Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review Board Final Report 2016 A city becomes magnificent when the spaces between the buildings equal the architecture they frame Contents
Mayoral Preface...... 6 Chair’s Note...... 8 1. The Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review Board...... 9 Board Members...... 9 2. Overview and Introduction...... 13 Background and Context...... 13 Time of Austerity...... 13 The Review...... 14 The Final Report...... 15 3. Report Structure...... 19 4. Health and Wellbeing...... 21 The contribution of green and open spaces to public health and wellbeing...... 22 General health and wellbeing...... 24 Protection from harmful environmental exposures...... 24 Promoting physical activity...... 25 Promoting social interaction and cohesion...... 25 Public health in Liverpool and the role of green and open spaces...... 27 Integrating public health care and green and open spaces...... 28
1 5. Environmental Factors...... 33 Climate change, flooding, air quality and biodiversity...... 33 Climate change...... 34 Hotter, drier summers...... 34 The role of green spaces in hotter, drier summers...... 35 Milder, wetter winters...... 35 The role of green spaces in milder, wetter weather...... 35 Unpredictable and extreme weather events...... 36 The role of green spaces in unpredictable and extreme weather events...... 36 Sea level rise...... 36 The role of green spaces for future sea level rise...... 36 Flooding...... 36 Surface water flooding...... 37 The role of green spaces in surface water flood alleviation...... 37 Tidal flooding...... 39 The role of green and open spaces in tidal flooding...... 39 Air quality...... 39 Air quality in Liverpool...... 39 Air quality and the role of green spaces ...... 40 Biodiversity...... 41 Biodiversity in Liverpool...... 41 6. Education...... 45 Environmental education in Liverpool...... 46 The importance of organised educational activities within parks...... 46
2 7. Finance - Balancing the Books?...... 49 Public parks finances...... 50 Balancing the books ...... 50 Public park – alternative maintenance regimes...... 51 The Future – Public parks, nature reserves and other public spaces...... 51 Sport and recreation finance...... 55 Playing pitch strategy...... 56 Other sports provision models...... 59 Highways and verges finances...... 59 Other spaces finance...... 60 Current cost other spaces 2016/17...... 60 Incidental space – alternative maintenance regimes...... 60 The future for incidental spaces...... 61 8. Other Options including Park Trusts...... 63 Six options for consideration...... 63 Option 1: Referendum for parks levy...... 63 Option 2: Car park levy...... 64 Option 3: Tourism levy...... 64 Option 4: Student levy...... 65 Option 5: Do nothing...... 65 Option 6: Parks Trust...... 67 Exploring a blended finance charitable parks trust model...... 67 Scoping the trust portfolio...... 67 Making a parks trust affordable – capital costs and commercialism...... 68 A charitable trust endowment...... 69 Future considerations and work...... 70 Brownfield development...... 70 Potential Stakeholders...... 70 Croxteth Country Park and Hall...... 73
3 9. Planning For the future...... 75 The Local Plan process...... 75 Providing enough housing...... 75 Protecting land and buildings for economic growth (providing enough employment land)...... 76 Protecting the open space that Liverpool needs...... 76 The next steps and the Local Plan examination stage...... 77 Housing...... 77 Employment land...... 80 Land categorisation...... 80 Green corridors forming a ‘Green Web’...... 81 Establishment of a ‘Green Web’ for Liverpool...... 82 Green corridors – the evidence...... 82 1.The added value of links-hubs-nodes...... 82 2.Behavioural change and added socio-economic benefits of access to and from nature...... 83 3.Non-motorised transport and the promotion of walking-cycling as significant forms of mobility...... 84 Green corridors – make the most of existing land use...... 84 ‘Green Web’ – strategic alignment with development contributions...... 85 Capital costs...... 88 Maintenance...... 89 Equity and accessibility...... 92 Opportunities for improving equity and accessibility...... 92 Play areas...... 92 Green Flag sites...... 93 Public woodland...... 95 Business links...... 95 Blue green links...... 97 Equestrian links...... 98 Corporate Access Forum (CAF)...... 99
4 10. Engagement...... 101 Engagement in Liverpool...... 102 Engagement Initiatives...... 103 11. Recommendations...... 107 Board Thematic Recommendations...... 108 Chair’s Recommendations...... 114 1. A Parks Trust...... 114 2. Green space maintenance and development funding...... 115 3. External green space funding...... 115 4. Liverpool ‘Green Web’...... 116 12. Chair’s Concluding Thoughts...... 119 Glossary of Terms and Acronyms...... 123 List of Figures...... 127 List of Tables...... 127 List of Appendices...... 127 Appendix 1...... 129 Appendix 5...... 138 Appendix 6...... 140 Appendix 10...... 140
5 Mayoral Preface
I would like to thank Simon and the Board Members for their time and commitment over the last 18 months. The scope of the work they have taken on has increased beyond what was originally envisaged and they have collectively led the way in seeking a solution to a problem that is affecting local authorities up and down the country. I asked Simon and the Board to consult locally and widely on the future of our parks and green spaces and it was very encouraging to see the strength of feeling and public support for such areas across the city. We are fortunate to live and work in a city that is defined by its historical green spaces and waterfront setting. Our green and open spaces are extremely valuable to the people of the city and they provide many benefits - spaces for outdoor exercise, education, biodiversity, as well as other environmental enhancements such as contributing to temperature control, flood alleviation and improved air quality. But to maintain our parks and spaces, regrettably comes with a high financial cost. So far, Liverpool City Council has lost 58% of our Government funding • identified £1million of funding from developers who have gained planning and by 2020 the Government will reduce this to zero. The longer term consent that is being invested in a 2 year Play Area Improvement maintenance of our green and open spaces is increasingly at risk. I therefore Programme to introduce 8 new natural outdoor play areas and refurbish tasked the Board to research and investigate alternative, cost-effective 11 existing playgrounds options that would enable us to retain and improve our green spaces in the future as Liverpool remains a global destination and continues to attract • promoted the ‘Green Web’ initiative for interconnecting green corridor visitors and businesses. routes and sought to include this within the emerging Local Plan The Board’s Interim Report was published in December 2015 and by bringing • launched a new Environmental Initiative Fund; providing grants for together local voices, background information and best practice models it community, school and business groups to make local green space presented a number of recommendations and identified the key objectives improvements to be addressed in the final report. • identified a site for a new park in Kirkdale, Melrose Cutting Since the publication of the Interim Report several months ago, I have, • partnered with key city stakeholders to submit a multi-million Euro bid for despite ongoing austerity, championed several initiatives to help deliver its a Horizon 2020 project, which if successful would allow us to establish recommendations. In direct response to the Board’s work and their interim green routes in our city centre. recommendations the city council has:
6 We will continue to review the recommendations, working with partners and stakeholders to progress other environmental proposals and initiatives, wherever possible. I am aware that the final report provides a number of alternative and complementary options that can now be considered to help us address the longer-term financial sustainability of our parks and green spaces. The Chair has made no secret of his interest in exploring a Parks Trust model and we will investigate those opportunities with Heritage Lottery and the National Trust. I want to see the proposals with the greatest positive impact brought to our city, and we will continue to look at the options available. I have no doubt that Liverpool will rise to the challenges facing our parks and green spaces and that this report is an important and significant contribution to the next steps of this journey. Once again, I thank Simon and the Board for their effort, time and commitment to our City.
Joe Anderson OBE Mayor of Liverpool liverpool.gov.uk/greenandopenspaces
7 The purpose of the final report is to build on the Chair’s Note 18 months of evidence gathering, consultation and discussion in the Interim Report and to focus on emerging key recommendations for the I sincerely hope that Central Government very quickly realises that the perilous future. The final report contains the voices of all state of Liverpool’s parks and public spaces is not a local issue. This is not a the Board members, members of the public and matter of a bellyaching Labour Council. key stakeholders who have engaged so sincerely From London to Newcastle a crisis is looming. with the review. As well as quotes from public meetings and correspondence I tasked Members This has finally been recognised by the Communities and Local Government of the Board and my strategic support officer to Committee with the launch of a public parks inquiry to examine the impact of write specific sections of this report where they reduced local authority budgets on these open spaces and consider concerns had particular experience and interest. The main that their existence is under threat. report is broken into distinct categories to enable the Mayor and the people My countrywide visits, conference attendance and presentations have painted of Liverpool to consider the immediate and longer term future of the green a very clear picture. As austerity measures and reduction to the public service and open spaces of our city. For ease of reference the final report is also sector continue unabated then those Local Council services which are non- supplemented by a Chair’s summary and recommendations, which include statutory will obviously have the weakest voice when it comes to grabbing a all the Board’s recommendations in addition to the 4 actions that I feel will share of dwindling resources and these include parks and other green spaces. deliver the greatest impact in the shortest space of time. Yet public open space is massively undervalued with regard to a host of major The final report also debates differing methods for maintaining and possibly issues facing our society. Health provision, environmental factors such as air enhancing our outdoor recreational facilities as the current public sector pollution and flood alleviation, as well as huge economic benefits to industry budget for such provision disappears. Liverpool is one of the first cities to and private property, are but a few of the valuable contributions the unbuilt undertake as thorough a piece of work and could lead the way into a dramatic environment bring to our nation. Academics understand, Health Providers and bold new approach to green space provision in the Core Cities. The work are realising and people just know that it is time to celebrate the true worth of the Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review will enable the people of of the space around us. Liverpool to assess the options and decide how we continue to care for our From the local play park to the swathes of greenbelt, it’s time to stop beautiful city. pontificating and hiding behind the need for more evidence and just sort this pressing issue out because as when it comes to ‘Paving Paradise’, Joni Mitchell was right penning ‘you don’t know what you got ‘til it’s gone’. However, the time for such debate is running out in Liverpool so this report will focus on the situation right now and seek to find a way forward whilst we all hope for a more enlightened approach with regard to our outdoor world. Simon O’Brien. Chair of the Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review Board
8 1. The Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review Board
Board Members Maxine Ennis The Mayor of Liverpool has tasked the Strategic Green and Open Spaces CEO at Rotunda Community College, Kirkdale Review Board to look at ways to help Liverpool retain its many and diverse Maxine Ennis is the Chief Executive Officer at Rotunda green and open spaces. The Review is independently chaired by Simon Ltd, a highly effective charity based in North Liverpool. O’Brien and supported by a Board of local authority Councillors and Officers, She has worked at Rotunda for the past six years and and members of the wider academic and third sector communities, each of has developed a culture within the organisation which whom bring a wealth of experience and sectorial expertise to the discussion has supported growth and success for the community. of how best Liverpool can manage its green and open spaces in the future. Her previous work has included supporting the cities response to The National Asylum Support Service in Simon O’Brien 2000 and implementing a high level strategy to deal Chair of the Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review Board with the statutory responsibilities of the city around housing and urban policy in this area. Maxine is an advocate for supporting people with multiple Born and brought up in Liverpool, Simon began acting complex needs and she has managed 3,500 bed spaces for vulnerable in 1982 in the first episode of Brookside. For the last people across the North West which included bail hostels, domestic violence thirty years he has successfully combined dual careers hostels and young person’s accommodation for children leaving care. As an of acting and presenting. When not working in these individual, Maxine is passionate about social change and the environment. two main creative fields Simon splits his time between developing and shooting his independent films and scouring Europe seeking out derelict properties to David Hughes renovate: all done from an ecological perspective. Head of Planning, Liverpool City Council Simon is uncompromising in his attitude toward our interaction with the David Hughes joined Liverpool City Council as Head natural environment. This philosophy has been practically applied to all his of Planning in November 2014. He is a Chartered building developments. Simon has campaigned individually and as part of Town Planner with over 25 years’ experience, at a wider groups for many years. senior level, of developing and delivering partnership solutions for complex regeneration challenges and unlocking economic growth. David has a degree in environmental science and has worked as an ecologist. David left the post of Head of Planning in August 2016.
9 Councillor Malcolm Kelly Professor Richard Meegan Director of Woolton Youth and Community Centre During the Review Richard was Professor of Economic Geography in the European Institute for Urban Affairs, Liverpool Councillor Malcolm Kelly has worked with a number John Moores University. Now retired, he is currently an of local voluntary and community groups within Honorary Research Fellow in the Department of Geography and Liverpool for nearly 30 years. During this time he has Planning, University of Liverpool. been committed to helping to improve communities and the lives of those who live within them through his Richard has worked in the field of social and voluntary work. He also serves as a City Councillor, economic research for over 40 years. His research which has given him a wealth of experience in local has ranged across urban and regional regeneration government over the past 19 years. and development, labour market change, community responses to the impact of economic restructuring, urban policy and community economic development. He has a particular interest in the recent economic Councillor Malcolm Kennedy and social history of Liverpool and Merseyside. His Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Transport and research has been funded by central and local government, overseas Climate Change planning and government agencies and a variety of research councils and Councillor Malcolm Kennedy has been a City Councillor foundations and the findings of this research have been widely published. in Liverpool since 1998. Malcolm was appointed to He recently completed a joint ESRC research project exploring the impact the Cabinet with responsibility for Regeneration and of the recession on households in Bristol and Liverpool with the Centre for Transport in May 2010. Last year the Mayor rearranged Urban and Public Policy Research at the University of Bristol. He was also portfolios and Malcolm is now the Cabinet Member for a member of the joint research team from Liverpool John Moores University Regeneration, responsible for physical development and the University of Liverpool that produced the recent ‘The State of the strategy and project development across the city. In Liverpool City Region: Making The Most of Devolution Report’. He lives this role he has been responsible for overseeing the in south Liverpool and treasures his easy access to both Calderstones and development of Liverpool’s Strategic Investment Plan and Liverpool’s Local Sefton Park. Development Framework. Malcolm is a director of several companies in his role as Cabinet Member including Liverpool Science Park and Liverpool Business Improvement District. Outside of the Council, Malcolm is the owner and director of RMK Business Solutions, a small consultancy aimed at assisting the growth and development of small businesses.
10 Dr. Ian Mell Ron Odunaiya Lecturer in Planning and Civic Design, School of Environmental Director of Community Services, Liverpool City Council Sciences, University of Liverpool Ron Odunaiya was appointed as Director of Community Dr. Ian Mell is a Lecturer in Planning and Civic Design at Services in September 2012. However, he is not new The University of Liverpool. He teaches and researches to the city and spent his early years in Liverpool and a variety of green infrastructure and planning issues many of his family still live in the city. He attended evaluating the opportunities and disconnects Liverpool John Moore’s University and chose a career between planning strategy, policy and practice. His in Local Government because he is passionate about research investigates the nature and ‘value’ of green providing excellent services to improve the quality infrastructure investment in a number of geographical of life for our communities. Ron has spent much of contexts to better understand how innovative and his career in Local Government and has previously worked as an Executive integrated landscape management can address social, economic and Director for Sunderland City Council and more locally at Knowsley Council ecological issues. This included recent work on the Interreg IVB Valuing where he was the Assistant Chief Executive. In his current role he has Attractive Landscapes in the Urban Economy (VALUE) project. Ian’s current responsibility for a wide range of services including: Sports and Outdoor work reflects on how green infrastructure is being positioned as one of the Recreation; Parks, Environmental Services and Waste Management; ‘go-to’ approach to planning for sustainable urban planning in the USA, India Libraries; Youth and Offending Service; Public Protection and Community and China. Outside of academia Ian has experience of green infrastructure Safety and Neighbourhoods. practice through working with advocacy organisations (Community Forests in North-East England) and as a local government officer in Cambridgeshire. Victoria Owens Managing Director, 4d4u Ltd
Councillor Steve Munby Victoria has lived in south Liverpool all her life and has Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods an unrivalled knowledge of the area and local property. Councillor Steve Munby has been a councillor With previous retail experience she spent 14 years since 1998 and was appointed to the Cabinet with operating an estate agency in south Liverpool, which responsibility for Neighbourhoods in May 2010. His she sold in July 2015. Victoria now owns and manages portfolio was extended to include young people in a baby scanning clinic, 4d4u Limited which is based in 2011, street cleansing and waste services in 2012 Woolton Village. Victoria has two children and lives in and parks in September 2014. Steve says: “My the Allerton area. priorities are to promote the devolution of services and decision-making down to neighbourhood level, keep the city’s streets and public spaces as clean and attractive as possible, secure sustained increases in recycling, radically improve our public and open land from creating community gardens, new allotments and securing a sustainable future for our parks.”
11 Steve Stuart The Chairman and the Board have been supported throughout the Brabners Stuart (Retired) Review by: Steve has over 25 years’ corporate finance experience Dr. Juliet Staples gained locally, nationally and internationally. Steve is Strategic Support, Liverpool City Council a great strategic thinker who specialises in innovative solutions. Formerly a partner with Ernst and Young, Juliet has over 25 years’ experience in the environmental Steve started the practice with the clear vision of and sustainability sector and has worked for a range providing high calibre entrepreneurial corporate of organisations that have included the public, finance advice to business owners. Since embarking private and voluntary sectors. Previous roles have on his own, Steve has gained first-hand experience of included working within academic institutions, as the issues facing entrepreneurs and this provides him with a truly unique an environmental consultant, for an environmental insight into the issues facing owner managers. Steve is a well-connected and charity and within Local Government. Juliet works for respected figure in the local business community and was the instrumental Liverpool City Council. driving force behind the creation of Merseyside Special Investment Fund in the mid-1990s. Steve has worked on a number of disposals of private companies to international buyers and more recently has successfully completed a number of financial restructuring exercises. Melanie Wilson PA Support, Liverpool City Council
Stephen Claus Board Observer - Partner, Head of Charity and Social Enterprise, Brabners Stuart
A copy of the Board’s Interim Report and the supporting appendices can be found at liverpool.gov.uk/greenandopenspaces. A copy of the Board’s Terms of Reference can also be located on the above website and are additionally available within this report as Appendix 1.
12 green spaces within the grounds of institutions, agricultural land, brownfield 2. Overview and sites and a long waterfront area, which together provide a mosaic of green and open spaces across the city. Viewed from above, the distribution of green and open spaces is uneven. However, in reviewing the size and spatial Introduction distribution of these spaces there are a number of interesting patterns. The River Mersey frames the city to the west, whilst the ring of Victorian parks circles around the city centre to create an inner urban greenbelt. This “The measure of any great civilisation is in its cities, and a measure of is supported further by the actual greenbelt, which lies at the eastern edge of a city’s greatness is to be found in the quality of its public spaces, its the city. Other green and open spaces, such as Otterspool Promenade and parks and its squares.” Croxteth Country Park are also important spaces in the city’s green network. John Ruskin quoted in CABE Space (2005:7) These major sites and the patchwork of small street-level, incidental and neighbourhood green and open spaces make up the city’s green and open space network. They offer key recreational, social and environmental benefits 2.1 Background and Context to Liverpool and its local residents. In the last decade Liverpool has undergone extensive change, with major The variability of the city’s green and open spaces also reflects the waves investment in the city centre and other locations, particularly south Liverpool, of development witnessed in Liverpool. From large-scale philanthropic which has included the rapid expansion of Liverpool Airport. However, despite investments in the 1800’s to more recent community gardening projects, these achievements Liverpool still faces a number of challenges. The legacy Liverpool has constantly reinvented its use of green and open space. Most of its long-term economic and population decline is evident in the economic recently, the development of ‘meanwhile’ spaces for temporary use has and social deprivation seen in the city. The scale of this situation is particularly shown that the city is attempting to reinstate value in some of Liverpool’s apparent in residential neighbourhoods close to the city centre, especially underused landscape. With such variety though also comes variation in in northern inner Liverpool where substantial parts of Anfield, Kirkdale and quality. Although Liverpool has a number of high quality and well used sites, Everton wards fall within the 1% most deprived areas in the country. As the others suffer from a range of social and financial issues, which require a city’s economic fortunes have varied, we have seen a corresponding change rethinking of how we manage and improve these spaces. As a consequence, in the quality of the public realm in Liverpool. it is fair to say that the city’s green and open space network is one of the Liverpool also has substantial green and open space resources, which reasons why Liverpool has prospered, as it has an almost unique mosaic of include parks, local wildlife sites, green wedges, allotments, street trees, parks and open spaces not seen in many UK cities. the internationally important Mersey Estuary, the Leeds-Liverpool Canal, numerous playing fields and private gardens. 2.2 Time of Austerity Although the Council has targeted Stanley Park in the north and Sefton Due to the financial cuts made to local government funding by the UK Park in the south to achieve Green Flag status annually, the geographical government the City of Liverpool has seen a 58% cut in its budget since distribution and quality of provision is not consistent across the city. There is 2010. The impact of this has been a collective tightening of the belt of what significant potential for improvements if we approach things differently. services can be provided by Liverpool City Council (LCC), and which may In addition to these easily recognised green spaces, the city also benefits have to be reduced further. This has been exacerbated as the city is legally from a Country Park at Croxteth, a number of cemeteries, churchyards, golf bound to deliver statutory services, such as adult social care, education and courses, hundreds of incidental spaces, civic and pedestrianised areas, waste collection, whilst discretionary services, such as leisure services or
13 green space provision, which are not protected, have been the first to be Frequently, when proposals to redevelop parks, gardens or public open earmarked for funding cuts. space are released the public raises objections. Such objections focus on a myriad of issues including access to nature, changing house prices, the From the 2017/18 financial year onwards it is feared that Liverpool will have health and well-being of local communities, and the rights to nature of the no money to meet some of its existing service provision so there is a pressing public - specifically children. However, whilst people object to green spaces need to look at alternative and creative examples of how other cities in the being redeveloped, Liverpool City Council is tasked with ensuring that the UK, and further afield have used alternative financial models to fund green city has sufficient housing, transport infrastructure, economic development space provision. The lack of future funding for green and open spaces is a opportunities and green and open space to function effectively. Liverpool problem also faced by the majority of core cities in England who are struggling City Council’s role in promoting liveability, prosperity and social equity can, to balance the delivery of statutory and discretionary services with ongoing on occasions, set its development objectives at odds with local opinion. funding cuts and Liverpool is therefore not the only city feeling the financial However, a significant proportion of the city’s residents remain adamant that strain. Newcastle and Sheffield, which are potentially the most comparable its green and open space provide city-scale benefits for health, community cities to Liverpool, are also currently engaged in similar financial reviews cohesion, and recreation, and that land sales would negatively impact the asking how they can continue to deliver green and open space provision; liveability of the city. although it could be argued that to date the issues being dealt with in these locations are not as significant as those experienced in Liverpool. The views presented in person, via email, letter and phone calls have provided one of the most extensive evidence bases of opinion and knowledge about As a response to both financial cuts and the growing disquiet amongst many green spaces that the city has ever received. Each of the submissions to residents to proposals to redevelop existing green and open spaces, the the consultations has been read, discussed and taken into account within Strategic Green and Open Space Review was convened to investigate what this final report (and the preceding Interim Report), and a series of public alternative funding opportunities could be available to Liverpool City Council comments are used to illustrate the feeling within Liverpool regarding specific (LCC) to limit the impacts of central government funding cuts. thematic issues. 2.3 The Review These opinions, facts and ideas have been incorporated alongside the broader thinking about financing green spaces within this final report, as The review commenced in January 2015 and from the initial round of public well as the experience and knowledge brought to the review by the Board. meetings held across the city, through a series of thematic workshops, Collectively this has helped to shape the thinking presented in this report and meetings with local communities and a range of key local, regional and to identify what is considered valuable in the city’s green and open and national stakeholders (Appendix 2) the Chairman and the Board have spaces, what alternatives (if any) could be used by the City Council to fund canvassed the city’s residents extensively asking for their thoughts, concerns maintenance of green spaces, and, which spaces could be used to meet and aspirations for the future of Liverpool’s green and open space. local development needs. The review has greatly benefited from the extensive and valuable insights Whilst the review cannot address all the concerns raised through eighteen of the people of Liverpool, Friends of groups, the business community and months of consultation the Board has attempted to find common ground direct input from the University of Liverpool, the National Health Service between pro and anti-development commentary, and between the needs of and Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and United Utilities. At times the local communities and the economic development of the city. ongoing discussion has led to confrontation, as people felt strongly that the city’s parks, gardens and green spaces were key resources making Liverpool special. The protection of green and open space is a highly emotive issue.
14 2.4 The Final Report Moreover, a series of strategic green investments are proposed as Liverpool’s ‘Green Web’, which could help Liverpool City Council identify and generate The outcome of this programme of consultation has been diverse and useful. income from developer contributions or from national and international It is clear from this consultation that Liverpool’s green and open spaces are development funds to support a city-wide network of connected green incredibly popular and valued assets by the city’s residents, businesses and spaces. social/environmental organisations. It has also become clear that people are aware of the financial constraints being placed upon Liverpool City All of the above options are supported by developing partnerships and Council and are sympathetic to the difficulties of managing development collaborations to help Liverpool City Council meet the challenges of funding conversations across the city. green and open space. This includes how local businesses have been engaged to assess management options for some of the city’s parks, the role What the review does not do is offer a single solution to the long term security that the National Health Service (NHS) and Clinical Commission Group (CCG) constraints of the city. can play in moving from users of parks for health programmes to funders Alternatively, it provides a set of options that can, and should, be investigated of parks or the broader benefits that can be derived from working with The further by Liverpool City Council and other stakeholders, to identify which Football Association (FA), Everton Football Club (EFC) and Liverpool Football investment and management options are best aligned to different parts of Club (LFC) to secure a long-term legacy for sports provision in the city. the city. Each of the options discussed has been applied elsewhere, and although The report considers a number of financing options including the potential all may not be appropriate in all locations across the city, the Board have of developing a Parks Trust model for the city, which would provide long identified how each could be feasible in some. This reflects the current state term security for the city’s green and open spaces. However, there is a of the city’s green and open spaces, which are well used and of high quality, need to generate financial, political and public support for such a process but also where improvements could be made. It also examines how different to secure an appropriate endowment fund. Extending the consultation and economic solutions could be used in individual sites to achieve positive engagement activities undertaken throughout the review will be crucial to outcomes for the environment, the city’s people and for the city’s economy. achieving this, and the engagement and commitment of key city and regional The report also presents the Board’s central recommendations in terms of stakeholders will be needed to deliver this. financial modelling in the city, the manner in which parks can support each Other options explored include revised developer contributions through other, and where and how stakeholder engagement and support will be commuted sums, devolution of management to local communities, or required to ensure the successful and sustainable delivery of the vision. greater engagement and payments from Public-Private-Partnerships (P-P- Ps) which are all discussed within the report as offering appropriate forms of investment for Liverpool.
15 16 The final report therefore seeks to address the Board’s Terms of Reference (Appendix 1) through the following aims:
1. To showcase alternative practices which can be used to identify green and open space funding mechanisms, for future consideration. 2. To present a series of green space management scenarios ranging from do nothing, increased public/community ownership to land sales and the formation of Trusts that could be established to meet provision and maintenance needs. 3. To provide a forum for interested parties in the city to come together and share their experience, expertise and knowledge of which green and open spaces are valuable, where areas of improvement could be identified and how green spaces provide key amenities for local people. 4. To consider the future land use needs of the city and how this affects provision of green and open spaces. 5. To ensure that equitable access and corridors of green spaces exist across Liverpool. 6. To lead the way by being one of the first UK authorities to explore alternative options and highlight best practice for the long-term future of green and open space provision. To arrive at the final report is, however, only part of the journey. The future of Liverpool’s green and open spaces is currently still subject to ongoing financial constraints. Moreover, the breadth and depth of knowledge invested in the Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review illustrates the possibilities open to Liverpool City Council, local communities and environmental organisations to adapt their thinking to include more creative and collaborative approaches to managing Liverpool’s landscape. However, from this point onwards it will be down to communities, individuals and Liverpool City Council to ensure that the momentum generated through the review is maintained and that work continues to deliver measurable achievements in the development, protection and management of the city’s green and open space.
17 © Graham Maddrell
Priceless......
18 3. Report Structure
The report will be presented in a series of sections highlighting the activities A range of thoughtful strategic documents including the Liverpool Green undertaken to populate the review and this final report. This reflects the Infrastructure Strategy 2010 (The Mersey Forest, 2010) and the United outcomes of the consultation and engagement activities undertaken Kingdom Natural Ecosystem Assessment (UNEP-WCMC, 2011) have also throughout the review and discusses the findings of the Interim Report been reviewed. Each of these go into a greater level of detail regarding the (Liverpool City Council, 2015). These discussions will illustrate where multiple benefits that such spaces provide, with the former calculating that progress has been made in addressing the recommendations proposed in Liverpool’s environment is an £8 billion asset for the city, whilst the latter the Interim Report, where additional evidence has been collected, and where argues that the natural environment contributes over £2.3 billion per year to additional evidence or engagement is needed to deliver them. The report the UK economy. also highlights the work that is still required to meet the long-term financing needs of Liverpool’s green and open space. To ensure that the review is grounded in an in-depth understanding of best practice the report draws on other experiences in the North West, the UK and internationally to illustrate what Liverpool can learn from other agencies and partners to deliver more efficient green space management (Appendix 2). The Chair and members of the Board have all actively consulted with key local, regional and national stakeholders in an attempt to rationalise the funding possibilities that Liverpool can draw upon to ensure it can maintain, and enhance, its green spaces in perpetuity. This is, however, an ongoing process and Liverpool City Council remains committed to working with partners, including the National Trust, the Heritage Lottery Fund and others, to lobby regional and central government for green and open space funding. However, before considering the future of Liverpool’s green and open spaces it is essential to once more grasp the importance of such spaces. These were discussed in the Interim Report and at the final round of public meetings at great length. There have been many excellent academic papers written by ground-breaking and inspirational parks organisations, as well as environmental organisations (CABE Space, 2005a, 2005b; NESTA, 2016).
19 The following sections of this report are: Section 4 Health and Wellbeing Section 5 Environmental Factors (Climate Change, Flooding, Air Quality and Biodiversity) Section 6 Education Section 7 Finance – Balancing the Books Section 8 Other Options Including Park Trusts Section 9 Planning for the Future (Land Use, Land Categorisation, Green Corridors, Equity and Accessibility) Section 10 Engagement Section 11 Recommendations Section 12 Chair’s Concluding Thoughts Each section will be introduced by a series of statements from the Board’s Chair, (Simon O’Brien) and from consultees to illustrate the range of ideas, experiences, and values that people place on Liverpool’s green and open spaces. In order to be as inclusive as possible the Chair has intentionally invited other contributions so that this report contains many voices thereby embracing detailed discussions of the thematic and financial aspects undertaken in support of the review. The report is supported by a set of appendices which will provide additional information of the consultations, engagement activities and evidence gathering undertaken for the Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review. This report will therefore not seek to collate every piece of data available but rather capture the essence of the academic and practitioner reporting, and perhaps most importantly the groundswell of opinion that the Chair and Board Members have encountered regarding our green and open spaces of all shapes and sizes. What the report can and does do is to present its findings independently, using city council structures and by seeking to address the comments of local people such as those presented throughout to ensure Liverpool remains an equitable and liveable city.
20 4. Health and Wellbeing
With key contributions from Board Member Professor Richard Meegan
Chair’s Comment:
Sedentary lifestyles and obesity are some of the most critical health issues of our time. Central to the “When I have been ill or had surgery Board’s and the public’s way of thinking is the belief that green and open spaces should be considered as an I first walk round my garden, then integral part of health provision rather than an incidental benefit. The Chair was very surprised at the amount our field, then Doric Park, Newsham Park before I start getting the bus of strong vocal support for the NHS to financially support parks - something that was raised frequently into town.” during all the public meetings and workshops. Mary (Old Swan resident) After hearing countless presentations and reading paper after paper, the argument that ‘more evidence is needed’ in order to ask health providers to invest directly into our parks and green spaces is deemed by many to be redundant. “The current system grossly underestimates the true value of our Whilst some worthwhile green space projects have always been financially supported in a piecemeal way, green spaces and what happens in there is an overwhelming feeling (both inside and outside the organisations) that the time for Liverpool’s them… Because the focus is on money Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), University Hospitals, Community Health Trust and all other health and investment now, we do not make judgements which fully appreciate the providers to start paying properly towards and thereafter fully utilising the amazing facilities on their doorsteps costs in terms of health and wellbeing if is long overdue. we do not preserve these spaces.” Open spaces bring people together for events such as the Liverpool International Music Festival (LIMF), Christina, Liverpool CIC. guided walks, toddler interaction, bike rides or just sitting on a patch of grass talking nonsense. From sitting alone and people watching to dancing en masse, the simple fact that the space is free of charge and free of walls removes barriers and opens up endless possibilities for people to get together. In an urban environment; there are few places where people of all ages, beliefs, lifestyles and mind sets mingle freely like we do in the gaps between the buildings. To quantify this benefit in monetary terms is impossible and this hits the nail on the head. Just because something can’t be valued in millions doesn’t mean that it’s not valued by millions.
21 “Parks provide children with opportunities for play, and play is critical characteristics, at the centre of an interconnected layering of these wider in the development of muscle strength and co-ordination, language, determinants of health and the wider global ecosystem (Figure 1). Measuring and cognitive abilities. Parks also build healthy communities by the relative contribution of these different determining factors is difficult but it creating stable neighbourhoods and strengthening community is generally agreed that the social and economic environment has the largest development. Research shows that residents of neighbourhoods impact (CSDH, 2008). The physical environment – both built and natural – is, with greenery in common spaces enjoy stronger social ties. nevertheless, still important, determining, on some estimates, as much as Neighbourhoods with community gardens are more stable, losing 15% of public health (Booske et al, 2010). fewer residents over time.” The evidence that green and open spaces are an essential element of a (The Trust for Public Land, 2006:6). healthy human habitat and crucial in enhancing community health and wellbeing, particularly in cities, is very strong - even though questions remain over the causal mechanisms that transmit these benefits and the variable effects of different types of green and open spaces. Greenspace Scotland, Public Health England and the Institute of Health 4.1 The Contribution of Green and Equity at University College London and the Faculty of Public Health, have all conducted recent authoritative evidence reviews of the links between Open Spaces to Public Health and Wellbeing green and open spaces and health and wellbeing outcomes (Croucher et al, The Board received submissions from the Merseyside Environmental 2008). The Marmot Review of evidence-based strategies for reducing health Advisory Service (MEAS), Mersey Forest and the City Council’s Community inequalities in England highlighted the role that green and open spaces Services Directorate that all highlighted the contribution that green and open play in the creation and development of healthy and sustainable places spaces make to enhancing public health and wellbeing. Dr. William Bird, GP, and communities (The Marmot Review, 2010). The European Environment member of the Physical Activity Programme Board for Public Health England Agency, in its broader review of the relationships between the environment and Chief Executive Officer of Intelligent Health, was also commissioned to and health, also identified the multiple benefits that access to green space review evidence on the links between nature and health and propose a plan can offer to physical health, mental and social wellbeing and improved quality for Liverpool (Intelligent Health 2016, Report attached in Appendix 3). of life (European Environment Agency, 2013). Natural England summarised the evidence demonstrating the natural environment’s contribution to public The Chair also took part in a workshop hosted by the Heseltine Institute; the health and wellbeing and academics from Sweden, the UK, the Netherlands University of Liverpool in collaboration with Nature Connected; the Liverpool and the US have also reviewed recent research on the links between nature City Region Local Nature Partnership, and the North West Coast Academic and health (Natural England, 2012 and Hartig et al, 2014). Health Science Network, discussing how the city can make better use of its natural assets both to strengthen its economy and to promote improved These reviews on health provide very strong support for the positive impact health and wellbeing. that green and open spaces have on health; notably through the direct impact that these spaces have on general health and wellbeing, the protection they The health impact of green and open spaces was also repeatedly stressed afford from harmful environmental exposure, the promotion of physical by members of the public in our consultation meetings following publication activity and the indirect effects of promoting social interaction and cohesion. of our Interim Report. Health is determined by a complex interaction between genetic characteristics, lifestyle and behaviours, the physical, social and economic environment and health care. Health maps have been produced which place people, differentiated by age, gender and hereditary
22 Figure 1. Health Map
bal Ecosystem Glo
ural Environm at en N t
vironm lt En en ui t B
Activities B i o Econ A d ng al om s i oc y i i v L r, v e e c o mmunit S W o y r a m C t s l P r a e e i g t t t P n fes yle l g s n i M a e e y t , i o L l r n s i y t a p t a a s ,
a t t i g i r L i p a N n People k R h n e p g a b i o e e r c a o , n a h t d c t
l w s u d L e h i C S
t h t
e l l
u o
, e
t
a
l
a a
a
r
i s
B g
r
k
a
r
m
c
n
n
u s i
e i
l
t
o
n
k
Age, Sex,
a
W r
C
S
i
n
o
Hereditary N
g
W
factors
Other Neighbourhoods
other Regions
Macro-economy,
politics Global forces
Source: (Barton, H. and Grant, M., 2006) ‘A
health map for the local human habitat’,
The determinants of health and
The Journal for the Royal Society for the
well-being in our neighbourhoods
Promotion of Health, 126 (6). pp. 252-253.
