Open Spaces and Sports Facilities Assessment Technical Study

OPEN SPACES AND SPORTS FACILITIES ASSESSMENT TECHNICAL STUDY

Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

October 2017

Nortoft Partnerships Limited 2 Green Lodge Barn, Nobottle, Northampton NN7 4HD Tel: 01604 586526 Fax: 01604 587719 Email: [email protected] Web: www.nortoft.co.uk

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY OF THE METHODOLOGY 8 OPEN SPACES ACROSS EAST HERTS 12 PARKS AND GARDENS 14 AMENITY GREEN SPACE 27 COMBINED PARKS AND GARDENS AND AMENITY GREEN SPACE 43 NATURAL AND SEMI NATURAL GREEN SPACE 50 CHILDREN’S PLAY AND TEENAGE PROVISION 68 ALLOTMENTS 90 CEMETERIES AND CHURCHYARDS 105 IMPLEMENTATION 108

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 1 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Open space typologies 6 Figure 2: Protected open space sites 7 Figure 3: Parish and wards in East Herts 10 Figure 4: Current levels of open space by typology 12 Figure 5: Current levels of children’s play and youth provision 12 Figure 6: Open spaces in East Herts – all typologies 13 Figure 7: Parks and Gardens across East Herts with existing accessibility 15 Figure 8: Existing adopted standards for Parks and Gardens 16 Figure 9: Existing standards testing for Parks and Gardens 17 Figure 10: Parks and Gardens quality scores 19 Figure 11: Parks and Gardens with quality issues 20 Figure 12: Comparators for Parks and Gardens 21 Figure 13: Proposed standard testing for Parks and Gardens 24 Figure 14: Parks and Gardens proposed accessibility standards 26 Figure 15: Amenity Green Space across East Herts with current accessibility 29 Figure 16: Existing adopted standards for Amenity Green Space 30 Figure 17: Existing standards testing for Amenity Green Space 32 Figure 18: Average quality scores for Amenity Green Space 34 Figure 19: Amenity Green Space with quality issues 34 Figure 20: Comparators for Amenity Green Space 37 Figure 21: Proposed standards testing for Amenity Green Space 40 Figure 22: Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Spaces – Large sites 44 Figure 23: Proposed quantity testing for combined Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space 45 Figure 24: Amenity Green Space proposed accessibility standard 47 Figure 25: Large Natural and Semi Natural Green Space sites 50 Figure 26: Existing adopted standards for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space 51 Figure 27: Natural and Semi Natural Green Space average quality 53 Figure 28: Natural and Semi Natural Green Space existing accessibility 54 Figure 29: Natural and Semi Natural Green Space existing accessibility standards 55 Figure 30: Comparators for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space 57 Figure 31: Geographical comparators for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space 58 Figure 32: ANGSt standard – 2 ha within 300m 60 Figure 33: ANGSt standard – 20 ha within 2km 61 Figure 34: ANGSt standard – 100 ha within 5km 62 Figure 35: Proposed accessibility standard for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space 64 Figure 36: Natural and Semi Natural Green Space proposed accessibility standards 66 Figure 37: Children’s Play sites in East Herts 71 Figure 38: Provision for teenagers in East Herts 72 Figure 39: Existing adopted standards for Children and Young People 73 Figure 40: Testing the existing standards for Children’s Play and teenage provision 75 Figure 41: Children’s play and teenage provision with quality issues 78 Figure 42: Comparators for Children’s Play and Youth provision 80 Figure 43: Proposed accessibility standards for Children’s Play 82 Figure 44: Proposed accessibility standards for Teenage Facilities 83

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 2 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 45: Proposed accessibility testing for Children’s Play and Teenage provision 84 Figure 46: Existing adopted standards for Allotments 92 Figure 47: Existing accessibility standards for allotments 94 Figure 48: Testing the existing standards for allotments 95 Figure 49: Allotments – vacancy and flagged quality summary 97 Figure 50: CIPFA Comparators for Allotments 99 Figure 51: Allotments across East Herts – proposed accessibility 101 Figure 52: Testing of proposed allotment standards 102 Figure 53: Churchyards and cemeteries within East Herts 106 Figure 54: Quality scores for Cemeteries and Churchyards 107 Figure 55: Proposed planning standards for open space 109

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 3 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1: Site audit templates

APPENDIX 2: Open spaces maps for Towns and Group 1 Villages

APPENDIX 3: Existing standards testing

APPENDIX 4: Proposed standards testing

APPENDIX 5: Fields in Trust play definitions

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 4 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

INTRODUCTION

This Open Spaces Assessment Study is part of East Hertfordshire Council’s Open Space Sports Facilities Assessment and Strategies study, which covers open spaces and both indoor and outdoor sports facilities. The Background and Context report (Part 1) applies to all of sports facility provision and open spaces. The structure for these reports is:

Part 1: Background and context Part 2: Built facilities strategy Part 3: Playing pitch strategy Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

East Hertfordshire Council requires this Open Spaces Assessment to assess the existing provision of open space in East Herts, building on, and updating a previous study published in 2005 (East Herts Council, 2005), but also having regard to changes in national planning policy. The study makes an assessment of future needs within the timescale of the new Local Plan to 2033.

The findings and recommendations will:

 Provide a robust evidence base for strategy development.  Support the drafting of planning policy for the East Hertfordshire Local Plan (Part 2).  Determine future provision needs (e.g. protection, enhancement, surplus to requirements).  Inform the determination of planning applications.  Prioritise East Hertfordshire Council’s and its partners’ capital and revenue investment, including S106 and any future Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) receipts.

The East Hertfordshire PPG17 Open Spaces Strategy 2005 uses the Government definition of open space, and this has been carried forwards in this study:

Government guidance defines open space as: “all open space of public value, including not just land, but also areas of water such as rivers, canals, lakes and reservoirs which offer important opportunities for sport and recreation and can also act as a visual amenity”.

The study uses well established categories of open space which originated in the national planning policy guidance note (PPG17). These are:

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 5 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 1: Open space typologies

Parks and Gardens These range from major parks to small memorial gardens – often used for informal recreation and community events. These may include paths, benches, footpaths, tree and shrub planting, formal gardens, close mown grass for ball games / picnics etc, play areas, facilities for young people, and toilets. Examples of these sites include: Pishiobury Park, Sawbridgeworth and Panshanger Park, Hertford. Amenity green Most commonly found in housing areas. Includes informal space recreation green spaces abd village greens. Used for informal activities close to home or work, children’s casual play, enhancement of the appearance of residential areas. Examples include: Lower Bourne Gardens, Ware and Brickendon Green, Brickendon. Natural and semi These include publicly accessible woodlands, as well as natural green space urban forestry, scrub, grasslands (e.g. commons, meadows), wetlands and wastelands. Uses include wildlife conservation, biodiversity and environmental education and awareness. A high proportion of these will be in the countryside rather than the urban areas. Examples include: Kings Mead (Water Meads) in Hertford/Ware and Broxbourne Wood Nature Reserve in Brickendon Liberty. Children and young Areas designed primarily for play and social interaction people’s facilities involving children below age 12, specifically designed as equipped play facilities.

And

Areas designed primarily for play and social interaction involving young people aged 12 and above, specifically designed for use by young people (e.g. youth shelters, skateboard parks etc). Allotments, Sites laid out for people to grow their own vegetables, fruit community gardens and flowers as part of the long‐term promotion of and urban farms sustainability, health and social inclusion. Cemeteries & Including closed churchyards or other burial grounds. churchyards

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 6 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Open space sites can be formally protected, either because they are village greens or because they are protected by the Fields in Trust. These sites are usually well used by their communities and are not therefore usually under threat from development. The protected sites in East Herts are listed in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Protected open space sites

Location Protected site Designation Hertford Hartham Common Fields In Trust Ware The Bury Fields Fields In Trust Ardeley Ardeley – School Lane Fields In Trust Ware Ware Fields In Trust High Wych High Wych Fields In Trust Sawbridgeworth Cutforth Road Recreation Ground Fields In Trust Hormead The Meads Fields In Trust Aspendon The Mead Town/Village Green High Wych Allens Green Town/Village Green High Wych King Georges Playing Field Town/Village Green Sacombe Sacombe Green Town/Village Green Hertingfordbury Hetty Green Town/Village Green Cumberland green and Cole Green Hertingfordbury Town/Village Green Staines Green Hertingfordbury Town/Village Green Birch Green Hertingfordbury Town/Village Green Eastend Green Hertingfordbury Town/Village Green Little Hadham Playing Field Town/Village Green Braughing The Square Town/Village Green Cottered Cross Bowling Bull and School Green Town/Village Green Datchworth Datchworth Green Town/Village Green Little Munden Village Green Town/Village Green Sacombe Potters Green Town/Village Green Brickendon Liberty Coldhall Green Town/Village Green Brickendon Liberty Emmanuel Pollards Town/Village Green Tewin Upper Green Town/Village Green Tewin Tewin Lower Green Town/Village Green Standon Standon Village Green Town/Village Green Tewin Bulls Green Town/Village Green Bengeo Rural Chapmore End Pond and Land Town/Village Green Brickendon Liberty Brickendon Green Town/Village Green Westmill Village Greens Town/Village Green Barkway The Pond Town/Village Green Meesden Meesden Green Town/Village Green Ware Rural Reeves Green Town/Village Green Ware Rural Babbs Green Town/Village Green Ware Rural Helham Green Town/Village Green Ware Rural Nobland Green Town/Village Green

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 7 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment SUMMARY OF THE METHODOLOGY

The starting point for the sites list for the study was the information behind the PPG17 Open Space Strategy 2005. The following criteria were agreed as the typologies to be included.

Open Space Typology Criteria Parks and Gardens All sites Natural and semi‐ Only include where these have a clear recreational natural green space function, are part of public open space and are at least 0.2ha in size. Amenity green space Min size 0.2ha unless there is a clear recreational function e.g. children’s play. Includes informal unequipped play and kickabout areas. Children’s Play All sites Provision for young Open access MUGAs, teenage shelters, skate parks, people/teenagers outdoor basketball etc. Allotments All sites Churchyards and Assessment in relation to open space criteria for sites cemeteries that have a clear recreational purpose.

Assessment templates and sampling

The detailed assessment criteria for each typology was agreed with East Hertfordshire Council (EHC). All of the site auditing was undertaken by a single highly experienced consultant in order to ensure consistency of approach.

Confirming the sites pre‐audit

The following steps were followed to update the previous sites list for auditing:

 Desk based assessment of the GIS layer of all sites and typologies provided by EHC, to amend/reclassify to new typologies and amended scope.  Added new open space sites known to be completed from planning records since the last audit.  Consultation with the Parish and Town Councils to identify any changes in their areas.  Updating of the sites database in response from the consultation feedback.

Auditing

Each site was assessed during late March/April 2017 against the agreed templates (details provided in Appendix 1) and the majority were photographed to confirm site quality and any issues identified in the assessment. Due to child protection issues and actual presence on some sites of children during the time of the audit, there are a small number sites, which were not possible to photograph.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 8 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Consultation

Consultation about open spaces included a survey sent out to all parish and town councils. The survey included a map of all the open spaces within the parish, and asked councils to amend the sites as necessary.

In addition, the consultation asked councils to provide details for any known projects, either planned or underway.

Of the parishes and town councils, there were responses from 18 of the 50 councils. Bishops Stortford and Ware were the only towns where a response was not received.

Site lists

The final sites list (post audit) was agreed with East Herts officers in June 2017 and this was the basis for the assessment.

Assessment

Each open space typology has been tested against the currently adopted standards, developed from the 2009 Open Space, Sport and Recreation SPD (East Herts Council , 2009). The assessment includes tests for quantity, quality and accessibility. Further testing has then been undertaken where it appears that the existing standards require to be updated. The recommended standards then emerge based on the testing and the consideration of comparator authority standards (see para 1.14 below) and best practice guidance.

The PPG17 Open Spaces Strategy 2005 is the basis for this study. However, the 2009 Open Space, Sport and Recreation SPD updated several of the existing standards, and is therefore used as the basis for the testing of the existing standards.

Both the existing and proposed standards for open space have been tested for all parishes in East Herts.

Standards are based on a provision per 1000 people therefore the population of each parish is needed to enable the testing to be completed. The most recent population data for parishes is from the 2011 census.

The sub areas used in this open space strategy are different to those used in Part 1 (Background and Context) and Part 3 (Playing Pitch Strategy) as open spaces are much more of a local facility, therefore requiring a smaller sub area assessment. The existing parish boundaries have been used as the basis for assessment and the main focus is on the Towns and Group 1 Villages as defined in the Village Hierarchy Study (East Herts Council, 2016).

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 9 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 3: Parish and wards in East Herts

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 10 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Key to sub areas map:

Parish/Ward name Map ref Parish/Ward name Map ref Albury CP 1 High Wych CP 26 Anstey CP 2 Hormead CP 27 Ardeley CP 3 Hunsdon CP 28 Aspenden CP 4 Little Berkhamsted CP 29 Aston CP 5 Little Hadham CP 30 Bayford CP 6 Little Munden CP 31 Bengeo Rural CP 7 Meesden CP 32 Benington CP 8 Much Hadham CP 33 Bishop's Stortford CP 9 Sacombe CP 34 Bramfield CP 10 Sawbridgeworth CP 35 Braughing CP 11 Standon CP 36 Brent Pelham CP 12 Stanstead Abbots CP 37 Brickendon Liberty CP 13 Stanstead St. Margarets CP 38 Buckland CP 14 Stapleford CP 39 Buntingford CP 15 Stocking Pelham CP 40 Cottered CP 16 Tewin CP 41 Datchworth CP 17 Thorley CP 42 Eastwick CP 18 Thundridge CP 43 Furneux Pelham CP 19 Walkern CP 44 Gilston CP 20 Ware CP 45 Great Amwell CP 21 Wareside CP 46 Great Munden CP 22 Watton‐at‐Stone CP 47 Hertford CP 23 Westmill CP 48 Hertford Heath CP 24 Widford CP 49 Hertingfordbury CP 25 Wyddial CP 50

Comparator authorities

In relation to comparator authorities, it is appropriate to use the CIPFA ‘Nearest Neighbour’ model. This was developed by CIPFA (the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy) to aid local authorities in comparative and benchmarking exercises. It is widely used across both central and local government. The model uses a number of variables to calculate similarity between local authorities. Examples of these variables include population, unemployment rates, tax base per head of population, council tax bands and mortality ratios.

The local authorities that are ‘similar’ to East Hertfordshire are: Sevenoaks, South Oxfordshire, St Albans and the Vale of White Horse.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 11 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment OPEN SPACES ACROSS EAST HERTS

There are a large number of open spaces across East Herts with different primary purposes, including country parks, amenity green spaces, children’s play, and allotments. All of the sites assessed in this study are mapped district‐wide in Figure 6 by typology, which provides a valuable overview of the extent and purpose of the existing open space network.

