Recover NL - Pitch Improvement Programme
North Lanarkshire Council · 29 September 2022
Back to Policy and Strategy Committee — 29 September 2022 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
North Lanarkshire Council Report Policy and Strategy Committee Does this report require to be approved? ☒ Yes ☐ No Ref DH/JMcK Date 29/09/22 Recover NL – Pitch Improvement Programme From Head of Asset and Procurement Solutions E-mail mckinstryj@northlan.gov.uk Telephone 07939 281102 Executive Summary As part of the Recover NL Programme, £2.2million was allocated for a number of pitch improvements across North Lanarkshire. It was anticipated that funding would be utilised to upgrade four existing grass pitches to synthetic surfaces; along with upgrading existing synthetic pitches which require upgrades. It was recognised that a feasibility study to further understand costs associated with upgrading grass pitches was required. This paper presents the resulting feasibility report for upgrade work on each pitch and to access the associated risk and challenges of delivering each of these pitches around infrastructure such as parking, changing accommodation and floodlighting. In respect of upgrading existing synthetic pitches this involves replacing the shock pads and the synthetic surface (carpet) to ensure the pitch remains operational. £1millon, for example, would fund the replacement of three existing synthetic surfaces in the educational estate at Calderhead High School in Shotts, Caldervale High School in Airdrie and Coltness High School in Wishaw. It should be noted that there are four other synthetic pitches which would benefit from upgrades during the current cycle and at present no funding is available to replace the surfaces. This could be addressed by choosing option three from the options outlined below. From the feasibility study work that has been carried out it is determined that the £2.2million budget will not cover the costs of the proposals presented and agreed within the budget. Ultimately, a decision is required to allow for the funding to be spent appropriately and timeously. As such four options are considered. Option One: Proceed with the four ‘grass to synthetic’ pitch upgrades at an estimated cost of £3.2m. This will require additional budget allocation. In addition, replace three synthetic surfaces at an estimated costs of £1million: Convert four grass pitches at a cost of £3.2million and replace three synthetic surfaces at cost of £1million. Total Cost £4.2million against £2.2million allocation. There is insufficient funding to proceed with this option. Option Two: Proceed with only one ‘grass to synthetic’ pitch upgrade. Cleland would be identified as the recommended option of the four due to the current infrastructure available at the site and proximity to Cleland Primary School. This option links to the current strategy being adopted by the Town and Community Hub programme to provide community access out with the school day. Convert one grass pitch at Cleland and replace three synthetic surfaces.
Page 2
£1.9million plus contingency resulting in £2.2million cost against £2.2millon budget allocation. Option Three: The £1.2m ‘grass to synthetic’ budget be reallocated to the existing estate to replace all synthetic surfaces which would benefit from replacement during this cycle to ensure maximum availability of facilities. This would facilitate replacement of four additional synthetic pitch surfaces within the budget. Therefore, replace seven synthetic surfaces and no grass conversions. Total Cost £2.2million against budget allocation of £2.2million. This option does not reflect the aspiration to convert any grass park to synthetic surface. Option Four: Proceed with the four ‘grass to synthetic’ pitch upgrades at an estimated cost of £3.2m. This will require additional budget allocation of £1m. Defer the replacement of three synthetic surfaces at an estimated current cost of £1million – looking to redirect any variances in the capital programme for this in future years. Convert four grass pitches at a cost of £3.2million Total Cost £3.2million against £2.2million allocation. Redistribute £1m from other capital programmes to increase this budget to £3.2m. Should it be the case that any of the four “grass to synthetic” pitch upgrades is ultimately deemed undeliverable – the associated budget would be allocated to deliver one or more of the synthetic carpet replacements. Recommendations Policy and Strategy Committee is asked to note the four options considered, and following review: 1. Approve Option Four outlined above: a) Convert four grass pitches to synthetic surfaces at: Cleland, Mossend, Harthill and Moodiesburn, subject to each project being deliverable and suitable funding being identified within the current capital plan allocations. b) Defer the replacement of carpets to a future year of the current five-year programme, recognising a prioritisation of spend in this area if funding becomes available. The Plan for North Lanarkshire Priority Improve the health and wellbeing of our communities Ambition statement (15) Encourage the health and wellbeing of people through a range of social, cultural, and leisure activities
Page 3
1. Background 1.1 A one-off Recover NL investment budget was approved at council budget meeting on 22nd February 2022. An allocation of £2.2million was awarded for various pitch improvements across North Lanarkshire. Grass to Synthetic Conversions 1.2 Four areas was suggested for ‘grass to synthetic’ upgrades: Cleland, Mossend, Harthill and Moodiesburn. The pitches identified for consideration were: Cleland – Cleland Sports Park; Mossend – Warnock Crescent or Calder Road; Harthill – Hawthorn Drive; and Moodiesburn – Glenmanor Avenue. 1.3 All four pitches scoped for upgrade from grass to synthetic are currently within council ownership although the pitch in Moodiesburn is currently under a lease agreement to Bridgend Football Club. Existing Synthetic Pitches 1.4 There is currently no allocated budget for replacing the existing synthetic pitch surface within the North Lanarkshire education estate. An analysis was undertaken to access the priority for replacement of each of the pitches and there are currently seven pitches which could benefit from a replacement surface: Caldervale High School, Airdrie; Calderhead High School, Shotts; Coltness High School, Wishaw; Chryston High School, Chryston; and St Ambrose High School, Coatbridge: Three pitches at this site. It should be noted that the PPP estate is excluded from the evaluation below as these sites are contracted differently. 2. Report Grass to Synthetics Conversions 2.1 For 2022/23 a one off investment of £2.2million was provided to Asset and Procurement. This one-off investment was granted under the recover NL Programme. 2.2 A feasibility study has been carried out by Professional Sportsturf Design (PSD) to identify the associated costs with of the upgrade works at the sites in the four identified areas along with the practicalities of taking forward conversions. It should be noted there were two pitches in the Mossend area considered as both were within council ownership. The feasibility study identified a lack of infrastructure (lighting, parking etc.) around the current grass pitches that would be required to accommodate an upgrade from grass to synthetic and identified an approximate cost for each pitch.
