track;

the pitch could not be used when athletics training/cycling was occurring;

5-aside cross-pitch use would be affected by the lack of ball catch fencing and

footballers running over the track in studded boots to recover footballs;

The development of additional five-a-side courts alongside Devon Avenue could be

considered as an alternative small sided games offer. The current estimated cost of

such a facility is £375,000 for a six court floodlit facility plus fees and any general

infrastructure improvements (3 court construction pro rata)

A detailed investigation is required to take account of access, planning matters in

respect of noise and light pollution and ground conditions. The above costs do not

take account of any design premiums

The development of additional five-a-side courts could offset some of the stadium

pitch inefficiencies, but the overall commercial benefit would be questionable as it is

considered that the capital investment required to develop a facility, to offset the

inefficiencies of the stadium pitch, and hopefully create a profit to finance the

renewal of the carpet, is the same as the cost of replacing the carpet in years 6 to 8.

Furthermore, it is considered that to maximise use, attractive small sided games

courts would be better located alongside the schools at Colcot Sports Centre.




th February 2015)

The development of a 3G pitch at Jenner Park would also be seen as the Council

spending nearly £800,000 on a single facility when there are significant issues for the

sports that if addressed could have a greater impact. For example at Colcot, where future

school developments are planned and where the High Schools, Welsh medium School,

College and Rugby Club as well as Football could all benefit.

An options appraisal and review of the Colcot Sports Centre and Artificial Turf Pitch

alongside the future development needs of football was undertaken in April 2012. In that

report the conclusions included recommendations to:

significantly review the changing pavilion accommodation

upgrade the artificial pitch to 3G

make better use of and review the need for the number of grass pitches with more

artificial pitches instead

create a strategic football hub with new all-weather facilities and appropriate

accommodation in support of an agreed football club development and business

plan for the Vale with the ATP at Bryn Hafren designated as a hockey hub with

appropriate support accommodation alongside.

Future Management Options for Jenner Park

3G Options

The following summarise potential 3G management options:

Direct management by Council – not considered appropriate as it would be seen as

competition for Parkwood

Management by Barry Town Utd FC – if the pitch is converted to 3G the Club would

be exposed to significant risk (carpet test failure) and the Council may have to

accept the future replacement liability. APPENDIX F describes the Football in the

Community/Community Hub Model promoted by the FAW

Control of the stadium vested in Community Interest Company – as above. Neither

club is currently considered to be robust enough to take on the management,

operational and infrastructure liabilities

Add the stadium to the Parkwood contract – loss of social and off-pitch income

potential to user clubs, Parkwood unlikely to accept a year 6 -8 potential carpet

replacement liability.

Grass Pitch Retained Options




th February 2015)

The following summarise potential grass pitch management options:

Direct management by Council – not considered appropriate – high cost relative to

the current levels of use

Management by Barry Town Utd FC – a workable option but may lead to conflict

with the existing ground share club, significant cash savings for the Council

would follow

Control of the stadium vested in Community Interest Company (CIC) – everyone

has a ‘say’ and profits can be distributed by activity levels, significant cash

savings for the Council would follow

Add the stadium to the Parkwood portfolio – not considered appropriate with the

retention of a grass pitch due to insufficient income

The establishment of a Community Interest Company (CIC) may secure NNDR and other

tax benefits.

A possible next step would be to consider the establishment of a ‘Stadium Company’ with

a view to ‘testing’ the new arrangements for a season – management, maintenance and

operation. The CIC to be responsible for all costs (less NNDR) in year one, after an initial

capital investment has been made by the Council.

Into the future the CIC would receive a lease for no less than 25 years for the operation of

the Stadium and in the event that it was unable to secure NNDR relief, the Council could

consider making an annual subsidy payment in respect of the track and infield for

educational use.

The CIC to be established through the primary users - Barry Town Utd FC and Rhoose FC

- together with the Athletics and Sensory Group. The financial return to the users to be a

matter for further consideration. Each of the current user groups would have license terms

established at the start of the leasehold arrangement with the Local Authority.




th February 2015)

TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY STUDY – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Presented below are the key findings of a feasibility study for the construction of a 3G

football pitch at Jenner Park. The assessment included, but was not limited to:

Laboratory testing topsoil and near surface subsoil samples obtained from site

On site dynamic cone penetration (CBR) testing

Desktop assessment of flood risks

Assessment of the floodlight system

A review of underground and overhead utility services which may affect the site

A camera survey of the infield drainage system and outlet

Procurement and review of historical maps

Planning consent for the development will be required and does not appear to have

applied for to date.


pitch but the system would need to be modified.