Appendix 2 provides a series of maps which provide a more detailed overview of the open spaces provision across the Towns of Bishop’s Stortford, Sawbridgeworth, Hertford, Ware, Buntingford and also for the Group 1 Villages of Stanstead Abbots, Stanstead St Margarets, Watton‐at‐Stone, Standon, Much Hadham, Braughing, Hunsdon, Walkern and Hertford Heath. These groupings are in line with the East Herts Local Plan settlement hierarchy (East Herts Council, 2016).

The total area of open space identified in the audit is shown below along with the current level of provision per 1000 population.

Figure 4: Current levels of open space by typology

Current level of provision (Ha per Typology Area (hectares) 1000 population) Parks and Gardens 385.4 2.8 Amenity Green Space 234.1 1.7 Natural and Semi Natural Green Space 740.9 5.4 Allotments 42.1 0.3 Cemeteries & Churchyards 52.5 0.4 Total 1455 10.6

The total number and area of Children’s Play Areas and Youth Sites identified in the audit are shown in Figure 5 along with the current level of provision per 1000 population.

Children’s play areas or youth facilities will often be found within a larger site, such as a park or recreation ground. Where this is the case, the physical area of the facility is incorporated into the overall total area of the larger site and this is included in the parish and ward totals.

Figure 5: Current levels of children’s play and youth provision

Current level of Current level of Number of provision (Sites per provision (ha per Typology sites Area (hectares) 1000 population) 1000 population) Children’s Play Sites 104 8.7 0.8 0.06 Youth Provision 48 2.2 0.3 0.02

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 12 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 6: Open spaces in East Herts – all typologies

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 13 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment PARKS AND GARDENS

The Parks and Gardens typology includes town parks, formal gardens, country parks and pocket parks. The larger parks provide accessible, high quality open space to be enjoyed by the general public, for a range of formal and informal activities. Pocket Parks are generally maintained by community groups to promote the wildlife value of the site, often providing recreation opportunities such as pond dipping, bird watching and picnics.

The definition of this typology in the PPG17 Open Spaces 2005 study was:

This type of open space includes urban parks and formal gardens that, as their primary purpose, provide opportunities for various informal recreation and community events. Recreation grounds where there is, for example planting, and therefore elements of formal gardens, whilst their role is acknowledged, are not included under this typology.

As Parks and Gardens are multi‐functional green spaces they are more likely to be a specific destination, compared to smaller open spaces closer to home. They are often high value spaces which can act as an important focal point in a community, contributing towards the identity of an area and a sense of place. Larger parks can have an important focus at the neighbourhood scale, while small parks can have a more local focus. Parks and Gardens offer a number of activities within a designed space and function as important social venues for individuals and groups.

As these sites are multifunctional the total area of each Park or Garden is taken as including the separate areas of any facilities within them, such as children’s play areas, tennis courts, or football pitches. Some of these facilities are also addressed separately within this report, for example: children’s play and teenage facilities.

Current provision and assessment

There are 8 sites across East Herts which meet the criteria to be included in the Parks and Gardens typology. Figure 7 provides an overview of these sites across the district.

A walking catchment of 800m (the current adopted standard) has been applied to each of the parishes in order to show the accessibility at a local level (Figure 7).

Parks and Gardens which are outside of the district boundary within other authorities are too far away to provide any significant extra coverage of this typology for the residents of the authority.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 14 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 7: Parks and Gardens across East Herts with existing accessibility

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 15 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Testing the existing standards

The existing adopted standards for Parks and Gardens are:

Figure 8: Existing adopted standards for Parks and Gardens

Quantity per Accessibility Quality 1000 people Parks and 0.53ha 800m Urban parks and gardens Gardens should be clean and litter free. They should be well maintained, with well‐kept grass, planting and vegetation and high quality and appropriate ancillary facilities.

The previous study identified 67.22ha of Parks and Gardens across the district, which gave a district wide average provision of 0.53ha.

The testing of the existing standards in relation to quantity and accessibility is summarised in Figure 9 for the Towns and Group 1 Villages. Testing of existing standards for all other parishes is provided in Appendix 3.

Quantity

The existing quantity standard for Parks and Gardens of 0.53ha per 1000 is only achieved in 2 of the 5 towns; Hertford and Sawbridgeworth. The remaining 3 towns all have a deficit in provision, with Bishop’s Stortford and Ware requiring an additional 17ha and 9ha respectively to meet the existing quantity standard. This theoretical surplus in provision compared to the standard in Hertford and Sawbridgeworth equates to over 55ha of Parks and Gardens space.

None of the Group 1 Villages have a Park and Garden within the parish boundary.

The existing standard was based on the average district wide quantity provision of Parks and Gardens at the time of the 2005 PPG17 report. The current average district wide quantity provision is 2.8ha per 1000.

The substantial increase in the average provision has occurred due to the inclusion of Panshanger Park; a 352ha Park and Garden located in Hertford and Hertingfordbury, accounting for 84% of the total Parks and Gardens space in East Herts. If the area of Panshanger Park is removed from the calculation of average provision, the current average district provision is 0.44ha per 1000.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 16 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 9: Existing standards testing for Parks and Gardens

Impact of Applying applied provision provision Existing Existing standard standard Existing Provision provision (surplus or (surplus or Provision standard (ha per 1000 deficit / 1000 deficit by total Accessibility of main settlement Parish Population (total ha) / 1000 popn) popn popn) ha) (800m) Bishop's Stortford town centre is the only area to have access. Areas to the north of Parsonage Lane, east of 37212 2.7 0.53 0.07 ‐0.46 ‐17.0131 Stortford Hall Park, south of Thorley Bishop's Hill and west of Wentworth Drive are Stortford CP not covered by existing accessibility Houses to the south of Crouch 4948 0.9 0.53 0.18 ‐0.35 ‐1.73085 Gardens are not covered by existing Buntingford CP accessibility Houses around Bengeo, Pine Hurst 26783 40.3 0.53 1.51 0.98 26.12778 and Brickendon Lane are not covered Hertford CP by existing accessibility Areas to the north of Sayesbury Sawbridgeworth 8458 33.7 0.53 3.98 3.45 29.22006 Avenue are not covered by existing CP accessibility Ware town centre is the only area to have access. Houses to the north of Homefield Road, east of Vicarage 18799 0.6 0.53 0.03 ‐0.50 ‐9.31368 Road, south of Gilpin Road and west of Wengeo Lane are not covered by Ware CP existing accessibility Braughing CP 1203 0 0.53 0 ‐0.53 ‐0.63759 X

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 17 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Impact of Applying applied provision provision Existing Existing standard standard Existing Provision provision (surplus or (surplus or Provision standard (ha per 1000 deficit / 1000 deficit by total Accessibility of main settlement Parish Population (total ha) / 1000 popn) popn popn) ha) (800m) Hertford Heath 2672 0 0.53 0 ‐0.53 ‐1.41616 CP X Hunsdon CP 1080 0 0.53 0 ‐0.53 ‐0.5724 X

Much Hadham 2087 0 0.53 0 ‐0.53 ‐1.10611 CP X 4335 0 0.53 0 ‐0.53 ‐2.29755 Standon CP X Stanstead Abbots 1950 0 0.53 0 ‐0.53 ‐1.0335 CP X Stanstead St 1652 0 0.53 0 ‐0.53 ‐0.87556 Margarets CP X

1541 0 0.53 0 ‐0.53 ‐0.81673 Walkern CP X Watton‐at‐Stone 2338 0 0.53 0 ‐0.53 ‐1.23914 CP X

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 18 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Accessibility

The existing accessibility catchment for Parks and Gardens of 800m does not provide a complete coverage for all residents in any of the Towns. As there are no Park and Gardens in any of the Group 1 Villages, the existing accessibility standard does not provide any coverage.

Bishop’s Stortford and Ware both have a Park and Garden located close to the town centre. This provides an accessibility coverage for much of the central areas of the towns, however the urban fringes are not covered. This is most apparent in Bishop’s Stortford, with much of the south and north east of the town not covered by the existing accessibility.

A network of Parks and Gardens in Hertford provides an accessibility coverage for a significant proportion of the town. However, areas such as Bengeo and Pine Hurst are not covered.

Buntingford and Sawbridgeworth both show a good coverage from the existing accessibility standard, with the vast majority of residents covered by the existing standards.

Quality

Green Flag is the current formal quality standard for Parks and Gardens, and has proved a useful assessment tool. For Parks and Gardens, the criteria used for quality relates to six areas:

 A Welcoming Place  Healthy, Safe and Secure  Well Maintained and Clean  Conservation and Heritage  Community Involvement  Marketing

The average quality scores for the Parks and Gardens sites are provided in Figure 10.

Figure 10: Parks and Gardens quality scores

Category Average quality score A welcoming place 79% Health, safety and security 68% Well maintained and clean 91% Conservation and heritage 100% Community involvement 47% Marketing 52% Ecosystem Services 80%

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 19 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment The quality criteria for the Parks and Gardens is based on the Green Flag principles and is not easily comparable to the previous adopted quality standard. The scores varied between sites. However, with the exception of marketing and community involvement, all scores indicate a good quality for all categories.

Across all Parks and Gardens, only 4 sites received a poor quality score for one of the Green Flag criteria. Ware Council Park and Layston Court Gardens scored poorly for community involvement. Balls Park scored poorly for marketing and The Sanctuary scored poorly for ecosystem services (see Figure 11). All sites scored 100% for conservation and heritage.

Figure 11: Parks and Gardens with quality issues

Site Site Name Community Marketing Ecosystem ID involvement services

6005 Ware Council Park X 6007 Balls Park X 6002 Layston Court Gardens X 6011 The Sanctuary X

Testing alternative standards

Assessment criteria

The assessment considers alternatives based on current practice nationally, and on the adopted standards across East Herts benchmark comparator authorities.

Fields in Trust

Fields in Trust (FiT) has recently begun reviewing its own standards, and the findings of a national survey of local authorities in England and Wales was provided in their report Review of the Planning and Design for Outdoor Sport and Play, Phase 2 Survey Findings for England and Wales (Fields in Trust, 2015). The report states that the median level of provision for local parks and gardens was 0.8ha per 1000. The accessibility element of the standards was a median of 710m, but varied from as little as 300m for local/pocket parks to 4,300m for major urban and country parks. If measured by walking time, the median was 15 minutes walk from home.

The Fields in Trust has now recommended within their report Guidance for Outdoor Sport and Play: Beyond the Six Acre Standard, England (Fields in Trust, 2015) a minimum quantity guideline of 0.8ha per 1000, with an accessibility standard of 710m walking catchment (approximately 9 minutes walk).

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 20 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment The quality recommendation in the FiT 2015 report for Parks and Gardens is:

 Parks to be of Green Flag status  Appropriately landscaped  Positive management  Provision of footpaths  Designed so as to be free of the fear of harm or crime.

Comparators

The CIPFA benchmark authorities show that East Herts standards are much lower than the comparators authorities, see Figure 12.

Figure 12: Comparators for Parks and Gardens

Parks and Gardens Access (m) Quantity [adopted in Open Space (Ha per 1000) SPD 2009] East Hertfordshire 0.53 800m CIPFA comparators Seven Oaks 1.00 in Swanley (No standard elsewhere) 1200m South Oxfordshire 1.4 (combined for Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space) 710m St Albans 4500m (district parks) 1.2 500m Vale of White Horse 15% of residential area (Combined for Parks and 480m Gardens and Amenity Green Space)

Quantity

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 21 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

Given that:

 The existing quantity standard for Parks and Gardens is based on the district wide provision;  The CIPFA comparators have very different standards;  Parks and Gardens also function as Amenity Green Spaces, as residents are likely to access their nearest sites regardless of its typology;  open space on new developments (excluding large scale SUEs etc.) are unlikely to require the inclusion of a formal Park and Garden due to size and cost;

it is therefore appropriate to consider a combined quantity standard for Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space. This is explored in Section 5.

Quality

The Green Flag criteria are the most appropriate quality standards for Parks and Gardens and achieving or maintaining a Green Flag status should be the goal for all Parks and Gardens. The relevant criteria for parks and gardens are:

 A Welcoming Place  Healthy, Safe and Secure  Well Maintained and Clean  Conservation and Heritage  Community Involvement  Marketing

Accessibility

The existing accessibility standard of 800m does not provide a complete coverage for all residents in any of the Towns or Group 1 Villages.

There is still a need to retain a separate standard for Parks and Gardens to recognise their importance as a destination venue. Considering emerging best practice and East Herts comparator authorities, a 710m walking accessibility is proposed. This uses the FiT guidelines for distance/travel time for Parks and Gardens.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 22 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Proposed standards for Parks and Gardens

As has been outlined above, the existing standards for Parks and Gardens do not accurately reflect the current provision for this typology. Furthermore, comparison between the existing standards and East Herts comparator authorities highlights a considerable variety in both the quantity and accessibility of Parks and Gardens. It is therefore appropriate to review the standards.

Figure 13 provides a summary of the testing of the proposed quantity and accessibility standards for Parks and Gardens.

The proposed quantity standard of 0.8ha per 1000 is based on the Fields in Trust recommended quantity standard. The outcome of the increased quantity standard is provided in Figure 13.

As with the existing quantity standards for Parks and Gardens, only two of the Towns; Hertford and Sawbridgeworth have a surplus in the quantity of Park and Garden space. Reflecting the increase in quantity standards, the remaining Towns and Group 1 Villages all show a greater deficit in provision of Park and Garden space.

The decrease in accessibility from 800m to 710m has reduced resident’s accessibility to Parks and Gardens, but better represents a typical travel time to Parks and Gardens. All of the Towns display at least a partial coverage from the proposed accessibility.

The town centres of Bishop’s Stortford and Ware are within the proposed accessibility catchments, however much of the urban fringe is not covered in either town.

Hertford has a sufficient accessibility coverage for the central and south eastern areas of the town. However, Bengeo and Pinehurst and several smaller urban pockets are not covered by the proposed accessibility.

As none of the Group 1 Villages have a Park and Garden within their boundary, there is no coverage from the proposed accessibility standard.