Page 4
Table 2.2: Proposed pitches for Grass to Synthetic upgrades based on the results of the Feasibility Study. Cost Size (m) Changing Parking Floodlighting Potential Issues CLELAND PARK – CLELAND SPORTS PARK £870,000 90 x 50 Pavilion 20 No MOSSEND 1 – WARNOCK CRESCENT £795,000 100 x 55 None 10 No Access issues MOSSEND 2 – CALDER ROAD £815,000 95 x 55 Container 0 No Limited Street Parking HARTHILL – HAWTHORN DRIVE £745,000 90 x 45 None 10 No Light pollution, pitch size MOODIESBURN ‐ GLENMANOR AVENUE £830,000 100 x 60 Container 15 No Lease arrangements Estimated Cost (with Mossend Option 1) £3,240,000 Estimated Cost (with Mossend Option 2) £3,260,000 2.3 Appendix 1 articulates potential issues with delivery of projects at some of the chosen sites. For each pitch this can be summarised below: Pros Cons Cleland - Adjacent to Primary School. - Potential for a car park. - Accessible to develop. Mossend 1: Warnock Crescent - Access to develop. - Adjacent to houses. - Light pollution. - Challenges for car parking. Mossend 2: Calder Road - Access to develop. - Adjacent to housing. - Challenging for car parking. - Flood lighting. Harthill - Access to develop. - Housing on all sites. - Light pollution. - Challenging car parking. Moodiesburn - Access to develop existing pitch. - Lighting utilised. - Across from Primary School. - Long term lease to Boys Club who own changing facilities. - If wish to make a fully community pitch timescale for delivery, linked into existing lease. 2.4 Mossend (Warnock Crescent), in the view of the consultant has significant access issues which could be problematic for delivery of the project. Mossend (Calder Street), has identified access and parking issues – with a determination that the maximum pitch surface could be 95m x 45m (rather than 100m x 60m).
Page 5
2.5 Harthill is likely to experience issues with light pollution and may result in no floodlighting being available – restricting the use of the facility. In addition, the maximum pitch surface possible is estimated at 90m x 45m (rather than 100m x 60m). 2.6 Cleland is developable and may facilitate use for the school and as such is considered a viable project from all aspects. 2.7 The pitch at Glenmanor Avenue is currently under lease and would require this to be terminated to proceed with upgrade. At present no discussions have taken place with the Football club. If this option is to be pursued, negotiations would need to be discussed and may delay delivery of this upgrade. Replacement Synthetic Surfaces 2.8 Seven pitches in total within the education estate would benefit from the replacement of the current synthetic surface required to be replaced in this cycle but there is no budget allocated to carry out these works. Investment would allow the many groups to continue to utilise the pitches to their full capacity. 2.9 The following methodology was used to prioritise the pitches which had exceeded their lifespan. • A review of all synthetic pitches within the education estate was undertaken to understand when they were installed or have had their carpets replaced previously. This identified the pitches in scope and what would be required going forward using a RAG system for all 3G/4G pitches. • To prioritise the pitches, Active and Creative Communities provided condition reports from their maintenance programme to advise of current issues and expenditure to keep the pitches functioning and affecting current revenue budgets. • Once the condition of the pitches was understood, the pitches were ranked based on usage – Information was provided by the Community Lets Team on the statistics for the number of hours that these pitches are being used for and generating. Pitches with higher usage were prioritised. • Finally, an analysis of the geographical location of the pitches and other available synthetic pitches within those areas was used to ensure there is provision available across the authority. Using the above methodology, the pitches were prioritised in the following order: 1. Calderhead High School; 2. Caldervale High School; 3. Coltness High School; 4. Chryston High School; and 5. St Ambrose High School – Three synthetic pitches at this site. 2.10 Estimated costs for replacing synthetic surfaces has been benchmarked and costed against a similar project which has been completed at Daisy Park Community Centre in Motherwell. 2.11 It is anticipated that Chryston High School pitch could be replaced as part of an extension upgrade which is expected to be brought forward as part of the Town and Community Hub programme.
