Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment (An Update to the PPG17 Assessment 2006)

Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment (An update to the PPG17 Assessment 2006)

Part of the evidence base for the Hart District Local Development Framework

June 2012

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY………………………………………………………... 7

1.0 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………. 14 1.1 Background……………………………………………………………………… 14 1.2 Scope of Study…………………………………………………………………… 15 2.0 METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………………. 15 3.0 POLICY CONTEXT REVIEW……………………………………………... 17 3.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………… 17 3.2 National Policy…………………………………………………………………... 17 3.3 Regional Policy…………………………………………………………………... 21 3.4 Local Policy……………………………………………………………………… 24 4.0 GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR LOCAL ASSESSMENTS…………….... 28 5.0 CONSULTATION…………………………………………………………… 30 5.1 Background……………………………………………………………………… 30 5.2 2006 Consultation Findings…………………………………………………….. 30 5.3 2010 Consultation Findings…………………………………………………….. 32 6.0 QUANTITY ASSESSMENT………………………………………………… 34 6.1 Background……………………………………………………………………… 34 6.2 Quantity Assessment – District Wide…………………………………………. 35 6.3 Quantity Assessment – By Parish………………………………………………. 44 6.4 Setting Quantity Standards……………………………………………………… 73 7.0 QUALITY ASSESSMENT…………………………………………………... 94 7.1 Background……………………………………………………………………… 94 7.2 Quality Assessment – District Wide…………………………………………… 95 7.3 Quality Assessment – By Parish………………………………………………... 97 7.4 Setting Quality Standards………………………………………………………. 127 8.0 ACCESSIBILITY ASSESSMENT………………………………………….. 130 8.1 Background……………………………………………………………………… 130 8.2 Setting Accessibility Standards…………………………………………………. 130 8.3 Accessibility Assessment of District Provision………………………………… 134 9.0 ACCESSIBLE NATURAL GREENSPACE………………………………. 139 10.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS……………………… 155

11.0 APPENDICES 157 Appendix 1: Parish and Town Council Responses to 2010 Consultation………... 158 Appendix 2: All sites identified within the District with facilities on site………… 177 Appendix 3: Accessibility Maps – District Wide…………………………………. 184

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Charts 1. Breakdown of all sites by number………………………………………………………….. 42 2. Breakdown of sites by area they cover within the District as percentage of all sites…… 42 3. Breakdown of unrestricted sites by number……………………………………………… 43 4. Breakdown of unrestricted sites by area they cover within the District as percentage of all sites…………………………………………………………………………………….. 43 5. Percentage of Quality and Value Scores – District Wide…………………………………. 96 6. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the District………………………… 96 7. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Blackwater and Hawley….. 97 8. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Blackwater and Hawley…. 98 9. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Bramshill………………….. 99 10. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Bramshill……………….. 100 11. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Church Crookham……… 100 12. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Church Crookham……. 101 13. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Crondall………………… 102 14. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Crondall……………….. 103 15. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Crookham Village………. 104 16. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Crookham Village……… 104 17. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Dogmersfield…………… 105 18. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Dogmersfield………….. 106 19. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Elvetham Heath…………. 107 20. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Elvetham Heath………… 108 21. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Eversley…………………. 109 22. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Eversley………………… 110 23. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Ewshot………………….. 110 24. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Ewshot………………… 111 25. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Fleet…………………….. 112 26. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Fleet…………………… 113 27. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Hartley Wintney………… 114 28. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Hartley Wintney………. 115 29. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Heckfield………………… 115 30. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Heckfield………………. 116 31. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Hook……………………. 117 32. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Hook…………………… 118 33. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Long Sutton and Well….. 118 34. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Long Sutton and Well…………… 119 35. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Odiham…………………. 120 36. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Odiham………………… 121 37. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Rotherwick……………… 122 38. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Rotherwick……………. 122 39. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of South Warnborough……. 123 40. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of South Warnborough…… 124 41. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Winchfield………………. 124 42. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Winchfield……………… 125 43. Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Yateley…………………… 126 44. Breakdown of average scores by provision type for Parish of Yateley…………………. 127