The proposed accessibility standard for Parks and Gardens is tested in Figure 14 and the proposed standards are provided in Section 5.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 23 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 13: Proposed standard testing for Parks and Gardens

Impact of Applying applied provision provision Existing Existing standard standard Existing Provision provision (surplus or (surplus or Provision standard (ha per 1000 deficit / 1000 deficit by Parish Population (total ha) / 1000 popn) popn popn) total ha) Accessibility of main settlement (710m) Bishop's Stortford town centre is the only area to have access. Areas to the north of Parsonage Lane, east of 37212 2.7 0.8 0.1 ‐0.7 ‐27.1 Stortford Hall Park, south of Thorley Bishop's Hill and west of Westfield Road are not Stortford CP covered by proposed accessibility. Houses to the south of Owles Lane are 4948 0.9 0.8 0.2 ‐0.6 ‐3.1 not covered by the proposed Buntingford CP accessibility. Houses to the north of Warren Park 26783 40.4 0.8 1.5 0.7 19.0 Road and Beane Road are not covered Hertford CP by the proposed accessibility. Houses to the north of Sayesbury Sawbridgeworth 8458 33.7 0.8 4.0 3.2 26.9 Avenue are not covered by the CP proposed accessibility. Houses to the east of Cross Street, north of Kingsway, south of Windmill 18799 0.6 0.8 0.0 ‐0.8 ‐14.4 Field and west of Fanshawe Crescent are not covered by the proposed Ware CP accessibility.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 24 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Impact of Applying applied provision provision Existing Existing standard standard Existing Provision provision (surplus or (surplus or Provision standard (ha per 1000 deficit / 1000 deficit by Parish Population (total ha) / 1000 popn) popn popn) total ha) Accessibility of main settlement (710m) Braughing CP 1203 0.0 0.8 0.0 ‐0.8 ‐1.0 X Hertford Heath 2672 0.0 0.8 0.0 ‐0.8 ‐2.1 CP X Hunsdon CP 1080 0.0 0.8 0.0 ‐0.8 ‐0.9 X

Much Hadham 2087 0.0 0.8 0.0 ‐0.8 ‐1.7 CP X 4335 0.0 0.8 0.0 ‐0.8 ‐3.5 Standon CP X Stanstead Abbots 1950 0.0 0.8 0.0 ‐0.8 ‐1.6 CP X Stanstead St. 1652 0.0 0.8 0.0 ‐0.8 ‐1.3 Margarets CP X

1541 0.0 0.8 0.0 ‐0.8 ‐1.2 Walkern CP X Watton‐at‐Stone 2338 0.0 0.8 0.0 ‐0.8 ‐1.9 CP X

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 25 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 14: Parks and Gardens proposed accessibility standards

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 26 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment AMENITY GREEN SPACE

Typology and best practice

Amenity green spaces are public open spaces whose primary purpose is to improve and enhance the appearance of the local environment and improve the well‐being of local residents. Often children’s equipped playgrounds whether or not they are fenced, are part of amenity green spaces, and the “informal” unequipped play space which links to children’s play provision is integral to the amenity green space.

The definition of this typology in the PPG17 Open Spaces Study 2005 was:

Most commonly but not exclusively found in housing areas. It Includes informal recreation spaces and village greens with a primary purpose of providing opportunities for informal activities close to home or work or enhancing the appearance of residential or other areas.

The size of a green space is an important factor in the role it plays in the community, as larger spaces tend to support a wider array of activities and are more likely to be a focal point for communities. Smaller green spaces are however still important features to enhance a townscape or village, and to support informal activities. These spaces often have fewer ancillary facilities than large open spaces, and provide less value for local residents.

Very small green spaces, of less than 0.2ha in size tend not to be practical or usable spaces for recreation. They are often incidental open space within housing developments, and may be roadside verges. These very small areas usually have no ancillary facilities such as seating or any defining landscape features which are designed for play or leisure. Although these spaces are important in terms of design and a sense of place for both existing settlements and new developments, their limitations for amenity use means that emerging best practice now differentiates between amenity green spaces larger than 0.2ha which have a recreational function, and those below this size which are treated as design features.

Green spaces which are less than 0.2ha in size and without obvious recreational use, (i.e. not containing a play area for example) have therefore been excluded from this assessment.

The quality of an amenity green space is reflective of the provision and condition of its features and characteristics. The quality reflects what is provided on a site, the condition of facilities, and the immediate surroundings. The higher the quality of amenity green spaces, the more likely people are to use them. Lower quality spaces often have limited facilities and also lack landscaping and planting, they have little positive use, and may be of low or negative value to the community.

The need for new amenity green space often relates to the type of development. A residential development with large gardens will often have a lower need for smaller

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 27 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment amenity green spaces compared to high density housing developments or sheltered housing, where gardens are sometimes not provided. Both of the latter will however require larger areas of amenity green space.

The need for amenity green space is not limited to housing areas. The landscaping associated with many non‐residential developments, such as business parks, should be included in the consideration of need. In these areas, quality is as important as quantity.

Current provision and assessment

There are a large number of sites across East Herts which meet the criteria to be included in the Amenity Green Space typology. Figure 15 provides an overview of these sites across the district, showing the existing accessibility standard of 400m.

As with the Parks and Gardens typology, where these sites are multifunctional they also include the physical area of the facilities within them such as children’s play areas. These facilities are also considered separately within this report, but as they are integral parts of what makes up the green space, they need to be included in the overall area.

The map in Figure 15 also demonstrates that the distribution of the Amenity Green Spaces across the district is relatively even. However, a number of parishes do not have any provision.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 28 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 15: Amenity Green Space across East Herts with current accessibility

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 29 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Testing the existing standards

The existing standards in East Herts for Amenity Green Space are:

Figure 16: Existing adopted standards for Amenity Green Space

Quantity per Accessibility Quality 1000 people Amenity Green 0.55ha 400m Amenity green space should be Space free from litter and anti‐social behaviour. They should be well maintained with appropriate vegetation and planting, as well as ancillary facilities, such as litter bins and seating.

The testing of the standards in relation to quantity and accessibility are summarised in Figure 17 for the towns and Group 1 Villages. Testing of existing standards for all other parishes is provided in Appendix 3.

Quantity

Overall the current provision across the district is 1.7ha per 1000, showing substantial variation from the existing standard of 0.55ha, despite this standard being based on the district wide provision for Amenity Green Space at the time of the previous report.

The significant variation in district wide provision is not surprising as the previous strategy was based on the now removed PPG17 guidance note. The scope of this report has also changed with the removal of the outdoor sports typology; this has meant many sites that were previously classified as outdoor sports have become amenity green spaces.

Figure 17 provides a summary for the testing of existing standards in the Towns and Group 1 Villages. All of the towns have a surplus in provision of Amenity Green Space, with the combined surplus exceeding 67ha. The current average provision for the Towns in East Herts is 1.3ha, over double the existing standard.

Bishop’s Stortford and Hertford both have a very substantial quantity provision, the result of several large sites within the town boundary. For example, Grange Paddocks (12.2ha) and Thorley Wedge (8.3ha) in Bishop’s Stortford and Hartham Common (8.6ha) in Hertford.

With the exception of Stanstead St Margarets, all of the Group 1 Villages have a surplus in the provision of Amenity Green Space. Stanstead St Margarets does not have any Amenity Green Space within the parish boundary.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 30 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

Accessibility

All of the Towns and Group 1 Villages have at least a partial accessibility coverage of Amenity Green Space.

In Bishop’s Stortford the existing accessibility standard provides a good coverage of Amenity Green Space in the urban fringes despite some gaps in the eastern and northern extents of the town. In Hertford, the provision of Amenity Green Space is more evenly distributed throughout the town. However, there are several small gaps in the existing accessibility.

Buntingford, Sawbridgeworth and Ware show a near complete coverage from the existing accessibility.

Five of the Group 1 Villages have a full coverage from the existing accessibility standard.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 31 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

Figure 17: Existing standards testing for Amenity Green Space

Sawbridgeworth Area's around White Post Field and 8458 6.7 0.55 0.79 0.24 2.05 CP to the North of Northfield Road is not currently covered. Areas to the West of Chauncy Ware CP 18799 18.9 0.55 1.01 0.46 8.60 School are not covered by the existing accessibility Braughing CP 1203 3.8 0.55 3.13 2.58 3.10 

Hertford Heath 2672 3.7 0.55 1.40 0.85 2.28 CP 

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 32 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Impact of Applying applied provision provision Existing Existing standard standard Existing Provision provision (surplus or (surplus or Provision standard (ha per 1000 deficit / 1000 deficit by total Accessibility of main settlement Parish Population (total ha) / 1000 popn) popn popn) ha) (10 min walk/400m) Houses to the North of Hundson Hunsdon CP 1080 1.5 0.55 1.34 0.79 0.86 are not covered by the existing accessibility

Much Hadham House to the North of Much 2087 3.1 0.55 1.47 0.92 1.91 CP Hadham are not covered by existing accessibility Standon has full coverage from the existing accessibility. Areas to the West of Fishers Close (Puckeridge) Standon CP 4335 3.9 0.55 0.90 0.35 1.50 are not covered. There are no Amenity Green Spaces in Colliers End. Stanstead Abbots 1950 1.6 0.55 0.83 0.28 0.54 CP  Stanstead St 1652 0.0 0.55 0.00 ‐0.55 ‐0.91 Margarets CP  Houses to the North of Church end Walkern CP 1541 3.3 0.55 2.11 1.56 2.41 are not covered by existing accessibility Watton‐at‐Stone 2338 2.1 0.55 0.89 0.34 0.80 CP 

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 33 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Quality

As with Parks and Gardens, Amenity Green Spaces have been assessed against the Green Flag criteria and comparisons between the previous quality standard and Green Flag are not appropriate. The criteria used in the site assessments were:

 A welcoming place  Health, safety and security  Well maintained and clean  Ecosystem services

The average quality scores for Amenity Green Spaces are provided in Figure 18. The significant variety in the type of sites classified as Amenity Green Space will typically produce a range of quality scores. It is not appropriate for Amenity Green Spaces to be tested against all of the Green Flag criteria in the same way in which Parks and Gardens are so the relevant criteria have been included in the table below.

Figure 18: Average quality scores for Amenity Green Space

Category Average quality score A welcoming place 87% Health, safety and security 83% Well maintained and clean 90% Ecosystem services 51%

Generally, Amenity Green Spaces in East Herts are good quality. All the Amenity Green Space sites where quality issues were flagged as ‘Acceptable’ are provided in Figure 19. It is clear that ‘Health, safety and security’ has consistently been an issue for overall site quality.

Figure 19: Amenity Green Space with quality issues

Site ID Site Name A welcoming Health, Well place safety and maintained security and clean 2002 Brookside X 2037 Crozier Avenue X 2044 Cottered Village Green X 2051 Brookside X 2052 The Bourne X 2062 Bury Green X 2064 College Road X 2073 Village Green X 2078 Burnham Green X 2080 Vixen Green X

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 34 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment 2084 Mead Lane AGS X 2086 Marshgate Drive AGS X 2087 Terlings Park AGS X 2088 Church End AGS X 2089 Ardley Village Hall Grounds X 2140 Birch Green Village Green X X 2106 Perrys Green Village Green X 2095 Rivers Hospital Open Space X 2096 Rivers Nursery Open Space X X 2094 Heron Close Open Space X 2132 Sanville Gardens X X 2127 Waterford Village Hall Grounds X 2120 Arthur Martin‐Leake Way X 2123 Sacombe Green green X 2139 Letty Green Village Green X 2090 Moor Green Village Green X 2091 Wood End Village Green X 2105 Green Tye Village Green X 2144 Levens Green Village Green X 6014 Kibes Lane Park X 2117 Waytemore Road AGS X 2147 Meesdon Village Green X 5012 Hertingfordbury Cricket Ground X 5027 Walnut Drive X 5035 Herts and Essex Uni X 5046 Cottered Playing Fields X 5047 Horse’s Meadow X 5049 Bennington Playing Fields X 5055 London Road Playing Field X 5058 Turkey Farm Playing Fields X 5071 Aspendon Recreation Ground X 5083 Bullocks Lane Cricket Ground X

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 35 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Testing alternative standards

Assessment criteria

The assessment considers current practice nationally, and the adopted standards across East Hertfordshire’s benchmark comparator authorities.

Fields in Trust

The Fields in Trust’s review of its own standards, the Review of the Planning and Design for Outdoor Sport and Play, Phase 2 Survey Findings for England and Wales (Fields in Trust, 2015), identified 0.55ha per 1000 as the median level of provision for amenity green space. The accessibility standard varied widely, from 120m through to 800m, but the median accessibility standard was 480m.

The Fields in Trust has now recommended within the report Guidance for Outdoor Sport and Play: Beyond the Six Acre Standard, England (Fields in Trust, 2015) a minimum quantity guideline for Amenity Green Space of 0.6ha per 1000, with an accessibility standard of 480m walking catchment (approximately a 6 minute walk). There is no differentiation between urban and rural areas.

The adopted standard for Amenity Green Space in East Herts is slightly lower that the FiT recommended rate of provision.

The quality recommendation in the FiT 2015 report for Amenity Green Space is the same as for the Parks and Gardens typology, but without the recommendation that the sites should achieve Green Flag status. The quality guidelines are therefore that sites are/have:

 Appropriately landscaped  Positive management  Provision of footpaths  Designed so as to be free of the fear of harm or crime.

Comparators

The range of quantity standards adopted by the CIPFA benchmark authorities are all considerably higher than East Herts adopted standard. St Albans uses a standard of 1.5ha per 1000 for Amenity Green Space, South Oxfordshire requires 1.4ha per 1000 in a combined standard for Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space and the Vale of White Horse uses 15% of the residential area as the basis for quantity requirements.

The accessibility standards between the CIPFA benchmark authorities also displays a variation, with comparator standards ranging from 300m in St Albans, to 800m in Sevenoaks.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 36 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

Figure 20: Comparators for Amenity Green Space

Parks and Gardens Access (m) Quantity [adopted in Open (Ha per 1000) Space SPD 2009] East Hertfordshire 0.55 400m walk CIPFA comparators

Sevenoaks No standard 800m South Oxfordshire 1.4 (Combined standard for Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space) 480m St Albans 1.5 300m Vale of White Horse 15% of residential area (Combined standard for 480m Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space)

Emerging best practice

A key consideration in assessing the availability of amenity green space within an authority is the practical usefulness of each of the spaces for informal recreation. To date there is no formal guidance about this, but there is emerging good practice which suggests that to be useful space, the amenity green space should be:

 0.2ha or greater in size, or have a clear amenity use, for example children’s play  Have natural grass on a high proportion of the site  Permanently available for informal public recreation use  Reasonably flat and accessible to the local community  Safe for use by a wide range of ages  Clearly designed, with definition between the public space and adjoining private spaces e.g. fenced  Provided with facilities, including as appropriate, children’s equipped play, seating, and kick about area.  Not be primarily a playing field, sustainable urban drainage site, roadside verge, or landscaping as part of a development.

Where a children’s play facility is clearly part of the amenity green space area and meets these criteria, its area has been included within the overall total for amenity green space.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 37 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Quantity

Given that:

 the existing quantity standards do not reflect the current provision of Amenity Green Space;  The CIPFA comparators have very different standards;  Parks and Gardens also function as Amenity Green Spaces, as residents are likely to access their nearest site regardless of its typology.

it is therefore appropriate to consider a combined quantity standard for Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space. This is explored in Section 5.

Quality

Green Flag is the current formal quality standard for Amenity Green Space, and has proved a useful assessment tool. For Amenity Green Space, the relevant Green Flag criteria is used as a basis for the proposed as the quality standard.