Page 6
2.12 At this time there is no identified budget to replace the three pitches at St Ambrose High School. These pitches could be completed if option 3 was chosen. 3. Measures of success 3.1 A strategic approach to delivering new and upgraded assets to the local communities. 3.2 Major investment at priority sites and consideration of future investment at other sites whilst open space / pitch strategy is developed. 4. Supporting documentation Appendix 1 Feasibility Study James McKinstry Head of Asset and Procurement Solutions
Page 7
5. Impacts ( http://connect/report-template-guidance ) 5.1 Public Sector Equality Duty and Fairer Scotland Duty Does the report contain information that has an impact as a result of the Public Sector Equality Duty and/or Fairer Scotland Duty? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? If Yes, has an assessment been carried out and published on the council’s website? https://www.northlanarkshire.gov.uk/your-community/equalities/equality-and-fairer- scotland-duty-impact-assessments Yes ☐ No ☐ 5.2 Financial impact Does the report contain any financial impacts? Yes ☒ No ☐ If Yes, have all relevant financial impacts have been discussed and agreed with Financial Solutions? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? The report highlights the proposed usage of one-off Recover NL Budget investment of £2.2million as highlighted to council committee in February 2022. The report highlights an estimated budget gap of at least £2million should the four pitch upgrades be taken forward – along with the associated replacement of three synthetic surfaces, or a £1million budget gap if option four is progressed. If option 2 or 3 is approved, the budget allocated is in line with the anticipated costs subject to site investigations to determine any unknown abnormal costs and the current rise in inflation for materials and labour costs. 5.3 HR policy impact Does the report contain any HR policy or procedure impacts? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, have all relevant HR impacts have been discussed and agreed with People and Organisational Development? Yes ☐ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.4 Legal impact Does the report contain any legal impacts (such as general legal matters, statutory considerations (including employment law considerations), or new legislation)? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, have all relevant legal impacts have been discussed and agreed with Legal and Democratic Solutions? Yes ☐ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? 5.5 Data protection impact Does the report / project / practice contain or involve the processing of personal data? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, is the processing of this personal data likely to result in a high risk to the data subject? Yes ☐ No ☐ If Yes, has a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) been carried out and e- mailed to dataprotection@northlan.gov.uk
Page 8
Yes ☐ No ☐ 5.6 Technology / Digital impact Does the report contain information that has an impact on either technology, digital transformation, service redesign / business change processes, data management, or connectivity / broadband / Wi-Fi? Yes ☐ No ☒ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? Where the impact identifies a requirement for technology, has an assessment been carried out (or scheduled) by the Enterprise Architecture Governance Group (EAGG)? Yes ☐ No ☐ 5.7 Environmental / Carbon impact Does the report / project / practice contain information that has an impact on any environmental or carbon matters? Yes ☒ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? Increased awareness of health and well-being opportunities available in parks and community facilities increasing local uptake of these opportunities, reducing leisure travel through use of local facilities. 5.8 Communications impact Does the report contain any information that has an impact on the council’s communications activities? Yes ☒ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the impact? Promotion of improved facilities and marketing through social media and website. There will be input required from Corporate Communications irrespective of the proposal taken forward. This is a visible project both at a local level, and at a council level. Communications would focus on healthy outdoor activities. 5.9 Risk impact Is there a risk impact? Yes ☒ No ☐ If Yes, please provide a brief summary of the key risks and potential impacts, highlighting where the risk(s) are assessed and recorded (e.g. Corporate or Service or Project Risk Registers), and how they are managed? Improving the condition of facilities would promote healthy lifestyles throughout North Lanarkshire. If the existing pitches are not upgraded continued additional maintenance costs would be required to keep them functional.