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Tables 1. Number of identified sites by typology…………………………………………………….. 35 2. Accessibility Breakdown…………………………………………………………………… 37 3. Total unrestricted, restricted and limited access provision within the District…………. 39 4. Total unrestricted access provision within the District………………………………….. 39 5. All provision (unrestricted/limited/restricted access) per 1000 head of population…….. 40 6. Unrestricted access provision per 1000 head of population……………………………… 41 7. Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Blackwater and Hawley…………… 45 8. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Bramshill…………………………. 47 9. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Church Crookham………………. 48 10. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Crondall………………………… 50 11. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Crookham Village………………. 51 12. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Dogmersfield……………………. 52 13. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Elvetham Heath…………………. 53 14. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Eversley…………………………. 54 15. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Ewshot………………………….. 57 16. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Fleet…………………………….. 58 17. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Hartley Wintney………………… 60 18. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Heckfield……………………….. 62 19. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Hook……………………………. 63 20. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Long Sutton and Well………….. 65 21. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Mattingley………………………. 66 22. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Odiham…………………………. 67 23. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Rotherwick…………………….. 69 24. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of South Warnborough…………… 70 25. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Winchfield……………………… 71 26. Breakdown of provision by amount for the Parish of Yateley………………………….. 73 27. Comparison of level of provision within the District with 2006 standards and other local authority standards……………………………………………………………………… 74 28. Provision needs based on estimated population increases……………………………… 82 29. Comparison of parish provision by 100 head of population…………………………….. 84 30. Comparison of parish provision by 100 head of population……………………………. 90 31. Quantity standard by person 2011………………………………………………………. 91 32-33. Quality and Value Scoring System……………………………………………………. 95 34. Improvements needed to existing provision……………………………………………. 128 35. Comparison of the 2006 Study Distance Thresholds with other local authority standards………………………………………………………………………………… 131 36. Distance Thresholds set for Hart District 2011………………………………………….. 134

Maps 1. All identified sites within the District…………………………………………………….. 36 2. Unrestricted sites within the District…………………………………………………….. 38

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction and Scope of the Study

This Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment provides an update to the 2006 Planning Policy Guidance 17 (PPG17) Assessment (the ‘2006 Study’) produced on behalf of the Council by Kit Campbell Associates. It assesses the quantity, quality and accessibility of the existing open space, sport and recreation provision within the District. The Assessment provides an evidence base for the local planning policy framework for the Hart Local Plan.

Policy Context

There are a number of policy documents and guidance notes supporting the protection and enhancement of existing spaces and the need for further provision. The 2006 Study was undertaken following the requirements of PPG17: Planning Open Space, Sport and Recreation (ODPM, 2002). This guidance was superseded by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (CLG, 2012). The NPPF provides a similar stance in that access to high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and recreation can make an important contribution to the health and well-being of communities. It states that planning policies should be based on robust and up-to- date assessments of the needs for open space, sport and recreation facilities and opportunities for new facilities.

The 2006 Study for the District was carried out by consultants to form part of the evidence base for the Hart Local Plan. The report sets out quality, quantity and accessibility standards with the key recommendation to enhance the quality of provision rather than increasing the quantity. However the study highlighted some potential limitations and therefore it was considered appropriate to provide an update to address these and provide more current information on the District’s provision. It is the intention this assessment update will accompany the 2006 Study rather than replace it.

Typology

The typology of provision assessed within this assessment follows the same list used in 2006 to ensure a consistent approach:

• Allotments

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

• Amenity Greenspace: informal recreation spaces, mainly in and around housing areas and village greens • Artificial Turf Pitches • Bowling Greens • Cemeteries • Formal Parks and Gardens • Grass Pitches: grass football pitches, cricket pitches etc • Play Areas and Playgrounds: up the age of 12 years • Tennis and multi-courts: hard surfaced outdoor areas for tennis, netball, 5-a- side etc • Youth Facilities: skateboard parks, outdoor basketball hoops, informal areas for teenagers • Indoor Sports Facilities

Consultation

Three consultations have been undertaken which support this assessment. The first was undertaken for the 2006 Study and the other two in 2010. The findings of the 2006 consultation with local residents and parish and town councils were to:

• Enhance the quality rather than the quantity of provision • Improve pitches and changing accommodation • Enhance parks • Better provision for children and teenagers • Create more cycle and footpaths.

In 2010 two separate consultations were undertaken with the Parish and Town Councils. The first requested a list of open space and community projects to inform the spending priorities for developer contributions until an open space policy is produced under the Hart Local Plan.

The second consultation formed the start of this updated assessment. A list of sites, broken down by parish boundary, was sent to each Parish and Town Council with a request to check all sites of open space, sport and recreation had been included, to rate each site in terms of quality and value, provide information on ownership, and provide suggestions for any potential improvements.