The pitch size should be a minimum of 100m by 64m plus 3.0m margins all round (106m

by 70m). To construct a pitch of this size the inner two lanes of the running track at the

sides of the pitch will need to be removed.

The site lies outside an indicative floodplain (river and reservoir). The site does not lie

within a Groundwater Protection Zone.

The orientation of the proposed development area is inside the ideal range stipulated in

the Sport England guidance.

The falls across the pitch are in a crown formation and not excessive. Minor regrading of

the falls would however be required.

The drainage outfall for the running track and infield area presently discharges directly

onto the Court Road Council depot. Drainage flows as a result of constructing a 3G pitch

are likely to increase. It is unlikely that permission will be granted to discharge the

drainage water into the local sewer network which appears to consist only of a combined

foul-surface water sewer. Limited flow to the sewer network may be permissible but that

would result in the need for attenuation. There are no surface water features such as

ditches near to the site. A possible option to discharge drainage water may be to soak-

away. To establish if a soak-away is viable then on site soak-away tests will need to be

undertaken. An alternative could be deep borehole soak-away but further investigation is

required. If soak-aways are not viable then it may not be possible to construct the

proposed 3G pitch.

A CDM Planning co-coordinator will need to be appointed to manage the H&S process

during the design stage. CDM regulations should be reviewed and fully understood and

the Client has responsibilities.

Site access is satisfactory and there is room to form a contractor’s compound at the south

western corner of the site.

Where sampled the pitch topsoil compiles with BS3882:2007 and the sampled topsoil

would be suitable for reuse as a general landscaping soil with the exception of low

Potassium levels. Where sampled the topsoil did not contain significant levels of chemical

contamination. However, slightly elevated levels of benzo(a)pyrene were detected in one




th February 2015)

sample of ash subsoil. Further advice with regard to this should be obtained by a qualified

environmental scientist.

Where inspected, topsoil depth ranged from 140-150mm. The sampled topsoil does not

contain significant levels of contamination. Where sampled the topsoil compiles with the

British Standard for general purpose topsoil with the exception of potassium levels which

are low.

Ash present in the near surface subsoil contains slightly elevated levels of organic

contamination, and it would be advisable to obtain further advice in relation to this from an

environmental scientist.

Where tested to a depth of approximately 950mm all subsoil CBR values were in excess

of 5% indicating adequate near-surface stability.

The estimated cost to construct a 3G pitch is between £417,395.00 and £573,022.60 exc

VAT.

There may be a requirement to install a water attenuation system depending on the

capacity of the drainage outlet. The cost of this system could be up to £50,000.00 exc

VAT. This is included in the costs stated above. The costs do not include the following:

Additional environmental site investigation

Onsite soak-away testing

Drainage study

Planning consent fees

Professional fees (Design, Contract Management, Construction Monitoring & CDM

Planning Co-ordinator). The additional site investigation, soak-away testing and drainage

study could cost between £7,000 and £10,000 exc VAT. The Planning Consent fee could

be in the order of £1,500 exc VAT. Professional fees could be between 5 and 10% of the

construction costs.

The proposed development area does not appear to be directly affected by underground

or overhead utility services.

KEY: No action required Action may be required Action required




th February 2015)

FACILITY CONSTRUCTION COST PLAN

The estimated cost to construct a 3G pitch is between £417,395.00 and £573,022.60

excluding VAT.

There is a large range in the earthworks costs stated as it is hard to predict the off-site

disposal cost of subsoil and topsoil. The cost of disposal is very much dependent on local

demand for soils during the construction period.

There is also a large range in the cost estimate of the carpet and shockpad system. This is

because there are numerous systems on the market of varying quality and depth, plus

varying warranties.

There may be a requirement to install a water attenuation system depending on the

capacity of the drainage outlet. The cost of this system cost could be up to £50,000.00

excluding VAT.


pitch, but the system would need to be modified. The ability to water the pitch during the

summer could be useful to help cool the playing surface, and to produce a surface with

improved ball roll properties. The cost to modify the irrigation system could however be

high as perimeter water cannons would most probably need to be installed. The decision

to retain and modify the irrigation would therefore need careful consideration.

The costs given do not include the following:

Additional environmental site investigation

Onsite soak-away testing

Drainage study

Planning consent fees

Professional fees (Design, Contract Management, Construction Monitoring & CDM

Planning Co-ordinator).

The additional site investigation, soak-away testing and drainage study could cost between

£7,000 and £10,000 excluding VAT. The Planning Consent fee could be in the order of

£1,500.00 excluding VAT. Professional fees could be between 5 and 10% of the

construction costs.

