DOCSLIB.ORG

London Parks Benchmarking Research Project Finsbury Park

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
London Parks Benchmarking Research Project Finsbury Park London Parks Benchmarking Research Project Finsbury Park/Parkland Walk Survey Findings REPORT BY Bone Wells Associates December 2008 1 2 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................5 Finsbury Park/Parkland Walk ...................................................................................................... 5 2. Methodology......................................................................................................................................7 2.1. Household survey ........................................................................................................................7 2.2 Field interviews .............................................................................................................................7 2.3 User counts...................................................................................................................................8 3. Analysis and comparisons of household & field survey responses...........................................9 SECTION 1: General – All respondent...............................................................................................9 SECTION 2: Finsbury Park/Parkland Walk – Park Users Only........................................................12 Park Uses: Walking ................................................................................................................... 14 Park Uses: Cycling .................................................................................................................... 16 Park Uses: Sports...................................................................................................................... 18 Park Characteristics: Flora/Fauna ............................................................................................. 20 Park Characteristics: Safety ...................................................................................................... 21 Park Characteristics: Facilities................................................................................................... 22 Park Rating ................................................................................................................................ 22 SECTION 3: About you – All respondents........................................................................................26 4. Conclusions.....................................................................................................................................29 Appendix 1 – Manual counts at Finsbury Park/Parkland Walk ......................................................31 Appendix 2 – Detailed responses to walking and cycling provision, safety and other facilities. ..........................................................................................................................................................34 Appendix 3 Household Survey ..........................................................................................................49 3 4 1. Introduction This report presents the results of two surveys undertaken simultaneously for Finsbury Park/Parkland Walk. Each set of data is presented in a user-friendly, easy-to-read manner to enable quick and clear understanding of park issues and park user views as well as to facilitate comparisons with other parks in the study. The reports were not intended to include detailed conclusions but a very general top-line commentary has been provided for each question’s responses. This park is one of five parks being surveyed, each representing a cross section of the typology of parks identified in the London Plan. The parks selected are: o Small – Newington Green (Islington) o Local - Central Park (Newham) o District - Finsbury Park and Parkland Walk (Haringey) o Metropolitan - Tooting Bec Common (Wandsworth) o Regional - Richmond Park (Royal Parks) Finsbury Park Finsbury Park is situated in the borough of Haringey. It covers 115 acres (46.5 has) and following a £5m restoration and improvement project funded by the from the Heritage Lottery Fund, it now offers a play area, café, toilets, an Art Hut, athletics track and gym, bowls, a skatepark, boating lake, tennis, a ball games area and a softball pitch. Opening times are from 6.30 to dusk every day of the year and there is a warden based on site. Source: Haringey Council 5 6 2. Methodology 2.1. Household survey 2,400 questionnaires were distributed during the week commencing 29 th September. The questionnaires were distributed in batches of 100 from 24 points within the park catchment area (defined as a maximum of 20 minute walk from the park). 1. Hermitage/Vale/Eade/Vale 13. Chesterfield 2. Stanhope 14. Tavistock/Hermitage/Vale 3. Woodberrry Grove/Down 15. Monsell/Plimsoll 4. Gloucester/Alexander 16. Florence/Albert 5. Wilberforce/Somerfiled 17. Medina 6. Tollington/Charteris 18. Kinsdown.Sussex 7. Tollington/Scarborough/Lancaster 19. Woodlands/Conway 8. Umberville 20. Tollington/Moray 9. Dukett 21. Hanley/Eversholt 10.Coleridege 22. Granville/Inderwick.Ridge 11. Stapleton Hall/Oakfield 23. Hewitt 12. Pemberton 24. Effingham A total of 373 responses received were analysed representing a response rate of 16%, just over the anticipated 15%, or 350 replies. Factors affecting the response rates include the proximity of Clissold Park and Highbury Fields and the high degree of ethnic diversity and respective language barriers and lower level of active community participation and expression of the local residents. 