Accessibility

The accessibility of Amenity Green Spaces is relatively good across both the towns and Group 1 Villages. A number of Group 1 Villages have a complete accessibility coverage and several of the Towns have a sufficient accessibility for most residents.

However, after considering emerging best practice, East Herts comparator authorities and the localised importance of Amenity Green Space, a 480m accessibility is proposed. This uses the FiT guidelines for distance/travel time for Amenity Green Space and would bring both Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space accessibility standards in line with FiT recommendations.

The proposed accessibility for Amenity Green Space is also applied to all Parks and Gardens. By their very nature Parks and Gardens can also be classed as Amenity Green Spaces, and are often located in areas where there are fewer Amenity Green Space sites. Figure 21 shows the testing of this and Figure 24 shows this mapped.

Proposed standards for Amenity Green Space

As has been outlined in the previous section, the existing standards for Amenity Green Space do not accurately reflect the current situation for this typology.

Figure 21 provides a summary of the testing for both the proposed quantity and accessibility standards.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 38 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment The proposed quantity standards are based on the Fields in Trust standards of provision for Amenity Green Space. At 0.6ha per 1000, this represents only a small increase from the existing standard.

See Section 5 for further details and the proposed standards.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 39 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 21: Proposed standards testing for Amenity Green Space

Impact of Applying applied provision provision Proposed Existing standard standard Existing quantity provision (surplus or (surplus or Accessibility of main settlement to Provision standard (ha per 1000 deficit / 1000 deficit by total either Amenity Green Space or Park Parish/Ward Population (total ha) / 1000 popn) popn popn) ha) and Garden (10 min walk/480m) Houses to the north of Michaels Road, on Windhill Old Road, parts of 37212 62.39 0.60 1.68 1.08 40.06 Southmill Road and on Manor Links Bishop's are not covered by the proposed Stortford CP accessibility. 4948 7.18 0.60 1.45 0.85 4.21  Buntingford CP Houses on Valeside and Chelmsford Road, The Dr, Woodland Mount and 26783 28.45 0.60 1.06 0.46 12.38 Queen's Road are not covered by the Hertford CP proposed accessibility.

Houses to the east of the train line 8458 6.99 0.60 0.83 0.23 1.91 Sawbridgeworth are not covered by the proposed CP accessibility

Houses to the west of Wengeo Lane 18799 19.42 0.60 1.03 0.43 8.14 and on The Hyde are not covered by Ware CP the proposed accessibility.

1203 3.82 0.60 3.18 2.58 3.10  Braughing CP

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 40 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Impact of Applying applied provision provision Proposed Existing standard standard Existing quantity provision (surplus or (surplus or Accessibility of main settlement to Provision standard (ha per 1000 deficit / 1000 deficit by total either Amenity Green Space or Park Parish/Ward Population (total ha) / 1000 popn) popn popn) ha) and Garden (10 min walk/480m)

2672 3.79 0.60 1.42 0.82 2.19 Hertford Heath  CP A few houses to the north of Hundson are not covered by the 1080 1.52 0.60 1.41 0.81 0.87 proposed accessibility. Hunsdonbury is not covered by the proposed Hunsdon CP accessibility.

Houses to the south of Kettle Green 2087 3.15 0.60 1.51 0.91 1.90 Road and north of Church Lane are Much Hadham not covered by the proposed CP accessibility. Houses on the High Street and north 4335 4.23 0.60 0.98 0.38 1.63 of Park Lane are not covered by the Standon CP proposed accessibility.

Stanstead 1950 1.72 0.60 0.88 0.28 0.55  Abbots CP

Stanstead St. 1652 7.71 0.60 4.67 4.07 6.72  Margarets CP Houses on Church End and Glebe 1541 3.32 0.60 2.15 1.55 2.39 View are not covered by the Walkern CP proposed accessibility.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 41 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Impact of Applying applied provision provision Proposed Existing standard standard Existing quantity provision (surplus or (surplus or Accessibility of main settlement to Provision standard (ha per 1000 deficit / 1000 deficit by total either Amenity Green Space or Park Parish/Ward Population (total ha) / 1000 popn) popn popn) ha) and Garden (10 min walk/480m)

Watton‐at‐ 2338 2.12 0.60 0.91 0.31 0.72  Stone CP

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 42 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

COMBINED PARKS AND GARDENS AND AMENITY GREEN SPACE

This section looks at the options for combining the quantity standards of the Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space typologies.

As Parks and Gardens are also Amenity Green Spaces (but not vice versa), the accessibility for Parks and Gardens using the Amenity Green Space proposed standard has also been tested.

This combined approach has in principle been agreed by East Hertfordshire Council to help assess the need for the open space required on new developments. This approach allows flexibility in how the open spaces can be planned for new developments and will help to provide better quality spaces that are appropriate to their location.

The existing standards for both typologies, as well as testing of separate proposed standards have already been considered in the previous sections.

This section therefore only shows the testing of the combined quantity standards for Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space before considering accessibility and quality.

Proposed standards for combining Amenity Green Space and Parks and Gardens

Quantity

Combining the Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space typologies gives a current provision of 4.5ha per 1000.

As mentioned in the previous sections for Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space, there are a small number of large sites that distort the district wide average provision. For Parks and Gardens, large sites are those exceeding 19ha in area. For Amenity Green Spaces, large sites are those exceeding 5ha in area. These sites are listed in Figure 22.

The three Parks and Gardens exceeding 19ha are substantially larger in area than the remaining five Parks and Gardens which are all under 3ha in area. For Amenity Green Space, the 9 sites exceeding 5ha are considerably larger than most of the remaining sites.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 43 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment The sites listed in Figure 22 have therefore be considered as ‘extremes’ and removed from the calculations of average provision. Nonetheless, such sites still play an important role in the provision of open space in East Herts and remain part of the open spaces testing.

The combined area for the large sites is 472.1ha, and make up 76% of the total combined area for Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space (619.5ha). If these sites are removed from the calculation of average provision, the value changes from 4.5ha to 1.1ha.

Figure 22: Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Spaces – Large sites

Typology Site Name Site Area (ha) Panshanger Park 352.1 Parks and Gardens Pishiobury Park 33.7 Balls Park 19.8 The Grange Paddocks 12.2 Hartham Common 8.6 Thorley Wedge 8.3 Maze Green Heights 8.2 Kings Mead 7.3 Amenity Green Space Bishops Park 5.7 Stanstead Abbots Recreation 5.4 Ground Presdales Recreation Ground 5.4 Moor Green Village Green 5.4 472.1 If the FiT standards for Amenity Green Space and Parks and Gardens are combined, this gives a recommended rate of provision of 1.4ha per 1000; 0.6ha per 1000 from Amenity Green Space and 0.8ha per 1000 from Parks and Gardens, close to the current average provision of 1.1ha (excluding large sites).

Testing based on the combined FiT standard is shown below in Figure 23 for the Towns and Group 1 Villages. The testing of the proposed standards for the other parishes is provided in Appendix 4.

The proposed standards are met in all but 4 of the Towns and Group 1 Villages. Ware is the only Town that does not meet the proposed quantity standard. The Group 1 Villages of Standon, Stanstead Abbots and Watton‐at‐Stone do not meet the proposed quantity standard.

The deficit in provision in the Group 1 Villages is minor, each requiring less than 2.0ha in additional Parks and Gardens or Amenity Green Space to meet the combined standard. However, the deficit in Ware is more significant with an additional 6.25ha of Parks and Gardens or Amenity Green Space required to meet the standard.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 44 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 23: Proposed quantity testing for combined Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space

Impact of applied Existing Existing Provision Existing Applying provision provision standard Provision standard (ha / provision per standard (surplus or deficit (surplus or deficit by total Parish/Ward Population (total ha) 1000 popn) 1000 popn / 1000 popn) ha) Bishop's Stortford CP 37212 65.10 1.40 1.75 0.35 13.00 Buntingford CP 4948 8.08 1.40 1.63 0.23 1.15 Hertford CP 26783 68.83 1.40 2.57 1.17 31.33 Sawbridgeworth CP 8458 40.69 1.40 4.81 3.41 28.85 Ware CP 18799 20.07 1.40 1.07 ‐0.33 ‐6.25 Braughing CP 1203 3.82 1.40 3.18 1.78 2.14 Hertford Heath CP 2672 3.79 1.40 1.42 0.02 0.05 Hunsdon CP 1080 1.52 1.40 1.41 0.01 0.01 Much Hadham CP 2087 3.15 1.40 1.51 0.11 0.23 Standon CP 4335 4.23 1.40 0.98 ‐0.42 ‐1.84 Stanstead Abbots CP 1950 1.72 1.40 0.88 ‐0.52 ‐1.01 Stanstead St. Margarets CP 1652 7.71 1.40 4.67 3.27 5.40 Walkern CP 1541 3.32 1.40 2.15 0.75 1.16 Watton‐at‐Stone CP 2338 2.12 1.40 0.91 ‐0.49 ‐1.15

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 45 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Accessibility

Recognising that Parks and Gardens also act as Amenity Green Space it is appropriate to test a combined accessibility standard. This is suggested as 480m to bring it in line with the FiT recommendations of a 5 minute walk. The result of this testing is shown in Figure 21 in the previous section and mapped below in Figure 24.

Testing the proposed accessibility for Amenity Green Spaces and Parks and Gardens together results in an overall improvement, as would be expected. Most Parks and Gardens within East Herts are located in the Towns so this is where the improvement is seen.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 46 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 24: Amenity Green Space proposed accessibility standard

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 47 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Summary

Neither the current adopted standard for Parks and Gardens or Amenity Green Space reflect the actual provision of these typologies.

The close relationship between Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space means that these sites are not often provided in close proximity. However, people are likely to visit a site due to its closeness, instead of its classification.

The average district wide provision for the combined Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space of 1.1ha (excluding the largest sites) displays a closer relationship with the 1.4ha Fields in Trust combined standard than the previous standard. In addition, this quantity standard is also a better fit when compared to East Hertfordshire’s comparator authorities.

From a planning perspective, a combined standard offers flexibility for development management to provide open spaces that are suited to the specific needs and requirements of the site. However, it should be noted that the capital and maintenance costs of Parks and Gardens will usually be higher than Amenity Green Space provision, therefore negotiation will need to be undertaken on a case by case basis for major developments.

Proposed Standards

The following standards are proposed for Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space.

In new developments, planning policy should identify the expected proportion of the site to be developed as Parks and Gardens and as Amenity Green Space.

Quantity

 1.4ha per 1000

Quality

 Parks and Gardens: Green Flag Award  Sites should be kept well maintained with well‐kept grass, planting and vegetation. High quality and appropriate ancillary facilities should be provided.

 Amenity Green Space: Green Flag standard  Sites should be well maintained with appropriate vegetation and planting. Appropriate ancillary facilities, such as litter bins and seating should be provided.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 48 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

Accessibility

 710m to a Park and Garden  480m to an Amenity Green Space or a Park and Garden

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 49 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment NATURAL AND SEMI NATURAL GREEN SPACE

The definition of Natural and Semi Natural Green Space in the PPG17 Open Spaces Strategy 2005 was:

These include publicly accessible woodlands, urban forestry, scrub, grasslands (e.g. downlands, commons, meadows), wetlands, open and running water, nature reserves and wastelands with a primary purpose of wildlife conservation and biodiversity.

Natural England believes everyone should have access to good quality natural green space near to where they live and have developed policy guidance for local authorities in their 2010 report Nature Nearby: Accessible Natural Greenspace.

Current provision and assessment

There are a large number of sites across East Herts which meet the criteria to be included in the Natural and Semi‐Natural Green Space typology. The total area of Natural and Semi Natural Green Space is 740.86ha across 75 sites.

Figure 28 provides an overview of these sites across the district with a catchment of 800m (the existing accessibility standard). The map shows how most of the Towns have a suitable provision of Natural and Semi Natural Green Space. However, many of the rural parishes lack the required provision compared to the standard.

There are 18 large (>10ha) sites within the district which make up 72% of the total quantity of Natural and Semi Natural provision.

Figure 25: Large Natural and Semi Natural Green Space sites

Site ID Site name Parish/Ward Size (ha) 4000 Balls Wood Hertford Heath CP 12.7 4001 Red, White and Blue Bishop’s Stortford CP 12.1 4002 Mill Wood Much Hadham CP 15.0 4007 Post Wood Ware CP 11.0 4022 Goldings Wood Hertford Heath CP 30.7 4023 Nature Reserve Hertford Heath CP 12.6 4068 Amwell Quarry Nature Great Amwell CP 53.2 Reserve Hertford CP 4084 Kings Mead (Water Meads) 100.9 Ware CP 4089 Horns Road Hertford CP 15.7 4095 Highfields Wood Brickendon Liberty CP 56.9 4099 Claypits Wood Brickendon Liberty CP 13.8 4100 Broxbourne Wood Nature Brickendon Liberty CP 33.2 Reserve

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 50 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment 4101 Lower White Stubbs Brickendon Liberty CP 11.4 4103 Rye Mead Nature Reserve Stanstead Abbots CP 60.3 Hertford CP 4105 Waterford Heath 31.7 Stapleford CP Thorley CP 4008 Southern Country Park 20.9 Bishop’s Stortford CP 4131 Bencroft Wood Brickendon Liberty CP 17.1 4130 Bishops Avenue NSN Bishop’s Stortford CP 21.6 530.8ha

Testing the existing standards

The standards tested for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space are:

Figure 26: Existing adopted standards for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space

Quantity per 1000 Accessibility Quality people Natural and 7.64ha 800m Natural and semi‐natural Semi Natural green spaces should be clean and litter free, with natural Green Space features (including water where appropriate). Public Rights of Way, footways and cycle paths should be clear and unrestricted and conservation areas should be identified. Sites should be maintained to an appropriate conservation standard.

The testing of the existing standards in relation to quantity and accessibility are summarised in Figure 28 and Figure 29 for the Towns and Group 1 Villages. Testing of existing standards for all other parishes within East Herts is provided in Appendix 3.

Quantity

The PPG17 Open Spaces Strategy 2005 provided a quantity standard for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space of 7.76ha. However, the quantity standards adopted in the Open Space, Sport and Recreation SPD 2009 gave a quantity standard of 7.64ha.

The quantity standard as stated 2009 SPD (7.64ha) has been used as the basis for testing the existing standards.

Overall the provision across the district is now 5.4ha per 1000 population which is significantly lower than the previous average provision. A number of sites have been

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 51 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment removed from this study as they are not publicly accessible, and this is likely to have caused this change.

Figure 29 provides a summary of the testing of existing standards. Despite a high district wide average provision, only two of the Group 1 Villages (Hertford Heath and Stanstead St Margarets) parishes have a sufficient supply of Natural and Semi Natural Green Space.