Athletic throwing events could possibly be relocated to land directly behind the western

stand, but the work required to make the area suitable could be extensive and this could

result in a high cost.




th February 2015)

3G SYNTHETIC TURF PITCH (106m by 70m inc 3.0m margins) Guideline Costs

Description Unit Quantity Min Rate Max Rate Min Total Max Total Minimum Maximum

1.0 Preliminary Items

Preliminary costs, including Health & Safety, Site setup

Temporary fencing and setting out £13,000.00 £20,000.00 £13,000.00 £20,000.00

2.0 Estimated Earthworks

Excavate & dispose of topsoil off site m3 1,113 £8.00 £15.00 £8,904.00 £16,695.00

Excavate & dispose of subsoil off site – assuming not contaminated.

m3 2,277 £5.00 £10.00 £11,385.00 £22,770.00

Amendments to running track – removal of inner two lanes Item 1 £8,000.00 £15,000.00 £8,000.00 £15,000.00

Cut m3 300 £2.00 £2.50 £600.00 £750.00

Fill m3 300 £2.00 £2.50 £600.00 £750.00 £29,489.00 £55,965.00

3.0 Sub-base

Laser grading formation m2 7,420 £0.10 £0.13 £742.00 £964.60

Formation compaction and proof roll m2 7,420 £1.40 £1.60 £10,388.00 £11,872.00

Lay geotextile to formation m2 7,420 £0.40 £0.50 £2,968.00 £3,710.00 Trimming m2 7,420 £0.10 £0.15 £742.00 £1,118.00 Supply, level & compact 350mm of modified MOT Type 3 m3 2,597 £22.00 £24.00 £57,134.00 £62,328.00 Supply porous macadam @ 40mm thick m2 7,420 £6.50 £8.50 £48,230.00 £63,070.00

£120,204.00 £143,062.60

3.0 Drainage Lateral drainage @ 7.0m centres m 1,060 £9.00 £11.00 £8,370.00 £10,230.00 Main perimeter drain & Junctions m 180 £13.50 £16.00 £2,430.00 £2,880.00 Outfall drain & connection No 1 £350.00 £500.00 £350.00 £500.00 Inspection chambers 450mm x 600mm No 3 £233.00 £500.00 £700.00 £1,500.00 Attenuation/soakaway costs if required No 1 £0.00 £50,000.00 £0.00 £50,000.00 £11,850.00 £55,110.00

4.0 Surface Perimeter tie in m 355 £12.00 £15.00 £4,260.00 £5,325.00 Supply and lay shockpad m2 7,590 £8.00 £11.00 £60,720.00 £83,490.00 40-60mm 3G synthetic surface including Infill m2 7,590 £18.00 £20.00 £136,620.00 £151,800.00 Install artificial turf inc line markings Item 7,590 £2.80 £3.00 £21,252.00 £22,770.00 £222,852.00 £263,385.00

5.0 Testing

Key stage inspections & testing Item 1 £3,500.00 £5,500.00 £3,500.00 £5,500.00

Testing to FIFA 1 or 2 Star & IRB Standards Item 1 £2,500.00 £3,000.00 £2,500.00 £3,000.00 £6,000.00 £8,500.00

6.0 Others Maintenance Equipment Item 1 £6,000.00 £7,000.00 £6,000.00 £7,000.00 Goals flags etc Item 1 £8,000.00 £10,000.00 £8,000.00 £10,000.00 £14,000.00 £17,000.00

Total exc VAT £417,395.00 £573,022.60




th February 2015)

With respect to timescales for completing the project, it is recommended that construction works are only undertaken under suitable ground and weather conditions. The date for first use is highly dependent on weather conditions during the construction phase. An indicative work programme is presented below for the construction of the 3G pitch.

3G Pitch Project Sequence & Duration

2015

January February March April May June July August

Design & Tender Works

Prepare CDM Documentation

Contract Negotiations

Mobilisation Contractor & Est Compound

3G Pitch Construction Works

Reinstatement

Install Sports Equipment

FIFA/IRB Testing as required




th February 2015)

THE BUSINESS CASE

The Council decision to proceed with this feasibility was partly informed by an initial

summary financial appraisal of a desktop assessment, provided by carpet supplier Notts

Sport.

As part of the initial consideration of the 3G pitch development suggested indicative pricing

and income was as follows:

Full sized pitch @ £70 booked for 2 hours over 3 days a week by football clubs for

training and mid-week matches

Third of pitch @ £30 booked over 2 hours over 5 days a week

4 match bookings of 90 minutes

An overall accumulative booking level of over 20 hours a week over 44 weeks

And a total income of £73,920

However, the above was not a bespoke model for Jenner or Barry and with the growth in

the number of 3G pitches in the Vale projected to increase by 3 or 4 over the next 3-5

years, competition for the letting of pitches will become stiffer and the willingness of the

football community to pay £70 for a pitch will be limited – particularly when there may be

cheaper options available. It is evident from current research that junior football facility hire

is price sensitive and only larger clubs will pay for their 1st team to hire a 3G pitch for

training.

