DRAFT - WiltshireWFCAP Wiltshire Forum of Community Area Partnerships DRAFT Wiltshire Open Space...

Wiltshire Open Space Study

2015 – 2026 Part I of II

(Final)

Report produced on behalf of Wiltshire Council by Ethos Environmental Planning

DRAFT

1 Wiltshire Open Space Study

Wiltshire Open Space Study

Contents 1.0 Introduction 7 - 13

2.0 Methodology 14 - 18

3.0 Strategic Context 19 - 44

4.0 Local Needs Assessment 45 - 56

5.0 Audit of existing open space assets 57 - 72

6.0 Setting local standards 73 - 83

7.0 Applying local standards 84 - 101 8.0 Strategic options, policy and management recommendations 102 - 112

DRAFT


Glossary of Terms

Term Meaning

AGP Artificial Grass Pitch

CAP Community Area Partnership

CAB Community Area Board

CIL Community Infrastructure Levy

DPD Development Plan Document

FIT Fields In Trust (originally known as the ‘National Playing Fields Association’)

GIA Green Infrastructure Assessment

GIS Green Infrastructure Strategy

GIS Geographic Information Systems

IDP Infrastructure Delivery Plan

LAP Local Area for Play

LDD Local Development Document

LDF Local Development Framework (a component of the revised statutory land use planning system)

LEAP Local Equipped Area for Play

LSP Local Strategic Partnership

MUGA Multi Use Games Area

NEAP Neighbourhood Equipped Play Area

NEWP Natural Environment White Paper

NGB National Governing Body

NPPF National Planning Policy Framework

OSPA Open Space and Play Area Strategy

PPG17 Planning Policy Guidance Note 17

SAC Special Area of Conservation

SPD Supplementary Planning Document

SPA Special Protection Area

SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest

STP Synthetic Turf Pitch

PPS Planning Policy Statement

WCS Wiltshire Core Strategy

WFCAP Wiltshire Forum of Community Area Partnerships

DRAFT


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.0 Introduction The study has been carried out in-line with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (Para 73 and 74) and informed by the former guidance provided in ‘Planning Policy Guidance Note 17: Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation’, and its Companion Guide ‘Assessing Needs and Opportunities’, which is a tried and tested methodology and takes a consistent approach with many other local authorities. This report is part 1 of an overall study with a comprehensive set of documents presented in three parts:

Part 1: Main Report

Part 2: Area Profiles

Part 3: Playing Pitch Strategy

2.0 Methodology The study has been informed by the PPG17 guidance highlighted above and has followed the following six key stages:

Step 1: Strategic Overview

Step 2: Identify local needs

Step 3: Audit local provision

Step 4: Set provision standards

Step 5: Apply the provision standards

Step 6: Draft policies / recommendations

3.0 Strategic Overview This section includes a review of national, regional and local policy. The focus is on reviewing previous standards and policies from the four district authorities that combined in 2009 to form Wiltshire Council. From this a review of the current Wiltshire Local Plan is made and links between local policy and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) highlighted.

4.0 Local Needs Assessment The report has examined local need for a wide range of different kinds of recreational open space. It has drawn upon a range of survey and analytical techniques including a review of consultation findings from relevant play, sports, leisure and open space studies. Questionnaire surveys were undertaken as below:

A general household and online survey

A survey of town and parish Councils

Local groups and organisations’ survey

Survey of sports national governing bodies; league secretaries and local clubs.

DRAFT


In addition to the above a series of one to one stakeholder interviews was undertaken. The result of this consultation and other analyses will help amongst other things to inform the content of the recommended local standards. Crucially it has also helped the study to understand local people’s appreciation of open space, sport and recreation facilities, and the wider green infrastructure and the values attached by the community to the various forms of open spaces and facilities. This appreciation will have clear implications for the way in which green infrastructure, open spaces and sports facilities are treated and designated in the Wiltshire Local Plan.

5.0 Audit of Local Provision The audit of local provision has included a comprehensive mapping and audit process to collate data on the current provision and quality of open space across Wiltshire. Over 3,000 open spaces have been mapped onto a GIS system, and broken down into individual open space typologies (see section xx below). In addition to this, over 450 sites from previous audits were entered onto a revised quality audit database and 300 site audits undertaken at key sites across Wiltshire.

6.0 Proposed standards of provision The information from the assessment of local needs and the audit of provision has been used to develop standards of provision for open space, sports and recreation facilities. The standards have three aspects – Quantity, Access and Quality – and they are summarised below: 6.1 Proposed open space standards (quantity and access) The proposed standards for open space have been split into three ‘analysis areas’ as summarised in the tables below: Urban Analysis Areas

Typology Quantity standards (ha/1000 population)

Access standard

Allotments 0.20 480 metres or 10 minutes’ walk time

Amenity green space 1.50 480 metres or 10 minutes’ walk time

Parks, Sport and Recreation Grounds

1.20 to include both public and private grounds (excluding education sites)

600 metres or 12-13 minutes’ walk time

Play Space (Children) 0.05 480 metres or 10 minutes’ walk time

Play Space (Youth) 0.02 600 metres or 12-13 minutes’ walk time

DRAFT


Rural Analysis Areas


Access standard

Allotments 0.25 (for new provision) 480 metres or 10 minutes’ walk time

Recreation Space 3.00 to include both public and private grounds (excluding education sites)


Play Space (Children and Youth)

0.07 600 metres or 12-13 minutes’ walk time

Natural Green Space Analysis

Typology

Quantity standards (ha/1000 population)

Access standard For assessing current and future provision

Requirement from new development

Natural Green Space

ANGSt 1.50 to be provided within the amenity green space standard

ANGSt

6.2 Open space standards (quality) All open space has been assessed against quality standards outlined in the PPG17 guidance and ‘Green Flag’ standards. A comprehensive database of the quality scores of all sites has been developed and used to identify priorities for improving the quality of open space across the District.

7.0 Application of the standards The standards outlined above have been used to identify existing deficiencies or surplus in the quantity, access and quality of facilities across Wiltshire. The following summarises the key findings made across Wiltshire:

There are significant differences in the levels of provision in ‘urban’ areas compared to ‘rural’ areas;

The provision of open space varies greatly across Wiltshire, with some areas with significant deficiencies and other areas meeting the standard;

All analysis areas have a deficiency in at least one open space typology;

The analysis has identified the need for action plans to be developed at a local level (Community Area Board) and through neighbourhood plans.

DRAFT


8.0 Policies and recommendations The policies and recommendations that are made in the study identify where new provision is required and where provision needs to be enhanced, protected or relocated. The following identifies the key findings for open space:

New provision. Open space should be provided as part of new development in line with the Wiltshire standard. Where it is not practical to provide open space on site, there should be new provision off site or enhancement to existing facilities.

Enhanced provision. Key sites for improvement have been identified through the study, and opportunities to improve sites through development and external funding need to be sought.

Protected provision. Public open space should be afforded protection through planning policy. There is little opportunity for disposing of open space, unless there is a greater community need and/or alternative provision can be provided.

Relocated provision. With significant variation in supply across Wiltshire, neighbourhood plans need to consider addressing the ‘balance’ between different types of open space.

DRAFT


1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Overview This report is an open space study for Wiltshire Council. The study has been undertaken by Ethos Environmental Planning and covers the period up to 2026, which is the current timescale for the local plan. The study has been carried out in-line with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (Para 73 and 74). Since the adoption of the NPPF, there have been major changes to national planning policy. Open space assessment has primarily been affected by the omission of Planning Policy Guidance Note 17 (PPG 17) from the new national policy framework. Whilst the government has not published anything specifically to replace this document (it does signpost the Sport England guidance for sports facilities assessments1), there is however, still a clear reference made in the new guidance to the principles and ideology established within PPG17. As such the underlying principles of this study have been informed by the former guidance provided in ‘Planning Policy Guidance Note 17: Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation’, and its Companion Guide ‘Assessing Needs and Opportunities’, which is a tried and tested methodology and takes a consistent approach with many other local authorities.

1.2 Scope of Study and Objectives 1.2.1 Overall Aim of the Study The aims of the study are to provide a robust assessment of needs and deficiencies in open spaces upon which emerging policy within the revised Wiltshire Core Strategy should be based, and create an up to date evidence base which can be maintained to aid implementation of the policies and the provision of open spaces during the plan period (2026). 1.2.2 Scope of Study and Objectives The study covers all forms of public open space as referred to in Annex A of the PPG17 Companion Guide. Indoor facilities are not included. In order to deliver the aims of the study, the following objectives will be met:

Evaluate the quantity, quality and accessibility of open space, sports and recreational facilities for all Community Areas, identifying any specific needs or deficiencies;

Identify mechanisms to meet future needs including recommendations for appropriate standards of provision by new development;

Provide a robust and comprehensive evidence base to underpin the development and implementation of detailed planning policies, and facilitate the management future management of open space and recreational assets;

1 http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/open-space-sports-and-recreation-facilities-public-rights-of-way-and-local-green-space/open-space-sports-and-recreation-facilities

DRAFT

http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/open-space-sports-and-recreation-facilities-public-rights-of-way-and-local-green-space/open-space-sports-and-recreation-facilities

http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/open-space-sports-and-recreation-facilities-public-rights-of-way-and-local-green-space/open-space-sports-and-recreation-facilities


To provide information to justify the collection of developer contributions towards open space;

To provide information to help to inform the spending of Community Infrastructure Levy.

1.3 Key Stages The study follows 5 key stages as summarised below:

Step 1 – Identifying Local Needs

Step 2 – Audit of Existing Open Space Assets

Step 3 – Setting Local Standards

Step 4 – Applying Local Standards

Step 5 – Drafting Policy Recommendations 1.4 The Study Area 1.4.1 Overview Wiltshire Council was formed as a unitary authority in 2009, replacing the former Wiltshire County Council and four district councils – Kennet, North Wiltshire, Salisbury and West Wiltshire. This makes Wiltshire Council one of the largest local authorities in England with a population of over 470,982 covering a land area of almost 3,500km2. It is a very rural county, with an average population density of 141 persons per square kilometre. The area with the highest population density is Salisbury City, with 2,145 persons per square kilometre. For the rest of Wiltshire the highest, but more modest, population densities are found in the north and west market towns of Trowbridge, Bradford-on-Avon, Chippenham, Melksham, Corsham and Westbury. Salisbury apart, the southern area of the county has generally lower population densities, with the community areas of Mere, Pewsey, Wilton and Tisbury all having fewer than 55 persons per square kilometre. The population of Salisbury is expected to grow by over 50,000 by 2026, which is mostly accounted for by the aging population. The relocation of the army to a new super garrison at Salisbury Plain will also see an acute rise in populations at the villages surrounding the plains due to the rebasing of 4,000 troops and their families.

DRAFT


1.4.3 Community Area Boards In 2009, eighteen Community Area Boards (CABs) were established, one for each community area, with the exception of Mere, Tisbury and Wilton, which are together covered by the South West Wiltshire Area Board. The Area Boards for Wiltshire Council are as follows (as shown on figure 1): • Amesbury • Bradford-on-Avon • Calne • Chippenham • Corsham • Devizes • Malmesbury • Marlborough • Melksham • Pewsey Figure 1 Community Area Boards

• Salisbury • Southern Wiltshire • South West Wiltshire • Tidworth • Trowbridge • Warminster • Westbury • Royal Wootton Bassett & Cricklade

The CABs have been used as the starting point for defining the analysis areas for the open space study as outlined in the following section.

DRAFT


1.4.4 Open space analysis areas In order to analyse the current provision and future requirements for open space across Wiltshire, it is necessary to define ‘open space analysis areas’. A number of factors have been taken into account when determining these anlaysis areas, including the distribution and density of the population, physical geography and barriers (e.g. hills, major roads), existing administrative and planning areas and proposals for future population growth. In Wiltshire, the 18 Community Areas Boards have been the starting point for defining the analysis areas. The second key factor being the significant differences in population distriubution, varying from urban areas to very rural areas. The analysis areas have thus been split into the Community Area Boards, but with Urban areas seperated. This results in two levels of analysis:

1. Urban Analysis Areas. These areas comprise the larger towns and villages with a population above 3500 peoople (2011 Census). Whilst some of these areas may not be seen to be ‘urban’ by the local community (particularly when compared to larger towns and cities), this term has been used for the purpose of the assessment.

2. Rural Analysis Areas. These areas comprise the smaller towns and villages with a population below 3500 people (2011 Census).

It is acknowledged that there are a number of villages with a population just below 3500, as such there is a ‘borderline’ of villages which could be classed as ‘urban’ or ‘rural’, however, best judgement has been made and it is considered that the split of urban and rural is appropriate for the analysis. The current split of areas has used the 2011 census data, and whilst it is recognised that populations will change within the local plan period (2026), the proposed distribuition of housing will not fundamentally change the ‘urban/rural’ split.

DRAFT


Figure 2 Urban and Rural Analysis Areas (black labels are Urban Areas, red labels are Rural Areas)

The following Parishes which fall within the Urban Area Analysis have been merged for the purpose of the analysis because several open spaces overlap the analysis boundaries:

Trowbridge and Hilperton (combined population: 37,205);

Devizes and Roundway (combined population: 17,005);

Melksham and Melksham Without (combined population: 21,907). 1.4.4 Population Community Area Boards The population of the defined study area is shown in Table 1 below. The study has drawn on census data from 2011 using; (LC1105EW - Population Density, Office for National Statistics). The total population under the jurisdiction of Wiltshire Council is 470,570 people. The table below in Figure 3 provides a summary of population by Area Board and also shows the number of parishes in each Area Board. Chippenham, Trowbridge and Salisbury and the 3 largest Area Boards in terms of population count, with Bradford-On-Avon and Marlborough being the smallest. However, as highlighted in Section 1.4.1 of the report, there are areas of higher population density in the towns, with Salisbury seeing the highest population density and even smaller towns like Bradford-On-Avon registering relatively high.

CAB

DRAFT


Table 1 Population by CAB in Wiltshire (2011 census)

Community Area Board Population No. Of Parishes Size (Ha)

Amesbury 32,874 22 31421

Bradford-On-Avon 17,935 9 5919

Calne 23,168 7 13172

Chippenham 45,367 16 16021

Corsham 20,656 4 7623

Devizes 32,062 18 21642

Malmesbury 19,439 20 24493

Marlborough 17,953 19 28108

Melksham 28,343 11 9847

Pewsey 13,945 26 26837

Royal Wootton Bassett & Cricklade 28,749 12 15457

Salisbury 45,774 2 2744

South West Wiltshire 22,037 38 43247

Southern Wiltshire 17,768 14 21138

Tidworth 19,228 11 18307

Trowbridge 41,649 5 4167

Warminster 24,454 20 28048

Westbury 19,581 6 7328

Totals 470,982 260 325,521

Population of Urban and Rural Analysis Areas The population of the urban and rural analysis areas has been calculated using the 2011 census data for parishes and the CABs, as shown in table 2. The first column in the table shows each Community Area Board with the total population (columns 2), then the population in the rural areas i.e. excluding the urban area population (column 3). Columns 4 lists the urban analysis areas with the corresponding population in the final column.

DRAFT


Table 2 Population of urban and rural analysis areas

1.5 Structure of the report The open space study is presented in two key parts. Part 1, the Main Report follows the five key stages as outlined in section 1.3. Part 2 comprises the Area Profiles that have been developed for the 18 Community Area Boards defined by Wiltshire Council. The area profiles are provided as a separate report so that they can be used by parishes to inform their neighbourhood plans as and when required. It is intended that the area profiles would be used and read alongside the main report.

Community Area Board

Total Population in

CAB

Rural Population

in CAB Urban areas in CAB

Urban Area

Population

Amesbury Area Board 32874 10570 Amesbury 10724

Durrington 7379

Bulford 4201

Bradford on Avon Area Board 17935 8533 Bradford on Avon 9402

Calne Area Board 23168 5905 Calne 17263

Chippenham Area Board 45367 9537 Chippenham 35830

Corsham Area Board 20656 4131 Corsham 13000

Box 3525

Devizes Area Board 32062 15057

Devizes & Roundway

(merged) 17005

Malmesbury Area Board 19439 14059 Malmesbury 5380

Marlborough Area Board 17953 9558 Marlborough 8395

Melksham Area Board 28343 6436

Melksham &

Melksham Without

(merged) 21907

Pewsey Area Board 13945 10311 Pewsey 3634

Salisbury Area Board 45774 0 Sailsbury 45774

South West Wiltshire Area Board 22037 18458 Wilton 3579

Southern Wiltshire Area Board 17768 12296 Laverstock 5472

Tidworth Area Board 19228 4180 Tidworth 10621

Ludgershall 4427

Trowbridge Area Board 41649 4444

Trowbridge and

Hilperton (merged) 37205

Warminster Area Board 24454 6964 Warminster 17490

Westbury Area Board 19581 4872 Westbury 14709

Royal Wootton Bassett and

Cricklade Area Board 28749 3964 Royal Wooton Bassett 11385

Purton 4228

Cricklade 4227

Lyneham and Bradenstoke4945

Total 470982 149275 321707

DRAFT


2.0 METHODOLOGY 2.1 General The starting point for this study has been the guidance in Section 8 of the NPPF, which adheres to but has superseded PPG17. The new policy gives clear recommendations for the protection of and appropriate provision for open space, however it does not provide any detailed guidance on how to conduct an open space assessment. It is therefore both logical and acceptable to reference the guidance for assessment provided in the former PPG17 and its Companion Guide. PPG17 placed a requirement on local authorities to undertake assessments and audits of open space, sports and recreational facilities in order to:

identify the needs of the population;

identify the potential for increased use;

establish an effective strategy for open space/sports/recreational facilities at the local level.

The Companion Guide to PPG17 recommended an overall approach to this kind of study as summarised below:

Figure 3 Summary of methodology

Within this overall approach the Companion Guide suggests a range of methods and techniques that might be adopted in helping the assessment process. Where appropriate, these methods and techniques have been employed within this study and are explained at the relevant point in the report. In addition, they are summarised in the paragraphs below.

Step 1: Identify local needs

Step 2: Audit local

provision

Step 3: Set provision

standards

Step 4: Apply the provision

standards

Step 5: Draft Policies /

Recommendations

DRAFT


2.2 Identifying Local Need (Step 1) The report examines identified local need for various types of open space, sports and recreational opportunities. It has drawn upon a range of survey and analytical techniques as well as a detailed review of existing consultation data and other relevant documentation. The report details the community consultation and research process that has been undertaken as part of the study as well as the main findings. The findings of this assessment are summarised in this document and full details are provided as an appendix.

2.3 Audit of Existing Open Space Assets (Step 2) 2.3.1 Defining the scope of the audit In order to build up an accurate picture of the current open space and play provision in Wiltshire, an audit of assets was carried out, this included:

analysis of existing GIS data held by Wiltshire Council;

desktop mapping of open space from aerial photography;

questionnaires to town and parish councils;

liaison with council officers;

discussions with local user groups and clubs. Due to the limitation of resources available for this study, site audits were undertaken at 300 sites. These audits focused on larger multi-functional open spaces, and included an assessment of playing pitch provision in line with Sport England Guidance (see separate playing pitch strategy). 2.3.2 Approach to mapping As part of the audit process, sites were mapped into their different functions using a multi-functional approach to mapping. The advantage of the multi-functional approach is that it gives a much more accurate picture of the provision of open space. This is more advantageous than the primary typology approach which tends to result in an over assessment of provision, and which can significantly impact decisions on quantity standards. The differences in approach are demonstrated in figures 4 and 5 below:

DRAFT


Figure 4 Primary approach to open space mapping

Figure 5 Multi-functional mapping of open space

DRAFT


2.4 Set and Apply Provision Standards (Steps 3 and 4) Local provision standards have been set, with three components, embracing:

quantity;

accessibility;

quality. Quantity The GIS database and mapping has been used to assess the existing provision of open space across different urban and rural analysis areas (see section 1.4.4). The existing levels of provision are considered alongside findings of previous studies, the local needs assessment and consideration of existing and national standards or benchmarks. The key to developing robust local quantity standards is that they are locally derived, based on evidence and most importantly achievable. Typically standards are expressed as hectares per 1000 people. The recommended standards are then used to assess the supply of each type of open space by CAB. Access Evidence from previous studies, the needs assessment and consideration of national benchmarks are used to develop access standards for open space. Typically standards are expressed as straight line walk times. A series of maps assessing access for different typologies are presented in the report. Quality Quality standards have been developed drawing on previous studies, national benchmarks and good practice, evidence from the needs assessment and the findings of the quality audits. The quality standards also include recommended policies to guide the provision of new open space through development in the future.