The responses from these consultations have helped in the assessment of quantity, quality and accessibility of the sites and therefore the results are set out in the following sections.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Quantity Assessment

The quantity assessment sets out the existing provision of open space, sport and recreation facility within the District. These sites were measured providing calculations per head of population. In the 2006 Study specific standards were set for the different typologies. The current provision was compared to the original standards and to the standards set by other local authorities.

From this analysis the following standards were set for the required quantity of provision:

Type of Provision Ha (Sq m) /1000 persons Allotments 0.075ha (750sqm) Amenity Greenspace/ Recreation 2.740ha (27440sqm) Grounds/Formal Parks and Gardens Artificial Turf Pitches 0.025ha (250sqm) Bowling greens 0.01ha (100sqm) Play Areas and Play Grounds 0.05ha (500sqm) Grass pitches 1.90ha (19000sqm) Youth facilities 0.03ha (300sqm) Tennis Courts/Multi Courts 0.035sqm (350sqm)

It is noted within the quantity assessment in total there is more provision per head of population than required by the standards. However this is heavily skewed by the historic parks (which do not form part of the required standard as these have been created by accident of history and cannot be assumed to represent a response to meet local need) and the cemeteries (for which standards have not been set as the need to provide open space is not their primary function).

Although there is more provision it is necessary to look at the provision standards individually to enable assessment of individual provision needs and the locality of provision. The amount of provision also does not mean there will be some surplus to requirements – open space is a key to Hart’s characteristics as the green lung between urbanised areas.

The majority of requests by the Parish and Town Councils were for improvements to existing facilities rather than new provision. This highlights that there is a reasonable level of provision already within the District that should be retained, and in many cases upgrades to these would suffice over the provision of new facilities. However this is based on current populations needs and further increases in 9

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

population, which is expected through the need to provide more housing through the Hart Local Plan, will need to be catered for. Any proposal that supports the particular need for children’s play and youth facilities should be looked upon favourably as this is an identified need due to need for these to be easily accessible on foot by young people and children.

Quality Assessment

The quality assessment looks at the quality and value rating of the sites within the District. Identifying the quality of a site is important to ensure that open space, sport and recreation provision meets the needs of the residents by providing desirable locations for people to visit.

Each Parish and Town Council were asked to rate the quality and value of the sites within their boundary against a scoring system. This enable overall rating to be derived District wide and by parish, and by overall scores and provision type.

The findings show that overall sites are considered to be of reasonable quality; however it should be noted average scores for the District can hide specific problems. From the parish responses the majority of needs focussed around enhancing existing facilities. A number of sites have been highlighted for improvement taking account of the quality and value scores, and the sites highlighted through the consultations in need of improvement.

Parish Site Improvement needed Blackwater and Blackwater and Hawley Leisure Improvements to grass pitches Hawley Centre Church Crookham Azalea Gardens Improvements to open space for children’s play and youth provision Crondall Hook Meadow Children’s Improvements to play provision Playground Dogmersfield Pilcot Green North Side Village Better maintenance needed Green Elvetham Heath Sports Pitches and Pavilion Pitches need resurfacing. Eversley Lower Common Amenity Improvements to play provision and Greenspace maintenance of footpaths and trees

Up Green Village Green Needs ditch and drainage maintenance Ewshot Ewshot Recreation Ground Improvements to play area Ewshot Ewshot Tennis Courts Resurfacing needed Fleet Oakley Park improvement to enhance access to facility for people with disabilities

The Views Improvements to play provision

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Basingbourne Recreation Area Improvements to play provision

Ancells park recreation Ground Improvements to play provision

Odiham Odiham Recreation Ground Improvements to play provision North Warnborough Improvements to play provision Recreation Ground Rotherwick Rotherwick Playground Replacement playground facility South Warnborough South Warnborough Recreation Improvements to play provision and Area netball court Yateley Cranford Park Winton Improvements to play provision and Crescent surfacing Monteagle Opens space Improvements to play provision and interpretation/signage Hearsey Gardens Improvements to play provision Churchill Crescent Improvements to play provision

In terms of setting quality standards each type of provision varies in terms of their needs to be considered a site of quality. As a basis for quality it is recommended that the Council use the Green Flag Standards. These have become nationally accepted standards for all types of greenspace. Each site identified within the study would not be expected to meet of the requirements of the standards as it depends on the functionality of the individual site, its size etc, but the standards should be used as a benchmark for aiming to improve sites within the District. The sites listed in Table 33 are key sites identified by the parish and town councils for improvements and should be concentrated on first but all sites are likely to need some improvements over time and these should be in line with the Green Flag Standards.