2.2 Field interviews Sport England required each park surveyed as part of this project to have at least 350 user survey questionnaires completed over a nine day period (including two weekends) to make the results compatible with their Leisure Centre surveys. The survey bureau MRUK undertook interviews in Finsbury Park using a similar questionnaire as the household survey but amended for in-park use. Field surveys were carried out across a two week period – 15 nd October -28 th October including both weekends. The interviews were conducted at different times of the day – morning, lunchtime and afternoon, and at different entry gates to the park as shown in Table 2.1. Table 2.1 Interviews conducted in Finsbury Park, October 2008 Gate Week Day Time nd th th th 6 -12 13 -19 Mon- Sat Sun 09.00- 12.00- 15.00- October October Fri 12.00hrs 15.00hrs 18.00 Finsbury Gate 130 Manor House Gate 150 293 120 102 207 104 Parkland Walk 133 Total 413 413 413 The length of the interview lasted roughly 10 minutes – the maximum length of time advised by MRUK for an exit interview. 413 in-park surveys were completed across the period, well in excess of the target of 350. 7 2.3 User counts Counts could only be carried out for Finsbury Park, not Parkland Walk as well, due to resource restrictions. This park does not have gate counters so MRUK also conducted user counts in Finsbury Park for 15 minutes each hour between 9.00am and 6.00pm, at the gates detailed in section 2.2. The field survey counts, when grossed up, generated an estimated 1,343,700 users over the year. This calculation takes into account: • seasonal variability, using a multiplier adjusting October survey month to annual average estimates. This is based on an analysis of the automatic counts for Central Park which has automotive gate counters. • adjustment for the gates unable to be covered by the research company’s gate counters • an adjustment (1.05) for assumed after counts hours usage The park-user estimate above, translated to persons per hectare per year, gives a figure of 28,900 persons per year. 8 3. Analysis and comparisons of household & field survey responses SECTION 1: General – All respondents Q1 and Q2 are the Best Value Performance Indicator questions relating to parks, they were not asked in the park interviews in order to keep the interview time down. Q1. Thinking generally about the parks and open spaces in your area: Household Survey (%) Yes No Do you feel they are important in making 99.5 0 somewhere a good place to live? Do you feel satisfied with the provision in your 86.9 8.9 area? Do you feel your local parks/open spaces 54.7 45.3 need improving? Q2. Do you feel that the parks/open spaces in your area have improved over the last three years? Household Survey (%) Better Worse Same 79.7 1.6 18.9 Legend: Household Survey Field Survey Q3 Do you have access to a garden? 100 90 80 69.7 70 60 49.6 48.9 % 50 40 30.2 30 20 10 0 Yes No Just over two thirds of household respondents and only one half of field respondents had access to a garden. 9 Legend: Household Survey Field Survey Q4 In the last 12 months have you been for a day out in the countryside? 100 85.2 90 80 70 60 55 45 % 50 40 30 20 14.8 10 0 Yes No The majority of household respondents had been for a day out in the countryside compared to just over a half of field respondents Q5 In the last 12 months how often have you used parks and open spaces, including as part of a shortcut or cycle journey? (Summer = May - October and Winter = November - April) Finsbury Park-Parkland Walk/season 100 90 80 70 60 50 % 40 30 20 10 0 Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Household Household Household Household Household Household Household Never Seldom used 1/ month 1/fortnight 1-2 / w eek Most days Every day Other Parks/season 100 90 80 70 60 % 50 40 30 20 10 0 Field Field Field Field Field Field Field Household Household Household Household Household Household Household Household
Load more

Recommended publications
  • London National Park City Week 2018
    London National Park City Week 2018 Saturday 21 July – Sunday 29 July www.london.gov.uk/national-park-city-week Share your experiences using #NationalParkCity SATURDAY JULY 21 All day events InspiralLondon DayNight Trail Relay, 12 am – 12am Theme: Arts in Parks Meet at Kings Cross Square - Spindle Sculpture by Henry Moore - Start of InspiralLondon Metropolitan Trail, N1C 4DE (at midnight or join us along the route) Come and experience London as a National Park City day and night at this relay walk of InspiralLondon Metropolitan Trail. Join a team of artists and inspirallers as they walk non-stop for 48 hours to cover the first six parts of this 36- section walk. There are designated points where you can pick up the trail, with walks from one mile to eight miles plus. Visit InspiralLondon to find out more. The Crofton Park Railway Garden Sensory-Learning Themed Garden, 10am- 5:30pm Theme: Look & learn Crofton Park Railway Garden, Marnock Road, SE4 1AZ The railway garden opens its doors to showcase its plans for creating a 'sensory-learning' themed garden. Drop in at any time on the day to explore the garden, the landscaping plans, the various stalls or join one of the workshops. Free event, just turn up. Find out more on Crofton Park Railway Garden Brockley Tree Peaks Trail, 10am - 5:30pm Theme: Day walk & talk Crofton Park Railway Garden, Marnock Road, London, SE4 1AZ Collect your map and discount voucher before heading off to explore the wider Brockley area along a five-mile circular walk. The route will take you through the valley of the River Ravensbourne at Ladywell Fields and to the peaks of Blythe Hill Fields, Hilly Fields, One Tree Hill for the best views across London! You’ll find loads of great places to enjoy food and drink along the way and independent shops to explore (with some offering ten per cent for visitors on the day with your voucher).