Furthermore, a 3G pitch development at Jenner Park will have only a limited level of

use during the day – schools do not have curriculum time or budgets to travel off-

site to facilities, except where there are no other options available.

In addition, shared use with athletics for at least 2 nights a week, and the lack of ball

catch netting, will all have a bearing on the success of a 3G facility and the ability to

maximise the income necessary to pay for the management, maintenance and

necessary set-aside account demanding no less than £25,000 pa from the net profit

for the carpet replacement sinking fund to ensure the pitch achieves its FIFA

accreditation on an ongoing basis.




th February 2015)

PITCH MANAGEMENT FEASIBILITY

Indicative Income and Expenditure Plan

Model A

'Commercially'

Operated by

Parkwood Leisure or

Local Authority

Model B

Club/3rd Sector

Operated through

CIC

Without

Athletics

With

Athletics

Without

Athletics

With

Athletics

3G Pitch Indicative Income Sources Estimated Income

Winter

Other Barry Clubs- training, matches, five-a-side – both adult and

juniors 2 hours 40 weeks pa @ an average of £70phr £5,600

0 £5,600

0

Sunday leagues and other club matches 3 hours 30 weeks @£70 £6,300 £6,300 £6,300 £6,300

Mini Junior Leagues 6 hours 30 weeks @ £30 £5,400 £5,400 £5,400 £5,400

Holiday programmes – women and girls, development centres

net profit £5,000

£5,000

Coaching programmes including FAW/WFT – 60 hours @ £70 £4,200 £4,200 £4,200 £4,200

Barry Town Utd FC use for training and academy 6hrs per week

for 30 weeks @£70 £12,600 £12,600 £12,600 £12,600

Rhoose FC use for training demy 6hrs per week for 30 weeks

@£70 £12,600 £6,300 £12,600 £6,300

Adult and corporate leagues 40 weeks 18 teams £7,200 £7,200 £7,200 £7,200

School and college use up to 5pm FOC £0 £0 £0 £0

Summer

Summer use – women and girls, development centres summer

leagues 200 hours @ £45 £9,000 £9,000 £9,000 £9,000

Total estimated income £67,900 £51,000 £67,900 £51,000

3G Pitch Indicative Operating Costs Estimated Costs

Pitch maintenance (routine) 4 hrs per week @ £12 per hour £25,000 £25,000

£2,400 £2,400

Annual pitch surface maintenance (contractor £4,000 £4,000

Contribution to utilities/buildings-clubhouse £4,000 £4,000 £4,000 £4,000

Changing facility cleaning 14 hours @ £9 per hour £6,174 £6,174 £4,802 £4,802

Floodlighting (Sept- April) 300 hours @ £5 per hour for 250 lux £1,500 £1,500 £1,500 £1,500

Sinking Fund for carpet replacement shockpad floodlighting

(£80,000 start-up set aside in sinking fund) £25,000 £25,000 £25,000 £25,000

Other costs inc insurance £2,500 £2,500 £2,500 £2,500

Pitch Manager - supervision promotion bookings £22,000 £22,000 £15,000 £15,000

Other 3G costs

NNDR £49,000 £49,000 £0 £0

Marketing and promotion £3,000 £3,000 £3,000 £3,000

Replacement equipment (nets, posts etc.) £1,000 £1,000 £1,000 £1,000

Total estimated annual costs £139,174 £139,174 £63,202 £63,202

Profit/Loss -£71,274 -£88,174 £4,698 -£12,202




th February 2015)