2.5 Drafting Policy Recommendations (Step 5) This section outlines higher level strategic options which may be applicable at town, parish community area board and study area wide level. The strategic options address five key areas:

1. Existing provision to be protected; 2. Existing provision to be enhanced; 3. Opportunities for re-location/re-designation of open space; 4. Identification of areas for new provision; 5. Facilities that may be surplus to requirement.

In addition, this section will also draw a number of conclusions in relation to the requirements of the brief, specifically:

DRAFT


To provide recommendations in relation to onsite or offsite provision required as a consequence of new developments, including commuted sums for maintenance or establishment;

To propose draft wording for inclusion in the new policy within the WCS;

To identify alternative mechanism for meeting local need such as community asset transfer of land, adoption and management of open spaces by town and parish councils, use of CIL receipts and externally funded projects.

DRAFT


3.0 STRATEGIC CONTEXT This section sets out a brief review of the most relevant national, regional and local policies related to the study, which have been considered in developing the methodology and findings of the study. Policies and strategies are subject to regular change, therefore the summary provided in this section was considered to be correct at the time of writing. Wiltshire Council reserve the right to change and update this section as policies change.

3.1 Introduction The transition period to incorporate the NPPF into local policy, has resulted in some disparity between the old policy and the new. Where feasible, these issues have been highlighted and explained. The policy overview includes analysis of the councils’ existing policy and the forthcoming development documents to ensure clarity and consistency with the new national policy as outlined in the strategy brief. Other strategies of relevance at national, regional and local levels have also been considered and an assessment of their implications for the provision of open space undertaken. In addition, the relationship between the proposed study and other relevant council strategies and initiatives is outlined. The PPG17 companion guide identified the importance of understanding the implications of existing strategies on the study. Specifically, before initiating local consultation, there should be a review of existing national, regional and local plans and strategies, and an assessment of the implementation and effectiveness of existing planning policies and provision standards.

3.2 National Strategic Context 3.2.1 National Planning Policy Framework In April 2012, the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published and previous planning guidance related to open space (PPG17 – Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation and Companion Guide) was archived in March 2014 The NPPF sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how they should be applied. The NPPF must be adhered to in the preparation of local and neighbourhood plans, and is a material consideration in planning decisions. The NPPF contains the following references that relate to green infrastructure and open spaces: Achieving Sustainable Development - Core Planning Principles: Para 17: Within the overarching roles that the planning system ought to play, a set of core land-use planning principles should underpin both plan-making and decision-taking, these 12 principles include:

DRAFT


promote mixed use developments, and encourage multiple benefits from the use of land in urban and rural areas, recognising that some open land can perform many functions (such as for wildlife, recreation, flood risk mitigation, carbon storage, or food production);

actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling, and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable; and

take account of and support local strategies to improve health, social and cultural well-being for all, and deliver sufficient community and cultural facilities and services to

meet local needs. Para 58 - Local and neighbourhood plans should develop robust and comprehensive policies that set out the quality of development that will be expected for the area. Such policies should be based on stated objectives for the future of the area and an understanding and evaluation of its defining characteristics. Planning policies and decisions should aim to ensure that developments:

optimise the potential of the site to accommodate development, create and sustain an appropriate mix of uses (including incorporation of green and other public space as part of developments) and support local facilities and transport networks.

create safe and accessible environments where crime and disorder, and the fear of crime, do not undermine quality of life or community cohesion; and

are visually attractive as a result of good architecture and appropriate landscaping. Para 73 - Access to high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and recreation can make an important contribution to the health and well-being of communities. Planning policies should be based on robust and up-to-date assessments of the needs for open space, sports and recreation facilities and opportunities for new provision. The assessments should identify specific needs and quantitative or qualitative deficits or surpluses of open space, sports and recreational facilities in the local area. Information gained from the assessments should be used to determine what open space, sports and recreational provision is required. Para 75 - Planning policies should protect and enhance public rights of way and access. Local authorities should seek opportunities to provide better facilities for users, for example by adding links to existing rights of way networks including National Trails. Para 99 - Local Plans should take account of climate change over the longer term, including factors such as flood risk, coastal change, water supply and changes to biodiversity and landscape. New development should be planned to avoid increased vulnerability to the range of impacts arising from climate change. When new development is brought forward in areas which are vulnerable, care should be taken to ensure that risks can be managed through suitable adaptation measures, including through the planning of green infrastructure. Para 109 - The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:

recognising the wider benefits of ecosystem services;

DRAFT


minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contributing to the Government’s commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity, including by establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures.

Para 114 - Local planning authorities should:

set out a strategic approach in their Local Plans, planning positively for the creation, protection, enhancement and management of networks of biodiversity and green infrastructure; and

maintain the character of the undeveloped coast, protecting and enhancing its distinctive landscapes, particularly in areas defined as Heritage Coast, and improve public access to and enjoyment of the coast.

Para 158 - Using a proportionate evidence base Each local planning authority should ensure that the Local Plan is based on adequate, up-to-date and relevant evidence about the economic, social and environmental characteristics and prospects of the area. Local planning authorities should ensure that their assessment of and strategies for housing, employment and other uses are integrated, and that they take full account of relevant market and economic signals.

3.2.2 National Standards (Natural Green Space): Governing bodies have put forward national standards for different green space typologies in order to allow local authorities who do not have an up to date local set of standards to employ green space standards based on national average. These standards do not always meet the local needs of residents or take into account the peculiarities of a said area. However as national standards have been used in previous greenspace studies for Wiltshire they are broadly outlined below. The Natural England Accessible Natural Greenspace standard is:

• that no person should live more than 300m from their nearest area of natural greenspace of at least 2ha in size

• provision of at least 1ha of Local Nature Reserve per 1,000 population • that there should be at least one accessible 20ha site within 2km from home • that there should be one accessible 100ha site within 5km • that there should be one 500ha site within 20 km.

The Woodland Trust standard for natural and semi-natural greenspace is:

• no person should live more than 500m from at least one area of accessible woodland of no less than 2ha in size

• there should be also be at least one area of accessible woodland of no less than 20ha within 4km (8km round-trip) of people’s homes.

DRAFT


3.2.3 Field in Trust (FIT) Standards Since ‘The Six Acre Standard’ was last published in 2001, governments throughout the United Kingdom have more clearly defined and adopted polices for planning standards for open space, sport and recreation including outdoor facilities for sport and play. Those policies call for the local determination and adoption of standards relating to quantity, quality and accessibility. In 2006, Fields in Trust developed a revised set of benchmark standards as a tool for assisting in the development of local standards. The recommendations are very similar to the previous recommendations in the ‘The Six Acre Standard’, as summarised below: Figure 6 Summary of FIT standards Playing Pitches

All Outdoor Sport

Children’s Play Space

DRAFT


3.2.4 The Natural Environment White Paper (NEWP) The Natural Choice: securing the value of nature (2011) The white paper2 recognised that a healthy natural environment is the foundation of sustained economic growth, prospering communities and personal wellbeing. It sets out how the value of nature can be mainstreamed across our society by facilitating local action; strengthening the connections between people and nature; creating a green economy and showing leadership in the EU and internationally. It sets out 92 specific commitments for action. The white paper recognises the benefits of green infrastructure and encourages local action, including:

the establishment of a green infrastructure partnership and support for the development of Local Nature Partnerships;

the creation of Nature Improvement Areas aimed at reversing the decline and fragmentation of wildlife habitats;

the establishment of a new Green Areas Designation to protect local green spaces;

recognising the value of ecosystem services at a landscape scale.

3.2.5 Sport England Strategy 2012-17 (creating a sporting habit for life) The 2012-17 Youth and Community Strategy for Sport England was launched in January 20123. It describes how Sport England will invest over £1 billion of National Lottery and Exchequer funding over five years into four main areas of work:

National Governing Body (NGB) 2013-17 funding;

facilities;

local investment; and

the ‘School Games’.

2 http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm80/8082/8082.pdf 3 http://www.sportengland.org/media/130949/DCMS-Creating-a-sporting-habit-for-life-1-.pdf

DRAFT

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm80/8082/8082.pdf

http://www.sportengland.org/media/130949/DCMS-Creating-a-sporting-habit-for-life-1-.pdf


The overall ambition is to increase the number of people who play sports regularly and reduce the number of young people who stop playing when they finish school. Funding for governing bodies will be tied to their own specific participation targets. Goals for 2012-17 include:

all of the 4,000 secondary schools in England will be offered a community sport club on its site with a direct link to one or more NGBs, depending on the local clubs in its area;

county sports partnerships will be given new resources to create effective links locally between schools and sport in the community;

all secondary schools who wish to do so will be helped to open up, or keep open, their sports facilities for local community use and at least a third of these will receive additional funding to make this happen;

at least 150 further education colleges will benefit from full-time sports professional who will act as a ‘College Sport Maker’;

three quarters of university students aged 18-24 will get the chance to take up a new sport or continue playing a sport they played at school or college;

1000 of the most disadvantaged local communities will get a ‘Door Step Club’;

a minimum of 30 sports will have enhanced ‘England Talent Pathways’ to ensure young people and others fulfil their potential;

2000 young people on the margins of society will be encouraged by the Dame Kelly Holmes Legacy Trust into sport, gaining new life skills at the same time; and

building on the early success of ‘Places People Play’, a further £100m will be invested in facilities for the most popular sports, for example new artificial pitches and upgrading local swimming pools.

3.2.6 Conclusion To reflect and meet the obligations of the National Policy Context for open space provision, the adoption of this document and the strategic framework it provides will enable a consistent policy approach for open space planning and investment to be applied in Wiltshire, ensuring that opportunities are not missed. In addition, as a strategic open space framework, this document can, by setting out local open space intentions, provide a single point of reference to evidence conformity with existing and emerging national policies.

3.3 Local and Regional Context 3.3.1 Previous Open Space Studies The current local plan policies set different standards for provision across the four former districts of Wiltshire, and are based on open space studies which are now relatively out of date. Brief review of previous studies undertaken before 2009 when Wiltshire became a unitary authority are outlined below.

DRAFT


3.3.2 North Wiltshire Open Space Study (2004) The North Wiltshire Open Space Study (2004) uses a hierarchy system to differentiate between different types of open space within the catchment as per the table below. The hierarchy system is based on the London Planning Advisory Committee hierarchical system which was developed to map and assess green spaces within the City of London.

Figure 7 Adopted North Wiltshire Open Space Hierarchy

Problems may arise when using this type of system in more rural areas where the size of green space may be larger, but the scope and supply of green space could be smaller and local distinctiveness is more pronounced. The hierarchy is not consistent as some types of open greenspace are omitted; play spaces and allotments. The hierarchy does not offer specific standards for the assessment area and the standards for the ‘other types’ of open greenspace not included in the hierarchy are based on national standards. As detailed in the report these have been widely criticised. For the North Wiltshire OSS, Open Space (0S), level 4 of the hierarchy is not included in the POS calculations. Play areas are based on the NFPA standards of 0.2 – 0.3 ha per 1000 population and allotments provision is based on the NSALG national standards of 0.25 ha per 1000 population. Showing a shortfall of 2.25 ha with demand expected to rise. Lack of conformity with the assessment makes the document difficult to interpret and may cause inconsistency in the application of the provisions suggested.

DRAFT


3.3.4 South Wiltshire OS Audit (2007) – Salisbury and surrounding catchment The South Wiltshire Audit is generally comprehensive in terms of setting and justifying standards where relevant, the main findings of the report are as follows: Natural and semi-natural open greenspace: The report does not seek to set a local standard for this typology as the current supply meets national standards set by the Woodland Trust and Natural England as outlined in Section 3.2.2 of this report. Specifically, the South Wiltshire audit suggests that the Council concentrated on improving quality and access where possible. Amenity greenspace: Standards for amenity greenspace were set at 1.05 ha per 100 population and 10 minutes’ walk time or (800m distance). Figures 8 a-d below shows the deficiencies for each sub-area designated in the study: Figure 8a Standards for amenity greenspace

Play space and youth space: Standards for children’s play space were set at 0.1 ha per 1000 population and 10 minutes’ walk time or (800m distance). The table below shows the deficiencies for each sub-area designated in the study: Figure 8b Standards for children’s play space

DRAFT


Standards for young people were set at 0.2 ha per 1000 population and 15 minutes’ walk time. The table below shows the deficiencies for each sub-area designated in the study: Figure 8c Standards for young people

Allotments: The standards set for allotments include both urban and rural settings. The urban recommendation is 0.55 ha per 1000 population and the rural standard is 0.38 ha per 1000 population. Both access standards are set at 15 minutes’ walk time. The table below shows the deficiencies for each sub-area designated in the study: Figure 8d Standards for allotments

Outdoor Sports Facilities: The standards set for outdoor sports facilities include an urban standard relating to Salisbury City (which is 4.9 ha per 1000 population) and a lower figure of 2.4 ha per 1000 population for a rural standard which covers the rest of the study area. The urban access is set at 20 minutes’ walk time and the rural is 20 minutes’ walk time. It was suggested in the report that due to demand for outdoor sports facilities it would be prudent of the Council to assess the current status of dual-use agreements for local educational facilities. In addition there was recommendation to carry out a separate Playing Pitch Strategy for the South Wiltshire area.

DRAFT


Green Corridors: The study concluded that the need for green corridors arises from the need to promote environmentally sustainable forms of transport such as walking and cycling within urban areas. This means that there is no sensible way of stating a provision standard, just as there is no way of having a standard for the proportion of land in an area which it will be desirable to allocate for roads. The rural nature of the majority of Wiltshire demands strategic green linkages. The audit highlights the opportunities to develop further pathways along the routes of the rivers, as well as developing existing rights of way to link with or form cycle routes.

3.3.5 West Wiltshire Leisure and Recreational Needs Assessment (2007) The Study was an updated review from the initial audit taken in 2005 and saw the inclusion of extra typologies allowing for a more accurate review of the current greenspace provision in the study area. The following greenspace standards were also derived from the study:

• Allotments: 1.5 sq m/person • Bowling greens: 0.2 sq m/person • Equipped play areas for children: 0.5 sq m per person • Multi-functional greenspaces: 12 sq m/person • Sport pitches and courts: 10 sq m per person • Teenage facilities: 0.25 sq m per person • Urban parks and gardens 1.3 sq m person.

As part of the study, the provision standards were applied to the five main towns in the study area to identify overall shortfalls or surpluses in provision. This process identified an overall surplus of provision in each of the towns except Westbury, although some forms of provision appeared to be in deficit and others in surplus. The study also highlighted the following issues for the future of open space, sport and recreation provision in West Wiltshire:

• Levels of provision – in some areas there is too much greenspace and the land could be more efficiently managed • Countryside access and the canals – local residents would like better access to these facilities • Greenspace management and maintenance – needs to be improved • Indoor sports provision – 8 public facilities within 5 towns and close proximity seems excessive and should be re-addressed • Provision for children’s play – there are a substantial amount of small facilities with older/ traditional equipment which could be improved upon • Provision for outdoor sports – inadequate provision especially in Westbury and Trowbridge

DRAFT


• Provision for teenagers - generally inadequate although Melksham has a suitable skate park • Provision for water sports – although resource is limiting there is potential to promote further use of the canals and encouraging boating etc. • Tree cover – low level of tree cover across the study area is extremely apparent • Working with schools – the use of community use agreements across the study area is generally poor and could be developed • Funding – needs addressing, effective management of spaces can help improve maintenance ability and efficiency • The future of Southwick Country Park – limited facilities available and competition from other local greenspace (masterplan suggested to re-design and reinvigorate the park).

3.3.6 Kennet District Council Community benefits from Planning (2005) This document includes policy and standard on open space provision required from new development as summarised below: Figure 9 Open space standards

3.3.7 Conclusion and Overview The four previous local open space audits which underpinned the studies outlined above were carried out using slightly different methodologies, therefore in 2010 the Council commissioned a piece of work to consolidate the datasets, bringing them together into a single GIS data layer. Further to these audits, the Council has continued to gather data on the quantity and quality of individual assets, however given the size of the county it was not considered feasible to reach a position where a comprehensive and up to date audit could be reached with the resources currently available in house. Local community groups have also gathered and submitted data on their own local open spaces, which has supplemented the data gathered by the Council although the quality, age and coverage of that data is variable, and most of it has not been digitised. This open space study will seek to address these

DRAFT


inconsistences and provide a robust and viable strategy base on which to inform and develop new green space strategy moving forward. The tables below taken from Topic Paper 11 (Green Infrastructure)4 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy give a comparison of standards used across the four districts of Kennet, Salisbury, West Wiltshire and North Wiltshire. Figure 10 Comparison of Standards for Green Space in Kennet, Salisbury, West Wiltshire and North Wiltshire

From the tables it is clear to see the lack of conformity and omissions in the data which will be addressed in this report.

4 http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/corestrategydocument?directory=Topic%20Papers&fileref=10

DRAFT

http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/corestrategydocument?directory=Topic%20Papers&fileref=10


3.3.8 Wiltshire Infrastructure Delivery Plan (2) 2011-2016 – September 2013 The Wiltshire Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) is designed to support the Wiltshire Core Strategy (WCS) and to help inform and underpin other planning policy documents. However, it also has a wider corporate role, from developing synergies with other council plans and strategies, to contributing to the council’s working relationship with key external partners such as the Swindon and Wiltshire Local Enterprise Partnership (SWLEP). The IDP provides a framework for making choices and determining investment priorities to deliver strategic objectives in an environment of finite resources. It seeks to provide a clear and consistent rationale for the investment priorities identified, including evidence of the local demographic, social, economic and environmental needs they will address. In addition, the IDP plans at a similar geography as the WCS, setting out requirements for Wiltshire-wide and Community Area-specific infrastructure as per the 20 Community Area Partnerships (CAPs) described earlier in this report. The IDP identifies funding sources for infrastructure, such as Section 106 agreements and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). It demonstrates the existence of a funding gap between the total cost of infrastructure and other sources of available funding. The funding gap justifies the need to introduce CIL in Wiltshire to help offset the costs of delivering wider more generalised forms of infrastructure requirements. The IDP also informs the council’s list of infrastructure projects funded wholly or in part by CIL, known as the ‘Regulation 123 list’. The Wiltshire Core Strategy sets out the amount and distribution of development up until 2026. Strategic Objective 6 of the Core Strategy focuses on “ensuring that adequate infrastructure is in place to support our communities”. This objective includes a list of key outcomes that the Core Strategy seeks in delivering infrastructure. Core Policy 3 sets out the council’s approach to the delivery of physical, social and green infrastructure requirements to support new development. This includes the securing of developer contributions to help fund infrastructure. The IDP is an important document in identifying the need for improved green infrastructure and in providing evidence in order to secure the continued protection and development of green infrastructure in Wiltshire. It is influenced by the Green Infrastructure Strategy as outlined below. 3.3.9 Wiltshire Core Strategy Green Infrastructure Topic Paper 11 (2012) Topic Paper 11 relating to Green Infrastructure (GI) in Wiltshire draws together findings from the previous four authorities and has been written to inform the Core Strategy which will set out an overarching strategy for the management and development of GI and greenspace when it is adopted in November 2014 up until the end of the plan period in 2026. Policy options have been considered relating to the protection and reinstatement of the historic alignment of the Wilts & Berks and Thames and Severn canals, to the protection of the proposed route of the Melksham link canal, and to sports, leisure and recreation based development in the Cotswold Water Park. These policy options were developed in direct response to concerns raised during the June 2011 consultation to inform the core strategy. The most appropriate policy approaches are considered to be the inclusion of policies

DRAFT


safeguarding the historic alignment of the canals, protecting the proposed Melksham link route, and supporting outdoor or water-based sports, leisure and recreation based development in the Cotswold Water Park, subject to fulfilment of certain criteria.

The local plans for the four former council areas of Kennet, Salisbury, North Wiltshire and West Wiltshire contain a number of “saved policies” which are relevant to green infrastructure. The local plans form part of the current Development Plan for Wiltshire and provide a local policy framework to guide development. The “saved” local plan policies will remain in place until replaced by policies in new Development Plan Documents (DPDs), including the Wiltshire Core Strategy. The table below shows an overview of the most relevant policies related to open space which are referenced in appendix D of the Local Plan, January 2015. Table 3 Overview of ‘saved policies’ to inform the WCS

Existing Policy To be replaced by WCS or continue to save?