    [Show full text]
  • The Park Keeper
    The Park Keeper 1 ‘Most of us remember the park keeper of the past. More often than not a man, uniformed, close to retirement age, and – in the mind’s eye at least – carrying a pointed stick for collecting litter. It is almost impossible to find such an individual ...over the last twenty years or so, these individuals have disappeared from our parks and in many circumstances their role has not been replaced.’ [Nick Burton1] CONTENTS training as key factors in any parks rebirth. Despite a consensus that the old-fashioned park keeper and his Overview 2 authoritarian ‘keep off the grass’ image were out of place A note on nomenclature 4 in the 21st century, the matter of his disappearance crept back constantly in discussions.The press have published The work of the park keeper 5 articles4, 5, 6 highlighting the need for safer public open Park keepers and gardening skills 6 spaces, and in particular for a rebirth of the park keeper’s role. The provision of park-keeping services 7 English Heritage, as the government’s advisor on the Uniforms 8 historic environment, has joined forces with other agencies Wages and status 9 to research the skills shortage in public parks.These efforts Staffing levels at London parks 10 have contributed to the government’s ‘Cleaner, Safer, Greener’ agenda,7 with its emphasis on tackling crime and The park keeper and the community 12 safety, vandalism and graffiti, litter, dog fouling and related issues, and on broader targets such as the enhancement of children’s access to culture and sport in our parks The demise of the park keeper 13 and green spaces.
    [Show full text]
  • Night Buses from Finsbury Park
    Night buses from Finsbury Park N29 N279 towards Waltham Cross Bus Station from stops L, R, X from stops L, R, X Eneld Little Park Gardens Little Park Gardens ENFIELD Winchmore Hill Winchmore Hill N279 Edmonton Green MUSWELL N29 Upper Edmonton MUSWELL N29 Angel Corner for Silver Street HILL Palmers Green North Circular Road W7 Alexandra Palace White Hart Lane Northumberland Great Cambridge Road from stop A W7 Ice Rink Great Cambridge Road Park Muswell Hill W3 Alexandra Wood Perth W3 White Broadway Alexandra Park Crouch End Palace Green Road Hart W3 Park Road/Priory Road Tottenham Lane Lane YMCA from stop B WOOD Bruce Grove Turnpike Lane Ferme Park Road W7 Ferme Park Road GREEN Crouch End Broadway W7 W3 TOTTENHAM N29 Tottenham Town Hall Stroud Green N29 N279 Crouch Hill Stapleton Hall Road Harringay Green Lanes Seven Sisters D. N253 D E S Clapton LENNOX R C T Amhurst Stamford Stamford Hill A ROU Finsbury Park Common PL Park Hill Broadway S D Park RI R CL O M IFTON M FTON B Manor House A GREEN STAMFORD Clapton C T AP C ER N29 N253 N279 HILL . L N29 N253 N279 HILL ROAD L CLAPTON Clapton Pond M N Finsbury G H N Hackney Downs H IO IO Park ACE Park ACE WELLS TERRACE L WELLS TERRACE L P P BLA STAT HACKNEY STAT HACKNEY CKS Hackney Central T O AP C N N253 F CK ONTHI ROAD K ROAD ET Hackney Mare Street EET for London Fields L R R for London Fields L ROAD ST K OC RO P Cambridge Heath S Blackstock Road BETHNAL Cambridge Heath EVEN SISTERS S P X S P X D D R R GREEN A A AH AH Bethnal Green Highbury Barn RO RO ROA D ROA D S S ’ ’ HIGHBURY S S Whitechapel A D Whitechapel A T D T N19 Highbury & Islington M Highbury & Islington M for Royal London Hospital O O H H T T W W .
