Community Facility Use Planning Checklist

List every group who would expect to use the facility, including those using the site now who would carry on doing so afterwards.

Existing users are the ones most often left out of a proposal, and they are also the ones who object most loudly once drawings appear.

Note who uses the space without booking anything, such as dog walkers, families after school or people cutting across the ground.

Informal use rarely appears in any record, yet it is what makes a shared site feel used or abandoned once the arrangement changes.

Write down the age range and the mix of abilities in each group, without drawing any conclusion about what that means for the design.

Who actually turns up shapes the whole conversation with a designer, and it is information only the group holds.

What a mixed age or ability range means for layout, surfaces and supervision is established by qualified professionals and the relevant governing body.

Record roughly how many people come to a typical session for each group, and mark where that figure is a guess rather than something counted.

Rough figures are useful as long as they are labelled as rough, since invented precision is harder to defend than an honest estimate.

Any limit on how many people may use a space at once is set by the relevant authority and qualified professionals, never by the group itself.

Note any group who has asked to use the site and been turned away, and record why that happened at the time.

Refused requests describe demand the current facility cannot hold, which is exactly what a proposal needs to be able to show.

Consider which parts of the local community do not use the site at all, and record that as an observation rather than as an explanation.

Absence is a finding in its own right, and noting it early keeps consultation from being limited to the people already involved.

Write down what each activity needs around it as well as within it, such as room to run out, somewhere to stand and a place to put bags down.

The area beyond the marked space is the part that gets forgotten, and it is usually what makes an activity workable or not.

How much space an activity requires is established by the relevant governing body and qualified professionals for the sport and level of play involved.

Note what each group says about the ground they play or meet on now, in their own words, without deciding what surface would suit them.

User comments about existing ground are evidence a designer can work with, while a surface chosen by a committee usually is not.

Surface selection for a shared facility is a matter for specialist contractors and the relevant governing body, informed by how the space is used.

Record what has to be put out and taken away for each activity, and who currently does that work every time.

Setting up is invisible in a brief but it decides where storage goes and whether an activity is realistic for volunteers to run at all.

Note the noise each activity makes and where it is heard from, including whistles, shouting, music and vehicles arriving.

Noise is the most common reason neighbours object, and describing it honestly carries more weight than claiming there will not be any.

Record which activities stop when the light goes, and which groups have said they would use the space later if they could see.

Demand for evening use drives a large part of a facility brief, and it can be established simply by asking the groups directly.

Whether lighting is possible at this site, and what it would involve, is for qualified professionals and the local authority to establish.

Consider whether each activity brings people who stay and watch, and note where those people currently stand or sit.

Onlookers need somewhere to be, and where nothing is provided they end up occupying the space the activity itself needs.

Note the times of day each group uses the site, and mark which of those are fixed and which could move if the space allowed it.

Flexible sessions are what make a shared facility work, and knowing which ones can move is far more useful than a list of preferences.

Write down which days each group meets, and whether any of them already clash before the project has begun.

Existing clashes show that the facility is already stretched, which is stronger evidence than a general claim about demand.

Record how use changes across the seasons, including which activities stop altogether and which appear only in the warmer part of the year.

Seasonal facilities stand empty for long stretches, and knowing when that happens shapes maintenance, storage and any shared arrangement.

Note the periods when the site is barely used at all, such as school holidays, and consider who might make use of it then.

Empty periods are the easiest time to offer to another group, and they are the part of the pattern nobody writes down.

Record what each group does when the weather stops play, and whether they move somewhere else or simply cancel the session.

What happens in bad weather shows whether an all weather surface or a covered area is being asked for by the users themselves.

Note the occasional events the site holds, such as a tournament, a fete or a fundraising day, and what each of those brings with it.

Occasional events dictate parking, waste, power and access far more than routine sessions do, yet they are treated as exceptions.

Anything beyond a routine session carries its own local requirements, which are confirmed with the local authority and qualified professionals rather than assumed.

Mark the points in the pattern where more than one group would want the space at the same time, and note who is currently giving way.

The group that quietly gives way is usually the one that disappears, and naming that now keeps the proposal honest.

Record what gap there is between one group leaving and the next arriving, and whether anyone is ever still packing up when the next starts.