Indicative Timetable of Use to the Required Income and Expenditure Plan

Indicative/Anticipated Weekly Use of 3G Pitch

A term–time winter programme

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday

Maintenance

8.30 – 10am

Maintenance

8.30 to 9.30

Maintenance

8.30 to 9.30

Maintenance

8.30 to 9.30

Maintenance

8.30 to 9.30

Maintenance

8am to 9am

Maintenance

8am to 9am

School use School use School use Disability

team training

School use Junior

Football

League

matches

9am –11am

Junior

football

league

matches

9am - 11am

Disability

team training

College

team training

Junior team

training 4pm

to 5pm

5 aside

Leagues

College team

training

Hired out

from 11am

to 1pm

Sunday

Adult

League 11 –

1pm

5 aside

Leagues

Community

use

Unemployed

/disengaged

groups

Community

use

disengaged

groups

Disability

matches and

training 4.30

- 6pm

Girls Turn up

and play 4pm

to 5pm

Firsts or

Under 19

warm ups

6-8yrs

coaching

1pm – 2pm

Junior teams

or after

school clubs

4pm to 6pm

Junior teams

or after

school clubs

4pm to 6pm

Junior teams

or after

school clubs

4pm to 6pm

Academy

Girls 5pm to

7pm

Parties/5aside

Leagues

Firsts or

Under 19

match

2 to 4.30pm

Youth or

Academy

match at

2pm

Girls and

Ladies

training

Academy

teams

training 6pm

to 8pm

Academy

teams

training 6pm

to 8pm

First Team

training 7pm

to 9pm

Junior team

training or

matches 5pm

to 6pm

Possibility of

Under 19

playing at

5pm

Ladies or

Academy

match at

4pm

Bookings till

10pm

Under 19

team training

8pm to 10pm

5 aside

Leagues

Bookings till

10pm

Bookings till

10pm

Bookings till

10pm

Bookings till

10pm

Bookings till

10pm

N.B There will be less use during June when main football stops, but pre-season starts in July and training

and friendlies start immediately.

Indicative Maintenance Requirements

A robust maintenance schedule for a well-used full size 3G pitch is crucial to:

retain a safe playing environment

retain acceptable playing characteristics

minimise wear and deterioration of the surface

maintain an visually appealing environment

maximise the life of the playing surface

The specific focus of the maintenance regime is:

To prevent pile flattening the effects of which can include:




th February 2015)

o Low grip due to lack of stud penetration

o Increased risk of skin burns

o Increased fibre wear and tuft lose

o Excessive ball roll – surface too fast; biggest cause of FQC field failures

o Inability to de-compact infill leading to loss of shock absorption, excessive

ball bounce and reduced water permeability

To maintain infill distribution - poor infill distribution can cause:

o Loss of grip, low rotational resistance and poor foot grip = potential ankle

injuries

o Excessive deformation – high player fatigue

o Rubber splash -eye contamination – injury risk

o Higher surface temperatures on sunny days

To remove litter, debris and dirt, minimising infill contamination

Indicatively a FIFA 1Star pitch has a recommended maximum use of 2,500 hours pa (30

players per hour) and demands 1 hour maintenance for every 4 hours of use and testing

every 4 years at an approximate cost of £3,000. The table below provides an indication of

the main features of such a maintenance programme.

UEFA Education Programme Guidance on 3G Maintenance

Minimum

frequency Recommended Operation

Typical time

allowance

As required Daily Litter removal 0.5 hour

Weekly 2 / 3 times per

week Infill redistribution

1 hours per

operation

Weekly Every 10 hours

use

Brushing / grooming to lift

carpet pile

2 hours per

operation

Weekly Daily Inspection of seams and joints 0.5 hour per

inspection

Every six months Quarterly Infill de-compaction 1 day

Yearly – as

required As required Moss treatment and weed treatment

Six years – as required Rejuvenation




th February 2015)

Pricing Policies

The table below provides a summary of the current prices for football facilities.

CURRENT PRICING POLICIES

LOCATION FACILITY/USE FEES

Jenner Park The cost per match

With lights

£288.50

+£80

Countywide Grass match pitches

Changing rooms

£36.50

£12.50-£18

Colcot ATP full size without floodlights

Half size without floodlights

Changing rooms

Sports hall

£51.75

£27.45

£10.50

£44.25

Cowbridge 3G ATP full size with or without floodlights

Half sized pitch with or without floodlights

Match pitch with or without floodlights

Changing rooms

Sports hall

£70

£35

£80

£10

£40

Hiring and product prices will need to be set at a level that will allow for all costs to be

recovered (including any salaries, insurance and basic equipment) and build a not for

distribution profit in order that on-going maintenance, future capital requirements can be

self-funded from reinvested profits. Pricing will also reflect the quality and nature of the

facilities/product/experience.

A community inclusive facility will demand realistic prices in line with what is an affordable

rate in the area.

If affordable, pricing concessions can be introduced (for example - students and the

unemployed, discounted rates in off peak times and for special groups – club discounts

etc. to encourage as much engagement as possible).

Pricing will be determined by the following factors:

Numbers

Time of hire (peak and off peak hours)

Length of hire (number of hours)

Area of hire (facility, whole pitch, half pitch etc.)