Kennet District Local Plan - Adopted April 2004

HC34 Recreation provision on large housing sites

Continue to save

HC35 Recreation provision on small housing sites

Continue to save

TR17 Existing Outdoor Sport & Recreation Facilities

Continue to save

TR20 Protection of allotments Continue to save

North Wiltshire Local Plan 2011-Adopted June 2006

HE3 Historic Parks and Gardens

Replaced by CP58 (Ensuring conservation of the historic environment)

T4 Cycling, Walking and Public Transport Replaced by CP61 (Transport and development)

CF2 Leisure facilities and open space Continue to save.

CF3 Provisions of open space Continue to save.

West Wiltshire District Plan 1st Alteration- Adopted June 2004

C10 Local Nature Reserves

Replaced by CP50 (Biodiversity and Geodiversity) and CP52 (Green Infrastructure).

R7 Trowbridge Cricket Ground Continue to save.

R10 Poulton Field Bradford On Avon Continue to save.

R12 Allotments Continue to save.

T12 Footpaths and Bridleways

Replaced by CP60 (Sustainable transport), CP61 (Transport and development) and CP63 (Transport strategies).

West Wiltshire Leisure and Recreation DPD- Adopted February 2009

LP1 Protection and enhancement of existing open space or sport and recreation provision

Continue to save.

LP2 Proposals that involve the loss of open space or sport and recreation provision

Continue to save.

LP3 Review of low value sites Continue to save.

DRAFT


LP4 Providing recreation facilities in new developments

Continue to save.

LP5 New sport and recreation facilities Continue to save.

OS1 New artificial turf pitch provision Continue to save.

OS2 New grass pitch provision Continue to save.

CR1 Footpaths and rights of way Continue to save.

CR2 Country Parks Continue to save.

CR3 Greenspace Network Continue to save.

GM1 Maintenance of existing open space Continue to save.

GM2 Management and maintenance of new or enhanced open space

Continue to save.

GM3 Future management partnerships Continue to save.

YP1 Children’s play areas Continue to save.

YP2 Provision for teenagers Continue to save.

Salisbury District Local Plan 2011- Adopted June 2003

H17 Important Open Spaces within Housing Policy Boundaries

Continue to save.

H18 Amenity open space within Housing Policy Boundaries

Continue to save.

CN18 Historic Parks and Gardens

Replaced by CP58 (Ensuring conservation of the historic environment).

CN19 Environmental Enhancement

Replaced by CP52 (Green infrastructure), CP57 (Ensuring high quality design and place shaping) and CP58 (Ensuring the conservation of the historic environment).

C16 Local Nature Reserves

Replaced by CP50 (Biodiversity and Geodiversity).

R1A Sports and Leisure Continue to save.

R1C Outdoor Recreation Continue to save.

R2 Open Space Provision Continue to save.

R3 Open Space Provision Continue to save.

R5 Protection of Outdoor Facilities Continue to save.

R6 Urban Parks Continue to save.

R17 Public Rights of Way (Existing network) Replaced by CP52 (Green infrastructure).

R18 Public rights of way (increased access Replaced by CP52 (Green infrastructure).

R20 Allotments

Continue to save.

The key challenges and opportunities for the core strategy in relation to GI can be summarised as follows:

The need for a core strategy policy dealing specifically with green infrastructure, supporting green infrastructure projects and initiatives, and providing a link to the Wiltshire Green Infrastructure Strategy and the emerging Wiltshire-wide open space standards.

DRAFT


The need for a specific policy to support the restoration of the Wilts & Berks and Thames and Severn Canals.

The need for a specific policy to protect the proposed route for the Melksham Link canal.

The need for a core strategy policy dealing specifically with the Cotswold Water Park. The Topic Paper on GI offers a range of options to be tested via Sustainability Appraisal (SA) in order that the most relevant options be adopted into the Core Strategy to help protect and enhance GI in Wiltshire for the future. 3.3.10 Wiltshire Core Strategy The Wiltshire Core Strategy (WCS), adopted in January 2015, sets out the overall spatial policies for the development of Wiltshire up until 2026. This will include the amount and distribution of development, employment and infrastructure. Much of this development will have a bearing on green infrastructure in Wiltshire which is why the Core Strategy seeks to protect and enhance the green infrastructure network within Core Policy 52: 6.82 “Green infrastructure is a descriptive term used to characterise spaces such as parks and gardens (urban and country parks, formal gardens); amenity green space (informal and formal recreation and sports spaces, domestic gardens, village greens, green roofs); urban green spaces (urban commons, waste land and disturbed ground); woodland, downland and meadows, wetlands, open and running water, quarries; green corridors (rivers and canals including their banks, road and rail corridors, cycling routes, pedestrian paths, and rights of way); allotments, cemeteries, and churchyards. It provides socio-economic and cultural benefits which underpin individual and community health and wellbeing. These include: conserving and enhancing the natural environment; providing wildlife corridors; reducing noise and air pollution; and helping communities adapt to climate change through water and carbon management. In urban areas, functions include providing routes (e.g. footpaths and cycleways) which link areas of open space within settlements; providing sustainable drainage, flood storage and urban cooling; and providing a wide range of opportunities for engagement and active citizenship, relaxation and quiet contemplation, sport, recreation and children’s play. The section goes on to highlight a number of key priorities for the enhancement of the strategic green infrastructure network in Wiltshire which have already been identified, including: 6.85

the delivery of green infrastructure within the Cricklade Country Way, in line with the Green Infrastructure Plan for the Cricklade Country Way

the continued restoration and enhancement of the canal network in Wiltshire

the delivery of green infrastructure in the Cotswold Water Park, through the delivery of relevant objectives set out in the Cotswold Water Park Strategic Review and Implementation Plan (Master Plan)

the delivery of the objectives of the Great Western Community Forest Plan

DRAFT


the maintenance and enhancement of existing country parks, and the provision of new country parks in strategic locations

improvements to the rights of way network across Wiltshire to maintain access to the countryside and improve the quality of routes, through the delivery of relevant objectives set out in the Rights of Way Improvement Plan and

the development and improvement of sub-regional green corridors, including river corridors.

Notably, in relation to new development, the Core Strategy states: 6.88 “Development will need to make provision for accessible open spaces (such as parks, play areas, sports pitches and allotments) in accordance with the adopted Wiltshire Open Space Standards. Four sets of open space standards are currently in operation across Wiltshire, with different standards applying in each of the former district areas, and these will be used for the purposes of Core Policy 52 until such time as new Wiltshire-wide standards are adopted. The Wiltshire-wide standards are currently being produced and will be informed by an Open Spaces Study, to be completed in 2015, with the new standards adopted as part of the Partial Review of the Wiltshire Core Strategy (LDS) in 2016.” This point also highlights the importance of this audit report and emphasises the requirement to produce county wide standards for greenspace provision and management. Figure 12 Core Policy 52 of the WCS

DRAFT


3.3.11 Housing and Development in Wiltshire The Wiltshire Core Strategy sets out a settlement strategy5 for Wiltshire which identifies four tiers of settlements, namely:

Principle Settlements

Market Towns

Local Service Centres

Large and Small Villages Figure 13 below shows the key areas within this settlement strategy: Figure 13 Settlement Strategy for Wiltshire

Core Policy 2: Delivery strategy “Wiltshire’s proposed strategic housing requirement is set out against defined subcounty areas as identified within the Wiltshire Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA). However, in order to support the most sustainable pattern of growth, in line with the principles defined in Core Policy 1, indicative requirements are provided for each Principal Settlement, Market Town and by Community Area (see figure 5). The indicative figures also allow a flexible approach which will allow the council including through the preparation of the Site Allocations DPD and local communities preparing neighbourhood plans to respond positively to opportunities without being inhibited by an overly prescriptive, rigid approach which might

5 http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/core-strategy-adoption.pdf (P.34)

DRAFT

http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/core-strategy-adoption.pdf


otherwise prevent sustainable development proposals that can contribute to delivering the strategic objectives of the plan”. Figure 14 Housing figures from the Wiltshire Core Strategy

DRAFT


DRAFT


Figure 15: Core Policy 2: Settlement Strategy

DRAFT


3.3.13 Other Relevant Policy in Neighbouring Authorities The council has worked and will continue to work with neighbouring authorities to address cross-boundary service provision and the resolution of infrastructure concerns. For example, managing the impact of new development in Wiltshire and Swindon on Junctions 16 and 17 of the M4 is the subject of considerable work and discussion between Wiltshire Council, Swindon Borough Council and the Highways Authority. The council also works with Dorset County Council, which provides secondary school places for children living in the Mere Community Area. A Green Infrastructure Strategy for Swindon (2010 - 2026) Swindon‟s Green Infrastructure Strategy presents a vision for the development of a strategic green infrastructure network across the Borough of Swindon and reaching into neighbouring areas. The Strategy identifies three GI corridors at the strategic scale:

The Upper Thames

The Ridgeway

The River Ray/Sustrans Cycle Route 45. The Strategy also proposes six sub-regional corridors, including:

Swindon to Highworth

The Braydon Forest

The River Cole Corridor

The Wilts & Berks Canal to Wootton Bassett

Wroughton to Barbury Castle. The strategy notes that “ambitious plans are in place for the restoration of the historic canal network, linking the Wilts & Berks Canal, with the Thames and Severn canal via Swindon. Feasibility studies are currently being undertaken for routing the canal through the centre of Swindon”. The strategy also refers to the Swindon Central Area Action Plan, which “includes policies and proposals on green roofs, enhancing GI through Central Swindon and re-instatement of the canal through Swindon”. A Green Infrastructure Plan for the Cricklade Country Way (2007) The Cricklade Country Way (CCW) Project is seeking to create a recreational corridor linking urban Swindon and the Saxon town of Cricklade, the Cotswold Water Park and the River Thames. The key project elements include 5 miles of restored North Wilts canal, canal basins, moorings and marina. The Green Infrastructure Plan for the Cricklade Country Way (CCW) was published in 2007 as part of a Big Lottery Fund’s Living Landmarks scheme development grant awarded to the CCW partnership in September 2006. The GI Plan sets out a detailed project plan for the CCW

DRAFT


highlighting the significant GI benefits and opportunities that delivery of the plan would provide. The plan notes that “The construction of the canal, associated towpath, and cycle route along the CCW will create a ‘spine’ into which the existing footpath network can connect: unlocking the potential to develop a network of promoted circular walking routes linked to key ‘gateway’ points along the CCW corridor, to nearby settlements and to significant areas of open space” The plan also states that “Land acquisition and mitigation measures being considered in the development of the canal should also consider wider opportunities for habitat creation, in particular where any such work would be easily accessible for users of the CCW corridor. The semi-natural habitats typically associated with the line of canals/railway/cycle routes will form important connective features on completion of these routes as part of the CCW initiative. In addition, potential mitigation measures associated with the development of the canal, e.g. creation of wetland areas, would help to improve the viability of the core corridor as a connecting feature for wildlife”. One of the objectives identified under the theme of ‘re-connecting the landscape’ is to “create and improve semi-natural habitats including neutral grassland, wetland and associated features, hedgerows with a focus on key areas” including the planned route of the canal. An Urban Fringe Action Plan for Southern Swindon This Action Plan is a non-statutory plan for the southern urban fringe of Swindon, an area of strategic significance, providing the southern gateway to Swindon from the M4 and the bridge between Swindon and the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) to the south. The Action Plan was set out as a requirement in the AONB management plan. The Great Western Community Forest team are also currently working on the preparation of a Green Infrastructure Strategy for the urban fringes of Swindon beginning with the urban fringe area of southern Swindon. The Wiltshire Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) identifies local priorities for conservation most relevant to Wiltshire and sets out actions and targets for their conservation. It is prepared and delivered by a partnership of organisations including Wiltshire Council, Natural England, Environment Agency, Wiltshire Wildlife Trust, Forestry Commission, Wiltshire and Swindon Biological Records Centre, Cotswold Water Park Trust, and many others. The Wiltshire BAP works within the framework of the South West Biodiversity Delivery Plan and Integrates with the Cotswold Water Park Biodiversity Action Plan. Together these biodiversity action plans identify the priorities for the maintenance and enhancement of Wiltshire’s biodiversity and establish the biodiversity priorities which Wiltshire’s GI network should also deliver.

DRAFT


3.3.14 Site Based Plans There are a number of site based local level plans which are worth noting: Cranborne Chase and West Wiltshire Downs AONB Management Plan (2014 - 2019) This plan is the statutory management plan for the Cranborne Chase and West Wiltshire Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), as required by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. The plan sets out a vision for the AONB and presents a suite of objectives and policies, which are delivered through an annually reviewed rolling programme of actions. The plan contains a number of objectives, policies and actions relating to countryside recreation, leisure, public access and environmental enhancement. 68% of the AONB falls within Wiltshire and 44% of Wiltshire is covered by AONB designation. North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Management Plan (2014 - 2019) This plan is the statutory management plan for the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), as required by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. The plan sets out a vision for the AONB and presents a suite of objectives and policies, which are delivered through an annually reviewed rolling programme of actions. The plan contains a number of objectives, policies and actions relating to countryside recreation, leisure, public access and environmental enhancement, which includes the following specific GI action: “Ensure that ‘green infrastructure’ (new or enhanced biodiversity assets) is incorporated within the area of all medium or large-scale developments, both within or near the AONB”. Thirty-nine percent of the AONB falls within Wiltshire and forty-four percent of Wiltshire is covered by AONB designation. Cotswolds AONB Management Plan (2013 - 2018) This plan is the statutory management plan for the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), as required by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. The plan was prepared for the Cotswolds Conservation board following a review of the earlier 2004 management plan prepared for the then 17 constituent local authorities, and has been adopted by the Board. The plan is intended to provide direction for a period of around 20 years, although the focus is on policies and actions for the period 2008-2013. The plan contains a number of objectives, policies and actions relating to countryside recreation, leisure, public access and environmental enhancement, including: “Encourage the improvement of priority habitat and species conservation by extending and improving ecological connections between habitats at an appropriate mindscape scale”. Seven percent of the AONB falls within Wiltshire and forty-four percent of Wiltshire is covered by AONB designation. New Forest National Park Management Plan (2010 – 2015) This plan is currently under review, however, the current plan sets out a vision for how the National Park should look and function in 20 years’ time. The Management Plan sets out a

DRAFT


suite of strategic and aspirational targets to deliver the vision. The National Park provides a significant GI resource and a proportion of the Park is situated within south east Wiltshire. The Plan includes the following action relevant to GI: Agree and implement a recreation management strategy for the National Park. Avebury and Stonehenge Management Plans Both parts of the Stonehenge and Avebury WHS have their own management plans produced in 2009 and 2005 respectively. In April 2013 both local steering committees agreed that there should be a joint management plan for the whole of the Stonehenge, Avebury and Associated Sites WHS. A review of the management plans for both Avebury and Stonehenge was carried out in 2012 and 2013. This involved stakeholder workshops, drop in public consultation sessions, professional focus groups and a web-based questionnaire. A full public consultation took place on the draft Stonehenge and Avebury WHS Management Plan between 8 December 2014 and 1 March 2015. Cotswold Water Park Strategic Review and Implementation Plan (2008) This strategic master plan provides a 20 year vision to help guide the future development of the area known as the Cotswold Water Park (CWP). The aims of the master plan are around the area becoming a distinctive countryside and a premier site for nature conservation; offering a range of sports, leisure and recreation facilities; and presenting a quality visitor destination. Green Infrastructure is recognised as a key driver for sustainable development and environmental enhancement in the strategy. Relevant master plan objectives include: “Establish actual links between the countryside and settlements of the CWP using strong landscape features...securing the provision of open public spaces close to settlements; and the development of an integrated leisure infrastructure network.‟ “Develop a comprehensive and integrated network of leisure and recreation routes, designed to deliver a quality experience for all types of users, including walkers and hikers, dog walkers, cyclists, horse riders, runners and general sightseers; the network is to connect all parts of the CWP area and is to be fully integrated in respect of management and transport with all other components of the CWP to meet sustainability objectives.‟ The master plan includes specific references to the Thames and Severn and North Wilts Canals. The vision for the CWP in 2028 includes the statement that “the restored Thames and Severn Canal and North Wilts Canal are now hubs of different types of leisure activity, with a number of marinas providing ideal focal points with each consisting of moorings, pubs/restaurants, and retail as well as providing an attractive setting for small-scale office/business units”. The vision also includes an aspiration for a water-taxi system along the canal and for important nature reserves along the corridor of the Thames and Severn Canal. The master plan notes that “issues concerning the sustainability of maintaining the water levels within the Thames and Severn Canal are still to be fully resolved”. Despite the potential issues with hydrology, it is noted that “the towpath of the canal still represents an important resource for land-based leisure and recreation pursuits, in particular providing a potential axis route for walking and cycling across the CWP area”. The plan also lists

DRAFT


“conceptual developments and projects‟ including “Small-scale marinas at the main junctions between the Thames & Severn Canal and River Thames, and the Thames and Severn Canal and North Wilts Canal”. The CWP has delivered significant green infrastructure enhancements in North Wiltshire and Gloucestershire and has huge potential to deliver further enhancements, particularly through the appropriate restoration and after-use of current and future minerals workings. The Wiltshire Core Strategy provides a vital opportunity to increase the importance of the Cotswold Water Park Vision and Implementation Plan, helping to secure its implementation and delivery. The plan is the product of a major study and consultation exercise carried out in 2008, clearly identifying the major issues and opportunities facing this area and setting out a strategy to secure the long-term sustainable growth and prosperity of the area while protecting and enhancing its unique communities, heritage and environment. The plan identified planning policy as an „enabling driver‟, as the achievement of the core priorities will be dependent upon it. The plan recognises the lack of a consistent planning framework across the CWP area as an ongoing problem and a potential constraint to delivery of the master plan. The Wiltshire Core Strategy therefore represents an important opportunity to address these issues and contribute to delivery of the CWP Vision and Implementation Plan. A Restoration Strategy for the Completion and Future Development of the Wilts & Berks Canal (Wilts & Berks Canal Partnership, 2009) This strategy includes a vision to have completely restored a navigable waterway by 2025. The strategy sets out priorities for the project, and identifies linking to the national waterways network as the top priority. The following sections of the canal are listed in order of priority: 1. Kennet and Avon (Semington) to Melksham 2. The Navigable River Thames to Swindon 3. Melksham to Swindon 4. Abingdon to Swindon

DRAFT


4.0 LOCAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT (STEP 1)

4.1 Introduction Part One of the Wiltshire Open Spaces Study examined local need for a wide range of different kinds of recreational open space. It drew upon a range of survey and analytical techniques including a review of consultation findings from relevant play, sports, leisure and open space studies. The report detailed the community consultation and research process that was undertaken as part of the study as well as the main findings. The extent of the research reflected the breadth and diversity of the study and a consequent need to engage with as wide a cross section of the community and stakeholders as possible6. Questionnaire surveys were undertaken as below:

A general household and online survey

A survey of town and parish Councils

Local groups and organisations’ survey

Survey of sports national governing bodies; league secretaries and local clubs.

In addition to the above a series of one to one stakeholder interviews was undertaken. The result of this consultation and other analyses will help amongst other things to inform the content of the recommended local standards. Crucially it has also helped the study to understand local people’s appreciation of open space, sport and recreation facilities, and the wider green infrastructure and the values attached by the community to the various forms of open spaces and facilities. This appreciation will have clear implications for the way in which green infrastructure, open spaces and sports facilities are treated and designated in the Wiltshire Local Plan. This section summaries findings under 6 sections:

1. General Community Consultation 2. Town and Parish Councils 3. Outdoor Sports (non-pitch) 4. Parks, green spaces, countryside, and rights of way 5. Children and Young People 6. Cross Boundary Issues - Neighbouring Authorities

4.2 General Community – Key Findings 4.2.1 Use of open spaces

6 It should be noted that the Consultation Report provides evidence in the form of the observations and

views/opinions sourced from many different organisations, individuals and studies. On occasion the views and

observations expressed by individuals and groups may not be consistent with each other, nor are such individual

contributions necessarily accurate or always up to date.

DRAFT


It is the areas’ rights of way and it's countryside, country parks and woodlands that are most commonly used by households at least monthly (over 76%). Over 64% of households also use parks, recreation grounds and informal open spaces e.g. grassed areas for dog-walking, picnics at least monthly.

Rights of way are also by far the most frequently used facility with 40% of households reporting using them almost every day. Other spaces used on an almost daily basis by at least 15% of households are local parks/recreation grounds; countryside, country parks and woodlands; and informal open spaces.