Changeover is where shared facilities fail day to day, and it depends on storage and access rather than on goodwill.

Consider which activities could run beside each other without interfering, and which could not, based on what has already been tried here.

Experience on this site is far better evidence than an assumption about which activities fit together.

Write down how sessions are booked at present, whether that is a diary, a message group or an understanding nobody has written down.

An unwritten booking habit works until the facility gets busier, which is exactly what the project is meant to achieve.

Decide and record how a clash would be settled, and who has the final say when two groups both want the same slot.

Agreeing the rule before there is a dispute is far easier than agreeing it during one, and it belongs in the written arrangement.

Note whether the facility would be offered to groups from outside the community, and record how the group feels about that.

Outside use changes wear, access, supervision and the character of a facility, so it belongs in the brief rather than being settled later.

Write down who is normally present while each group uses the site, and whether that is a volunteer, a member of staff or nobody in particular.

The existing arrangement is the starting point for any conversation about a larger facility, and it is seldom written down anywhere.

What supervision a facility requires, and any checks the people involved need, is determined by the relevant authority and the governing body.

Note whether children or young people use the site without an adult present, and record that as an observation to raise with others.

Arrangements for children and young people are set by the relevant authority and the governing body, and nothing recorded here settles what is required.

Record whether somebody has to be there to open and close, and what happens on the occasions when that person cannot come.

A facility that depends on one available person is fragile, and the fragility shows first at the times it is most wanted.

Note what happens now if somebody is hurt, including who is called and where any equipment is kept, and treat any change as a question for others.

First aid provision at a shared facility is established with the relevant authority and the governing body, not decided by a committee on its own.

Write down how a problem with the site is reported at present, and whether the people using it know that route exists.

Faults get reported when people know who to tell, so the route matters more than any form or record it produces.

Consider whether anyone uses the facility alone, particularly outside the busy times, and make sure that appears in the record.

Solitary use raises questions a committee cannot answer itself, but it needs to be visible in the brief for the people who can.

Decide and record whether the facility is meant to be open between arranged sessions or closed, and note what happens at present.

Open access and booked use lead to different fences, surfaces, signage and upkeep, so the choice belongs early in the brief.

Describe what casual use actually looks like here, such as younger children on a marked area or people using the ground as a shortcut.

A description drawn from observation carries more weight in a consultation than a general statement about community benefit.

Note where casual use shows as wear, such as a worn line across the grass or a gate that is always found open.

Wear patterns are a written record of how people really move, and they are visible to anyone willing to walk the site.

Record what has happened here that the group would rather had not, such as litter, damage or gatherings, without exaggerating or minimising it.

An honest account of past problems allows others to respond usefully, while a tidied one leads to a facility that fails the same way again.

Note what signs exist now, what they say and whether anybody takes any notice of them.

Existing signs show what the site has already tried, and an ignored sign usually points at something the layout is doing wrong.

What a sign at a shared facility needs to say is confirmed with the relevant authority and the governing body rather than drafted by the group alone.

Ask nearby residents what they notice at the quiet times, and record their answers separately from the group's own view.

Neighbours see the site at hours the committee does not, and their account is often the more complete one.

Draw the pattern of use together into a single written summary that somebody outside the group could read and follow.

A designer will ask for this at the first meeting, and having it ready changes the quality of everything that follows.

Mark clearly which parts of the record were counted, which are remembered and which are hoped for.

Mixing evidence with aspiration is what causes a brief to be doubted, and separating them takes very little effort.

Write down which current uses must survive the project, and which the group would accept losing if it came to that.

Trade offs are far easier to discuss when they have been considered in advance rather than raised in a meeting under pressure.

Record whether each group expects to grow, stay the same or shrink, and note the reason each of them gives for that.

Expected growth drives the whole scale of a proposal, so the reasoning behind it should be visible rather than assumed.

Keep a separate list of the things the group cannot settle itself, and take that list to qualified professionals and the relevant authority.

Separating questions from decisions is what keeps a community brief useful and stops a committee answering things it should not.

Decide who keeps the use record up to date and where it is stored, so it is still available when the committee changes.

Community records vanish with the person who made them, and naming a keeper is the difference between preparation and lost work.