«Lists of figures, plans, tables and appendices ii Glossary vii Executive Summary viii 1 Introduction 1 2 Undertaking the Study 9 3 Strategic Context ...»
10.58 When the ratio is calculated using the later ONS mid-year 2008 population estimates as shown in Table 10.8, the ratio calculates at a considerably lower average. This data also includes for the recent closure of South Leeds Sports Centre and East Leeds Leisure Centre, both of which provided pools. The high level of provision in the South Inner area reflects the number of private pools associated with commercial gym operations and hotels in Leeds city centre. The lowest provision is in the East Inner area, closely followed by the West Outer area.
The council provide a pool facility in all the analysis areas.
Source: Sport England, Active Places Power (May 2011) which includes all providers (public, private, education, community etc) Needs Assessment Consultation
10.59 The on street and household needs assessment results differed across the 10 analysis areas, with a higher proportion of respondents in the following analysis areas considering there to be not enough swimming pools – North East Inner (43%), East Inner (42%) and South Inner (42%) from the household survey and 29% of on-street survey respondents in the North East Inner area.
10.60 By comparison, a higher proportion (61%) of on-street survey respondents in the West Inner area, 67% of the West Outer and 58% of the South Outer area respondents from the household survey said that they consider swimming pool provision to be either about right or more than enough.
10.61 A few respondents said that there were not enough 50 metre length swimming pools in Leeds. Leeds has one 50 metre length pool at the John Charles centre for sport. Sport England and the Amateur Swimming Association do not support the provision of more than one 50 metre pool per city, therefore, it is unlikely there will be further opportunities to provide an additional 50 metre pool.
10.62 As part of the consultation process, children were asked what new facility or type of provision they would most like to have near their home, 35% answered a swimming pool.
10.63 During the stakeholder workshop it was noted that Leeds does not have a leisure pool ie. wave / waterslide pool. The nearest leisure pools are Lightwaves in Wakefield, Richard Dunns Sport Centre in Bradford, the Metrodome in Barnsley, and the Doncaster Dome. There are currently no plans to create a leisure pool in Leeds.
Setting Provision Standards Current level of council provision 7.89 square metres per 1,000 population Proposed level of council provision 7.8 square metres per 1,000 population
10.64 At the time, the FPM analysis indicates that existing pool provision is in excess of demand by some 17,666 visits per week. This was prior to the closure of South Leeds and East Leeds centres. The above provision takes account of these closures.
10.65 To account for continued over provision and the increase in participation, the proposed provision is reduced to 7.8 square metres per 1,000 population.
Current Provision Quality
10.66 Quest is an industry standard award, based on customer experiences, which has been developed to assist leisure facilities and sport development organisations improve the quality of service they offer to customers. It concerns service, maintenance, cleaning and programming. 11 swimming pools in Leeds are Quest accredited.
10.67 Leeds City Council physical condition surveys indicated that all the centres are a grade B or B/C when assessed against this standard.
10.68 The Youth Forum stated that there is a need for improved levels of cleanliness across indoor sports facilities, in particular, swimming pool changing rooms.
10.69 Analysis of the quality of existing council pool sites demonstrates that:
10.70 Holt Park Leisure Centre which was built in 1976 will be replaced by a Well Being Centre in 2013. At present there are no finances identified to replace or refurbish other council provided swimming pool facilities.
10.71 All council leisure centre sites have been assessed for quality using a bespoke assessment which considers multiple quality criteria which contribute to the user experience. A copy of the assessment sheet is at Appendix F All criteria receive a score out of 10 and the overall score for the site is then an average, again out of 10.
10.72 The average quality of the existing centres with swimming pools is improved by the recent rebuilding of both Armley and Morley which increase the average score from
4.75 to 5.3.
Existing average quality for council sites with a swimming pool is 5.3 (Fair) Proposed quality standard is 7 (good) Current Provision Accessibility
10.73 Access is the most important determinant of the adequacy of provision of facilities.
As is the case with many indoor sports facilities discussed, expected mode of transport is primarily via one of two methods; either walking or by car.
10.74 The 2009 update to the FPM for swimming pools contains some useful accessibility
data for existing travel patterns to swimming pools in Leeds:
10.75 Sport England’s Active Places Power provides data on the accessibility of facilities to different forms of transportation. Table 10.9 below compiles this data for all swimming pools in Leeds.
Table 10.9 Access to Swimming Pools in Leeds by Public Transport, Walking and Driving
10.76 Analysis of the Leeds Card user data for 2010/11 reveals that the average distance travelled to access a council swimming pool site is 3.4 km. The 75th percentile is
10.77 Almost half of both the on-street survey respondents (45%) and household survey respondents (49%) expect to drive to reach a swimming pool, which is a higher proportion than many other types of sports facilities in Leeds. The proportion of respondents who expect to travel by bus is also marginally higher for swimming pools than other sport facilities.
10.78 For those respondents expecting to walk to a swimming pool the 75th percentile was 20 minutes in the household survey and 17.5 minutes in the on-street survey.
In terms of accessing a swimming pool by car, overall results from the household survey show a 75th percentile time of 15 minutes and a modal response of 10 minutes. The expectation amongst on-street respondents is lower, with an anticipated journey time of 20 minutes (supported by both the 75th percentile and modal response).
10.79 Generally comments regarding swimming pools related to the need for leisure water and affordable opportunities. Other key comments related to the need for good disability access.
Setting an Accessibility Standard
10.80 The majority of residents expect to use a car as their chosen mode of travel to swimming pools. However, the needs assessment showed that dense inner urban areas with low levels of car ownership expect to walk.