Areas for water recreation and wildlife areas/nature reserves are also fairly frequently used with at least 50% of households using them on a regular basis (at least monthly).

Play areas, grass playing fields and churchyards/cemeteries are also fairly frequently used but with fewer households (at least 31%) using them on a regular basis (at least monthly). This is not surprising given the more specific purposes of these facilities.

The national 2008 Place Survey indicated that about 81% of households in Wiltshire were very or fairly happy with provision. Satisfaction levels in Wiltshire are also notably higher than the South West and England as whole.

4.2.2 Quantity

Other than for facilities for teenagers a majority of households reported that there were currently enough of all of the various kinds of open space and recreational facilities.

The most commonly identified shortfall was for provision of teenage facilities where 59% thought there was insufficient currently.

52% or more of households thought there was a need for more rights of way; and wildlife areas/nature reserves;

In addition, a significant minority (over 35%) also thought there were insufficient allotments; play areas; recreation grounds/parks; country parks; and informal open space.

4.2.3 Quality

All facilities are rated average or better by a majority of households other than facilities for teenagers. 50% of households highlighted the quality of outdoor facilities for teenagers as being either poor or very poor.

Over 20% thought that the quality of astro-turf pitches; allotments; and courts and greens was poor or very poor.

The high quality of parks and recreation grounds stands out notably, being viewed by around 60% of respondents as very good or good. Other kinds of open spaces where quality is widely thought to be good/very good by a majority are country parks, countryside and woodlands; and play areas.

4.2.4 Access

Where households make use of the opportunities identified, 50% or more of users are prepared to travel more than 20 minutes to use some facilities such as wildlife areas/nature reserves; country parks and woodlands; and astro-turf pitches.

DRAFT


In contrast, for significant numbers of residents, facilities need to be much more locally accessible before they will be used (for example, allotments, rights of way, play areas, and informal green spaces).

Over 56% of users would expect allotments to be within a 10 minute travel time, of which 26% would not wish to travel more than 5 minutes.

55% of users would expect play areas to be within a 10 minute travel time, of which 18% would not wish to travel more than 5 minutes.

Over 40% of users would expect parks and rec. grounds and areas of informal open space to be within a 10 minute travel.

Residents are more likely than not to drive to many kinds of open space including wildlife areas/nature reserves; artificial turf pitches; country parks, countryside; and tennis courts/bowling greens.

However, walking and cycling are the norm for other facilities in particular play areas; parks/recreation grounds; informal green spaces; water recreation; outdoor teenage facilities; allotments; playing fields; and foot/cyclepaths and bridleways.

For a significant number of open spaces access by cycle is important, particularly for facilities for teenagers; and access by bus is important for a small number of households e.g. teenage facilities and allotments.

4.2.5 Priorities and other issues

The category clearly highlighted by the largest number of households as a high priority for potential improvement/new provision was for improvements to the footpath, bridleway and cyclepath network.

Following this the most commonly identified high priority categories were country parks and accessible woodlands/countryside; and parks and recreation grounds.

Other notable high priorities for improvement highlighted by significant numbers were play areas; wildlife areas/nature reserves; informal open space e.g. grassed areas for dog-walking, informal games, picnics etc; and facilities for teenagers.

The issues and concerns of the rural areas of Wiltshire are sometimes quite different from those of the main towns and service centres. This will need to be addressed when considering the development of local standards.

Provision of and access to open space, sport and recreation opportunities is regarded by the Associate Director of Public Health as an extremely important factor in terms of maintaining health and wellbeing for local residents.

Some sectors of the community face particular barriers to access such as disabled people; children and young people; households in the more isolated rural areas and those in the more deprived urban wards of the study area.

4.3 Town and Parish Councils – Key Findings 4.3.1 General Overview

The individual towns and parishes are very different in relation to size, demographics, geography, needs and demand/aspirations. It is important that the study and local standards take this variation into account.

DRAFT


77% of the town and parish councils who responded were directly responsible for the management of various local spaces and facilities.

80% reported that there was a need for additional or improved open space, play and recreation facilities within their town or parish.

Of the towns/parishes expressing an opinion 38% thought that there was scope for greater community use of outdoor sport and recreation spaces at local schools.

The sector of the community most commonly identified as being poorly served in relation to their needs were young people/teenagers (60% of parishes identifying specific sectors in need highlighted this).

The rural nature of much of the study area and related transport difficulties means that as much as possible needs to be provided locally or that opportunities are made available to access city and town facilities and activities more readily.

4.3.2 Common areas of concern The areas of most common concern highlighted by Town and Parish Councils are:

Not enough areas for teenagers e.g. skateparks, shelters etc.

The quality of children's play areas (quantity issues less common).

The need for more and better access to rights of way.

A lack of and the poor quality of football pitches; tennis courts (quality mainly); and MUGAs (primarily a lack of).

A need for more allotments. 4.3.3 Quality considerations

The quality factors most commonly deemed to be important as regards open spaces are that: they should be clean and free from litter and graffiti; be safe and secure for those using them; be easy to get to for all members of the community; and that equipment and grounds should be of high quality and well maintained.

It is also thought important that: equipment and grounds should be of high quality and well maintained; be easy to get around by all members of the community; and there be adequate opportunities for dog walking and freedom from dog fouling.

Many Councils highlight that there should also be good footpath and cycleway links to and between them

4.3.4 Detailed responses on open space typologies Many town and parish councils provided detailed responses relating to aspects of quantity and quality of the various elements of open spaces surveyed. These responses can be found in the associated excel spreadsheet.

DRAFT


4.4 Outdoor (non-pitch) sports: Key Findings 4.4.1 General points and observations

Range of sports and recreation activities making use of open space In general, the amount of activity detailed demonstrates the range of outdoor sport and recreation taking place in Wiltshire and the value of the open space facilities and resources which are used. All the trends suggest that use of outdoor space for health and fitness activities is growing – and there is tremendous scope for the greater linking and development of outdoor resources to serve this market (see below). The more formal types of sporting activity are seeing demand remain, for the most part, steady. There is some evidence of gradually declining numbers of bowls and tennis players – but with much of this demand, the maintenance of quality facilities is critical, to continue to retain existing participants and attract new ones. Growing importance of linkages between health and fitness and sport With changes in public health management and revenue streams, linking fitness, sport and health can access new areas of funding; moreover the advantages to community health in increasing fitness levels is now receiving political support. Many initiatives and opportunities are possible: e.g. the idea of linking sports sites with trim trails, outdoor fitness equipment etc (using sports facilities as a base and green infrastructure and open space as resources). Associated with this, there is rapidly growing activity and demand for ‘individual fitness activities’ - walking, running and cycling, using existing facilities and open space resources. Maintaining a rural network of facilities Recreation Grounds, tennis courts, multi use games areas and bowling greens are important sports facilities in rural areas. Maintaining these facilities with quality surfaces and ancillary facilities can be difficult; financial support is often required. Comments from clubs emphasise the ongoing issues of sourcing finance for upgrades to changing facilities and maintaining good quality grounds. 4.4.2 Sports Specific Points Tennis

Wiltshire LTA has 40 tennis venues registered across the County. These range from traditional tennis clubs to park sites and public indoor courts.

There is a generally good spread of facilities across the county which accommodate all range of people wanting to play tennis. There are no significant problems in relation to accommodating matches or training.

Progression within the sport in generally available due to the variation of facility types across the county. There is a good mix of traditional clubs and public facilities which feed into indoor facilities in Swindon and Downton.

DRAFT


The majority of people playing tennis would rather participate on park/local authority or public pay and play courts. Due to this the LTA is currently prioritising projects within the county which will impact on this need.

In some cases there may be the potential to convert dedicated courts to multi use games areas.

Specifically there is a need for indoor courts in the centre of the county and potentially better quality public facilities for outdoor usage.

There is potential for better use and more affordable access to Leisure Centres for tennis clubs to deliver mini tennis; and access to school courts outside of school hours.

LTA priorities for facility improvements are park courts across the County e.g. Town Gardens Swindon, Warminster, Trowbridge, Salisbury, Bradford on Avon, and Chippenham).

Athletics

England Athletics suggest that overall demand for athletics is increasing in Wiltshire. Many of the junior clubs have waiting lists and participation by adults is rising.

Geographically through the run England work and partnership work there is opportunity to run in a group or club in most towns and large villages. However some of these are adult only, road or off track running and do not provide for juniors or those wanting to run, jump, throw in a track type setting.

The west of the county clubs who are amongst the most proactive clubs are the most disadvantaged in terms of access to a track. They are more likely to access Bath University track which they do so from time to time, but travel times to Bath and access to the track are limited..

England Athletics identify a need for a West Wiltshire training facility which would benefit Avon Valley Runners, Chippenham Harriers, Calne, Devizes and a number of Run England groups. This would ensure the county is fully catered for.

A number of clubs have specific plans and aspirations to improve their main facility.

Bowls

Most bowling greens in Wiltshire are provided by town and parish councils and local clubs.

Overall, there appears to be a good supply of bowls facilities available across the County.

In general the quality of facilities and access to them is adequate; though many clubs have plans and aspirations for improvements.

There are lots of established clubs across Wiltshire and they are fairly independent. A number are fairly active in engagement with Wiltshire Council regarding sports development/ funding seminars etc.

A number of bowling clubs are sustaining (some even increasing) their current levels of membership but a challenge for all of them is attracting new members, particularly younger players (the best international players are between 20-35 years).

DRAFT


Where clubs have held open days, taster sessions and coaching, the response is generally good, but it is maintaining the interest which can be difficult. Short mat bowls is a popular addition to the sport.

The English Bowls Association in its Whole Sport Plan sets out that over the next four years, it will target those over 55 and disabled participants aged 16+. The BDA will deliver a range of products through the Hot Spots and the packages under the ‘Play Bowls’ brand to attract more people into the sport, including roadshows, play bowls days and other Specialist Health, Age, Business and Community Projects as appropriate.

Netball

Most netball takes place at dual use school facilities.

Clubs come together for competition at central locations e.g. Devizes and Salisbury. This seems to work well for Wiltshire.

All the clubs who responded to the survey noted that their playing membership has increased over the past 3 years - demand is growing.

WASP suggest that overall there are not enough netball facilities available to meet current and anticipated growing demand.

As regards quality, many outdoors courts need improving; indoors courts are generally acceptable.

The lack of outdoor facilities with floodlights is a major issue. WASP indicate that there are no outdoor netball venues in Wiltshire that are floodlit.

Other (non-pitch) outdoor sports/activities

Golf: there are a large number and good geographical spread of golf clubs across Wiltshire. Following a recent decline in trends around club membership few clubs are full resulting in available capacity and more flexible membership packages being offered at existing clubs.

Lacrosse: limited number of clubs within the county with a few in their infancy stages. Facilities required include grass or artificial/synthetic pitch. Season being Sept/Oct-Easter this means that for evening training and developing a competitive team the use of floodlights is required. Limited pitch time with floodlights available across the county in certain areas.

Sailing: very few sailing facilities within Wiltshire resulting in few clubs. Those in existence are based around lakes in Westbury and Cotswold Water. Other lakes are available and have large clubs outside the county in Dorset/Hampshire and Swindon/Gloucestershire. Travelling required by most people involved/interest in sailing. Facility redevelopment in Westbury due to fire.

Softball: little/no softball that takes place within Wiltshire known about – Some corporate activity in Swindon. Able to use existing sports club facilities if demand requires.

Equestrian: overall there appears to be a good supply of equestrian facilities available, of good quality; and reasonable access (as far as we're aware).

Cycling: there is a shortage of facilities for cycling across Wiltshire.

DRAFT


4.5 Parks, Green Spaces, Countryside and Rights of Way - Key Findings 4.5.1 Introduction and overview

Wiltshire Council completed a Draft Green Infrastructure Strategy (GIS) in 2013. The Wiltshire GIS though not yet formally adopted and has many links with the open spaces study. The evidence, tools and outcomes provided through the open spaces study will help support the delivery of the strategy.

The Wiltshire Council Countryside Access Development Plan highlights many priorities for rights of way; and more widely in relation to developing opportunities for countryside recreation.

Natural England stress the need to take into account the ANGSt standard as a starting point for developing a standard for natural and semi-natural green space. Variation from this standard should be justified. The Woodland Trust also have a standard for woodlands endorsed by Natural England.

Many stakeholders highlight the extent to which access to and the use of green spaces is of importance to the public health agenda and in relation to community development.

There is a widespread appreciation of the value of green spaces in relation to encouraging bio-diversity through sympathetic management regimes; and the potential for developing more multi-functional green spaces. There is an understanding of the need for a careful balance between developing recreation and conservation.

There are a wide range of active and enthusiastic owners and managers of public accessible green spaces in Wiltshire and a recognition of the value and importance of partnership working.

Stakeholders point out the importance of ensuring ongoing maintenance of Wiltshire's green spaces and the potential for greater involvement by local individuals, groups and organisations for taking on greater ownership and responsibility.

4.5.2 Use of Parks, Green Spaces, Countryside and Rights of Way

It is Wiltshire's rights of way; and it's countryside, country parks and woodlands that are most commonly used by households at least monthly (over 76%). Over 64% of households also use parks, recreation grounds and informal open spaces e.g. grassed areas for dog-walking, picnics at least monthly.

Rights of way are also by far the most frequently used facility with 40% of households reporting using them almost every day. Other spaces used on an almost daily basis by at least 15% of households are local parks/recreation grounds; countryside, country parks and woodlands; and informal open spaces.

Areas for water recreation and wildlife areas/nature reserves are also fairly frequently used with at least 50% of households using them on a regular basis (at least monthly).

42% of allotment users visit them at least weekly (of which 31% visit almost daily).

DRAFT


4.5.3 Quantity

52% or more of households thought there was a need for more rights of way and wildlife areas/nature reserves.

In addition, a significant minority (over 35%) also thought there were insufficient allotments; recreation grounds/parks; country parks; and informal open space.

57% of urban households reported a need for more rights of way compared to 48% of rural households; and 42% of urban households compared to 35% of rural households highlighted a need for additional access to country parks, woodlands and local countryside.

A number of stakeholders highlighted a particular shortfall and poor linkages in Wiltshire's bridleway network.

A number of town and parish councils highlight a shortfall in allotment space. 4.5.4 Quality

The quality of all the typologies of green space are rated average or better by a majority of households.


Over 20% thought that the quality of allotments was poor or very poor.

The quality of parks and recreation grounds is rated higher in urban areas than rural e.g. 15% of urban households rate play areas as very good compared to 6% in rural areas; 17% in urban areas rate parks as very good compared to 14% in rural.

The quality of country parks, accessible woodlands etc; rights of way; and allotments is rated higher in rural than urban areas e.g. 36% of rural households rate allotments as good/very good compared to 26% in urban areas.

4.5.5 Access

The resident’s survey indicates that 50% or more of users are prepared to travel more than 20 minutes to use some facilities such as wildlife areas/nature reserves; country parks and woodlands.

In contrast, for significant numbers of residents, facilities need to be much more locally accessible before they will be used (for example, allotments, rights of way, and informal green spaces).

Over 56% of users would expect allotments to be within a 10 minute travel time, of which 26% would not wish to travel more than 5 minutes. Over 40% of users would expect parks and rec. grounds and areas of informal open space to be within a 10 minute travel time.

Residents are more likely than not to drive to many kinds of green spaces including wildlife areas/nature reserves; country parks, and accessible countryside.

DRAFT


However, walking and cycling are the norm for other facilities in particular parks/recreation grounds; informal green spaces; water recreation; allotments; and foot/cyclepaths and bridleways.

A greater proportion of rural households normally travel by car to access all of the green space typologies.

77% of households said that they would walk or travel by bike more often to facilities if the quality of foot / cycle paths were improved. 79% said that they would use open space facilities more often if access by foot or cycle were improved.

4.5.6 Priorities/Other Issues

There is considerable interest in and potential for improving access to and facilities for water recreation, in particular as regards canals and water courses.

Many stakeholders highlight the need for improving publicity and promotion of access to Wiltshire's natural green space assets and for better signposting and interpretation.

The category clearly highlighted by the largest number of households as a high priority for potential improvement/new provision was for improvements to the footpath, bridleway and cyclepath network.

The rural nature of county lends itself to Mountain biking but there are issues around rights of way and MOD owned land. Could a mountain bike facility be developed to target a new audience and potentially increase sports tourism to the county?

Following this the most commonly identified high priority categories were Country parks and accessible woodlands/countryside; and parks and recreation grounds.

It is important to promote the value of walking and cycling and the use of open spaces and rights of way in relation to their benefits to health, and to encourage community involvement.

4.6 Children and Young People - Key Findings 4.6.1 Quantity

The most commonly identified shortfall in the general residents survey was for provision of teenage facilities where 59% thought there was insufficient currently.

In addition, a significant minority (over 35%) also thought there were insufficient play areas.

The provision of play and youth facilities in the towns and parishes is very varied and many town and parish councils report a shortage of such facilities (particularly for youth) and/or a need for improvements and refurbishments.

There is a widespread view from stakeholders specifically on the need for more skate parks across Wiltshire.

4.6.2 Quality

51% of households in the general resident’s survey rated the quality of play areas overall in Wiltshire as good or very good and around 16% rated them as generally being poor or very poor.

DRAFT


Just over 50% of households highlighted the quality of outdoor facilities for teenagers as being either poor or very poor with 16% rating them as good or very good.

The quality of play areas is rated higher in urban areas than rural e.g. 15% of urban households rate play areas as very good compared to 6% in rural areas.

Over 56% of rural households rate teenage facilities as poor/very poor compared to 44% in urban areas.

Many town and parish councils highlight the need to improve the quality of local play and youth facilities.

Various stakeholders highlighted the need for play spaces to provide more challenging and adventurous play opportunities, particularly for older children.

Various stakeholders highlight the importance and value of the provision of unequipped "playable" natural green space for informal nature and "wild" play; and than planning for play in the future should take this into account in addition to equipped formal play spaces.

4.6.3 Access

The resident’s survey highlighted that 55% of users would expect play areas to be within a 10 minute travel time, of which 18% would not wish to travel more than 5 minutes.

It is important that younger children have access to some kind of play space within easy walking distance from home and that teenagers have access to spaces to hang out independently with friends.

It appears that children and young people will walk and cycle further to access more interesting sites and these will therefore have a larger “catchment”. Young people will walk further than younger children to access such sites.

Nearly 22% of rural households would not wish to travel more than 5 minutes to access a play area compared to 14% in urban areas. However a greater proportion of households in rural areas are prepared to travel to access play areas by car (23% compared to 10%).

Nearly 64% of households in urban areas would not wish to travel more than 15 minutes to use an outdoor youth facility compared to 57% in rural areas.

The need for improved transport to facilities for children and young people (particularly in the rural areas) and safe walking and cycling routes to play opportunities.

There is need to ensure that the design of play and youth facilities is inclusive as regards use by disabled children and young people.

4.6.4 Other Issues and priorities

Many stakeholders highlight the importance of involving children and young people in all aspects of play and youth facility provision e.g. location, the kind of provision most needed, design, access issues etc.

While both youth facilities and play areas feature high in households list of priorities for improvement, it seems that while the priority need for youth facilities is to provide

DRAFT


more of such facilities, the priority for play areas is for improvements to the quality of what currently exists.

There are currently no specific outdoor free running facilities in the county. Parkour provision should be considered as a priority given the growth in the activity and the potential for the activity being perceived as anti-social.

Children and teenagers play and hang out regularly “on the street”, near local shops, etc as well as on spaces planned for play and recreation. The study should therefore highlight planning related issues aimed at making the wider residential environment more child-friendly.

A key barrier to teenagers’ use of “public” open space is that they are often moved on by nearby residents and authorities such as the police. They need more tolerance and places recognised as “theirs”.

Play England provide excellent guidance on play and spatial planning; play space design; a Quality Assessment Tool for play spaces; and managing risk in play. Some of these could be adopted as guidance and Supplementary Planning Documents.

There is some potential for more community (extended) use of school facilities for play (after school, weekends and during holidays).