    [Show full text]
  • Barnard Park.Pdf
    Development Management Service PLANNING COMMITTEE REPORT Planning and Development Division Environment and Regeneration Department PO Box 3333 222 Upper Street LONDON N1 1YA PLANNING SUB COMMITTEE A NON-EXEMPT Date: 18 July 2016 Application number P2016/1109/FUL Application type Full Planning Application (Council Own) Ward Barnsbury Listed building Unlisted Conservation area Barnsbury Development Plan Context Open Space, Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) Licensing Implications None Site Address Barnard Park, Copenhagen Street, Islington, London, N1 0NL Proposal Refurbishment of east side of Barnard Park involving replacement of existing sports pitch (8,990 square metres) with a new sports pitch (2,763 square metres) that would be repositioned and re-oriented in the centre of the park. The creation of a large ‘Village Green’ grass area and other works including planting and landscaping, construction of turfed areas and re-design of pathways. Case Officer Pedro Rizo Applicant London Borough of Islington - Kate Lynch Agent None 1. RECOMMENDATION The Committee is asked to resolve to GRANT planning permission and referral to Secretary of State: 1. Subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1; 2. And conditional upon the completion of a Director’s Service Legal Agreement securing the heads of terms set out in Appendix 1. P-RPT-COM-Main 2. Site Plan (Site outlined in BLACK) 3. PHOTOS OF SITE/STREET Image 1: Aerial photograph showing the existing sports pitch P-RPT-COM-Main Image 2: Masterplan of Proposed Development (phase one outlined) Image 2: View of the park and existing footpaths (access from Barnsbury Road P-RPT-COM-Main Image 4 - View of the east side of the existing sports pitch.
    [Show full text]
  • Finsbury Park
    FINSBURY PARK Park Management Plan 2020 (minor amendments January 2021) Finsbury Park: Park Management Plan amended Jan 2021 Section Heading Page Contents Foreword by Councillor Hearn 4 Draft open space vision in Haringey 5 Purpose of the management plan 6 1.0 Setting the Scene 1.1 Haringey in a nutshell 7 1.2 The demographics of Haringey 7 1.3 Deprivation 8 1.4 Open space provision in Haringey 8 2.0 About Finsbury Park 2.1 Site location and description 9 2.2 Facilities 9 2.3 Buildings 17 2.4 Trees 18 3.0 A welcoming place 3.1 Visiting Finsbury Park 21 3.2 Entrances 23 3.3 Access for all 24 3.4 Signage 25 3.5 Toilet facilities and refreshments 26 3.6 Events 26 4.0 A clean and well-maintained park 4.1 Operational and management responsibility for parks 30 4.2 Current maintenance by Parks Operations 31 4.3 Asset management and project management 32 4.4 Scheduled maintenance 34 4.5 Setting and measuring service standards 38 4.6 Monitoring the condition of equipment and physical assets 39 4.7 Tree maintenance programme 40 4.8 Graffiti 40 4.9 Maintenance of buildings, equipment and landscape 40 4.10 Hygiene 40 5.0 Healthy, safe and secure place to visit 5.1 Smoking 42 5.2 Alcohol 42 5.3 Walking 42 5.4 Health and safety 43 5.5 Reporting issues with the ‘Love Clean Streets’ app 44 5.6 Community safety and policing 45 5.7 Extending Neighbourhood Watch into parks 45 5.8 Designing out crime 46 5.9 24 hour access 48 5.10 Dogs and dog control orders 49 6.0 Sustainability 6.1 Greenest borough strategy 51 6.2 Pesticide use 51 6.3 Sustainable use of
    [Show full text]
  • Great Northern Route
    Wells-next-the-Sea SERVICES AND FACILITIES Burnham Market Hunstanton This is a general guide to the basic daily services. Not all trains stop at Fakenham all stations on each coloured line, so please check the timetable. Dersingham Routes are shown in different colours to help identify the general pattern. Sandringham King’s Lynn Great Northern LIMITED REGULAR ROUTE Watlington SERVICE SERVICE IDENTITY GN1 King’s Lynn and Cambridge Downham Market Wisbech GN2 Cambridge local to Yorkshire, the North East and Scotland Littleport to Norwich GN3 Peterborough and Ipswich GN4 Hertford Ely GN5 Welwyn Waterbeach Other train operators may provide additional services along some of our routes. Peterborough to Newmarket Cambridge North and Ipswich Other train operators’ routes St. Ives Bus links Huntingdon Cambridge Principal stations to Stansted Airport Foxton and London Interchange with London Underground St. Neots Interchange with London Overground