Page 9
Appendix 1 NORTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL SITE ASSESSMENTS FOR POSSIBLE DEVELOPMENT OF 3G SPORTS PITCHES CLELAND PARK – CLELAND SPORTS PARK MOSSEND 1 – WARNOCK CRESCENT MOSSEND 2 – CALDER ROAD HARTHILL – HAWTHORN DRIVE MOODIESBURN ‐ GLENMANOR AVENUE Prepared by PROFESSIONAL SPORTSTURF DESIGN
Page 10
General Professional Sportsturf Design were appointed by North Lanarkshire Council to look at the possibility of developing new artificial grass sports facilities in areas defined by them to allow consideration of any proposed works. These studies were to highlight the individual sites and give a general assessment of the possible development. The studies were to look at the following issues: • Location of sites • Description of the proposed sites • Local site conditions and considerations • Accessibility • Possible planning issues • Budget costs for each development To give some uniformity it was agreed that the optimal pitch size should 100 x 60m with a 3m safety run off all around. This is generally recognised as the standard to be adopted where possible by sportscotland. The facility best option would also allow a spectator area some 3m wide down one side of the pitch with goal recesses allowed for storage of goals for small sided games. The pitch would have a 5m high perimeter ball stop fence and would be fully floodlit. It was agreed that on some sites this may not be possible due to site constraints. We would give a best estimate of what we assessed as possible, on each site, in advance of full topographic surveys and site investigations
Page 11
CLELAND SPORTS PARK Current Site Conditions This site lies to the north west and is adjacent to Cleland Primary School and at the north end of Gray Street, Cleland. It contains at present two natural full size football pitches and a small changing pavilion which is in poor repair. One pitch which abuts the primary School is located on a previously levelled site and is in better overall condition than the second pitch which lies to the west. This second pitch is on sloping ground and appears to be located on a section of the site which has not been reconstructed in the recent past. The surfaces of both pitches were at the time of visit in poor condition though dry and stable with weak sward establishment. They had been recently lined and it is assumed therefore that they are in regular use. If we refer to the pitch adjacent to the Primary school as Pitch 1 and the lower pitch as Pitch 2 we can further asses them as follows: Pitch 1 – appears to be 91 x 50m in size and it is located some 5m off the primary school, wall and fence. The pitch as stressed above has in the past been levelled as can be seen from the site photograph:-
Page 12
The above picture is taken from the rear of the pavilion looking towards the west side of the primary school and shows that the area has been subjected to ‘cut and fill’ to create the pitch platform. The surface levels over the existing pitch are reasonable with the exception of the goal mounths which have been infilled over the years. There was no evidence of existing surface water drainage over the pitch and consequently no existing manholes located. Pitch 2 – this pitch is approximately 90 x 56m and it lies as stated to the west of Pitch 1 on a sloping area of land which falls to the west as can be seen from the following photograph the banking down from Pitch 1 is noted. This photograph was taken from the west of the site looking back towards the Primary School and Pitch 1. This pitch as it has not been regraded in the recent past falls some 1.5 - 2 metres across the width of the pitch, when assessed by eye, This would leave approximately a 1:40 gradient over the surface. The pitch again has a poor sward vigour and there is a lot of rabbit damage. Again there is no evidence of any existing surface water drainage installed. Pavilion The existing pavilion lies to the south of the site at the end of Gray Street and it has a good access into the site, being level from the road. It also offers some informal parking spaces around the building. We have no information on the condition of the building but externally it is in need some repair.
Page 13
Access The park is fully accessible from the Gray Street entrance on the south side of the site. Possible Planning Issues There would be no change of use for the site and therefore there should be no contentious issues in respect of Planning consent, other than the standard considerations and these can be summarised as follows: • Development High Risk Area requiring Coal Authority approval – no recorded shafts on the site however a Coal Mine Risk Assessment will be required. • Site investigation required • Neighbour notifications showing; Installation of floodlighting, fencing etc. • Car parking – there is some scope for on street parking and a small car park could be created adjacent to the pavilion. • Increased traffic will have to be detailed • Construction process will cause some temporary issues with noise and traffic increases whilst some 5,000 tonnes of materials are brought to site.
Page 14
Development Proposals with Budgets This site is accessible from a development point of view with a good access from street level and no real restrictions. The positioning of a new facility within the park is crucial and it is felt that this could best be located on the area we have identified as Pitch 2. This would be easier to develop as the location adjacent to the Primary school would restrict the size of the pitch to be located. There would be a new cut and fill earthworks package to produce the formation levels required for a new artificial grass pitch where we must have a maximum fall across the surface of say 1:100. This will require the new pitch platform to be lowered by some 1.5m to the west of the existing Pitch 1 and the west side to be raised by approximately 0.5m with the required dressing of surrounds. The pitch should be moved to suit the general site layout but the actual details of this will require the topographic survey is carried out to allow the earthworks to be more fully assessed. This would be in conjunction with the Site Investigation which will allow the ground conditions to be fully assessed. To allow some consideration we have prepared an initial plan based only on the GIS map and therefore not having precise detail on site levels.