4.7 Observations – Cross Boundary Issues This section reviewed feedback from neighbouring Local Authorities in relation to their open space strategies and associated studies. It was noted that the variation of documents and strategies in place (and their relevance to current planning policy) is considerable, embracing green infrastructure studies, open space strategies, and sport, recreation and play strategies. The approach adopted by each authority is very much locally derived. It is noteworthy that few strategies currently appear to look in depth at cross boundary issues or identify networks of green infrastructure or open space which cross local authority boundaries and officers highlight a very small number of specific cross border issues and plans (with the notable exception of the Bath and North East Somerset Council Green Infrastructure Strategy). It is also notable that many authorities are currently involved with commissioning new open space related studies or updating previous strategies that are out of date. There is scope for neighbouring local authorities to work more together to make the most of accessible natural green space resources and to develop some common themes and agendas. It is suggested that much could be learnt in regard to best practice by better sharing of information between authorities and ensuring that local authority strategies afford some importance to considering developments and proposals in neighbouring authorities.

4.8 Concluding Remarks The survey work, stakeholder consultation, desk-based research and group sessions has highlighted a wide range of issues of value to the wider Open Space and Play Area Study. There is a strong degree of consistency across the various sources on key areas of local need and aspiration from which we can be confident that the findings are robust and reliable, providing a strong evidence base to be combined with the detailed facilities audit.

DRAFT


5.0 AUDIT OF EXISTING OPEN SPACE ASSETS

5.1 General approach Due to the varied geography of the study area, a bespoke approach to auditing and analysing open space has been developed (see section 1.4.4). The first distinction is made between ‘Urban Analysis Areas’ and ‘Rural Analysis Areas’. Secondly, the approach to auditing and analysing the natural resource is undertaken separately from the more formal facilities. To distinguish between this natural resource and more formal facilities, a second level of classification is made between ‘formal provision’ and ‘natural provision’. The analysis therefore includes:

1. Urban Analysis Areas (formal provision); 2. Rural Analysis Areas (formal provision); 3. Natural provision (covering both urban and rural areas).

5.2 Urban Analysis Areas (formal provision) This section sets out the proposed typologies which will have standards developed or have been included within the quantitative or access analysis. The following is proposed: Table 3 Summary of urban area typologies

Typologies with standards Typologies mapped but no standards7

Formal provision:

Allotments

Amenity Green Space

Park and Recreation Grounds: - Outdoor sports space (Pitches) - Outdoor Sports Space (Fixed)

Outdoor Sports Space (Private)

Play Space (Children)

Play Space (Youth)

Education sites

Churchyard and Cemetery

7 An explanation for not developing standards for these typologies is outlined in the following sections

DRAFT


5.2.1 Allotments

Allotments provide areas for people to grow their own produce and plants. It is important to be clear about what is meant by the term ‘Allotment’. The Small Holdings and Allotments Act 1908 obliged local authorities to provide sufficient allotments and to let them to persons living in their areas where they considered there was a demand. The Allotment Act of 1922 defines the term ‘allotment garden’ as: “an allotment not exceeding 40 poles in extent which is wholly or mainly cultivated by the occupier for the production of vegetable or fruit crops for consumption by himself or his family” (n.b. 40 Poles equals 1,210 square yards or 1,012 square metres. A Pole can also be known as a Rod or Perch.) The Allotments Act of 1925 gives protection to land acquired specifically for use as allotments, so called Statutory Allotment Sites, by the requirement for the need for the approval of Secretary of State in event of sale or disposal. Some allotment sites may not specifically have been acquired for this purpose. Such allotment sites are known as “temporary” (even if they have been in use for decades) and are not protected by the 1925 legislation.

DRAFT


5.2.2 Amenity Green Space

The category is considered to include those spaces open to free and spontaneous use by the public, but neither laid out nor managed for a specific function such as a park, public playing field or recreation ground; nor managed as a natural or semi-natural habitat. These areas of open space will be of varied size, but are likely to share the following characteristics:

Unlikely to be physically demarcated by walls or fences.

Predominantly lain down to (mown) grass.

Unlikely to have identifiable entrance points (unlike parks).

They may have shrub and tree planting, and occasionally formal planted flower beds.

They may occasionally have other recreational facilities and fixtures (such as play equipment or ball courts).

Examples might include both small and larger informal grassed areas in housing estates and general recreation spaces. They can serve a variety of functions dependent on their size, shape, location and topography. Some may be used for informal recreation activities, whilst others by themselves, or else collectively, contribute to the overall visual amenity of an area. 5.2.3 Parks and Recreation Grounds

This typology brings together the function of Parks and Recreation Grounds and Outdoor Sports Space as identified in the former PPG17 typology. The distinction between the two

DRAFT


typologies in the study area is blurred, with very few formal gardens and many parks and/or outdoor sports space having multi-functions used for both informal and formal recreation. The consultation undertaken indicated that people refer to their local park or rec, and communities do not make a distinction between outdoor sports space and parks and recreation grounds. Therefore, for the study an overarching typology for Parks and Recreation Grounds has been used comprising three elements:

Park and Recreation Ground. This comprises the general open space surrounding play areas, sports facilities etc used for general recreation.

Outdoor Sport (Pitches). This comprises publicly accessible sports pitches (including football and rugby).

Outdoor Sport (Fixed). This comprises all other non-pitch based provision including publicly accessible tennis courts and bowling greens.

Parks and Recreation Grounds take on many forms, and may embrace a wide range of functions including:

Play space of many kinds

Provision for a range of formal pitch and fixed sports

Informal recreation and sport

Providing attractive walks and cycle routes to work

Offering landscape and amenity features

Areas of formal planting

Providing areas for ‘events’

Providing habitats for wildlife

Dog walking The multi-functional approach to mapping has provided detail to the range of functions that exist within parks and recreation grounds, with all outdoor sport and play facilities being mapped (see section 2.3.2). This has meant that more accurate assessment of these facilities can be undertaken.

DRAFT


5.2.4 Play Space: Children and Youth provision

There are a number of recognised types of play area including Local Areas for Play (LAPs), Local Equipped Areas for Play (LEAPs), Neighbourhood Equipped Areas for Play (NEAPs), School Playgrounds, informal ball courts, and ‘hang out’ areas. The study has recorded the following:

Play Space (Children)

Play Space (Youth) The former comprises equipped areas of play that cater for the needs of children up to and around 12 years. The latter comprises informal recreation opportunities for, broadly, the 13 to 16/17 age group, and which might include facilities like skateboard parks, basketball courts and ‘free access’ Multi Use Games Areas (MUGAs). In practice, there will always be some blurring around the edges in terms of younger children using equipment aimed for youths and vice versa. Whilst the focus of this study has been on equipped play areas, it is important to recognise that children and young people will play/’hang out’ in almost all publicly accessible “space” ranging from the street, town centres and squares, parks, playing fields, “amenity” grassed areas etc. as well as the more recognisable play and youth facility areas such as equipped playgrounds, youth shelters, BMX and skateboard parks, Multi-use Games Areas etc. Clearly many of the other types of open space covered by this study will therefore provide informal play opportunities. To a child, the whole world is a potential playground: where an adult sees a low wall, a railing, kerb or street bench, a child might see a mini adventure playground or a challenging skateboard obstacle. Play should not be restricted to designated ‘reservations’ and planning and urban design principles should reflect these considerations. Play space (Children) Play Areas are an essential way of creating safe but adventurous places for children of varying ages to play and learn. The emphasis in play area management is shifting away from

DRAFT


straightforward and formal equipment such as slides and swings towards creating areas where imagination and natural learning can flourish through the use of landscaping and natural building materials and the creation of areas that need exploring. Play Space (Youth) This category includes skate parks/BMX tracks and Multi-Use Games Areas (MUGA) for ease, as most of these are predominantly used by young people and have been installed with this key client group in mind. Teenagers should not be ignored, it is important to create areas for ‘hanging out’ and providing them with things to do such as shelters. Currently recognisable provision for teenagers is few and far between. 5.2.5 Outdoor Sport (Private) Outdoor sports space with limited public access (e.g. private sports grounds), have also been recorded and mapped where known. Private sport space makes up an important part of outdoor sports provision across the study area, and forms an important part of the community facilities. The private sports spaces have been mapped separately to publicly accessible sites, to determine exact provision of the different types of provision. 5.2.6 Churchyards and Cemeteries The study area has many churches and cemeteries and these provide significant aesthetic value and space for informal recreation such as walking and relaxing. Many are also important in terms of biodiversity. Their importance for informal recreation, aesthetic value and contribution towards biodiversity must be acknowledged, and as such, investment in their upkeep, maintenance and quality is an important factor. Churchyards and Cemeteries have been identified and mapped where known, however, no quantity or access standard for provision have been set, as it is outside the scope of this study to make recommendations related to requirements for new provision. However, the quality of churchyards can be influenced by this study, particularly closed churchyards which have become the responsibility of the Local Authority. This reflects the priorities established through consultation, which identifies the need to provide and improve open spaces. Churchyards can provide important open space, particularly closed churchyards, where the ownership is often transferred to the local authority to manage and maintain. 5.2.7 Education Many schools and colleges have open space and sports facilities within their grounds. This may range from a small playground to large playing fields with several sports pitches. More often than not, public access to these spaces is restricted and in many cases forbidden. Nevertheless, many of the sports facilities are used by local people on both an informal and formal basis.

DRAFT


Sports clubs may have local informal arrangements with a school to use their pitches, and in some cases more formal ‘dual-use’ agreements may be in place. School grounds can also contribute towards the green infrastructure and biodiversity of an area. Quantity and access standards have not been proposed for education sites. This is because they are not openly accessible to the public and whilst important to the local community, there is less opportunity for the Council to influence their provision and management. However, their existence is still an important factor of local provision, and as such they will be subject to the same policy considerations as publicly accessible space.

5.3 Rural Analysis Areas (formal provision) Table 4 Summary of rural area typologies

Typologies with standards Typologies mapped but no standards

Formal provision:

Allotments

Recreation Space

Recreation Space (Private)

Play Space

School Playing Fields

Churchyard and Cemetery

For the rural parishes, a different approach has been adopted, as these areas do not have the range of types of open space found in the main parishes, as follows:

Allotments are analysed in the same way as urban areas;

Spaces for formal recreation which cover amenity green space and parks and recreation grounds have been grouped as ‘Recreation Space’;

Similarly private sports grounds and spaces with limited access are mapped as ‘Recreation Space (Private)’;

Play space groups together children and youth space due to the limited provision of youth space in rural areas.

5.4 Natural Green Space (covering both urban and rural analysis areas)

DRAFT


For the purpose of this study, natural and semi-natural green space covers a variety of partly

or wholly accessible spaces including meadows, woodland and copses all of which share a

trait of having natural characteristics and wildlife value, but which are also open to public use

and enjoyment.

Research elsewhere (Natural England) and the local consultation for this study have identified

the value attached to such space for recreation and emotional well-being. A sense of

‘closeness to nature’ with its attendant benefits for people is something that is all too easily

lost in urban areas. Natural Green spaces can make important contributions towards local

Biodiversity Action Plan targets and can also raise awareness of biodiversity values and issues.

Some sites will have statutory rights or permissive codes allowing the public to wander in

these sites. Others may have defined Rights of Way or permissive routes running through

them. For the remainder of sites there may be some access on a managed basis. Many natural

spaces may not be ‘accessible’ in the sense that they cannot be entered and used by the

general community, but they can be appreciated from a distance, and contribute to visual

amenity. Although such spaces are not the subject of standards developed by this study, their

value is recognised.

DRAFT


5.5 Existing provision of open space (formal provision) 5.5.1 Existing provision in urban analysis areas The GIS mapping of open space has been used to assess the existing quantity of open space within the urban areas. A summary of existing provision is shown in tables 4 and 5. Table 4 Existing provision of open space (hectares) in urban areas

PARISH Allotments

Amenity

Green Space

Park and

Recreation

Ground

(combined)

Park and

Recreation

Ground

Outdoor

Sport

(Pitches)

Outdoor

Sport

(Fixed)

Outdoor

Sport

(Private)

Play Space

(Children)

Play Space

(Youth)

Accessible

Natural

Green Space

Natural

Green Space

(Limited

Access)

Churchyards

and

Cemeteries Education

Amesbury 0.26 18.74 15.09 11.21 2.69 1.19 0 0.32 0.06 0.43 0 1.73 4.04

Box 0.56 3.45 4.53 2.87 1.37 0.29 0 0.08 0.08 1.99 7.2 1.76 1.4

Bradford on

Avon 3.02 2.43 12.6 9.97 2.47 0.16 0.23 0.69 0.15 22.34 4.2 3.49 13.99

Bulford 0 0 3.17 2.28 0.81 0.08 0 0.07 0.05 0 0 0 2.46

Calne 1.72 7.86 19.4 16.16 3 0.24 0.43 0.78 0.26 22.06 0.33 3.26 25.56

Chippenham 4.79 48.55 22.06 14.56 5.74 1.76 6.55 0.73 0.54 59.39 1.29 4.25 45.04

Corsham 2.23 12.08 6.39 5.08 0.91 0.4 9.35 0.73 0.11 18.78 11.81 3.55 13.98

Cricklade 0 8.98 4.06 1.54 2.28 0.24 4.91 0.18 0.04 49.71 2.44 1.37 3.6

Devizes and

Roundway 3.69 27.07 7.48 5.98 1.05 0.45 9.64 0.97 0.44 25.39 1.29 7.96 17.61

Durrington 0.25 8.11 2.57 2.29 0 0.28 0 0.2 0.36 0 0 1.09 8.6

Laverstock 0.97 13.89 3.09 1.73 0.19 1.17 0.89 0.06 0.04 8.28 0.05 0.72 13.78

Ludgershall 2.3 6.36 0.67 0 0.67 0 0 0.21 0 524.85 0 0.63 7.53

Lyneham and

Bradenstoke 0.46 7.58 1.93 1.51 0.42 0 0 0.17 0 2.01 1.9 1.29 1.43

Malmesbury 0.44 2.31 2.21 0.87 1.03 0.31 2.29 0.48 0 9.9 1.42 1.93 6.19

Marlborough 0.62 28.06 7.03 3.38 3.5 0.15 0 0.17 0.04 24.2 0 2.49 40.75

Melksham

and

Melksham

Without 3.2 29.72 21.33 15.4 5.1 0.83 6.37 0.95 0.45 14.89 0 3.04 21.16

Pewsey 1.34 1.16 7.9 4.56 2.83 0.51 0 0.31 0.05 95.65 0 1.1 8.32

Purton 3.59 0.34 1.97 0.62 0.92 0.43 2.73 0.07 0.05 193.7 0.69 1.28 5.73

Royal

Wootton

Bassett 2.68 7.42 15.51 8.39 6.58 0.54 0 0.65 0.04 45.36 1.54 1.83 9.37

Salisbury 16.02 145.73 47.45 35.08 10.49 1.88 7.57 1.26 0.29 50.75 25.91 22.56 44.48

Tidworth 0 14.14 25.49 15.23 6.83 3.43 27.54 0.77 0.17 1.65 0 1.6 12.29

Trowbridge

and Hilperton 4.1 25.1 10.75 6.55 3.69 0.51 3.78 1.24 0.57 84.36 39.68 8.95 33.84

Warminster 3.06 25.4 30.87 22.4 7.36 1.11 4.51 1.97 0.21 56.64 36.9 2.87 21.79

Westbury 0 15 6.33 3.82 2.1 0.41 2.36 0.58 0.15 29.52 0 3.98 8.74

Wilton 0 7.88 3.01 2 0.63 0.38 0 0.24 0.01 1254.96 2.17 0.66 4.06

Total 55.3 467.36 282.89 193.48 72.66 16.75 89.15 13.88 4.16 2596.81 138.82 83.39 375.74

DRAFT


Table 5 Existing provision of open space (ha/1000) in urban areas

PARISH Allotments

Amenity

Green

Space

Park and

Recreation

Ground

(combined)

Park and

Recreation

Ground

Outdoor

Sport

(Pitches)

Outdoor

Sport

(Fixed)

Outdoor

Sport

(Private)

Play Space

(Children)

Play Space

(Youth)

Accessible

Natural

Green

Space

Natural

Green

Space

(Limited

Access)

Churchyards

and


Amesbury 0.02 1.75 1.41 1.05 0.25 0.11 0 0.03 0.01 0.04 0 0.16 0.38

Box 0.16 0.98 1.28 0.81 0.39 0.08 0 0.02 0.02 0.56 2.04 0.5 0.4

Bradford on

Avon 0.32 0.26 1.34 1.06 0.26 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.02 2.38 0.45 0.37 1.49

Bulford 0 0 0.75 0.54 0.19 0.02 0 0.02 0.01 0 0 0 0.59

Calne 0.1 0.46 1.12 0.94 0.17 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.02 1.28 0.02 0.19 1.48

Chippenham 0.13 1.36 0.62 0.41 0.16 0.05 0.18 0.02 0.02 1.66 0.04 0.12 1.26

Corsham 0.17 0.93 0.49 0.39 0.07 0.03 0.72 0.06 0.01 1.44 0.91 0.27 1.08

Cricklade 0 2.12 0.96 0.36 0.54 0.06 1.16 0.04 0.01 11.76 0.58 0.32 0.85

Devizes and

Roundway 0.22 1.59 0.44 0.35 0.06 0.03 0.57 0.06 0.03 1.49 0.08 0.47 1.04

Durrington 0.03 1.1 0.35 0.31 0 0.04 0 0.03 0.05 0 0 0.15 1.17

Laverstock 0.18 2.54 0.56 0.32 0.03 0.21 0.16 0.01 0.01 1.51 0.01 0.13 2.52

Ludgershall 0.52 1.44 0.15 0 0.15 0 0 0.05 0 118.56 0 0.14 1.7

Lyneham and

Bradenstoke 0.09 1.53 0.39 0.31 0.08 0 0 0.03 0 0.41 0.38 0.26 0.29

Malmesbury 0.08 0.43 0.41 0.16 0.19 0.06 0.43 0.09 0 1.84 0.26 0.36 1.15

Marlborough 0.07 3.34 0.84 0.4 0.42 0.02 0 0.02 0 2.88 0 0.3 4.85

Melksham and

Melksham

Without 0.15 1.36 0.97 0.7 0.23 0.04 0.29 0.04 0.02 0.68 0 0.14 0.97

Pewsey 0.37 0.32 2.17 1.25 0.78 0.14 0 0.09 0.01 26.32 0 0.3 2.29

Purton 0.85 0.08 0.47 0.15 0.22 0.1 0.65 0.02 0.01 45.81 0.16 0.3 1.36

Royal

Wootton

Bassett 0.24 0.65 1.37 0.74 0.58 0.05 0 0.06 0 3.98 0.14 0.16 0.82

Salisbury 0.4 3.62 1.18 0.87 0.26 0.05 0.19 0.03 0.01 1.26 0.64 0.56 1.1

Tidworth 0 1.33 2.39 1.43 0.64 0.32 2.59 0.07 0.02 0.16 0 0.15 1.16

Trowbridge

and Hilperton 0.11 0.67 0.29 0.18 0.1 0.01 0.1 0.03 0.02 2.27 1.07 0.24 0.91

Warminster 0.17 1.45 1.76 1.28 0.42 0.06 0.26 0.11 0.01 3.24 2.11 0.16 1.25

Westbury 0 1.02 0.43 0.26 0.14 0.03 0.16 0.04 0.01 2.01 0 0.27 0.59

Wilton 0 2.2 0.85 0.56 0.18 0.11 0 0.07 0 350.65 0.61 0.18 1.13

Average 0.17 1.45 0.88 0.60 0.23 0.05 0.28 0.04 0.01 8.07 0.43 0.26 1.17DRAFT


5.5.2 Existing provision of open space in rural analysis areas Table 6 Existing provision of open space (hectares) in rural analysis areas

CBA Allotments

Recreation

Space

Recreation

Space

(Private) Play Space

Accessible

Natural

Green

Space

Natural

Green Space

(Limited

Access)