23 The following sections highlight some of the identified key health benefits of • Populations exposed to the greenest environments have the lowest levels green and open spaces under these different headings. of health inequality related to income deprivation (Mitchell and Popham, 2008). 4.2 General Health and Wellbeing • Income-related inequality in health is less pronounced where people have access to green space; • Better health is related to green and open spaces - regardless of socio-economic status (Mitchell and Popham, 2008); • …but access to green space is not equal - people living in the most deprived …but this is highly dependent on the accessibility, quantity and quality of areas are less likely to live in the greenest areas, and consequently have green space: poor quality green space may have a negative health impact less chances to benefit from the health benefits of green space compared (de Vries, et al, 2003; White et al, 2013; Takano, Nakamura and Watanabe, with people living in the least deprived areas; 2002; Maas et al, 2006; Kuo, 1998; Bixler and Floyd, 1997; Tzoulas et al, • …so increasing access to and use of good quality green space for all 2007). social groups is likely to improve health outcomes and reduce health • People are happier when living in urban areas with greater amounts of inequalities (Public Health England and UCL Institute for Health Equity, green space - compared to those living in areas with less green space 2014). they show significantly lower mental distress and significantly higher “I have used my park to find friends and other wellbeing; local new mums; it is a community hub. Before • …living in an area with higher levels of green space has been associated I had the baby I used the park for walking and with improvements in wellbeing indicators roughly equal to a third of that running as do many local residents.” gained from being married, or a tenth as large as being employed versus Score Lane Resident. unemployed (White et al, 2013). • Green and open spaces have a positive impact on levels of stress - 4.3 Protection from Harmful reducing and aiding recovery from stress and attention fatigue (Grahn and Stigsdotter, 2003; Hartig et al, 2003; Orsega-Smith et al, 2006; Whitelaw Environmental Exposures et al, 2008; van den Berg et al, 2010). • Green and open spaces in cities protect people from harmful environmental • Individuals report less mental distress and higher life satisfaction when exposures such as flooding, air pollution, noise and extremes of they live in greener areas - even after accounting for changes over time temperature including those generated by the ‘urban heat island effect’ in income, employment, marital status, physical health, and housing type (Intelligent Health, 2016; Pugh et al, 2012; Regional Public Health, 2010; and personality (White et al, 2013; de Vries et al, 2003; van den Berg et al, Rao et al, 2014). 2010; Maas et al, 2009). • Trees and vegetation can directly reduce air pollution by catching • Spending time in green space or simply viewing nature – even for relatively and eradicating fine particulate matter and indirectly by reducing air brief periods - can improve attitude, self-esteem and concentration, and temperatures (Nowak et al, 2006; Tallis et al, 2011). help alleviate stress and mental health disorders (Depledge et al, 2011; • Air temperatures are lowered by green infrastructure through both the Thompson Coon et al, 2011; Pretty et al, 2007; Barton and Pretty, 2010). evaporation of water from vegetation and shading (Bowler et al, 2010; Doick, 2013).
24 4.4 Promoting Physical Activity 4.5 Promoting Social Interaction and Cohesion • Accessible and safe urban green spaces have a positive influence on • Green and open spaces have the potential to increase and enhance social levels of physical activity – as long as the green space is well-maintained interactions and the use of public spaces (Coley, Sullivan and Kuo, 1997; and safe to use (Intelligent Health, 2016; Bird, 2004; Coombes, Jones and Sullivan, Kuo and De Pooter, 2004; Maas et al, 2009). Hillsdon, 2010; Hillsdon et al, 2006; Jones, Hillsdon and Coombes, 2009); • 85% of people surveyed found that parks and green spaces had a positive Lachowycz and Jones, 2011; Maas et al, 2008). impact on the quality of life in a given location (Cabe Space, 2004). • Parks most likely to generate physical activity are close to users, large, • Not all parks, gardens or public space are the same or provide the same form part of a network with trails, have lighting, have less disorder and are opportunities to promote social cohesion, however, if we know the socio- surrounded by lower speed streets (Kaczynski et al, 2014; Turnstall et al, economic context of a given space we can assess whether, and if so, how 2006; Rydin et al, 2012; Tunstall et al, 2006; Hillsdon et al, 2006; Bowler its physical structure can be of benefit (Mell, 2016). et al, 2010; Richardson et al, 2005). • Communal green and open space activities – for example, allotments and • Green and open spaces can increase physical activity by both providing community gardens and ‘friends of parks’ organisations - can enhance an attractive area to exercise and the opportunity to take part in physical community interactions and build local capacity, self-esteem, social activity with other people (Mytton et al, 2012). empowerment and the ‘social capital’ that promotes wellbeing (Kingsley • There is a positive association between access to green space and and Townsend, 2006; Moore, Townsend and Oldroyd (2006); Maas et al, physical activity, weight and associated health conditions (Coombes, 2009). Jones and Hillsdon, 2010; Maas et al, 2008; Natural England, 2011). • Public green spaces are also important for social integration by offering • Green spaces offer a site for regular physical activity, which reduces, in the opportunity for people from different social and ethnic backgrounds to particular, the risk of coronary heart disease, obesity and diabetes (Rydin meet and interact (Shinew, Glover and Parry, 2004; Seeland, Dübendorfer et al, 2012). and Hansmann, 2009; Peters, Elands and Buijs, 2010). • There is an additional positive benefit of a walk or run in a natural • People with chronic illness who experience high levels of social cohesion environment in comparison to synthetic environments such as indoor are less likely to report deteriorating health (Waverijn et al, 2014). gyms (Bowler et al, 2010). • Green and open spaces also support frequent, casual contact amongst • Exercising in natural environments - compared to exercising indoors - is neighbours that builds social ties where people support and care for green associated with greater feelings of revitalisation, and a greater intention to and open spaces – fostering safer neighbourhoods and the enhanced repeat the activity (Coon et al, 2011). wellbeing associated with them (Kuo and Sullivan, 2001). • Providing spaces that enable people to interact with nature in different ways allows them to gain a lifelong attachment to the environment; …parks need to be seen as locations of adventure, of education, and of inclusion, and parents, communities, and other formal and informal groups (schools, churches, health care professionals, and sports teams) need to be encouraged to make best use of them (Louv, 2005).
25 Moving in the right direction
26 • Parks act as focal points for recreation and the variety in the form, location alcohol related hospital admissions have also decreased. The last year of and activities held in parks addresses a wide range of social needs and the decade also saw a promising reversal of the trend of increasing obesity the recreational use of parks helps to tackle anti-social behaviour and in children, with the proportion of 4 - 5 year olds having excess weight falling foster greater care of green spaces by local people (NESTA, 2016). and the proportion of 10 - 11 year olds stabilising. • Local authorities and parks managers are increasingly looking to the users Despite these improvements, however, the health of the city’s residents remains of their sites for inspiration to help design and manage these spaces as a major challenge, and at just over the half way mark in the city’s Decade of these are most likely to know what works and what innovations could lead Health and Wellbeing (2010 - 2020), the city still performs significantly worse to additional benefits (NESTA, 2016). than the England average in over 60% (16 of 24) indicators of health, disease and life expectancy in Public Health England’s latest health profile (Public Health England, 2015). It is significantly better than the England average 4.6 Public Health in Liverpool and the Role in only 3 of the indicators. In its Blueprint for Healthy Liverpool, Liverpool of Green and Open Spaces Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) provides a sobering assessment of health and wellbeing, highlighting how the city has the highest levels of poor The city’s Green Infrastructure Strategy showed very clearly that, while health and health inequalities both within it and compared to the rest of the the city as a whole is relatively green, green infrastructure is very unevenly country (Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group, 2015). 30% of Liverpool distributed across it (Liverpool City Council, 2010a, and 2010b). The lowest residents live with one or more long-term health conditions. 93,000 residents levels are in the City Centre and surrounding Inner Areas and the limited are affected by mental health issues. green infrastructure that is present in these areas functions very poorly. It also showed how the geography of green infrastructure closely maps onto The city also has one of the highest cancer mortality rates in the country. the geography of ill health - with areas of the city with a higher incidence of In terms of health inequality, men in Liverpool live 3.1 years less and coronary heart disease, poor mental health and poor air quality also having women 2.8 years less than the England average. Moreover, across the city, relatively low levels of green infrastructure. The local relationships, albeit life expectancy can vary by more than 10 years between different areas. moderate in statistical terms, clearly supported the argument in the academic Residents of Picton ward in the centre of the city, for example, are 2.5 times literature that the physical environment – in the form of green infrastructure - more likely to die of cardiovascular disease than those living in Mossley Hill is one of the many interconnected determinants of health. ward in the south of the city. The city’s residents are living longer but not necessarily living well in their later years. Almost 26,000 older people have The latest health data for the city for life expectancy and conditions recognised long-term illnesses that limit their daily activities and by 2021, the number in the literature as being particularly related to the presence or absence of of people living with dementia is forecast to increase by 10.7%. In terms of accessible green infrastructure - including obesity and premature mortality lifestyles, more than half of Liverpool adults are overweight or obese. Some from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases - provide a mixed picture with 11,300 residents drink alcohol at high risk levels. 86% of people in Liverpool some recent improvements alongside ongoing challenges. are not active enough to maintain good health and, despite recent reductions, The latest report of Liverpool’s Director of Public Health highlights some 25% of Liverpool adults still smoke. notable public health improvements over the last decade (Liverpool City Council, 2015). There has been a 10% reduction in the annual number of deaths, 10 times the national rate, and the infant mortality rate is now below the national rate after being significantly above it. Mortality for all causes of death, as well as cancer and cardiovascular disease have also fallen and faster than nationally over the past ten years. Smoking prevalence and
27 In this context, then, the Board would argue that the continued provision and Green Infrastructure Strategy and the Mayoral Health Commission of adequate, accessible and well-maintained green and open spaces is report and at city-regional level in the Health is Wealth Commission report, essential for its contribution to sustaining public health improvement and the Liverpool City Region and Warrington Green Infrastructure Framework helping to build healthy and sustainable neighbourhoods and a healthy and Action Plan and the Liverpool City Region Parks Study (Liverpool City sustainable city. Council, 2005a, 2005b, 2010: 2014a; Liverpool City Region Health is Wealth Commission, 2008; Mersey Forest, 2014; Peter Neal Consulting Ltd with Richard Tracey Ltd, 2015). 4.7 Integrating Public Health Care and Green and At local level, the integration of green and open spaces into health care has Open Spaces been greatly facilitated by the movement of public health into local government The public health benefits of green and open spaces and green infrastructure and the partnerships that have developed to establish the Integrated Health more broadly defined have been recognised in policy – at national, regional and Social Care System focusing on prevention and self-care recommended and local levels. At national level, the relationship drives Natural England’s by the Mayoral Health Commission. Liverpool Clinical Commissioning promotion of a ‘Natural Health Service’ (Natural England, 2008, 2009, 2012). Group’s Prospectus and Blueprint for Change and the Health and Wellbeing The natural environment - and green and open spaces within it - is recognised Strategy produced by the Health and Wellbeing Board are the foundations of as an important determinant of public health in the Government’s White the Healthy Liverpool transformation agenda of the local health system, and Paper, Healthy Lives, Healthy People, which set out a long-term vision for are supported by the Board (Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group, 2014a, public health and informed the Health and Social Care Act that produced the 2015; Liverpool City Council, 2014c). most recent reorganisation of the National Health Service (HM Government, The Board also welcomes the Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group’s 2010, 2012). In March 2016, NHS England announced plans to create ten social value strategy aimed explicitly at increasing the social, economic and NHS-supported ‘healthy new towns’ across the country in which the built environmental wellbeing of local people (Liverpool Clinical Commissioning and natural environment will be designed specifically to build in health and Group, 2014b). For environmental wellbeing, the goal is to improve health wellbeing and to link up with new models of technology-enabled health care. outcomes through approaches which both reduce health inequalities and Two of these are in the North West; one in Fylde, Lancashire and one in mitigate climate change to create healthy places and communities. Two Runcorn in the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority area. of the five areas for action relate directly to green and open spaces and The Board feels strongly that to establish greater clarity on these issues, the Board’s promotion of green corridors. The first recognises the need to National Government should recognise the positive impact of accessible improve neighbourhood environments by increasing the provision, access and well-maintained green and open spaces and green infrastructure more and quality of green space to improve mental and physical health. broadly defined within public health and well-being and account for this The second recognises the need to increase active travel (walking and cycling) accordingly in the local government financial settlement. Green infrastructure to increase physical activity, reduce traffic emission related respiratory illness should be included in national infrastructure planning and funding on a par and carbon emissions. Related performance measures to green space and with transport infrastructure. reduction in exceedances of air quality standards and performance metrics At regional level, the Centre for Public Health at Liverpool John Moores are the increases in access/quality of the Green Infrastructure Strategy and University has put forward a powerful case for utilising parks as hubs for in physical activity. improving public health (Wheater et al, 2007). Locally, the contribution The City Council has already developed a partnership between its parks and that green and open spaces can make to improving public health has been sport and recreation services and the health sector in the implementation recognised at city-level in the Council’s Parks Strategy, Open Spaces Study of the city’s Physical Activity and Sports Strategy (Liverpool City Council,
28 2012, 2014b). As part of this partnership working, the Council’s Community and subsequent central government austerity programme, which have Services Directorate has already secured over £3m of funding from the affected its delivery. The target to establish, by 2008, a Friends Group for Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group – and Sport England - to support every high level park (City Parks, Green Flag Parks, and English Heritage physical activity programmes across the city including within the city’s parks Registered Parks) was achieved but funding cuts have since reduced the and the Review Board would like this ‘social prescribing’ to be developed level of support and led to the disbandment of some groups. Budgetary cuts further. have also meant that the target to have Site Management Plans for the high level parks in place by 2008 has not been met. To facilitate this ongoing dialogue it is important to recognise that Green and open spaces are key elements of ‘community health’ and need to be The target to achieve Green Flag status for 14 parks or open spaces was incorporated into local public health care strategies and funding and local actually exceeded in 2012, when Green Flag status was secured for 18 health partners should be members of a Green and Open Spaces Strategic sites. Budget cuts since then, however, have meant that the Council has Group responsible for the long term management and maintenance of green only been able to fund Green Flag applications for Sefton and Stanley Parks. and open spaces. Other partners would include the Council (Community This along with Chavasse Park managed by Liverpool ONE, means the city Services, Adult Services, Regeneration, Children and Young People’s now only has three parks with Green Flag status so the target for 50% of Services and Public Health), Merseytravel, and local housing associations, Liverpool’s citizens to live within 1,000m of a Green Flag park has not been Mersey Forest, Merseyside Environmental Trust and Friends of Parks Groups. achieved. Moreover, the target for all Liverpool Citizens to live within 1,000m of a children’s play area by 2010 was unsuccessful. Moreover, The Health and Wellbeing Board should continue to encourage the use of green space through commissioned programmes of health The strategy clearly needs revisiting in a broader strategic approach to improvement interventions (like the former ‘Natural Choices for Health’ and development and landscape management in the city. ‘Wellbeing Grants Scheme’ and sponsored activities like green gyms, health walks and park runs). In its Report to the Board (Appendix 3) Intelligent Health suggested that the Council should pilot a ‘Nature Exchange’ funding model, which would charge for the estimated loss of health value of each square metre of green and/or open space covered by buildings or roads. The revenue for loss would be collected annually by a newly established Foundation and would be used to create or maintain green space to help improve the health and wellbeing of the local community within 800 meters or half a mile of the charged developments. The Foundation would engage with local community groups in managing the Fund. The Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) should explore the potential for establishing a ‘Nature Exchange Fund’ for creating and maintaining green and open spaces which would allow GPs to prescribe activities in green spaces as part of a community prescription in which patients with long term conditions participate in electronically-logged activity programmes. The city’s Parks Strategy was published 11 years ago, before the recession
29 Staying healthy can be a ‘walk in the park’
30 The Mayor’s Commission on Environmental Sustainability also recommended the establishment of an International Research Centre for Environmentally Recommendation: Sustainable Cities. This Research Centre should include a strand of research on the impact of green and open spaces on public health and well- The Board recommends a series of interventions to make more effective being. Links should also be made with researchers in ‘Sensor City’, the and visible links between the city’s green and open spaces and improving University Enterprise Zone, located within the Knowledge Quarter, to exploit developing sensor technologies for measuring and monitoring the usage and the health of Liverpool’s population. environmental impact of green and open spaces in the city. These include: There is also much forward thinking work being done by organisations • 20 of the largest parks in Liverpool should be of equal quality and such as Liverpool Food People and Squash Nutrition. The Chair has attended enlightening workshops and other discussions centred around the equally accessible to all communities objective of growing much more food with the city’s boundaries. Planting • No person should live more than 300m from their nearest area of fruit trees everywhere, growing crops on public land, cultivating mushrooms on brownfield sites and sprouting veg on any available space. Every little accessible natural green space of at least 2 hectares in size (and with intervention would not only help the health and wellbeing of those involved a children’s play area) but would also be the next step to making Liverpool truly sustainable • Every person over the age of 60 years living in Liverpool should have access to a communal space, garden, allotment or raised bed within Recommendation: 500 metres of where they live, so that they can grow plants and vegetables City Council to continue to work with interested stakeholders to identify places to grow food across the city. • All GPs should be able to recommend a free activity (i.e. Health Walks, Green Gym etc.) in a park or as part of a community prescription in which patients with long term conditions participate in activity program’s – that are logged electronically
• In 2017/18 aim to get 5,000 Liverpool Residents to visit a park that they have not visited before and a further 10,000 Liverpool residents in 2018/19
31 Chair’s Comment:
Frisbee, rounders, hide and seek, running, walking, cartwheeling, scooting, boot camping, limbering, meditating, climbing, dodging, stick throwing, ball kicking, ball throwing, leapfrogging, batting, escaping, wrestling, sunbathing, dancing, ball catching, conkers, swinging, sliding, spinning, splashing, hockey, laughing, cloud shaping, hopping, building, planting, dog walking, rolling, tagging, rustling, collecting, spotting, adventuring, nothing, drawing, painting, snogging, lolling, spying, working, sleeping. Just about anything can happen in a park.
Anecdotally it is possible to see the benefits of public parks as recreational spaces in Liverpool with any trip to Walton Hall Park, Sefton Park or Otterspool. Every weekend these spaces, and many other neighbourhood level sites such as Score Lane Gardens or Reynolds Park, are full of families using the play equipment, groups of people playing football, and children riding bicycles or running around. Recreation in parks is a multi- generation and cross-cultural activity and due to the variability in the size, design, location and function of these spaces the parks and green spaces of Liverpool are able to meet a wide range of needs and outdoor aspirations simultaneously.
From raucous sport to quiet contemplation the recreational fun to be had in parks green and open spaces is without limits. Quantifying such physical and mental wellbeing is nigh on impossible but that is not the point. Every moment spent exercising or relaxing within reach of our homes is vital for the wellbeing of our city and nation. This is the very raison d’être for any of our glorious parks and must be at the heart of all future strategies and plans.
32 5. Environmental Factors - Climate Change,
Flooding, Air Quality, Biodiversity
With key contributions from Dr. Juliet Staples
Chair’s Comment: “Once our green spaces have been built on our land changes forever. Please don’t From air pollution management through urban temperature control to flood alleviation the make short sighted decisions about our importance of green and open space within a cityscape cannot be over stated. As global warming remaining areas of green which will have devastating consequences for future changes our weather systems and patterns become more extreme then the mitigating effect of generations. Your current proposals and parks, woodland and other spaces will become even more essential. ideas do just that. It is time to listen, really listen to the voices of the people A good barometer of the health of any urban environment is the biodiversity of the flora and of our city.” fauna to be found within its boundaries. As was discussed in the Interim Report the picture for Nikki (from Childwall) Liverpool is patchy but there has been some good work done by Mersey Forest, Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service (MEAS) and other organisations with regard to the provision on offer. Whilst not completely black and white, as some less tended smaller spaces can be more supportive than larger homogeneous sites, it stands to reason that the less natural and semi natural areas to be found then the less the offer for wildlife.
The incredible offer that Green, Blue and other Public spaces provide for what they cost cannot be overstated. Our green space provision may be non-statutory but the importance of such places, evidentially and morally, is way beyond any legal obligation and though austerity imposed from Westminster is driving the city to a cliff edge in this respect, the money must be found from somewhere and we must start realising our Parks, Recreation Grounds, Sports Facilities and Wild Places are priceless.
33 Green and open spaces provide many valuable attributes. They offer wild UKCP09 lists the current main climate change projections for the northwest places to enjoy; space for exercise, education, agriculture and leisure as of England as: well as providing biodiversity, green pedestrian routes, health benefits and • Hotter, drier summers; making an important contribution to temperature control, flood alleviation, biodiversity and improved air quality. • milder, wetter winters; • more unpredictable and extreme weather events; and The following is limited to summarising the key issues associated with climate change, air quality, flooding and biodiversity in Liverpool and the important • sea level rise. role that green space can provide in these areas for both helping us to adapt to environmental changes and continuing to supporting our wellbeing. 5.1.1 Hotter, drier summers NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) data show the 5.1 Climate Change average global surface temperature in February 2016 was 1.35°C warmer Climate Change is the long term, underlying warming of our environment than the average temperature for the same month between 1951 - 1980, a that is creating changes in our weather patterns. Climate change has been far bigger margin than ever seen before (CLASP, 2016). By the end of the occurring for many years already and future projections of climate change century, temperatures are expected potentially to rise by about 3.5°C across are certain to impact on economic, social and environmental aspects of our the UK (under a medium-emissions scenario), with more warming in summer lives. The Climate Change Act was introduced in 2008 to ensure the UK than in winter (CLASP, 2016). Increased urbanisation and release of waste cuts its carbon emissions by 80% by 2050. The 80% target is set against heat could increase this still further. a 1990 baseline. The act enables the UK to transition towards being a low Hotter, drier summers bring a range of different opportunities, some of carbon economy. It also sets in place a legally binding framework allowing which could support different land uses with new crops, higher yields and the government to introduce measures which will achieve carbon reduction, extended growing seasons. Economically green and open spaces could and mitigate and adapt to climate change. also benefit financially through the prioritisation of promoting a greater use of The last set of United Kingdom Climate Projections (UKCP09) were published the outdoors and a corresponding development in outdoor leisure services. in June 2009 and provided the most comprehensive report of its kind ever Linked to the health and wellbeing agenda these spaces could help to deliver produced (Jenkins et al, 2009). Since then, and following the Paris Agreement outdoor education and begin to facilitate healthier and active lifestyles and on climate change in December 2015, Defra (Department of Environmental, better diet. Warmer weather could also facilitate future development of the Food and Rural Affairs) are now updating the climate projections and it is low carbon economy through the adoption of renewable energy and enhance anticipated that an updated set of climate projections, UKCP18 which are the tourism offer of the city. due to be completed in 2018, will build on UKCP09 to give greater regional However, these benefits need to also be balanced against a number of data and provide more analysis of risks and the potential extremes and potential risks. Although people may become more active in better weather, impacts of climate change. the increased footfall in and around green and open space results in a need for additional maintenance, cleansing and brings an increasing risk of UV exposure and subsequent skin damage. Hotter, drier weather is also likely to see an increase in infectious diseases and other health issues such as overheating or respiratory issues (Brown et al, 2014). Buildings currently designed without adaptation measures will potentially incur increased costs
34 for cooling and ventilation. By the 2050s it is estimated that one fifth of 5.1.2 Milder, wetter winters homes in England could experience overheating even in a cool summer and excess deaths from high temperatures are projected to triple to 7,000 per December 2015 was the wettest December on record in the UK and was year, on average (Adaptation Sub-Committee, 2014). the also the sixth wettest year on record dating back to 1910 when records began (CLASP, 2016). Projections currently indicate that in future, rainfall Warmer weather will also result in changes to habitats and established could significantly decrease in the summer, (particularly in the South East) and ecosystem functioning; with short-term pest population explosions and significantly increase in the winter (particularly in the North West). Heavier longer term potential species loss and migration. Prolonged periods of drier winter rainfall is expected to become more frequent, potentially resulting in weather will lead to reductions in water availability with water restrictions or an increased risk of surface water flooding to homes, properties, businesses drought adversely affecting people, crops and the maintenance and upkeep and critical national infrastructure (Jenkins et al, 2009). of green and blue (water) spaces. Milder, wetter winters can, however, bring a number of benefits, such as The role of green spaces in hotter drier summers reduced winter heating bills, and an expectation of fewer cold-related winter deaths. Mild weather can also extend the growing season for crops leading to Under hotter and drier conditions the role of trees and green space becomes increased agricultural productivity. However, milder weather can also result increasingly important. Wide canopies of broad leaved trees provide shady in an increase in food, water and vector borne diseases and similarly extend places that are cool and protected from the sun. the growing season for weeds and grass, which need further treatment Research has shown that grassed surfaces in tree shade can also be 15 - or supplementary maintenance at additional cost. With the increasing 20°C cooler than tarmac exposed to sun whilst the air temperature in tree precipitation expected by the 2080s there will also be a corresponding shade can be 5 - 7°C lower than in the sun (Nature Connected, 2015; Bowler increase in surface water run-off. et al, 2010). Urban parks with dense vegetation are on average 1°C cooler than built-up areas during the day (Nature Connected, 2015; Bowler et al, The role of green spaces in milder, wetter weather 2010). Adding 10 percent green cover to areas with little green in high density Research has shown that increasing green cover or tree cover by 10 percent, residential areas also helps to maintain maximum surface temperatures at or or adding green roofs to high density residential areas or town centres will all below the 1961 – 1990 baseline levels (Gill et al, 2007). Just as importantly, help to reduce run off at a local level (Gill et al, 2007). However, the projected research has indicated that removing 10 percent of existing green cover increase in winter precipitation brought about by climate change is such that in high density residential areas is likely to result in surface temperatures run-off cannot be contained by these sources alone and it will be necessary increasing by 7 - 8oC under a similar timeframe (Gill et al, 2007). to use the green space in different ways to provide increased storage for Green space coverage in all its forms – be it street trees, grass, green walls, increased run off through sustainable urban drainage (SUDS) techniques, green facades, or greening of railway lines - all contribute to the environment’s such as creating swales, infiltration, detention and retention ponds in parks natural cooling ability (The Mersey Forest, 2010). In addition to coverage, (Mell, 2016b; Young, 2010). vegetation positioning can also be influential in helping to reduce solar heat gain in buildings and thus reducing the demand for air conditioning, which contributes to both greenhouse gas emissions and waste heat (Niachou et al, 2001). Natural, cool, green spaces play an important role in helping to adapt cities to climate change and the associated environmental and health issues.
35 5.1.3 Unpredictable and extreme weather events The role of green spaces for future sea level rise Severe weather events such as storms, winds and very heavy rain can Well-designed green space behind the sea wall and along the city’s coastline damage infrastructure, transport networks, parks and ecosystems and offers capacity to accommodate overtopping and sea storm surges without increase insurance costs. In Liverpool severe weather has previously these issues directly and immediately impacting on the city and its residents. resulted in the cancellation of public events, power cuts, and damage to buildings, trees being blown down, summer flash floods and closure of parts of the City Centre. Often a corresponding loss of utilities will increase the 5.2 Flooding support required for vulnerable people at a time when transport and other services are disrupted and there is a reduced ability to provide assistance. “Green and open spaces act as natural flood defences enabling water In the longer term, there are risks of disruption caused by rising food and fuel to infiltrate the ground rather than adding to surface water runoff and prices and by the pressure of inward migration in response to the impacts overloading sewers and rivers. By building on green and open spaces of climate change elsewhere as well as loss of income associated with the Liverpool would make itself less resilient to future climate change and cancellation of outdoor events for health and safety reasons. prone to more surface water flooding”. Lucy (email correspondent) The role of green spaces in unpredictable and extreme weather events In addition to the important role green space plays to contain surface water The Flood and Water Management Act 2010 and the Flood Risk Regulations run-off in extreme precipitation events or provide shady, cooler areas during 2009, place responsibilities on County and Unitary Authorities including hotter weather, it can also become a valuable and practical asset to a range Liverpool City Council. As the Lead Local Flood Authority, Liverpool has of service providers. Parks and green spaces (where safe and suitable) are a responsibility in taking the lead role in understanding, co-ordinating and able to offer alternative access routes when others are blocked; provide managing local flood risk. operational working space for emergency responders and /or equipment In recent years Liverpool has experienced different types of flooding storage options for infrastructure or utilities repair work. Following damage that include groundwater flooding (where the water table is very close to inflicted by severe weather they can also act as a community hub and focus the surface), sewer flooding (when excess surface water has entered the in the recovery period. drainage network and exceeded the sewer capacity), tidal flooding (from high tides) and surface water flooding (from excessive rainfall). Flooding is often a result of complex interactions between these and other sources (Draft Flood 5.1.4 Sea level rise Risk Management Strategy (FRMS), 2016). Within this report the focus on The sea-level rise across the UK is projected to be between 13cm and 52cm flooding evaluates the issues of two key flood related risks that will potentially under a medium emission scenario by 2080 (CAG, 2010). Liverpool is largely be exacerbated through climate change in Liverpool, which are surface water protected from current sea level rise through a combination of its sea wall flooding (a type of flooding which is expected to become more frequent due and docks complex. However, weather events in recent years has seen to climate change and over development in flood plains) and tidal flooding. overtopping and sea storm surges that have resulted in localised flooding at Pier Head and Otterspool Park. Climate projections indicate that sea level rise is likely to be more pronounced in the south of the UK than the north.
36 5.2.1 Surface water flooding The role of green spaces in surface water flood alleviation Liverpool’s history, growth and general development have created one of the Parks and green spaces have the potential to play a key role in helping to UK’s core cities but like many other early cities its drainage infrastructure manage and alleviate surface water flooding by slowing water discharge dates from Victorian times and was designed to service a much smaller upstream of flood areas and safely soaking away excess surface water population. As a result many of the culverts under the city are more than (Ahern, 2007; Natural England and Landuse Consultants, 2009). 150 years old, in poor condition and provide inadequate capacity to meet Green infrastructure can intercept, infiltrate, store and evaporate rainwater, today’s needs. Coupled with this a significant proportion of the earlier open thereby reducing the rate and volume of water entering drains and limiting channels, ditches and watercourses have been culverted or backfilled as the the risk of them being overwhelmed during extreme rainfall. Runoff can city developed, which has, in turn, led to a reduction in the efficiency of the be reduced by up to 60% by the planting of trees over hard surfaces and original land drainage system. Collectively, these factors, together with the by nearly 100% by grassland (Ennos, 2001). A hectare of grassland and loss of previous open space to development, has resulted in Liverpool having broadleaved woodland in the UK can evaporate, respectively, 3.4 and 4.0 the 4th highest surface water flood risk in the UK (Low Carbon Liverpool, million litres of water (Hölzinger, 2011) and trees can increase the capacity of 2013). soils to absorb water (Bird et al, 2003) and both reduce flood water velocity (Collins et al, 1997) and delay the downstream progression of peak flood As a result of climate change the pattern of rainfall has also gradually changed waters (Thomas and Nisbet, 2006). Modelling conducted in Manchester has with a shift away from small, regular rainfall to longer periods of dry weather also shown that adding green roofs to all buildings in densely built-up areas interspersed by deluges of rain with several inches sometimes falling in a could reduce runoff by over 17% and introducing an additional 10% of green very short space of time. Under such conditions dry ground is either unable space can reduce surface water runoff by 5 - 6% (Gill et al, 2007). to soak up the water fast enough, or becomes so saturated that it can no longer drain away excess surface water. This excess water then competes In recent years Liverpool has commissioned a range of works to help manage with run off from roads and hard surfaces for the limited capacity in gullies surface water flood risk through improving knowledge and understanding of the risks within the city and gathering data on the flood risk assets (Draft and drains. During periods of high intensity rainfall, when the network is FRMS, 2016). In addition to this work there have been a number of capital full to capacity, or on occasions where stormy weather results in leaf fall schemes to proactively treat culverts in poor condition, realign a problematic and detritus temporarily blocking road gulley gratings, the water will begin to brook, create capacity for flood retention through the introduction of dry ‘pond’. This can quickly lead to water pooling on the highway and ultimately swales or SUDs and, through external grants funding and partnership to surface water several inches deep entering neighbouring homes and working, provide property level flood protection to some of the properties properties. This situation can also be further exacerbated by the surcharging most vulnerable to surface water flooding. An overview of these schemes is of pipes which would usually carry surface water away to the sewer and is available in the Draft FRMS. most prevalent in topographical low spots (Draft FRMS, 2016). Recognising the importance of green space for flood alleviation the Chair Surface water flooding is often unpredictable and rapid. In addition to and Board have engaged positively with United Utilities (UU) who have damaging properties, flood waters often result in loss of utilities and acknowledged the valuable role green spaces can play in mitigating surface communication services and have a range of knock on effects including water flooding. At present, work is being scoped with United Utilities (UU) staff work absence and travel disruption. Flood waters are also frequently to investigate and model the effect of theoretical green space loss on future contaminated by sewer overflows, which bring additional health risks to the surface water flooding within the city. This information will help to provide a increase in respiratory-related conditions, which have been evidenced from better understanding and importantly a stronger business case for the role of those directly affected by flooding. green space in the future management of surface water flooding.
37 © James Killick When it comes to climate change, green space is cool
38 5.3 Air Quality Recommendation: “The green spaces of Liverpool are its greatest asset; the envy of the The Board recommends that United Utilities continue their work to country, the lungs for the people of Liverpool.” investigate and model the effect of theoretical green space loss on future Christine (Aigburth resident) surface water flooding within the city to provide a robust business-case for future investment in services and green infrastructure. Good air quality is vital for our health and quality of life as well as the environment. The Environment Act 1995 placed a statutory duty on all Local Authorities to review and assess air quality within their electoral boundaries.
5.2.2 Tidal flooding 5.3.1 Air quality in Liverpool The second most relevant type of flooding for Liverpool is the risk of tidal Liverpool City Council (LCC) has to monitor and submit the results of air flooding. This occurs on the Mersey River during spring high tides and can quality monitoring on a yearly basis to Defra (Department of Environmental, result in a rapid increase in water levels, which together with strong winds Food and Rural Affairs). The monitoring is undertaken at two continuous causes ‘overtopping’ on the waterfront. Approximately every 18 years there Air Quality monitoring stations in operation as part of the Defra operated is an unusually large tide due to the alignment of the moon and the sun. The Automatic Urban and Rural Network (AURN). They are located as follows: last such event happened in 29th September 2015 resulting in a tide height in Liverpool of 10.37m (The National Tidal and Sea Level Facility, National • Queens Drive Walton: Particulate Matter <10 micron (PM10), Nitrogen Oceanography Centre). Dioxide (NO2) • Speke: Particulate Matter PM10, Particulate Matter PM2.5, Ozone, The role of green spaces in tidal flooding Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) Fortunately, Liverpool is currently fairly well protected from tidal flooding In addition, there are 43 locations in the city where Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) is through a combination of the dock complex, the dock or sea wall and the measured on a monthly basis through the use of Passive Diffusion Tubes (73 green space at Otterspool which collectively help to accommodate high tubes in total). Results of the monitoring assessments undertaken since 2001 tides and any overtopping from sea storm surges. The green and blue show that Liverpool has continuously failed to meet the required European infrastructure of the city thus plays an important role in delivering economic Standard for NO2 on an annual mean basis (40 ug/m3). flood related benefits to the city and making a valuable contribution to the city’s resilience. In 2003 LCC declared two Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) for NO2. Further review and assessments of air quality between 2004 and 2007 showed a further deterioration in Air Quality across Liverpool and in 2008 Liverpool designated a city wide AQMA based on the exceedances of NO2 (Liverpool Air Quality Management Action Plan, 2008). Once an AQMA has been declared, the local authority has to produce an Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) which contains actions to be taken to reduce the level of air pollution.
39 Although poor air quality emanates from both domestic and industrial sources Air quality and the role of green spaces the majority of the air pollution, especially relating to NO2 in Liverpool is Warmer weather and climate change projections will exacerbate poor air associated with transport sources in particular buses, heavy goods vehicles quality, particularly in the case of fine particles (PM10, PM2.5) which become and taxi fleets. This is compounded by a growth in road traffic, decreasing more prevalent at higher temperatures and also notably for ozone, which is bus patronage, low environmental standards for the majority of buses, and formed more rapidly in strong sunlight. an increase in congestion. The decision to cut carbon emissions by engineering a switch to diesel fuels Buses alone account for 57% of the NO2 from local roads in Liverpool and came at the expense of increasing particulate air pollution. In recent years evidence suggests that a 60% reduction in road transport oxides of nitrogen scientists have found that the fine particles emitted by diesel engines play a emissions (NOx - which is a precursor to NO2) is necessary to achieve the far bigger role in global warming than many previously thought. The smallest NO2 annual mean objective. particles known as ‘black carbon’ trap heat in the atmosphere and are now The AQAP contains 23 key actions under 6 different themes which collectively thought by some to be second only to carbon dioxide as a driver of global were intended to reduce traffic related emissions by almost 10% at specified warming. This has repercussions for cardiovascular and respiratory health locations within the previously designated AQMAs. Given the impact of as links between air pollution and heart disease are now robustly proven transport on local air quality the AQAP was also fully integrated into the Local (Vidal, 2015). Transport Plan (2006-2011). In the north west of England there are a high proportion of communities with Information on local air quality has been made available via the Liverpool increased vulnerability to cardiovascular and respiratory diseases which City Council website with additional links to external air quality information will be adversely affected by poor air quality, which can trigger breathing through the UK Government. problems and exacerbate health conditions such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and bronchitis. In addition this can The Government recognises opportunities to improve air quality for the protection of public health and the environment through decisions made be compounded by the earlier seasonal appearance of respiratory symptoms on land use planning, permitting, roads and air quality management and longer duration of exposure to aeroallergen (e.g. pollen) associated with areas. From 2016 local authorities will now be required to work together climate change (Public Health England, 2012; Climate Ready, 2014). across departmental or authority boundaries to identify suitable measures Trees and green spaces make a valuable contribution to improving local air to address air quality issues. This includes measures in relation to local quality in urban areas in a number of ways. They are able to remove carbon transport, highways, land use planning, environmental health and public dioxide from the atmosphere, act as carbon sinks and help to alleviate the health. Subsequently, the annual reporting of air quality monitoring to Defra greenhouse effect associated with climate change. In addition they also help and provision of updates on the actions being taken within the AQAP will now manage high temperatures by providing shade to homes and offices, and help have to have sign-off from a senior level of all departments within the Council. to improve local air quality as trees and green walls can capture and remove This will take the form of a new Annual Status Report being submitted by the gaseous pollutants through the stomata in the leaf surface by absorbing end of June in 2016 and by April in each subsequent year. them with normal air components (Lafortezza et al, 2013; Mathey et al, 2011). Fine particulate matter, especially that emitted from the combustion of diesel, can also sometimes be effectively trapped by road side trees which act as ‘biological filters’, removing airborne particles that settle on their leaves and reducing street-level particulates (Nowak et al, 2006).
40 Moreover, work by the Urban Forestry Network in the Unites States (2014) 5.4.1 Biodiversity in Liverpool has estimated that over a 50-year lifespan a tree can generate $32,000 worth of oxygen, providing $62,000 worth of air pollution control in addition Liverpool has several areas of high biodiversity value of which the estuary is to recycling $37,500 worth of water and controlling $31,000 worth of soil the most important. erosion. Therefore, although costs are associated with the planting and A large part of the estuary including its banks is designated as a Site of maintenance of trees they do have a reciprocal economic value for urban Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Ramsar Site, and Special Protection Area areas with evidence from both the UK and internationally highlighting these (SPA) due to the vital role played by the intertidal flats and salt-marshes in benefits (cf. Byrne, Lo, & Jianjun, 2015; Mell et al, 2013). providing feeding and roosting sites for large and internationally important populations of waterfowl. The city also has 31 Local Wildlife Sites and 4 Local Nature Reserves at Croxteth Local Nature Reserve; Childwall Fields 5.4 Biodiversity and Black Woods; Mill Wood and Alder Wood; and Allerton (Eric Hardy) Biodiversity is the variety of living things and includes all species of plants, Local Nature Reserve. In total, an area of 950.7 hectares in Liverpool has animals and the natural systems that support them. Every organism, been identified as being of substantive nature conservation interest, which whether rare or abundant, contributes to the balance of nature and this equates to 8.6% of the city’s land area and 33% of green and open space inter-dependence is fundamental to the good health of the world around us. within the city boundary. Ecosystems which are rich in biodiversity make a range of environmental, To fulfil its obligation under the NERC Act, and to meet local and national economic and social contributions and are typically healthy and more resilient biodiversity priorities and objectives including the North Merseyside to the impacts of climate change, especially extreme weather events. Biodiversity Action Plan, the City Council must ensure that these sites are The conservation of biodiversity is then a critical component of Liverpool’s protected from inappropriate development. response to climate change and will aid the delivery of crucial ecosystem There are of course large areas of open space across the city with more services for the city such as flood management and the provision of clean limited nature conservation value which could still be targeted for biodiversity air and water. It will also play a key role in enhancing the community’s well- enhancement. This includes land in both public and private ownership; being and in providing a ‘sense of place’. Recognising the many important comprising the city’s green wedges, parks, allotments, street trees, hedges, contributions that biodiversity can offer, it is clearly important that maximum cemeteries, private gardens and water bodies including the park lakes and effort is given to its protection and development. water courses. For the most part this resource is fragmented and isolated Local authorities, along with all other public organisations, already have a within the urban setting but some remain connected to varying degrees by statutory responsibility to consider the impact of their decisions and actions green corridors such as the Leeds Liverpool Canal and Liverpool Loopline. on biodiversity. This duty was introduced by the Natural Environment The effects of climate change including hotter, drier summers and milder, and Rural Communities Act (NERC) Act (2006) and extends beyond just wetter winters with increased flood risk are understood. Wildlife has already conserving what is already there to carrying out, supporting and requiring begun to respond to these changes through the timing of seasonal events actions that may also restore or enhance species populations and habitats. such as flowering, species distributions, species abundance, and rates of growth. These changes are likely to impact adversely on some species and habitats, but provide gains for others.
41 Life flowing into the heart of the City
42 The current fragmentation of valued habitat across Liverpool means that Also, in appreciating the important contribution that biodiversity will make wildlife is less able to respond to climate change by movement. This to climate change mitigation, the Green and Open Spaces Review Board vulnerability is further heightened by additional pressures including built commissioned MEAS in 2015 to undertake a biodiversity assessment of development, invasive non-native species, air pollution and historical Liverpool. Following the review of data sets and historic habitat reports management practices. however, it became clear that species records per hectare were very low and probably under-representative of the presence of biodiversity in the city. For The active conservation of Liverpool’s protected sites and other habitats is many areas, there were simply no records. Although absence of evidence vital if we are to maintain a healthy, bio diverse environment and respond is not evidence of absence, it highlighted that there has been little formal effectively to climate change. Management objectives must ensure that recording or monitoring on either a city wide, species wide or habitat wide areas with high biodiversity value in particular and other green spaces in basis and there is a scarcity of robust information on biodiversity detail across general, take full account of climate change adaptation requirements and the city. Without this it will be difficult to deliver on statutory conservation that opportunities to extend provision are realised. Appropriate management obligations or to provide protection for the most fragile sites and species. of protected sites, other non-designated land such as parks, school grounds and cemeteries, provides extensive habitat for wildlife and creates More detail of the importance of wildlife and provision for biodiversity can be opportunities to enhance the area for biodiversity and local communities. found in the MEAS report(s) in Appendix 4a and 4b. The connectivity between sites should also be improved by promoting and enhancing green corridors and ecological networks.
Recommendation:
The Board recommends that biodiversity should be a key consideration and form an integral part of the Local Plan consultation and the ‘Green Web’* vision for the city. *see chapter 9
In support of these aims, Liverpool City Council is working with CARTIF (an experienced organisation that is currently running 12 successful transnational projects across Europe) and a number of additional external partners to be one of 3 lead cities in a trans-European project to be submitted to the Horizon2020 programme EU SMART AND SUSTAINABLE CITIES “demonstrating innovative nature-based solutions in cities”. The other two lead cities are Valladolid in northern Spain and Izmir in Turkey and the proposed programme of work would be to research the potential of introducing green infrastructure solutions to improve pedestrian and cyclist connectivity, to improve local community and wildlife value, and to test the impact of vertical gardens, green roofs and new technologies.
43 Side by side with nature
44 6. Education
With key contributions from Board Member Councillor Malcolm Kelly
“Schools, Colleges, Universities should get involved and include The work of The Mersey Forest and individual forest school providers gardening and horticulture within their curriculum, pupils should learn continue to make a positive impact on the education of the City’s children. new skills and be educated about the environment, so they respect and Below is an excerpt from A Forest School Study undertaken by the Forestry have pride in their green and open spaces.” Commission on behalf of the Government: Nadine (Consultation respondent) The evaluation suggests Forest Schools make a difference in the following ways: • Confidence: children have the freedom, time and space to learn and demonstrate Chair’s Comment: independence. “What’s that?” My daughter asked me. “That’s the sound • Social skills: of a Woodpecker” I answered. children gain increased awareness of the consequences of their actions on peers through team activities such as sharing tools and participating in play. “What’s a Woodpecker”? Her ongoing biology lesson • Communication: continued as it does whenever we walk around my beloved language development was prompted by the children’s sensory experiences. Woolton Woods. Our green and open spaces have long • Motivation: been valued for the educational possibilities but none more the woodland tended to fascinate the children and they developed a keenness to participate and the ability to concentrate over longer periods of time. so than now. Study after study tells us that achievers of all levels thrive when taken from the classroom and asked the • Physical skills: these improvements were characterised by the development of physical same questions surrounded by the interwoven, complex stamina with gross and fine motor skills. yet unrestricted great outdoors. • Knowledge and understanding: the children develop an interest in the natural surroundings and respect for the environment as they grow up.
45 The full report can be found at the Forestry Commission website 6.1.1 The importance of organised educational (forestry.gov.uk/forestresearch). The evidence therefore appears clear and should be acted upon and Forest School further developed within the City activities within parks and City Region. A number of reasons can be identified why organised educational activities are important for children. It can be argued that there is concern about Recommendation: children being disengaged from the natural environment and that they are not being afforded opportunities to play and learn in these environments, which The Board recommends that Liverpool City Council continue to work with means much more needs to be done to engage them as widely as possible. schools, Education Authorities, The Mersey Forest and other stakeholders But why are they not being engaged in a way they should be? A recent case to identify and energise ‘A Forest School For Every School’ on a citywide study funded by Natural England identified a range of barriers that had been scale. This work to commence with the newly created public woodland suggested by children in relation to their play at home and within the natural at Woolton Woods being developed as a Forest School for schools within environment. Seventeen children from one school participated in small focus groups before and after a 12-week Forest School that took place within a Woolton, Allerton and Hunts Cross wards. school woodland area in The Mersey Forest. It was found that Forest School had a positive influence on children’s natural play and their knowledge of the natural world around them.
“I don’t want my children’s children to say; what is a park?” However, the barriers highlighted by the children were around parental constraints with the majority of children taking part explaining that these Imelda (participant at public meeting) constraints were closely linked to safety concerns such as parental fears of abduction, heavy road traffic when travelling to and from local park land and risk of injury. Many children stated that they were not allowed to go to the local park without adult or older sibling supervision, and were subsequently 6.1 Environmental Education in Liverpool reliant on their families for taking them to play in natural environments. Our parks, especially in cities such as Liverpool, are so important to us all The more of our green open space and woodland areas that disappear or because of the range of opportunities they can offer in a variety of ways. The are reduced within the city, the less opportunity there will be for our children most obvious use of our parks is for sport and recreation, but there is clearly a wider use, none more so than education, of both adults and of our children. to be engaged educationally with the natural environment. Communities cannot be solely blamed for the lack of use of some of our green space or In Liverpool there is some support given to schools through the Liverpool woodland area if they are not encouraged to use it to its full potential. It is Environmental Advocate Team (LEAP) who deliver national curriculum ‘Key short sighted to simply adopt the “use it or lose it” approach to our green Stages’ about our parks in areas such as heritage, local history and geography space, when much more can be done to help encourage a greater use of it. sessions, study of seasonal change, plant growth, tree identification, habitats and mini-beasts. More details can be found about this at www.ednet.co/leat Those of us who work closely with children and young people know how excited and engaging they are when they visit the countryside or rural areas to take part in organised recreational or educational activities. The
46 excitement and interest shown by young people in this type of environment Elsewhere in the country Ofsted highlighted two schools, Duncton Junior clearly highlights the limited outdoor experiences of our open space and School and Graffham Infant School, in West Sussex as good practice by woodland areas that they currently get, and as such probably endorses the setting up Forest Schools, which improved provision, engagement with pupils findings by Natural England (Truss, E, 2016). and learning (Martin, H. 2012). The schools said, “This led to the beginnings of a new, creative topic structure with a strong focus on out of classroom But whilst it might be desirable for local schools or youth groups to travel learning. The addition of the Forest School, using a stretch of woodland one to the countryside, why do we need to take our children so far to engage mile away, enriched this culture. Every child has a forest school experience them in these educational activities or studies? Why not bring those same each year; this improves their confidence, self-esteem, collaborative and activities to our urban parks, open spaces and woodland areas on a much enquiry skills” (Ridgers et al 2012). more frequent basis? Opportunities may therefore arise for the use of local parkland or green At a national level the Government has recognised the need to safeguard space close to woodland areas for the development of a new school building; National Parks and in March 2016, it launched a kick start programme however, it can be argued that building schools to improve education on of activity to safeguard their future (https://www.gov.uk/government/ local parkland is counterproductive. This has the potential to take away publications/national-parks-8-point-plan-for-england-2016-to-2020). a valuable community asset, but more importantly, take away or damage New figures revealed that nationally only 10% of schoolchildren currently have natural educational opportunities. access to outdoor learning, which may also be reflected here in Liverpool. In the area of Further Education, there is also an opportunity for the city council The UK Government is including, as part of the programme, the engagement to expand on its current apprenticeship schemes with more apprenticeships of young people throughout their education, from primary school through to geared to looking after our parks and woodland areas and helping to set secondary school with the aim of increasing the number of young people young people up with opportunities for their future employment. visiting the National Parks and by including National Parks in the curriculum. However, part of the programme will also include supporting the first steps With the majority of the population of Liverpool living close to parks, green to employment by developing a new apprenticeship standard and doubling space and woodland areas, the council must aim to help increase the diversity apprenticeships in National Parks. of visitors from across the city to our parks through education. A similar approach can be applied to our local parks by encouraging schools at all levels to use green spaces as a means to support most, if not all, subjects in the curriculum. Through an active engagement with environmental “The goal of early childhood education should be to activate education we may also see greater uptake from sport, environmental studies, the child’s own natural desire to learn.” art, and science. This can also be extended to youth organisations such as Youth Clubs, Scouts, and Guides. Maria Montessori There are also examples around the city where schools or youth organisations who are located on, or immediately next to parks, open spaces or woodland areas and already make some use of this open space to support the education or work that they do with young people. There are many more examples of schools or youth organisations that are located in close proximity to such areas who should be encouraged to use our parks to their full potential as an educational resource.
47 Thinking outside the box
48 7. Finance - Balancing the Books?
With key contributions from Board Members Ron Odunaiya, Victoria Owens and LCC Finance Team
Chair’s Comment:
It is very difficult to put the exact economic value on the City’s unbuilt environment. The incredibly successful ‘Giants’ events, Tour of Britain (cycling) stages and the ‘3 Queens’ visit took place entirely on the highways and in the open and blue spaces of Liverpool and generated millions of pounds toward the economy of the city, and yet these events are a huge financial burden on the Council’s balance sheets for reasons of logistical planning, post event clean up etc. and the limited fees charged by Liverpool City Council to use the city’s green and open spaces. Further to Central Government budgetary cuts, this is rapidly becoming untenable but a loss of such events would be significant to the city’s prestige, its people and very importantly, its visitor economy. The River Mersey, parks and other civic areas also have an economic value by just making Liverpool an attractive place to visit, do business and live.
Thus parks, recreation grounds, nature reserves and other public green spaces are a priceless asset with regard to urban living but this report was partly born out of the fact that the city is struggling to allocate the finances required to maintain these places. Valuable lessons can be learned from other councils such as Nottingham City Council with regard to the commercial offer of green space provision. Yet even in Nottingham the books do not balance (https://nottinghaminsight.org.uk/f/96578/Library/Council-Government-and-Democracy/Financial-Statements/) and the cost of public open space provision remains whilst the value is unquantifiable.
Later in the report there will be discussion over the potential regime change the existing possibilities in order to continue to close the financial gap for for the long-term financial security of the city’s green and open spaces. It is Liverpool’s green and open space provision which could ultimately both help however assumed that in the short-term at least, such provision will remain the council to fight austerity and make any alternative regimes more realistic. within council control. The following sections will therefore investigate
49 For the purposes of this report the current and possible future revenue Over the last 2 years, Glendale-Liverpool Ltd have implemented a number streams and maintenance costs of Liverpool’s green space provision will be of efficiencies in the grounds maintenance of cemeteries and crematoria broken down into the following areas: totalling circa £1.3 million per annum. It is recommended that this efficiency be ring-fenced and continue to be reinvested into parks maintenance. Given • Public Parks Finances the costs involved it is important that existing funding streams are not lost • Sports and Recreation Finances and the current support from Cemeteries and Crematoria that provides a ‘legacy’ contribution to the parks maintenance is preserved. • Highways and Verges Finances • Other Finances Recommendation: 7.1 Public Parks Finances The Board recommends that the £1.3 million efficiencies from Cemeteries Throughout the duration of the review Liverpool City Council has continued and Crematoria be retained and continue to be reinvested back into parks. to seek to reduce costs and improve income from the public spaces. This is an ongoing process which requires extensive analysis of current and future trends in government and Local Authority financing and maintenance costs. One way possibly to reduce the parks maintenance cost deficit is to follow Burnley’s example (Appendix 7) and take the provision of green and open spaces back in house, under Liverpool City Council control, at the end of 7.1.1 Balancing the Books the current contract. This would in theory allow the city to regain control over the programme of maintenance and lower the overall costs of managing The current costs for green space maintenance and the overall analysis of the programme. However, based on the updated 2016/17 figures discussed costs and income for green spaces can be viewed in Appendices 5 and 6 above, Liverpool City Council cannot afford to do this unless other possible respectively. models are considered. One option available to Liverpool City Council would Table 1 provides an overview of the current costs and income for Parks and be to move towards a transitional maintenance arrangement which lowers Public Green Space. the revenue costs to the city. Table1. Parks and Public Green Space Overall Costs 2016/17
Cost Element Value in £ (2016/17) Recommendation: Costs £3, 754,056 The Board recommends that if transitional funding cannot be secured prior Income £387,600 to 2017/18 then maintenance of the City’s green and open spaces should (concessions and rents) be reduced from its current regime to 50-70% in the interim. At such a Efficiencies in maintenance regime £1,301,230 from Cemeteries and Crematoria point when a sustainable form of financing becomes available the 100% Balance £2,065,226 maintenance (modified to meet needs) can be reinstated.
50 7.1.2 Public Park - Alternative maintenance regimes Re-wilding the city A process of re-wilding could be appropriate if the city fails to identify To highlight the opportunities to Liverpool City Council a range of best practice alternative sources of funding for green and open space post 2017/18. The exemplars can be identified highlighting how different cities and parks are process of re-wilding has been successfully employed in other locations and working with alternative financing regimes- these include excellent examples could provide a short-term solution between the current financial scenarios to be found nationally such as the Heeley Development Trust in Sheffield faced by the city and the identification of alternative funding sources, and a www.heeleypeoplespark.co.uk and Streatham Common Co-operative in longer-term solution to permanently reduce maintenance budgets. London www.sccoop.org.uk/ All of these very different examples potentially have something to offer when These include: looking at the possibilities to continue to maintain and enhance the city’s The Isla Gladstone parks and green spaces in the future. The Isla Gladstone in Stanley Park operates a successful commercial business within a public park. Based within a large, historic conservatory building and 7.1.3 The Future - Public Parks, Nature Reserves with a vested interest in the state of Stanley Park, the commercial viability of the Isla Gladstone is closely linked to the quality of the surrounding park. and other Public Spaces Whilst certain alternative regimes could reduce the cost of running parks and Speke Hall green space the savings under the current regime made over the previous five Speke Hall is a historic property and grounds which lie within the city. It is years have to all intents and purposes cut the current workforce ‘to the bone’, currently operated by the National Trust as part of their nationwide parks trust and have led to the loss of skilled and knowledgeable personnel. There are model, which generates a mixed income from gifts, membership, entrance already signs of falling standards in some of the city’s parks and other green fees to buildings, merchandising and endowment. This in turn, subsidises spaces, where the management regimes are considered by some locals to and facilitates the ongoing maintenance of the estate. now be inadequate for the level of use (for instance in Walton Hall Park). Acrehurst Park, Belle Vale Further savings could be made by following some other cities and taking This excellently presented public park was developed and is currently the maintenance back in house and thus removing any management fee maintained by Riverside Housing Association with resident input. (Appendix 8) payable (see section 7.1.1 - although this could be a moot point if there is no money for any maintenance regime of any sort). Any future ‘in-house’ regime Chavasse Park, City Centre would also benefit from increasing revenue from Liverpool’s green and open This distinctive, raised quasi-public space is the largest green roof in the space assets as it is felt that there is great potential in this area. Liverpool city and is maintained by Liverpool ONE Management Group. Its green flag City Council can work with small businesses and other service providers quality status was re-awarded for another year in July 2016. to assess what opportunities exist to increase the economic returns from green and open spaces without impacting negative on the integrity of these Business Improvement District (BID) spaces. Maintenance of this quasi-public space to the rear of Exchange Station has Raising revenue within our parks can essentially be broken down into two previously been paid for by businesses located in the Business Improvement elements, commercial revenue and event revenue. District (BID) through an agreed business environment improvement levy but is now Council owned and maintained.
51 Commercial revenue Going forward There are already a number of examples across the city such as Otterspool The following opportunities and actions have been identified to increase Adventure Centre and the Isla Gladstone which are considered to be good revenue into the parks budgets and to improve the process for leases and examples of what can be achieved in our parks. concessions: Businesses operating within our parks provide added value and increase • Review current lease agreements to ensure they are not financially footfall within the park. There is a need to support and develop business detrimental to the city council. Produce a framework for future leases to within our parks, as not only do they help to animate the park but importantly ensure rents are realistic and terms fair to both parties. because businesses within parks are able to raise revenue to help support and maintain parks. • Create a plan for empty, derelict buildings in parks. Leases • Consider a franchise business agreement to apply to all new businesses operating within a park. This would rely on a percentage of the turnover Currently the business leases are not robust and many still rely on the city being handed back to the council and have the added bonus that it may council to inspect, report and carry out most, if not all, repairs. Some rents also promote some degree of networking within the parks business have not been updated and are out of line with current commercial rates and community. fail to account for potential growth. There are also a number of buildings within the parks that are empty or underutilised and could accommodate • Identify areas within parks where a concession could work particularly in local business and generate funding for the maintenance of the park. Work the smaller parks where there is no current café facility. is currently underway within the city council to both review existing leases • Place a value on a concession area to establish a fair rent for the area. and commercial arrangements within parks and to explore the commercial appetite for some of the unused buildings within our green space. It will be • Review the tender process to ensure it does not become a downward- important going forward that a significant proportion of income generated bidding process. from any sale of buildings within the green space is ring fenced for the future • Introduce an audit process to help support businesses and provide maintenance of the park/s. guidance and ensure compliance with lease and franchise agreement. Concessions • Should a business wish to expand and promote a new idea this should be There are currently a low number of concessions in the parks and although encouraged and supported rather than put out for tender. they do bring in important income there is an opportunity to develop this • Identify a community business support ‘Advisor’ providing a point of call income stream further. In recent months the city council has updated its and support/promotion for park businesses. tender and procurement process for parks concessions which has seen a positive increase in income and there are plans to test additional concessions at new sites. Increasing the type and location of hot and cold concessions and ensuring that adequate enforcement is in place to protect concession holders will help the city council to grow this area of future income. There is also an opportunity to explore the potential for all business users of parks (boot camps, professional dog walkers, private sports trainers etc.) to register and contribute financially to the future maintenance and upkeep.
52 In addition, there are a number of new financial initiatives that can also be considered: Recommendation: • Create a concession licence/badge – visible on inspection - for boot camp The Board recommends that all commercial receipts generated from and dog-walking businesses. commercial activities including, but not exclusively from, income associated • Improve the promotion of the memorial bench initiative and develop with parks leases, parks concessions and parks sponsorship be ring-fenced additional memorial initiatives such as ‘Memory Walks,’ where people to fund on-going maintenance of the city’s green and open spaces. This could buy a brick to create a walkway in memory of a loved one, or pay to plant and maintain a tree. income would be utilised to manage green spaces across Liverpool, and • Create sponsorship packages to sell to local business which in turn pay not just the sites where events are held. for the maintenance of a particular area e.g. Japanese garden sponsored by local restaurant including a food event during the summer, photo opportunity with Mayor, subtle advertising within the area etc. Event revenue
• Create ‘100 Club’ – local business participates in a raffle with the prize of “Give people a reason to come to the park and they will!” free marketing/branding of an event/area. Anonymous Parks User • Sponsorship of areas within our parks using subtle advertising.
Liverpool is a place like no other, and undeniably the home of incredible innovative events. The programme of events held across the city in the past Recommendation: has been very successful, well received and supported, but it is increasingly apparent that as a city we can no longer afford to host these events unless we The Board recommends that a review of the commercialisation opportunities can also cover costs incurred through associated clean-up and reinstatement for the city’s green and open spaces be undertaken to identify sites where works. activities and/or businesses can be promoted to increase revenue. The If we are to raise revenue from events in parks we need to factor in all Board recommends that Liverpool City Council works with local communities costs; ensuring that we actively market and promote our parks to all whilst simultaneously increasing parks income. and businesses to identify opportunities for small, medium and large scale commercialisation activities. One initiative that caught the imagination of the Board was that of ‘MyPark Scotland’ at http://www.mypark.scot/. Their remit is to connect people to their parks by providing up to date information on park locations, facilities and what’s on. The web site also provides details of exciting projects that will help to improve the parks for future generations and additionally provides a method of funding park improvements and longer term investments by combining elements of project funding, for individuals and businesses to support parks and projects, with an investment strategy to develop longer- term sustainability and endowment funds. Currently this is Scotland’s only
53 crowd funding site specifically for parks and green spaces and through the • Successful key park initiatives such as “The Walk in the Park” campaign web site people can Gift Aid donations the ‘extra funding’ going towards should be developed, replicated and marketed into smaller parks e.g. ‘A building an endowment fund for Scotland parks. This is a model that Walk in the Park’ to help attract further commercial events and be linked could be usefully considered and adopted in Liverpool and forms part of a to a new centrally managed booking system. recommendation within the Engagement section of this report. • Tenders should be sought for smaller commercial events such as circus To progress this further commercialisation in innovation there is a need and funfair to ensure best value for the city council. to develop a strategic approach to events in our parks that involve local • The implementation of a new central booking process would need to be businesses as well as the business based in the parks. Liverpool is a city supported by a dedicated commercial officer, who could focus on parks that is opening itself up for business and our parks have a big role to play in events and seek to maximise their income. Whilst parks officers remain helping to attract large scale events and attracting footfall and revenue. For a key consultee their expertise is not necessarily in event planning and example: finance and it is suggested that this role could be best delivered through • There is a need for a joined up approach between Green Space Officers staff in the Culture Liverpool Team for an agreed management fee. and Culture Liverpool Officers, along with a need to simplify the application process; potentially considering investment into an online application process that includes all outdoor event bookings on public realm. This will encourage more enquiries, create a smoother process Recommendation: and present the council more professionally. • Green Space Officers and Culture Liverpool Officers should work together The Board recommends that Green Space Officers and Culture Liverpool to share expertise and to streamline and improve the events application Officers should work together with additional identified Liverpool City process for park events. Additional support should be sought from wider Council staff to share expertise and streamline and improve the events Liverpool city council officers e.g. Licencing, Highways, Streetscene, City Centre Management etc. Crowd funding could also be considered along application process for park events. similar lines to the successful examples at ‘My Park Scotland’.
• A scale of differential charges needs to be established for premier and Recommendation: key park sites to maximise their earning potential so that the income they generate can help to support other parks and open spaces. Charges and The Board recommends that all income generating events in parks should costs should seek to recover all associated reinstatement and clean-up be managed by the Culture Liverpool Team in liaison with Green Space costs and an upfront bond to cover these costs (based on the types, size, and duration of event) should be provided before any events and Officers. Revenue generated through park events should be ring fenced returned after any necessary deductions have been made after the event. for future parks maintenance, subject to payment of an agreed percentage Consideration should also be given to introducing a disruption or non- management fee to the Culture Liverpool Team. operational charge (if applicable) to all events. • The Council should seek to balance the commercialisation of parks with the continuation of free or affordable charges for charitable/voluntary/not for profit events.
54 All green space sports provision (outside of that in parks) currently costs the Recommendation: city £360,463 per year. This will come under increasing pressure as non- statutory budgets continue to be cut. There has been a move in recent years The Board recommends that all commercial for-profit events held in the toward shifting the management and financing of council managed spaces city’s green spaces are charged appropriate licensing fees that cover the to private businesses, and in light of budget contraction this looks likely to reinstatement costs and make a financial contribution to ongoing site continue. Any transfers should, however, be done with great care in order to avoid the visibility of issues that surround sites like Olive Mount Sports maintenance. Fields. The loss of school sports fields for development is also notable. The baseline assessment of the number of playing pitches disposed of across the city in the last ten years is subject to change given that it is an 7.2 Sport and Recreation Finance assessment of the pitches in the city dependent on variables such as pitches Just like public parks, dedicated green space allocated to Sports and being ‘disused’, ‘lapsed’, new secured community access arrangements Recreation is also non statutory, which in the current climate of sedentary emerging, and the opening of new/replacement playing surfaces as a result health issues and obesity is rather surprising. Current dedicated sport and of planning conditions. The number of playing pitches at a given site can recreation pitch facility costs are shown in Table 2 below: fluctuate over periods of time for reasons relating to management and maintenance - this means the findings of a count conducted in one season may differ from results of similar exercise conducted previously or in future Table 2. Sports and Recreation Overall Costs 2016/17 seasons.
Cost Element Value in £ (2016/17) The current supply of playing pitches across the city was established through undertaking a series of independent data review, research and consultation Costs (Expenditure) £520,463 exercises. This included a review of information held by the council; site Income £160,000 visits to pitches owned and managed by the council; consultation with key Balance Minus £360,463 stakeholders; and a survey of all identified sports clubs as agreed with the council. This exercise was undertaken in 2013 and is the basis of Liverpool’s N.B. This refers to sports provision outside of parks. Playing Pitch Strategy (PPS). The PPS is currently under review with Sport England and seeks to provide guidance for planning decisions made across Liverpool up to 2020. This strategy will help in identification, and prioritisation, of playing pitches that are of local and city-wide significance and guide the City Council and its partners to work collaboratively (i.e. reduce duplication and competition), identify and use limited resources to optimum effect. It is against this background that future provision must be considered.
55 7.2.1 Playing pitch strategy (PPS) The following key priorities and objectives are required relative to the FA Investment Programme: The Liverpool PPS together with a number of other important City Council Strategies and documents (including the Physical Activity and Sport Strategy) • Determine the future requirements of sites/pitches where there is forms part of the evidence base that will support local planning and other currently no recorded football play and/or spare capacity at education policies for Liverpool. sites to address overplay on senior, youth and mini pitches; The primary purpose of the PPS is to provide a strategic framework which • identify strategic grass pitch sites and improve football pitch quality in ensures that the provision of outdoor playing pitches meet the local needs order to increase capacity to accommodate unmet and future demand of existing and future residents within the city. In addition, the Football for youth 11 vs 11 and adult 11 vs 11 football; Association (FA) Strategy was produced in accordance with the national • a current shortfall of one full size 3G (third generation) Artificial Grass planning guidance and provides robust and objective justification for future Pitches (AGPs) to service unmet demand for football in the north of the playing pitch provision throughout Liverpool. city; Liverpool City Council in partnership with Sport England and the five main • deliver a phased implementation of new 3G Artificial Grass Pitches (AGPs) pitch sport national governing bodies (The Football Association FA, England and changing facilities on strategic hub sites to meet the FA Chairman’s and Wales Cricket Board, Rugby Football Union, Rugby Football League England Commission priorities and be the catalyst to address shortfalls and the England Hockey Board) produced a Playing Pitch Strategy (PPS) for in provision in the city e.g. shortfall of adult pitches in the south of the Liverpool during 2012/13. The PPS Action Plan has helped inform a variety city. of investment projects and planning applications since the policy was signed off by the Steering Group in December 2013. All partners acknowledged Each of these priorities seek to focus future investment into a new more the need to update the baseline data for the PPS Action Plan and take into sustainable business model for football within the city, where key football account changes in sport programmes and projects, particularly the FA hub sites, (including changing facilities and the creation of new 3G AGPs to Investment Programme for Liverpool. It was agreed that the PPS should be serve for training, affiliated match play and recreational football) will, in turn, refreshed to reflect changes that have occurred since 2013. support the maintenance and improvement of key grass pitch sites. The 2016 PPS will address a number of key factors including: To achieve this the City Council is required to enter into an investment partnership with the external joint funding partners (Football Association FA, • Rectify quantitative shortfalls through improvements to the current pitch Premier League and Sport England) totalling £12.6 million and commit a City stock; Council £4.4 million capital contribution to the development and construction • establish a framework to inform planning application negotiations which of the new third generation (3G) pitches and ancillary facilities. involve the loss of playing fields; The benefits to Liverpool will include new and affordable facilities – artificial • establish an approach to securing developer contributions which pitches, improved grass pitches and changing, increased participation levels, priorities projects according to a range of core criteria; and improved health; major capital investment from national sources and a potential long-term saving to the council as more play is concentrated on • work with facility providers to establish an approach to co-ordinate fewer pitches. investment.
56 The FA model is based around all grass roots football delivery in an area Chair’s Comment: being focused on floodlit 3G pitches and a small number of high quality grass pitch hub sites. The ownership of the improved sites after the investment ‘The City Council is already working with the FA to create 4 citywide 3G has been undertaken would be transferred from council ownership to a new city-wide local delivery vehicle (Football Trust) responsible for maintenance football hubs. I have real misgivings about this model. Personally, natural and management of football in the city. play always seems to be the best option and, though unproven at this point, The proposal in Liverpool is to invest in up to 4 hub sites across the city; the potential health risks associated with the rubber crumb incorporated each consisting of three floodlit artificial grass pitches, three grass pitches, into the 3G pitches should be carefully and thoroughly investigated before associated changing provision and extensive car parking. The sites that swapping grass pitches for synthetic pitches in the long term. I watch with have been identified are Jeffrey Humble Playing Fields, Heron Eccles Playing Fields, Jericho Lane Playing Fields and the Simpson Ground. At least two of disquiet as my daughter’s under 8’s football team make piles of the crumb these sites would include a health and fitness offer. and throw it at each other! Despite the evidence of a shortfall of pitches in Figure 2. Map of the south of the city, I also wonder whether locating three of the hubs within Football Association Jeffrey Humble a 1.5-mile radius of each other is a ‘citywide’ model’? Hub Sites. Playing Fields Even though the Council continue to make great efforts to be more sustainable, simply due to the public access ethos and being affordable for all, Council sports provision is loss making and subsidised. However, there are significant streams of revenue generated by some sports away from the public sector. Football for example, which makes up the majority of the council maintained pitches, generates enormous amounts of money for other interested parties.
The Football Association made £261million profit in the year ending 2014, which is far less than the estimated £3billion generated by the Premier Jericho Lane League. Liverpool FC and Everton FC received a combined figure of over Playing Fields Simpson Ground Heron Eccles £170 million from the Premier League this year (2015/16) alone. Playing FIeld This multi-million pound entertainment industry owes a great deal to the council maintained pitches and public parks where young talent is nurtured and discovered.
© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 100018351
57 © Francis Rowlands Where sport has no boundaries
58 funding to the City Council to co-fund fully public facilities. One example Recommendation: would be Sefton Park Tennis Club, (Mersey Bowmen) which could provide The Board recommends that to ensure a continuation of Liverpool’s proud funding to subsidise the management of the public courts in Sefton Park, thus ensuring that all people can benefit from these resources. In addition, heritage of creating national and international talent in football it is imperative there has been recent contact with the ‘John Mitchel’s Gaelic Football Club’ that both of the city’s football clubs and the Premier League and the city’s who have expressed an interest to investigate the possibility of a Community professional football clubs join with the FA and enter into dialogue with the Asset Transfer or long lease of the Council owned pitch in Greenbank Lane. City Council to discuss the viability of funding and improving football pitch Thus, while sports provision plays a vital role within a city, if approached carefully with an all-inclusive philosophy, it is deemed that such is the provision and management in the long-term. commercial interest and potential of the offer private organisations, local and national stakeholders must now engage more than ever to assist the city’s offer going forward. This can be achieved through financial, commercial or logistical support in order to stop the impending decline as budgets diminish and uphold the invaluable ‘sport for all’ spirit within the city.
7.2.2 Other sports provision models 7.3 Highways and Verges Finances As well as a sport being supported by larger organisations with a vested Although the maintenance of highways and roadside verges is technically interest in its continuity, there are also examples of how sports provision can a non-statutory service, Liverpool City Council does have a legal obligation be run outside Liverpool City Council but remain relatively accessible and to keep sight lines clear and all transport corridors safe, such as checking affordable: roadside tree health. Therefore, it is assumed throughout the remainder of • Allerton Municipal Golf Course is now maintained privately but with a this report that the costs of such provision will have to be maintained (with contract to provide ‘Pay Per Play’ access. possible increases in line with the costs of service provision). However, if less intensive management regimes are investigated costs could go down. • Mersey Bowmen Tennis Club in Sefton Park, is a further example of how sports facilities run by a voluntary group of members can be supported This report will not focus on this section of green and open spaces provision by national bodies like Sport England and the Lawn Tennis Association at all. (LTA). • The Alder Sports Club provides a variety of sports in conjunction with a bar and function room facility. However, although these examples highlight the ability of sports provision to be managed by non-Liverpool City Council organisations, some may also constrain use by the public. Private courses and tennis clubs exclude some members of society who may be put off from joining a club or having to pay to play sport. It may therefore be useful to link the provision of private/semi- private facilities with an additional proviso in their contracts that they allocate
59 7.4 Other Spaces Finance • Community Asset Transfer As per the Interim Report recommendations, the Board has held meetings As well as our public parks, nature reserves and recreation ground there are with stakeholders around Menlove Gardens and Circular Road West to hundreds of other smaller public green spaces dotted throughout the city. investigate different models of Community Asset Transfer of ‘Incidental This provision is very labour intensive as the associated travel, unloading and Spaces’ in order to reduce current maintenance costs. reloading of plant and equipment takes a good deal of time and thus makes these small spaces relatively expensive to maintain. The Menlove Gardens meeting was very well attended by the local residents and after much debate it was generally agreed that two models could be further investigated. The first being a full community asset transfer to the 7.4.1 Current cost other spaces 2016/17 community and the second being a partial transfer of maintenance with the council retaining ownership and liability of the space. The current costs for these other, incidental spaces is calculated to be £51,811 for 2016/17. Both models would see the area continue to be a public space. The Board have tasked council officers to continue this work following the conclusion of the review. 7.4.2 Incidental space - alternative maintenance The West Circle (Circular Road West) public meeting was less well attended regimes but those that did attend discussed at great length the possibilities for a There are already diverse examples of how such spaces could be managed different approach and other examples to be found elsewhere in the country. under different regimes should the council be unable to do so as predicted Liverpool Mutual Homes (LMH) was also in attendance and has been very earlier. supportive of the process. Liverpool Mutual Homes later held a further ‘Impact’ day to engage the community further and identified that 58% of • Derwent Square those questioned used the space and would be interested in being part of a This is a green space within a conservation area that is maintained by group to decide its future. a voluntary levy raised by the properties surrounding the space as well as in kind hours. The space is integral to the architectural style of the surrounding properties but it should be noted that this is not a public Recommendation: space and use is at the invitation of the residents only. The Board recommends that the Council continue the engagement with • Business Improvement District, BID Previously a levy has been paid by businesses to improve the environment Menlove Gardens and Circular Road West communities to investigate and in the proximity of the work place. build transferrable models of alternative maintenance. • Pocket Park, Sandheys Close, Kirkdale A previously unkempt brownfield site is now a community garden Other possibilities for alternative provision should also be explored. managed by Liverpool Mutual Homes (LMH) with volunteer force in Engagement with the Homebaked co-operative and Community Land Trust support. in Anfield has been very positive and the group have shown a real appetite • Ferngrove Community Growing Garden, Toxteth the potential community asset transfer of the currently run down recreational A ‘meanwhile space’ initiative entirely maintained by a local community space to the rear of the building at Oakfield Road. group with support from local councillors.
60 The group has a very clear vision for the space with plans to develop a community growing space and reinvigorate the recreational aspect of the site. There has already been positive dialogue with LCC and this could be used as an excellent example of creating alternative public play areas.
Recommendation:
The Board recommends that Liverpool City Council should continue to work with the Anfield based Homebaked Community Land Trust to explore opportunities for Homebaked to take over the maintenance and development of the recreational ground to the rear of this building.
Recommendation:
The Board recommends that when a community organisation can generate community value from the management and maintenance of incidental spaces, the city council should prioritise that community’s needs in any development proposals for those spaces.
7.4.3 The Future for Incidental Spaces As the Council becomes unable to provide sufficient budget for the maintenance of green spaces such as those described above it is almost inevitable that community groups, enthusiastic individual and stakeholders such as businesses and Housing Associations will have to step into the void to stop local pockets of much needed greenery falling into disuse and disrepair. This may happen organically as people notice the maintenance dwindling or could be done strategically with the support of Housing Associations, schools and other community stakeholders.
61 Small is beautiful too
62 8. Other Options Including Park Trusts
Key contributions from Board Members Councillor Steve Munby, Steve Stuart and LCC Finance Team.
8.1 Six Options for Consideration Chair’s Comment: Based on the assumption that ‘the current model isn’t working’ and that this issue needs to be urgently addressed, the Chair and the Board Members As was previously discussed even with more commercialisation have investigated at great length alternative ways to maintain and enhance and a radical overhaul of the revenue generated by the city’s our green and open spaces. Many have been considered (some already exist within Liverpool as discussed earlier) but after due consideration a parks it is still very unlikely that the maintenance budget could smaller number of models emerge as the most appropriate and relevant to be reduced to zero under the current regime. Therefore, if the the management scenarios facing Liverpool and these are presented below. landscapes of Liverpool are to remain accessible green and Option 1: Referendum for Parks levy open spaces, then it is clear that an alternative form of funding The people of Liverpool could be asked via referendum whether they would and management is needed. be willing to pay a levy on the Council Tax bill ring-fenced for the maintenance of green spaces, with contributions varying by Council tax bands from £5 (Band A) to £15 (Band H), thereby making the service statutory at a local level.
Chair’s Comment:
For just £5 per person per year we could ensure the security of all the public parks and sports pitches throughout the city. That’s what I call value for money.
There is no single option that can be used to meet the current and future needs of the city’s green and open spaces. What alternatives are available Apart from the objections to paying ‘extra tax’, the referendum would in itself and how these can be achieved may be one or a mixture of options outlined cost money to undertake. However, the value to Liverpool of its139 parks above. What is certain is that by reviewing the appropriateness of each (and other green and open spaces) could be seen as an investment in the option Liverpool City Council, the Review and the Board, and the city’s future prosperity of the city and its environment. If adopted the levy could be residents are engaging in a much needed and broad conversation. administrated by the City Council or an independent Parks Trust.
63 Option 2: Car park levy Under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, car park revenue surplus can There is a growing case for using monies raised from parking charges, only be used for certain purposes including: passenger transport, highway not least for car parking in and around parks, to fund other non-vehicular improvements and environmental improvements. The environmental infrastructure. If Liverpool City Council were to ring-fence a proportion of car improvements include: parking income to pay for parks and green space maintenance either in the 1. The reduction of environmental pollution. short or long-term then these resources could be funded indefinitely. 2. Improving a road or piece of land in the vicinity of a road. Car parks modify urban landscapes by concretising natural resources and creating barriers between the earth, people and wildlife - Dr William 3. The provision of outdoor recreational facilities available to the general Bird makes this clear in his paper prepared for the Review (Appendix 3). public without charge. Dr Bird refers to a possible levy paid by Medical Centres to fund other The advantage of using the car parking levy surplus is that it already exists activities and infrastructure, which could be extrapolated on a city-scale in and could be appropriated or ring-fenced with legal amendments in the short Liverpool if car parking charges were made available. There is also a direct term. As Liverpool City Council has continually demonstrated that there will correlation between car parking and air pollution (http://www.airqualitynews. be no money for non-statutory services within two years this would be an com/2016/02/12/london-car-parking-plans-prompt-pollution-concern/). appropriate opportunity to utilise existing funding streams to safeguard the Thus an argument could be made where funding the city’s green and open city’s parks and green spaces as a long term model or until a Parks Trust is spaces could be viewed as offsetting a proportion of the emissions of the put in place. city’s traffic pollution and green space ‘loss’. By ring-fencing a proportion of the surplus revenue raised by Liverpool City Council from car parking which averaged £2.03 million pounds per year Option 3: Tourism levy from 2012 - 2015 (£2.606 million for 2014/15), coupled with more effective commercialisation and/or alternative maintenance regimes, the city’s public “If Liverpool wants to continue its current popularity in tourist ratings parks and open spaces would be safeguarded for the foreseeable future. and attract residents then it needs to stop hammering green spaces.” Moreover, if employed effectively an additional proportion of any surplus Penny (written submission) could be used to enhance the ‘Green Web’ network (see section 9.5). This would, in effect, help release a proportion of the pressures placed on existing highways infrastructure, as the development of traffic-free corridors would With just under 2.3 million overnight stays in Liverpool during 2014 the city is promote more non-vehicular movement. a major national and international tourism destination (Liverpool Vision 2015). By way of example in 2014 Liverpool was identified by Rough Guide as the 3rd best place to visit in the UK or world. Also, the RTPI (Royal Town Planning Institute) placed Liverpool’s historic waterfront as ‘England’s’ Greatest Place’ in December 2015. If the City Council were to adopt a £1 per person per night ‘tourism tax’ this would raise the revenue needed to maintain the green and open spaces which visitors enjoy. Such local taxes are commonplace in European countries, e.g. France, where small 1 - 2 Euro payments are required as a local tax. Unfortunately, such levies, unless voluntarily accepted by cities and their
64 businesses are illegal in the UK, and any changes would require legislation to 4. Through the Liverpool Students Guild and Students Union societies, be adopted by central government. students could work with Glendale Liverpool Limited to train as volunteer park wardens/maintenance crews. This could provide A prime justification for any proposed ‘tourist tax’ is the added value that essential experience for students and provide a valuable co-productive Liverpool’s green and open spaces, as well as the Mersey River provide. service for the city. The city’s landscape is a significant element of Liverpool as an attractive and welcoming city. Moreover, visitors to the riverfront, and the city’s parks for 5. The universities could play a greater civic role in promoting the socio- events bring a large financial boost to the economy of Liverpool per annum. economic and ecological value of the city’s green and open spaces, and taking ownership and leadership of Liverpool’s green space campaigns. Option 4: Student levy The practicalities of developing any of these options are subject to ongoing discussions between the three universities in the city and Liverpool City Students form one of the largest distinct communities in the city. Students Council. It is therefore important to ensure that dialogue continues as the from the University of Liverpool, Liverpool John Moores University and from universities can contribute to debates over green space issues and have Liverpool Hope University are residents and employees in the city, they are the intellectual expertise to promote diverse thinking in terms of green also frequent users of the city’s landscape for recreation and study. space management. The universities also have a significant body of staff Currently there are approximately 48,000 students enrolled in University and students who can be engaged to support volunteering and project work programmes in the city and more enrolled in further and tertiary education. throughout Liverpool. This is a significant body who could make a more direct impact on the funding and management of the city’s green and open spaces. For example, Students and/or the Universities could be asked to: Option 5: Do nothing A further option, and potentially the most radical, is to leave parks to go ‘wild’ 1. Pay into an endowment fund to manage green and open spaces in or re-nature the city until an alternative source of funding e.g. crowd funding, close proximity to student halls of residence or campuses. individual/corporate philanthropy or a more enlightened central government 2. The universities are making significant investment in their on and off- fills the void. The city’s parks are currently maintained to a high standard campus facilities. They could extend their capital/revenue programmes and moving to a re-wilding regime of limited maintenance, i.e. one/two grass and sponsor or take leased ownership of sites, e.g. Crown Street Park cuttings per year would be a significant shift in management. or Greenbank Park, and manage them on behalf of the city. However, elsewhere re-wilding or limiting the level of management that the 3. Whilst students do not pay council tax they could be asked to pay city’s parks receive would remove some of the financial costs of maintenance a minor payment to the city council or through the University of £3 and if the sites were protected once re-wilded, could reduce the level of - £5 which could be ring-fenced for parks management, which could discussion of whether land sales of parks or green spaces are needed. The generate over £144,000 - £240,000 pro rata, per annum towards argument about whether some sites should be sold to endow the remaining maintenance budgets. area was challenged by the dark days of the 1970’s and 80’s. It should be noted that if such practice was applied to Sefton Park the HLF could demand significant financial claw-back from previous investment in the Park.
65 The past, present and future?
66 ‘The parks may have been wrecked and abandoned but they were still • The formation of an independent Charitable Parks Trust would leave a there’ lasting legacy so that whatever changes happen to the cityscape as the population rises the 139 parks within the Trust would be safeguarded for Public speaker at meeting. the people of Liverpool in perpetuity.
Option 6: Parks Trust Whilst all the above options are worthy of consideration the Board was Following continued investigation, evidence gathering and collaboration especially keen to explore the option of a Charitable Parks Trust for both with interested parties and independent experts one practical possibility financial and philosophical reasons. has come to the fore regarding future maintenance. Liverpool’s parks could be endowed as an Independent Parks Trust (or Trusts). Presented here is The following section provides an example of how one such Parks Trust, a an overview of one such model but there are other possible models worth blended finance Parks Charitable Trust, would work, including consideration further work such as individual Parks Trusts or cluster based Trusts. Any of issues such as scoping, affordability, maintenance, contingency and Trust would function on similar principles to other Charitable Parks Trusts, be charitable status. they a single Park Trust, City Park Trust or City Region Park Trust. All would require further work to test the robustness and desirability of each model. 8.2 Exploring a Blended Finance Charitable Parks Of all the possible long term maintenance regimes, a Charitable Parks Trust model is deemed by the Board to be the most attractive for the following Trust Model reasons: The Liverpool Parks Trust would work with identified city stakeholders to help • The terms of reference for a Trust would be the enhancement and endow, further commercialise and reduce maintenance costs within the city’s maintenance of Liverpool’s parks, which would provide a single, parks. These key stakeholder partners would have a significant influence focused, strategic approach to the future of our parks. on the long term governance and strategic development of the Parks Trust. However, the Liverpool Parks Trust would be an Independent Charitable • Liverpool would lead the way in achieving a radical approach to Trust with an associated commercial company. All revenue raised by the establishing a Trust model in an established Victorian City. This has not Trust would be used for the ongoing integration, protection, maintenance been implemented in the UK before and the city would be an exemplar and subsequent enhancement of all parks in the City. All parks within the for the protection and enhancement of urban green spaces. Trust would be held on a leasehold basis with the ultimate ownership still • The blended finance approach, with other stakeholders sharing the being retained by Liverpool City Council on behalf of the people of Liverpool. burden of endowment and ongoing maintenance, would mean the city could realise the initial investment in relatively few years, after which time the ongoing maintenance burden would be removed from the Council Scoping the Trust portfolio for the long term. The strategy behind such a Trust model is driven by both the future long term • The Parks Trust could be expanded to a Metro or City Region scale to economic and physical security of the parks of Liverpool. further increase efficiencies and the variety of offer. A Trust model is based on the principle of securing assets and/or capital funding and investing the capital or securing a commercial return from the assets to generate revenue funding. This type of Trust model has been successfully applied to parks large and small within the UK such as Beam
67 Parklands, Dagenham; Pottersfield Park, Southwark; Heeley Development Making a Parks Trust affordable - capital costs and Trust, Sheffield; Lambeth Co-operative Parks, Lambeth; Shenley Park Trust, commercialisation Hertfordshire and outside of the UK to Bryant Park in New York where the investments have generated sufficient income (and more), to maintain and The updated costs for parks and cemeteries and crematoria maintenance develop their parks and green spaces. are now £3,754,056 and £4,926,765 respectively (see Appendix 6). It can be argued that these costs could be further reduced to make a Parks Trust A proposal to endow all of Liverpool’s Parks is based on the following scoping more affordable. For example, an initial comparison of Liverpool parks’ criteria: maintenance costs for a selection of key sites when benchmarked against best practice costs taken from APSE (Association of Public Service Excellence) • Highways and Verges - excluded suggest there may be an opportunity to reduce current costs by up to 20%. As referenced in the Interim Report this provision is considered to be a Similarly, using best practice data from the Institute for Fiscal Studies it may statutory requirement because the city is legally required to keep all sight lines be possible under a Charitable Trust structure to reduce staffing costs by clear and to ensure the safety of road users with regard to issues including a similar margin. Perhaps the greatest possible cost reduction could be tree maintenance. Highways and verges would therefore be excluded from seen in reductions to the current corporate support service recharge costs the Parks Trust model. (CSSR), which when compared with those from existing Charitable Trusts indicate significant potential savings of up to 75%. • Sports and Recreation Grounds - excluded Investigating and applying any such reductions and considering these To be excluded: see Sports and Recreation section. However, it should be alongside current and future income will almost certainly help to narrow the noted that there are cases around the city where sports provision falls within financial gap and reduce the endowment figure required to make a Charitable parks and this would continue to be the case within the Parks Trust. There Parks Trust more attractive and affordable. are also mixed use sites which though deemed to be ‘Sports and Recreation It is however, important to note that any resulting endowment figure would, Grounds’ clearly serve a dual purpose as a public park. Sites identified as in addition to the revenue streams and yearly maintenance costs of the green such e.g. Wavertree Playground (The Mystery), Long Lane Rec (Garston spaces, also need to factor in associated capital costs, which can vary greatly Park) and Scargreen should also fall within the Parks Trust. year by year for a variety of reasons and could increase the endowment sum required. As such, the capital costs and their impact on any future Trust • Allotments - excluded model would need further exploration as they could differ greatly if moved Allotments are deemed to be largely cost neutral and there is also the from the systems and regulations governing the city council’s operations to possibility that they could be passed over to individual associations to be those of a Charitable Trust. This is a detailed but necessary piece of future run on an independent basis. work in order to explore the viability of any Charitable Parks Trust model. In addition to exploring the cost reduction opportunities and to offset any • Cemeteries and Crematoria - included capital cost implications for a Trust model it would also be necessary to These sites are offset by income from internment and cremation and are further commercialise any provision within a Charitable Parks Trust however generally deemed to be cost neutral but can and do generate efficiencies appropriate. There is evidence that the income currently raised by the Council which are currently used to part fund green space maintenance. As such, could be increased significantly. For example, Nottingham City Council have these sites need to fall within the Parks Trust Model. made a determined effort to increase their commercial offer within their parks and green spaces and now bring in circa £4m per annum. As with the capital costs, the opportunities for additional commercialisation will need further
68 detailed analysis and planning in association with relevant stakeholders to The asset being used for a charitable purpose but a charge being imposed make any future Trust financially viable. for the use of that charitable asset is perfectly acceptable and that income could contribute to the endowment. The detailed financial modelling and investigation, together with further work on both land categorisation and alternative stakeholder provision should be Charities are permitted to accumulate income for 21 years from their incorporated and explored more fully within the proposed ‘resilience funding establishment, provided that the Trusts permit it. This would potentially permit bid’ to the Heritage Lottery Fund. the endowment to comprise a smaller capital amount at first with an ambition to expand that capital sum over a 21 year period. For example, collecting A Charitable Trust Endowment income from use of the parks through concessions or other non-charitable use could accumulate so that over a planned period an appropriately sized In a charitable context an endowment would belong to the Charitable Trust. endowment could be created. Gifts to charity can result in donations being held for a charitable purpose or in the event of a failure of that purpose, for alternative charitable purposes. A charity could receive capital sums from a range of sources, including The endowment, therefore, would have to be held by the charity and in the match-funding potentially from Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) and/or the event that for any reason the Trusts were to fail, then that endowment could City and that money can be retained for specified use upon a restricted only be used in an exclusively charitable way by distributing for other similar basis, i.e. it may only be applied for the park A, B or C. The more flexible charitable purposes. It should be noted that it would be unlikely that the approach would be to accumulate an endowment which the trustees would endowment could be used to relieve the investment rate and that, therefore, then determine the expenditure thereof. If terms are written flexibly then the use of such an endowment in the hands of anybody other than a charity the endowment itself might be expended in an exceptional year where high for exclusively charitable purposes, would not be permitted by the charity expenditure was incurred, or it might be retained on a permanent basis so regulator. that only the income arising from it is expended upon the charitable work. It would, however, using this model be possible to use endowment monies that Charity endowments ought to be invested by responsible trustees in order might have been associated with park A or the benefit of park B or C and vice to generate a proper return, such monies being expended upon exclusively versa, thus ensuring the sustainability of the project generally. charitable purposes of the Trust means that there is normally no charge to tax on income arising. Such a generous fiscal concession also applies in respect The endowment being invested in ordinary circumstances could be expected of any capital gain. However, charity trustees cannot invest their assets in to achieve a yield according to market conditions and it would be possible for every type of investment vehicle, but must rather confine their investments to an accumulated expendable endowment, i.e. a non-permanent endowment, those approved by HMRC. This list, however, is fairly expansive. to sit alongside a permanent endowment so that peaks and troughs in the investment markets could be effectively ironed out, thus ensuring a sufficient The endowment could be invested either for pure maximum return, or ethically. income for the basic maintenance of the parks concerned on an ongoing Endowment could be established in such a way that total return principles were basis. adopted so that all of the income and potentially capital arising on a year-by-year basis could be redeployed for the benefit of the Trust. Any businesses or individuals wishing to contribute to the endowment in the hands of a registered charity may do so using the benefits of either Gift Aid Charities can hold land as part of their endowment and in this case the parks or the corporate scheme whereby a tax break is available through HMRC, or open spaces concerned could potentially be held for a charitable use, i.e. according to the amount of the gift made available. use and occupation by beneficiaries as users of the park, or they may be held to exploit the asset to generate an income. It is also possible to use the There are several examples of permanently endowed charities up and assets for a combination of both purposes. down the country, some of which have existed for many hundreds of years.
69 Prudent stewardship and management of the endowment are key and the • Housing Associations selection of an appropriate investment policy would be one of the critical Liverpool Mutual Homes, Cobalt Housing, South Liverpool Homes, Riverside steps faced by the trustees in ensuring that the fund grows sufficiently on a Housing have been positive with regard to the potential maintenance of capital basis so as to preserve the base value against inflation, whilst at the public green space in the proximity of their housing stock. same time generating sufficient income to enable the proper maintenance and development of the parks to occur. • Universities Liverpool John Moores University, Hope University and University of Liverpool Recommendation: in particular, have shown a positive attitude toward collaborating in any future Parks Trust model. The Board recommends that the concept of a Parks Trust or Trusts be • United Utilities explored and that subject to the establishment of a Parks Trust management United Utilities continue to be positively engaged in a potential Parks Trust model that ‘(a) Shadow Board(s) of Trustees’ are created to oversee the model and have agreed to investigate differing scenarios with regard to development of the Trust(s). possible endowment of a Parks Trust model. • Peel Holdings Initial discussions with one of Liverpool’s largest private stakeholders have 8.2.1 Future Considerations and Work left the door open for further engagement. Brownfield Development • Mersey Forest The Mersey Forest social enterprise has been updated and engaged There is also potential to attach a portfolio of ‘Brownfield’ development sites throughout the review and is already a strategic partner. to the endowment. These sites would be developed in partnership with Liverpool City Council and any profit split 50/50 between the endowment • Liverpool Anglican Cathedral fund and Liverpool City Council. This would assist the city in achieving its The Dean and community stakeholders, given their interest in St James’s housing targets and economic aspirations whilst enabling the Parks Trust to Garden and the green space surrounding the Cathedral have been very develop a robust mixed economy base for future investment. positive with regard to potential alternative maintenance regimes going Further contingency and capacity would be built by working with other forward. Stakeholders to provide maintenance support for strategic parks to drive • Community Groups down costs further. Menlove Gardens, West Circle (Circular Road West, Norris Green) Potential Stakeholders In response to the consultation undertaken by the Review Board, Liverpool Mutual Homes (LMH) also held a resident impact day on 3rd June 2016 to Potential stakeholders positively currently engaged in endowment or further investigate the appetite for local people to get involved in decisions alternative provision are: and management for Circular Road West greenspace. Of the 24 respondents • CCG: Clinical Commissioning Group that completed a questionnaire 58% used the space and would be interested in being part of a group to decide its future, however, of these, 43% would Several meetings have been held with key members of the CCG and dialogue prefer not to be involved in management and maintenance aspects. remains ongoing.
70 It must be stressed that whilst the above stakeholders are in active dialogue there are other potential Parks Trust provision partners - most notably Her Majesty’s Treasury, major regional corporations/companies, major Recommendation: supporters and commercial businesses along with individual philanthropists The Board recommends that whichever future management option is all interested in being involved. adopted that at least 50% of any dowry, uplift from development of open Timeframe and Support space and/or sale of assets within the green space should be ring-fenced A target of two or more years could be set for the formation of the ‘Liverpool Parks Trust’, to allow for the setting up of Shadow Board(s) and the completion for the Parks Trust or future maintenance of public green and open spaces. of legal paperwork. The remaining issue is then the detailed planning of capital investment via HLF match funding and other commercial partners in order to capitalise fully and investigate the commercial potential of the city’s parks. This is currently Recommendation: considered to be outside the current scope of this Review. The Board recommends that, where legal requirements are met, developer Capacity contributions in the form of commuted sums are ring-fenced to financially Following discussions with the HLF and The National Trust, Liverpool has support the delivery of the city’s ‘Green Web’ (where most appropriate), been encouraged to bid for up to £250,000 HLF Resilience Funding from July 2016 to progress these works further for an 18 month period. rather than being used to fund alternative services.
Chair’s Comment:
Whilst the fine details of the ‘Liverpool Parks Trust’ model needs further work it is seen as a very viable option. The model has been examined and discussed with the National Trust, Directors of the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) and independent financial advisors.
All have deemed the proposed Trust model to be robust and achievable.
HLF have encouraged Liverpool to continue to lead the way as the independent approach instigated by the Mayor and this Review has put the city in a more advanced position than other core cities and organisations to date. The ‘Liverpool Parks Trust’ would complete the mission of the Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review by saving the amazing public parks we have from the threat of dereliction and ensure they are here for the future generations of Liverpool.
71 72 8.3 Croxteth Country Park and Hall The range of interests and enquiries give confidence to take a new step in securing the future of Croxteth Hall and Country Park with new governance and management arrangements. “Croxteth Park needs more publicity, more music events, etc and Discussions have also been held with stakeholders which could see Croxteth benefits from Forest Schools which give natural health from early Hall and Country Park transferred into the city-wide Charitable Parks Trust years.” as previously discussed or into a Croxteth Hall and Country Park Trust with a Board based on a tripartite structure: a third representatives of the Council Attendee (Consultation event 8) with a golden share, a third local stakeholders, a third independents. The aim of the Croxteth Hall and Country Park Trust would be the preservation of Croxteth Hall and Park as public assets with public access, etc. The precise terms would need to be the subject of detailed consultation and there would Croxteth Country Park is the city’s largest park and one of Liverpool’s most need to be crucial caveats e.g. protection of green space, heritage, public important heritage sites. Key features of the park are Croxteth Hall, the Walled access, reversion to Liverpool City Council in the event of failure. The initial Garden and Croxteth Country Farm. Despite the opportunities provided by steps would involve a decision by the Council to establish a Shadow Trust the park the City Council has failed over many years to secure adequate Board, followed by recruitment of members and work to agree a constitution investment in the Hall and Park, attract the potential uses and visitors it could and legal terms. In parallel to this the Council would work with the Shadow benefit from, and generate sufficient income either for capital investment or Board to procure managing agents for Croxteth Hall and Croxteth Park. to secure a sustainable financial future for the Hall and Park. In the current Both steps would take a minimum of a year in which to agree the considerable financial year the Hall and Park are operating at a running loss of £1.7 million complexities involved, ranging from legal and financial terms, addressing which represents a third of the total Parks budget. environmental and heritage concerns and risks, creating and agreeing Over the last 18 months discussions have taken place with key stakeholders working models for both the Board and Managing Agent. There are major on the future of the Hall and Country Park and in particular with two major uncertainties which would need to be resolved before any agreements could operators in the park: Myerscough College in relation to their training or should be finalised. provision and Alt Valley Community Trust in relation to Croxteth Country It is not just for financial reasons that Charitable Parks Trust should be Farm. Negotiations are currently underway aimed at securing long term considered. It is a philosophical point that placing all Liverpool’s parks into agreements with both parties, improved use of space, a reduction in running charitable status will offer better protection and further safeguard them for costs and an increase in income. future generations. Towards the end of 2015 the Council issued a prospectus seeking ideas from the voluntary and private sector on activities which could increase the attractions of the Hall and Country Park and generate additional income. Following this a number of organisations and individuals made presentations over two days of sittings in Croxteth Hall to a panel composed of the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods, council officers and representatives of the Friends of Croxteth Park and Croxteth Hall Volunteers. The presentations made clear the wide range of interest and potential offers to develop the Hall and Country Park. Further submissions were invited and received.
73 A new direction with something for everyone
74 9. Planning For The Future
With key contributions from Board Members David Hughes, Dr. Ian Mell and Councillor Malcolm Kennedy
“There are many in this city who are crying out for some peace 9.1 The Local Plan Process and quiet in their lives, and the healing power of the natural world is beyond questions…..” On 19th August 2016 Liverpool City Council’s Cabinet approved the undertaking of public consultation on the draft Liverpool Local Plan. The Arthur (written submission) Local Plan, when adopted will both update and amend the City’s existing planning framework, the Liverpool Unitary Development Plan. The Cabinet report states that the draft Local Plan has a number of relevant key priorities to deliver: “We all share the Mayor’s vision of a vibrant, prosperous city but • A focus on delivering homes on brownfield sites without open spaces, greenery and the occasional ‘pause for breath’ • Protecting land and buildings for economic growth between the rows of housing, Liverpool won’t be in a position to offer people who are looking to move into the city a green balance and, • Protecting Liverpool City Parks for the health and wellbeing of the more to the point, won’t be an attractive place to live for those who population. are already here”. Ian (Woolton resident) 9.1.1 Providing enough housing This is a key issue for every local planning authority and measured by the amount of land required is often the most significant. Chair’s Comment: If the City Council does not provide enough land for new homes it is at significant risk of losing control of what can be built and where. The National As Liverpool continues to rapidly regenerate following the Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requires the City Council to calculate how difficult times of the 70’s and 80’s then the ability of the many homes are needed and the potential supply of land to meet that need. spaces between the buildings to catalyse further growth and investment is compelling. Property values, business investment and immigration are all directly influenced by the quantity and quality of green space and conversely by the scars of decline and decay.
75 How many homes has three main components: 9.1.2 Protecting land and buildings for economic • The overall number needed growth (providing enough employment land) • The type and size of homes needed, and In addition to providing Liverpool with enough homes, the Local Plan is • Has a backlog built up because the number of homes completed does required to meet the need for a range of other land uses based on a robust not meet the annual need? If so this must be made up through increased and up to date evidence base. delivery in subsequent years. It does not increase the overall number Of these the City’s employment land requirements are particularly significant. needed but is intended to ensure that the overall number needed are The emerging evidence has identified a level of need between 105 and 140 delivered by increasing the average annual requirement. hectares against a potential supply of less than 100 hectares. Housing land supply has two key components: The sites that make up the potential supply are still being assessed for their • The amount of land available overall suitability, therefore the draft Local Plan does not yet include site specific recommendations. DCLG are aware that the Draft Local Plan will not contain • Is there a five year supply plus a 5% or 20% buffer site allocations and designations, however provided that they are included To identify how many homes are needed over the whole plan-period (2013 in the final version of the Local Plan for publication in spring 2017, they wish – 2033) the City Council is required to produce a Strategic Housing Market to see the City Council undertake consultation on the draft Local Plan at the Assessment (SHMA). The SHMA calculates the Full Objectively Assessed earliest opportunity. Need (FOAN) for new homes and the size and type of homes required. To identify how much land is available to meet the FOAN figure, the City 9.1.3 Protecting the open space that Council must maintain an up to date Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA). Liverpool needs The open space policies of the Local Plan will be informed by the Open There are two parts to the housing land supply calculation: Space Study which is currently being completed by the consultants KKP. • Is there enough land to meet the housing need over the plan – period as The Open Space Study comprises an Assessment Report which examines a whole? existing provision, its condition, distribution and overall quality. • Can the City Council meet the government requirement of having a Taking the Open Space Study as its evidence base the final version of the rolling five year supply of deliverable sites plus a buffer of either 5% or Local Plan will give direction on the future provision of accessible, high as much as 20%? quality, sustainable provision for open spaces across Liverpool based on The five year figure is calculated by dividing the total need by the number of population distribution, planned growth and consultation findings. The Local years in the plan–period to give the annual requirement and multiplying that Plan will also tie in with this Strategic Green and Open Spaces review which by 5 and then applying the 5% or 20% buffer. will inform the final version of the Local Plan for publication in spring 2017. In the interim the draft Local Plan, contains proposed policies taking on board the Open Space and Green Wedge polices in the existing UDP, as well as new policies addressing the natural environment.
76 As with the employment land policies DCLG are aware that some aspects 9.1.4 The next steps and the Local Plan of the Local Plan’s Green Space policies and designations are not yet fully developed due to the need to complete the update of the evidence base. examination stage Their advice is that in the Local Plan consultation the Council set out the Following the consultation on the draft Local Plan and the consideration position with the emerging Open Space Study and ensure that the final of the representations a final version of the Local Plan will be published. version of the Local Plan, which must be published in 2017, is complete. The ‘Publication’ version will be available for six weeks and the comments An independent Inspector will be appointed by the Secretary of State received along with the Local Plan as published will be submitted for to conduct an examination into whether the plan has been prepared in independent examination. accordance with the Duty to Cooperate, legal and procedural requirements An independent Inspector will be appointed by the Secretary of State and whether it is sound. New Population and Household Projections have to conduct an examination into whether the plan has been prepared in recently suggested that Liverpool’s resident population and households accordance with the Duty to Cooperate, legal and procedural requirements will grow faster than anticipated in the Local Plan. The Department of and whether it is sound. Communities and Local Government has set every local planning authority the task of putting a new Local plan in place by early 2017 and as a result has advised that despite this it is more important to progress the current plan 9.2 Housing rather than pause to amend the Local plan evidence base and potentially the policies and proposals in it. “There is plenty of land in Liverpool to build on without touching our parks. Leave them as they are”. When the Local Plan is submitted for examination the independent Inspector will have to decide whether the government’s policy to have all local plans in Kev (Consultation participant) place by 2017 has priority over the government’s requirement to meet housing need in full. At present however the City Council is able to demonstrate a high level of annual housing delivery, a large stock of existing planning permissions and a number of proposed housing sites on brownfield sites. By Liverpool has a legal obligation from Central Government to provide at least the time that the Local Plan is undergoing examination the level of need and a 5-year supply of deliverable sites (plus an additional buffer of either 5% or whether the City does have to find more land will have been clarified by work 20%) for the building of the different housing types to meet the Objectively now taking place in a Liverpool City Region wide assessment of housing and Assessed Need for new housing required by the city. For a site to be employment land needs. deliverable it must be one that will contribute new homes within the next 5 years because it: • Is available now; • offers a suitable location for development now; • is achievable within five years; and • development of the site is viable.
77 Chair’s Comment:
“The Chair agrees with the vast majority of the public submissions that there continues to be scant regard to well purposed public open space when it comes to planning applications and those granted within Liverpool. This may be a legacy of the years of decline when ‘anything was better than nothing’ but if Liverpool wishes to remain an attractive place to live, work and play on par with other forward thinking global cities then the tail must stop wagging the dog.
The loss of public or private fields within the urban landscape may be at times inevitable but there has been a perceived lack of forethought historically with regards to replacement of such space where there is often little alternative provision of any replacement green space. This approach infuriates local communities and leaves them wondering ‘where did the money go?’
Such examples of poor decisions past and present are littered across the city:
• Speke: A community where a significant proportion of its green space, large and small, has been lost in recent years and is still waiting for improvements and replenishment of other green space. • Old Swan: The loss of Rathbone Park within the current planning consent to be replaced by a much smaller space along with limited green spaces, urban greening or traffic free routes. • Woolton: Planning permission has been granted for rebuilding of St Julie’s school partly on a gifted piece of parkland, when a temporary move by the school to an empty state of the art facility less than two miles away would enable the required rebuild to happen entirely on the current site. • Park Avenue: Whilst the argument that ‘Sefton Park Meadows’ lies within the original 1903 boundaries of Sefton Park are contested, the economic benefits of new development appear to be weaker than originally proposed by the chosen developer.
These are just a small number of the high profile examples of land use conflicts being witnessed in Liverpool. There are other examples, as evidenced at public meetings and seen by the Chair whilst surveying the city.
We are therefore at a critical junction in the city’s development. Do we continue to look at green space as a development opportunity or do we take inspiration from other cities in Europe such as Hamburg, Oslo and Copenhagen to work with Liverpool’s green infrastructure to ensure liveability across the city? If we follow the latter course of action the city will be able to realise better equity and accessibility as well as meeting the building needs of the city.”
78 The Mayor and Council leaders also have aspirational plans with regard to circumstances. However, the government’s timetable means that this is the mix of housing on offer. The ongoing Local Plan consultation will provide not possible and so DCLG have advised that while the new population and more detailed analysis of what types of homes are needed and where they Household Projections have significantly increased, the City Council should should be developed. continue to progress its Local Plan as drafted, as quickly as possible and if necessary to address the consequences of new projections in a review of As part of the review the Board was also tasked to identify potential sites the Local Plan. where a mixture of housing types and tenure could be linked with green space provision. This work is embodied within the land categorisation work The City Council is also advised by DCLG to make a clear statement in the (see section 9.4). Evidence from the public meetings and workshops has also Local Plan consultation that it may need to undertake an early review in the been considered within this process. The Board does, however, consider light of the new housing projections data. This will involve both the updating the change of green and open spaces to facilitate housing development an of the assessment of how many homes the City needs and only if necessary ongoing discussion: not one that is finalised. a search for new sites. That updating will emerge through a piece of work now taking place in a Liverpool City Region wide assessment of housing and The Draft Local Plan has been prepared on the basis of an overall housing employment land needs. requirement of 29,600 between 2013 and 2033. Through a combination of completed homes since 2013, outstanding planning permissions and the proposed site allocations it has been possible to meet this requirement through the use of sites which are brownfield and do not involve building on Chair’s Comment: public parks or designated green/open spaces. Even if the Department for Communities and Local Recently, this situation has now changed because the calculations set out in the current SHMA are derived from population and Household Projections, Government (DCLG) should impose an extra requirement on which have changed since both the SHMA and the Local Plan have been Liverpool with regard to extra housing, I believe that the City prepared. should set itself the challenge of implementing such plans Annex 1 to the 19th August 2016 Cabinet Report explains that: without building on any more public open space. As the “17. On the 25th May 2016 the Office for National Statistics (ONS) published population rises and the City becomes more crowded then new Sub-National Population Projections (SNPP) covering the period from such spaces will become even more important than they 2014 to 2039. The new figures show that by the end of the Local Plan period in 2033 Liverpool’s population will have increased to 517,000 an increase of currently are. The City should work with its regional partners some 25,000 over the previous figure of 492,000. to seek the best solutions for housing (and other land) needs. 18. Subsequently on 12th July 2016 DCLG published new Household Furthermore, there are many examples throughout Europe Projections which reflect the increases in the SNPP figures for Liverpool. and beyond which demonstrate that high density sustainable In summary the projections show that Liverpool will have 9,000 more living does not need to be at the expense of personal privacy. households at the end of the plan period (2033) than has been built into the Local plan as it has been prepared.” Land pressure requires creative thinking and solutions rather While in any other circumstances it would be appropriate for a Liverpool than simply ‘filling the gaps.’ City Council to adjust its plan-making timetable to address the changed
79 On balance it appears that as far as ‘land pressure’ is concerned with sites development and the ongoing provision of green and open space. There is, already available plus windfall sites, Liverpool can potentially meet its housing as already mentioned, a view within some local communities that the city has needs without building on Public Parks or designated green/open spaces. focussed too heavily on providing the right environment for development. This conclusion is aimed at strengthening the legislation, covenants, legacies What may be required now is a more balanced discussion that places and other protection afforded the Public Parks and civic spaces, as well as development, the provision of employment land, and the environment in responding to the groundswell of opinion contesting the conversion of green equilibrium. There is also a strong case, even more so than housing, that space into development sites. employment land should be considered on a city-region basis. In order to achieve this objective a more in-depth consideration of the value of retaining public green and open space, be it council or privately owned, is 9.4 Land Categorisation required. With a mix of large developer, Housing Association, council self-build, custom self-build (such as Kingsley Road HPBC; http://www.selfbuildportal. “I feel very strongly that there should be no building org.uk/liverpool-habitat-for-humanity-community-collaboration) and LILAC on any of our precious parkland. Brownfield ONLY”. Bramley Leeds; http://www.lilac.coop/), Liverpool has the potential to retain and enhance a beautiful city to complement and juxtapose the one inherited Elizabeth (written comment) from our Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian architects. Development does not have to mean a lack of biodiversity and wildlife. The Review therefore proposes a more ecologically sensitive form of development Chair’s Comment: within Liverpool that attempt to use nature-based solutions (NBS), ecological planning and green infrastructure to balance built infrastructure and nature. ‘During public consultation meetings with Council Officers and ward By using best practice already found in pockets around the city, for example the Eldonian Village, Kirkdale and Lower Everton Valley and Croxteth Councillors the wish to have properly categorised and defined public corridor, along with further consultation with local residents and stakeholders areas of all sorts was a pervading message. There are already statutory regarding the ‘Green Web’ network and identified areas of inequality, it may and strategic guidelines in place regarding planning and land use but in be possible to address the housing needs of a growing city whilst allowing people’s lives and wildlife to flourish. Moreover, given the potential of further a fast changing urban environment there is a desire to know ‘what will democratic devolution a more strategic and co-ordinated approach to such be here in 10 years’ time?’ and ‘what can be relied on not to change?’. practice could be scaled to a city-region level. There is also the necessity to value the variety of open space in the city in order to strategically plan any future maintenance regimes. This work 9.3 Employment Land aims to help bridge the gap between the Unitary Development Plan As well as housing the city must continue to develop its employment land (UDP) and the formation of the Local Plan. This land categorisation in order to improve the commercial offer of the city’s landscape for the 21st will also cut across and draw together just about every aspect of the Century. This includes providing sites for additional job creation, as well as supporting existing businesses that are looking to expand. Whilst such Review from Finance, Recreation, Biodiversity, Housing, Employment, provision is essential it must be created sensitively and as cohesively as Equity and Green Corridors. This is the final major undertaking by the possible in terms of aligning housing development, commercial/industrial Board for a cohesive Green and Open Spaces Review.’
80 Following the survey completed for the Interim Report which covered some 9.5 Green Corridors forming a ‘Green Web’ 1,253 unbuilt sites (Appendix 9) and an extensive (and ongoing) process of public consultation it was agreed that it would be very useful to have an update of land categorisation of all sites within the city. “The Loop Line is a superb green relaxing corridor, where you can An initial meeting involving the Chair and representation from Glendale catch glimpses of wildlife such as birds and squirrels and enjoy the Liverpool Limited and representatives from Liverpool Council from Physical trees and flowers - perfect for enhancing your health and wellbeing!” Assets, Finance and Parks service areas was held to scope out the necessary work involved. A sample of 5 sites of various types was chosen within Stella (South Liverpool Resident) Kirkdale Ward (as this was the ward with the most unbuilt spaces in the city). A working draft of potential categories evidenced by standard practices from around the country was also prepared which could be adapted as the process developed. It quickly became apparent, however, that whilst such a categorisation would be valuable the undertaking would be both extremely Chair’s Comment: complicated and labour intensive. For this reason, it has not been possible to complete the categorisation process before the publication of the final “The network of green corridors proposed in this Report is a direct report. result of the city-wide survey of 1,253 sites undertaken by the The Chair has undertaken the task of paring back the number of sites as Chair during the course of the Green and Open Spaces Review. some were already developed or in the process of being so as the survey took place. Others are already clearly defined such as cemeteries and Throughout the Review the Chair, Board Members and the general football pitches. public identified a number of sites within Liverpool, both north and Capacity is now being sought to continue this body of work as it is obviously south, which are considered to have significant social, ecological and a necessary undertaking for the future planning of the city and will also be economic values to the city’s population. Additional links between vital for the development of the Green Corridor Network (‘Green Web’) and any potential Parks Trust model. these sites would improve access and potential use of these spaces by the city’s residents. As a result of ongoing consultation with residents the Review has identified a ‘Green Web’ of corridors and that could be created as a connected network of green and open Recommendation: spaces.”
The Board recommends that the land categorisation work continues as an essential tool for the future development and preservation of the city green and open spaces.
81 The proposed network covers large areas of the city linking existing sites, With direct input via a process of on-site scoping from Board Members Dr. such as Anfield Cemetery, Stanley Park and Croxteth Hall Park, with a series Ian Mell (University of Liverpool), David Hughes (former Head of Planning, of improvements and investments in on and off-street corridors. The aim of LCC), Dr. Juliet Staples (Green and Open Spaces, LCC), and the Chair, the the network is to provide access to green and open space within, and across Board have proposed a network of green corridors that will form a green the city, in a safe, accessible and connective manner. Moreover, the network web and facilitate more effective engagement by people with the city’s green promotes the use of the English Nature (now Natural England) Accessible spaces that run throughout the city. Additional input has been received from Natural Green Space Standards (ANGSt), whereby people would live no local GP Dr. David Webster (CCG), Dr. Simon Bowers (CCG), Alan Jemmett more that 5 - 10 minutes’ walk from a good sized park, garden, waterway or of MEAS, Dr. John Morrissey (LJMU) and his urban geography students other green space (Harrison et al, 1995; Pauleit et al, 2003). at Liverpool John Moores University, as well as representatives from the Merseyside Cycle Campaign. Unlike some cities in the UK, and others globally, Liverpool benefits from an existing resource base that can be considered to offer a series of high quality Alongside the professional advice and guidance received from the people green and open spaces throughout the city (Green Infrastructure North West, mentioned above the green corridors initiative has benefited from the 2010). These ‘green jewels’ of Victorian parks, city-scale parks such as Stanley knowledge provided by the city’s residents, who have provided in-depth information to support the location of the proposed corridors. Evidence has and Calderstones Park, The Mersey riverfront and promenade, as well as the been received by the Board at the public meetings and workshops, and via interaction of the city with its Green Belt on the city’s edge provide Liverpool additional emails/telephone calls/letters with the review team. with an extensive network of largely accessible green and open space. The diversity of these small urban parks and larger and more biodiverse urban- fringe sites provides Liverpool with a broad range of spaces which support 9.5.2 Green Corridors: the evidence ecological, social and economic activities for different members of the city’s population (Amati, 2008; Fábos, 2004). There is a growing body of evidence arguing that linking isolated areas of natural habitat with a range of man-made and natural corridors provides a strong supporting environment for biodiversity (Hellmund & Smith, 2006). 9.5.1 Establishment of a ‘Green Web’ for Liverpool This reflects the added connectivity provided by a network of green spaces but also the additional opportunities that wildlife can gain from access to The overall impact of the network would be the establishment of a ‘Green Web’ various, diverse biological landscape resources (Green Infrastructure North for Liverpool, which would make best use of a series of existing and potential West, 2010). Furthermore, by developing a network of green spaces that linear corridors radiating from the city centre. These would be intersected by address local and city-wide deficiencies which utilise links and hubs and three distinct radials circling the city centre, the Victorian parks network of corridors as linking infrastructure, there is a potential for a much greater level the city, and the outer (and larger) green spaces, for example Croxteth Hall of movement and support for wildlife across the urban area of Liverpool Park, respectively. The spatial layout of such a network would provide key (Ahern, 2013; Hostetler, Allen, and Meurk, 2011). links between the urban core of the city and its parks and gardens, the River Mersey, and the wider green infrastructure of Liverpool, something which has 1. The added value of links-hubs-nodes 1 been scoped previously . The spatial distribution of the ‘Green Web’ will To marry such links with traffic free paths, like the existing Loopline Route, potentially provide investment in much needed linkages across the city that which already traverse Liverpool, could be proposed as common sense. It complement the Sustrans Cycling network, the existing parks network, but can also be considered to be a cost effective way of providing vital services, also fill the gaps left by uneven development in many parts of the city. as habitats for wildlife and connective features for people, that can help create a more interactive, supportive and sustainable 21st century urban environment (Mell, 2016a).
1The Liverpool Green Infrastructure Strategy developed by The Mersey Forest highlighted areas of potential for the creation of green corridors, as well as areas of green space deficiency. The Green and Open Spaces Review is though the first concerted effort to identify a deliverable plan that identifies pinch-points, development opportunities and a city-wide network for investment. 82 Moreover, promoting the ecological values of green corridors illustrates just inclusion and supporting community interactions have also been associated one of the many positives that such investments can deliver. A review of with improved access to green and open spaces (Coutts and Hahn, 2015; the literature on ‘greenway’ investments suggests that ‘Green Corridors’ can England’s Community Forests and Forestry Commission, 2012; Pretty et al, provide a broad range of further socio-economic values to an urban areas 2007). (Lindsey, Maraj, and Kuan, 2001; Noss, 2006; Taylor, Paine, and FitzGibbon, Investment in green corridors have also been seen to have a positive 1995). economic impact on the value of local homes and commercial returns. Where The promotion of a Liverpool ‘Green Web’ helps to identify which benefits in investment in linear corridors is linked to better access to socio-economic which locations exist, as well as where gaps in the provision of amenities or services and amenities, for instance on riverfronts or promenades, there are access exist. The three most prominent benefits are: greater returns on the investments made. Green corridors that link areas of business and promote a more attractive investment environment (and more (i) Recreational routes and sports; productive in terms of employee productivity, access to recreational facilities, (ii) health and wellbeing agendas; and and other amenities), are therefore more likely to support a prosperous urban landscape (Fitzsimons et al, 2012; Kousky, Olmstead, Walls, and Macauley, (iii) property values and improved economic value. 2013; Mell, 2016b). Sports and recreation can be used to promote health, wellbeing and community engagement especially if they can link via green corridors 2. Behavioural change and the added socio-economic benefits of access to homes/residential areas. Green corridors provide focal points for to and from nature communities in many locations, as well as opportunities for families to interact Whilst access to nature and green spaces does not necessarily lead to with their peers; a view discussed extensively in the wider ‘greenways’ and behavioural change in the level of use it does provide the physical location linear corridors literature (Little, 1990; Walmsley, 2006). Green corridors can to promote increased use. The English Nature ANGSt standards argued that therefore be proposed to decrease the need to have or use a car to access where green and open spaces were within 5 - 10 minutes of a person’s home nature potentially promoting greater equity between different groups within they may be used more frequently (Countryside Agency and Groundwork, society. Although it also has to be acknowledged that investments in green 2005; Harrison et al, 1995). Within the academic and practitioner literature corridors may not directly change the behaviour of how people access or there is a wealth of evidence supporting such claims, however, there is a make use of local/city green spaces. caveat: that such spaces must offer appropriate and diverse amenity values for its users if it is to encourage use (Hale and Sadler, 2012; Young, 2011). Along with promoting recreational use of the landscape green corridors can also help to improve individual and communal health and well-being. By Additional evidence supporting such claims has been discussed in providing better access to green and open spaces close to people’s homes Scandinavia where access to green and open spaces is argued to increase older people can find it easier to socialise and are more likely to spend time educational attainment in children (Konijnendijk, 2003; Sandström, 2002). outside (CABE Space, 2009). Children are also more likely to socialise if This includes the use of outdoor spaces as ‘living classrooms’, as well as parks and green spaces are accessible and deemed safe to use by parents the role that nature plays in supporting exploratory and adventure play (Louv, 2005; Luymes & Tamminga, 1995). Linking spaces through green (Ridgers and Sayers, 2010a, 2010b). Developing a network of green and corridors could thus promote exercise and learning through interactions open spaces that are linked to schools may offer a mechanism for urban with nature that benefits individuals, families and communities; especially planners to facilitate interaction with the landscape by providing the physical if access to a private car is limited (Pauleit et al, 2003). Additional and infrastructure to promote walking to school, outdoor classrooms and greater quantifiable improvements to individual physical and mental health (See interactions with the landscape. Health and Wellbeing, Chapter 4) and to communal health in terms of social
83 It may also be sensible to review the research of Dr Richard Louv (2005) here Green Corridors – make the most of existing land use as well. His work on Nature Deficit Disorder (NDD) posits that children who are not exposed to nature or green spaces early in their lives may not develop The Green Corridors being proposed aim to establish a logical development attachments to the physical landscape in later life. Whilst there are clear process that links ‘Brownfield’, ‘Existing Green Space’ and potential recreational, health and potentially education concerns with such a situation ‘Development sites’ into a city-wide ‘Green Web’. Examples of each category there are also issues regarding the longer-term use and valuing of green and can be found throughout Liverpool and provide the foundation for the green open spaces. What Louv proposes is that with an active engagement with corridors network or ‘Green Web’. the landscapes around us, people are more likely to respect, use and protect The existing network of spaces also highlights that although some areas may them in later life (Abrahams, 2010; Louv, 2005; Mell, 2016b). have higher proportions of green space, i.e. in south Liverpool, or brownfield 3. Non-motorised transport and the promotion of walking-cycling as land for example Anfield, when viewed collectively most neighbourhoods in significant forms of mobility the city have a combination of these sites. Most wards also have various areas which have been identified by Liverpool City Council (and other A further benefit of investing in green corridors is the promotion of non- government agencies) as potential development sites (Couch and Karecha, motorised forms of transport including walking and cycling (Hellmund and 2006; Sykes et al, 2013). We must therefore view Liverpool as an evolving Smith, 2006; Luymes and Tamminga, 1995). Within the UK the Sustrans landscape that provides scope for the city, its people and developers to cycle network offers a spatially broad series of on and off-road amenities that promote development, whilst also ensuring that the city’s green corridors are enable cyclists to ride safely across urban areas. In Liverpool the Loopline enhanced. and the Sustrans Route No. 56 are good examples of the positive difference such infrastructure can make in promoting cycling. Moreover, when cycle Through a process of consultation with the public and other stakeholders, paths are integrated with pedestrianised routes it is possible to develop city- and through extensive site visits across the city, the role of the Board wide routes that allow people to move freely between places of interest, work as a Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review has developed the and their homes (Walmsley, 2006). The promotion of greenways in North recommendation that Liverpool City Council, development stakeholders, America offer good exemplars of how such projects can be integrated into the public and other actors should support investment in a city-wide green urban areas. Cities such as New York and Boston have both invested in corridors network to create a ‘Green Web’. Between the basic frameworks urban greenways to facilitate urban mobility with notable successes (Fábos, provided by The Promenade, The Loop Line and the Leeds/Liverpool Canal, 2004; Mell, 2016b). In Liverpool the ongoing discussions between the city as well as other bridleways and public footpaths (i.e. Public Rights of Way council, Mersey Travel and other transport orientated stakeholders are – ProW), are islands of greenery that our city has inherited and around them exploring the value of such projects to establish their potential value in the lie potential development sites. These spaces are the foundation of the city. The green corridors programme is viewed as one mechanism to focus proposed Liverpool ‘Green Web’ network. these discussions on defined programme of investment for the city. The creation of new links plus the extension and/or maintenance of existing spaces do not infer a loss of public open space. Alternatively, it calls for the creation of a rather more pragmatic way of thinking about the city’s landscape and how best to promote its amenity value. Furthermore, there is a need to consider that some open space may be lost as a city develops. As Liverpool continues to develop the landscape will invariably change as it has done already. The Board therefore suggest that it is better to work with developers if, and where loss of green space occurs, to find innovative solutions to minimise any losses and to create high quality and connective
84 green space that service the city as a whole. This includes the promotion of boundaries that include the River Mersey and the Green Belt at the perimeter a strategic green corridors network, Liverpool’s ‘Green Web’, as a key piece of the city, and a network of linear corridors (links) within it linked to larger of infrastructure that requires funding from a broader range of investments. parks, gardens and green/open spaces (hubs and nodes). The proposed enhancement of the existing network therefore aims to address the gaps or pinch points in this network. Recommendation: Green Web – Strategic alignment with development The Board recommends that the Mayor engages Merseytravel, MEAS contributions and The Mersey Forest and other stakeholders to begin costing and To ensure that the green web network is delivered the Review recommends that it be considered as a programme of strategic investment of city-wide planning the Green Corridor network (or ‘Green Web’) in greater detail. importance. Due to its spatial breadth the network will deliver benefits to The implementation of the ‘Green Web’, as embedded in the Local Plan, the whole city and should therefore be viewed as a key investment proposal should begin with an implementation plan for critical sites. within the Local Plan. Elements of the network already exist throughout the city and the proposed ’Green Web’ programme aims to facilitate an expansion of any green and open space that is required to meet the limitations of the The proposed ‘Green Web’ will make extensive use of existing infrastructure city’s existing green space network. Proposals for the ‘Green Web’ routes within the city. Liverpool is criss-crossed with a series of public rights of are illustrated below in Figure 3. way (PRoW), long and shorter cycle paths developed by Sustrans and linear walkways/paths, such as the Otterspool Promenade, which provide excellent links between people’s homes, places of work, and local amenities. The ‘Green Web’ will use these links as its foundations for enhancement of the city’s landscape. Where gaps exist Liverpool City Council will work with stakeholders including the Highways Agency, Mersey Travel and local communities to: (i) identify how best to maximise the amenity value of the existing network; (ii) how to address infrastructure needs in specific locations; and (iii) how to promote behavioural change in the use of the city’s landscape by local people. The city’s topography and the spatial layout of housing/commercial/ transport infrastructure also provide Liverpool with a series of identifiable natural corridors. These include linear features running along the River Mersey, the location of potential wildlife corridors along main roads such as Menlove Avenue or Edge Lane, and the opportunities for green links to be made between small gardens and parks in the city centre, i.e. Saint George’s Hall, and the universities, and sites further afield including Everton Park and Princes Park. What this gives Liverpool is a clear set of identifiable
85 Figure 3. Proposals for ‘Green Web’ Routes
Green Corridors Stage One
Green Corridors Stage Two
Maintained Greenspace
© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 100018351
86 inclusive communities remit the ‘Green Web’ will promote greater access to nature, transparent urban environments (in terms of location, access and Recommendation: amenity), and the creation/delivery of places that people want to live, work The Board recommends that the ‘Green Web’ network should be identified and recreate in (Department of Communties and Local Government, 2012; Natural England and Landuse Consultants, 2009; Office of the Deputy Prime as a strategic investment within the Local Plan consultation to ensure that Minister, 2003). All of which helps to support the City Council’s promotion of developer contributions from sites located in proximity to the corridors can Liverpool as a liveable place to work, live and spend time. be generated to make financial contributions to deliver the scheme. Given To ensure that Liverpool’s ‘Green Web’ moves from planning to implementation its spatial diversity and potential to deliver benefits across Liverpool the it is imperative that Liverpool City Council continues to engage with all stakeholders located along the corridors. This includes resident/housing ‘Green Web’ may be able to deliver a multitude of social, economic and groups, local land owners, health and educational providers, and local ecological benefits to the city that are cost-effective and make best use of businesses that can all contribute and benefit from improvements to the the city’s existing green network and areas of brownfield land. connectivity of the city. Improvements to Liverpool’s ‘Green Web’ could also provide a low-cost solution to the delivery of green space throughout the city. Moreover, as the ‘Green Web’ is aligned with the upcoming Local Plan as a strategic investment project then it should be less complicated to attract and Due to its presentation as a strategic investment linked to all development allocate funding for investment from development in Liverpool. Such links in the city, the ‘Green Web’ is viewed as offering Liverpool City Council a may also provide Liverpool City Council or a new management vehicle, i.e. mechanism to require payments from all development in the city to fund a Charitable Trust Endowment Fund to maintain the city’s green and open its delivery. Such large-scale projects work in other cities, for example spaces in the future by identifying specific requirements from developers in Atlanta (Georgia, USA) where the development of a city-scale circular to contribute to the creation, enhancement and maintenance of the ‘Green corridor – the Atlanta Beltline, has facilitated a form of corporate taxation Web’. or philanthropy, whereby businesses (led by Coca-Cola, CNN and Home Depot) have required businesses to pay into the Beltline investment fund to ensure that the landscape of the city is function and connected (Atlanta Recommendation: Beltline Inc, 2015; Kirkman, Noonan, and Dunn, 2012). The Liverpool ‘Green The Board recommends that to kick start the green corridor work and realise the Web’, project may not be able to rely on such multi-national sponsors but the aims of the project, its spatial distribution and the proposed socio-economic possibilities of the ‘Green Web’ initiative the city council should work in partnership benefits it can deliver are reasons for Liverpool City Council to present the and through the Horizon 2020 programme if possible to establish the first green project as strategically important. corridor in the Baltic area, linking Bold Street to the Arena on the waterfront. The proposed ‘Green Web’ also provides a large-scale project that is The Board also recommends the following specific corridors: visible to both the public and the development sector who should be able • An area close to the Churchill Flyovers should be identified as a conduit for a to see the benefits of paying into it through planning consent/obligations wider Business District City Centre green corridor. (Byrne, Lo, andJianjun, 2015b; Cabe Space, 2005a). Its scale should also attract positive reactions from the public, as the enhancements to the city’s • The Eastern Corridor moving from the City Centre to the City’s boundary. landscape will not be spatially constrained to one area or neighbourhood. • The Everton-Anfield corridor linking the City Centre, Everton Valley, Anfield Furthermore, in terms of meeting the UK government’s sustainable and and Croxteth Country Park. • Southern corridor linking the City Centre with Sefton Park, Princes Park, Calderstones Park and Otterspool Promenade. 87 9.5.3 Capital costs Chair’s Comment: “I believe that you get out of the community what you put into it. We A vital ‘live’ example is the proposed redevelopment of the ‘Fruit should all do our bit to keep our environment pleasant and at least we Market’ site between Edge Lane and Prescot Road as a mixed use site should all look after our patch”. including Merseyside Police facilities and housing. This is a one-off Elaine (Workshop comment) opportunity to create a purposeful traffic-free link between between Newsham Park and Fairfield through to Wavertree Technology Park The network routes developed for the ‘Green Web’ have been identified with and Wavertree Botanic Gardens. This crucial link for the entire city the direct purpose of minimising the capital costs required by Liverpool City network will be very difficult to develop through any other site(s). I urge Council to realise their delivery. This has been done by identifying routes all stakeholders to work together to create this section of the ‘Green that are already used and linking these with existing spaces to reduce any engineering works that may be required. The capital costs of the network Web’ and therby lay down a market for the future of the network. would be largely met by a range of development stakeholders in a variety of ways to ensure that equity and accessibility issues around the city are addressed. To actualise the project the following interventions could be used to fund the corridors: • Working with developers to set aside and construct ‘Green Web’ routes as part of a more forward-thinking planning process • Using capital receipts from the sale of council sites to fund investment Recommendation: • Using any levies due or uplift from development sites to fund investment The Board recommends that stakeholders should work together to develop • Ring fencing a portion of Highways budget to meet strategic ‘Green the vital link of the ‘Green Web’ between Newsham Park and Fairfield Web’ investment needs through to Wavertree Technology Park and Wavertree Botanic Gardens. • Strategic investment in ‘health target areas’ by Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) • Strategic investment from Merseytravel as part of ‘Stepping Stones’ investment • Strategic investment from utility providers • Strategic investment from Higher Education establishments • Corporate Investment for sponsored routes including members of the development and sports industry
88 • Sustainability Investment and sponsorship by Universities and Higher The network would allow a targeted approach of a variety of community Education Providers groups to promote initial and longer-term involvement in the creation and management of the routes. These include: • Crowdfunding for one off construction work • User groups • Volunteering • Local schools • Other forms of sponsorship and income • Corporate social initiatives such as team building days and interdepartmental competitions 9.5.4 Maintenance • University teams and volunteer societies The ongoing maintenance costs of the proposed ‘Green Web’ would be achieved through a diverse stream of financial payments and donations and • Site specific volunteer stakeholders such as ‘Friends of the Flyover” labour. It is envisaged that the strategic and local focus of the ‘Green Web’ • Other interested groups such as The Ramblers Association network will promote buy in from a range of public, community and private sources including: The proposed ‘Green Web’ network will not happen overnight. Instead the report proposes a ten-year implementation period that will ensure that the • Neighbourhood Commissions investments develop into a major green infrastructure asset for Liverpool. • Investment from the NHS and CCG such as prescriptive investment or By presenting this long-term vision and planning proactively for its delivery funding associated with the location of medical centres and interactions the city could take a major step in achieving its sustainability and growth with health providers objectives. • Corporate capital sponsorship of sections of corridors such as piloted in It would also assist the city’s promotion of itself as an innovative European Darlington and global city. • Ring-fenced contribution from parking, tourism, student or other levies • Other income such as social enterprise contributions (such as NESTA model - Bristol Park Ways) In order to keep costs down, as well as achieve an increased city-wide buy in, the network would make extensive use of volunteer contributions. The Chair has discussed with MEAS the possible mapping of the network in conjunction with the Mersey Forest and other relevant stakeholders to identify in more detail the potential investor and custodian possibilities for the corridor routes.
89 Let the imagination fly
90 Chair’s Comment:
‘The Interim Report identified a lack of accessible public woodland in the North and Eastern core of the city and recommended that two sites be identified for such provision. As the Chair continued gathering evidence from around the city, an introduction to one passionate individual led to a site visit of an old railway track in Kirkdale Ward, adjacent to Kirkdale Station. This piece of land owned by Liverpool City Council has self-wilded into a Birch Woodland with mixed deciduous trees now taking hold. With a little imagination and limited investment this site (which incidentally was identified as a potential park in the Unitary Development Plan (UDP)) could become a fabulous public park and part of the Green Corridor network linking Kirkdale station to the local community, the Leeds - Liverpool Canal and the city centre. There is ongoing community engagement regarding the possibilities for this hidden gem through the ‘Ralla’ project – details are (http://www.everymanplayhouse.com/the-ralla).
With regard to developing public woodland in the Eastern Core, the review has engaged with The Mersey Forest to look into the possibilities of planting woodland in the Kensington and Fairfield/Old Swan wards. There are possibilities of drawing on a philanthropic offer from a private individual who wishes to leave Liverpool a woodland legacy. Further planting on Fairfield public park could be an appropriate project but such a proposal would require further consultation with the local community and friends group, and a fundable maintenance plan to be put in place prior to commencement.
Thus the recommendation from the Interim Report regarding new woodland has developed further and should continue to do so in partnership with The Mersey Forest.
The educational value of Forest Schools is cited elsewhere in the report and it is clear that working with The Mersey Forest to identify a ‘Forest School for Every School’ would be a very positive step with regard to this provision.
91 9.6 Equity and Accessibility 9.6.1 Opportunities for improving equity and accessibility
“These are public amenities that are used and add to the quality of life of those in the area. They should be preserved at all costs as they Play Areas will never be reclaimed when they are gone.” The Interim Report highlighted that in addition to acute under provision of outdoor play facilities in some areas there were a number of existing Janet (email correspondent) playground sites that were over 20 years old and in a state of decline. In response to this, and following the publication of the Interim Report, the Mayor announced a £1million investment into a 2 year Play Area Investment Programme which will introduce 8 new natural play areas to help address Bearing in mind the current financial situation Liverpool is in it may prove the identified gaps in play provision. The programme will also see the difficult to equalise the inequity of high quality green space provision around refurbishment of 11 existing playgrounds so that existing levels of play value the city and provide better accessibility. It therefore seems prudent that, can be improved or maintained across the city. This investment programme whilst remaining within the legal framework, we consider more creative will be funded by Section 106 developer contributions, which is money paid approaches to how we use S106 or other developer contributions, as well by developers to the council as part of their planning agreements. Figure 4 as proposing more detailed collaborations between the alternative financial shows the location of the existing outdoor play provision and the planned provision and green corridor network proposals contained within this report. new play provision and improvements. Moreover, the opinion that any monies raised from development on open space should be largely, if not entirely, used to improve other open space provision had been prevalent throughout the consultation process and the whole Review. Using funding raised from the commercialisation and/or sale of green and open spaces to pay for the long-term management of other green spaces is a view held by a large proportion of the public in Liverpool, stakeholders in the city and the Board.
92 Figure 4. Liverpool Play Area Provision Recommendation:
The Board recommends that no playgrounds/provision should be lost to development in Liverpool (without a minimum like for like replacement in close proximity), and where possible provision of play equipment should be improved.
Green Flag Sites Likewise, to ensure there is equity of high quality green spaces the Board recommends that Green Flag status should be retained in the north and south of the city.
Recommendation:
The Board recommends that the city take steps to ensure that its Green Flag parks retain their status as high quality spaces. Green Flag parks provide the city with nationally important spaces which can be used to promote the liveability and investment environment of Liverpool to external partners.
Play Area (Existing)
Play Area to be refurbished
Proposed new ‘Natural Play Area’
© Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 100018351
93 © Jon Warren Not far from the madding crowd
94 Public Woodland Businesses Links Access to public open woodland was discussed in the Interim Report and Liverpool is one of the most verdant cities in the country yet the City Centre it was noted that there was a lack of provision to the eastern, central and has a distinct lack of green spaces. With the exception of St. John’s Gardens northern areas of the City Centre. and a few other small oases it is an issue that needs redressing for both residents and commuting workers. This imbalance was a priority of the Recommendation: Mayor when setting up this review. The Business Improvement District (BID) have been engaged throughout the The Board recommends that two new areas of public woodland are process of the Review and are continually seeking ways in which to bring more developed. One in Kirkdale next to Kirkdale Station, now known as greenery into the central business district. Plans to engage businesses and Melrose Cutting (formally the ‘Ralla’ site) which could act as a community the city council to rework and green Williamson Square are very interesting and could help to uplift the surrounding environs. hub as well as a green corridor route spur to Kirkdale Station. The second The Liverpool City Centre Strategic Investment Framework contains an opportunity is to continue to work with the Mersey Forest and local artist’s impression of a far greener Lime Street corridor. This improved communities to further explore the possibility of creating a new woodland physical link between the city’s main train station and the business district is at Fairfield, adjacent to Newsham Park in Kensington and Fairfield ward desperately needed. The Friends of The Flyover (http://friendsoftheflyover. org.uk/) campaign to create a linear park on one or both of the city centre bordering Old Swan. flyovers would dramatically change the area around the Museum, Walker Art Gallery, Central Library and LJMU Faculties and be a catalyst for the regeneration of the London Road area as happened with the High Line Park in Manhattan (http://www.thehighline.org/). Chair’s Comment:
As austerity continues to erode LCC budgets there is a danger that tree lined streets and thoroughfares are seen merely as an expensive drain Chair’s Comment: on the maintenance coffers of both public and private bodies (take a The flyover park would also bring a welcome splash of greenery walk around the Mann Island or Kings Dock and Arena complex and play to the otherwise urban desert that is Dale Street. There is so much ‘spot the grass’). Many new developments around the city are ‘concrete more planting and landscaping that could be done in Liverpool city deserts’ with token trees and borders added as an afterthought. Such centre by both the Council and individual businesses. A walk up design flies in the face of sustainable development and Liverpool must Stanley Street past Delifonseca shows what can be done with the reverse the trend. This can be achieved via appropriate tree planting right energy and mind-set. Imagine if every business did the same. along the developing Green Corridor network and one way of gauging The city centre would be transformed! such progress would be to plant a tree for every child in the city.
95 Figure 5. Illustration of Potential Sites at Brunswick Docks for Eden Centre of the North Tourist Attraction. By kind permission of Architectural Emporium and Reshaped Landscape Architects
Walk on water
96 Blue Green Links Recommendation: Following evidence and input from Bluegreen, The City Council is already investigating via its Horizon 2020 bid how to begin creating Green Corridors The Board recommends that all partners and stakeholders continue to throughout the city centre starting with a potential link between the Bold Street retail district via the Baltic Triangle to The Arena and Convention engage and creatively develop the city centre dock system as vital public Centre on the waterfront. space and corridor routes. There is some very creative thinking emerging around the city centre - by pulling together the interested parties and stakeholders there is no question that the quality and quantity of the city centre green and open space offer Recommendation: could substantially change the way Liverpool looks and feels. The Board recommends that dialogue should continue with the Canal and Liverpool’s blue (water) space is both diverse and fascinating. From the mighty Mersey Estuary to the trickling Fazakerley Brook, the importance of River Trust, Maritime Museum and other stakeholders to create a City such provision is moving up the agenda. Centre Stevedore Adventure Park on the Graving Dock Dockside which The River Mersey is, of course, the city’s raison d’etre. In terms of the city’s will also increase connectivity in and around the Albert Dock area. economy it remains vital for secondary and tertiary industries. The substantial dock system running alongside the river is an equally valuable asset for many reasons and as the century develops so will the purpose of many of these Further afield, the Leeds-Liverpool Canal already provides a corridor for spaces. The planned development by Peel Holdings, Liverpool Waters, people and wildlife to the north of the city and out into the city-region. The should create a vital corridor link to the north of the city as well as providing River Alt also provides a valuable wildlife corridor to the northeast of the city. much needed housing around the Northern Dock basins. The newly opened Alt Park should be the first step in opening up the entire Alt corridor as a valuable route for the city region. Ditton Brook could do the As public open spaces many of the docks are both welcoming and foreboding same to the south of the City Region. at the same time. They provide welcome gaps between the cityscape but the height of the dock walls can be a barrier and deter public use. This Many of Liverpool’s lost brooks and streams still enhance our landscape disconnect is being challenged by various stakeholders. The City Centre when they appear from beneath our feet. The Sefton Park Lake system is the Strategic Infrastructure Framework calls for better links between Mann Island damned brook which once ran into the Mersey at the ‘Otters Pool’. Greenbank across to the Albert Dock. Lake and The Dell at the end of Queens Drive are both part of another brook which originated at the top of The Mystery (Wavertree Playground) and Engage (www.engageliverpool.com) also seek ideas to improve the greener ran down past the ‘Brookhouse Pub’ on Smithdown Road. There are also offer around the City Centre and connect people to the blue and green culverted waterways under Walton Hall Park and other city parks and green spaces. Working with Bluegreen and Engage and other partners, The Canal spaces. Deculverting or ‘daylighting’ of any urban river, brook or steam and River Trust are currently developing strategic plans to create water level will not only help to alleviate flood risk and increase biodiversity but will, if floating corridors along with a mixed commercial and cultural offer including managed correctly, greatly enhance our built environment. It is also often possible event venues and floating parks as illustrated in Figure 5. The the cheapest engineering solution for a problem culvert. Further discussions Maritime Museum continues to be engaged in this process as it seeks to involving the Environment Agency and United Utilities (UU) to investigate and develop the currently redundant Graving Dockside. evidence such good practice whenever possible, should be developed in the future.
97 Liverpool’s blue space provision is diverse and complex, much of which Equestrian Links could be further enhanced and every effort should be made to encourage people and wildlife to use such spaces. Very early on in the process the visit to Milton Keynes threw up one very interesting scenario. There are paddocks for horses dotted everywhere around the urban Recommendation: landscape. When investigated further it transpired that these paddocks were both popular with the public and lucrative. The Board recommends that the city should engage with ‘Bluegreen’ to There are already council owned livery and stables at Beechley Riding School identify another Riverside Greenspace and investigate the potential for the adjacent to Calderstones Park, but the only privately run equestrian facility development of an ‘Eden of The North’: (https://www.insidermedia.com/ lies within Croxteth Country Park. insider/northwest/pomona-island-green-space-set-for-prs-scheme Since the release of the Interim Report, engagement with Liverpool based volunteers of the British Horse Society has led to a rudimentary citywide ‘hacking’ route being identified which could be easily adapted to fit in with the ‘Green Web’ network. There are also outline plans for a much larger City Chair’s Comment: Region circuit. A livery and stables (Park Palace Ponies) are soon to open in the Riverside “I believe the city should relentlessly pursue the goal of freeing ward which will give access to horse and pony riding to the inner city The Strand of all traffic by dropping the road below ground level. population. Liverpool will never realise its full potential until a peaceful parkway It has also been evidenced to the Board by ‘Beautiful Ideas’ that a livery and links the Pier Head, Albert Dock and Arena to the rest of the City stables could with the support of the British Horse Society, be opened at Centre.” Walton Hall Park allowing access to the Loop Line and, using the ‘Green Web’ network in the future, out into Croxteth Country Park and the surrounding countryside. This would bring a greater offer to the park and a useful revenue stream as well as giving children the chance to simply engage with these magnificent animals.
Recommendation:
The Board recommends that Mayor and city continue to engage with the British Horse Society (BHS) to co-ordinate a Liverpool City Horse Riding Strategy and citywide stabling/livery network linked to the ‘Green Web’ Network.
98 Corporate Access Forum (CAF) Chair’s Comments: For those of us with any kind of physical impairment public open spaces can be incredibly liberating as they are more often than not on one level and I found it of interest to note that the fields at Park Avenue/Sefton offer few physical barriers to the social inclusion of all. Yet what should be Park Meadows have a bylaw allowing horse riding. I engaged with an amazing facility for those with physical impairment can be infuriatingly upsetting due to the lack of infrastructure and facilities available. A beautiful the Save Sefton Park Meadows Campaign Group to determine park is no use to a chair user if the toilet facilities are inadequate. The Loopline whether a livery and stables along with paddocking could be a is a fabulous asset to the city but access is often impossible or impractical suitable alternative to any proposed housing scheme. The reply was for wheel chair users. There are some exemplary cases of inclusive design such as the toilet facilities in Newsham and Calderstones Parks created uncompromising. A fairly predictable “no building of any sort.” So in co-operation with ‘Changing Places‘ (http://www.changing-places.org/ much for compromise. find_a_toilet/location_search_results.aspx#map).
This year the British Horse Show was held at the Liverpool Arena and As the ‘Green Web’ corridor network develops it is essential that an audio route adviser becomes available for the visually impaired to whom a visual will return for a 5 year period. It seems that this is a perfect moment app or map is of little use. to engage with all stakeholders and interested parties to see how Equitable access to green and open space must be exactly that. To create a horse riding could be better integrated within the urban fabric and beautiful outdoor place which excludes part of society is cruelly contradictory. encourage particularly the children of the city to have a go at horse Every new development or enhancement within public open space must take on best practice incorporating the invaluable guidance of the Corporate riding whilst bringing in revenue to the city’s green spaces. Access Forum. (http://liverpool.gov.uk/health-and-social-care/disability/ corporate-access-forum/).
99 A strand of the ‘Green Web’
100 10. Engagement
With key contributions from Board Member Maxine Ennis
“Liverpool is renowned for its open spaces. Once they are gone, Throughout the review the city has seen how green and open spaces act they are gone. Let community groups take them on and show the as a clarion call for local communities, especially where development may country what happens when Liverpool gives its people the power to threaten the integrity of a given space. In the Save Woolton Woods, Sefton let Liverpool breathe!” Park Meadows and Walton Hall Park campaigns the city has witnessed a groundswell of public engagement around issues which affect people’s daily Helen (Written submission) lives. Each of these campaigns has seen a broad range of local people of all ages come together to protect locally important spaces from housing or larger developments. At times this has been antagonistic and the review has received numerous comments questioning the logic of selling or redeveloping Chair’s Comment: parks as residential areas. However, the review has allowed people, community groups and interested stakeholders to make representations to Liverpool City Council has undergone massive restructuring the city council expressing their concerns over development. It has acted as during recent years and sadly many knowledgeable a meeting point for likeminded people to voice their aspirations and thoughts members of staff have been lost from within different on the city’s green spaces and parks. departments. Public meeting evidence and meetings with This has been a valuable experience for the Board and the review as a whole as it has illustrated the breadth of knowledge, engagement and passion for various stakeholders has indicated that the loss of staff the city’s green and open spaces. It has also highlighted the variability of and restructuring has left a void with regard to engagement uses for these spaces and key place they hold in the lives of a significant between the Council and members of the public. ‘I used proportion of the city’s population. to talk to...’ ‘Don’t know who I call anymore…’. This It is vital that the support for volunteer organisations making our spaces more vibrant is cohesive and reactive. When putting in unpaid time to a space unfortunate state of affairs must be addressed in order to you love there is nothing more discouraging than not getting a response to a help those people who value our Parks and to help the city request for help or direction for a suggested event. With this in mind the Board council run the facilities to the highest standards. has been actively seeking ways to simplify and enhance the engagement process some of which already exists but have been left redundant for one reason or another. The use of appropriate technology and social media must also be considered.
101 10.1 Engagement in Liverpool A good example of partnership development and engagement can be seen in the model adopted by Liverpool Knowledge Quarter Strategic Network For effective engagement Liverpool City Council needs to broaden how it it (KQSN). The KQSN promotes sustainability and environmental issues sees itself as a provider of public open space and become a delivery partner, through Liverpool’s Knowledge Quarter and encourages active collaboration facilitator, supporter, collaborator, and enabler of citizens and stakeholders. and partnership. Its members are well placed to identify projects and This change requires letting go of some of the traditional reins of power and collaborations that will improve sustainability, including energy infrastructure; trusting that people can and will effectively engage in the issues. sustainable built environment; green infrastructure and green space People are ‘engaged’ when they play a meaningful role in the deliberations, (including biodiversity); local food growing (including incidental greenspace) discussions, decision-making and/or implementation of things affecting sustainable and ethical procurement; health and wellbeing; travel, transport them. Central government cuts to local authority budgets across the country and public realm; and low carbon circular economy (including responsible have been extreme, more so in Liverpool with over 58% cuts since 2010 waste management). The KQSN considers it essential to raise the awareness leaving non-statutory provision most at risk. Our green space provision may and profile of sustainability and related projects/initiatives amongst the local be non-statutory, but the importance of such places, evidentially and morally, community and stakeholders, specifically those developments which the is way beyond any legal obligation, as previously argued within this report. community, including residents, students, businesses and organisations, can directly access and benefit from. The money must be found from somewhere and we must start by accepting that our parks, recreation grounds, sports facilities and wild places are We all understand that budget reductions are going to impact greatly on priceless. resources so drawing on key networks such as KQSN, Friends Groups, Health Partners, and other stakeholder resources and existing staff teams After 18 months of evidence gathering, stakeholder consultation and together is crucial. How we do this successfully will be the deciding factor; discussions, the Board has made a number of interim recommendations; rebuilding trust with Friends Groups for example, who have felt undervalued critically the key recommendation and the platform on which success rests and disregarded previously, will need a different approach – they will need to within this report ‘is better stakeholder engagement’ with a more ‘joined –up feel respected, informed, involved, consulted and empowered. mechanism for strategic decision making’. A key element of face-to-face engagement at community level is to invoke At the heart of this section of the report is the belief that we make better meaningful conversation, listening rather than talking at, often rebuilds decisions together. damaged relationships at all levels. Loosening the reins of authority, policy How we facilitate this approach to decision making, specifically in relation and process will inevitably lead to innovation and greater productivity – to saving our green and open spaces, is academic. There are numerous allowing people to do what they do best and want to do is always a good thing, best practice examples and evidential reports to draw on, demonstrating providing enabling structures are in place. The long term sustainable aim of common themes of successful stakeholder engagement. this strategy is to ensure that all areas of dialogue, consultation, engagement and decision-making are robust and transparent as this will impact on the However, for the purpose of this report and based on the feedback of those task ahead. The first stage is about ‘joining up’ all stakeholders to ‘talk’ most experienced in engagement activities the basic principles are the and ‘engage’ in a timely and formal manner. Existing relationships with, for simplest to apply: be respectful, inform, consult, involve and empower. By example, KQSN, and Friends Groups exist (which are fruitful partnerships employing these basic principles we can build a platform of trust as a critical built over many years) but difficult to maintain without a single mechanism element in long-term, sustainable engagement and effective governance of of communication. The question is therefore how we become smarter in our green and open spaces for our children of which we can be proud. our approach to stakeholder engagement which is both innovative and sustainable.
102 10.2 Engagement Initiatives On-line recruitment for volunteers for both culture and park activities is also a good way of engaging people and encouraging them to participate in Liverpool City Council’s vision is “to enable Liverpool to become the first decision making processes as part of their volunteering experience. Smart City in the UK creating ongoing monitoring of resource deployment, insightful visualizations and constant feedback loops to develop a highly Awards to showcase the work local people do for their Parks and Open efficient, interactive and engaging city stimulating behavioural change. This Spaces e.g. Best Park Gardens, Best Allotment, dog shows are all fun ways will develop a low carbon, competitive and therefore sustainable Liverpool of engaging people, and a means of capturing information about usage and City Region utilising contemporary technology and design….” Liverpool City the health benefits associated with being more active. NHS England, CCG or Council has already identified the need to think differently about the issue Local Business could sponsor these events generating an income that can we’re all facing, firstly by commissioning this independent Review Board be reinvested, either to fund other activities or sustain administrative support to help facilitate discussions and rationalise the terms of reference for the to Friends Group Forums and/or the Green and Open Spaces Ambassadors ongoing management and maintenance of our greenspace and secondly the Programme. city’s commitment to smart technologies and environmental sustainability. Using both face-to-face and digital methods of communication a tool box of Recommendation: mediums can be created, one supporting the other, to achieve a successful engagement strategy for our green and open spaces. The Board recommends the creation of an interactive website. Such a The creation of an interactive website would encourage people to discover website would encourage people to discover and support their local parks and support their local parks but also provides a platform for individual but also provide a platform for individual projects and events with an projects and events with an investment strategy to develop crowd funding, investment strategy to develop crowd funding, longer term sustainability longer term sustainability and endowment funds. It should also provide information about park events, facilities and activities. and endowment funds. It should also provide information about park MyPark Scotland is one of 11 UK ‘park trailblazers’ in the Rethinking Parks events, facilities and activities. Programme, funded by NESTA, Heritage Lottery Fund and Big Lottery Fund, and is thus an avenue of funding LCC can explore for the development of The creation of an internet based parks app would feature parks, gardens and such a tool. However, Liverpool can be more creative and incorporate our open space, with images and video footage relating to the cultural heritage cultural offer, actives and events happing across the city from local community of those sites. Regular activities and events would encourage greater footfall activities and projects, to more strategic park events such as ‘African Oye’ boosting the economy at a micro level within parks, but also citywide, not to and the ‘Giants’ visits. An animated character representing the old ‘Park mention the potential health benefits. Better marketing and promotion is the Wardens,’ the Liverpool virtual ‘Parkie’ should be explored as an approachable key to the success for any business – the business of our city’s parks and image would encourage a more friendly engagement experience in relation green spaces is no exception. One example of a similar app is: The Chimani to park communications, information sharing or responses to complaints National Parks app (https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com. perhaps about litter, or dog fouling. Positive engagement with dog owners chimani.parks.free&hl=en_GB), which contains details on each of the such as a local dog show, with donated prizes from dog grooming salons to 400 plus units of the U.S. National Park Service, including national parks, help reduce the amount of dog fouling may be more productive, than just monuments, seashores, historic sites, and more. The app includes a photo imposing fines – negativity breeds negative actions. gallery with hundreds of images, and the ability to collect badges and earn points for each of the parks you visit.
103 Recommendation: Recommendation:
The Board recommends the creation of an internet based parks app The Board recommends the creation of a gaming experience of our parks. which would feature parks, gardens and open space, with images and The concept of ‘gaming’ could be incorporated into park technologies that video footage relating to the cultural heritage of those sites. Promoting can provide both and on-line and real time experience or activity. regular activities and events would encourage greater footfall boosting the economy both at a micro-level within parks and citywide.
The creation of a ‘Green and Open Spaces Ambassadors Programme’ would benefit parks by ‘Ambassadors’ providing face to face engagement, and The creation of a gaming experience of our parks could incorporate the harnessing local involvement from Community Groups, Friends Groups, and concept of ‘gaming’ into park technologies that can provide both and on-line local Business investors as well as employment/volunteering opportunities and real time experience or activity. Games and gaming is already a very for local people to help maintain and improve parks. The programme should popular way of engaging children to learn in a fun and creative way with on- incorporate an element of peer support and mentoring, education and training line homework platforms such as Purple Mash (https://www.2simple.com/ for those participating. Funding to support the programme could be sourced purple-mash) which focuses on numeracy and literacy and more lately for from Institute of Leadership and Management (ILM), Skills Funding Agency fun through Pokeman-Go. Developing a similar on-line game and activities (SFA), ESF and Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG); building the capacity that promote the use of a local park or green space familiar to the learner, of the programme, providing real resources and employability progression incorporating outdoor adventures, such as a Treasure Hunt, (horticultural routes for participants willing to support the maintenance and upkeep of local or heritage based perhaps), adding value to their classroom curriculum but greenspace – either incidental, pocket or large park activities. This group also promoting local knowledge of their area and community, health and could provide the content for the website, be ‘the Parkie’, organise shows wellbeing advantages too. ‘To get children to be active in parks, public open and awards for the Best Park Friend of the Month perhaps – complementing space needs to be interesting and provide an element of risk’. Nature-based and adding value to the digital and reality engagement methods. As far as is features (i.e., trees, rocks and water) in parks attract children and youth of all reasonably practicable, all stakeholders would be kept informed of planning ages (Fjørtoft, 2001, Fjørtoft and Sageie, 2000, Lee and Christiansen, 1999, developments, and fully consulted and involved with decision making Loukaitou-Sideris and Stieglitz, 2002, Wood et al, 2010). process relating to changes to the local green infrastructure.
104 Recommendation Recommendation: The Board recommends that where feasible and appropriate that events The Board recommends the creation of a ‘Green and Open Spaces held in the city’s parks and green spaces are shared equitably across ‘Ambassadors Programme’. ‘Ambassadors’ would benefit parks by Liverpool. This would promote interactions and investment in a larger ‘Ambassadors’ providing face to face engagement, and harnessing local number of major sites in north and south Liverpool. involvement from Community Groups, Friends Groups, and local Business investors as well as employment/volunteering opportunities for local people to help maintain and improve parks. Final recommendation
The Board recommends that the City Council commit to providing In addition to the Ambassadors programme there is the potential for greater sufficient in-house capacity and resources to both explore and test Trust interactivity with the city-wide Parks Forum to facilitate innovation in parks management and financing in Liverpool. model options and drive forward delivery of the key recommendations within this final report.
Recommendation
The Board recommends an ongoing engagement with the Liverpool Friends of Parks Forum to liaise between local and site specific issues and city-wide green and open space management practices.
105 © Frank Rowlands Engaged and engaging
106 11. Recommendations
1.1 Board Thematic Recommendations
Chair’s Comment:
Although the final report makes recommendations in a number of areas and provides detail and background on wider areas such as health and wellbeing, environmental factors, education etc. The main focus of the Review Board was to explore the financial issues that faced the city council and to identify options that could help to preserve and improve our green and open spaces. As such, the reader is referred to the main body of the report for the wider discussions and I restrict myself here to providing a summary of the Board’s final set of recommendations (Table 3) and additionally highlighting the 4 key recommendations which I, as Chair believe are realistically achievable and would have the most impact in the shortest space of time.
107 Table 3 Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review Board Thematic Recommendations
The final report should be read in conjunction with the Interim Report, and recommendations in the final report are additional to and complement those in the Interim Report. The Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review Board recommend:
Finance – cost reduction, commercialisation and revenue generation No Cost Reduction Reference 1 if transitional funding cannot be secured prior to 2017/18 then maintenance of the city’s green and open spaces should be reduced Chapter 7 from its current regime to 50 - 70% in the interim. At such a point when a sustainable form of financing becomes available the Section 7.1.1 100% maintenance (modified to meet needs) can be reinstated. 2 the city council should continue the engagement with Menlove Gardens and Circular Road West communities to investigate and Chapter 7 build transfer models for alternative maintenance. Section 7.4.1 Commercialisation 3 a review of the commercialisation opportunities for the city’s green and open spaces be undertaken to identify sites where Chapter 7 activities and/or businesses can be promoted to increase revenue. The Board recommends that Liverpool City Council works with Section 7.1.2 local communities and businesses to identify opportunities for small, medium and large scale commercialisation activities. 4 council Officers from Parks and Green Spaces, Culture-Liverpool and Licensing should work together to share expertise and Chapter 7 streamline and improve the events application process for Parks events. Section 7.1.3 Revenue Generation 5 £1.3 million efficiencies from Cemeteries and Crematoria be retained and reinvested back into Parks. Chapter 7 Section 7.1.1 6 all commercial for-profit events held in the city’s green spaces are charged appropriate licensing fees that cover the reinstatement Chapter 7 costs and make a financial contribution to ongoing site maintenance. Section 7.1.2 7 all income generating events in parks should be managed by the Culture Liverpool Team in liaison with Green Space Officers. Chapter 7 Revenue generated through park events should be ring-fenced for future parks maintenance, subject to payment of an agreed Section 7.1.2 percentage management fee to the Culture Liverpool Team. 8 whichever future management option is adopted that at least 50% of any dowry, uplift from development of open space and/or Chapter 8 sale of assets within the green space should be ring-fenced for the Parks Trust or future maintenance of public green and open Section 8.2.1 spaces. 9 all commercial receipts generated from commercial activities including, but not exclusively from, income associated with parks Chapter 7 leases, parks concessions and parks sponsorship be ring-fenced to fund on-going maintenance of the city’s green and open Section 7.1.2 spaces. This income would be utilised to manage green spaces across Liverpool, and not just the sites where events are held. 10 where legal requirements are met developer contributions in the form of commuted sums are ring-fenced to financially support the Chapter 8 delivery of the city’s green corridors (where most appropriate), rather than being used to fund alternative services. Section 8.2.1
108 Engagement, Health, Wellbeing and Activity No Engagement Reference 11 an ongoing engagement with the Liverpool Friends of Parks Forum to liaise between local and site specific issues and city-wide green Chapter 10 and open space management practices. Section 10.2 12 the creation of a ‘Green and Open Spaces ‘Ambassadors Programme’. ‘Ambassadors’ would benefit parks by providing face to face Chapter 10 engagement, and harnessing local involvement from Community Groups, Friends Groups, and local Business investors as well as Section 10.2 employment/volunteering opportunities for local people to help maintain and improve parks. 13 where feasible and appropriate that events held in the city’s parks and green spaces are shared equitably across Liverpool. This Chapter 10 would promote interactions and investment in a larger number of major sites in north and south Liverpool. Section 10.2 14 Liverpool City Council continue to work with schools, Education Authorities, The Mersey Forest and other stakeholders to identify and Chapter 6 energise ‘A Forest School For Every School’ on a citywide scale. This work to commence with the newly created public woodland at Section 6.0 Woolton Woods being developed as a Forest School for schools within Woolton, Allerton and Hunts Cross wards. 15 the creation of an internet based parks app that would feature parks, gardens and open space, with images and video footage Chapter 10 relating to the cultural heritage of those sites. Promoting regular activities and events would encourage greater footfall boosting the Section 10.2 economy both at a micro-level within parks and citywide. 16 the creation of an interactive website. Such a website would encourage people to discover and support their local parks but also Chapter 10 provide a platform for individual projects and events with an investment strategy to develop crowd funding, longer term sustainability Section 10.2 and endowment funds. It should also provide information about park events, facilities and activities. 17 when a community organisation can generate community value from the management and maintenance of incidental spaces, the city Chapter 7 council should prioritise that community’s needs in any development proposals for those spaces. Section 7.4.2 18 Liverpool City Council should continue to work with the Anfield based Homebaked Community Land Trust to explore opportunities for Chapter 7 Homebaked to take over the maintenance and development of the recreation ground at the rear of this building. Section 7.4.2
109 No Health and Wellbeing Reference 19 a series of interventions to make more effective and visible links between the city’s green and open spaces and improving the health Chapter 4 of Liverpool’s population. These include: Section 4.7 • 20 of the largest parks in Liverpool should be of equal quality and equally accessible to all communities • No person should live more than 300m from their nearest area of accessible natural green space of at least 2 hectares in size (and with a children’s play area) • Every person over the age of 60 years living in Liverpool should have access to a communal space, garden, allotment or raised bed within 500 metres of where they live, so that they can grow plants and vegetables • All GPs should be able to recommend a free activity (i.e. Health Walks, Green Gym etc.) in a park or as part of a community prescription in which patients with long term conditions participate in activity programmes – that are logged electronically • In 2017/18 aim to get 5,000 Liverpool Residents to visit a park that they have not visited before and a further 10,000 Liverpool residents in 2018/19.
Activity 20 City Council to continue to work with interested stakeholders to identify places to grow food across the city. Chapter 4 Section 4.7 21 to ensure a continuation of Liverpool’s proud heritage of creating national and international talent in football it is imperative that both Chapter 7 of the city’s football clubs and the Premier League and the city’s professional football clubs join with the FA and enter into dialogue Section 7.2 with the City Council to discuss the viability of funding and improving football pitch provision and management in the long-term. 22 the creation of a gaming experience of our parks. The concept of ‘gaming’ could be incorporated into park technologies that can Chapter 10 provide both and on-line an real time experience or activity. Section 10.2
110 Categorisation, Provision and Protection of Greenspace No Categorisation Reference 23 the land categorisation work continues as an essential tool for the future development and preservation of the city green and open Chapter 9 spaces. Section 9.4 Provision 24 the city takes steps to ensure that its Green Flag parks retain their status as high quality spaces. Green Flag parks provide the city Chapter 9 with nationally important spaces which can be used to promote the liveability and investment environment of Liverpool to external Section 9.6.1 partners. Protection 25 the concept of a Parks Trust or Trusts be explored and that subject to the establishment of a Parks Trust management model that ‘(a) Chapter 8 Shadow Board(s) of Trustees’ are created to oversee the development of the Trust(s). Section 8.2 26 no playgrounds/provision should be lost to development in Liverpool (without a like for like replacement in close proximity), and where Chapter 9 possible provision of play equipment should be improved. Section 9.6.1
111 Creation/Improvement of Green and Blue Spaces
No Green Spaces Reference 27 the ‘Green Web’ network forming the green web should be identified as a strategic investment within the Local Plan consultation to Chapter 9 ensure that developer contributions from sites located in proximity to the corridors can be generated to make financial contributions to Section 9.5.2 deliver the scheme. Given its spatial diversity and potential to deliver benefits across Liverpool the ‘Green Web’ may be able to deliver a multitude of social, economic and ecological benefits to the city that are cost-effective and make best use of the city’s existing green network and areas of brownfield land. 28 to kick start the green corridor work and realise the possibilities of the ‘Green Web’ initiative. The city council should work in Chapter 9 partnership and through the Horizon 2020 programme if possible to establish the first green corridor in the Baltic area, linking Bold Section 9.5.4 Street to the Arena on the waterfront. The Board also recommends the following specific corridors: • An area close to the Churchill Flyovers should be identified as a conduit for a wider Business District City Centre green corridor • The Eastern Corridor moving from the city centre to the city’s boundary • The Everton - Anfield corridor linking the city centre, Everton Valley, Anfield and Croxteth Hall Park • Southern corridor linking the city-centre with Sefton Park, Princes Park, Calderstones Park and Otterspool Promenade. 29 that stakeholders should work together to develop the vital link of the ‘Green Web’ between Newsham Park and Fairfield through to Chapter 9 Wavertree Technology Park and Wavertree Botanic Gardens. Section 9.5.2 30 the Mayor engages Merseytravel, MEAS and The Mersey Forest and other stakeholders to begin costing and planning the Green Chapter 9 Corridor network (or ‘Green Web’) in greater detail. The implementation of the ‘Green Web’, as embedded in the Local Plan, should Section 9.5.2 begin with an implementation plan for critical sites. 31 biodiversity should be a key consideration and form an integral part of the Local Plan consultation and the ‘Green Web’ vision for the Chapter 5 city. Section 5.4.1 32 two new areas of public woodland are developed. One in Kirkdale next to Kirkdale Station, now known as Melrose Cutting (formally Chapter 9 the ‘Ralla’ site) which could act as a community hub as well as a green corridor route spur to Kirkdale Station. The second opportunity Section 9.6.1 is to continue to work with the Mersey Forest and local communities to further explore the possibility of creating a new woodland at Fairfield, adjacent to Newsham Park in Kensington and Fairfield ward bordering Old Swan. 33 the Mayor and city to continue to engage with the British Horse Society (BHS) to co-ordinate a Liverpool City Horse Riding Strategy Chapter 9 and city-wide stabling/livery network linked to the ‘Green Web’’ Network. Section 9.6.1
112 No Blue Spaces Reference 34 United Utilities continue their work to investigate and model the effect of theoretical green space loss on future surface water flooding Chapter 5 within the city to provide a robust business-case for future investment in services and green infrastructure Section 5.2.1 35 all partners and stakeholders to continue to engage and creatively develop the city centre dock system as vital public space and Chapter 9 corridor routes. Section 9.6.1 36 dialogue should continue with the Canal and River Trust, Maritime Museum and other stakeholders to create a City Centre Stevedore Chapter 9 Adventure Park on the Graving Dock Dockside which will also increase connectivity in and around the Albert Dock area. Section 9.6.1 37 the city should engage with ‘Bluegreen’ to identify another Riverside Greenspace and investigate the potential for the development of Chapter 9 an ‘Eden of The North’: https://www.insidermedia.com/insider/northwest/pomona-island-green-space-set-for-prs-scheme Section 9.6.1
Capacity and resources
No Capacity and Resources Reference 38 the City Council commit to providing sufficient in-house capacity and resources to both explore and test Trust model options and Chapter 10 drive forward delivery of the key recommendations within this final report. Section 10.2
Chair’s comment:
My Liverpool ‘Green Vision’ proposes a multi-faceted approach to the long-term management of the city’s green and open spaces making use of a number of options/recommendations contained within the report. The central aim of the vision is to limit the constraints placed upon Liverpool City Council by current, and potential future austerity measures and enhance such spaces by strategically linking the following recommendations.
Following extensive discussion with stakeholders in the city and nationally I believe that the following approaches should be considered to finance future green and open space provision.
113 1.2 Chair’s Recommendations Figure 6. Proposed Charitable Federal Parks Clusters 1. A Parks Trust Throughout the review it has become clearer to me that a Parks Trust in some form could help to solve the ongoing financial maintenance of parks and green spaces whilst also protecting them in the longer term by transferring them to an independent body whose long term objective is solely to maintain, preserve and enhance them for all to enjoy. Whilst other financial models may seek to balance the books in the short- term, they often fail to address the potential long-term sustainability that a Parks Trust could offer. I believe it is only by transferring our parks to a Trust or similar organisation that we can free them from the financial constraints of City Council control and allow them to generate an income that can support them in the future. The process will be overseen by a Shadow Board of Trustees/Management Team who will work with local stakeholders to ensure the funding and management of the city’s parks remains effective. Each sub-management team will report to the overarching Parks Trust Board of Trustees. The proposed Parks Trust for Liverpool makes use of a ‘blended finance model’ to support short and long-term investment in the city’s green and open spaces. A ‘blended finance model’ is one that operates on endowment, commercialisation, financial gifts and other support. To ensure the successful migration from planning to implementation the proposal is to use a tiered hierarchy of sites linked through a Federal Park Trust structure. In practice Liverpool could be categorised into six clusters using Tier 1 parks as the financial ‘anchor’ that other lower tier parks and spaces can ‘tie onto’ for management and funding purposes. The Tier 1 parks will be used to Tier 1 Parks attract funding which will cascade down to the lower tiered sites under the Cemeteries and Crematoria Charitable Federal Parks Trust model. Funding will be obtained from a range of sources discussed within the report. Non-Parks Trust Sport Figure 6 highlights the initial conceptualisation of the proposed clusters and Key Housing Association Areas provides a draft working illustration of how clusters could be formed. The separate clusters each contain an identified Tier 1 park and a range of other green and open spaces. The clusters encourage local focus and continued community /stakeholder engagement, whilst providing a degree of flexibility to use the commercial spaces most effectively. However, in order to apply economies of scale and strategic planning, the clusters would all form part of a single Charitable Federal Parks Trust. © Crown copyright and database rights 2016 Ordnance Survey 100018351
114 Putting all our beautiful parks into a Charitable Trust and thus removing 3. External Green Space Funding them from the political agenda and securing them in a legal framework for generations to come would be on the understanding that all such assets In support of green space improvement and the delivery of some of the would continue to be the property of the people of Liverpool but safeguarded recommendations made within this report it will be important to work in the longer term under lease to The Liverpool Parks Trust. with stakeholders and external funding bodies to attract the capital and investment needed to realise the City’s vision for its green spaces. An opportunity currently exists for the city council to work with the Heritage Chair’s Recommendation: Lottery Funding (HLF) to investigate an application for between £100,000 - £250,000 Resilience Funding to aid the city to develop the institutional I therefore recommend that The Mayor and Liverpool City framework and buy-in from key partners/stakeholders for a Parks Trust Council work with relevant partners to explore the options structure for Liverpool. This is a timely opportunity to work collaboratively with some other core cities that are on a similar green space journey and and seek to endow an Independent Charitable Parks Trust should be embraced by Liverpool City Council. for Liverpool. Together with the Board, I strongly endorse the current work in the City Council to develop an EU Horizon 2020 funding application that could attract financial support for research and investment in developing green corridors 2. Green Space Maintenance and in the city. If successful, this work would help to deliver and retrofit green corridors into urban areas; delivering both on the recommendations within Development Funding this review and that of the Mayoral Commission on Sustainability. To support future maintenance of green space for a Trust or other financial model it is critical that the revenue generated by the assets within the park can be ring fenced for the future maintenance of green and open spaces.
Chair’s Recommendation:
I therefore recommend that Liverpool City Council Chair’s Recommendation: investigates funding opportunities through the Heritage I therefore recommend that capital receipts of any green or Lottery Fund to further explore the Parks Trust Vision and open space sale be retained to fund the maintenance and that the City Council also continues to assess the viability of development of the city’s other green spaces and recommend other funding mechanisms to support future green and open that a minimum of 50% of any sale or uplift be retained to fund space provision. green space management.
115 4. Liverpool ‘Green Web’ hidden woodland and rediscover forgotten bridges and ancient byways. Let’s not be ruled by the accountants and get on with it. One senior Council Officer pointed out that if Sustrans had ever worked out how much it would Chair’s Recommendation: cost to maintain the bridge decks on the Loop Line then they would never have built it. Thank heavens they didn’t or that fabulous facility, my favourite I recommend that a proposed ‘Green Web’ (a network of bike route, would not exist! linking green corridors) be integrated and be taken forward The progress Liverpool has made to date, where it is now and the journey in the Liverpool City Council Local Plan at the earliest that lies ahead is perhaps best illustrated and captured below using the NESTA Seven Stages for Innovation in Figure 7. possible juncture. Having started at stage one in December 2014 the work of the Board has over the last 18 months carried Liverpool through the first 4 stages, positioning us strongly and enabling us to make a solid case to progress this work further through to its conclusion. There is still a way to go, both on delivering the recommendations and making the parks more financially sustainable. The City Council will need to provide I believe that the ‘Green Web’ provides a spatial structure to support socio- continued support and capacity to drive forward this work and to maximise economic development in the city, as well as being essential to regulating, the benefits that a new way of working can potentially bring. supporting and providing ecological services. Joined up working between If Liverpool can pull together the above recommendations, then not only officers in planning and environmental services will help to ensure continuity could it protect the long term future of green and open spaces it would also between the ‘Green Web’ and the Local Plan preparations and consultation progress the existing legacy and demonstrate that Liverpool continues to Within the ‘Green Web’ there are also a number of strategic projects that I lead the way and retain its place as a city of innovation on the global stage. feel could be fast-tracked and/or promoted as key components of the city’s environmental resource base. Specific projects include the Everton Valley green link, the Friends of the Flyover project, and the provision of an east- west corridor linking the River Mersey, city centre and the Merseyside Green Belt. At the same time, I ask the whole city to grasp the opportunity of building the ‘Green Web’ traffic free corridors so Liverpool can catch up with other world class smart cities as this century develops. The city, housing developers, commercial stakeholders, health and infrastructure partners should commit to the strategic planning and delivery of a network for the people of the city and region to enjoy. Where possible this scheme should seek to incorporate the creative vision amongst us and we should embrace opportunities to build a Flyover Park, create Walks on Water and integrate Horse and equestrian facilities all over and before the window of opportunity closes uncover a
116 Figure 7. Liverpool’s 7 Stages for Innovation (using the NESTA 7 Stages for Innovation).
2. Board consults 1. Review January 2015 December 2014 onwards 7. Implementation 2018 onwards Generating 2 Ideas Changing Systems 7 Nesta 7 stages Opportunities 3. Interim Report 1 & Challenges December 2015 for Innovation Rethinking Parks Report 6. Decisions 2013 2018 onwards Developing 3 & Testing Growing Rethinking 6 & Scaling Parks Programme
Making Delivering 4 the Case 5 & Implementing
5. Heritage Lottery Bid (2016 to 2018) 4. Final Report Horizon 2020 Bid (2017 to 2020) October 2016 Glendale-Liverpool Ltd maintenance contract ends 2018 Alternative maintenance models 2017/18
117 © Mark Loudon
A beautiful view of a beautiful City
118 12. Chair’s Concluding Thoughts
Some 4,500 miles by train, 2,100 miles by bike and 410 miles by car and brownfield site on Edge Lane was the moment I realised the ‘Green Web’ over 7,000 miles travelled to see more than a 1,000 spaces in Liverpool and corridor network could be practically achieved. Rice Lane City Farm should in England. Searching for answers to the oddest and most engaging work I not be ‘Liverpool’s best kept secret’ anymore, it should be supported and have ever undertaken. advertised by all means possible! Wandering through a disused railway tunnel into pristine woodland in Kirkdale was fabulously uplifting. The Isla The conclusion: there is no single answer, yet. Gladstone in Stanley Park is a shining example of how commercialisation However, with the right commitment, I truly believe that Liverpool could be in parks can be achieved. Larkhill Gardens, Dutch Farm and Scargreen are the place where answers can be found. We are looking for a new way of all brilliant parks just a few miles from my front door that I never even knew enhancing and protecting our green spaces, one that offers security for the existed. future, and uses the city’s landscape as part of the offer to develop the city for Perhaps the most important park of all to me - that all of the Board Members 21st Century living. A model that can to be replicated in cities around the UK . are sick of hearing me mention is Doric Park in Old Swan. It is in fact a very Many people doubted Joe’s wisdom in inviting me, a loose cannon, into the ordinary park but to the people who live in the terraced streets surrounding Council. Many people (including me) thought I was mad to accept a role it, Doric Park is irreplaceable. It symbolizes many such public parks and within the seemingly opaque political world of local council. Yet it seems to green spaces around our city and throughout the country. It is part of the have worked. community and will hopefully remain so for many years. During hours of Being independent, whilst having the Liverpool City brand supporting me, debate in the boardroom and with the public, listening to expert advice and has allowed me (and the Board) to engage with people and organisations reading detailed evidence suggesting ways of maintaining our green and in a frank and enquiring manner and ask blunt questions without an overtly open spaces in these difficult times, I have repeatedly asked the question political agenda or bias. Along the way I have met some truly inspirational “What about Doric Park?” If any model or alternative regime being proposed people, too numerous to mention here, but thanks to all those energetic doesn’t solve the maintenance issues and future security of the likes of Doric souls who patiently, and enthusiastically, answered my sometimes obvious Park then, to me, whatever is being proposed is not good enough. questions, and championed their personal passions and ideas, a number of which are just too good to ignore.
Some of the places I have visited have also been inspiring. Again too many to list but around Liverpool a few have really stuck with me. The scrubby
119 It is worth mentioning that I got involved with this process due to a local facilities where they are most needed and the announcement of a new park campaign I felt very strongly about. Campaigning for something you care in Kirkdale, Melrose Cutting, which was a direct result of the ongoing work about passionately is hard work and takes dedication. Sometimes the of the review. result is not what you wanted but the ripples can become waves. However, Many of the other recommendations are also being progressed and several throughout all the discussions, all the arguments, and all the evidence there have been further explored and are re-presented within the final report; must be space for a rational discussion. Following such a process I would specifically those around new provision of green and open space, equality like to applaud both the campaigners and the Mayor for ensuring that Walton and accessibility to green space, outdoor play provision, the continued Hall Park will be there for future generations. exploration of community asset transfer for some spaces, ongoing work Drawing together the disparate strands of this process, I, as the Chair of the to investigate alternative financial models and a greater analysis on green Review, would like to do three things. space and associated health and wellbeing issues.
Firstly, I would like to thank the Board, the City Council and all the amazing Thirdly I ask for action not just words. I believe that if the recommendations individuals I have encountered, for their support and expertise which has and objectives are acted upon then our already beautiful green city would be been crucial in framing this Review. what it has been on many occasions during its history, a beacon of innovation and creativity for others to follow. Secondly, I would like to reflect on the Interim Report which identified 31 interim recommendations and outlined some key objectives for the final The development of the Green and Open Spaces Review has not been report recommendations. Since the publication of the Interim Report in straightforward. Neither has it been a process of agreement between the December 2015, it is pleasing to note that despite the difficult financial and Board Members, Liverpool City Council and the public. However, what it has capacity restrictions that the council is currently operating under, the green done is to bring a number of very emotive issues into a public forum leading space agenda has been prioritised and there are a number of examples to a much needed discussion of what green and open spaces mean to the where recommendations have been significantly progressed. These people of Liverpool, and how, in a time of austerity, the City Council (and include the development of the ‘Green Web’ initiative and its inclusion in the other partners) can finance their provision and management in the future. emerging Local Plan, the launch of the Environmental Initiative Fund, £1m Following the collection, discussion and exploration of the evidence presented, of funding being made available to address inadequacies in outdoor play the Mayoral Commission has identified a number of recommendations provision across the city to both improve existing facilities and build new aimed at managing the city’s green and open spaces in the long-term. These
120 are presented in the Recommendation Chapter of this report, where they There are other answers if the political will and vision is there. As well as have been grouped thematically and are additionally complemented by the developing the ways to link these precious places, all public green space 4 priority actions which I believe will yield the greatest impact in the shortest should be legally protected in perpetuity and Liverpool will continue to be a period of time. place I am proud to call home.
I end by once more emphasising the importance historically, presently and for the future of our green and open spaces. Liverpool is blessed with beautiful Parks and fabulous green and blue spaces. An amazing asset way beyond the understanding of hawkish number crunchers. The national population will continue to rise and my extensive travels with work have taught me that Simon O’Brien. what Liverpool has to offer is head and shoulders above most other cities, Chair of the Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review Board so people will come and make it home in ever increasing numbers but that increase will never be an excuse to build on public spaces. The complete opposite is true as the value of ‘space’ increases. Furthermore, in difficult financial times, the temptation to sell off the family jewels is obvious. With regard to Parks and public green spaces, such short-term thinking is folly.
121 Priceless ...... (Doric Park)
122 Glossary of Terms & Acronyms
Term/Acronyms: Full Description: 3G (Pitches) They refer to ‘third generation’ and types of artificial turf. The general idea is that the more G, the more technological advancement it incorporates, and the closer it should resemble playing on real grass. AGP Artificial Grass Pitches. ANGSt The accessible Green and Open Space Standards released by Natural England. APSE Association of Public Service Excellence. AQMA Air Quality Management Areas. AQAP Air Quality Action Plan. BID Business Improvement District. BSS British Safety Standards. CCG Clinical Commissioning Group. CAF Corporate Access Forum. CAG 2010 Citrix Access Gateway Hardware Installation & Set Up Guide. Cartif CARTIF develops research and development projects, directly funded by companies or public funds raised through competitive calls for national and international level. CARTIF also advises public authorities (municipalities and regional governments) in the planning and development of innovative projects with high economic returns. CIL Community Infrastructure Levy. CLASP 2016 Challenge Lead Applied Systems Programme. COPD Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. FA Football Association, The. FRMS 2016 Flood Risk Management Strategies. GIS Geographic Information System, is a system designed to capture, store, manipulate, analyse, manage and present all types of spatial or geographical data. GP General Practitioner (Doctor) Green Belt Green belt or greenbelt policy and land use designation use in land use planning to retain areas of largely undeveloped, wild or agricultural urban areas. Green Corridors A green corridor, wildlife corridor or habitat corridor is an area of habitat connecting wildlife populations separated by human activities or structures (such as roads, development, or logging). GVA Gross Value Added.
123 HLF Heritage Lottery Fund. HMRC Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs ILM Institute of Leadership and Management. KWSN Knowledge Quarter Strategic Network. LMH Liverpool Mutual Housing. LEAP Liverpool Environmental Advocate Team. The Local Plan The Local Plan sets out how Liverpool will plan its future development. It will guide new developments to appropriate locations, while protecting our natural environment and built heritage, and provides guidance to developers on submitting planning applications. The Local Plan is shaped by the National Planning Policy Framework – the top tier of planning policy. LTA Lawn Tennis Association. Meanwhile Space A space which will host an alternative interim, temporary or ‘meanwhile’ use (e.g. wildflower planting, community garden) pending the commencement of an otherwise agreed planning use for the site. MEAS Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service. MPs Elected Member of Parliament. NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NDD Nature Deficit Disorder. NBS Nature Based Solutions. NESTA An innovation charity that has been chosen by the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) to engage ‘exemplars’ projects to find possible solutions to the issue of financing green and open spaces. NERC National Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006). NPPF National Planning Policy Framework. PPS Playing Pitch Strategy. PASS Physical Activity and Sports Strategy. PRoW Public Rights of Way. Posit Puts forward as fact or as a basis for an argument. Purdah Purdah is the pre-election period in the United Kingdom, specifically the time between an announced election and the final election results. This time period prevents central and local government from making announcements about any new or controversial government initiatives (such as modernisation initiatives or administrative and legislative changes), which could be seen to be advantageous to an candidates or parties in the forthcoming election. RAMSAR A RAMSAR site is the land listed as a Wetland of International Importance under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (the RAMSAR Convention) 1973.
124 S106 Section 106 development agreements are a mechanism which makes a development proposal acceptable in planning terms that would not otherwise be acceptable. A section106 obligation can: • Restrict the development or use of the land in any specific way • Require specified operations or activities to be carried out in, on or over the land • Require the land to be used in any specific way or • Require the sum or sums to be paid to the authority (or, to the Greater London Authority) on a specified date or dates or periodically SFA Skills Funding Agency. SHLAA Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment. SLH South Liverpool Housing. Social Prescribing Social prescribing’ is defined by the Centre Forum Mental Health Commission as ‘a mechanism for linking patients with non-medical sources of support within the community’, including ‘opportunities for arts and creativity, physical activity, learning new skills, volunteering, mutual aid, befriending and self-help, as well as support with, for example, employment, benefits, housing, debt, legal advice, or parenting problems’ (Centre Forum Mental Health Commission, 2014; p6). In their informative review of social prescribing in the UK, Thomson, Camic and Chatterjee (2015) note how it has been brought about by the decentralisation of healthcare decision making from national to local government and is based on the notion that prevention is better than cure and the organisation of multi-agency and holistic approaches to healthcare. Actual models vary and include, for example, ‘Arts on Prescription’, ‘Books on Prescription’ and ‘Education on Prescription’. From the perspective of green and open spaces, relevant models would include ‘Exercise on Prescription’, ‘Green Gyms’ and green and open space- related ‘Healthy Living Initiatives’. SPA Special Protection Area. SuDS A sustainable drainage system (SuD) is designed to reduce the potential impact of new and existing developments with respect to surface water drainage discharges. SGOSRB Strategic Green & Open Spaces Review Board. ToR Terms of Reference. UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation. UK NEA National Ecosystem Assessment. UKCP09 UK Climate Projections. LCC Liverpool City Council. PPP Public Private Partnerships. Defra Dept of Environmental, Food and Rural Affairs.
125 126 List of Figures List of Tables Figure Figure Title Chapter Table Table Title Chapter Number Number 1 Health Map 4 1 Parks and Public Green Space Overall Costs 7 2016/17 2 Map of Football Association Hub Sites 7 2 Sports and Recreation Overall Costs 2016/17 7 3 Proposals for the Green Web routes 9 3 Strategic Green and Open Space Review Board 11 4 Existing outdoor play provision and planned new 9 Thematic Recommendations play provision and improvements 5 Illustrations of potential site at Brunswick Docks 9 for Eden Centre of the North Tourist Attraction 6 Proposed Charitable Federal Park Clusters 11 7 Liverpool’s 7 Stages for Innovation (using the 11 NESATA Stages for Innovation) List of Appendices Appendix Number Appendix Title Appendix 1 Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review Board, Terms of Reference, 2015 Appendix 2 Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review Board National, NESTA and other Visits April 2015 – October 2016 Appendix 3 Review of Evidence of Nature and Health Plan for Liverpool. A report by Dr. William Bird, Intelligent Health, 2016 Appendix 4a Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service – Biodiversity Evidence base Report, October 2015 Appendix 4b Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service – Assessment of Biodiversity Value in Liverpool, October 2015 Appendix 5 Analysis of Parks and Other Costs/Income for Liverpool City Council, July 2016 Appendix 6 Analysis of Glendale Liverpool Limited Contract Costs and Related Income, 2016 Appendix 7 Burnley’s Green Space Strategy, 2015 - 2025 Appendix 8 Acrehurst Park Presentation, Riverside Appendix 9 List of sites surveyed and visited in Liverpool for the Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review Appendix 10 Bibliography Please note all appendices for the interim and final report can be downloaded atliverpool.gov.uk/greenandopenspaces
127 128 Appendix 1 Analysis of Parks and Other Costs/Income for Liverpool City Council, July 2016 Simon O’Brien Chair of the SGOSRB: By Invitation: External organisations and community interest groups who can strategically input into the future of Green and Open Spaces use and Dr. Juliet Staples Strategic Support to the Chair: development within Liverpool, as and when required. (acting as Committee Secretary) 1.0 Purpose: Cllr Stephen Munby: Cabinet Member 1.1 The purpose of the Review Board is to provide strategic direction and Steve Stuart: Brabners Stuart (retired) recommendations to the Mayor/Cabinet/Council to make decisions in Cllr Malcolm Kennedy: Cabinet Member respect of the allocation of Strategic Green and Open Spaces for the benefit of the local communities of Liverpool. Maxine Ennis: CEO The Rotunda 1.2 The Review Board will operate as a key advisor on strategic green David Hughes: Former Head of Planning, LCC space planning, identifying benefits, testing solutions (both conceptual Malcolm Kelly: Director, Woolton Youth Club and real) and risk management. It will seek to align green spaces with Ron Odunaiya: Director of Community Services, the Council’s strategic priorities for the City. Liverpool City Council Victoria James: Local Entrepreneur 1.3 It has ultimate accountability for the Strategic Review of Green and Professor Richard Meegan Professor of Economic Geography, Open Spaces and acts as the ultimate point of reference for the European Institute for Urban Affairs, development and allocation of land types (as set out below) across Liverpool John Moores University Liverpool. Dr Ian Mell Lecturer in Planning & Civic Design University of Liverpool 2.0 Timescales: The Review Board will meet monthly and is expected to have concluded its Stephen Claus Board Observer: Brabners Stuart, review in six months, with final conclusion within twelve months. Liverpool The Board to be further supported by: Simon McEneny (Assistant Director, 3.0 Decision and Activity Areas are: Physical Assets); Derek Dottie (Parks (retired)); Mike Eccles (Planning); Peter 3.1 Challenging and owning of the strategic review, associated with the Cosgrove (Glendale); Cllr Peter Mitchell (Parks); Mike Brown (Divisional green and open space set out in section 4 .0 below. Manager, Streetscene). 3.2 Reviewing and making recommendations to the Council on open and External Partners with interest in Green & Open Spaces: Nature Connected; green spaces provision, including options and type. Liverpool Park Friends Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), Mersey Forest; The Land Trust; Liverpool Vision; Housing Associations; Wild Life 3.3 To ensure that equitable access and corridors of green spaces exists Trust; Friends of the Earth; Universities; & Elected Members. across Liverpool.
129 3.4 Supporting communication and stakeholder management in the 4.4.4 Incidental green and open space – that could be transferred to other strategic land review process. individuals or organisations. 3.5 Providing comments and guidance in the development of future 4.4.5 Land with a strategic value to the Council - whether that is through maintenance and ownership to enable a sustainable model(s) of open financial disposal to a developer; development of the land by the space provision. (This may involve looking at other models operated Council; or for wider regeneration and/or multifunctional benefits. across the country). 4.5 Green Space & Open Spaces Maintenance – To facilitate the 4.0 Business Objectives for the Board: development of a model that allows for the most appropriate methods for sustainable future management of green and open 4.1 The Green & Open Spaces Review Board will consider, challenge spaces. and make recommendations on the following areas: Consideration should be given to the types of funding models that will 4.2 Green & Open Space Provision – The city needs to improve and enable sustainable open space provision, together with a management preserve its green and open spaces for the future generations of and maintenance position whilst ensuring that open space aligns with the our city. It is important that we use our green and open spaces Council’s wider strategic priorities, such as a cleaner greener Liverpool, in a sustainable way, making sure that they meet the needs of our economic growth, health, wellbeing, and community cohesion. communities. 5.0 Frequency of Meetings: 4.3 Green Spaces Equitable Access for All - Successful, thriving and prosperous communities are characterised by streets, parks and 5.1 The Strategic Review Board will meet initially monthly; this is subject open spaces that are maintained, clean, safe, attractive areas that to change and is expected to be adjusted, as and when based upon local people are proud of and want to spend their time in. We need the key milestones (to be developed with the Board). to ensure our green and open spaces are equitable and accessible to the communities they serve. 6.0 Communications and Governance: 4.4 Land Identification & Ownership - Consider the key issues 6.1 All Board Members to abide to the Officer and Member Code of associated with land use in order to allow the Council to make Conduct as attached at Appendix 1. decisions in relation to land ownership, equitable access, 6.2 The Board to develop and approve a clear Communications Process development and management. The project will review and agree and Standards. the existing land assets and type. The following five categories are a suggested approach and a clear definition needs to be established 7.0 Expenditure and Commissioning: by the Board for each category. 7.1 Board Members will be reimbursed for travel and subsistence 4.4.1 Large strategic open spaces such as parkland and lakes. expenses (see proforma attached as Appendix 2). 4.4.2 Land of community value – that provides local equitable access and 7.2 Where identified and approved by the Council, the Board will contributes to local community cohesion. commission independent assessments/surveys as required to 4.4.3 Green Corridors – Green and open spaces that physically link sites achieve the outputs identified below. and movement corridors for people and urban wildlife.
130 8.0 Agenda: 1. Actions from previous meeting 2. Review topic and consideration 3. Performance and status, progress; milestones; issues, risks and actions 4. AOB 9.0 Inputs and Outputs: 9.1 Input: 1. Actions from previous Meeting 2. Programme Board report(s) 3. Presentations & Site Visits 9.2 Output: 1. Actions agreed /updated (including overall RAG status and review comments) 2. Land use and associated key issues relating to sustainability, equity and ownership (Strategic Overview key sites, ward by ward review) 3. Future management and maintenance options for open spaces 4. Final report from the review board 10.0 Financials: 10.1 There are a number of financial considerations that need to be managed and monitored as part of the work. It is expected that the view of the Board will be concluded within 12 months and will be reviewed at 3 and 6 months: • Payment of cost and expenses of the Chair and Board • Board support to be provided for up to 12 months • Project lead to be provided for up to 12 months • GIS support to be provided for up to 12 months
131 Appendix 5 Glendale Site Bill of Quantities by Area, by Cost and by Hectarage 2016/17
Based on desktop analysis
Site Hectares Cost per Hectare Annual Cost Anfield Cemetery - Maintenance 44.160 £3,085.09 £136,237.39 Everton Cemetery - Maintenance 19.830 £3,254.94 £64,545.38 Kirkdale Cemetery - Maintenance 12.350 £2,867.29 £35,411.05 West Derby Cemetery - Maintenance 18.240 £3,259.35 £59,450.62 West Derby Cemetery (Jewish) - Maintenance 0.712 £9,767.51 £6,949.58 Allerton Cemetery - Jewish & Springwood (Maintenance) 6.890 £5,738.42 £39,537.70 Allerton Cemetery (Maintenance) 21.730 £7,825.49 £170,047.91 Toxteth Cemetery - Maintenance 18.600 £3,238.08 £60,228.23 Anfield Crematorium 0.473 £93,952.92 £44,477.31 Springwood Crematorium 2.847 £26,377.33 £75,090.99 St Georges Church 0.263 £12,028.63 £3,168.34 St Mary’s Church Walton 0.115 £7,758.00 £892.17 Holy Trinity Church 0.966 £4,873.73 £4,706.56 St James Church 0.390 £18,039.74 £7,035.50 St Nicholas Church Gardens 0.241 £50,317.52 £12,116.46 Croxteth Country Park 45.100 £2,771.13 £124,978.09 Everton Park 23.746 £2,320.32 £55,098.96 Newsham Park 37.433 £3,175.45 £118,867.21 Stanley Park 24.590 £7,528.56 £185,124.19 Walton Hall Park\ Walton Soccer Centre 55.360 £2,852.70 £157,925.65 Botanic Gardens/Wavertree Park 19.653 £5,583.66 £109,735.65
132 Site Hectares Cost per Hectare Annual Cost Calderstones Park 48.470 £3,067.20 £148,666.97 Otterspool Park 12.210 £2,429.98 £29,670.07 Otterspool Promenade 18.431 £4,345.13 £80,086.33 Princes Park 15.911 £4,537.34 £72,195.00 Sefton Park 50.100 £3,885.14 £194,646.19 Lower Breck Recreation Ground 9.684 £4,017.97 £38,908.40 Norris Green Park 6.729 £5,085.19 £34,219.25 Rice Lane Recreation Ground 8.241 £2,900.44 £23,903.09 Sheil Park Open Space 1.301 £7,413.31 £9,644.72 Springfield Park 9.040 £3,307.01 £29,894.40 Allerton Towers 8.530 £6,383.98 £54,455.38 Belle Vale Park 4.984 £6,296.28 £31,379.42 Clarke Gardens 14.270 £3,351.66 £47,828.18 Garston Recreation Ground (Long Lane) 12.280 £4,836.19 £59,388.41 Netherley Park 9.498 £1,882.12 £17,876.57 Sudley Estate 80.540 £526.21 £42,380.87 Wavertree Playground (The Mystery) 34.160 £2,973.64 £101,580.75 Wood Lane Recreation Ground 14.887 £1,541.09 £22,941.81 Woolton Wood & Camphill 19.427 £5,810.84 £112,887.71 Adlam Park 3.556 £5,899.01 £20,976.88 Alf Langly (Crocus Street) Playground 0.000 £0.00 £1,155.46 Alt Park 2.553 £4,453.45 £11,369.65 Altcourse POS (Brookfield Drive) 2.888 £817.25 £2,360.38 Atlantic Park 1.688 £9,362.14 £15,806.10 Barnfield D.P.F. (Bill Shankley) 4.800 £4,321.11 £20,741.33 Birchfield Park 0.247 £16,622.41 £4,109.06
133 Site Hectares Cost per Hectare Annual Cost Canalside Park 4.823 £3,636.50 £17,538.85 Cantril Farm Park 2.155 £3,553.91 £7,659.39 Circular Road East Recreation Ground - Leisure 0.467 £37,784.83 £17,656.85 Clubmoor Recreation Ground 10.331 £3,074.67 £31,764.42 Croxteth Sports Centre 0.670 £10,279.58 £6,887.32 Devonfield Gardens 0.400 £37,195.65 £14,893.14 Doric Park (Wharncliffe Rec) 2.294 £6,222.40 £14,275.42 Dovecot Park 7.726 £2,792.32 £21,572.04 Everton Park (China Street) 0.000 £0.00 £2,310.91 Everton Park Nature Garden 0.405 £13,496.91 £5,464.90 Everton Sports Centre 6.005 £4,546.85 £27,305.68 Everton Terrace Playground 0.000 £0.00 £1,155.46 Fazakerley Fields 0.000 £0.00 £437.77 Fazakerley Woods 11.300 £44.15 £498.86 Grant Gardens 1.655 £2,615.12 £4,326.97 Hawksmoor Park 2.555 £2,164.59 £5,529.65 Joe Stone Recreation Ground 11.805 £2,318.60 £27,371.13 Kirkdale Recreation Ground 2.213 £3,661.76 £8,102.74 Larkhill Gardens 1.155 £8,064.57 £9,314.58 Maiden Lane D.P.F. 2.156 £2,455.58 £5,294.24 Midghall Street Playground 0.000 £0.00 £1,155.46 Muirhead Avenue Gardens Playground 0.000 £0.00 £1,155.46 Norwood Grove POS 2.061 £2,036.24 £4,196.49 Parkview Recreation Ground 2.409 £3,198.07 £7,704.16 Peter Lloyd Sports Centre 0.721 £6,012.71 £4,336.97 Pythian Park (MUGA) 0.000 £0.00 £1,155.46 Scargreen Avenue D.P.F. 4.576 £3,383.78 £15,484.19 Seeds Lane Park 3.907 £5,272.66 £20,601.86 Thirlmere POS Playground 0.031 £82,954.17 £2,588.17
134 Site Hectares Cost per Hectare Annual Cost Thomas Lane Playing Field 5.689 £2,929.39 £16,663.81 Townsend Lane D.P.F. 3.556 £4,145.38 £14,740.97 Walker D.P.F. 5.047 £2,854.45 £14,406.71 Walton (Cherry Lane) Recreation Ground 1.598 £5,420.14 £8,659.76 Warbreck Moor Recreation Ground 1.249 £9,345.65 £11,675.52 Whitley Gardens 2.399 £2,969.44 £7,123.69 William Cliffe Recreation Ground 1.157 £3,545.20 £4,101.80 William Collins POS - Leisure 5.788 £3,180.60 £18,409.65 Aigburth Vale Playground 0.321 £22,414.00 £7,185.93 Banks Road Recreation Ground 1.577 £7,796.30 £12,290.87 Barnham Drive Playing Field 6.792 £2,172.50 £14,756.07 Black Wood 0.000 £0.00 £3,178.18 Blackrod Avenue Recreation Ground 0.920 £9,241.04 £8,498.98 Caldway Drive Recreation Ground 5.450 £3,166.05 £17,254.96 Childwall Woods & Fields 3.923 £987.09 £3,871.88 Crown Street POS 2.980 £4,457.87 £13,283.55 Dingle Recreation Ground 0.863 £5,335.79 £4,605.85 Dutch Farm Recreation Ground 0.655 £4,642.95 £3,042.99 Gateacre Recreation Ground 1.682 £3,072.86 £5,169.47 Greenbank D.P.F. 2.161 £4,284.82 £9,260.79 Greenbank Park 3.761 £14,286.23 £53,731.95 Holt Recreation Ground 6.503 £1,985.88 £12,914.76 Jericho Lane Playing Fields (Boys) 4.787 £4,959.92 £23,742.63 Jericho Lane Playing Fields (Girls) 3.418 £2,734.54 £9,345.58 King George V Playing Fields 3.980 £778.45 £3,098.23 Little Heath D.P.F. 2.601 £2,990.03 £7,777.06 Lyndene Recreation Ground 3.871 £2,132.98 £8,256.75 Mersey Road Playing Fields 4.324 £3,076.33 £13,302.03 Millwood/Alder Plantation 0.000 £0.00 £1,993.74
135 Site Hectares Cost per Hectare Annual Cost Northway Recreation Ground 3.349 £3,656.61 £12,245.99 Park Road Sports Centre 0.593 £9,580.44 £5,681.20 Parkhill Playground 0.000 £0.00 £1,416.07 Picton Playground (Mill Lane) 0.578 £14,929.62 £8,633.80 Priory Wood 0.541 £8,390.83 £4,536.08 Rathbone Recreation Ground 2.330 £1,967.05 £4,583.23 Reynolds Park 4.123 £22,063.77 £90,962.29 Riverside Promenade (Green Space) 4.160 £3,884.11 £16,157.88 Roscoe Gardens 0.083 £38,948.85 £3,228.86 Sandon Street Garden 0.140 £14,169.26 £1,982.28 Sandown Park Playing Field 2.945 £2,545.12 £7,495.38 Score Lane Gardens 3.850 £4,462.97 £17,180.22 Shorefields Comp D.P.F. 3.359 £1,973.19 £6,627.37 Springwood Recreation Ground 2.432 £8,060.59 £19,602.54 St Agnes Playground 0.000 £0.00 £3,002.45 St James Gardens 0.802 £10,329.73 £8,282.38 St James Mount 0.490 £22,017.86 £10,797.56 St Johns Gardens 1.262 £27,182.35 £34,304.13 Stapleton Avenue Open Space 2.924 £3,381.83 £9,887.46 Palm House (Sefton Park) (Supply of Summer Bedding Only) 0.000 £0.00 Lester Gardens 1.185 £4,911.91 £5,821.11 Queens Drive Rest Gardens 0.232 £10,526.17 £2,437.86 Radcliffe POS Playground 0.000 £0.00 £1,155.46
136 Site Hectares Cost per Hectare Annual Cost Richmond Park Playground 0.000 £0.00 £1,155.46 St Martin’s Recreation Ground 0.642 £10,342.78 £6,641.10 Stalmine Road Gardens 0.592 £6,501.12 £3,846.71 Childwall POS Playground (Valley Rec) 0.000 £0.00 £1,295.27 Faulkner Square Park 0.650 £28,118.48 £18,274.20 Great George Square 0.443 £16,770.96 £7,421.15 Lyon Street Playground 0.000 £0.00 £1,155.46 Quarry Street Playground 0.388 £18,789.85 £7,296.10 St Lukes Church 0.424 £30,672.61 £13,011.32 The Venny Playground (Speke Adventure Playground) 0.000 £0.00 £2,311.00 Upper Hill Street Playground 0.000 £0.00 £3,399.17 Citywide Interments (6 Cemeteries) 2000.000 £286.11 £572,228.00 Tree Provison 955.502 £51.81 £49,500.00 Playgrounds Repairs - Labour & Materials 85 £820.94 £69,780.00 Infrastructure Repairs - Labour & Materials 955.502 £0.00 City Wide Astro Turf - Synthetic Pitches 22.000 £1,305.63 £28,723.87
Total Hectareage Average Cost Per Hectare Total Cost
955.502 £4,586.95 £4,382,840.43
137 Appendix 6 Analysis of Glendale Liverpool Limited Contract Costs and Related Income, 2016
Parks & Other Green Space COST Parks & Other Green Space COST Description Value £ Description Value £ Parks & Play Grounds maintenance 2,081,568 Parks & Play Grounds maintenance 2,081,568 Sports Pitches in Parks 150,000 Sports Pitches in Parks 150,000 Public Open Space 51,811 Public Open Space 51,811 Staffing LCC client 252,000 Staffing LCC client 252,000 Utilities 200,000 Utilities 200,000 Depreciation 390,281 Depreciation 390,281 CSSR’s 578,396 CSSR’s 578,396 Client Maintenance Budget 50,000 Client Maintenance Budget 50,000 Total 3,754,056 Total 3,754,056
Parks & Other Green Space INCOME Croxteth Hall & CP COST Description Value £ Description Value £ Stanley car park -332,600 Hall & CP 1,022,397 Funfairs -15,000 Glendales 151,600 Concessions & rents -40,000 Staff 326,080 Total -387,600 27600 Total 1,527,677
Total Parks Cost (Nett) 3,366,456
138 Croxteth Hall & CP INCOME Description Value £ Events & Sales 189,742 Property Rents 340,172 Concessions 94,176 Ice cream 28,692 Total 652,782
Cemeteries & Crematorium COST Description Value £ Comments Employees 942,000 Grounds Maintenance 2,313,861 Includes £1.3m Glendale-Liverpool contract efficiencies to be reallocated to parks Premises, utilities & Supplies etc 1,670,904 Inc central recharges
Total 4,926,765
Cemeteries & Crematorium INCOME Description Value £ Burials & Cremations 4,926,765 Total 4,926,765
139 Appendix 10 Bibliography
Abrahams, P. M. (2010). Stakeholders’ Atlanta Beltline Inc. (2015). Atlanta Beltline Bird, W., (2004). Natural Fit: Can Green Space perceptions of pedestrian accessibility to green Homepage. Retrieved January 1, 2015, from and Biodiversity Increase Levels of Physical infrastructure: Fort Worth’s urban villages. (T. R. www.beltline.org Activity? Ozdil, Ed.)ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. Barber, A. (2007) . ‘Urban Green Space’, in Bixler, R. D. & Floyd, M. F., (1997). Environment Architecture. Cavill, N. (ed) Building Health: Creating and and Behaviour, 29, 443-467. Tzoulas, K. et al., Ahern, J. (2007). Planning and design for enhancing places for healthy, active lives: What 2007, Landscape and Urban Planning, 81, 167- sustainable and resilient cities: theories, can be done? London: National Heart Forum, pp. 178. strategies and best practice for green 41-47. Boles, N. (2014). Right to Build: Nick Boles Tells infrastructure. Barton, H and Grant, M (2006). ‘A Health map Councils to Offer Land for Self-Builds –‘Or Be Ahern, J. (2013). Urban landscape sustainability for the local human habitat’, The Journal for the Sued’. Guardian Article. and resilience: the promise and challenges of Royal Society for the Promotion of Health, 126 Booske, B.C., Athens, J.K., Kinding, D.A., integrating ecology with urban planning and (6).pp.252-253 Park, H. and Remington, P.L., (2010). design. Landscape Ecology, 28(6), 1203–1212. Barton, J. & Pretty, J., (2010). Environmental ‘Different Perspectives for Assigning Weights to Allen, J. and Balfour, R. (2014). Natural Science & Technology, 44, 3947-3955. Determinants of Health’, County Health Rankings Solutions for Tackling Health Inequalities, Working Paper, Madison (WI): University of Bates, G; McCoy, E; Murphy, R; Kornyk, N; London: Institute of Health Equity, University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. Suckley, D (2013) . Evaluating the provision of London. outdoor gym equipment. Uptake and impact in Bowler, D. E. et al., (2010). Landscape and Amati, M. (2008). Urban Green Belts in the Sefton, Merseyside: Summary Report. Urban Planning, 97, 147-155. Forest Research. Twenty-first Century. (M. Amati, Ed.). Farnham, Green infrastructure and the urban heat island. BBC News (2015). ‘Fairy control’ to halt tiny UK: Ashgate. Forest Research. doors in Somerset woods. BBC News Article. Arup (2010). Toxteth Smart Grid Area – Outline Bowler, D., Buyung-Ali, L., Knight, T. and Pullin Bird, SB, Emmett, BA, Sinclair, FL, Stevens, Wind Assessment. A. (2010). BMC Public Health, 10, 456. PA, Reynolds, A, Nicholson, S & Jones, T. Asad, Ali (undated). Role of Green Space in (2003). PONTBREN: Effects of tree planting on Bowler, DE, Buyung-Ali, L, Knight, TM & Pullin Sustainable Urban Environment: A case of agricultural soils and their functions. Centre for A, S. (2010). Urban greening to cool towns and Tehran (Iran). Paper by the Assistant Professor of Ecology & Hydrology, Bangor, Gwynedd. cities. A systematic review of the empirical Extension and Education, Faculty of Agricultural evidence Landscape and Urban Planning 97: Bird, W. (2016). Intelligent Health Review of Economics and Development, University of 147-155. evidence of nature and health and plan for Tehran, Iran. Liverpool: A Report, Reading: Intelligent Health. Preventative Medicine, 49, (6). pp. 50-505.
140 Bristow, C and Farrell, J (2015). Reward Your Cabe Space (2005). Start With the Park. Carter, T & Butler, C. (2008). Ecological World and Liverpool City Council. Presentation Creating Sustainable Urban Green Spaces impacts of replacing traditional roofs with to Workshop 3 Innovation, Isla Gladstone, in Areas of Housing Growth and Renewal. green roofs in two urban areas. Cities and the Liverpool. Published by the Commission for Architecture Environment 1:9-17. and the Built Environment. Brown, L,. et al (2014). Impact of draught on CLASP (2016). Environmental Resilience vector-borne diseases - how does one manage CABE Space (2005a). Does money grow on Resource and Support Info. Bulletin March risk? Public Health Volume 128 issue 1 p 28 - trees? London UK. Resource News and Policy Update. Data taken 37. from the National Centre for Enviromental Cabe Space (2006). Paying for Parks. Eight Information. Byrne, J. A., Lo, A. Y., & Jianjun, Y. (2015b). Models for Funding Urban Green Space. Residents’ understanding of the role of green Published by the Commission for Architecture Climate Change (Undated). The Effect on infrastructure for climate change adaptation and the Built Environment. our Health. YPTE Young People’s Trust for the in Hangzhou, China. Landscape and Urban Environment. Cabe Space (2009). Making the Invisible Planning, 138, 132–143. Visible: The Real Value of Park Assets. Published Climate Change Act 2008 (2008). London, CABE Space (2002). Streets of Shame. by the Commission for Architecture and the Built UK: HM Stationary Office. Summary of findings from “Public Attitudes Environment. Cochran, B; Rothfuss, B; Cochran, J (2015). to Architecture and the Built Environment.” Cabe Space (2010). Community Green: Using Connecting Health Care and Green Space – London, UK. Local Spaces to Tackle Inequality and Improve Trends in Hospital Charity Care. An Opportunity Cabe Space (2004). A Guide to producing park Health. Published by the Commission for for Investment in Nature and Health? Nature & and green space management plans. Published Architecture and the Built Environment. Health Discussion Note. Willamette Partnership by the Commission for Architecture and the Built Cabe Space (2010). Community-led Spaces Coley, R.L., Sullivan, W.C. and Kuo,F.E. Environment. – A Guide for Local Authorities and Community (1997). ‘Where does community grow? The Cabe Space (2004). Green Space Strategies: Groups. Published by the Commission for social context created by nature in urban public A Good Practice Guide. Published by the Architecture and the Built Environment & the housing’, Environ. Behav., 29, 468–494. Commission for Architecture and the Built Asset Transfer University. Collins, T, Empson, B, Leafe R & Lowe, J. Environment. (1997). Sustainable flood defene & habitat Cabe Space (2005). Decent Parks? Decent conservation in Estuaries - a strategic Cabe Space (2010). Managing Green Spaces. Behaviour? The Link between the Quality of framework. In proceedings of 32nd MAFF Seven Ingredients for Success. Published by Parks and User Behaviour. Published by the Conference of River & Coastal Engineers. the Commission for Architecture and the Built Commission for Architecture and the Built University of Loughbourough, July 2 - 4 1997. Environment. London UK. Environment. Communities and Local Government (2012). CAG (March 2010). Adapting to Climate National Planning Policy Framework. Published Change. Annexe to Liverpool City Council’s by Department for Communities and Local Climate Change Adaptive Action Plan, March Government. 2010.
141 Cookson, C. (2016). Climate change strongly Croucher K., Myers, L. and Bretherton, J. Doick, K. H., (2013). Air temperature regulation linked to UK flooding. Financial Times, Science (2008). The Links between green space and by urban trees and green infrastructure. Forest Editor. health: A critical literature review, Stirling: Research. Greenspace Scotland. Coombs E, Jones A P and Hillsdon M Dottie, D. (2015). A Parks Strategy for Liverpool. (2010). The relationship of physical activity CSDH (2008). Closing the gap in a generation: Presentation to Workshop 3 Innovation, 13th May and overweight to objectively measured green health equality through action on the social 2016, Isla Gladstone, Liverpool. space accessibility and use. Social Science and determinants of health. Final Report of the Dover, J. and Phillips,S., (Nov 2015). Particulate Medicine 70(6): 816–822. Commission on Social Determinants of Health, Pollution Capture by Green Screens along the A38 Geneva: WHO World Health Organisation. Coon, J.T., Boddy, K., Stein, K., Barton, J. and Bristol Street in Birmingham. Depledge, M.H. (2011). ‘Does Participating in Cullingworth, B., Nadin, V., Hart, T., Davoudi, S., Easyjet Traveller Magazine (2016). Where to Physical Activity in Outdoor Natural Environments Pendlebury, J., Vigar, G., Townshend, T. (2015) find a forest that floats. Article in The Traveller, Have a Greatere Effect on Physical and Mental . Town and Country Planning in the UK (15th ed.). Easyjet April 2016. Well-Being than Physical Activity Indoors? A Abingdon: Routledge. Systematic Review’, Enviro. Sci. Technol., 45, 5, Eight Point Plan for Englands National Parks Dahl, D and Lew, N. (2015). South Park Food 1761-1772 (2016). Defra. Bridge Wins Design Contest for Old 520 Floating Cosgrove, P. (2015). A Unique Partnership Bridges to Span Parts of the Duwarmish River England’s Community Forests and Forestry Success Story. Glendale Liverpool Limited. Waterfront with Parks and Gardens. KPLU News Commission. (2012). Benefits to Health and Presentation to Workshop 1 Finance 29th April for Seattle and the Northwest, USA. Web Article. Wellbeing of Trees and Green Spaces. Farnham. 2015, Croxteth Hall, Liverpool. Retrieved from http://www.communityforest.org. Davies, C. (2015). A Local Authority Perspective. uk/resources/case_study_health_and_wellbeing. Couch, C. and Karecha, J., (2006). Controlling Knowsley MBC. Presentation to Workshop 1 pdf urban sprawl: Some experiences from Liverpool. Finance 29th April 2015, Croxteth Hall, Liverpool. In: Cities, Volume 23, Issue 5, Amsterdam: English Nature (2007). A Natural Estate. De Vries, S, Verheij, R.A, Groenewegen, Elsevier, pp. 353-363. DOI: http://dx.doi. Commissioned on behalf of Neighbourhoods P.P., Spreeuwenberg, P. (2003). ‘Natural org/10.1016/j.cities.2006.05.003. Green. environments - healthy environments? An Countryside Agency & Groundwork. (2005). exploratory analysis of the relationship between Ennos, A.R. (2011). Quantifying the cooling The Countryside in and around towns: A vision greenspace and health’, Environment and benefits of urban trees. for connecting town and county in the pursuit of Planning A, 35(10):1717-1731. Ennos, R. (2011). Quantifying the cooling and sustainable development. Wetherby. Department of Communties and Local anti-flooding benefits of green infrastructure. Coutts, C., & Hahn, M. (2015). Green Government. (2012). National Planning Policy Available at www.sed.manchester.ac.uk/ Infrastructure, Ecosystem Services, and Human Framework. London. architecture/research/ecocities/news/documents/ Health. International Journal of Environmental UoM_Roland_Ennos.pdf Depledge, M. H. et al., (2011). Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(8), 9768–98. Science & Technology, 45, 4660-4665. http://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph120809768.
142 European Environment Agency (2013) . Goode, D. (2014). Nature in Towns and Cities. Groundwork (2005). Areas of Opportunity. A Environment and human health, EA Report No London: William Collins. review of local green space policy and guidance 5/2013, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the in a social housing context. Produced for Grahn, P. and Stigdotter, U.A. (2003). European Union. Neighbourhoods Green by Hannah Peabody ‘Landscape planning and stress’, Urban Forestry (Groundwork) in collaboration with Mathew Frith Fábos, J. G. (2004). Greenway planning in the and Urban Greening, 2(1), 1-18. (of Peabody Trust). United States: its origins and recent case studies. Gray, L. (2009). Floating Allotments - Allotments Landscape and Urban Planning, 68(2-3), 321–342. Hale, J., & Sadler, J. (2012). Resilient ecological on Canals to be offered to public. Telegraph solutions for urban regeneration. Engineering Faculty of Public Health (2010). Great Outdoors: article produced by Louise Gray, Environment Sustainability, 165(1), 59–67. How Our Natural Health Service Uses Green Correspondent. Space to Improve Wellbeing - Briefing Statement, Harrison, C., Burgess, J., Milward, A., & Dawe, Green Infrastructure North West. (2010). London: Faculty of Public Health in association G. (1995). Accessible natural greenspace in Liverpool Green Infrastructure Strategy. Liverpool with Natural England. towns and cities: A review of appropriate size and City Council UK. distance criteria. English Nature Research Reports Fitzsimons, J., Pearson, C. J., Lawson, C., & Greenspace (2013). An opportunity for change: No. 153. Peterborough UK. Hill, M. J. (2012). Evaluation of land-use planning Exploring the Trust option for parks and green in greenbelts based on intrinsic characteristics Hartig, T, Mitchell, R, de Vries, S, & Frumkin, space services. A practical guide to the feasibility and stakeholder values. Landscape and Urban H. (2014). ‘Nature and Health’, Annual Review of stage. Full version 1: Jan 2013. Planning, 106(1), 23–34. Public Health, 35(1), 207–228. Greenspace Scotland (2007). The links Five things to know about flooding and climate Hartig, T., Evans, G.W., Jamner, L.D., Davis, between greenspace and health: critical literature change (2012). Carbon Brief, clear on climate. D.S. and Garling, T. (2003). ‘Tracking restoration review. Executive Summary Stirling: Greenspace in natural and urban field setting’, Journal of Gallent, N. (2013). Re-connecting “people and Scotland. Environmental Psychology 23, 109-123. planning”: parish plans and the English localism Greenspace Scotland (2016). Transforming agenda. Town Planning Review, 84(3), 371–396. Hawkins, S (2015). Aquatic Biodiversity urban spaces into people places, working and Ecosystems - evolution, interactions & Geographers to collaborate on landscape together to imporve the quality of life of people global change, Liverpool 2015. University of database for Britain (2011). Kingston University. in urban communities through the creation Southampton. and sustainable management of greenspaces. Gill, SE, Handley, JF, Ennos, AR & Pauleit, S. Greenspace Scotland. Stirling. Hellard, B. (2015). Liverpool City Council Budget. (2007). Adapting cities for climate change the role Presentation by the Director of Finance at of the green infrastructure. Built Environment 33: Groenewegen, P. (2009). Vitamin G - Green Liverpool City Council to the Strategic Green and 115-133 Space the Key to Helath. Nivel, Netherlands Open Space Review Board. Institute for Health Services Research. Glendale Liverpool (2014). Glendale Liverpool Hellmund, P. C., & Smith, D. (2006). Designing Recognition Awards. Greenways: Sustainable Landscapes for Nature Glendale Liverpool Budget (2014/15). Produced and People. Washington DC: Island Press. by Glendale Liverpool Limited.
143 Heritage Lottery Fund (2014). State of UK Hornsby, M. (2015). Liverpool’s Best Kept Johnston, M. and Percival, G. (eds). (2011). Public Parks. Research Report to the Heritage Secret. Presentation by Rice Lane Farm to Trees, People and the Built Environment Lottery Fund. Prepared by Peter Neal Consulting, Workshop 1 Finance 29th April 2015 Croxteth Conference, Birmingham, April 2011. Forestry Community First Partnership, Ben Hurley Hall, Liverpool. Commission, Edinburgh, Scotland, pp. 122–127. Communications, Peter Harnik Centre for City Hostetler, M., Allen, W., & Meurk, C. (2011). Jones, A, Hillsdon M, Coombes E (2009b). Park Excellence, Dr Ed Hobson, Ipsos MORI. Conserving urban biodiversity? Creating green Greenspace access, use and physical activity: Hillsdon M, Panter J, Foster C, Jones, A (2006). infrastructure is only the first step. Landscape and Understanding the effects of area deprivation. The relationship between access and quality Urban Planning, 100(4), 369–371. Kaczynski, A.T., Besenyi, G.M., Wilhelm of urban green space with population physical Hu et al (2008). Rao et al (2014) IARC (2013). Stanis, S.A., Koohsari, M.J., Oestman, K.B., activity. Journal of the Roayl Instititue for Public Bergstrom, R., Potwarka, L.R. and Reis, R.S. Health, 120: 1127-1132. Social Science and Hughes, D. (2015). National and Local Planning (2014). ‘Are park proximity and park features Medicine 70(6): 816-822. Policy. Presentation by David Hughes, Head of related to park use and park based physical Planning and Policy at Liverpool City Council to Hillsdon M, Panter J, Foster C, Jones, A (2006). activity amongst adults? Variations by multiple Workshop 2 Balance 6th May 2015, Palm House, The relationship between access and quality socio-demographic characteristics’, International Sefton Park, Liverpool. of urban green space with population physical Journal of Behavioural Nutrition and Physical activity. Journal of the Royal Institute of Public Iliad Presentation (2015). Vertical Gardens Activity, 11:146. Health, 120: 1127-1132. Project. Connecting Rope Walks & the Baltic Kandy, D and Diaz, D. (2015). Using Carbon Triangle through an environmentally sustainable Hillsdon, M., et al. (2006). Public Health, 120, Markets to help Urban Landowners in Oregon Pay vertical garden maze. 1127-1132. for Healthcare. Does Healthcare Cash Grow on Jackson, BM, Wheater HS, McIntyre NR, Trees? Ecosystem Marketplace. Website. HM Government (2010). Healthy Lives, Healthy Chell, J, Francis OJ, Frogbrook, Z, Marshall, People: Our strategy for public health in England, Keaney, M. (2015). Liverpool Playing Pitch M, Reynolds, B and Solloway, I. (2008). The CM 7985, London: TSO. Strategy. Presentation to the Strategic Green and Impact of Upland Land Management on Flooding, Open Spaces Review Board. HM Government (2010). Healthy Lives, Healthy insights from a multiscale experimental and People: Our strategy for public health in England, modelling programme. Journal of Flood Risk Kings Fund (2014). Making the case for public CM 7985, London: TSO. Management 1:71-80. health interventions, London: Kings Fund (citing Canadian Institute of Advanced Research, 2012). Holzinger, O. (2011). The Value of Green Jenkins, G. (2015). Landlife. Presentation by Infrastructure in Birmingham and the Black Landlife to Workshop 3 Innovation, 13th May Kingsley, J. and Townsend, M. (2006). ‘Dig in to Country. The Total Economic Value of Ecosystem 2016, Isla Gladstone, Liverpool. social capital: community gardens as mechanisms Services provided by the Urban Green for growing urban social connectedness’, Urb. Jenkins, G. J., Murphy, J. M., Sexton, D. M. H., Infrastructure. The Wildlife Trust for Birmingham & Policy Res, 24, 525–537. Lowe, J. A., Jones, P., & Kilsby, C. G. (2009). UK the Black Country. See Gill et al (2007) Climate Projections: Briefing report. Exeter. Kirkman, R., Noonan, D. S., & Dunn, S. K. (2012). Urban transformation and individual responsibility: The Atlanta BeltLine. Planning Theory, 11(4), 418–434.
144 Konijnendijk, C. C. (2003). A decade of urban Leonard, M. (2015). The Art of Innovation. Liverpool City Council (2010). Liverpool Green forestry in Europe. Forest Policy and Economics, Presentation by Palm House, Sefton Park to Infrastructure Strategy: Technical Department, 5(2), 173–186. Workshop 3 Innovation, Isla Gladstone, Liverpool. Liverpool: Liverpool City Council. Liverpool Kousky, C., Olmstead, S. M., Walls, M. A., & Lindsey, G., Maraj, M., & Kuan, S. (2001). Liverpool City Council (2011). Liverpool Macauley, M. (2013). Strategically placing green Access, Equity, and Urban Greenways: An Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) infrastructure: cost-effective land conservation in Exploratory Investigation. The Professional Report. Prepared by GVA Ltd the floodplain. Environmental Science Technology, Geographer, 53(3), 332–346. Liverpool City Council (2011). Liverpool 47(8), 3563–70. Little, C. (1990). Greenways for America. Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) – Kuo, F. E., (1998). American Journal of Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press. Appendix C. Forecasting Future Population and Community Psychology, 26, 823-851. Household Growth – Modelling Methodology and Liverpool Air Quality Management Action Plan Assumptions. Prepared by GVA Ltd. Kuo, F.E., Sullivan, W.C. (2001). Environment (2008). Liverpool City Council. Liverpool. and crime in the inner city: does vegetation Liverpool City Council (2011). Liverpool Liverpool City Council (2005). A Parks Strategy reduce crime? Environ. Behav.,33, 343-367. Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) for Liverpool, Liverpool: Liverpool City Council. – Appendix B. Housing Survey Methodological Kuznetsova, D. (2012) Healthy Places: Councils Liverpool City Council (2005) Liverpool Open Overview. Prepared by GVA Ltd. leading on public health, London: New Local Space Study. Report to City Council by Atkins, Government Network. Kings Fund (2014) Making Liverpool: Liverpool City Council. Liverpool City Council (2012). Green Print for the case for public health interventions, London: Growth. Mayoral Recommendation. Report No: Liverpool City Council (2005). Liverpool Open Kings Fund (citing Canadian Institute of Advanced EDR/82/12 & EDR/48/12. Space Study Volume 1: Strategic Open Space Research, 2012). See also http://www.kingsfund. Assessment Final Report. Produced by Atkins. Liverpool City Council (2012). Liverpool Active org.uk/time-to-think-differently/trends/broader- City Strategy 2012–2017, Be Active: Be Healthy, determinants-health. Liverpool City Council (2009). Positive Future Creating a Moving Culture, Liverpool: Liverpool 2009. Regeneration Policy Programmes and Lachowycz K, Jones A P (2011). Greenspace City Council. Performance Division. and obesity: a systematic review of the evidence. Liverpool City Council (2014). Liverpool Draft Obesity Reviews, Vol 12, Issue 5, pp e183-189, Liverpool City Council (2010). A Guide for Playing Pitch Strategy 5 Year Plan 2014 – 2019. May 2011. Community Groups: Setting up Community Produced by Knight, Kavanagh and Page. Greening Activities. Liverpool City Council. Lafortezza, R., Davies, C., Sanesi, G., & Liverpool. Liverpool City Council (2014). Liverpool’s Konijnendijk, C. C. (2013). Green Infrastructure Cycling Revolution. A Cycling Strategy for as a tool to support spatial planning in European Liverpool City Council (2010). Greening the City Liverpool 2014 – 26. urban regions. iForest - Biogeosciences and - moving towards a strategic approach. Topic Forestry, 6, 102–108. Paper – An investigation in the temporary re- Liverpool City Council (2014). Liverpool Active use of land within Liverpool. Produced by SQW City: Physical Activity and Sports Strategy, 2014- Lambeth Council (2015). Enabling Local Consulting. 20121, Liverpool: Liverpool City Council. Leadership of Lambeth Parks and Open Spaces. Delivering differently in Neighbourhoods. Produced by Lambeth Council.
145 Liverpool City Council (2014). Liverpool Green Liverpool City Region (2015). LEP Final Report - Liverpool Waterfront Voted England’s Greatest Infrastructure Strategy Liverpool: Liverpool City Green Infrastructure Technical Report. Produced Place (Dec 2015). Royal Town Planning Council (2014) by Arup and Partners. Institutue. Liverpool City Council (2014). Liverpool Liverpool City Region (2015). Liverpool City Local History Liverpool. BBC Home. Reservoir - Sustainable City Health and Wellbeing Strategy, Region Parks Study Final Report. Commissioned Water Supply in Liverpool. 2014-2019, Liverpool: Liverpool City Council. by the Rethinking Parks Task Group. Established London Car Parking Plans Prompt Pollution by Nature Connected the Liverpool City Region Liverpool City Council (2015 - 2021). Liverpool Concern (2016). National Air Quality Conference Local Nature Partnership Knowsley Metropolitan Active City - Physical Activity & Sports Strategy. and Awards. Borough Council with Halton Borough Council, Liverpool City Council. Liverpool Liverpool City Council Sefton Council and Los Angeles County Department of Public Liverpool City Council (2015). Annual Report of St Helens Metropolitan Council. Peter Neal Health (2013) Social determinants of Health: the Director of Public Health 2014/15: Power of Consulting Ltd with Richard Tracey Ltd. How Social and Economic Factors Affect Health, Prevention, Liverpool: Liverpool City Council. Los Angeles: Los Angeles County Department of Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Public Health. Liverpool City Council (2015). City Centre (2015). A Transport Plan for Growth. Connectivity, Stand and North Liverpool Major Merseytravel. Louv, R. (2005). Last Child in the Woods: Saving Schemes. Presentation to Regeneration Select Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder. Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group (2014). Committee. Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill. Healthy Liverpool: Prospectus for Change, Liverpool City Council (2015). Draft Local Flood Liverpool: Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Low Carbon Liverpool (2013). An Enviromental Risk Management Strategy - Highways and Group. Audit of Liverpool. Dept of Geography & Planning, Transportation Regeneration. University of Liverpool. Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group (2014). Liverpool City Council (2015). The Report Commissioning for Social Value: Social Value Luymes, D. T., and Tamminga, K. (1995). of the Mayor of Liverpool’s Commission on Strategy and Action Plan, 2014, Liverpool Clinical Integrating public safety and use into Environmental Sustainability. Chair of the Commissioning Group. planning urban greenways. Landscape and Commission Vice Chancellor and Chief Executive Urban Planning, 33(1-3), 391–400. http://doi. Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group (2015). - Liverpool John Moores University Professor org/10.1016/0169-2046(94)02030-J Healthy Liverpool: The Blueprint, Liverpool: Nigel Wetherill. Liverpool Clinical Commissioning Group. Maas J, Verheij R.A., Groenewegen P.P., Liverpool City Council, et al (2012). Greenprint Spreeuwenberg P., de Vries, S. (2008). ‘Physical Liverpool Nature (Aug 1997). A Nature for Growth. The making of the Great Park: North activity as a possible mechanism behind the Conservation Strategy for Liverpool. Lancashire and South Liverpool. North Liverpool and South relationship between green space and health: A Wildlife Trust, Seaforth. Sefton Stakeholder Event. Presented by Richard multilevel analysis’, BMS Public Health 8: 206. Tracey. Liverpool Vision (2015). Figures rises up for Maas, J., van Dillen, S.M.E., Verheij, R.A. and visitor economy. Liverpool Vision. Liverpool City Council. (2012). Submission Draft Groenewegen, P.P. (2009) ‘Social contacts as a – Liverpool Core Strategy. Liverpool Vision (2024). People, Place and possible mechanism behind the relation between Prosperity. An Economic Prospectus. greenspace and health’, Health Place, 15(2), 586- 595.
146 Maas, J., et al. (2006). ‘Greenspace, urbanity, Mell, I. C., Henneberry, J., Hehl-Lange, S., & Michael, G, R. (2010). Air Purifying Road Surface and health: how strong is the relation? Epidemiol. Keskin, B. (2013). Promoting urban greening: Eats 45% of Nox Pollution. Driving sustainability Community Health, 60, (7),587–592. Valuing the development of green infrastructure mainstream. investments in the urban core of Manchester, UK. Maas, J.et al., (2009). Journal of epidemiology Mitchell, R. and Phoham, F. (2008). Effect Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 12(3), 296–306. and community health, 63, 967-973 of exposure to natural environment on health Mersey Forest Trust (2010). Liverpool Green inequalities: an observational population study. Marmot, M. (2016). The Health Gap: Improving Infrastructure Strategy Technical Document. Lancet, 372 (9650):1655-60 Health in an Unequal World, London: Bloomsbury. Mersey Forest. Modern Farmer (2015). Plastic eating Martin, H. (2012). Improving teaching and Mersey Forest Trust (2015). Forest School mushrooms could save the world. Anna Roth learning using the outdoor environment: Lavington Research. Paper to the Strategic Green and Open January 2015. Park Federation. Duncton Junior School, West Spaces Review Board. Sussex. Moore, M., Townsend, M. and Oldroyd, J. Mersey Forest Trust (2015). Benefits of Trees. (2006). ‘Linking human and ecosystem health: Mathey, J., Roessler, S., Lehmann, I., & Presentation to the Strategic Green and Open the benefits of community involvement in Braeuer, A. (2011). Urban Green Spaces: Spaces Review Board. conservation groups’, Ecohealth3 (4), 255–261. Potentials and Constraints for Urban Adaptation to Climate Change. (K. OttoZimmermann, Ed.) Merseyside Biodiversity Group. North Munro, Gavin (2015). The Innovators: Growing Resilient Cities Cities and Adaptation to Climate Merseyside Biodiversity Action Plan. Latest Solid Wooden Furniture Without the Joins. Change Proceedings of the Global Forum 2010 news on Liverpool City Region Local Nature Guardian Newspaper Article. (Vol. 1). http://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0785- Partnership. Mytton, O., Townsend, N., Rutter, H., and 6_47 Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service Foster, C. (2012). ‘Green space and physical McGovern, I., Miller, G. and Hughes-Cronwick, (2015). Biodiversity Evidence Base Report. activity: an observational study using Health P. (2014). ‘The Relative Contribution of Multiple Prepared for The Strategic Green and Open Survey for England data’, Health and Place, 18, Determinants to Health Outcomes’, Health Affairs, Spaces Review Board. (5), 1034-1041. August 21, Princeton (NJ): Robert Wood Johnson Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service Mytton, O., Townsend, N., Rutter, H., and Foundation. MEAS (2015). An overview of the Merseyside Foster, C. (2012). Green space and physical Mell, I. C. (2016a). Financing Green Infrastructure Environmental Advisory Service. Presentation activity: an observational study using Health in times of austerity: The case of Liverpool, UK. to the Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review Survey for England data. Health and Place, 18, Biotope City Journal. Retrieved from http:// Board. (5), 1034–1041. www.biotope-city.net/gallery/financing-green- Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service National Housing Federation (2011). Greener infrastructure-times-austerity MEAS (2015). Assessment on Biodiversity Value Neighbourhoods: A Good Practice Guide to Mell, I. C. (2016b). Global Green frastructure: in Liverpool. Version 2. Prepared by MEAS for Managing Green Space. NHF. Lessons for successful policy-making, investment The Strategic Green and Open Spaces Review National Museums Liverpool (2014). Maritime and management. Abingdon: Routledge. Board. Park Design and Access Statement. Revision A. Produced by Austin Smith Lord LLP
147 Natural England & Landuse Consultants. NERC Act (2006). Natural Environment and Rural Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. (2003). (2009). Green Infrastructure Guidance. Communities Act. Sustainable Communities: Building for the Future. Peterborough. London. NESTA. (2016). Learning to rethink parks. Natural England (2008). A Manifesto for the London, UK. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. (2005). Natural Environment, London: Natural England. Sustainable Communities: People, Places and Nolan, P. (2015). The Mersey Forest. Mersey Natural England (2009) Our Natural Health Prosperity. London. Forest, Presentation by the Mersey Forest at Service: The role of the natural environment Workshop 2 Balance 6th May 2015, Palm House, Orsega-Smith, E., Mowen, A., Payne, L. and in maintaining healthy lives, London: Natural Sefton Park, Liverpool. Godbey, G. (2006). ‘The interaction of stress and England. park use on psycho-physiological health in older North Merseyside Biodiversity Action Plan. Natural England (2008). A Manifesto for the adults’. Journal of Leisure Research, 36:232-56. Published by the Merseyside Biodiversity Group Natural Environment, London: Natural England. chaired by MEAS. Otterbourgh, K. (2016). National Geographic The Natural England (2009). Our Natural Health Power of Parks. How Urban Parks are Bringing Noss, R. (2006). Greenways as wildlife corridors. Service: The role of the natural environment in Nature Close to Home. In P. C. Hellmund & D. Smith (Eds.), Designing maintaining healthy lives, London: Greenways: Sustainable Landsacpes for Nature Pauleit, S., Slinn, P., Handley, J., & Lindley, S. Natural England (2011). Green space access, and People (pp. 70–107). Washington DC: Island (2003). Promoting the Natural Greenstructure of green space use, physical activity and overweight, Press. Towns and Cities: English Nature’s Accessible Sheffield: Natural England. Natural Greenspace Standards Model. Built Novotny, V., Ahern., Brown, J&B (Eds.). Environment, 29(2), 157–170. Natural England (2011). Green space access, (Undated). Water-Centric Sustainable green space use, physical activity and overweight, Communities (pp. 135–176). Hoboken: Wiley- Peel Holdings (2016). Liverpool Waters - A Sheffield: Natural England. Blackwell. Waterfront for the World. Natural England (2012). Health and natural Nowak, BJ, Crane, DE, Stevens, J,C. (2006). Peter Neal Consulting Ltd with Richard Tracey environments: An evidence based information Air pollution removed by urban trees and shrubs October Communications (2015). The Liverpool pack. http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/ in the United States. Urban Forestry and Urban City-region Health is Wealth Commission Final enjoying/linkingpeople/health/default.aspx. Greening (4) 2006 115 - 123 USA Forest Service, Report. North Eastern Reseach Str, 5 Mozn Library, SUNY Neal, P.Nesta Rethinking Parks (2013). Peters, K., Elands, B. and Buijs, A. (2010). - ESF, Syracuse, NY13210 USA Exploring new business models for parks in the ‘Social interactions in urban parks: Stimulating 21st Century. Nesta. Nowak, D,J., Daniel, E., Crane, J. and Stevens, social cohesion?’ Urban Forestry & Urban C. (2006). Air pollution removal by urban trees Greening, 9, 93–100. (Seeland et al, 2009; Shinew Neighbourhoods Green (undated). A Natural and shrubs in the United States. Urban Forestry et al, 2004). Estate. Improving the greenspace for social and Urban Greening. housing. Prepared by Ecology Consultancy Ltd Place Northwest (2011). Exchange Flags Enjoys and Commissioned by Natural England on behalf Nowak, D. J., et al., (2006). Urban Forestry and Year of Revival. Web Article. of the Neighbourhoods Green project. Urban Greening, 4, 115-123. Tallis, M., et al., 2011, Landscape and Urban Planning, 103, 129- 138
148 Places to see in your lifetime (2015). A new Regencia, T. (2015). The Award-Winning Bridge Riley, J; Newton, J; Massin, P, Frith, M. (2015). attraction in Sydney – Floating Forest, Australia. Connecting Iranians. The Third Symbol of Tehran Making space for nature on housing estates. www.placestoseeinyourlifetime.com Earns International Recognition for Architect Leila Neighbourhoods Green. Araghian. Web Article in Al Jazeera English. Planting on Agricultural Soils & Their Rockey Jnr, D.L, Barcelona, R, Brookover, Functions. Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Reacher, M. et al.,(2004). Communicable Disease R, Thorn, D, Saturday, D (2016). USA Creative Bangor, Gwynedd and Public Health, 7, 39-46. Strategies for Financing Parks & Recreation. Research Update. Pretty, J. et al., (2007). Journal of Environmental Regional Public Health (2010). ‘Healthy Open Planning and Management, 50, 211-231. Spaces: A Summary of the impact of open spaces RSPB (2004). Natural Fit: Can Green Space and on health and wellbeing’, Regional Public Health Biodiversity Increase Levels of Physical Activity? Pretty, J., Peacock, J., Hine, R., Sellens, M., Information Paper, Lower Hutt: Hutt Valley District Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. Sandy, South, N., & Griffin, M. (2007). Green exercise Health Board, Greater Wellington Region, New UK. in the UK countryside: Effects on health and Zealand. psychological well-being, and implications for Rydin, Y. et al. (2012). Lancet, 379, 2079. policy and planning. Journal of Environmental Ridgers, N and Sayers, J. (2010). Natural Play in Rydin, Y. et al. (2012). Shaping cities for Planning and Management, 50(2), 211–231. the Forest School Evaluation – children. Research health: complexity and the planning of urban Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Public Health England (2015). Health profile for environments in the 21st century. Lancet 2;379 Liverpool John Moores University and The Mersey Liverpool Unitary Authority, 2015, London: Public (9831):2079-108. Forest. A report produced for Natural England Health England (Report 1 of 2). Sandström, U. (2002). Green Infrastructure Public Health England and UCL Institute for Planning in Urban Sweden. Planning Practice and Ridgers, N and Sayers, J. (2010). Natural Play Health Equity (2014) op cit. Research, 17(4), 37–41. in the Forest, Forest School evaluation (Families). Public Health England and UCL Institute for Research Institute for Sport and Exercise Seeland, K., Dübendorfer, S. and Hansmann, R. Health Equity (2014). ‘Local Action on health Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University and (2009). ‘Making friends in Zurich’s urban forests inequalities: Improving access to green spaces’. The Mersey Forest. A report produced for Natural and parks: The role of public green space for Health Equity Evidence Review 8, London: Public England (Report 2of 2). social inclusion of youths from different cultures’, Health England. Forest Policy and Economics 11, 10–17. Ridgers, N.D., Knowles, Z.R. and Sayers, J. Pugh, T. A. M., MacKenzie, A.R., Whyatt, J.D. (2012). Childrens Geographies. Encouraging play Shinew, K.J., Glover,T.D. and Parry, D.C. (2004). and Hewitt, C.N. (2012). ‘Effectiveness of Green in the natural environment: a child-focused case ‘Leisure spaces as potential sites for interracial Infrastructure for Improvement of Air Quality in study for Forest School. interaction: community gardens in urban areas’, J. Urban Street Canyons’, Environ. Sci. Technol., 46, Leis. Res., 36, 336–355. Ridgers, N; Knowles, Z; Sayers, J. (2012). 7692-7699. Encouraging Play in the Natural Environment: Sidders, J. (2010). Parks trusts - models of Rao, M., George, L.A., Rosenstiel, T.N., a child-focused case study of Forest School. community-run green spaces. Retrieved June Shandas, V., Dinno, A. (2014). ‘Assessing the Children’s Geographies, 10:1,49-65. 7, 2016, from http://www.hortweek.com/parks- relationship among urban trees, nitrogen dioxide, trusts-models-community-run-green-spaces/ and respiratory health’, Environmental Pollution, article/1027246 194, 96–104.
149 Slater, P. (2015). Submission to Liverpool Green Takano, T., Nakamura, K., Watanabe, M. Thomas A. M. Pugh*, A. Robert MacKenzie, Spaces Review. (2002). ‘Urban residential environments and J. Duncan Whyatt, and C. Nicholas Hewitt senior citizens’ longevity in megacity areas: the (2012). Effectiveness of Green Infrastructure Stansfield, G and Whiteoak, F. (2015). Liverpool importance of walkable green spaces’, Journal for Improvement of Air Quality in Urban Street Housing Partnership, Building Our Future. of Epidemiology and Community Health, 56, 12, Canyons. Lancaster Environment Centre, Presentation by Redrow to Workshop 1 Finance 913-8. Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4 YQ, UK. 29th April 2015 Croxteth Hall, Liverpool. Taylor, J., Paine, C., & FitzGibbon, J. (1995). Thomas, H & Nisbet T,R. (2006). An Assessment Staples, J. (2015). Climate Change and Green From greenbelt to greenways: four Canadian case of the impact of floodplain woodland on flood Space. Presentation to Liverpool City Council to studies. Landscape and Urban Planning, 33(1-3), flows. Water & Enviroment Journal 21:114-126. Workshop 2 Balance 6th May 2015, Palm House, 47–64. Sefton Park, Liverpool. Thomas, J. (2014). Liverpool Air Pollution is The Flood and Water Management Act (2010). cutting lives short: shocking new figures reveal STEP (2015). Sustainable Transport IFRC 8th April 2010. impact of toxic emissions. Enhancements Package Executive Summary. Merseytravel documentation. The Flood Risk Regulations (2009). Thompson Coon, J. et al., (2011). Environmental Environmental Protection. Defra 2009. Science & Technology, 45, 1761-1772. Stewart, K and Bennett, M. (2015). Friends of the Flyover. Presentation by Friends of the The Local Transport Plan for Merseyside 2006 - Truss, E. (2016). New Plan for National Parks Flyover to Workshop 3 Innovation 13th May, Isla 2011. Liverpool City Council, UK. gives every schoolchild a chance to visit. Gladstone, Liverpool. Environment Agency and Natural England The Marmot Review (2010). Fair Society, Healthy Sullivan, W.C., Kuo, F.E. and De Pooter, Lives: Strategic Review of Health Inequalities Tunstall, S., et al. (2006). Journal of Water Health, S.F. (2004) ‘The fruit of urban nature: vital in England post - 2010, London: Institute for 4, 365-380. neighbourhood spaces’, Environ. Behav.,36, 678- Health Equality, University College London. UCL Institute of Health Equality (2014). Review 700. The Mayoral Health Commission (2008). All of social determinants and the health divide in Sunderland, T. (2012). Microeconomic Benefits Change - the platform to a healthier Liverpool, the WHO European region: final report updated, of Investment in the Environment, Natural Liverpool: Liverpool City Council, UK Liverpool Copenhagen: WHO World Health Organisation. England. City - Region Health is Wealth Commission. UNEP-WCMC. (2011). UK National Ecosystem Supertides’ the weather and coastal flood risk. The Mersey Forest. (2010). Liverpool Green Assessment: Understanding nature’s value to (2015). National Oceonography Centre. Infrastructure Strategy. Mossley Rise. society. Synthesis of key findings. Cambridge. Sykes, O., Brown, J., Cocks, M., Shaw, D., & The Trust for Public Land. (2006). The Health University of Liverpool (2015). Fresh Thinking: Couch, C. (2013). A City Profile of Liverpool. Benefits of Parks. San Francisco, USA. Beyond Greenspace: How can nature create Cities, 35, 299–318. http://doi.org/10.1016/j. healthier and wealthier places? The Heseltine cities.2013.03.013 Institute for Public Policy and Practice 2015. University of Sussex (1998). Tree Traps: An effective filter for air pollutants. Media Release19th Feb 1998.
150 University of Washington (2012). When Wheater, C.P., Potts, E., Shaw, E., Perkin, C., plants go vegan. Conservation, the source for Smith, S., Casstles, H., Cook, P. and Bellis, environmental intelligence. M.A. (2007). Returning Urban Parks to their Public Health Roots. Liverpool: Centre for Public Health, Urban Task Force. (1999). Towards a Strong Liverpool John Moores University. Urban Renaissance. London. Retrieved from http://www.urbantaskforce.org/UTF_final_report. White, M., Alcock, I., Wheeler, B., and pdf Depledge, M. (2013). Would you be happier living in a greener urban area? A fixed effects US Forest Service (2014). Trees improve our air analysis of panel data. Psychological Science, 24, quality. Urban Forestry Network. 6, 920-928. van den Berg, A., Mass, J., Verheij, R., and White, M.P. et al., (2013). Psychological Science Groenewegen, P. (2010). ‘Green space as a 24, 920-928. van den Berg, A. E. et al., 2010, buffer between stressful life events and health’, Social Science and Medicine, 70, 1203-1210. Social Science & Medicine, 70, 1203-1210. Whitelaw, S., Swift, J., Goodwin, A. and Clark, Vidal, J. (2015) All Choked Up: did Britain’s dirty D. (2008). Physical activity and mental health: the air make me dangerously ill? Guardian newspaper role of physical activity in promoting mental well- article. being and preventing mental health problems, Walmsley, A. (2006). Greenways: multiplying and Edinburgh: National Health Service: Scotland. diversifying in the 21st century. Landscape and Woodland Trust (2011). Trees or Turf? Best Urban Planning, 76(1-4), 252–290. Value in Managing Urban Green Space. Prepared Watson, E. (2015). Acrehurst Park, The Project. by Land Use Consultants. Presentation by Riverside Housing to Workshop 2 Young, R. F. (2010). Managing municipal green Balance 6th May 2015, Palm House, Sefton Park, space for ecosystem services. Urban Forestry & Liverpool. Urban Greening, 9(4), 313–321. Waverijn, G., Wolfe, M.K., Mohnen, S., Rijken, Young, R. F. (2011). Planting the Living City. M., Spreeuwenberg, P. and Groenewegen. Journal of the American Planning Association, P. (2014). A prospective analysis of the effect 77(4), 368–381. http://doi.org/6 of neighbourhood and individual social capital on changes in self related health of people with chronic illness. BMC Public Health, 14:675.
Photography by Tim McConville
151