Recommended Accessibility Standard 15 minutes public transport journey time
10.81 This reflects the needs assessment results that would support a 20 minute travel time. The standard assumes that there will be additional time demands for onward travel by foot and waiting for public transport.
10.82 The needs assessment results demonstrated a slightly higher proportion expecting to travel by car. The expected car journey time using the 75th percentile was 15 minutes for the household survey and 20 minutes for the on-street survey. It would be unsustainable and inequitable to consider the standard in terms of a car drive time. Future provision needs to place increased emphasis on access by sustainable modes of travel.
Applying the Standard
10.83 Plan 10.3 illustrates the distribution of existing council swimming pools and demonstrates the catchments, based on the proposed access standards. The plan highlights residents in Ledsham may have public transport access issues and should expect a travel time of up to 45 minutes. Residents in parts of Alwoodley, Shadwell, Adel, Garforth, Farnley, Carlton and Drighlington have to travel up to 30 minutes.
10.84 Analysis of the quantity, quality and accessibility of swimming pools indicates that the key issue for swimming provision in Leeds is the affordability and cleanliness of the facilities. All residents have access to facilities, either on foot or by car within 20 minutes. The FPM indicated sufficient pool capacity until 2014, which included an allowance for comfort levels. The model has not been reassessed following the closure of South Leeds and East Leeds centres.
10.85 There is no leisure water in Leeds. The consultation highlights a desire for some provision of this nature.
10.86 There is only one indoor bowls facility in Leeds, located at the John Charles Centre for Sport in Beeston. The facility provides 8 rinks.
10.87 Sport England’s Active Places Power calculates provision in Leeds as 0.01 rinks per 1,000 population. The Yorkshire and the Humber regional and England average is 0.02 and 0.04 respectively. Based on this quantity comparison, the local provision is considerably below both the regional and national provision.
However, indoor bowling has not traditionally been a Yorkshire recreational pursuit, with crown green bowls proving more popular locally.
10.88 A large proportion of respondents (61% in the household survey) had no opinion about indoor bowls. For those that did, opinion that the provision was acceptable was mainly consistent across the 10 analysis areas, with the exception of East Outer and Inner areas where respondents stated there was not enough.
10.89 Active Places Power reveals that only 18.6% of demand for indoor bowls in Leeds is met, compared to 58.5% nationally and 35.3% regionally. This would suggest that the level of unsatisfied demand in the city is substantial.
10.90 For those users that responded, the 75th percentile result for those residents who would expect to drive is a 20 minute drive time. For those respondents that would expect to walk, the modal response is 10 minutes and the 75th percentile is 20 minutes. Public transport was also popular, with 19% of household survey respondents and 14% of on-street respondents expecting to travel by this mode of transport.
10.91 Analysis of the Leeds Card user data for 2010/11 reveals that the average distance travelled to access the indoor bowling facility at the John Charles Centre for Sport is 14.2 km. The 75th percentile is 19.8 kilometres. These results indicate that the facility is attracting users beyond the Leeds metropolitan boundary.
10.92 Plan 10.4 illustrates the current distribution of indoor bowls facilities. It can be seen that the single facility is located in Beeston, to the South of the city centre. This restricts the catchment to the South of the city. Due to the facility location, few residential properties are within a reasonable walking distance.
10.93 John Charles user data indicates that the bowling facility is little used in the Summer months, although participation in Winter is more popular. 2009/10 figures showed 81.9% of visits for indoor bowls were between October and March, leaving the bowls area underused for 6 months of the year; in a specialist facility that cannot be utilised for alternative activities.
10.94 All sports halls across Leeds have indoor bowls rink carpets, therefore, all sports halls have the facilities to accommodate indoor bowls if sufficient demand were to manifest.
10.95 While there was limited demand expressed for additional bowls facilities during consultation, the provision of more bowling rinks may contribute to increases in physical activity. ‘Elsie and Arnold’, one of the dominant Sport England population segment groups in Leeds enjoy activities such as bowls. Demand should, therefore, be monitored and any new provision, should it be considered appropriate, should be located in areas currently outside of the catchment for the existing facility.
10.96 There is currently one indoor bowls facility in Leeds providing a total of 8 rinks.
Active Places power indicates that only 18.6% of demand is met by this facility.
While this would indicate there is substantial unsatisfied demand, the needs assessment indicated that the majority of respondents expressed no opinion.
No standard has been set for indoor bowling facilities.
10.97 Given that consultation did not identify demand for additional bowls provision at this time, the need for indoor bowl facilities should be monitored.
10.98 The total provision in the city equates to 32 courts. This complements the provision of outdoor tennis courts. The largest providers are David Lloyd (11 courts) in Meanwood and John Charles Tennis Centre (6 courts) in Beeston.
10.99 The needs assessment considered racquet sports as a whole, therefore, any conclusions drawn should be made in the knowledge that the data collected from the surveys was in response to all indoor racquet sports, ie. squash, badminton and tennis.
10.100 The needs assessment reflected the specialist nature of racquet sports with a large proportion of respondents (approximately 40%) to both household and on street surveys offering no opinion on the quantity of the facilities. Of those who did have an opinion, 39% of the household survey and 46% of the on-street survey respondents felt there was nearly enough, about right or more than enough provision. However, 25% of the household survey and 13% of on-street survey respondents felt there was not enough provision. On balance, this would indicate that overall supply is about right and that the issue is more related to access and distribution of the existing facilities.
Current Provision Quantity
10.101 Analysis of the quantity of current provision indicates that there are 0.04 courts per 1,000 population in Leeds. This compares positively to both the national average (0.03) and the regional average 0.02.