Pavilion Q&A


Pavilion Q&A


New Pavilion Site

For thirty years, ever since we lost the part of our field for the dualling of the A33 to Southampton, the pavilion has been facing the wrong way. We now have the chance to put that right.The plan is to build the new pavilion on the eastern border of the field, amongst the trees and further away from houses. The diagrams show the two latest possible designs. The architect has based these new designs on feedback received from parishioners, the sports club and the Parish Council.
Although it’s not finalised, Scheme C is the preferred option as it allows space for basement storage. No more unsightly separate tractor shed or equipment storage area!  

view from south west
view from south west

Scheme C (preferred) from the south west
This and other diagrams © Charles M Walker, Architect, reproduced by permission

Car Park

Vehicle access would be via a new car park on the “return land”, removing the vehicle nuisance suffered by those who live on the access route to the old pavilion.

Tennis Court

The plan is for a third tennis court, adjacent to the existing ones, on the site of the old pavilion.

The tennis club would like to have enough courts to avoid having to rely on the generosity of various parishioners with their own tennis courts for league matches. Although four courts would be ideal for tennis league matches, because of the difficulty of siting a further two courts sensitively, the tennis club has agreed to a plan containing just one extra court.

The tennis club is not asking for parish funds towards the new court.


Questions and Answers


Question PC Response
I’m worried that the pavilion will be used for noisy parties and discos There has never been any suggestion by the sports club that they will hold noisy events in the new pavilion. Their present license prohibits antisocial activities and this clause would be continued into the new lease.
Does the pavilion need to be so big? In January last year I wrote: “Our current thinking is that any new pavilion should be about the same size as the existing facilities. We don’t believe that people want a large community centre like that proposed by CASCA about 5 years ago”.We believe that the proposed design does pass this test: a reasonable person would accept that the pavilion design is adequate for its intended purpose without being overlarge.

Some extra facilities have to be included these days. But the architect has managed to incorporate disabled toilets as well as changing facilities for women within a ground area of almost the same size as that of the buildings it replaces

Why does the new pavilion need two storeys? Have a look at the picture. You couldn’t really call it a two storey building – it’s more like a single storey building with rooms in the roof. And even without the upstairs rooms the roof line would hardly be any lower unless we went for a flat roofed building.
Scheme C from the west (field)
The upper rooms are to allow cricket and tennis teams to serve teas at the same time on match days, and to house the snooker table which was generously given to the parish and will replace the current small pool and snooker tables.
Won’t the pavilion need to be hired out to cover running costs? I’m worried it will take business away from the Parish Hall The intent is to have an energy efficient building with running costs as low as possible. The lease will impose controls on subletting in line with the present license.
The figure quoted for the pavilion (£200,000) seems expensive – why don’t we put up a cheaper building? We think we have a duty to the parish to put up a building which will be a credit to the village. In a community such as ours we should aim for a quality building which will serve several generations. With the expected grant income we believe the pavilion is affordable.
Why don’t we go for a wooden building? It would look more attractive and save money Attractiveness is subjective – some may prefer wooden construction while others favour designs such as the one above. We believe that the more permanent building is affordable and also more acceptable to grant aiding bodies.
Why do you need such a large car park (51 spaces shown on the plan)? We will look at reducing the size of the car park but we want to be sure we avoid football or cricket players having to disturb residents through overflow parking on the field or the road on match days
Won’t the car park be open to misuse? The present car park has several drawbacks:

  1. access is via a narrow track between houses
  2. there is a blind exit past a resident’s garage
  3. it is dangerous for children
  4. it is too small and there is often chaos with overflow parking on the field on match days.

The new car park will allow players to access the field without having to drive between houses and this should cause far less disturbance to residents.We will certainly make sure that we have a plan to prevent misuse of the car park.

I’m worried that the proposed car park might look unsightly for traffic coming over Shepherds Lane bridge The existing clump of trees will prevent the pavilion or car park being visible from Shepherds Lane bridge, and a tree screen will soon hide it from the road as well.
How can additional tennis courts be justified when the present ones are often unused? The additional courts are justified by league requirements, in the same way that many of the facilities needed by the football section are defined by their leagues.The success of the tennis club can better be judged by the fact that it achieved promotion in its first year in the Apsley League and is so well supported by its members that it is in a position to fund new courts.
Is the tennis club planning to boost its numbers by admitting people from outside the parish? The tennis section is the only sports club section which restricts its membership to residents of the parish. It has no plans to change this. If it turns out to be a condition of any grant application that the sports club admit members from outside the parish, the tennis club would probably place a limit on its membership to prevent overuse of the facilities.
We support the pavilion and a third court for tennis league matches but we are worried about increased traffic using Shepherd’s Lane bridge It is not our intention that a replacement pavilion or additional tennis facility would increase traffic materially. No additional football or cricket teams are planned.And of course, by providing parking on the “return land”, traffic will be able to access it directly, which should substantially reduce traffic nuisance, particularly to those who live on the access route to the present pavilion.
We’re worried that the new pavilion will be used as a social club The sports club does have social members at present and it would be nice if a new pavilion could be used for sports club members in the village to meet over a drink. But the lease will guard against misuse of this facility.
I’m not happy about converting grassed area to hard tennis courts Since the new court is planned on the site of the old pavilion, it will not really reduce the green area of the field at all.
Do we really need to apply for lottery funding? In a project like this it is normal to apply to several different sources for grants – the Sports Council lottery fund is just one of the sources which we will be approaching.

Scheme B (non-preferred)

west aspect