All of the Towns have a large deficit in the provision of Natural and Semi Natural Green Space. The additional space needed in the Towns to meet the existing standard of 7.64ha is 424ha. Clearly, such provision is not realistic, especially when the urban nature of the Towns is considered.

As stated in Figure 25, there are a number of large Natural and Semi Natural Green Spaces across East Herts. The 6 largest of these sites are responsible for nearly 50% of Natural and Semi Natural Green Spaces, and therefore distort the realistic provision of this type of open space.

It is therefore clear that the average district wide provision of Natural and Semi Natural Green Space is not a suitable quantity standard.

Accessibility

The existing accessibility standard of 800m is achieved in 2 of the Towns (Sawbridgeworth and Herford) and 5 of the Group 1 Villages (Stanstead Abbots, Stanstead St Margarets, Watton‐at‐Stone, Much Hadham and Hertford Heath).

The 3 Towns and 4 Group 1 Villages without a complete accessibility all have at least a partial coverage from the existing accessibility.

Quality

Green Flag is the current formal quality standard for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space, and has proved a useful assessment tool. It is not appropriate to make comparisons between the previous quality standard and Green Flag. For Natural and Semi Natural Green Space, the Green Flag criteria assessed are:

 A welcoming place  Health, safety and security  Well maintained and clean  Conservation and heritage  Community involvement  Marketing  Ecosystem Services

The average quality scores are provided in Figure 27 and show a considerable variation between the Green Flag criteria.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 52 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

The Green Flag criteria used to assess Natural and Semi Natural Green Space are also used for the assessment of all multi‐functional green spaces and are therefore broad in their application, but narrow in their focus.

Natural and Semi Natural Green Spaces display a considerable variety, from the managed sites (e.g. Waterford Heath) to the ‘natural’ grasslands and meadows. Therefore, it is inherently difficult to produce a site assessment that suitably meets the site specific details of each site whilst allowing for a comparison between the different typologies and specific sites.

Most notably, community involvement only scores an average of 17% and marketing scores an average of 25%. However, when the nature of a Natural and Semi Natural Green Space is considered, the criteria for community involvement (Active friends group) and marketing (programme of events, information for users) will not be relevant for the majority of sites, but remains relevant for the larger sites. The variety of sites included within this typology means that a category relevant to one site may not be relevant at another especially as sites in this typology are often subject to reduced maintenance (to ensure the site is ‘natural’) and may not be actively marketed or easily accessed.

Figure 27: Natural and Semi Natural Green Space average quality

Category Average quality score A welcoming place 67% Health, safety and security 64% Well maintained and clean 77% Conservation and heritage 100% Community involvement 17% Marketing 25% Ecosystem Services 97%

The quality scores awarded to Natural and Semi Natural Green Spaces, especially the scores flagged as being of poor quality, should therefore be considered on a site by site basis, dependent on each site’s specific needs and requirements.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 53 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 28: Natural and Semi Natural Green Space existing accessibility

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 54 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

Figure 29: Natural and Semi Natural Green Space existing accessibility standards

Applying Existing provision Impact of applied Existing Provision Existing standard (surplus provision standard Provision standard (ha / provision per or deficit / 1000 (surplus or deficit Accessibility of main Parish Population (total ha) 1000 popn) 1000 popn popn) by total ha) settlement (800m) Houses around Avenue Bishop's Stortford Road and Cavell Drive are 37212 84.53 7.64 2.27 ‐5.37 ‐199.77 CP not covered by existing accessibility Houses around Vicarage Road and Freman Drive are Buntingford CP 4948 3.10 7.64 0.63 ‐7.01 ‐34.70 not covered by existing accessibility Hertford CP 26783 139.24 7.64 5.20 ‐2.44 ‐65.38 

Sawbridgeworth 8458 26.44 7.64 3.13 ‐4.51 ‐38.18 CP 

Houses to the North of Musley Lane and East of Ware CP 18799 57.70 7.64 3.07 ‐4.57 ‐85.92 Musley Hill are not covered by existing accessibility Braughing CP 1203 0.00 7.64 0.00 ‐7.64 ‐9.19 X Hertford Heath 2672 75.27 7.64 28.17 20.53 54.86 CP 

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 55 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Applying Existing provision Impact of applied Existing Provision Existing standard (surplus provision standard Provision standard (ha / provision per or deficit / 1000 (surplus or deficit Accessibility of main Parish Population (total ha) 1000 popn) 1000 popn popn) by total ha) settlement (800m) Hunsdon CP 1080 0.00 7.64 0.00 ‐7.64 ‐8.25 X Much Hadham CP 2087 15.74 7.64 7.54 ‐0.10 ‐0.20  Standon CP 4335 0.00 7.64 0.00 ‐7.64 ‐33.12 X

Stanstead Abbots 1950 64.20 7.64 32.92 25.28 49.30 CP 

Stanstead St 1652 0.00 7.64 0.00 ‐7.64 ‐12.62 Margarets CP  Walkern CP 1541 0.00 7.64 0.00 ‐7.64 ‐11.77 X

Watton‐at‐Stone 2338 9.54 7.64 4.08 ‐3.56 ‐8.32 CP 

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 56 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Testing alternative standards

Assessment criteria

As agreed by East Hertfordshire Council, the criteria used to assess the quality of Natural and Semi Natural Green Space is based on the Green Flag approach. All sites have been assessed against the following Green Flag categories:

 A Welcoming Place  Healthy, Safe and Secure  Well Maintained and Clean  Conservation and Heritage  Community Involvement  Marketing  Ecosystem Services

The assessment considers current practice nationally, and the adopted standards across East Herts benchmark comparator authorities.

Fields in Trust

The Fields in Trust survey of local authorities report of 2015 identified that only a relatively small number of authorities had separate standards for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space (including green corridors). Where they did, the median level of the standard of provision was 1.78ha per 1000. The FiT has now recommended within their October 2015 report a minimum quantity guideline for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space of 1.8ha per 1000, with an accessibility standard of 720m (approximately a 9 minute walk).

Comparators

A comparison of the standards of provision in East Herts with the CIPFA benchmark authorities is provided in Figure 30. However, as three of the four authorities do not have a quantity standard the usefulness of the CIPFA comparators for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space is limited.

Figure 30: Comparators for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space

Natural and Semi Natural Green space Quantity (Ha per 1000) Accessibility (m) East Hertfordshire 7.64 800m CIPFA comparators Sevenoaks No quantity standard 1200m

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 57 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment South Oxfordshire No quantity No accessibility standard standard St Albans 0.5 600m Vale of White horse No quantity No accessibility standard standard

As the CIPFA comparators are of little use, the Natural and Semi Natural Green Space standards of several of the geographic neighbours for East Herts have been considered.

Figure 31: Geographical comparators for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space

Natural and Semi Natural Green space

Quantity (Ha per 1000) Accessibility (m) East Hertfordshire 7.64 800m Geographic comparators Welwyn Hatfield ANGSt accessibility 6.29 standards North Herts 2 (Combined standard with Amenity Green Space and No accessibility ‘recreational’ space) standards Uttlesford 7 300‐400m

The quantity standards used by Welwyn Hatfield and Uttlesford are based on the district wide average provision, with North Hertfordshire Council favouring a combined standard for Amenity Green Space, recreational space and Natural and Semi Natural Green Space.

In agreement with the testing of the existing quantity standard for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space in East Herts, the Welwyn Hatfield and Uttlesford strategies highlighted the inadequacy of a district wide average provision as the overall standard for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space.

Natural England

Natural England is the relevant statutory body in relation to natural green space, and in the report Nature Nearby: Accessible Natural Greenspace (Natural England, 2011) it recommends the following standards:

 at least one accessible 2 hectare site within 300 m of home; and  at least one accessible 20 hectare site within two kilometres of home; and  one accessible 100 hectare site within five kilometres of home; and  one accessible 500 hectare site within ten kilometres of home.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 58 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment  minimum of one hectare of statutory Local Nature Reserve per 1000 population.

Testing has taken place for only the first three standards stated above, as there are no sites within East Herts that are over 500 hectares in size and having a standard for local nature reserves is not considered appropriate for this study.

Testing ANGSt standards

The Accessible Natural Green Space standards (ANGSt) promoted by Natural England only have accessibility criteria. They are therefore tested through mapping, and the results are provided in Figure 32, Figure 33 and Figure 34.

There are no sites either within or close to the boundaries of the authority which meet the 500ha site size, so there is no map for this ANGSt level.

The key findings are:

 There is one site which meet the 100ha and above in size; Kings Mead (Water Meads). The 5000m catchment covers Hertford, Ware and the surrounding parishes.

 There are a number of sites which are 20ha and above in size, and the 2km catchment covers large areas of Hertford, Ware and Bishops Stortford. However, there are significant gaps across central and northern rural areas of the borough.

 The 300m catchment to sites of 2ha and above gives some coverage to Hertford, Ware and Bishops Stortford, but there is only limited coverage elsewhere.

Whilst the ANGSt standards are a useful tool in gauging the spread of Natural and Semi Natural spaces available to the public in East Herts, the larger levels of provision are unrealistic.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 59 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 32: ANGSt standard – 2 ha within 300m

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 60 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 33: ANGSt standard – 20 ha within 2km

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 61 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 34: ANGSt standard – 100 ha within 5km

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 62 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Quantity

The current adopted standard for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space is based on the previous district wide average provision, which is distorted by the presence of a number of large sites. Clearly, the district wide average provision should not be carried forward. However, a more focused average provision might provide a suitable alternative.

The average provision of Natural and Semi Natural Green Space for the Towns in East Herts is 3.2ha per 1000.

The East Herts Local Plan identifies the majority of new developments being located either within or adjacent to the existing towns (both in East Herts as well as neighbouring authorities).

The existing network of Natural and Semi Natural Green Spaces should be retained, with new developments providing a quantity of Natural and Semi Natural Green Space that will maintain this.

Given the outcome of the testing, analysis of comparator authorities and the concentration of development within or adjacent to existing urban centres, it is proposed that a quantity standard of 3.2ha per 1000 is used for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space. This is based on the current average provision in the Towns.

Quality

Selected criteria from the Green Flag approach is the most appropriate way of assessing the quality of natural and semi natural green spaces. These are:

 A Welcoming Place  Healthy, Safe and Secure  Well Maintained and Clean

Accessibility

Fields in Trust identify a 720m catchment as suitable for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space. As the Fields in Trust accessibility standards have been recommended to be used for both Parks and Gardens and Amenity Green Space, the 720m catchment for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space is proposed.

The location of Natural and Semi Natural Green Spaces means that most of the Towns and most of the Group 1 Villages have at least a partial coverage to the proposed accessibility standards, despite the decrease in distance.

The proposed accessibility standard testing Natural and Semi Natural Green Space is shown in Figure 35 and Figure 36.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 63 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

Figure 35: Proposed accessibility standard for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space

Applying provision Impact of applied Existing Existing standard provision Existing Provision provision (surplus or standard (surplus Provision standard (ha / per 1000 deficit / 1000 or deficit by total Accessibility of main Parish Population (total ha) 1000 popn) popn popn) ha) settlement (720m) Houses between Warwick Road and Thorn Grove are Bishop's Stortford CP 37212 84.61 3.2 2.27 ‐0.93 ‐34.47 not covered by the proposed accessibility. Houses on Greenways and Skips Meadows and Buntingford CP 4948 3.10 3.2 0.63 ‐2.57 ‐12.73 Vicarage Road are not covered by the proposed accessibility. Hertford CP 26783 139.35 3.2 5.20 2.00 53.64 

Sawbridgeworth CP 8458 26.44 3.2 3.13 ‐0.07 ‐0.63 

Houses to the west of Mulsey Hill are not Ware CP 18799 57.70 3.2 3.07 ‐0.13 ‐2.46 covered by the proposed accessibility.

Braughing CP 1203 0.00 3.2 0.00 ‐3.20 ‐3.85 X Hertford Heath CP 2672 75.27 3.2 28.17 24.97 66.72 

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 64 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Applying provision Impact of applied Existing Existing standard provision Existing Provision provision (surplus or standard (surplus Provision standard (ha / per 1000 deficit / 1000 or deficit by total Accessibility of main Parish Population (total ha) 1000 popn) popn popn) ha) settlement (720m)

Hunsdon CP 1080 0.00 3.2 0.00 ‐3.20 ‐3.46 X Houses on Winding Hill and New Barnes Lane are Much Hadham CP 2087 15.74 3.2 7.54 4.34 9.07 not covered by the proposed accessibility. Standon CP 4335 0.00 3.2 0.00 ‐3.20 ‐13.87 X

Stanstead Abbots CP 1950 64.20 3.2 32.92 29.72 57.96 

Stanstead St. 1652 3.47 3.2 2.10 ‐1.10 ‐1.82 Margarets CP  Walkern CP 1541 0.00 3.2 0.00 ‐3.20 ‐4.93 X

Watton‐at‐Stone CP 2338 9.54 3.2 4.08 0.88 2.06 

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 65 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 36: Natural and Semi Natural Green Space proposed accessibility standards

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 66 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Proposed Standards

The following standards are proposed for Natural and Semi Natural Green Space:

Quantity

 3.2ha per 1000

Quality

 Green Flag standard  Natural and semi‐natural green spaces should have natural features (including water where appropriate). If provided, Public Rights of Way, footways and cycle paths should be clear and unrestricted and conservation areas should be identified. Sites should be maintained to an appropriate conservation standard.

Accessibility

 720m

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 67 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment CHILDREN’S PLAY AND TEENAGE PROVISION

The typologies of different open spaces were set out in the, now withdrawn, PPG17 and its Annex. The Provision for Children and Young People related to open space areas with play equipment found in housing areas providing a focus for children and young people to engage in physical and social activities.

The definition for this typology in the PPG17 Open Spaces Strategy 2005 was:

Areas designed primarily for play and social interaction involving children and young people. This type of open space includes areas such as equipped play areas, ball courts, skateboard areas and teenage shelters.

The definition of play sites is as defined by Fields In Trust (FIT) (previously the National Playing Fields Association). Fields In Trust has identified three categories of play area. These are set out in Appendix 5 along with their defining characteristics, but very simplistically:

 Local Area for Play (LAPs): a minimum area of around 100 sq m designed for children up to 6 years, and located within 1 minute walking time from home.

 Local Equipped Area for Play (LEAP): must be a minimum of 400 sq m in size, to cater for younger children beginning to play independently, and to have a catchment of around 400 m.

 Neighbourhood Equipped Area for Play (NEAP): is much larger and caters predominantly for more independent older children with a minimum area of around 1,000 sq m in size and to have a catchment of around 1,000m. NEAPs may also have equipment suitable for younger ages, and therefore act as a LEAP as well as a NEAP. NEAPs should have a hard surface area such as a multi‐use games area or a skate park, or other youth facility catering for older children.

