Cabinet considered grant funding to modernise tennis courts at four parks in Windsor & Maidenhead as part of improving health and fitness facilities and opportunities for residents, thanks to potential significant investment from the Government and the Lawn Tennis Association (LTA).

The Cabinet Member for Digital Connectivity, Housing Opportunity, and Sport and Leisure explained the proposal would improve 10 courts in the borough with funding of £110,000 in partnership with the LTA as part of a national scheme. If approved, works would begin in the autumn including resurfacing, new nets and posts, and an enhanced tennis programme including some free lessons. A new access control system with online booking would be implemented, providing certainty of booking and maximising usage. LTA research showed that 78% of players would like to be able to book a court.

The courts would continue to be owned and managed by the council. The reference to a lease was to ensure the maintenance would continue at a high standard. The fee system would ensure maintenance was sustainable and ensure bookings were met. A variety of ways to pay would be offered including an annual pass and pay as you go.

Councillor Hilton commented the report was excellent as it set out something that would be difficult to do without large expenditure. It would change people’s views of playing as they would have a guaranteed slot and would bring courts up to a good standard.

Councillor Rayner commented that the borough had officially been named the happiest place in England and the proposal supported the Corporate Plan objective to improve wellbeing through sport.

Mike Piggford from the LTA explained the proposal was part of a national project with the key aim to increase participation with a target of 1m more players by 2024. It was a once in a lifetime opportunity for investment. Mike Piggford provided examples of successful projects in Wokingham and Reading which had seen increases in usage once access gates were in place.

Councillor Davey explained that he had pushed out a survey the day before and had received 40 responses. Over 90% were not keen on the freedom to use courts being taken away. The courts in Windsor were last refurbished in 2010 and looked perfectly ok to him. He felt the proposal would push people away who may otherwise have used the facility. There were already two professional clubs in Windsor where residents could pay an annual membership. The courts in the centre of town were for those who randomly wanted to play. He asked why the council had not saved money itself to be able to refurbish the courts rather than limiting access because there was external funding available.  Councillor Davey suggested proper consultation was needed to find out what residents really wanted. He had started a conversation with an organisation who may be willing to provide funding for advertising therefore there were other options available.

Councillor McWilliams referenced the figures provided by the LTA which showed an exponential rise in users once access gates were installed. The scheme would also remove uncertainty in the ability to play. The fee structures would be reasonable for high quality courts. Many residents may not be able to afford the membership fees for professional clubs.

Councillor Davey suggested the council could take the money and approach schools to offer coaching and guidance on professional courts already in existence, to invest in those with skills, but not the funds, to play tennis. He also suggested the proposal be trialled in Maidenhead to see if it worked before being rolled out elsewhere in the borough.

The Executive Director of Place Services commented the proposal was part of a national programme with a significant sum of funding for a reason, as it had been recognised that courts in parks and community settings would benefit. He had seen a successful example of a court with access gates, run by a parish council in the south of the borough. He referenced the penetration figures detailed in Appendix B which gave examples of different court locations with types of users in parks and community settings in comparison to club activity. All courts selected for the programme demonstrated a latent demand for this type of arrangement.

Mike Piggford confirmed that the measure allowed predictions of demand for usage based on demographics. This enabled the LTA to determine the best sites for investment. A technical consultant had visited all locations and the proposals were based on their findings. He stated that the cost of membership at Windsor tennis club was £74 per month whereas the annual membership for the Reading courts referenced earlier was £40. The proposal also included a free tennis element to ensure people could easily get into the sport in the first place. The system was flexible to allow for free and discounted times. The funding was time based as contractors would be allocated work in one area at a time so it was unlikely an area could be revisited at a later point.

Councillor Singh commented that he had originally raised concerns at the Maidenhead Town Forum meeting so he was pleased more detail was now being provided. He was concerned about the level of fees. He highlighted that a new tennis facility had just opened in north Maidenhead and asked if this had been taken into account. He felt that most residents did not play to win Wimbledon but just to get out of the house and have some free exercise, and this proposal would price them out. If the proposal was to be approved, he suggested an addition to the third recommendation to prioritise free to play and vulnerable residents within the business model.

Councillor McWilliams highlighted that the proposal would improve access as it included a free to play element. The charging scheme would be set by the borough in liaison with the LTA. Reading charged £40 per year and had seen exponential growth.

Mike Piggford clarified that Wokingham annual membership gave access to free bookings all year; the hourly fee was only for pay as you go. The north Maidenhead facility was a privately funded grass court centre so was not related to the proposal.

Councillor Price commented that there had been no mention of disabled residents.

Councillor McWilliams referred to paragraph 7.2 of the report which referenced access for all abilities.

Councillor Stimson commented the proposal support wheelchair tennis. The ability to turn floodlights on when needed would be of benefit in terms of carbon reduction and not being on during anti-social hours.

RECOMMENDATION: That Cabinet notes the report and:

i)             Agree officers can continue working with the LTA to obtain funding to improve tennis court provision in RBWM.

ii)            Agree recommendation to progress the funded tennis court

improvement project as a fully funded capital scheme for agreement at full Council.