Churchyards

and


Amesbury 1.32 21.83 7.6 0.64 1030.5 7.51 4.31 4.28

Bradford on

Avon 0 27.58 0.23 0.23 47.15 0.45 1.34 4.41

Calne 1.28 33.63 7.92 0.18 161.58 0 3.9 10.15

Chippenham 1.98 24.1 15.19 0.71 91.32 10.98 6.59 21.65

Corsham 2.75 20.95 3.05 0.5 4.31 0.21 1.86 1.99

Devizes 2.64 29.46 15.06 0.68 83.51 0.16 7.98 51.3

Malmesbury 4.13 27 1.35 0.75 240.09 1.81 9.16 14.36

Marlborough 0.26 21.27 66.51 0.67 708.69 0.85 7.33 23.19

Melksham 0 7.44 0.31 0.58 13.97 39.68 3.18 21.3

Pewsey 1.31 21.42 6.49 0.89 168.5 1.19 8.56 4.91

Royal

Wootton

Bassett and

Cricklade 0.07 5.98 0 0.44 280.88 0.8 1.86 1.82

Salisbury 0 0 0 0 32.31 0 0 0

Southern

Wiltshire 2.39 42.34 2.18 0.54 96.84 0.07 6.28 9.33

South West

Wiltshire 4.48 115.94 18.56 0.82 1090.81 47.07 9.22 8.48

Tidworth 0.3 8.33 0 0.17 527.62 11.27 3.18 1.2

Trowbridge 2.47 6.57 3.01 0.25 162.72 50.58 0.94 1.71

Warminster 0.51 30.72 0 0.47 115.33 0.59 3.66 5.06

Westbury 0.64 21.45 0 0.19 83.19 0.48 1.89 1.12

Total 26.53 466.01 147.46 8.71 4939.32 173.7 81.24 186.26DRAFT


Table 7 Existing provision of open space (ha/1000) in rural areas

CBA Allotments

Recreation

Space

Recreation

Space


Accessible

Natural

Green

Space

Natural

Green Space

(Limited

Access)

Churchyards

and


Amesbury 0.12 2.07 0.72 0.06 97.49 0.71 0.41 0.4

Bradford on

Avon 0 3.23 0.03 0.03 5.53 0.05 0.16 0.52

Calne 0.22 5.7 1.34 0.03 27.36 0 0.66 1.72

Chippenham 0.21 2.53 1.59 0.07 9.58 1.15 0.69 2.27

Corsham 0.67 5.07 0.74 0.12 1.04 0.05 0.45 0.48

Devizes 0.18 1.96 1 0.05 5.55 0.01 0.53 3.41

Malmesbury 0.29 1.92 0.1 0.05 17.08 0.13 0.65 1.02

Marlborough 0.03 2.23 6.96 0.07 74.15 0.09 0.77 2.43

Melksham 0 1.16 0.05 0.09 2.17 6.17 0.49 3.31

Pewsey 0.13 2.08 0.63 0.09 16.34 0.12 0.83 0.48

Royal

Wootton

Bassett and

Cricklade 0.02 1.51 0 0.11 70.86 0.2 0.47 0.46

Southern

Wiltshire 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

South West

Wiltshire 0.19 3.44 0.18 0.04 7.88 0.01 0.51 0.76

Tidworth 0.24 6.28 1.01 0.04 59.1 2.55 0.5 0.46

Trowbridge 0.07 1.99 0 0.04 126.22 2.7 0.76 0.29

Warminster 0.56 1.48 0.68 0.06 36.62 11.38 0.21 0.38

Westbury 0.07 4.41 0 0.07 16.56 0.08 0.53 0.73

0.13 4.4 0 0.04 17.08 0.1 0.39 0.23

Average 0.18 3.12 0.99 0.06 33.09 1.16 0.54 1.25DRAFT


5.6 Existing provision of natural green space This section provides a broad overview of the existing provision of natural green space across the study area. The maps are intended to be indicative, and more detailed maps of provision are shown in the area profiles. The focus is on the public rights of way network and areas of natural green space. Consideration is also given to the provision of natural green space under the ownership of the Ministry of Defence (MOD). The community consultation highlighted the important local people place on the natural environment:

Rights of way, countryside, country parks and woodlands are most commonly used by households at least monthly (over 76%).

Rights of way are also by far the most frequently used facility with 40% of households reporting using them almost every day.

5.6.1 Public Rights of Way Figure 16 Rights of Way in Study Area

DRAFT


5.6.2 Areas of Natural Green space Figure 17 Provision of Natural Green Space in the Study Area

5.6.3 Ministry of Defence Land (DIO) Consultation with the MOD - Defence Infrastructure Organisation (DIO) was undertaken as part of the study. The DIO are a major land holder within Wiltshire (see figure 18), and much of this land has some form of managed public access. Anecdotal evidence indicates that at least 80% of visitors are dog walkers, with visitors concentrating in several ‘activity hot spots’, typically where site layout facilitates car parking, such as tank crossing locations or main access points. There is a strong link between visitor numbers and population i.e. the bigger the town the greater the visitor concentration. For example, Warminster hot spots include: Cradle Hill and Vedette Post 5 to the west and Battlesbury Spur to the East. These areas are so popular that the dog bins are emptied 3 times per week. The DIO Access and Recreation Advisor has identified the following activity hot spots across Salisbury Plain Training Area:

Tilshead Water Tower (SU 02036, 47376)

Cradle Hill nr Warminster (ST 88583, 46707)

Battlesbury Hill (ST 89364, 45285)

DRAFT


Westbury White Horse (ST 89738, 51357) – Wiltshire provide parking which is outside our boundary and works well, but during busy periods and for those visitors that want to steer clear of the “tourists”, cars do spread out on the MOD estate.

Heytesbury / Imber Rd (ST 92984, 43134)

Larkhill Driving Range (SU 14440, 44220)

Lavington Vedette (SU 02403, 53428)

Redhorn Vedette (SU 05997, 55366)

Casterly Vedette (SU 11241, 53720)

Tank crossing A/A1 (SU 13471, 54005 / SU 13901, 53848)

Tank crossing B/B1 (SU 14202, 50265 / SU 15006, 50104)

Tank crossing C/C1 (SU 15363, 45946 / SU 16323, 45862) The importance of these recreational facilities needs to be highlighted within this study for a number of reasons:

The general community consultation identified the value people place on public rights of way and access to the countryside;

The DIO land holdings contribute significantly to recreation to the community of Wiltshire;

Recreational pressure on the DIO land holdings results in management issues, in particular the need to balance the needs of, military activity, recreation and nature conservation;

The proposed increase in population within the plan period will increase pressure on the DIO land holdings, particularly in activity hot spots. Consideration has to be given as to how developer contributions from local development can facilitate management of these issues.

DRAFT


Figure 18 MOD owned land

DRAFT


6.0 SETTING LOCAL STANDARDS (STEP 3)

6.1 The development of Standards Following the completion of the assessment of local needs and the audit of provision (the first two steps of this study), new standards of provision for open space are proposed below. This section explains how the standards for Wiltshire have been developed, and provides specific information and justification for each of the typologies where standards have been proposed. The standards for open space have been developed in-line with the new NPPF. Standards comprise the following components:

Quantity standards: These are determined by the analysis of existing quantity, consideration of existing local and national standards and benchmarks and evidence gathered from the local needs assessment. It is important that quantity standards are locally derived and are realistic and achievable. The recommended standards need to be robust, evidence based and deliverable through new development and future mechanisms of contributions through on-site provision and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).

Accessibility standards: These reflect the needs of potential users. Spaces likely to be used on a frequent and regular basis need to be within easy walking distance and to have safe access. Other facilities where visits are longer but perhaps less frequent, for example country parks, can be further away. Consideration is also given to existing local or national standards and benchmarks.

Quality standards: The standards for each form of provision are derived from the quality audit, existing good practice and from the views of the community and those that use the spaces. Again, quality standards should be achievable and reflect the priorities that emerge through consultation.

The standards that have been proposed are for minimum guidance levels of provision. So, just because geographical areas may enjoy levels of provision exceeding minimum standards does not mean there is a surplus, as all such provision may be well used.

DRAFT


6.2 Recommended standards (formal provision) 6.2.1 Allotments (Urban and Rural analysis areas) Summary of quantity and access standard

Quantity Standard Access Standard

0.20 ha/1000 population 480m (10 minutes, straight line walk time)

Existing national or local standards National standards for allotments and other such open spaces are difficult to find. The closest thing to such standards appears to be those set out by the National Society of Allotment and Leisure Gardeners (NSALG). These are as follows:

Standard Plot Size = 330 sq yards (250sqm*)

Paths = 1.4m wide for disabled access

Haulage ways = 3m wide

Plotholders shed = 12sqm

Greenhouse = 15sqm

Polytunnel = 30sqm *Wiltshire Council has a local standard plot size of 100sqm. Quantity standard for allotments Quantity:

82% of all respondents from the household survey ‘never’ use allotments, meaning this is the least used type of open space;

The existing average level of provision in urban areas is 0.17 ha/1000, and in rural areas is 0.18 ha/1000.

The household survey identified 42% of people felt there should be more allotments, however, 53% felt there are enough;

Other consultation (for example with Town and Parish Councils) identified several areas where there are long waiting lists and an unmet demand for allotments;

Considering the identified demand for allotments, the propensity for new housing to have high density levels, and hence smaller gardens, aswell as a national trend for an increased demand for allotments8, there should be an increased provision for allotments against the average level of provision;

A minimum standard of 0.20 ha/1000 is proposed for analysing existing provision and for new provision in both urban and rural areas.

8 www.transitiontownwestkirby.org.uk/files/ttwk_nsalg_survey_2013.pdf

DRAFT


Access standard for allotments

Just under 60% of people want allotments close to home (up to 10 mins).

Just under 65 % of people walk to their allotments;

Proposed standard of 480 metres (10 minutes’ walk time) in urban and rural areas. Quality standards for allotments Few comments were received in relation to the quality of allotments, furthermore the information gathered in relation to allotments is more difficult to assess in comparison to other types of open space. The reason for this is two fold: Firstly, the number of people who actually use allotments is very low compared to the numbers who use other types of open space and, therefore specific comments related to the quality of allotments are less frequent; Secondly, the majority of allotments sites are locked, and the quality audit only allows for assessment against key criteria such as the level of cultivation and general maintenance, which is less comprehensive than the assessments of other open space. For allotments, a number of general recommendations are made in relation to quality, which should include the following:

Well-drained soil which is capable of cultivation to a reasonable standard.

A sunny, open aspect preferably on a southern facing slope.

Limited overhang from trees and buildings either bounding or within the site.

Adequate lockable storage facilities, and a good water supply within easy walking distance of individual plots.

Provision for composting facilities.

Secure boundary fencing.

Good access within the site both for pedestrians and vehicles.

Good vehicular access into the site and adequate parking and manoeuvring space.

Disabled access.

Toilets.

Notice boards. 6.2.2 Amenity Green Space (Urban Areas) Summary of quantity and access standard


1.5 ha/1000 population from sites > 0.2ha 480 metres or 10 minutes’ walk time

Existing national or local standards There is no national guidance suggesting a standard for the provision of Amenity green space. The Fields in Trust (FIT) ‘Six Acre Standard’ proposes casual or informal playing space should be provided within housing areas as part of the overall standard. This is equivalent to 0.4 – 0.5 ha/1000 population of informal space for play.

DRAFT


Quantity standard for Amenity green space

Existing average level of provision in urban areas is 1.45 ha/1000 population;

No specific questions asked in relation to amenity green space, however, 46% of people identified they were satisfied with current levels of provision of ‘other open space’, and 52% of people felt there was enough;

Provision varies greatly with some areas having no provision or falling well below the average, and others far exceeding it;

There is no strong need or justification for significantly increasing current levels of provision, therefore a minimum standard of 1.5 ha/1000 population is proposed;

The minimum size of a space that will be considered acceptable and count towards open space provision is recommended to be: - 0.2 ha in size (about the size of a mini football pitch) for developments of 50

or more dwellings; - 0.1 Ha for developments of 20-49 dwellings. This will avoid a proliferation of small amenity spaces which have no real recreation function. Any spaces below this size will be acceptable in terms of their visual amenity, but would not count towards the required level of provision.

Access standard for amenity green space

Consultation identified people want spaces close to home, and that these are accessed by foot;

Proposed standard in urban areas of 480 metres (10 minutes’ walk time). Quality standards for amenity green space The audit of provision as well as the consultation has identified the importance attached by local people to open space close to home. The value of ‘amenity green space’ must be recognised especially within housing areas, where it can provide important local opportunities for play, exercise and visual amenity that are almost immediately accessible. On the other hand open space can be expensive to maintain and it is very important to strike the correct balance between having sufficient space to meet the needs of the community for accessible and attractive space, and having too much which would be impossible to manage properly and therefore a potential liability and source of nuisance. It is important that amenity green space should be capable of use for at least some forms of public recreation activity. It is therefore recommended that in addition to the minimum size threshold identified above, that all amenity green space should be subject to landscape design, ensuring the following quality principles:

Capable of supporting informal recreation such as a kickabout, space for dog walking or space to sit and relax;

Include high quality planting of trees and/or shrubs to create landscape structure and biodiversity value;

DRAFT


Include paths along main desire lines (lit where appropriate);

Be designed to ensure easy maintenance.

6.2.3 Parks and Recreation Grounds (Urban Areas)


1.2 ha/1000 population for public and private provision

600 metres (12-13 minutes’ straight line walk time)

Existing national and local policies Fields in Trust (FIT), previously known as the National Playing Fields Association promoted the Six Acre Standard of 2.4 hectares (6 acres) per 1000 persons, but with a specific provision of 1.6-1.8 hectares per 1000 persons of outdoor sports space (and 0.8 hectares per 1000 people for children’s play of which around 0.3 hectares should be equipped provision). The new FIT ‘Benchmark Standards for Outdoor Sport and Play’ also suggest similar overall levels of provision as a guide to local authorities, although FIT does accept the importance of developing locally researched standards. Quantity of parks and recreation grounds

Existing average level of provision in urban areas is 0.88 ha/1000 population, with an additional 0.28 ha/1000 population of private sports space available;

This combined level of provision (1.16 ha/1000) falls below the FIT standards (which proposes 1.6 ha/1000 population);

The household survey identified the following in relation to this typology: - 35% of people felt there should be more local recreation grounds or parks,

however, 64% felt there was enough; - Similarly, 73% of people felt there are enough playing fields; - In terms of more formal provision such as ‘courts and green’, 65% of people

felt there is enough;

A number of facilities have limited access (e.g. private sports grounds), nevertheless they are important community facilities, and as such it is recommended that the standard includes these sites and affords them suitable protection/due consideration in the planning process;

A proposed standard of 1.2 ha/1000 population is proposed for both public and private space. There is no justification for significantly increasing current average levels of provision, and it is felt that this standard is appropriate for assessing current levels of provision and as a requirement through new development.

Access standard for parks and recreation grounds

14% of people want facilities within 5 minutes of home, 30% within 10 minutes and 28% up to 15 minutes, the rest are willing to travel up to 20 minutes or more;

For playing fields and tennis, bowls etc., a similar figure is found;

DRAFT


Over 70% of people walk to these facilities;

The survey findings indicate that people are willing to travel slightly further to these type of facilities, therefore, a standard of 600 metres (12-13 minutes’ walk time) is recommended.

Quality standards for parks and recreation grounds Satisfaction levels with the quality of facilities such as recreation grounds were high, with 60% of people assessing them as good or very good. For grass playing fields, this was slightly lower with 48% identifying them as good/very good and 40% as average. Similar figures were returned for facilities such as bowling greens and tennis courts. National guidance relevant to this typology is provided in the ‘Green Flag’ quality standard for parks which sets out benchmark criteria for quality open spaces. For outdoor sports space, Sport England have produced a wealth of useful documents outlining the quality standards for facilities such as playing pitches, changing rooms, MUGAS and tennis courts plus associated ancillary facilities. The Rugby Football Union have provided guidance on the quality and standard of provision of facilities for rugby, and the England and Wales Cricket Board have provided guidance for cricket facilities. It is recommended that the guidance provided in these documents is adopted by the council, and that all new and improved provision seeks to meet these guidelines. 6.2.4 Recreation Space (Rural Areas)


3.0 ha/1000 population

600 metres (12-13 minutes’ straight line walk time)

Quantity

The typology of Recreation Space covers a range of types of provision from recreation grounds, village greens and amenity space (see section 5.3);

The current average level of provision is 3.12 ha/1000 population, with an additional 0.99 ha/1000 of private sports space;

The consultation findings show that people are generally happy with current levels of provision, although there are significant variations in provision across the rural analysis areas;

A standard of 3.0 ha/1000 population covering all types of recreation space is deliverable and appropriate for rural areas.

Access

The same standard proposed for urban areas i.e. 600 metres (12-13 minutes’ walk time). The dispersed nature of rural areas will make it unachievable anywhere outside the main villages (i.e. the settlement areas).

DRAFT


6.2.5 Play Space (Urban and Rural Areas) Table 8 Summary of quantity and access standards

Typology Quantity Standard Access Standard

Children’s Play Space (Urban Areas)


480m (10 minutes’ straight line walk time)

Youth Play Space (Urban Areas)


Youth Provision – 600m (12-13 minutes’ straight line walk time)

Play Space (Rural Areas)

0.07 600m (12-13 minutes straight line walk time)

Existing National and Local Policies The FIT guidance recommends provision of 0.8 hectares per 1000 people for children’s play of which around 0.3 hectares should be equipped provision. These standards have been criticised in recent years because they are often seen as undeliverable, and can result in a proliferation of play areas that can be difficult to maintain, as well as setting unrealistic aspirations in urban areas where insufficient land is available to provide facilities, especially higher density development on brownfield sites. An additional problem is that the current FIT guidance does not specifically cover the needs of most teenagers within the ‘Standard Youth Provision’. Quantity standards for play

In urban areas, current level of provision of children’s play space is 0.04 ha/1000 population, for youth space this is 0.01 ha/1000 population;

In rural areas the combined provision of play space is 0.06 ha/1000 population;

Only 40% of people felt there were insufficient children’s play areas, where as nearly 60% of people felt there was a need for more facilities for teenagers;

The proposed standard for children’s play areas is 0.05 ha/1000 which allows a minor increase from the average, however, there is clear justification for increasing provision for teenagers which has been doubled to 0.02 ha/1000.

In rural areas, a combined level of provision of 0.07 ha/1000 population is proposed which is an increase from the current average provision, allowing for additional teenage facilities where appropriate.

Access standards for play

For children’s play space around 54% of people want facilities within 10 minutes. For teenage facilities this figure was less with just under 30% of people stating 10 minutes, with a further 30% willing to travel up to 15 minutes;

Nearly 80% of people walk to children’s facilities, where as the figure for walking is 40% for teenage facilities with 28% of people also cycling.

In light of these findings, the following access standards are recommended:

DRAFT


Children’s provision – 480m for urban areas (10 minutes’ straight line walk time), and 600m for rural areas (12-13 minutes’ straight line walk time);

Youth Provision – 600m for both urban and rural areas (12-13 minutes’ straight line walk time).

Quality standards for play Wiltshire Council has a play specification which sets out the quality for on-site provision required from new development. This will be the principle document to be used within the planning system to inform the design of new play facilities. In addition to this, guidance can be drawn from Play England who are keen to see a range of play spaces in all urban environments: A Door-step spaces close to home B Local play spaces – larger areas within easy walking distance C Neighbourhood spaces for play – larger spaces within walking distance D Destination/family sites – accessible by bicycle, public transport and with car parking. Moving forward, Play England would like their new Design Guide; ‘Design for Play’ to be referenced and added as a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) in standard configuration. Play England have also developed a ‘Quality Assessment Tool’ which can be used to judge the quality of individual play spaces. It has been recommended that the council consider adopting this as a means of assessing the quality of play spaces in the study area. Play England also highlight a potential need for standards for smaller settlements and rural areas where the doorstep, local, neighbourhood, and destination hierarchy is unlikely to be appropriate. Disability access is also an important issue for Play England and they would like local authorities to adopt the KIDS9 publication; ‘Inclusion by Design’ as an SPD. Their most recent guidance document, ‘Better Places to Play through Planning’ gives detailed guidance on setting local standards for access, quantity and quality of playable space and is considered as a background context for the standards suggested in this study.

9 KIDS, is a charity which in its 40 years, has pioneered a number of approaches and programmes for disabled children and young people. KIDS was established in 1970 and in 2003, KIDS merged with KIDSACTIVE, previously known as the Handicapped Adventure Play Association.

DRAFT


6.2.6 Summary: Urban Areas Table 9: Urban Areas standards for formal provision


Access standard

Allotments 0.20 480 metres or 10 minutes’ walk time

Amenity green space 1.50 480 metres or 10 minutes’ walk time

Parks, Sport and Recreation Grounds

1.20 to include both public and private grounds (excluding education sites)


Play Space (Children) 0.05 480 metres or 10 minutes’ walk time

Play Space (Youth) 0.02 600 metres or 12-13 minutes’ walk time

6.2.7 Summary: Rural Areas Table 10: Rural Areas standards of formal provision


Access standard

Allotments 0.25 (for new provision) 480 metres or 10 minutes’ walk time

Recreation Space 3.00 to include both public and private grounds (excluding education sites)


Play Space (Children and Youth)

0.07 600 metres or 12-13 minutes’ walk time

For the rural parishes, it is particularly important to apply these standards to the main settlement areas only, as many of the rural parishes have large areas of land where there is no residential occupancy.

