29 May 2015

Parish Councillors thro’ Parish Clerk

REPORT TO NORTH LUFFENHAM PARISH COUNCIL

ERECTION OF NEW NETS BY NORTH LUFFENHAM CRICKET CLUB

AIM

1.This report has been prepared by as directed by NLPC at its meeting held on18 May 15 by:

Cllr Sewell

Cllr Riordan

Cllr Smith

Cllr Cummings.

2.The aim of this report to is to make recommendations to NLPC concerning the viability of making modifications/alterations to reduce the visual and physical ‘impact’ of the cricket nets that had been erected by North Luffenham Cricket Club (NLCC) on the Oval during the Spring of 2015. In particular the report aims to answer the following questions:

•Planning considerations

•The views of local residents affected by the construction.

•The reason(s) behind replacing the original practice nets

•Query whether the same benefit could be achieved using a different construction, or siting the construction in a different place.

BACKGROUND

In February 2015, NLCC replaced the cricket nets on the Oval with purpose built permanent nets that met the specifications laid down by ECB. Prior to ordering the new nets the Cricket Club did not consult with the Parish Council and did not consider the viability of utilizing mobile nets. The nets were provided by Durant Cricket Ltd ( of Unit 1a, Station Yard Trading Estate, Station Road, Uppingham, Rutland LE15 9TX. The new nets replaced locally manufactured nets that did not comply with current ECB direction on construction. Since the erection of the nets NLPC had received complaints from four individuals and letters of support from a similar number of villagers.

The size of the new nets is Length: 19.2m – Height 3.85m and the metal tubing used in the construction is of a greater diameter. This replaced a structure that had been 12m long and about 2,8m high. Overall the visual impact upon the oval is much greater and the footprint significantly increased.

REVIEW - OPTIONS

On Thu 28 May the NLPC representatives met a delegation from the Cricket Club to discuss the options to reduce the impact of the nets on the Oval and the viability thereof. Mr Christian Durrant of Durrant Cricket, the provider of the new nets, was on hand to provide technical advice.

The options considered were:

●Remove 1 or more Sections.

●Reduce the height of the nets.

●Adapt the whole structure or some sections by adding wheels to make them mobile.

●Take down the nets at the end of the season, store and re-build at the beginning of the next season.

●Paint the poles with a matt black or green paint.

Each of these options was discussed at length with the Cricket Club delegation, and subsequently in private. The considered view of the PC representatives was:

Option 1 – Remove 1 or more Sections to reduce the size of the footprint. This option was rejected as a reduced length of cricket net would reduce its efficacy and would impact upon safety and could have potential insurance implications.

Option 2 – Reduce the height of the nets. This option was rejected, as a reduced height would significantly reduce its efficacy, especially for younger cricketers. The increased height and length enables balls to be ‘lobbed’ without landing on the top of the nets.

Option 3 – Adapt the nets by adding wheels to make them mobile. The technical advice given by Mr Durrant was that mobile nets were generally used to enable clubs to move the nets onto the playing surface to get experience of the wicket. Mobile nets cannot be constructed to be as high as fixed ones. Given that the extra height is primarily required at the “bowling” end (see Option 2) consideration was given to making part (back) of the nets mobile and part (Front) permanent but rejected as being impractical. It would also provide only a limited improvement, as it is the front part which “encroaches” onto the Oval compared with the previous structure.

Option 4 - Take down the nets at the end of the season, store and re-build at the beginning of the next season. This was rejected as being impractical as the structure of the nets had been designed to be permanent. Concern was expressed that if the structure were removed the exposed footings would become a significant hazard.

Option 5 - Paint the poles with a matt black or green paint. Whilst reducing the impact it was considered that over time the painted poles would chip and become unsightly. This option was rejected at this stage but could be reviewed in the future. It was anticipated that over time the alloy tubes would oxidise and reduce the level of shine, thereby reducing the impact of the structure.

RECOMMENDATIONS

a.The Cricket Club should be reminded in the strongest terms of their obligation to consult with the Parish Council prior to making any changes to the Oval.

b.The existing structure was considered fit for purpose and whilst having a significantly increased footprint and impact upon the Oval this was justified in terms of increased levels of safety and practicality for users.

c.None of the changes considered were considered to be practical without impacting upon the efficacy of the structure.

d.The issue of insurance cover for non- Cricket Club use needs to be resolved. The Parish Council and Cricket Club should review current cover to ensure that the nets can be made available for use by individuals other than during cricket club activities with appropriate insurance cover in place.

e.Assuming such cover can be provided, a set of stumps within the nets should be provided by the cricket club to enable use of the nets as a village amenity.

f.If appropriate insurance cover cannot be provided, the cricket club must take such steps as are necessary to ensure that the nets are inaccessible to the public. In that situation the PC will need to consider the issue of levying a charge for the area “occupied” by the cricket club.

g.The cricket club must be responsible for “strimming” the grass within and adjacent to the nets at no cot to the PC.