Accessibility Assessment

Accessibility is the measure of distance that households should be from an accessible open space. It is important to understand how accessible facilities are to local residents.

Accessibility thresholds (e.g. straight line buffer catchment distances in meters) have been derived for different typologies of provision. The maps highlight areas of the District which are not currently served by certain types of publicly accessible provision.

The standards have been derived from the original standards set in 2006, average walking and cycling times taken from online sources and standards set by other local authorities.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Walking distance – Cycling Distance – Driving Distance – Provision Type minutes (metres) minutes (metres) minutes (metres) Allotments 15 min (300m) 15 min (2250m) 15 min (7500m) Amenity Greenspace 5-10 min (300-600m) 5-10 min (750 – No standard set 1500m) Artificial Turf Pitch 20 min (1200m) 20 min (3000m) 20 min (10000m) (ATP) Bowling Greens 15 min (900m) 15 min (2250) 15 min (7500m) Cemeteries No standard set No standard set No standard set Grass Pitches 15 min (900m) 15 min (2250) 15 min (7500) Formal Parks and 15-20 min (900 -1200m) 15-20 min (2250 – 15-20 min (7500 – Gardens 3000m) 10,000m) Playing 10-15 min (600-900m) 10-15 min (1500- No standard set Fields/Recreation 2250m) Grounds Play Areas and Play 5 min – 10 min walk No standard set No standard set Grounds (300-600m) Tennis and Multi-courts 15 min (900m) 15 min (2250m) 15 min (7500m) Youth Facilities 10 min (600m) 10 min (1500m) No standard set Indoor Sports Facilities 20 min (1200m) 20 min (3000m) 20 min (10000m)

The key conclusion is that there is a need for further children’s play areas and youth provision and a need for some tennis courts and allotments in terms of accessibility across the District.

There is more limited access within the rural areas but is it unlikely sites would be viable to come forward and access, unless improvements are made to footpaths and cyclepaths would be limited to cars.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Each assessment for quantity, quality and accessibility of provision within the District has so far been considered in isolation. It is necessary to make a fair assessment of the provision to consider all three assessments together.

The quantity assessment highlighted that there is a reasonable supply of provision within the District however there is a highlighted need for some further children’s play areas and youth provision. The accessibility map corresponded with this need highlighting that further provision across the District would benefit the younger population. It was also identified that further tennis courts and allotments would be needed. Although the previous standard for tennis courts had been met some of these sites were limited/restricted and with the identified need by the Parish and

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Town Councils it was recommended that the standard was increased to accommodate further provision. Although the provision of allotments is low within the District only Hook and Odiham Parish Councils identified a need for further allotments and as this study was being produced a new scheme came forward within Hook meeting this need.

The key to improving the provision of open space, sport and recreation within the District appears to lie with improving the quality of existing provision rather than increasing the quantity. The average overall scores showed that the majority of sites were in reasonable quality however this did hide some of the specific problems identified by the Parish and Town Councils. The list of sites within the quality section should be the focus of the improvements in the first instance, however all other sites should be continued to be monitored to note any deterioration which is likely with age. As the population increases these sites are likely to experience increased usage and will therefore over time require quality improvements.

However there will be exceptions when large housing developments are proposed and on-site provision should be provided due to the impact of a large increase in resident population. Each site should be assessed on a case-by-case basis depending on the location of the development and the provision available in that area. Any on- site provision need should be assessed in terms of the accessibility and quality of existing provision and quantity standards, in discussion with the Council and the relevant Parish or Town Council.

Next Steps

The next stage will be to take this study forward as part of the overarching Green Infrastructure Strategy for the District, which will also include the Accessible Natural Greenspace Study and a local Biodiversity Action Plan. Together these will form a strategy for protecting and enhancing the greenspaces within our District, including the improvements of links between these sites.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.0 Background

1.1.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (CLG, 2012) states that access to high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and recreation can make an important contribution to the health and well-being of communities.

1.1.2 It requires planning policies to be based on robust and up-to-date assessments of the needs for open space, sport and recreation facilities and opportunities for new provision. The assessments should identify specific needs and quantitative or qualitative deficits or surpluses of open space, sport and recreation facilities in the local area. Information gained from the assessments should be used to determine what open space, sport and recreation provision is required.