DRAFT


6.3 Recommended Standards (natural provision) 6.3.1 Natural England Accessible Natural Green space Standards (ANGSt)

at least one accessible 20 hectare site within two kilometre of home;

one accessible 100 hectare site within five kilometres of home; and

one accessible 500 hectare site within ten kilometres of home; plus

a minimum of one hectare of statutory Local Nature Reserves per thousand population at least 2 hectares in size, no more than 300 metres (5 minutes’ walk) from home.

6.3.2 Local standards For this purpose of this study, it is recommended that the analysis should adopt the Natural England ANGSt to analyse current levels of provision and gaps. It is considered that the ANGSt are not deliverable through new development in Wiltshire – the scale of proposed development would be unlikely to trigger the provision of large natural green spaces. It is therefore recommended that a local standard is adopted for providing new levels of provision through development. New provision should be provided within the amenity green space standard. It has already been identified that the provision of amenity green space should avoid small areas of grass with little landscape, biodiversity or recreational value. Therefore, the provision of amenity green space should include provision of natural green space i.e. a combination of amenity and natural features which are large enough (minimum 0.2 ha) to provide recreational value, aesthetic value and biodiversity value (see further guidance on quality below). The proposed standards are summarised below: Table 11: Summary of natural provision standards

Typology

Quantity standards (ha/1000 population)

Access standard For assessing current and future provision

Requirement from new development

Natural Green Space

ANGSt 1.50 to be provided within the amenity green space standard

ANGSt

DRAFT


6.3.4 Quality of natural and semi-natural green space

Satisfaction levels with the quality of natural green space are above average, with over 60% of people in the household sample survey rating their quality as good or very good. Consultation results also highlight the value attached to certain attributes of open space, in particular:

Good maintenance and cleanliness

Ease of access

Lack of antisocial behaviour, noise etc. This suggests that the provision of new or improved open space cannot be considered in isolation from the means of maintaining such space, perceptions of antisocial behaviour, and ease of access from within the surrounding environment. The shape and size of space provided (0.2 Ha in size for developments of 50 or more dwellings; 0.1 Ha for developments of 20-49 dwellings) should allow for meaningful and safe recreation. Provision might be expected to include (as appropriate) elements of woodland, wetland, heathland and meadow, and could also be made for informal public access through recreation corridors. For larger areas, where car borne visits might be anticipated, some parking provision will be required. The larger the area the more valuable sites will tend to be in terms of their potential for enhancing local conservation interest and biodiversity. Wherever possible these sites should be linked to help improve wildlife value as part of a network. In areas where it may be impossible or inappropriate to provide additional natural green space consistent with the standard, other approaches should be pursued which could include (for example):

Changing the management of marginal space on playing fields and parks to enhance biodiversity.

Encouraging living green roofs as part of new development/ redevelopment.

Encouraging the creation of mixed species hedgerows.

Additional use of long grass management regimes.

Improvements to watercourses and water bodies.

Innovative use of new drainage schemes / Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS).

Use of native trees and plants with biodiversity value in high quality soft landscaping of new developments.

The above should in any event be principles to be pursued and encouraged at all times. Further guidance in this regard should be included in appropriate SPDs.

DRAFT


7.0 APPLYING LOCAL STANDARDS (STEP 4)

7.1 Introduction This part of the report uses the recommended standards to analyse provision across the study area. This section provides an overview of provision across all parishes, with further detail being provided for the main parishes in the area profiles in part 2 of the report. This section includes: Quantity analysis The quantity of provision is assessed using the recommended quantity standards for each of the typologies where a quantity standard has been developed. Recommended standards are expressed as hectares of open space per 1000 people. The quantity assessment looks at the existing levels of provision, then uses the recommended standard to assess the required level of provision. From this a calculation is made of the supply, which will either be sufficient or insufficient. Within this section, levels of provision are provided by parish or urban settlement area. For each typology, a table showing quantity analysis is shown, it provides:

Existing provision (hectares);

Required provision against the standards (hectares);

Surplus of deficiency of Supply (hectares); Access analysis This section of the report provides analysis of the recommended access standards for each typology across the study area. The maps and analysis in this section are intended to be indicative, providing an overall picture of provision and highlighting any key issues across the study area. However, the key to access analysis, is understanding the picture at a more localised level, therefore, maps showing local access provision are provided within the area profiles (part 2 of the report). Quality analysis This section of the report makes analysis of each typology across the study area – it highlights any common themes or issues that have arisen from the quality audit. Again, local recommendations are highlighted within the area profiles (part 2 of the report).

DRAFT


7.2 Application of quantity standards 7.2.1 Urban Area Analysis Table 12 shows the existing provision of open space in hectares for each typology for each of the urban analysis areas. The figures for ‘Park and Recreation Grounds’ include a combination of the following four typologies:

Park and Recreation Ground;

Outdoor Sport (Pitches);

Outdoor Sport (Other);

Outdoor Sport (Private). Table 13 shows the required level of provision (in hectares), against the recommended standards. Within this table, the figures for ‘park and recreation ground’ includes both public and private facilities as outlined above. Table 14 shows the supply of open space against the recommended standards. This is expressed in hectares and shows where there supply is sufficient or deficient. A more detailed breakdown of quantity provision is shown for each of the main parishes in the area profiles in part 2 of the report. DRAFT


Table 12: Existing provision of open space (hectares) in urban analysis areas

PARISH Allotments

Amenity

Green Space

Park and

Recreation

Ground

(combined)

Park and

Recreation

Ground

Outdoor

Sport

(Pitches)

Outdoor

Sport

(Fixed)

Outdoor

Sport

(Private)

Play Space

(Children)

Play Space

(Youth)

Accessible

Natural

Green Space

Natural

Green Space

(Limited

Access)

Churchyards

and


Amesbury 0.26 18.74 15.09 11.21 2.69 1.19 0 0.32 0.06 0.43 0 1.73 4.04

Box 0.56 3.45 4.53 2.87 1.37 0.29 0 0.08 0.08 1.99 7.2 1.76 1.4

Bradford on

Avon 3.02 2.43 12.6 9.97 2.47 0.16 0.23 0.69 0.15 22.34 4.2 3.49 13.99

Bulford 0 0 3.17 2.28 0.81 0.08 0 0.07 0.05 0 0 0 2.46

Calne 1.72 7.86 19.4 16.16 3 0.24 0.43 0.78 0.26 22.06 0.33 3.26 25.56

Chippenham 4.79 48.55 22.06 14.56 5.74 1.76 6.55 0.73 0.54 59.39 1.29 4.25 45.04

Corsham 2.23 12.08 6.39 5.08 0.91 0.4 9.35 0.73 0.11 18.78 11.81 3.55 13.98

Cricklade 0 8.98 4.06 1.54 2.28 0.24 4.91 0.18 0.04 49.71 2.44 1.37 3.6

Devizes and

Roundway 3.69 27.07 7.48 5.98 1.05 0.45 9.64 0.97 0.44 25.39 1.29 7.96 17.61

Durrington 0.25 8.11 2.57 2.29 0 0.28 0 0.2 0.36 0 0 1.09 8.6

Laverstock 0.97 13.89 3.09 1.73 0.19 1.17 0.89 0.06 0.04 8.28 0.05 0.72 13.78

Ludgershall 2.3 6.36 0.67 0 0.67 0 0 0.21 0 524.85 0 0.63 7.53

Lyneham and

Bradenstoke 0.46 7.58 1.93 1.51 0.42 0 0 0.17 0 2.01 1.9 1.29 1.43

Malmesbury 0.44 2.31 2.21 0.87 1.03 0.31 2.29 0.48 0 9.9 1.42 1.93 6.19

Marlborough 0.62 28.06 7.03 3.38 3.5 0.15 63.56 0.17 0.04 24.2 0 2.49 40.75

Melksham

and

Melksham

Without 3.2 29.72 21.33 15.4 5.1 0.83 6.37 0.95 0.45 14.89 0 3.04 21.16

Pewsey 1.34 1.16 7.9 4.56 2.83 0.51 0 0.31 0.05 95.65 0 1.1 8.32

Purton 3.59 0.34 1.97 0.62 0.92 0.43 2.73 0.07 0.05 193.7 0.69 1.28 5.73

Royal

Wootton

Bassett 2.68 7.42 15.51 8.39 6.58 0.54 0 0.65 0.04 45.36 1.54 1.83 9.37

Salisbury 16.02 145.73 47.45 35.08 10.49 1.88 18.45 1.26 0.29 50.75 25.91 22.56 44.48

Tidworth 0 14.14 25.49 15.23 6.83 3.43 27.54 0.77 0.17 1.65 0 1.6 12.29

Trowbridge

and Hilperton 4.1 25.1 10.75 6.55 3.69 0.51 3.78 1.24 0.57 84.36 39.68 8.95 33.84

Warminster 3.06 25.4 30.87 22.4 7.36 1.11 37.72 1.97 0.21 56.64 36.9 2.87 21.79

Westbury 0 15 6.33 3.82 2.1 0.41 14.18 0.58 0.15 29.52 0 3.98 8.74

Wilton 0 7.88 3.01 2 0.63 0.38 0 0.24 0.01 1254.96 2.17 0.66 4.06

Total 55.3 467.36 282.89 193.48 72.66 16.75 208.62 13.88 4.16 2596.81 138.82 83.39 375.74

DRAFT


Table 13: Required provision of open space in urban analysis areas (hectares)

PARISH Allotments

Amenity

Green

Space

Park and

Recreation

Ground

Play Space

(Children)

Play Space

(Youth)

Amesbury 2.14 16.09 12.87 0.54 0.21

Box 0.7 5.29 4.23 0.18 0.07

Bradford on Avon 1.88 14.1 11.28 0.47 0.19

Bulford 0.84 6.3 5.04 0.21 0.08

Calne 3.45 25.89 20.72 0.86 0.35

Chippenham 7.17 53.74 43 1.79 0.72

Corsham 2.6 19.5 15.6 0.65 0.26

Cricklade 0.85 6.34 5.07 0.21 0.08

Devizes and

Roundway 3.4 25.51 20.41 0.85 0.34

Durrington 1.48 11.07 8.85 0.37 0.15

Laverstock 1.09 8.21 6.57 0.27 0.11

Ludgershall 0.89 6.64 5.31 0.22 0.09

Lyneham and

Bradenstoke 0.99 7.42 5.93 0.25 0.1

Malmesbury 1.08 8.07 6.46 0.27 0.11

Marlborough 1.68 12.59 10.07 0.42 0.17

Melksham and

Melksham Without 4.38 32.86 26.29 1.1 0.44

Pewsey 0.73 5.45 4.36 0.18 0.07

Purton 0.85 6.34 5.07 0.21 0.08

Royal Wootton

Bassett 2.28 17.08 13.66 0.57 0.23

Salisbury 8.06 60.45 48.36 2.02 0.81

Tidworth 2.12 15.93 12.75 0.53 0.21

Trowbridge and

Hilperton 7.44 55.81 44.65 1.86 0.74

Warminster 3.5 26.24 20.99 0.87 0.35

Westbury 2.94 22.06 17.65 0.74 0.29

Wilton 0.72 5.37 4.29 0.18 0.07

DRAFT


Table 14: Supply of open space in urban analysis areas against the Wiltshire Standard (Ha/1000)

PARISH Allotments

Amenity

Green

Space

Park and

Recreation

Ground

(combined)

Park and

Recreation

Ground

Outdoor

Sport

(Pitches)

Outdoor

Sport

(Fixed)

Outdoor

Sport

(Private)

Play Space

(Children)

Play Space

(Youth)

Amesbury -1.88 2.65 2.22 -1.66 2.69 1.19 0.00 -0.22 -0.15

Box -0.14 -1.84 0.30 -1.36 1.37 0.29 0.00 -0.10 0.01

Bradford on Avon 1.14 -11.67 1.55 -1.31 2.47 0.16 0.23 0.22 -0.04

Bulford -0.84 -6.30 -1.87 -2.76 0.81 0.08 0.00 -0.14 -0.03

Calne -3.01 -18.03 -13.27 -16.94 3.00 0.24 0.43 -0.08 -0.09

Chippenham -2.38 -5.20 -21.37 -34.95 5.27 1.76 6.55 -1.06 -0.18

Corsham -0.37 -7.42 0.14 -10.52 0.91 0.40 9.35 0.08 -0.15

Cricklade -0.85 2.64 3.90 -3.53 2.28 0.24 4.91 -0.03 -0.04

Devizes and

Roundway 0.29 1.56 -3.29 -14.43 1.05 0.45 9.64 0.12 0.10

Durrington -1.23 -2.96 -6.28 -6.56 0.00 0.28 0.00 -0.17 0.21

Laverstock -0.12 5.68 -2.59 -4.84 0.19 1.17 0.89 -0.21 -0.07

Ludgershall 1.41 -0.28 -4.64 -5.31 0.67 0.00 0.00 -0.01 -0.09

Lyneham and

Bradenstoke -0.53 0.16 -4.00 -4.42 0.42 0.00 0.00 -0.08 -0.10

Malmesbury -0.64 -5.76 -1.96 -5.59 1.03 0.31 2.29 0.21 -0.11

Marlborough -1.06 15.47 -3.04 -6.69 3.50 0.15 0.00 -0.25 -0.13

Melksham and

Melksham Without -1.18 -3.14 1.41 -10.89 5.10 0.83 6.37 -0.15 0.01

Pewsey 0.61 -4.29 3.54 0.20 2.83 0.51 0.00 0.13 -0.02

Purton 2.74 -6.00 -0.37 -4.45 0.92 0.43 2.73 -0.14 -0.03

Royal Wootton

Bassett 0.40 -9.66 1.85 -5.27 6.58 0.54 0.00 0.08 -0.19

Salisbury 7.96 85.28 6.66 -13.28 10.49 1.88 7.57 -0.76 -0.52

Tidworth -2.12 -1.79 40.28 2.48 6.83 3.43 27.54 0.24 -0.04

Trowbridge and

Hilperton -3.34 -30.71 -30.12 -38.10 3.69 0.51 3.78 -0.62 -0.17

Warminster -0.44 -0.84 14.39 1.41 7.36 1.11 4.51 1.10 -0.14

Westbury -2.94 -7.06 -8.96 -13.83 2.10 0.41 2.36 -0.16 -0.14

Wilton -0.72 2.51 -1.28 -2.29 0.63 0.38 0.00 0.06 -0.06

DRAFT


7.2.2 Rural Analysis Areas Table 15: Existing provision of open space in rural analysis areas (hectares)

CBA Allotments

Recreation

Space

Recreation

Space


Accessible

Natural

Green

Space

Natural

Green Space

(Limited

Access)

Churchyards

and


Amesbury 1.32 21.83 7.6 0.64 1030.5 7.51 4.31 4.28

Bradford on

Avon 0 27.58 0.23 0.23 47.15 0.45 1.34 4.41

Calne 1.28 33.63 7.92 0.18 161.58 0 3.9 10.15

Chippenham 1.98 24.1 15.19 0.71 91.32 10.98 6.59 21.65

Corsham 2.75 20.95 3.05 0.5 4.31 0.21 1.86 1.99

Devizes 2.64 29.46 15.06 0.68 83.51 0.16 7.98 51.3

Malmesbury 4.13 27 1.35 0.75 240.09 1.81 9.16 14.36

Marlborough 0.26 21.27 66.51 0.67 708.69 0.85 7.33 23.19

Melksham 0 7.44 0.31 0.58 13.97 39.68 3.18 21.3

Pewsey 1.31 21.42 6.49 0.89 168.5 1.19 8.56 4.91

Royal

Wootton

Bassett and

Cricklade 0.07 5.98 0 0.44 280.88 0.8 1.86 1.82

Southern

Wiltshire 2.39 42.34 2.18 0.54 96.84 0.07 6.28 9.33

South West

Wiltshire 4.48 115.94 18.56 0.82 1090.81 47.07 9.22 8.48

Tidworth 0.3 8.33 0 0.17 527.62 11.27 3.18 1.2

Trowbridge 2.47 6.57 3.01 0.25 162.72 50.58 0.94 1.71

Warminster 0.51 30.72 0 0.47 115.33 0.59 3.66 5.06

Westbury 0.64 21.45 0 0.19 83.19 0.48 1.89 1.12

Total 26.53 466.01 147.46 8.71 4907.01 173.7 81.24 186.26DRAFT


Table 16: Required provision of open space in rural analysis areas (hectares)

PARISH Allotments Recreation Space Play Space

Amesbury 2.64 31.71 0.74

Bradford on Avon 2.13 25.6 0.6

Calne 1.48 17.72 0.41

Chippenham 2.38 28.61 0.67

Corsham 1.03 12.39 0.29

Devizes 3.76 45.17 1.05

Malmesbury 3.51 42.18 0.98

Marlborough 2.39 28.67 0.67

Melksham 1.61 19.31 0.45

Pewsey 2.58 30.93 0.72

Royal Wootton Bassett and

Cricklade 0.99 11.89 0.28

Southern Wiltshire 3.07 36.89 0.86

South West Wiltshire 4.61 55.37 1.29

Tidworth 1.04 12.54 0.29

Trowbridge 1.11 13.33 0.31

Warminster 1.74 20.89 0.49

Westbury 1.22 14.62 0.34

DRAFT


Table 17: Supply of open space in rural analysis areas against the Wiltshire Standard (Ha/1000)

CBA Allotments

Recreation

Space

(combined)

Recreation

Space

Recreation

Space (Private) Play Space

Amesbury -1.32 -2.28 -9.88 7.60 -0.10

Bradford on

Avon -2.13 2.21 1.98 0.23 -0.37

Calne -0.20 23.84 15.92 7.92 -0.23

Chippenham -0.40 10.68 -4.51 15.19 0.04

Corsham 1.72 11.61 8.56 3.05 0.21

Devizes -1.12 -0.65 -15.71 15.06 -0.37

Malmesbury 0.62 -13.83 -15.18 1.35 -0.23

Marlborough -2.13 59.11 -7.40 66.51 0.00

Melksham -1.61 -11.56 -11.87 0.31 0.13

Pewsey -1.27 -3.02 -9.51 6.49 0.17

Royal Wootton

Bassett and

Cricklade -0.92 -5.91 -5.91 0.00 0.16

Southern

Wiltshire 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

South West

Wiltshire -0.68 7.63 5.45 2.18 -0.32

Tidworth -0.13 79.13 60.57 18.56 -0.47

Trowbridge -0.74 -4.21 -4.21 0.00 -0.12

Warminster 1.36 -3.75 -6.76 3.01 -0.06

Westbury -1.23 9.83 9.83 0.00 -0.02

Westbury -0.58 6.83 6.83 0.00 -0.15 DRAFT


7.3 Application of access standards This section provides an overview of access to different types of open space typologies across the whole study area. The maps are intended to provide an overview and are for illustrative purposes only. More detailed maps by parish and settlement area are provided within the area profiles in part 2 of this report. 7.3.1 Access to open space in urban analysis area Figure 19 Access to allotments across urban analysis areas

DRAFT


Figure 20 Access to amenity green space across urban analysis areas

Figure 21 Access to parks and recreation grounds across the urban analysis area

DRAFT


Figure 22 Access to children’s play space across the urban analysis area

Figure 23 Access to youth play space across the urban analysis area

DRAFT


7.3.2 Access to open space in rural analysis areas Figure 24 Access to Allotments across the rural analysis area

DRAFT


Figure 25 Access to Recreation Space across the rural analysis area

Figure 26 Access to Play Space across the rural analysis area

DRAFT


7.4 Application of standards (natural provision) This section looks at the application of standards for natural green space, and also considers the provision of rights of way. 7.4.1 Accessible Natural Green space Standards (ANGST) The ANGST are:

at least one accessible 20 hectare site within two kilometre of home;

one accessible 100 hectare site within five kilometres of home; and

one accessible 500 hectare site within ten kilometres of home; plus

a minimum of one hectare of statutory Local Nature Reserves per thousand population at least 2 hectares in size, no more than 300 metres (5 minutes’ walk) from home;

Figure 27 Access to 20 ha site within 2km

DRAFT


Figure 28 Access to 100 ha site within 5 km

Figure 29 Access to 500 ha site within 10 km

DRAFT


Figure 30 Access to Local Nature Reserves

As there are so few Local nature Reserves in the study area, figure 30 shows the location of each LNR with a buffer of 300 metres. As the map illustrates, there are significant deficiencies in attaining this standards across the study area.