Page 15
Proposed New 3G Pitch 100x60m Church Club Recreation Ground Location for Car Parking Tel Ex Pavilion Play Area Existing Natural Grass Pitch Cleland Primary School
Page 16
Budget Costs for Cleland Development There are certain costs that will be standard across the proposed developments and we have assessed the budget cost for the works at Cleland as proposed with the site particulars being preliminary works such as Coal Mine Risk Assessment, Site Investigation, Earthworks etc,. In addition we have budgeted the standard lay out as shown for this project as being: • Coal Mine Risk Assessment and Site Investigation And full Topographic Survey £ 35,000 • Earthworks assessed on visual survey only £ 40,000 • New power supply £ 25,000 • Full pitch construction for 100x60 with 3m run off, spectator path, floodlighting and fencing £ 695,000 • Car Parking – allow 20 cars, Cycle Stands etc £ 45,000 £ 840,000 • Allowance for Professional Fees etc. £ 30,000 £ 870,000
Page 17
MOSSEND – WARNOCK CRESCENT Current Site Conditions This site lies to south of the main train line through Mossend and is bound by Warnock Crescent to northwest and Thorndean Avenue to west and south and Garfield Drive/Hawthorn Gardens to the east. It contains at present an area for two red blaes full size football pitches to the north of the site and one natural grass pitch on steeply sloping ground. The area is in two parts the level area with the two blaes pitches to the north with the balance of the large site steeply sloping ground falling from north to south. The open ground is divided by some well established footpaths generally running east – west. The surfaces of all pitches were at the time of visit in poor condition though dry and stable with weak sward establishment on natural grass. They had not been recently lined and it is assumed therefore that they are not in regular use. If we refer to the blaes pitches to the north as Pitches 1&2 and the lower pitch on natural grass area as Pitch 3 we can further asses them as follows: Pitch 1&2 – appears to be a 205 x 50m area allowing 2 No 90x45m pitches to be sited end to end. The area has been fully constructed at some point in the past and is level over the full area with some 8 existing floodlight columns erected on the eastern pitch. The area has not been used for games for some time on the evidence of the condition of the overgrown surface.
Page 18
The above picture is taken from the west end of the blaes area and shows how level the site is. To the south of the area a small container/pavilion was located – this container is still shown on the satellite image at the start of of this section but has now been removed. The picture is looking east towards the railway under bridge. The surface levels over the existing blaes area are good overall and would make future development much easier. There was no evidence of existing surface water drainage over the area and consequently no existing manholes located. Pitch 3 – this pitch is approximately 96 x 56m (though difficult to assess as there were no lines) and it lies as stated to the south of Pitches 1&2 on a sloping area of land which falls to the south as can be seen from the following photograph the banking down from Pitch 1 is noted. This photograph was taken from the west of the site looking back towards the Garfield Drive and with Pitches 1&2 to the left above the blaes path. This pitch as it has not been regraded in the recent past falls some 2 metres across the width of the pitch, when assessed by eye. This fall would leave approximately a 1:35 gradient over the surface which is unacceptable. The pitch again had recently been mown and the grass cuttings were distributed over the pitch it did not look to be ready for play soon.
Page 19
Pavilion/Container There was an pavilion/container as seen on the satellite image which has now been removed.: This photo shows the area on which the pavilion stood Access This is the biggest issue for this park, and it could be insurmountable in my view. The development of a 3G pitch with the full construction even if it is located on the existing baes area will require the importation of some 5,000 tonnes of materials to site. At present the only access I could see to the park was via Warnock Crescent along the blaes path that led to the former pavilion. The access to this area strangely enough is included on Google Street View where it is possible to enter through Warnock Crescent and move right through to the old pavilion. To make the point this photo is of the main access into the site from Warnock Crescent:
Page 20
This photo is from inside the park looking out to Warnock Crescent. This is a very tight access for what would be multiple heavy lorry deliveries. Whilst this photo shows the road access around Warnock Crescent Possible Planning Issues There is little doubt that the main stumbling block to a development on this site is access. The only viable way to the area of any new pitch takes the traffic through Warnock Crescent and this is very restricted as can be viewed in the photographs above. The construction of the pitch would involve some 5,000 tonnes of material to be transported to site and although this would be over a relatively short period say 8 weeks the nuisance level would be high. There would be no change of use for the site and therefore there should be no contentious issues in respect of Planning consent, other than the standard considerations and these can be summarised as follows: • Not in a Development High Risk Area but in Coal Mining Reporting area – there are 3 recorded mine entries in the NW quadrant (this makes it unusual that it is not deemed a High Risk Area). • Site investigation required • Neighbour notifications showing; Installation of floodlighting, fencing etc. • Car parking – this as alluded to above is a major stumbling block as there is no scope for on street parking and while a small car park could be created adjacent to
Page 21
the pitch would have to be serviced by the very narrow access from Warnock Crescent. A traffic impact study would have to be prepared. Development Proposals with Budgets This site is not accessible from a development point of view and as stated has very poor access with no available on street parking. The positioning of a new facility within the area is crucial and it is felt that this could best be located on the area we have identified as Pitches 1& 2. This would be easier to develop as the area is largely level. We would have to widen the plateau to house the full size pitch or accept a smaller playing surface. There are numerous pedestrian access routes into the site from the north via the railway underbridge off Muirmadkin Road and from the east via Garfield Drive and Hawthorn Gardens. There is the possibility of constructing the pitch on the site on the area of the existing natural grass pitch which lies to the south of Pitches 1&2. This however would entail significant earthworks to create the levels that would be required to accommodate the pitch. This would be approximately £ 60 – 80,000 more expensive to develop than creating the facility on the area of Pitches1&2.
