A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Decision details

Decision details

Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire Playing Pitch Strategy

Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Infrastructure

Decision status: Recommendations approved

Is Key decision?: No

Is subject to call in?: No

Purpose:

To endorse the final report as an evidence base and material consideration in planning decisions.

Decisions:

Matter for Decision

The Officer’s report set out the work which had been undertaken with South Cambridgeshire District Council to develop the Playing Pitch Strategy 2015-2031 which addressed the needs of football, rugby, hockey, and cricket and the provision of need for both grass and artificial pitches.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport

 

  i.  Endorsed the Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire Playing Pitch Strategy 2015 – 2031 (Appendix B) as a material consideration I decision-making and as part of the technical evidence base for the Local Plan with immediate effect. 

  ii.  Agreed that any subsequent minor amendments and editing changes were made in consultation with the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport, the Chair, and Spokesperson of Development Plan Scrutiny Sub-Committee.

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

The Committee received a report from the Planning Policy Manager.

 

The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:

  i.  Questioned how schools fitted in and what the difference between secured and un-secured facilities was.

  ii.  Questioned if the council could deviate from the plan, and if sports for individuals with disabilities was outside of the terms of reference.

  iii.  Commented that the Council was compelled to look into majority sports.

  iv.  Commented that if there was no evidence base then issues would not be able to be addressed and questioned if the Council was limited by what provision it had. 

 

The Sports and Recreation Manager and the Senior Planning Policy Officer said the following in response to Members’ questions:

  i.  Schools in the City had community use agreements, which made them open their facilities to the public and therefore were “secured” public use. The Universities facilities were “un-secured” provision as they were not open for general public use or hire. There were some University facilities that had limited public use but this tended to be via special arrangement or new community use agreements in place at the North West University Sports facility.

  ii.  The pitch strategy looked at existing facilities supporting outdoor sports and how these could evolve in the future.

 

Representatives from Strategic Leisure said the following in response to Members’ questions:

  i.  Commented that the strategy document was a snap shot in time but there would be the opportunity to particularly look at girls and individuals with disabilities involvement in sport as the strategy was a fluid document. There was a requirement for mixed sex facilities and making existing pavilion disability friendly.

  ii.  The national methodology used for the strategy meant that only the four major sports were picked up and fully assessed.

 iii.  Sport England also looked at minority sports.

iv.  Rugby league was not included in the terms of reference and was not identified in the process.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the recommendation.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.

 

Report author: Bruce Waller

Publication date: 30/08/2016

Date of decision: 02/06/2016

Decided at meeting: 02/06/2016 - Development Plan Scrutiny Sub-Committee

Accompanying Documents: