Oldham Local Development Framework Open Space Study Steps One and Two September 2006 Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council PPG 17 Local Needs Assessment and Audit A Final Report by PMP September 2006 OLDHAM DISTRICT COUNCIL OPEN SPACE, SPORT AND RECREATION STUDY A FINAL REPORT BY PMP SEPTEMBER 2006 CONTENTS Page Executive Summary 1. Introduction and Background 1 2. Undertaking the Study – PPG17 5 3. Strategic Context 19 4. Consultations 34 5. Parks and Gardens 46 6. Natural and Semi-Natural Open Space 58 7. Amenity Greenspace 68 8. Provision for Children and Young People 78 9. Outdoor Sports Facilities 90 10. Allotments and Community Gardens 103 11. Cemeteries and Churchyards 111 12. Green Corridors 116 13. Civic Spaces 120 14. The Way Forward 125 APPENDICES Appendix A Benefits of open space Appendix B Open space typology - definitions Appendix C Surveys Appendix D Definitions Appendix E List of Sites Appendix F National Strategic Context Appendix G Site Assessment Matrix Appendix H Quantity standards Appendix I Quality standards Appendix J Accessibility standards Appendix K Quality Benchmarking EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background i. PMP were appointed to undertake a local needs assessment and audit of open space, sport and recreation facilities across the Borough of Oldham in accordance with the requirements of the latest Planning Policy Guidance Note 17 (Planning for Open Space Sport and Recreation, July 2002) and its Companion Guide (September 2002). ii. The Council commissioned PMP to undertake steps one and two of the five-step process outlined in the Companion Guide (and below). Recommendations for local provision standards (step 3) have also been provided. The steps of PPG17 are specifically: • Step 1 – Identifying Local Needs; • Step 2 – Auditing Local Provision; • Step 3 – Setting Provision Standards; • Step 4 – Applying Provision Standards; and • Step 5 – Drafting Policies – recommendations and strategic priorities. iii. It is the intention that the Council will then use the recommended local standards of provision to identify surpluses and deficiencies, draw up strategic options and prepare policies to be incorporated into the Local Development Framework. iv. The study considers nine typologies of open space, including: • parks and gardens; • natural and semi natural urban green spaces; • green corridors; • outdoor sports; • amenity greenspace; • provision for children and teenagers; • allotments and community gardens; • cemeteries and churchyards; and • civic spaces. v. The analysis has therefore been undertaken by type of open space looking at different areas across the local authority boundary. These are referred to as analysis areas. The use of analysis areas allows examination of data at a more detailed local level, and provides a geographical background to the analysis. vi. The analysis areas are based on the wards that make up the Borough of Oldham. The wards have been amalgamated into six analysis areas. These have been highlighted in the table overleaf: Open Space, Sport and Recreation Study – Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Table i - Analysis areas and relevant wards Area Number Ward Name Population Analysis Area Chadderton Central 10,784 Chadderton Chadderton North 10,269 Chadderton Chadderton South 10,061 Chadderton 2 Area TOTAL 31,114 St. James 9,684 East Oldham St. Marys 10,785 East Oldham Waterhead 12,876 East Oldham 5 Area TOTAL 33,345 Failsworth East 10,728 Failsworth Failsworth West 9,827 Failsworth Hollinwood 9,910 Failsworth 3 Area TOTAL 30,465 Crompton 11,066 Royton Royton North 10,588 Royton Royton South 10,373 Royton Shaw 10,655 Royton 4 Area TOTAL 42,682 Lees 10,132 Saddleworth Saddleworth East 13,042 Saddleworth Saddleworth West 11,309 Saddleworth 1 Area TOTAL 34,483 Alexandra 11,159 West Oldham Coldhurst 11,935 West Oldham St. Pauls 10,496 West Oldham Werneth 11,594 West Oldham 6 Area TOTAL 45,184 TOTAL 217,273 Map i.i – Analysis area map vii. The study includes an audit of all accessible open spaces of these typologies (regardless of ownership) throughout the settlement boundaries in Oldham, providing a robust baseline of data, indicating priorities for future open space, Open Space, Sport and Recreation Study – Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY recreation and sport provision and assisting the future development of appropriate strategies and planning policies. viii. The key elements of the study include: • to provide a comprehensive audit of existing provision of all types of open space, sporting and recreational facilities in terms of quantity, quality, accessibility and wider value to the community; • identify local needs and aspirations through a series of consultations, strategic reviews at a national, regional and local level and review of existing provision standards; and • recommend standards of provision (quantity, quality and accessibility) in accordance with Planning Policy Guidance Note17 (PPG17) Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation (2002). ix. Full details of the methodology and standard setting process can be found in sections 2 – 15 of the report. The recommended local standards, key issues and recommendations for each typology are summarised below. Open Space, Sport and Recreation Study – Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Parks and gardens Standards Quantity Standard 0.26 ha per 1000 population Accessibility Standard 15 minute walk time - (720 metres) 20 minute walk time for parks above 15ha - (960 metres) Quality Vision A welcoming, clean and litter free site providing a one- stop community facility, which is accessible to all and has a range of leisure, recreational and enriched play opportunities for an appropriate range of ages. Parks and gardens should be well maintained, providing varied vegetation, clear pathways, appropriate lighting and ancillary accommodation (including seating, toilets and litter bins) and well-signed to and within the site. Sites should be safe and secure and were appropriate have ranger / warden presence to further improve the security of the facilities Quality Benchmark 80% Key issues x. The key issues emerging from the review of the provision of parks and gardens across Oldham Borough and the assessment of local needs can be summarised as: • the quality of parks and garden in Oldham is higher than other types of open space in the Borough, in general the quality of this type of provision is consistent across all areas. An exception to this are sites within Failsworth and Hollinwood and West Oldham, consultation suggesting that these are varied in quality; • consultation with residents highlights the importance of good quality parks and is often the key determinant for the level of use. Cleanliness and maintenance is perceived to be the critical factor in determining the quality of a park, whilst some residents have sites experienced vandalism and litter at parks in the Borough, contributing to quality factors that need to be considered for this type of open space; • significant improvements made to the stock of parks and gardens in recent years are valued by local residents; • the quantity of parks and gardens are evenly distributed across the Borough although there is a higher level of provision in Royton and Shaw, given the size of the population; • consultation suggests that the quality and accessibility of sites is more important than the level of provision; Open Space, Sport and Recreation Study – Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • consideration of providing accessible parks that are near-by is under pinned through the preferred method of travel to this open space site (walking), highlighting the importance of an even distribution; and • poor consideration for people with disabilities and a lack of signage to and within sites was highlighted as key issues with regard to the accessibility of sites. Natural and Semi Natural Open Space Standards Quantity Standard 1.80 ha per 1000 population Accessibility Standard 15 minute walk (720m) Quality Vision A spacious, clean, well vegetated, litter free site with clear pathways and natural features that encourages wildlife conservation, biodiversity and environmental awareness. Management of local sites should involve the community if at all possible and a ranger presence should be encouraged to embrace community safety Quality Benchmark 72% Key issues xi. The key issues emerging from the review of the provision of natural and semi-natural provision across Oldham Borough and the assessment of local needs can be summarised as: • the overall quality of natural and semi-natural areas is poor with a significant number of sites scoring poor or very poor; • key problem areas relating to quality are poor maintenance, litter problems and general mis-use of the areas. Given the overall quality of this type of open space and comparison to the quality of other typologies, this may be an area for improvement; • the quantity of provision of natural areas in Oldham is very good with several large sites within the Borough; • quality is perceived to be a more significant issue than quantity; • the majority of residents would expect to walk to natural areas highlighting the importance of an even distribution across the Borough, however, people are willing to travel further to reach larger, better quality sites such as the Peak District National Park; and • poor consideration for people with disabilities and a lack of signage to and within sites were considered important accessibility factors for this type of open space. Open Space, Sport and Recreation Study – Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Amenity Green Space Standards Quantity Standard 0.46ha per 1000 population Accessibility Standard 10 minute walk (480m) Quality Vision A clean and well-maintained greenspace site. Sites should have appropriate ancillary furniture (dog and litter bins etc), pathways and landscaping in the right places providing a safe secure site with spacious outlook which enhances the appearance of the local environment. Larger sites should be suitable for informal play opportunities and should be enhanced to encourage the site to become a community focus Quality Benchmark 75% Key issues xii.