Ambitious plans to transform outdoor sports spaces across the district are facing a financial hurdle, with rising costs forcing councillors to consider scaling back the project.
A report presented to Torridge District Council outlines a funding shortfall of up to £98,006 for three proposed “Playzone” sites, prompting discussions over whether one location should be dropped to make the scheme viable.
The Playzones are designed as safe, inclusive and accessible outdoor facilities aimed at encouraging football and other sports, particularly among groups facing barriers to participation.
Councillors had previously approved £105,000 towards developing three sites in Holsworthy, Bideford and Great Torrington, with additional backing from town councils, charities and a £715,551 contribution from the Football Foundation.
However, updated figures show construction costs have increased significantly over the past 12 months, leaving gaps in funding across all locations. The total shortfall could reach £98,006 if all three sites proceed, or £73,006 under a reduced option at one site.
If the council decides to focus on just two sites, the funding gap would drop to around £38,000.
The Bideford site at Pollyfield has become a particular point of contention, with objections raised by the local community centre and residents. Concerns include the loss of open green space and increased pressure on parking.
Cllr Huw Thomas said: “While I support providing additional facilities for the people of ETW and Bideford, I do not believe this is the right place for such a facility.
“The proposed site is the only area of flat land at the Pollyfield with unrestricted access and is regularly used by many people, young and old, for games, dog walking and general leisure.
“The loss of this public open space would be very unpopular and would create a lot of resentment towards the council.”
He added that the development would “inevitably add to pressure on the car park”, which is already heavily used.
Cllr Jude Gubb also raised concerns following feedback from residents.
“I have had a couple of emails not supporting the play zone, mainly because of the space that it will be taking up and loss of free area for the public to use,” she said.
“For the Pollyfield Centre, the big issue will be parking, in an already crowded car park. I do not think the parking was considered at all.”
She added that, while she initially supported the idea, the views of the community and the centre meant the site was no longer considered suitable.
In contrast, lead member for leisure Cllr Lyndon Piper backed the wider scheme, describing it as “a wonderful opportunity to improve sport and play facilities”.
He said: “A decision needs to be made on the quantum of facilities to be provided, balancing risks and prioritising facilities where the need and community support is strongest.”
All three proposals are currently within the planning process and are expected to be considered by planning committees in May and June.
The report recommends that councillors consider using council reserves to cover the funding gap and review whether the Pollyfield application should be withdrawn if it is no longer viable or supported.