Page 22
Milnwood Recreation Ground Preferred location for pitch 100 x 55m with 3m run off Location of former pavilion Possible location for pitch on existing natural grass pitch 100 x 55m with 3m run off Only viable access point
Page 23
Budget Costs for Mossend, Warnock Crescent Development There are certain costs that will be standard across the proposed developments, and we have assessed the budget cost for the works at Mossend, Warnock Crescent as proposed with the site particulars being preliminary works such as Site Investigation, Earthworks etc, in addition we have budgeted the standard layout but reduced in size to suit the site as shown for this project as being: • Site Investigation and full Topographic Survey, Traffic Impact Study etc. £ 25,000 • Earthworks assessed on visual survey only £ 30,000 • New power supply £ 25,000 • Full pitch construction for 100x55 with 3m run off, spectator path, floodlighting and fencing £ 645,000 • Car Parking – allow 20 cars, Cycle Stands etc £ 45,000 £ 770,000 • Allowance for Professional Fees etc. £ 25,000 £ 795,000
Page 24
MOSSEND – CALDER ROAD Current Site Conditions This site lies at the junction of Calder Road and the A721 on the north west side of the junction with Glencalder Crescent to the north west. The present pitch is bounded to the north by a single bungalow which overlooks the site. The land to the west is heavily wooded and falls away to the west. The site at present has a natural grass pitch sloping very steeply from north to south. On a visual inspection only at this point there is almost a 2m fall over the length of the pitch. The pitch was in poor playing condition when viewed with long grass and no evidence of recent lining and poor surface levels. The site has a container/pavilion located at the south end of the site adjacent to Calder Road. We have no information at this time to the use this has or the condition therein. This unit is some 4m+ or so lower that the pitch level, at the roadside. There is a drop kerb entrance to the field at the north end some 5m south of the adjoining bungalow. This is assumed to offer access for maintenance equipment only for the upkeep of the park as there is no hardstanding within the park.
Page 25
The above photo is taken from the north end of the site looking south with the top of the container just visible. The general topography can be seen and shows the less than ideal conditions that prevail for a senior football pitch. This photograph shows the general condition of the existing grass pitch As can be viewed from the photographs the existing pitch does not offer in its present condition a suitable surface for senior football to an acceptable standard unless there was a programme of intensive maintenance following the site visit we had. The other issue is that there is no containment meaning that any play would result in the regular issue of trying to keep the ball within the park – any missed shot to the south would result in a major recovery effort to get the ball back.
Page 26
Access This photograph shown above would indicate the only really viable access point to the site for construction and for any future access for parking for users – the fencing on the right is the garden of the adjacent bungalow. General access is, again, one the biggest issues for the development of this park and it could be insurmountable again in my view. The development of a 3G pitch with full construction, assuming it is located on the existing grass pitch will require a substantial earthworks package to achieve an acceptable gradient across the surface. Allied to this is the importation of some 5,000 tonnes of materials to site. At present the only usable access I could locate to the park was the one highlighted above off Calder Road. This access is very close to the residential house which lies to the north of the site. Possible Planning Issues There is little doubt that one main stumbling block to a development on this site is as stated above, access for construction and in the longer term on site parking. The only viable way to the area is very restricted as can be viewed in the photographs above. It has to be assumed that we would need to consult and satisfy Planning and the Roads Department regarding any temporary construction access which would be in place for some 18 - 20 weeks for construction. Going forward as the site has no real availability for on street parking, as Calder Road is a major route, therefore, it would be necessary to look at some on site parking and this may again prove difficult to achieve. There would be no change of use for the site and therefore there should be no contentious issues in respect of Planning consent, other than the standard considerations and these can be summarised as follows:
Page 27
• Not in a Development High Risk Area but in Coal Mining Reporting area – there are no recorded mine entries. • Site investigation required • Neighbour notifications showing; Installation of floodlighting, fencing etc. • Car parking, as alluded to above, is a major stumbling block as there is no scope for on street parking. While a small car park could be created, adjacent to the pitch it would have to be serviced by a new access created from Calder Road, I would anticipate this would have to be agreed with the Roads Department. They would likely have concerns that at change over times there could be a number of cars entering and exiting the site Development Proposals with Budgets This site is difficult from a development point of view due to the access from a main road and with no available on street parking available it would require a permanent solution with some car parking for users. The positioning of a new facility within the area would essentially be restricted to developing over the existing natural grass pitch The general levels on this site would lead to substantial earthworks to create a solum that would suit a new 3G pitch within the limits of the sports guidelines. . I do not think that we will be able to locate a full size (100x60m) pitch preferred for some locations and we will have to limit the pitch to 95x55m with the usual 3m run offs. This would have to be reviewed again following receipt of the topographic survey, which would allow the earthworks to be more carefully considered..