DRAFT


Table 18 Summary of access issues for natural green space

Standard Key access Issues

ANGST:

at least one accessible 20 hectare site within two kilometre of home

Major gaps exist in central parts of the study area, northern areas and south west areas.

one accessible 100 hectare site within five kilometres of home

Gaps in north west, north east and south west

one accessible 500 hectare site within ten kilometres of home

Gaps in whole of northern area and part of south west

minimum of one hectare of statutory LNR’s per thousand population at least 2 hectares in size, no more than 300 metres (5 minutes’ walk) from home

Very little provision within the study area, therefore significant gaps with little real chance of fulfilling this standard

7.5 Application of quality standards

7.5.1 Quality of open space – consultation key findings Respondents were asked how they rated various types of facilities in the study area in terms of quality. The responses of those expressing an opinion on specific categories of facility are illustrated below: Figure 31 Quality of open space (responses from household survey)

DRAFT


All facilities are rated average or better by a majority of households other than facilities for teenagers. 50% of households highlighted the quality of outdoor facilities for teenagers as being either poor or very poor.

Over 20% thought that the quality of astro-turf pitches; allotments; and courts and greens was poor or very poor.


Urban/Rural variations

The quality of play areas and parks and recreation grounds is rated higher in urban areas than rural e.g. 15% of urban households rate play areas as very good compared to 6% in rural areas; 17% in urban areas rate parks as very good compared to 14% in rural.

Over 56% of rural households rate teenage facilities as poor/very poor compared to 44% in urban areas.

The quality of country parks, accessible woodlands etc; rights of way; and allotments is rated higher in rural than urban areas e.g. 36% of rural households rate allotments as good/very good compared to 26% in urban areas.

Otherwise the variation in ratings quality for different typologies of open space and facilities was relatively small.

The detailed findings regarding quality will be useful in relation to the determination of the “quality” aspect of local standards. 7.5.2 Quality of open space – audit findings The quality audit was undertaken at 300 sites across the study area. The sites selected for audit focused on multi-functional parks and recreation grounds which included playing pitches (these audits are included in the playing pitch study report). The details on the sites audited are provided in a quality audit database which has been provided as an electronic document as part of this study. The key findings and sites with most potential for improvements are highlighted in the eighteen area profiles (part 2 of this report).

DRAFT


8.0 STRATEGIC OPTIONS, POLICY & MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS (STEP 5) This section sets out strategic options and policy recommendations for open space within Wiltshire. It draws on all the previous steps of the study to bring together informed recommendations, and addresses a number of specific requirements of the study brief.

8.1 Strategic Options 8.1.1 Introduction

This section outlines higher level strategic options which may be applicable at town, parish and study area wide level. The strategic options addresses four key areas:

1) Existing provision to be protected; 2) Existing provision to be enhanced; 3) Opportunities for re-location/re-designation of open space; 4) Identification of areas for new provision; 5) Facilities that may be surplus to requirement.

8.1.2 Delivering Strategic Options Since the adoption of the National Planning Policy Framework in 2012, the planning environment is still in a state of change and flux. The abolition of regional spatial strategies, and the move towards localism, puts more focus on local authorities to work with local communities to make decisions and deliver services, rather than relying on national or regional guidance. This will clearly impact how some of the recommendations in this study will be delivered. Whilst the Local Authority will have an important role in delivering open space, sport and recreation facilities, their role may move from that of ‘deliverer’ to ‘facilitator’. The aim will be to work with community organisations to make local decisions about how facilities and services will be provided. Organisations such as neighbourhood fora, residents groups, voluntary organisation, sports clubs and societies will all have a key role in this. One of the emerging priorities from localism is for there to be much more local decision making with regards to planning, and for local communities to develop neighbourhood plans. Although it is up to local communities to define their own priorities within neighbourhood plans, the information provided within the area profiles in this study will form a good basis to inform any decisions related to the provision of open space. The following sections, consider the key issues for open space in the study area, and the recommendations that emerge need to be taken in context with the Localism Act and consider how they can fit into local decision making. With this agenda still relatively new, the following sections serve to highlight issues, but do not necessarily resolve how they may be delivered.

DRAFT


8.1.3 Existing provision to be protected The starting point of any policy adopted by the Council should be that all open space should be afforded protection unless it can be proved it is not required. Existing open space or sport and recreation facilities which should be given the highest level of protection by the planning system are those which are either:

Critically important in avoiding deficiencies in accessibility, quality or quantity and scored highly in the value assessment; or

Of particular nature conservation, historical or cultural value. The area profiles (part 2) of this study provide more detailed results at Community Area Board level as to the above considerations. The following draws on this and makes some more general observations and recommendations. Open Space Policy Recommendations (protecting open space): OS1 The distribution of open space varies across the study area, however, there are

identified shortages of at least 1 typology of open space in most areas. It is therefore recommended that priority is placed on protecting those open spaces where there is an existing shortfall of supply as highlighted in the area profiles.

OS2 Sites which are critical to avoiding deficiencies, or making existing deficiencies worse, in quality, quantity or access should be protected unless suitable alternative provision can be provided which would compensate for any deficiencies caused.

OS3 Sites which have significant nature conservation, historical or cultural value should be afforded protection, even if there is an identified surplus in quality, quantity or access in that local area.

OS4 The importance of privately managed spaces (e.g. sports grounds) as a community facility has been highlighted in this study. Therefore it is recommended the above policies apply to both public and private open space. protection.

8.1.4 Existing provision to be enhanced In areas where there is a quantitative deficiency of provision but no accessibility issues then increasing the capacity of existing provision may be considered. Alternatively, in areas where facilities or spaces do not meet the relevant quality standards, qualitative enhancements will be required. This includes those spaces or facilities which:

DRAFT


Are critically important in avoiding deficiencies in diversity, accessibility or quantity, but

Scored poorly in the quality or value assessment. Those sites which require enhancement are identified within the quality audit that was undertaken. Some of the key observations related to site enhancement include:

1. The importance of providing high quality provision and maintenance of formal

facilities such as Parks and Recreation Grounds and Play Space. 2. The role of private sports spaces to some local communities and the need to

provide opportunity for investment. 3. The need to ensure high quality open spaces are designed and provided through

new development where feasible. 4. The importance of rights of way and natural green space within the Study area,

and the need to maintain and enhance provision for biodiversity. 5. The role of open space in contributing to wider initiatives and strategies, for

example providing background information for Wiltshire’s green infrastructure strategy.

6. Extending and enhancing the network of green infrastructure including the connectivity between sites and improved accessibility to existing sites.

Open Space Policy Recommendations (enhancing open space): OS5 OS6

Future LDPD’s and Neighbourhood Plans should consider the opportunities for creating and enhancing a network of both utility and recreation routes for use by foot and bike in both urban and rural areas. Creative application of the amenity green space/natural green space components of the proposed overall standard in respect of new development should be explored. The study makes recommendations for improving the quality of open space across the study area. However, a long term strategy for achieving improvements is required which could be delivered through a Green space Strategy, neighbourhood plans and be considered within the Infrastructure Delivery Plan.

OS7 Priorities for improvement include the enhancement of the rights of way network and improving provision for teenagers.

OS8 Management plans should be developed for the main parks, sport and recreation grounds. These priorities could be considered in neighbourhood plans and by the local community.

8.1.5 Opportunities for re-location/re-designation of open space In some areas it may be possible to make better use of land by relocating an open space or sport and recreation facility, especially if this will enhance its quality or accessibility for

DRAFT


existing users, or use land which is not suitable for another purpose. This needs to be determined at a local level, considering the quality, quantity and access to facilities at neighbourhood level (Community Area Boards) and in some cases across the study area. Although it is up to local communities to define their own priorities within neighbourhood plans, the information provided within the area profiles in this study will form a good basis to inform any decisions related to the provision or replacement of open space, sport and recreation facilities. Some settlements may seek a consolidation of facilities on a single site, such as a new sports hub. These decisions could include the spatial and investment plans for green space, and set the foundations for green space provision (e.g. for the next 20 years). They should outline where different types of facilities and space - such as children's playgrounds, sports pitches, young people's facilities etc. are to be located. It will also identify if any green space is no longer needed and its disposal or re use can be used to fund improvements to other spaces. Each plan should apply the standards and policies set out in this study and ensure that the significant investment anticipated for green spaces is prioritised with the help of stakeholders and communities. The standards agreed in this study can determine a minimum level of quality and quantity of green space provision and the maximum distance people should have to travel to access different types of green space. The area profiles provided with this study provide information on the existing supply of different types of open space, an analysis of access and identify local issues related to quality. They will act as a good starting point for feeding into neighbourhood plans in consultation with the local community. Open Space Policy Recommendations (relocating open space):

OS9 Develop a pilot project within one of the towns to develop a neighbourhood plan which incorporates green space planning.

8.1.6 Identification of areas for new provision New provision will be required where there is a new development and a planned increase in population, and/or an existing deficiency in supply or access to facilities exists. The area profiles outline the existing situation with regards to supply and access to green infrastructure. As discussed, neighbourhood plans would form a good mechanism to determine exactly where new provision is required, however, this study can be used as the basis for decision making, as follows: Quantity Within the study report, for each typology, there is an identified ‘sufficient supply’ or ‘under supply’ for each of the urban and rural analysis areas. If an area has an existing under supply of any typology, there may be need for additional provision. This could be delivered through

DRAFT


developing a new site (for example as part of a housing development), acquiring land to extend the site or changing the typology of an existing space (which may be in over supply). The supply statistics should be used as part of the decision making process in development management to determine if a new development should provide facilities on-site or enhance existing provision through developer contributions. The use of the quantity statistics should not be in isolation, and considered alongside the access standards. Access This study considers how access to different types of open space varies across parishes against the proposed standards. The maps show where there are deficiencies and potential over supply of facilities. This information can be used alongside the quantity statistics to determine if new provision or improved accessibility is required in an area. For example, if a new development is proposed, the maps should be consulted to determine if there is an existing gap in provision of a particular typology which could be met by the development. Therefore, even though the quantity statistics may identify a sufficient supply of a particular typology, there may be gaps in access, and thus a new facility may still be required. Delivering new provision There are a number of opportunities for delivering new facilities through new development – developer contributions and to a lesser extent through capital and grant funding. New development, CIL and developer contributions Wiltshire Council have submitted their draft charging schedule and policy for the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) to the Planning Inspectorate for consideration. Many community needs and aspirations which will have a call on this levy. This open space study clearly identifies that there are needs for new and /or enhanced open space provision, particularly where new development is planned. Outside of CIL, new development will also be required to provide on-site open space in line with the standards outlined in this study. Whilst not all developments will be of a size that will generate the requirement for on-site open space (see table 22), when considering future housing numbers for Wiltshire, there will be many that will. This study should be used to make local decisions about where and when new on-site provision will be required. Capital and grant funding Although the availability of capital and grant funding has diminished in recent years, nevertheless funding does become available for providing facilities for open space, sport and recreation. National and governing bodies for individual sports should be consulted where new infrastructure is required, such as changing rooms and sports pitches. Environmental

DRAFT


grants and stewardship schemes are available for managing natural green space. As neighbourhood plans are developed and open space priorities are established within these, funding requirements will be identified and delivery through grant funding can be considered. Open Space Policy Recommendations (new provision of open space): OS10 New provision of open space will be required as part of new development in towns

or parishes where there are existing deficiencies in quantity or access to open space and/or where the new development will result in deficiencies. Where on-site provision is required, it should be provided in line with the proposed open space standards. Where on-site provision is deemed impractical, or not required, consideration will be given to opportunities for off-site provision through pooling of S106 contributions in line with policy.

OS11 The priorities for new provision are for teenage facilities and improving access to the countryside via the rights of way network.

8.1.7 Facilities that are surplus to requirement In addition to the strategic options outlined above, consideration should also be given to facilities that are surplus to requirement. There are important issues to resolve in terms of getting the correct balance of green infrastructure across the study area before any disposal can be contemplated. Whilst there is under provision relative to the minimum standards in several areas, there are other areas where provision compares favourably with the standards. However, it is once again emphasised that the proposed standards are for minimum levels of provision. Factors to be taken into account before any decision to release open space for alternative uses can be taken include:

The local value and use of a given open space - as it may be a locally popular resource.

Whether future local development/population growth might generate additional demands for open space.

Whether there is a demonstrable need for some other type of open space within the locality that a given space (subject to a change of management regime) would be well placed to meet.

Other non-recreational reasons that suggest a space should be retained (which might include ecological and visual reasons).

DRAFT


Figure 32 suggests an outline of the decision process that should be followed before the development of an open space can be seriously contemplated. Figure 32: Outline decision making process in relation to sanctioning (re)development of open space A hypothetical example of how this might be applied is as follows as related to an area of informal/amenity space. Q. Is there sufficient quantity? A. If the minimum quantitative standard for Informal/amenity space is achieved in a defined geographical area, the relative provision of other forms of open space must then be considered. (Informal open space can in principle be converted into other forms of open space where the need arises). If a) provision meets the minimum quantitative standard; b) there is no significant local information suggesting a need to retain the site; and, c) there is not a perceived lack of other forms of open space. The next question can be addressed. Q. Is there sufficient access to other opportunities? A. Within the defined geographical area there may be good overall provision of informal space relative to the quantity standard, but is it in the right place and can it be easily reached? Applying the accessibility component of the minimum standards will help to answer this question. If other similar open space cannot be easily reached, the site’s disposal for other uses may be unacceptable. Q. Are other accessible and similar opportunities elsewhere of sufficient quality? A. If it can be demonstrated that alternative opportunities are sufficient both in quantity and accessibility, there may still exist issues with the quality of these alternative provisions. The quality component of the proposed standards may indicate that certain improvements to alternative opportunities must be made which should be funded and secured before development is sanction. Even if these three tests are passed there may be other reasons for the site to remain as open space. For example, it may have value as a natural habitat or for views offerh considerations are important, but beyond the scop A hypothetical example of how this might be applied follows, and relates to an area of amenity open space.

Is there

sufficient

quantity

elsewhere?

Fail, unless

compensatory

provision made

Need to take into account

application of minimum

quantity standards and other

relevant local information

Is there

adequate access

to alternative

provision

opportunities?

Is there

sufficient

quality of

alternative

provision?

Consider other environmental and visual issues

Fail, unless access

improvements

made

Fail, unless quality

improvements

made



access standards and other




quality standards and other


No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

DRAFT


Q. Is there sufficient quantity? A. If the minimum quantitative standard for amenity green space is exceeded in a defined geographical area, the relative provision of other forms of open space must then be considered. (Amenity green space can in principle be converted into other forms of open space where the need arises). If a) provision meets the minimum quantitative standard; b) there is no significant local information suggesting a need to retain the site; and, c) there is not a perceived lack of other forms of open space. The next question can be addressed. Q. Is there adequate access to alternative provision? A. Within the defined geographical area there may be good overall provision of amenity green space relative to the quantity standard, but is it in the right place and can it be easily reached? Applying the accessibility component of the minimum standards will help to answer this question. If other similar open space cannot be easily reached, the site’s disposal for other uses may be unacceptable. Q. Are other accessible and similar opportunities elsewhere of sufficient quality? A. If it can be demonstrated that alternative opportunities are sufficient both in quantity and accessibility, there may still exist issues with the quality of these alternative provisions. The quality component of the proposed standards may indicate that certain improvements to alternative opportunities must be made which should be funded and secured before development is sanctioned. Even if these three tests are passed there may be other reasons for the site to remain as open space. For example, it may have value as a natural habitat or be visually important. Such considerations are important, but beyond the scope of this report.

DRAFT


8.2 Developer Contributions This section draws on the policy recommendations in the previous section and outlines a process for calculating developer contributions for on-site provision and recommendations for management and maintenance procedures and costs. 8.2.1 Developer contributions and Community Infrastructure Levy This section sets out higher level strategic recommendations and recommends an approach to developer contributions which can be used to inform policy for on-site contributions and to inform the feasibility for any off site investment proposed (through CIL or other external funding mechanisms). 1) Capital cost of providing open space In order to calculate developer contributions for facilities, a methodology has been adopted which calculates how much it would cost the Local Authority to provide them. These costs have been calculated using local information, and have also been benchmarked against other Local Authorities costs for providing facilities. A summary of the costs are outlined in table 19 below. Contributions towards the provision or improvement of open space are calculated using the capital cost of provision. The same charges apply to both provision of new facilities and the upgrading/improvement of existing facilities, which more often than not includes new provision. Contribution per person is therefore taken to be a reasonable measure of that impact, irrespective of whether new provision or improvement of existing facilities is required. The calculated costs have drawn on the standards of provision for urban areas, as this is where the majority of proposed growth is planned. Table 19 Costs for providing open space

Typology Standard (m²) per person

Cost of provision

Cost / m² Contribution per person

Allotments 2.0 £30.00 £60.00

Play Space (Children’s and Youth Provision) 0.7 £170.00 £119.00

Parks and Recreation grounds 12.0 £72.00 £864.00

Amenity/Natural green space 10.0 £15.00 £150.00

Total 24.7 £1,193

This shows that it costs £1,193 per person to provide new open space to meet the Wiltshire standard for open space. These calculations are to be used to calculate developer contributions for on-site provision and where feasible any off site projects.

DRAFT


2) Maintenance Contributions for on-site provision If a development is required to provide open space on-site, the developer would be expected to maintain the open space for a minimum period of 1 year. Developers will then be asked to maintain the new provision through a management company. It is expected that a management plan for the open space would be submitted and approved by the council as a planning condition. If the developer does not wish to assume responsibility for maintaining the open space, the council may be willing to accept a commuted sum and make arrangements for management of the open space through the council or a third party. The amount payable for the commuted sum will be calculated using the figures in table 20. Table 20 Maintenance sums payable for open space

Typology Cost/m²

Play Space (Children’s and Youth Provision) £3.67

Parks, Sport & Recreation Grounds £0.92

Amenity and Natural Green Space £0.62

Allotments £0.13

The figures in table 20 show how much it costs to maintain open space per metre squared. The figures have been calculated from average unit rates for maintenance of different types of open space, drawn from standard rates (Spons). 3) Eligible types of development for on-site provision Table 21 outlines the type of housing that will be considered eligible for making contributions towards open space to meet the needs of future occupants. Table 21 Eligible types of residential development

Category Open Market Housing / Flats

Affordable Housing *

Housing for the active elderly

Permanent mobile homes

Play Space ? ×

Outdoor Sports Space ?

Parks and Gardens ?

Amenity Open Space ?

Natural Green Space ?

Allotments ?

[* Should recognise that affordable housing generates a need for new green infrastructure, but it is a policy decision as to whether GI contributions should be provided]. Includes agricultural workers’ dwellings. Excludes extensions (for administrative reasons) Excludes replacement dwellings and nursing houses types.

DRAFT


4) Thresholds for provision The required open space, sport and recreation facilities can be provided by on-site provision, or through CIL (if included in adopted policy). Where facilities are to be provided on-site, the Council will expect the developer to provide the land for the facility and either:

Design and build the provision to the satisfaction of the Council; or

Make a financial contribution to the Council so that it may arrange for the construction and development of the required facility.

The decision on whether facility provision is to be on-site, off-site or both depends on the following considerations:

The scale of the proposed development and site area;

The suitability of a site reflecting, for example, its topography or flood risk;

The existing provision of facilities within the neighbourhood and/or the sub area;

Other sites in the neighbourhood where additional provision is proposed;

Existing access to facilities within the neighbourhood and/or sub area. Table 22 provides an indicative guide to assess which scales of housing generate a need for facilities in the categories listed to be provided on-site. For developments 20 – 49 dwellings the minimum size of amenity green space or parks, sports and recreation grounds is 0.1Ha. For developments of over 50 dwelling the minimum will be 0.2Ha.

Table 22 Requirement for open space, sport and recreation facilities

Type of Provision 1-19 dwellings 20-49 dwellings 50-99 dwellings 100+ dwellings

Allotments X X

Amenity Green Space X

Parks Sports and Recreation Grounds

X

Play Space (children) X X

Play Space (Youth) X X

Recreation Space (Rural)

X

Play Space (Rural) X X

KEY: on-site provision normally sought X off-site provision normally required

DRAFT

Date post:	11-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	3 times
Download:	0 times