Shepreth Interchange with other operators’ train services Sandy Meldreth Biggleswade Royston Ashwell & Morden ACCESSIBILITY Arlesey Baldock Step-Free access between the street and all platforms Letchworth Garden City Hitchin Some step-free access between the street and platforms Step-free access is available in the direction of the arrow Stevenage Watton-at-Stone No step-free access between the street and platforms Knebworth Notes: Hertford North Platform access points may vary and there may not be be step-free access to Welwyn North or between all station areas or facilities. Access routes may be unsuitable for Welwyn Garden City Bayford unassisted wheelchair users owing to the gradient of ramps or other reasons. St. Albans Hatfield Cuffley We want to be able to offer you the best possible assistance, so we ask you to contact us in advance of your journey if possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 8 London Borough of Haringey’S Park User Survey
    Appendix 8 London Borough of Haringey’s Park User Survey Extract from 2013 Park User Survey – London Borough of Haringey Throughout January 2013 people were invited to tell us what they thought of the borough’s parks and open spaces. 833 responses were received, with over 80% of respondents telling us they used a Haringey managed park, an increase of 10% since 2009. Headline results reveal that: 70% of respondents felt the condition of their local park was either the same or better than it was before the budget reductions happened in 2011 88% of respondents either feel safe or very safe when they use their local park Finsbury Park was the park that received the most responses followed equally by Downhill’s Park, Priory Park and Albert Road Recreation Ground People are using the parks less to relax and more for family outings, playing with friends and to observe wildlife four times as many people said they were volunteering on projects in parks The frequency and time when people used the park remained broadly the same People felt that the facilities within the park were either Good or Fair Individual park results have now been fed into management plans and will inform any future improvements. Page 1 of 6 Con Since Jan 2011 Chart 2000.00% Woodside Park 1800.00% Wood Green Common White Hart Lane Recreation Ground Tower Gardens 1600.00% Tottenham Green Stationers Park 1400.00% Springfield Park Shepherds Hill Gardens Russell Park 1200.00% Queen's Wood Priory Park 1000.00% Parkland Walk Paignton Park Nightingale Gardens 800.00% Muswell
    [Show full text]
  • Buxton Road, Stroud Green, N19 £518 Per Week
    Highbury 102 Highbury Park London N5 2XE Tel: 020 7288 9440 [email protected] Buxton Road, Stroud Green, N19 £518 per week (£2,250 pcm) 4 bedrooms, 2 Bathrooms Preliminary Details A beautifully presented, spacious four bedroom family home, finished to a high standard. As you enter via your private entrance you are met with an abundance of light and undisturbed view to the garden. The kitchen comes fully equip, large enough to home a 6 seater table for the family to enjoy, The bi-folding floor to ceiling doors open onto a trendy low maintenance garden. As you continue through the home to the second floor you a welcomed with a large lounge along with a bathroom and double bedroom. The third floor homes two further bedrooms one with en-suite. This property is perfectly located with green spaces of Whittington Park along with transport facilities including Archway underground (Northern Line) station and Upper Holloway (overground station). A Must See Property!! Key Features • Sharers Welcome • Four Bedrooms • Over 1100SQFT. • Finished to a High Standard • Private Garden • Two bathrooms and Separate W/C Highbury | 102 Highbury Park, London, N5 2XE | Tel: 020 7288 9440 | [email protected] 1 Area Overview With green spaces, an urban high street and an abundance of Victorian terraces, Stroud Green is a charming area along the main strip of Stroud Green Road. Well-known for bordering onto the glorious open space of Finsbury Park, the area benefits from a selection of exciting restaurants and bars and a warm, community atmosphere. Although Stroud Green doesn’t benefit from its own Tube station, residents are within 10 minutes of Finsbury Park (Victorian and Piccadilly Lines) and Manor House (Northern Line) underground stations, plus Crouch End Overground is also nearby.