Frequency of use (i.e. long term regular commitment or one off hire)

Commercial business or community based organisation

Type of event/use i.e. customers paying commercial rates or charitable




th February 2015)

Changing room requirements

Floodlight requirements

Overhead costs

Benchmarked prices

Indicative Fees for the Hire of a 3G Pitch

Whilst preparedness to pay has not yet been tested (any survey is unlikely to produce a

‘true picture’), with the predicted growth in 3G pitches it may prove difficult to attract

sufficient customers in the future prepared to pay the necessary higher rates.

Proposed Jenner Park 3G Prices excluding VAT

Full pitch Per hour Half Pitch Per hour Third pitch Per hour

Peak £70 Peak £30 Peak £20

Off Peak £45 Off Peak £20 Off Peak £15

Floodlights £4 Floodlights £3 Floodlights £2

The Club House and Changing Rooms

The property section of the Vale of Glamorgan County Council undertook a condition

survey in June 2013 and the subsequent report identified that maintenance works of just

over £150,000 were required to bring the building up to an acceptable standard.

The report concluded the building was generally sound, although some concern was

expressed in respect of the inter-connecting corridor, between the two ‘ground floor social

areas’. The outline schedule of required works identified the most significant costs to be for

internal decoration and upgraded floor surfaces along with extensive electrical works to the

building.

The hot water systems were considered to be satisfactory for their age.

Currently the basement area of the building is used as two changing rooms supporting use

of the stadium facilities and the ‘ground floor’ area has been re-decorated by current users

– although a large part of the upstairs area is currently ‘mothballed’ and in a poor state of

repair.

This report considers that there is little potential to extend the use of the building beyond

support accommodation for the stadium, other than the currently mothballed social area

could be converted into an open plan dance/activity studio, which could also be used for

social events organised by the resident clubs and wider community.




th February 2015)

The basement area was constructed with 4 changing rooms,2 of which were subsequently

converted into a skittle alley and it is proposed that further consideration be given to

converting the ‘games area’ into a learning suite/meeting room which could be used to

support extended adult learning classes in future years. Such a conversion would be

subject to survey, satisfactory escape routes and appropriate ventilation to the space to be

created.

It is recommended that any wider and longer term use of the facility should be the

subject of a local community needs assessment i.e. demand for playgroups;

community spaces; healthy living suite including consultation with Parkwood

Leisure Ltd in order to consider the potential for complementary developments

which would not compete with the existing leisure facilities in Barry .




th February 2015)

SUMMARY DECISION CONSIDERATIONS - PRINCIPLE OPTIONS AND

SUGGESTED NEXT STEPS

3G at Jenner

The year 4 FIFA testing regime and potential carpet failure before year 8 puts a big liability

in the hands of the ‘operator’. In which case the operator options scenarios would be as

follows:

The Local Authority would be unlikely to take on the liability

Parkwood Leisure would be unlikely to take on the liability

The Clubs (CIC) would be exposed to enormous risk and would require Local

Authority underwriting

Athletics would be compromised by the loss of a throwing facility

The business plan for the 3G would be compromised by the athletics use

The development of additional small sided games courts would go some way to

mitigating the business inefficiencies – the capital cost of floodlit courts are

estimated to be £375,000 for a six court facility (3 court construction pro rata)

3G at Colcot

A solution to the pressing need for better artificial surfaces for football

Not an additional facility, just better (assuming replacement of the current ATP)

Would demand a partnership with Parkwood to secure access for football

development/juniors etc.

Grass at Jenner

Most appropriate way forward to establish a CIC and test management ability for

one year

Would deliver significant savings to the Local Authority if the CIC were able to

secure mandatory/discretionary NNDR relief

Would demand investment in the region of £50k to improve the grass pitch and

assist in its long term maintenance as a quality grass pitch

Athletics would remain 'as is'

SUGGESTED NEXT STEPS

Discussions with Parkwood Leisure reference Colcot and formal consideration of

Jenner Park options – business case for club house and 3G alongside other

development opportunities on site to maximise income and impact

Discussions with clubs to test the appetite to establish a CIC Stadium Company




th February 2015)

Calculate the prudential borrowing capacity following the establishment of a CIC

and the reduction in Jenner Park running costs

Consider relocation of athletics and wider range of site redevelopment options to

maximise overall impact and all round gains




th February 2015)

APPENDICES




th February 2015)

APPENDIX A

SUMMARY OVERVIEW OF PROJECT

Project Aim:

To attract wider use and promote Jenner Park as the Vale's centre of sporting excellence.

