The target is unclear. Clarify LRS text. - Involvement of private sector organisations invariably increases user costs. - - Simplify/clarify by identifying key facets and linkages (where they exist). Identify links between key issues and their potential impact in LRS. - Identify primary objective of each leisure/sport outlet. Not possible/desirable in a mixed economy where leisure/sport outlets are trying to attract/generate income from many sources. - Prefer option 4 – primarily because it would be better after the recession. A stronger rationale/explanation would help to clarify why options 3 and 4 are not considered, but there is little benefit of doing so because the LRS will focus on one option only. - The links between sport, leisure and good health are well documented. - - We need a well-advertised 2, 5, 10 to 20 year plan, only. LRS sets direction for period to 2050, plus actions for five years to 2020. Action Plan included. No amendments identified. AP Split Educational/Community based facilities will never really succeed in developing a holistic commitment to sport and leisure if a sports hall is not available for several weeks each year. Issue should be addressed/considered as a result of implementation of an action in LRS Action Plan. AP Slightly confused by the statement to do with duplication of resources. Clarify LRS text p11 2 Cornwall Council – Local Plans Team Add a better understanding of how needs may have changed and how they may change in the foreseeable future. There’s no additional intelligence to suggest how future demand ‘might look’. p10, Add a point about the steady increase in costs for new build and maintenance. - p3 This housing figure is counting from 2010 and a significant number have already been built. Reduce number of new house required. p6 Is there a hidden demand for swimming space? - - The term “catchment gap/s” is jargon. Amend LRS text accordingly. pp8, 9 Suggested text: … use developer contributions to help pay for things...” Amend LRS text accordingly. -
developed for when the current leisure contract expires in March 2017. The Council has not established how efficient and/or efficient current leisure provision is. Improved efficiency and/or effectiveness is unlikely to result in the financial savings required. However, it would be useful to know if a future operator tries to identify whether or not efficiency and/or effectiveness could be improved. AP The needs assessment has not identified any over-provision. Any reductions are likely, therefore, to create catchment gaps. AP A soft market test which fully explores the range of potential solutions to achieve the Council’s outcomes for leisure will help establish the realistic options available. - - The options currently direct the Council in choosing between two routes, whereas the best solution may lie in a mixed economy of provision. In order to reduce its costs, the Council is likely to reduce its level of provision (i.e., Option 1) to include profitable leisure centres and seek to either transfer or close the others. It is unlikely that an alternative operator would be interested in having unprofitable leisure centres transferred to them (i.e., Option 2). This effectively means that the options are mutually exclusive. In addition the “mixed economy” referred to is unlikely because Cornwall Council is likely to withdraw from leisure. - Sport England would support further work to make informed decisions. - - 8 Cornwall Sports Partnership The relationship between the Council’s assets, other leisure assets and their respective importance in achieving the Council’s vison of increased participation needs to be further developed in order to provide a balanced picture of provision and impact. Amend LRS ‘Introduction’ accordingly. pp3-5