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic Noise in London's Parks
    Traffic noise in London's parks a A REPORT BY CPRE LONDON MAY 2018 Traffic Noise in London’s Parks: CPRE London May 2018 Contents 1. Foreword p2 2. Summary and recommendations p3 3. Why research traffic noise in parks? P5 Notes on legislation and policy p8 4. Methodology p9 5. Findings p12 6. Solutions to traffic noise in parks p14 Permanent traffic re-routing p14 Regular temporary street closures p15 Noise mitigation measures like natural or man-made barriers p15 7. ‘Good’ parks, Green Flags and traffic noise p18 8. Tables and Graphs p21 9. References p30 Graph 1 – ‘Good parks’ scores compared to ‘noisy parks’ scores p18 Table 1 – Main categorisation p21 Table 2 – Parks severely impacted by noise (by borough, best to worst) p22 Table 3 – Parks with no noise (by borough, best to worst) p23 Table 4 – Parks completely impacted by noise (by borough, best to worst) p24 Table 5 – Parks impacted by particularly loud noise (by borough, best to worst) p25 Graph 2 – of data in Table 2 p26 Graph 3 – of data in Table 3 p27 Graph 4 – of data in Table 4 p28 Graph 5 – of data in Table 5 p29 1 Traffic Noise in London’s Parks: CPRE London May 2018 1. Foreword The London Mayor’s draft Environment Strategy says: “All Londoners should be able to enjoy the very best parks, trees and wildlife.”i We agree. But our new research shows that many of London’s parks, and our enjoyment of them, are marred by traffic noise. Though 44% of the 885 London parks we surveyed are completely free from the sound of traffic, almost a third (29%) are severely impacted by noise from nearby roads.