Project Objectives:

To carry out a detailed study to identify all costs and income opportunities relating to

the construction, hire and maintenance of a 3G facility at Jenner Park, including

consultation with existing and potential users and local stakeholders (i.e. local

clubs/community groups; schools/College and National Governing Bodies) to assess the

need, likely demand and take-up for such a facility in Barry and gather feedback

regarding proposed hire rates for various sports activities informing an assessment of

possible income levels.

To also enable the Council to consider developing the stadium buildings in tandem

with the pitch to maximise their use for a wide range of sporting and community

operations in the future. The study will include an assessment of condition of the

existing infrastructure i.e. floodlighting, changing rooms and access routes will also be

reviewed in line with increased use and to comply with DDA.

As well as addressing design and technical and initial capital build considerations,

maintenance schedules and costs will be fully detailed including recommended

management models and associated costs i.e. for supervision, taking of bookings,

promotions, administration and collection of income.

Principle Sporting Considerations - Football, Athletics and Rugby

Whilst the creation of a full size rugby pitch may not appear feasible, rugby needs and

demands will be considered as part of the study to include the option of developing a

football pitch with a shock pad such that full contact rugby training could be offered to local

clubs and schools even if a full size rugby pitch was not an option.

Consideration of Athletics needs will involve discussions with the Barry and Vale Harriers

Athletics Club and Welsh Athletics to assess future needs, demands and options.

Project Timescales

A timescale for delivery will be considered as part of the study including the identification

of any potential construction problems. (The earliest possible construction date would be

during the summer of 2015/16).

Required Outputs




th February 2015)

Consultants will investigate and make recommendations regarding:

Ground conditions to include trial pits and sampling (or equivalent methods if as effective

and less disruptive). Reinstatement is to be to sports turf standards and must not interrupt

football league fixtures

Existing drainage (including camera survey) and irrigation system

Pitch and track dimensions in relation to FAW recommendations for synthetic pitches i.e.

regarding run-off onto athletics

Accommodating or relocating field throwing events

Condition of existing floodlights, changing rooms and access routes

Consultants will carry out:

Local stakeholder engagement and consultation with existing users

Surveys with potential user groups, local clubs and schools to ascertain likely demand and

uptake for the facility

Consultants will prepare:

Ground investigation will provide specification and construction methods and materials for

the preferred synthetic pitch system for the purpose of evaluating the estimated cost of the

project both within the feasibility study and form part of the Employer's Requirements for

an Invitation to Tender

Recommendations for pitch testing against performance standards

Dimensioned drawings to show the layout of the pitch and adjoining areas (topo survey will

be issued in CAD format to present layout drawing)

Cost schedule for all construction elements of the preferred system including assessment

of warranties and guarantees

Specifications and costs for all sports equipment associated with the new pitch

Assessment of the project sequence and duration

Recommended contractors with references and completed projects




th February 2015)

Income projections and opportunities for the hire of the new facility including provision of a

sinking fund for replacement costs

Maintenance schedule and rates Years 1-5 for all operations relating to the upkeep of the

pitch including purchase of tractor / equipment, attendants and administration

Recommendations for line markings, sockets and any other requirements for dual pitch

use as approved by FAW

An initial risk review

Project Management and Reporting:

Consultants Client Manager and appropriate team members will report to the Client

Working Group at regular intervals including attending regular progress meetings with the

Client Working Group together with other consultees as required.

In addition towards the end of the commission the Consultants team will be make a

presentation to Council Members and stakeholders.




th February 2015)

APPENDIX B

CONSULTEES INTERVIEWED AS PART OF THE FIRST STAGE

FEASIBILITY

Football

Ken Bryl, Secretary and Treasurer, Rhoose Football Club

David Cole, Secretary and Gavin Chesterfield, First Team Manager, Barry Town

United Football Club

Tony Williams, Vale of Glamorgan League Chairman, Lee Saunders, Vale of

Glamorgan Mini Football Coordinator

Wesley Drew, Vale of Glamorgan League Safeguarding Officer

Any Pask, Welsh Football Trust, Football Development Officer, Club Development

Jay Probert, Welsh Football Trust Regional Coordinator and Manager

Athletics

Michelle Briscombe, Secretary, Fred Malkin, Chairman and Danny Carter, Club

Coach, Barry and Vale Harriers

Matt Newman, Chief Executive, Welsh Athletics

Rugby

Colin Ham, Barry Rugby Football Club – telephone interview

Disability Sport

Cliff Hayes, Inter-sensory Cycle Club

Strategic

Dave Knevett, Operational Manager of Leisure and Tourism

Mike Matthews, Strategic Planning Officer, Education and Learning

Jane Wade, Operational Manager, Property Manager Parkwood Leisure

Coleen Tumelty, Parkwood Regional Manager; James Webber, Vale of Glamorgan

General Manager

Phil Beaman

Cllr Gwyn John

Malcolm Drysdale




th February 2015)

APPENDIX C

3G PITCH TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY REPORT

Separately Attached




th February 2015)

APPENDIX D

3G PITCH DESIGN SPECIFICATION

Separately Attached




th February 2015)

APPENDIX E

COMPACT ATHLETICS FACILITIES – SUMMARY DESCRIPTION

Compact Athletics Facilities have been developed by UK Sport and Sport England in

partnership with UK Athletics to inspire a new generation of young people to participate in

athletics.