Page 28
53.9m Proposed New 3G Pitch 95x55m Playing Field 47.2m Post Pavilion
Page 29
Budget Costs for Mossend, Calder Road Development There are certain costs that will be standard across all of the proposed developments and we have assessed the budget cost for the works at Calder Road as proposed with the site particulars being Site Investigation, Earthworks, access to main road etc, In addition we have budgeted the standard layout, but reduced in size to suit the site as shown. The costs for this development are assessed as being: • Site Investigation and full Topographic Survey, Traffic Impact Study etc. £ 25,000 • Earthworks assessed on visual survey only £ 40,000 • New power supply £ 25,000 • Full pitch construction for 95x55 with 3m run off, spectator path, floodlighting and fencing £ 615,000 • New access/junction to the main road £ 40,000 • Car Parking – allow 20 cars, Cycle Stands etc £ 45,000 £ 790,000 • Allowance for Professional Fees etc. £ 25,000 £ 815,000
Page 30
HARTHILL – HAWTHORN DRIVE Current Site Conditions This site is on an existing park bounded by housing on all sides. It is bounded to the north by Hawthorn Drive and West Main Street to the south. The main vehicular access is via Dunn Terrace to the east. It contains at present an existing natural grass football pitch approximately 90 x 50m to the north of the area parallel with Hawthorn Drive, The site also has a MUGA (Multi Use Games Area) built fairly recently by the condition to the south of the site and a children’s play area adjacent to the MUGA. The surface of all natural grass pitch was in reasonable condition and having been recently lined appeared to be in regular use. The park area is crisscrossed with pedestrian footways and the park appears to have a regular use. There is an area on north east corner where there must have been a further children’s play area now removed and this area has some drainage issues. The above picture is taken from main vehicular access off Dunn Terrace and it is noted that the pitch has been lined recently as stated
Page 31
The surface levels over the pitch are not ideal and has a fairly steep gradient from south to north falling >1.5m across the width. This picture looks along the south side line of the pitch from the east and shows the proximity of the MUGA The natural grass pitch as stated sits parallel with Hawthorn Drive and it is located some 8 – 10m in from the park edge. The pitch sits at the north side line >1.5m above the level of the road as can be seen below. Pavilion/Container There were no changing facilities or container visible on the site.
Page 32
Access The main points of access to the site for construction will be either through Dunn Terrance from the east or alternatively from the northwest corner at Hawthorn Drive. The approach via Hawthorn Drive will perhaps cause least nuisance for construction traffic as Dunn Terrace is narrow cul de sac with housing on both sides. The approach from Hawthorn Drive at the northwest corner will disturb less housing but it will bring construction traffic to site at a lower level. This photo looks east down Dunn Terrace In the long term in respect of access for users etc. I would suspect Dunn Terrance would offer the best route, as a small car park already exists which could easily be extended. This photo looks west down Dunn Terrace with small car park area visible
Page 33
Possible Planning Issues There will be difficulties in appeasing the local residents due the proximity of the housing on all sides which will make the construction process disruptive for some 16 – 20 weeks. The earthworks required will be significant with ‘cut and fill’ works to reduce the level difference across the pitch and will this create nuisance whilst ongoing. In the longer term once the pitch is installed the site will go from being a natural grass pitch hosting perhaps one game a week in the winter months to be used most evenings. The general topography will also make it very difficult to satisfy the requirements of Environmental Health in terms of the glare into neighbouring housing. This is always a consideration with Planning but it will be almost impossible to meet the standards due to the housing being so close and the pitch and floodlights being some 20m higher. Further • The site is not in a Development High Risk Area but is in Coal Mining Reporting Area – there are no recorded mine entries on the site • Site investigation will be required • Neighbour notifications showing; Installation of floodlighting, fencing,.see above this will be difficult to satisfy in my opinion • Car parking – there is some scope for on street parking and the possibility of extending the existing small car park off Dunn Terrace, • It will be necessary to heighten the fence on the side of the pitch adjacent to Hawthorn Drive as any cross field play would risk the ball reaching the housing. We would be looking to have the fence at 8m in height on this side. Development Proposals with Budgets The main stumbling blocks to developing this site are the likely nuisance caused to the close proximity housing during construction and the ongoing intensity of use to the neighbours and floodlighting in particular.. It will be necessary to locate the new pitch on the existing grass pitch footprint, but allowing 3m runoffs all round would will mean a playing surface of 90x45m.