This assessment has considered the provision of equipped play space. Complementary to equipped play provision is unequipped play space that is landscaped or provides an environment that can facilitate and support play activities. Unequipped play space is considered as part of Amenity Green Space, addressed earlier in this report. This is consistent with the provision of open space set out in guidance provided by the Fields In Trust and Planning Practice Guidance published by the Government, which does not distinguish between different types of open space and the functions they play in the community.

Only those sites which have unrestricted community access are included in this assessment and where a play facility lies within or immediately adjacent to another typology (like within a park), the area (ha) of play space has been incorporated into the overall total of that site.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 68 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment The characteristics of the play areas themselves and those of their surroundings provide the context of how these spaces are generally used and the role they play in the community. This often determines the quality and value they have to the local area.

Playgrounds located in the right locations will be well used. A good location is where children at play can ‘see and be seen’ by a trusted adult (usually a parent or a friend’s parent) and ‘where it is at’, where there is a high probability that other people will pass through. A playground in a poor location, even with good equipment, is likely to have low usage and be vulnerable to antisocial behaviour.

Children are more likely to use playgrounds further from their homes when they are with adults, but tend to use play areas nearer when they are out on their own or with friends. Well used playgrounds are an important meeting place for parents as well as children. Although a small number of playgrounds will be used as specific destinations, which usually relies on users driving to reach the facility, a drive time catchment for most Local Equipped Areas for Play and Neighbourhood Equipped Areas for Play is not appropriate. The focus on the testing of the standards for play is therefore on walking accessibility.

The previous study classified all children’s play sites in terms of them being designated play areas. This study has used the definitions of play sites and sites for young people defined by Fields In Trust in their October 2015 report, Guidance for Outdoor Sport and Play: Beyond the Six Acre Standard (Fields in Trust, 2015), hereafter called Children’s Play and Teenage provision (see also Appendix 5).

Emerging best practice is leading to slightly different approaches towards the provision of children’s play, which is not entirely in line with the earlier Fields In Trust criteria for LEAPs and NEAPs. In particular, there is a growing trend towards not fencing off children’s playgrounds for a number of reasons, including ease of maintenance and to help reduce bullying. Some areas have also seen the growth of natural play facilities, but this is most usually as part of a LEAP or NEAP as these areas still need designing and maintaining. The cost of a natural play area can at least equal that of a more traditional LEAP or NEAP with its standardised equipment.

There are a number of organisations and agencies which provide good practice advice, and these include Play England, the Play Safety Forum, County Playing Fields Associations, Register of Play Inspectors International, Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents and the Association of Play Industries.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 69 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Current provision and assessment

The map of the existing Children’s Play sites across East Herts is given in Figure 37 and provision for Teenagers is mapped in Figure 38 with the current accessibility standard of 800m.

The headline finding is that there is reasonable coverage of Children’s Play facilities in all of the Towns and most of the Group 1 Villages.

In relation to teenage provision, again all the Towns have a reasonable coverage, however there are some gaps in provision within the Group 1 Villages.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 70 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 37: Children’s Play sites in East Herts

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 71 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 38: Provision for teenagers in East Herts

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 72 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Testing the existing standards

The existing adopted standards for Children and Young people’s facilities are:

Figure 39: Existing adopted standards for Children and Young People

Children and Young People

Quantity (ha per Accessibility Quality 1000) (m) Provision for 0.2 800 Facilities for children and young Children & people should be dog and litter free, as well as clean and free from antisocial Young People behaviour. Sites should be well maintained and equipped to provide a range of activities to suit varied interests and age groups. Appropriate ancillary facilities, such as seating should also be provided.

All of the children’s play and teenage sites were audited against agreed templates. These identified which sites were appropriate for which age groups and whether the sites broadly met the LAP, LEAP or NEAP definitions of Fields In Trust.

The detailed results of the testing of the existing standards for Children’s Play and Teenage Facilities are provided in Figure 40 for the Towns and Group 1 Villages within East Herts. Testing of the existing standards for all parishes provided in Appendix 3.

Quantity

The existing quantity standard of 0.2ha has been applied to both children’s play and teenage facilities.

None of the Towns or Group 1 Villages meet the existing quantity standard, each requiring additional provision to meet the existing quantity standard. This deficit is most pronounced in Bishop’s Stortford where an additional 4.07ha of Children’s play and teenage facilities are required.

Accessibility

The existing accessibility standard for children’s play and teenage facilities in East Herts is 800m.

All of the Towns and Group 1 Villages have at least a partial coverage of either a children’s play or teenage facility.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 73 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Buntingford and Hertford are the only Towns which have a full accessibility network to children’s play facilities. Ware is the only town to have a full accessibility network for teenage facilities.

Five Group 1 Villages are fully covered by the existing children’s play accessibility standard, with three Group 1 Villages fully covered by the teenage accessibility.

The current accessibility standards do not reflect the nature of the different types of provision within the standard, for example the difference between a play area primarily designed for children under 12, and teenage facilities.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 74 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 40: Testing the existing standards for Children’s Play and teenage provision

Impact of Existing Applying applied Provision provision provision standard Existing standard standard Existing (ha / provision (surplus or (surplus or Accessibility of main Accessibility of main Provision 1000 per 1000 deficit / deficit by total settlement to Children’s Play settlement to teenage facilities Parish Population (total ha) popn) popn 1000 popn) ha) facilities (800m) (800m) Houses around Manor Links Houses to the northern areas of are not covered by existing Hadham road, eastern and Bishop's 37212 3.38 0.20 0.09 ‐0.11 ‐4.07 accessibility northern areas of the town are Stortford CP not covered by the existing accessibility. Houses to the south of Owles Buntingford CP 4948 0.39 0.20 0.08 ‐0.12 ‐0.60  Lane are not covered by the existing accessibility. Houses on Rib Vale and Hag's Hertford CP 26783 1.82 0.20 0.07 ‐0.13 ‐3.54  Dell are not covered by the existing accessibility.

Sawbridgeworth Houses around High Wych 8458 0.89 0.20 0.11 ‐0.09 ‐0.80 CP Road are not covered by  existing accessibility Houses to the south of Marsh Houses to the West of Lane and north of Wengeo Lane Ware CP 18799 1.12 0.20 0.06 ‐0.14 ‐2.64 Wengeo Lane are not covered are not covered by the existing by existing accessibility accessibility.

Braughing CP 1203 0.06 0.20 0.05 ‐0.15 ‐0.18  

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 75 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Impact of Existing Applying applied Provision provision provision standard Existing standard standard Existing (ha / provision (surplus or (surplus or Accessibility of main Accessibility of main Provision 1000 per 1000 deficit / deficit by total settlement to Children’s Play settlement to teenage facilities Parish Population (total ha) popn) popn 1000 popn) ha) facilities (800m) (800m) Houses around Hailey Lane are Houses on Hailey Lane not Hertford Heath 2672 0.04 0.20 0.02 ‐0.18 ‐0.49 not covered by existing covered by the existing CP accessibility accessibility. Houses to the South of Hunsdon CP 1080 0.07 0.20 0.06 ‐0.14 ‐0.15  Hunsdonbury are not covered by the existing accessibility. Houses on Winding Hill and Much Hadham Houses on New Barn Lane and New Barnes Lane are not 2087 0.09 0.20 0.04 ‐0.16 ‐0.32 CP Winding Hill are not covered covered by the existing by existing accessibility accessibility standard. Houses to the North and West Houses in Standon are covered of Huntsman Close are not by the existing accessibility. Standon CP 4335 0.35 0.20 0.08 ‐0.12 ‐0.52 covered by existing Houses to the west of High accessibility. No accessibility in Street are not covered by the Colliers End. existing accessibility.

Stanstead 1950 0.11 0.20 0.06 ‐0.14 ‐0.28 Abbots CP  

Stanstead St. 1652 0.00 0.20 0.00 ‐0.20 ‐0.33 Margarets CP   Houses to the north of Froghall Walkern CP 1541 0.11 0.20 0.07 ‐0.13 ‐0.20  Lane are not covered by the existing accessibility.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 76 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Impact of Existing Applying applied Provision provision provision standard Existing standard standard Existing (ha / provision (surplus or (surplus or Accessibility of main Accessibility of main Provision 1000 per 1000 deficit / deficit by total settlement to Children’s Play settlement to teenage facilities Parish Population (total ha) popn) popn 1000 popn) ha) facilities (800m) (800m)

Watton‐at‐ 2338 0.21 0.20 0.09 ‐0.11 ‐0.26 Stone CP  

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 77 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Quality

The sites were assessed for quality against the following headings. No formal safety assessment was conducted as this was outside the scope of the brief.

 General characteristics  Pedestrian Accessibility  Safety and Security  Condition of Play Equipment  Other Facilities  Management and Maintenance

The children’s play and teenage sites were generally considered good quality. However, Figure 41 details the sites that had quality issues (3 or more categories scored as ‘acceptable’ or 1 or more categories scores as ‘poor’):

Figure 41: Children’s play and teenage provision with quality issues

Site ID Site Quality criteria where issue flagged as less than high quality Children’s Play 8037 Sworders Field Adventure Safety and security [Acceptable] Playground Condition of play equipment [Acceptable] Management and maintenance [Acceptable] 8053 Turkey Farm Play Area General characteristics [Acceptable] Safety and security [Acceptable] Condition of other facilities [Acceptable] Management and maintenance [Acceptable] 8054 Nutcroft Play Area General characteristics [Acceptable] Safety and security [Acceptable] Condition of other facilities [Acceptable] 8071 Watton‐at‐Stone Play Area General characteristics [Acceptable] Safety and security [Acceptable] Condition of play equipment [Acceptable] Management and maintenance [Acceptable] 8090 Tonwell Playing Fields General characteristics [Acceptable] Playground Safety and security [Acceptable] Condition of other facilities [Acceptable] 8109 North Drive LAP General characteristics [Acceptable] Safety and security [Acceptable] Condition of other facilities [Poor] 8138 Dellfields Play Area Condition of other facilities [Poor] 8133 Southern Country Park Safety and security [Poor] Play Area Condition of other facilities [Acceptable]

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 78 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Teenage Facilities 8006 Burley Road Condition of other facilities [Poor] 8036 Sworders Field, Castle Condition of play equipment [Acceptable] Skate Park Condition of other facilities [Acceptable] Management and maintenance [Acceptable] 8040 Tanners Way Play Area General characteristics [Acceptable] Condition of other facilities [Acceptable] Management and maintenance [Acceptable] 8078 High Street Playing Fields General characteristics [Acceptable] Playground Conditions of play equipment [Acceptable] Condition of other facilities [Poor] 8099 Campfield Road 2 Condition of play equipment [Acceptable] Condition of other facilities [Acceptable] Management and maintenance [Acceptable] 8116 Aston Playing Field Youth General characteristics [Acceptable] Area Condition of other facilities [Poor] 5122 Bramfield MUGA General characteristics [Acceptable] Condition of other facilities [Poor] 8161 Trinity Road Youth Area General characteristics [Acceptable] Condition of play equipment [Acceptable] Condition of other facilities [Acceptable] Management and maintenance [Acceptable] 8160 Birch Green Youth Area General characteristics [Acceptable] Condition of other facilities [Poor] 8143 Rowleys Road Youth Area General characteristics [Acceptable] Condition of other facilities [Poor] 8167 Cecil Road Youth Area General characteristics [Acceptable] Condition of other facilities [Poor]

The annual inspection reports should be used to guide the prioritisation of investment at existing facilities in the short term as the situation in relation to improvements and maintenance changes quickly. However, Figure 41 should be used to identify a number of investment priorities that are currently required.

Testing of alternative standards

Assessment Criteria

The assessment criteria are developed from current practice nationally, and from the adopted standards across East Herts benchmark comparator authorities.

Fields in Trust

The Fields In Trust report of January 2015 (Review of the Planning and Design for Outdoor Sport and Play, Phase 2 Survey Findings for England and Wales) found that

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 79 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment the median level of provision for Designated Play Space was 0.25ha per 1000, and the median accessibility standards for LAPS was 100m, for LEAPs was 400m and for NEAPs was 1000m. Where standards had been provided for other facilities, such as skate parks and Multi‐Use Games areas, these had a median of 660m or alternatively 15 minutes walk.

Comparators

Comparisons with the CIPFA benchmark authorities show some degree of variation in the adopted standards and the approach between them, see Figure 42.

Figure 42: Comparators for Children’s Play and Youth provision

Children’s Play and Teenage facilities Quantity (Sites per 1000) Accessibility (m) East Hertfordshire 0.2 800m walk

CIPFA comparators Sevenoaks 0.1 800m South Oxfordshire 0.25 (Children’s Play) 400m LEAP 0.3 (Teenagers) 1000m NEAP/ Teenagers St Albans 0.005 (Children’s Play) 300m (Children’s Play) 0.018 (Teenagers) 600m (Teenagers) Vale of White 0.04 400m LEAP Horse 1000m NEAP/ Teenagers

Emerging best practice

The standardised approach towards the provision of LEAPs and NEAPs is well adopted nationally, although the application on the ground seems to be more flexible. Since expectations vary greatly and there are no set design standards, the assessment and future standards for East Herts should be based on the FIT acknowledged criteria for LEAP and NEAP provision.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 80 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Quantity

The standard recommended by the Fields in Trust in 2015 suggests that the median provision per 1000 of Designated Equipped Playing Space should be 0.25ha per 1000.

It is proposed that the standard for new developments in East Herts should be 0.25ha per 1000 but that this should be for Designated Equipped Playing Space, including teenage provision.

Where possible, the provision of LEAPs and NEAPs will be sought. However, smaller developments that do not require a LEAP may be required to provide a LAP on site where appropriate. In addition to this, a financial contribution towards improving the nearest LEAP/NEAP may be required. This will be decided by East Hertfordshire Council on a case by case basis.

The size of new LEAPs and NEAPs should be as set out in line with the current FIT recommendations.

Each of the Towns and Group 1 Villages should have a full network of LEAPs, NEAPs and teenage facilities.

The remaining Group 2 Villages and other settlements should have a LEAP where the population is greater than 200 people and where there is a local case for need.

Accessibility

The accessibility of LEAPs and NEAPs should be in line with the FIT recommendations. These are:

 400 m for a LEAP  1000 m for a NEAP  1000 m for teenage facilities

The proposed accessibility standards are mapped in Figure 43 and Figure 44, and detailed in Figure 45. These also show the existing smaller play areas (LAPs) for completeness.

Quality

New LEAPs and NEAPs should meet the FIT standards.