The concept is based on taking the main elements of a full sized athletics stadium and

scaling them down to a more affordable and appropriate solution for smaller sites.

Certainly Compact Athletics Facilities would be beneficial where the provision of a

standard 400m track is not viable and where complementary sports provision in schools

exist - where the facility provider wishes to provide a cost effective entry level facility.

The first principle of Compact Athletics Facilities is to create elements for running, jumping

and throwing - a running straight of 60m-100m will provide the focal point of any Compact

Athletics Facilities allowing participation in the wider range of activities. It would provide a

suitable space for training and developing specific skills, such as starting, baton changing

and finishing - skills for different disciplines. The running straight can be 4, 6 or 8 lanes

and the indicative cost for a 6 lane 60m straight is, £70k. A 120m straight which would

allow for warm up and warm down together with a run off area would therefore cost £140k.

The straight can be used for hurdles, shuttle runs and runs between turning boards,

supporting specific training and curriculum requirements.

Long jump areas can be provided beyond the warm up/warm down area and the cost of a

3 lane long jump/triple jump, sand pit and cover, excluding the run ups would be in the

order of £25k.

Clearly throwing areas can be provided on the grass areas alongside the track and

indicative costs for one throwing circle would be c£10k.

Protective screens can be provided ranging in cost from £7.5k-17.5k

Clearly providing the Compact Athletics Track adjacent to other facilities, in Barry’s case

perhaps alongside the Bryn Hafren ATP, would allow for a 300m running track to be

marked out on the artificial surface, with the sprint straight developed alongside the current

pitch boundary.

It would be possible to extend the sprint straight to provide a 4 lane training track –

providing a 6 lane straight and 4 lane track with total costs in the order of £400k, for 400m

and significantly less for a 200/300m facility.




th February 2015)

Floodlighting costs would be in the range of £15 – 40k and the total cost of a mixed

development, forming a Compact Athletics Facilities, would be in the order of £500-

£700,000




th February 2015)

APPENDIX F

A JENNER PARK - FOOTBALL IN THE COMMUNITY / CLUB HUB

The vision of the FAW/WFT is to use the 3G programme to enable Clubs to develop

Community Hubs as illustrated in the diagrams below.




th February 2015)

Many Football Clubs across the UK have a successful track record in delivering ‘football in

the community’ through participation and learning programmes.

One of the best examples of a Welsh Premier League Football in the Community

Programme is to be found in Rhyl

The Rhyl City FC Football in the Community aims are to: develop activities which increase

participation rates for all members of the local community which helps achieve social,

education and health goals.

Rhyl FITC’s turnover in the last 6 years has grown from £73,000 with 2 full time staff, 3

casual staff to £230,000 with 6 full time and 7 part time staff. Its successes have included:

16,500 children engaged in soccer camps; Street Strikers; Little Champs ; After school

football programmes; Mini Maestros; Girls football .

Education and Learning – ‘Strikers’ delivers learning outcomes for over 650

participants/disaffected young people:

Pupils who are under attaining at school; Offenders and ex-offenders ; Participants

engaged from disadvantaged and diverse communities; Groups at risk of social

exclusion; long term unemployed; loan parents.

Providing a secure and exciting learning environment encouraging higher

expectations and raised aspirations and improved health and well being

Achieving raised standards and achievement in literacy/numeracy

Developing skills to progress into further education, training and employment

3G developments could be used as a platform for establishing/developing Football in the

Community models - to deliver future community benefits and learning outcomes, with a

focus on young people.

Such a model would demand the appointment of a Business Manager responsible for

working with the Clubs to secure the smooth running of the ‘whole stadium ‘business’– a

single overarching management team.

Unlike larger established semi-professional Football Clubs, the current users are not

considered developed or robust enough to take on such a wide ranging community profile

at this stage – this is some way down the line.

Documents

FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A PROPOSED 3G PITCH AT JENNER … Reports/Cabin… · FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR A PROPOSED 3G PITCH AT JENNER PARK, BARRY FINAL REPORT 6 Just Solutions Leisure Consultants