Page 34
Proposed New 3G Pitch 90x45m El Sub Sta MUGA Bank PH 196.6m Play Area 198.1 m Shelt er 199.3m 64a PO 13 15 1 3
Page 35
Budget Costs for Harthill Hawthorn Drive Development The standard costs which are across all of the proposed developments are listed. In addition we have assessed the budget cost for the works at Harthill based on the pitch size as detailed. The standard particulars being preliminary works such as Site Investigation, Earthworks etc, In addition we have budgeted the reduced in size to suit the site constraints as shown. The costs for this project are assessed as: • Site Investigation and full Topographic Survey, Traffic Impact Study etc. £ 25,000 • Earthworks assessed on visual survey only £ 40,000 • New power supply £ 25,000 • Full pitch construction for 90x45 with 3m run off, spectator path, floodlighting and extended fencing £ 595,000 • Car Parking extending existing– allow 20 cars, Cycle Stands etc £ 35,000 £ 720,000 • Allowance for Professional Fees etc. £ 25,000 £ 745,000
Page 36
MOODIESBURN – GLENMANOR AVENUE Current Site Conditions This site is on an existing pitch area bounded by Gartferry Road to the north and Glenmanor Avenue to the west. There is housing on the east side on Penzance Way. The site currently houses a well established natural grass pitch which measures approximately 96x58m in size. This pitch appears to be operated by Bridgend Football Club who have a small well maintained changing facility at the northwest corner of the site. The site is reasonably level but sweeps up to the south side of the playing surface and the natural grass surface is in fair condition given the time of year at visit. The pitch was recently lined and appeared to be in regular use. The above picture is taken from the junction of Glenmanor Avenue and Gartferry Road looking east
Page 37
The surface levels over the pitch are regular until the south third of the pitch where it sweeps up to the south. The surface is reasonably regular however and it has a good sward at the time of visit. This picture looks along the west side line of the pitch from the north and shows the proximity of the changing container This picture is taken looking south along the eastern side line and shows the level change to the north
Page 38
There have been some recent drainage works (note drainage tracks) carried out at the northeaster corner of the site off the playing surface suggesting that there may be some drainage issues over the site The park looks large enough on the plan to accommodate a larger pitch than that which is currently housed there. The restriction to the south which does not show on the plan attached in this report is a tree belt between the path running east west before Penman Gardens to the south of the site. It should be possible however to extend the pitch to the desired 100m and retain these trees. . This picture is taken at the south end of the existing pitch looking east
Page 39
Pavilion/Container The pavilion which is a converted container appears to be operated by Bridgend Football Club and whilst we had no access to the building it appears to be in good condition. There is also a storage container adjacent to the changing pavilion. Converted Container photo from the road junction Photo shows the storage container and the changing pavilion container from the pitch
Page 40
Access The site is fully accessible from all sides with the exception of the east where there is housing on Penzance Way. There would be no issue with setting up the construction site although care and planning would be required due to the busy junction with Gartferry Road and Glenmanor Avenue. There is an open space at the other side of the junction which could be used as a set down area/compound for construction and in the long term as a car park for the facility This picture looks west across road the junction and shows possible car park Possible Planning Issues Of the sites we visited this one appears to be the least problematic to develop. The site is accessible and is generally level. It is open also with only issue of the housing on the east side to be considered in terms neighbour issues. There appears to be a possible drainage outfall also judging by the works most recently carried out in the northeast corner. . • The site is not in a Development High Risk Area but is in a Coal Mining Reporting Area – there are no recorded mine entries on the site, but a shaft is recorded to the west of the site though far enough away to not be an issue. • Site investigation will be required • Neighbour notifications showing; Installation of floodlighting, fencing, the housing to the east being the only area of likely concern • Car parking – there is some scope for off street parking in the area across the junction as the site appears to be in Council ownership • It will be necessary to ensure the fencing is a suitable height to prevent nuisance to housing at the east and road users to north and west. Development Proposals with Budgets This is as stated the most easily developed site that we viewed in this exercise. It is generally open for development. There is a requirement for some earthworks, but these are generally minimal. The pitch will be located on the existing pitch location but extended to the south and east to provide the optimal 100x60m playing surface.
Page 41
63.4m Bridgend Football Club Proposed New 3G Pitch 100x60m DO NOT SCALE DIMENSIONS FROM THIS DRAWING ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE VERIFIED ON SITE. Professional Sportsturf Design 6 Crosshill Drive,Glasgow, G73 3QU Tel: 0141 643 1286 Fax: 0141 647 8202 email: office@psdscotland.co.uk
Page 42
Budget Costs for Moodiesburn Glenmavor Avenuse Development As stated, there are certain costs that will be standard across all the proposed developments, and we have assessed the budget cost for the works at Moodiesburn as detailed below. With the standard costs for preliminary works such as Site Investigation, Earthworks etc, all for the full size facility as proposed. We have added some costs for the nearby car parking. and have budgeted the full size standard pitch layout. • Site Investigation and full Topographic Survey, Traffic Impact Study etc. £ 25,000 • Earthworks assessed on visual survey only £ 25,000 • New power supply £ 25,000 • Full pitch construction for 100x60 with 3m run off, spectator path, floodlighting and fencing £ 695,000 • Car Parking extending existing– allow 20 cars, Cycle Stands etc £ 35,000 £ 805,000 • Allowance for Professional Fees etc. £ 25,000 £ 830,000