    [Show full text]
  • Finsbury Park to Alexandra Palace Capacity Scheme
    Finsbury Park to Alexandra Palace Capacity Scheme Project Background Finsbury Park to Alexandra Palace Capacity Scheme This scheme formed part of Network Rail’s East Coast Main Line (ECML), - the UK’s main railway corridor between London and Edinburgh, via Client Leeds, York and Newcastle. This project will ease a congestion and UK Department for Transport improved service reliability, and provided extra capacity for more trains Location into central London. North London, UK The Finsbury Park to Alexandra Palace area is a severe bottleneck on Start Date the ECML. Performance improvement is one of the primary drivers for 2009 this scheme to support improvement towards HLOS performance targets of PPM 93% for London suburban services and 92% for Long Distance End Date High Speed services by March 2014. 2014 It has provided improved performance and flexibility for suburban Duration 63 months services. It also contributed towards the HLOS ECML route passenger kilometre target through supporting an increase in Contract Value Long Distance High Speed passenger capacity. £53.8m Services Provided Whole railway upgrade, track/ permanent way, programme management For more information please visit www.networkrailconsulting.com Scope of Works Key Project Outputs The project delivered the following The following outputs were delivered: improved capacity scope: performance improvements through increased optimisation of paths upgrading of sections of line reduction of delays increasing operational flexibility from freight to passenger service at Finsbury
    [Show full text]
  • Islington Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) Review
    Islington SINC Review Prepared by LUC April 2018 Planning & EIA LUC LONDON Offices also in: Land Use Consultants Ltd Registered in England Design 43 Chalton Street London Registered number: 2549296 Landscape Planning London Bristol Registered Office: Landscape Management NW1 1JD Glasgow 43 Chalton Street Ecology T +44 (0)20 7383 5784 Edinburgh London NW1 1JD Mapping & Visualisation [email protected] FS 566056 EMS 566057 LUC uses 100% recycled paper Project Title: Islington SINC Review Client: London Borough of Islington Version Date Version Details Prepared by Checked by Approved by 1 11/04/2018 Issue 1 Amy Coleman Peter Peter Lawrence Lawrence 2 20/04/2018 Issue 2 – following client Amy Coleman Peter Peter review Lawrence Lawrence Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Method 2 Review of Previous Surveys 3 Biological Records Review 3 Site Surveys 3 Site Assessment 4 Site Limitations 5 3 Survey Findings and Assessment 6 Summary 6 Appendix 1 1 Site Survey Pro-formas 1 Appendix 2 2 Phase 1 Habitat Survey – Habitat Legend 2 Appendix 3 3 Site Overview Map 3 Tables Table 2.1 Site Summary 2 Table 2.2 GLA assessment criteria 5 Table 3.1 Survey Summary and Recommendations 9 1 Introduction 1.1 LUC was appointed in December 2017, by the London Borough of Islington (LBI), to undertake habitat surveys and a review of selected sites within the borough (hereafter referred to as ‘the Sites’). This was to assess specific Sites identified by LBI Officers and consultees to inform the review of the Local Plan currently in progress. These Sites comprised either: • Existing Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) which have recently undergone changes and therefore may have improved or enhanced sufficiently to meet criteria to be upgraded and/or extended; • Existing SINCs which may have declined in condition to such an extent that designation at the current level may no longer be appropriate; • Potential Sites currently without SINC status which may meet criteria to be designated as a SINC.
    [Show full text]
  • Development Management Policies June 2013
    Islington’s Local Plan: Development Management Policies June 2013 Adopted 27 June 2013 Contents List of policies 3 1 Introduction 7 2 Design and heritage 11 3 Housing 30 4 Shops, culture and services 57 5 Employment 84 6 Health and open space 95 7 Energy and environmental standards 111 8 Transport 121 9 Infrastructure and implementation 133 10 Monitoring 138 Appendix Appendix 1 Local Views 146 Appendix 2 Primary and Secondary Frontages 152 Appendix 3 Local Shopping Areas 155 Appendix 4 Open spaces, SINCs and adventure playgrounds 160 Appendix 5 Transport Assessments and Travel Plans 168 Appendix 6 Cycling 172 Appendix 7 Archaeological Priority Areas and Scheduled Monuments 176 Appendix 8 Rail Safeguarding Areas 185 Appendix 9 Heritage 191 Development Management Policies - Adoption 2013 Islington Council Contents Appendix 10 Noise Exposure Categories and standards 197 Appendix 11 Marketing and market demand evidence 200 Appendix 12 Landscape plans 203 Appendix 13 Glossary 205 Islington Council Development Management Policies - Adoption 2013 List of policies List of policies Policy number Policy name Page Chapter 2: Design and heritage DM2.1 Design 11 DM2.2 Inclusive Design 16 DM2.3 Heritage 18 DM2.4 Protected views 23 DM2.5 Landmarks 24 DM2.6 Advertisements 25 DM2.7 Telecommunications and utilities 26 Chapter 3: Housing DM3.1 Mix of housing sizes 29 DM3.2 Existing housing 31 DM3.3 Residential conversions and extensions 31 DM3.4 Housing standards 34 DM3.5 Private outdoor space 42 DM3.6 Play space 45 DM3.7 Noise and vibration (residential
    [Show full text]