New youth provision should reflect current best practice, and also take into account the needs expressed by local young people.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 81 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 43: Proposed accessibility standards for Children’s Play

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 82 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

Figure 44: Proposed accessibility standards for Teenage Facilities

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 83 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

Figure 45: Proposed accessibility testing for Children’s Play and Teenage provision

Existing Children's Play Existing Teenage Proposed accessibility standard – Provision Provision (Number of 100m for LAPs, 400m for LEAPs Proposed teenage accessibility Parish Population (Number of sites) sites) and 1000m for NEAPs standard ‐ 1000m Houses adjacent to Hadham Road, Dunmow Road, Whittington Way and to the north of Cannons Mill Lane are Bishop's not covered by the proposed 37212 19 10 Stortford CP LEAP accessibility. The proposed  NEAP accessibility covers all houses apart from those to the west of Maze Green Road and East of Brooke Gardens. Houses on The Causeway and to the south of Owles Lane are not Buntingford 4948 4 2 covered by the proposed LEAP CP accessibility. No NEAP Houses on Olvega Drive are not accessibility. covered by the proposed accessibility. Houses adjacent to Bullocks Lane, between Mill Road and Tamworth Road, and between Church Road and The Avenue are Hertford CP 26783 20 7 not covered by the proposed  LEAP accessibility. All Houses are covered by the proposed NEAP accessibility apart from those to the south of Highfield Road.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 84 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Existing Children's Play Existing Teenage Proposed accessibility standard – Provision Provision (Number of 100m for LAPs, 400m for LEAPs Proposed teenage accessibility Parish Population (Number of sites) sites) and 1000m for NEAPs standard ‐ 1000m Houses on Hoestock Road, Burnside and Brook Road are not covered by the proposed LEAP Sawbridgewor 8458 5 2 accessibility. The proposed NEAP th CP  accessibility covers all houses apart from those to the south of Brook Road. Houses to the west of Wulfrath Way and close to Star Street are not covered by the proposed Ware CP 18799 9 3 LEAP accessibility. Houses on The Hyde and south of Hertford Road are not covered by the proposed Houses on The Hyde are not covered NEAP accessibility. by the proposed accessibility.

 Braughing CP 1203 1 1 Houses to the west of Church End  are not covered by the proposed LEAP accessibility.

 Hertford 2672 1 1 Houses to the north of Vicarage Heath CP Causeway and south of The Houses on the eastern most part of Roundings are not covered by the Hailey Lane are not covered by the proposed LEAP accessibility. proposed accessibility.

Hunsdon CP 1080 1 2 Houses to the north of Hollands  Croft are not covered by the

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 85 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Existing Children's Play Existing Teenage Proposed accessibility standard – Provision Provision (Number of 100m for LAPs, 400m for LEAPs Proposed teenage accessibility Parish Population (Number of sites) sites) and 1000m for NEAPs standard ‐ 1000m proposed LEAP accessibility. No NEAP accessibility.

Houses to the north of Church Lane and south of Station Road are not covered by the proposed Much Hadham 2087 1 1 LEAP accessibility. Houses on CP New Barnes Lane are not covered Houses on the western most part of by the proposed NEAP New Barnes Lane are not covered by accessibility. the proposed accessibility.

 Standon CP 4335 1 1 Houses to the north of Mentley Houses to the north of Mentley Lane Lane East are not covered by the East are not covered by the proposed proposed LEAP accessibility. accessibility.  Stanstead 1950 1 1 Houses to east of Roydon Road  Abbots CP are not covered by the proposed LEAP accessibility.  Stanstead St 1652 2 0 Houses on Amwell Lane are not  Margarets CP covered by the proposed LEAP accessibility.  Houses to the north of Winters Lane Walkern CP 1541 2 1 Houses to the south of the are not covered by the proposed Maltings and north of Church accessibility.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 86 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Existing Children's Play Existing Teenage Proposed accessibility standard – Provision Provision (Number of 100m for LAPs, 400m for LEAPs Proposed teenage accessibility Parish Population (Number of sites) sites) and 1000m for NEAPs standard ‐ 1000m Lane are not covered by the proposed LEAP accessibility.

Watton‐at‐ 2338 2 2 Stone CP  

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 87 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Proposed Standards

The following recommendations are therefore made for Children’s Play and Teenage provision:

The existing network of the equipped play areas and teenage provision should be reviewed, including their quality. However, in principle, the existing network of equipped children’s play and teenage facilities should be retained and enhanced. East Hertfordshire Council will primarily seek the provision of LEAPs and NEAPS, however for smaller developments, the provision of LAPs may be appropriate.

As new developments are considered, new children’s play and teenage provision will be required. New sites should be required to meet the revised standards, including in relation to minimum size, accessibility and design. Where provision is not appropriate on site, then the equivalent value of contributions should be made off site.

Quantity

 0.25ha per 1000 o 400 sqm active zone should be for a LEAP o 1000 sqm active zone should be for a NEAP

Accessibility

 400m (LEAP)  1000m (NEAP)  1000m (Teenage Facility)

Quality

 New LEAPs and NEAPs should meet FiT guidelines.  Teenage provision should follow current best practice and be designed following consultation with young people.

A full network of provision should be achieved in each of the Towns and Group 1 Villages.

Each of the Group 2 Villages and other settlements should have a LEAP where the population is greater than 200 people and where there is an identified local need.

The approach towards the delivery of children’s play and teenage provision in association with new housing should be:

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 88 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment  Where any housing development is fully within the catchment of an existing LEAP, NEAP or teenage facility, then developers’ contributions should be sought towards improvements and or extensions of the site(s).  For development sites with any housing located more than 400m from a LEAP, or 1000 m from a NEAP or youth facility then the approach should be, in priority order:  Develop on site new LEAP or NEAP, and teenage facilities as required to meet the standard  If not possible on site, then to a new site(s) immediately adjacent to the housing development and with safe, lit access on foot.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 89 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment ALLOTMENTS

Allotments provide opportunities for those people who wish to do so to grow their own produce providing landscaped open space for the local area that can promote improved physical and mental health. Allotments can therefore improve wellbeing and the quality of life of communities by providing; a cheap source of good food; healthy outdoor exercise and social interaction; and, enhancement of the biodiversity and green infrastructure in an area.

They can benefit all groups, from those on limited income, to those who are financially secure but take pleasure in growing their own food. By providing economic, social and environmental benefits, allotments contribute towards the three core principles of sustainable development. Allotments play an important role in providing areas of green space within urban environments.

The PPG17 Open Spaces Strategy 2005 uses the following definition for allotments:

This includes all forms of allotments with a primary purposed to provide opportunities for people to grow their own produce as part of the long‐term promotion of sustainability, health and social inclusion. This type of open space may also include urban farms.

There is a total of 47 allotment sites in East Herts with a combined area of 42.1ha.

Nationally there are no formal benchmark standards of provision for allotments but the National Society of Allotment and Leisure Gardeners (NSALG) recommends a quantitative standard of 20 plots per 1000 households (approximately 20 plots per 2200 people). The standard size of an allotment plot is 250 square metres (0.025ha). This standard is therefore equivalent to 0.23ha of allotments per 1000 people.

Legislation

Statutory allotment sites are those that a local authority has acquired for the purpose of allotment gardening, while temporary sites have been acquired for other purposes and are being used as allotments in the interim. Statutory sites have legal protection while temporary ones do not. Some allotments may have been in use for years and the reason for acquisition in the first place may be unclear. Their legal status and level of protection may be uncertain. However, if a site has been in continued use for a number of years as an allotment site, it may be treated as a statutory site.

If an allotment is on land owned by the local authority then it will either be classed as a statutory or temporary site. Statutory sites are protected by the Allotments Acts, in particular the Small Holdings and Allotments Act 1908. Most of the allotment sites are the responsibility of parish councils, East Hertfordshire Council, or charitable bodies.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 90 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment There are essentially four key requirements on a local authority in relation to allotments. It needs to ensure that it is:

 Advertising allotment provision;  Supplying enough plots to satisfy demand;  Providing a tenancy agreement with a compensation clause;  Keeping allotment sites in a “fit for use” condition.

There is no generally accepted procedure for assessing the gap between current use levels and the potential need for allotments that would be realised if the allotments were actively promoted.

The Local Government Association’s report, A Place to Grow: A supplementary document to growing in the community (Local Government Association, 2010), summarises the duty on local authorities (outside of Inner London) to provide allotment gardens where they consider there is a demand for them as is contained in the 1908 Small Holdings and Allotments Act s23, with subsequent amendments and case law. Requests for allotments submitted by at least six local taxpayers or electors must be taken into account in considering whether a demand exists. Having determined that there is a demand, the local authority must be able to demonstrate that it has a strategy in place to meet that demand. Although the law imposes no deadline for eventual provision, an interested party may be able to make a claim for judicial review in the High Court against an authority that does not fulfil its duty in a fair and reasonable way.

A local authority can put land it already owns into use as allotments. It also has powers to acquire land for allotments by lease, by compulsory hiring or (failing that) by compulsory purchase under the 1908 Small Holdings and Allotments Act s25 and subsequent legislation not specific to allotments. The exercise of these powers, however, depends on resource allocations to meet acquisition costs, and thus on the strength of the case made for prioritising allotments against other claims on capital budgets.

The planning requirements for new allotment sites are more difficult to specify in categorical terms. In the very simplest case, the act of converting land previously used for agriculture into allotment gardens does not constitute development requiring planning permission (following Crowborough Parish Council v Secretary of State for the Environment [1981]). Planning permission may be required, however, for allotment gardens established on land not previously under agricultural use.

Furthermore, it follows from the need to make a broader case for allotments in order to help secure the capital resources required, and to satisfy the demands of new plot holders for good facilities, that ancillary investments (such as vehicle access and fencing) are likely to be made that do constitute development. Planning permission may also be required for sheds and greenhouses, particularly if they are large or on a permanent base. However, the erection of sheds or other buildings by a local authority may be ‘permitted development’ that does not require a planning

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 91 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment application to be made. Where substantial buildings are to be included in a new site they will be subject to the Building Regulations, but some buildings may also be partially exempt as agricultural buildings used exclusively for storage.

Current provision and assessment

The 47 allotment sites in East Herts are mapped in Figure 47 together with the existing accessibility catchment standard of 4000m.

Overall, the current level of provision of allotments across the district is 0.31ha per 1000.

Testing the existing standards

The existing adopted standards for allotments are:

Figure 46: Existing adopted standards for Allotments

Quantity per Accessibility Quality 1000 people Allotments 0.21ha 4000m Allotments should be free from dog fouling, vandalism, litter and antisocial behaviour. Where appropriate, access pathways and signage should be clearly provided and well maintained.

The testing of the existing standards in relation to quantity and accessibility are summarised in Figure 48 for the Towns and Group 1 Villages in East Herts. Testing of existing standards for all parishes within East Herts is provided in Appendix 3.

Quantity

The average provision across East Herts is 0.31ha per 1000. Ware is the only Town to have a deficit in provision, requiring an additional 0.6ha of allotment space to meet the standard.

Stanstead St Margarets is the only Group 1 Village without any allotment space.

Bishop’s Stortford and Hertford both have a significant theoretical surplus in the provision of allotment space. Bishop’s Stortford has 2.7ha and Hertford has 4.4ha of allotment space over and above what the standard requires.

Allotment space in East Herts is well used, with a district wide vacancy rate of less than 5% (Figure 49) at the time of the on site assessment.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 92 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Accessibility

The existing accessibility standard is achieved in all of the Towns and Group 1 Villages. However, as the existing standard is large at 4000m (a 10 minute drive), this is unsurprising.

Quality

The quality of the allotment sites was assessed against criteria which links to the National Society of Allotment and Leisure Gardeners (NSALG). These included:

 General characteristics  Accessibility  Facilities  Amenity value  Recreational value

Generally, the quality of the allotment sites across East Herts was good, however a number of sites were flagged for quality issues. A summary of sites with quality issues is provided in Figure 49. Where a site has quality issues, this was primarily due to a lack of facilities.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 93 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 47: Existing accessibility standards for allotments

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 94 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 48: Testing the existing standards for allotments

Impact of applied Applying provision provision standard Existing Existing standard (surplus Existing Provision provision (surplus or or deficit Provision standard (ha per 1000 deficit / 1000 by total Accessibility of main settlement 4000m Parish Population (total ha) / 1000 popn) popn popn) ha) (drive) Bishop's 37212 10.50 0.21 0.28 0.07 2.68 Stortford CP  Buntingford CP 4948 1.70 0.21 0.34 0.13 0.66 

Hertford CP 26783 10.00 0.21 0.37 0.16 4.38  Sawbridgeworth 8458 3.30 0.21 0.39 0.18 1.53 CP 

Ware CP 18799 3.30 0.21 0.18 ‐0.03 ‐0.64 

Braughing CP 1203 0.65 0.21 0.54 0.33 0.40 

Hertford Heath 2672 1.78 0.21 0.66 0.45 1.21 CP 

Hunsdon CP 1080 0.32 0.21 0.29 0.08 0.09  Much Hadham 2087 0.75 0.21 0.36 0.15 0.32 CP 

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 95 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Impact of applied Applying provision provision standard Existing Existing standard (surplus Existing Provision provision (surplus or or deficit Provision standard (ha per 1000 deficit / 1000 by total Accessibility of main settlement 4000m Parish Population (total ha) / 1000 popn) popn popn) ha) (drive)

Standon CP 4335 2.27 0.21 0.52 0.31 1.36 

Stanstead Abbots 1950 1.30 0.21 0.67 0.46 0.90 CP  Stanstead St 1652 0.00 0.21 0.00 ‐0.21 ‐0.35 Margarets CP  Walkern CP 1541 0.55 0.21 0.36 0.15 0.23  Watton‐at‐Stone 2338 1.30 0.21 0.56 0.35 0.81 CP 

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 96 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 49: Allotments – vacancy and flagged quality summary

Percentage of Quality criteria where issue Site ID Site Name vacant plots flagged for being poor quality 1018 Ermine Street Allotments 5% Buntingford causeway road 15% 1032 allotments Facilities 1028 Westmill Allotments 0% Facilities 1017 Walkern Allotments 15% Facilities 1034 Aston Allotments 0% 1033 Reedings Way Allotments 20% Facilities Southbrook/Elmwood 5% 1016 Allotments Facilities 1013 Bellmead Allotments 0% Facilities 1012 Springhall Road Allotments 10% Facilities 1001 High Wych Allotments 0% Facilities 1015 Drury Lane 0% 1014 Walnut Close Allotments 10% Facilities 1023 Chapel Lane Allotments 0% 1035 Standon Allotments 20% 1036 Great Hornmead Allotments 0% Facilities 1019 The Bourne 60% Facilities 1024 Braughing Allotments 5% 1030 Everest Gardens Allotments 0% Facilities Barrells Down Road 0% 1037 Allotments Facilities 1038 Elm Road Allotments 0% Facilities 1039 Cricketfield Lane Allotments 0% Facilities 1010 Haymeads Lane Allotments 2% 1041 Hallingbury Road East 2% 1042 Hallingbury Road West 5% Cemetery Road 100% Facilities 1007 Recreational value 1043 London Road Allotments 0% Facilities 1040 Thornbera Road Allotments 1% Facilities 1044 Ward Crescent Allotments 1% Facilities 1009 Allotments 2% Facilities 1031 Little Munden Allotments 0% Facilities 1003 Rowleys Road 5% 1045 Warehouse Field Allotments 5% 1046 Crosspath Field Allotments 0% 1047 Bengeo Road Allotments 0% 1027 North Road Allotments 0%

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 97 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment 1022 High Street Allotments 0% Facilities 1026 Cappel Lane Allotments 2% 1002 Hertinfordbury Allotments 5% 1008 London Road Allotments 10% Facilities 1011 Widford Allotments 10% Facilities 1020 High Street Allotments 0% 1021 Turkey Farm Allotments 5% Facilities 1029 Tewin Allotments 0% 1048 West Street Allotments 10% Facilities 1004 Sele Farm 15% Facilities 1025 Frampton Street Allotments 5% Facilities 1049 Babbs Green Allotments 0% Facilities

Updating the existing standard

Assessment Criteria

The assessment criteria are developed from current best practice nationally, and on the adopted standards across East Herts benchmark comparator authorities.

Fields in Trust

The Fields In Trust report of January 2015 (Review of the Planning and Design for Outdoor Sport and Play, Phase 2 Survey Findings for England and Wales) found that the median level of allotment provision was 0.3ha per 1000 with a median accessibility catchment of 1000m or a 15 minute walk.

NSALG

The NSALG’s leaflet, Creating a new allotment site (NSALG, 2012) provides some, limited design guidance, including:

 That an acre of land can house 12‐15 standard size plots (approx 250 sqm each);  All paths should be no less than 1.5 m wide, but ideally 1.7 m wide;  The main gates should be wide enough to allow large delivery vehicles.

NSALG recommends that allotment catchments should be 1000m.

Comparators

Comparisons with the CIPFA benchmark authorities show that the rate pf provision in East Herts is lower than all of its comparator authorities. A number of comparators have separated urban and rural quantity standards, reflecting the varied needs for

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 98 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment allotment space. Comparison with the CIPFA authorities also identifies the significant difference in accessibility distances, in which East Herts is four times as large as the next nearest accessibility.

Figure 50: CIPFA Comparators for Allotments

Allotments Quantity Accessibility (Ha per 1000) (m) East Hertfordshire 0.21 4000m Comparator authorities Sevenoaks 0.1 in Swanley, 0.51 in North Sevenoaks, 0.31 in Central Sevenoaks, 800m 0.47 in South Sevenoaks South Oxfordshire 0.4 1000m St Albans 0.45 except for Colney Heath (0.6), Harpenden (0.55) and 600m Wheathampstead (1.22) Vale of White Horse 0.23 for Abingdon‐on‐ Thames, Faringdon and 1000m Wantage. 0.4ha elsewhere

Standard for quantity

Allotment sites in East Herts are well used, and the average district provision far exceeds the existing standard. Furthermore, both the FiT median level of provision and East Herts CIPFA comparators have a higher quantity standard for allotments.

It is proposed that the existing standard be replaced by the FiT average standard:

 0.30ha per 1000

New allotment sites can be either agreed through voluntary acquisition or potentially compulsory purchase, where the council uses its compulsory powers and then leases the land to the parish council. The costs of development of new allotment sites can be met through developers’ contributions.

If allotment land is made redundant, alternative uses of the site should be considered. If allotment land is genuinely surplus due to falling demand, and the council is unable to promote sufficient level of allotment use to secure proper

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 99 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment management of a particular site, then consideration must be given to alternative community based, sustainable land based activities. These could be, for example, community gardens or nature reserves. However, it would be appropriate for sites to be able to be easily converted back to allotments if the demand rose again.

Standard for accessibility

A 1000m catchment is recommended which is the NSALG recommended catchment. This is illustrated in the map in Figure 51 and discussed in Figure 52.

Standard for design and quality

East Herts has an existing quality standard from its 2005 PPG17 Open Spaces Strategy and this is proposed to be taken forward with some minor amendments, as follows:

 Allotments should, where appropriate, have parking, toilets, a water supply, access pathways and good signage.

This quality recommendation should be the benchmark for both existing allotments and any new provision of allotment space.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 100 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 51: Allotments across East Herts – proposed accessibility

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 101 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 52: Testing of proposed allotment standards

Applying provision Impact of applied Existing Existing standard provision Existing Provision provision (surplus or standard (surplus Accessibility of main Provision standard (ha / per 1000 deficit / 1000 or deficit by total settlement (15 min Parish Population (total ha) 1000 popn) popn popn) ha) walk/1000m) Houses on Dukes Ride, The Shearers and north of Bishop's Stortford 37212 10.50 0.3 0.28 ‐0.02 ‐0.66 Parsonage Lane are not CP covered by the proposed accessibility. Houses to the south of Crouch Gardens are not Buntingford CP 4948 1.70 0.3 0.34 0.04 0.21 covered by the proposed accessibility. Hertford CP 26783 10.00 0.3 0.37 0.07 1.97  Sawbridgeworth 8458 3.30 0.3 0.39 0.09 0.76 CP  Houses to the west of Croft Road and along Myddleton Ware CP 18799 3.30 0.3 0.18 ‐0.12 ‐2.34 Road are not covered by the proposed accessibility.

Braughing CP 1203 0.65 0.3 0.54 0.24 0.29 

Houses on Hailey Lane are Hertford Heath 2672 1.78 0.3 0.66 0.36 0.97 not covered by the proposed CP accessibility.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 102 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Applying provision Impact of applied Existing Existing standard provision Existing Provision provision (surplus or standard (surplus Accessibility of main Provision standard (ha / per 1000 deficit / 1000 or deficit by total settlement (15 min Parish Population (total ha) 1000 popn) popn popn) ha) walk/1000m) Houses to the south of Nine Hunsdon CP 1080 0.32 0.3 0.29 ‐0.01 ‐0.01 Ashes are not covered by the proposed accessibility. Houses to the North of Winding Hill and New Barnes Much Hadham CP 2087 0.75 0.3 0.36 0.06 0.13 Lane are not covered by the proposed accessibility. Houses to the east of Mill Standon CP 4335 2.27 0.3 0.52 0.22 0.97 End are not covered by the proposed accessibility. Stanstead Abbots 1950 1.30 0.3 0.67 0.37 0.72 CP  Stanstead St. 1652 0.00 0.3 0.00 ‐0.30 ‐0.50 Margarets CP  Walkern CP 1541 0.55 0.3 0.36 0.06 0.09  Watton‐at‐Stone 2338 1.30 0.3 0.56 0.26 0.60 CP 

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 103 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Proposed Standards

The current average provision of allotment space in East Herts is significantly larger (0.31ha per 1000) than the existing standard of 0.21.

There is a high level of take up of allotment space as most allotments have very little spare capacity despite some quality issues flagged in the audit.

The following standards are proposed for allotments:

The existing allotment sites should be retained and improved so that they are all high quality. New allotment sites should be encouraged and supported where there is sufficient justified need.

Quantity

 0.30ha per 1000

Quality

 Allotments should, where appropriate, have parking, toilets, a water supply, access pathways and good signage.

Accessibility

 1000m

For new developments it is proposed that:

 For all new housing developments, the approach should be, in priority order: o Develop on site new allotment space of a minimum size according to the authority’s allotment standards o If not possible on site, then: . site adjacent to the housing development or within 1000m of the centre of the site . contributions towards improvements (including extension) at the closest allotment site

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 104 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment CEMETERIES AND CHURCHYARDS

Cemeteries and churchyards within urban areas can act as important public open spaces, especially when they are located in the centre of the town. Whilst their primary purpose is for quiet contemplation, these sites can provide an important site for local people or workers who use the sites for lunch time breaks or dog walking, if the site permits. They can also provide space for wildlife conservation within the urban areas.

Current provision

In East Herts there are 50 cemeteries and churchyards. There are cemeteries and churchyards in all of the Towns and most of the Group 1 Villages. Cemeteries and churchyards within the district are shown on Figure 53.

Assessment criteria

There are currently no standards set within East Herts for the quantity, quality or accessibility of Cemeteries and Churchyards for recreational use and PPG17 recognised that it was not realistic to set standards for this typology.

It was agreed that only cemeteries and churchyards which provide a clear recreational function would be assessed. The list of 7 cemeteries and churchyards to be assessed was agreed prior to the audit, as follows:

 Cemetery Road, Bishop’s Stortford  Great St. Mary’s Church, Sawbridgeworth  St Bartholomew’s Church, Buntingford  Westmill Road Cemetery, Ware  St Mary’s Church, Brent Pelham  Hertford Cemetery, Hertford  Hagsdell Road Cemetery, Hertford

The accepted quality standard for open spaces generally is the Green Flag Award criteria. For spaces such as Cemeteries and Churchyards the following quality criteria are relevant:

 A Welcoming Place  Healthy, Safe and Secure  Well Maintained and Clean

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 105 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 53: Churchyards and cemeteries within East Herts

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 106 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Quantity

The existing provision of Cemeteries and Churchyards equates to 52.5ha. Sites are relatively evenly distributed throughout the borough.

Sites range in size from the more traditional village churchyards (e.g. St Andrews Churchyard, Hertford) to large cemeteries (e.g. Harwood Park Crematorium, south of Stevenage).

Quality

The 7 cemeteries and churchyards with a recreational function were assessed against the Green Flag Criteria mentioned above. The average quality scores are provided below in Figure 54. All of the Green Flag categories scored very well.

Figure 54: Quality scores for Cemeteries and Churchyards Category Average quality score A welcoming place 94% Health, safety and security 71% Well maintained and clean 90% Conservation and heritage 100% Ecosystem Services 94%

Proposed standards

The nature of this typology means that these sites are very specific to their locality. It is important for the quality of the current sites to be maintained and enhanced. However, it is not considered appropriate to set a quantity or accessibility standard for Cemeteries and Churchyards for recreational use in East Herts.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 107 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment IMPLEMENTATION

The implementation of the strategy will be achieved through a combination of approaches by East Hertfordshire Council and its partners. There are a number of recommendations emerging from the strategy which require specific actions and investment, and others which are more a matter of ensuring the protection of the existing network of open space sites. The formal planning standards and policies can be used as guidance for the negotiations of developers contributions linked to new housing.

Where there are no specific site proposals the overriding policy objective will be to protect and enhance the existing network of green spaces and associated facilities.

Planning standards

A key output from the strategy is the development of proposed standards, particularly for new developments. The justification and details behind each of these planning standards are contained within the relevant assessment sections of the report.

These standards will be used to both justify the new provision and developers’ contributions under the existing s106 planning arrangements as individual planning applications come forward.

For new housing developments, sites accommodating 10 dwellings or more will be required to contribute to open spaces provision as per the proposed standards in Figure 55.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 108 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Figure 55: Proposed planning standards for open space

Open space type Proposed planning standards for new developments Quantity per 1,000 Accessibility Quality population Parks and 710m Green Flag Award Gardens Sites should be kept well maintained with well‐kept grass, planting and vegetation. High quality and appropriate ancillary facilities should 1.4ha per 1000 be provided. Amenity Green 480m for Green Flag standard Space either Amenity Sites should be well maintained with Green Space appropriate vegetation and planting. Appropriate ancillary facilities, such as or Parks and litter bins and seating should be Gardens provided. Natural and Semi 3.2ha per 1000 720m Green Flag standard Natural Green Space Natural and semi‐natural green spaces should have natural features (including water where appropriate). If provided, Public Rights of Way, footways and cycle paths should be clear and unrestricted and conservation areas should be identified. Sites should be maintained to an appropriate conservation standard. Children’s Play 0.25ha per 1,000 of 100m for New LEAPs and NEAPs should and provision for Designated LAPs meet FiT guidelines. young people Equipped Playing Space including 400m for Teenage provision should follow teenage provision LEAPs best practice and be designed following consultation with 1000m for young people. NEAPs

1000m for teenage facilities

Full network of NEAPs, LEAPs and Teenage facilities in the Towns

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 109 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment and Group 1 Villages

Full network of LEAPs in the Group 2 Villages and other settlements where the population is greater than 200 people and there is an identified local need. Allotments 0.30ha per 1000 1000m Allotments should, where appropriate, have parking, toilets, a water supply, access pathways and good signage.

When considering the needs of an application which may be eligible to provide open space it will be important to assess the needs at the town or parish level for quantity, quality and accessibility. If the town or parish has a shortfall in quantity terms, then the development should provide for the typology based on the adopted standard. The quantity of provision will need to be as a minimum proportionate to the new development to make it CIL compliant. If when assessing the amount from a development this results in a surplus in the town or parish, the Council should choose on a case by case basis whether all of the requirement is needed or just the amount to bring it in balance. The Council may choose to negotiate for an alternative open space, equivalent to the excess, where there is a known local need.

If a town or parish has an oversupply of a particular typology and the existing supply is of a suitable quality and accessibility, then it will not normally be appropriate to seek additional provision. However, provision may still be required if the quality and/or accessibility of the existing supply is deemed deficient. This will need to be assessed on a case by case basis.

In the case where a typology is in surplus but another typology is in deficit, it will generally not be appropriate to seek larger provision of the typology in deficit if this is not CIL compliant. However, the Council, in negotiation with the developer, may agree to such a provision if there is an identified local need.

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 110 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment Bibliography

East Herts Council . (2009, September ). Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) and Development & Planning Briefs. Retrieved from Open Space, Sport and Recreation SPD : http://www.eastherts.gov.uk/spd East Herts Council. (2005). PPG17 Audit and Assessment. East Herts Council. (2016). Final Village Hierarchy Study August 2016. Fields in Trust. (2015). Retrieved from Guidance for Outdoor Sport and Play: Beyond the Six Acre Standard: http://fieldsintrust.org/Upload/file/Guidance/Guidance‐for‐Outdoor‐ Sport‐and‐Play‐England.pdf Fields in Trust. (2015). Retrieved from Planning and Design for Outdoor Sport and Play, Phase 2 Review: www.fieldsintrust.org/Upload/file/Survey%20findings.pdf Local Government Association. (2010). Retrieved from A Place to Grow: A supplementary document to growing in the community: https://www.local.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/place‐grow‐supplementary‐ ‐736.pdf Natural England. (2011). Retrieved from Nature Nearby: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20140605090108/http://publications.nat uralengland.org.uk/file/95015 NSALG. (2012). Retrieved from Creating a new allotment site: http://www.nsalg.org.uk/wp‐ content/uploads/2012/09/A5_Creating_a_new_allotment_site_LR.pdf

Nortoft Partnerships Ltd East Hertfordshire Page 111 of 111 Open Spaces and Sports Facility Assessment Technical Study Part 4: Open Spaces Assessment

Nortoft Partnerships Limited 2 Green Lodge Barn, Nobottle, Northampton NN7 4HD Tel: 01604 586526 Fax: 01604 587719 Email: [email protected] Web: www.nortoft.co.uk