1.1.3 In 2006 a Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) 17 Assessment (the ‘2006 Study’) was published for Hart District Council by Kit Campbell Consultants. This was produced under the PPG17: Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation (ODPM, 2002) which has been superseded by the NPPF. However, the 2006 Study highlighted some potential limitations and therefore it is appropriate to provide an update to this Study to address these and provide more current information on the District’s provision.

1.1.4 The more recent collective term for these types of spaces is Green Infrastructure which covers multi-functional greenspace. This takes the open space, sport and recreation requirement further by looking at the linkages between spaces and how they form a network. A green infrastructure strategy should be drawn up for the District.

1.1.5 The 2006 Study will be updated with current provision and assessment of future needs within the District of open space, sport and recreation provision. Although the PPG17 guidance has been superseded this approach will be continued for this assessment to enable a comparison between the two studies. The PPG17 definition covers all types of open space however a separate study is currently being produced by Natural England on the Accessible Natural Greenspace available within the District which takes account of sites such as commons, heathland, and forestry land. Rather than replicate this work, the 2006 Study reviewed some of these sites and will be 14

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

used here as the most current information until the Natural England Accessible Natural Greenspace Study is available to feed into this work.

1.1.6 This assessment aims to provide a clear picture of the current provision and future needs within the District, and assess the current provision to meet future needs in terms of quantity, quality and accessibility.

1.1.7 A similar methodology has been undertaken to ensure that comparison can be made between the new and previous findings. It is the intention that this update will accompany the 2006 Study rather than replace it.

1.2 Scope of Study

1.2.1 The aim of this assessment is to provide an update to the 2006 Study by assessing the quantity, quality and accessibility of the existing open space, sport and recreation provision. The objectives of this assessment are:

a) To provide an updated audit of existing open space, sport and recreation provision within the District in terms of quantity, quality and accessibility;

b) To provide an evidence base on open space, sport and recreation provision to support the Hart Local Plan;

c) To set local quantitative, qualitative and accessibility standards for provision in the District;

d) To highlight any areas of under-supply or where enhancement to provision is needed within the District

2.0 METHODOLOGY

2.1 This assessment has been undertaken in line with the guidance set out in PPG17 and its Companion Guide to ensure that the assessment follows a similar approach to that undertaken in the 2006 Study to enable comparison between the two sets of findings.

2.2 The assessment has been broken down into the following stages (which form the following chapters in this report):

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

i. Policy Context Review ii. Typology of Provision iii. Consultation iv. Quantity Assessment v. Quality Assessment vi. Accessibility Assessment vii. Conclusions and Recommendations.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

3.0 POLICY CONTEXT REVIEW

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 The 2006 Study highlighted the policy statements, plans and strategies that set out the broad context for planning and managing the District’s open space, sport and recreation provision. Since the previous study was produced five years ago it is useful to review the current policy context as some documents have been updated or superseded. A brief overview of the key documents is set out in the following section.

3.2 National Policy

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (CLG, 2012)

3.2.1 The NPPF has superseded the planning policy guidance and planning policy statements. Of particular relevance for this assessment it has replaced PPG17: Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation (ODPM, 2002). The NPPF sets out that access to high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and recreation can make an important contribution to the health and well-being of communities. Planning policies should be based on robust and up-to-date assessments of the need for open space, sports and recreation facilities and opportunities for new provision. The assessments should identify specific needs and quantitative or qualitative deficit or surpluses of open space, sports and recreational facilities in the local area. Information gained from the assessments should be used to determine what open space, sports and recreational facilities are required.

Urban Green Spaces Task Force Report (DTLR, 2002)

3.2.2 The Urban Green Spaces Task Force Report states that ‘strategic planning for parks and green spaces must take place alongside strategies for housing, community development and safety and economic regeneration’ and that local authorities should recognise that most open spaces can be multifunctional.

Green Spaces, Better Places – The Final Report of the Urban Green Spaces Taskforce (DTLR, 2002)

3.2.3 The Urban White Paper called for a ‘vision for the future of our parks, play areas and green spaces’. The Urban Green Spaces Taskforce looked at developing that vision. This final report identifies the importance of green 17

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

spaces to urban life and outlines the concerns about parks and other green spaces, with proposals for overcoming them.

3.2.4 The key points made within the report are:

• Urban parks and green spaces remain popular despite the fact that many are in decline. • Urban parks and green spaces make an important contribution to improving the quality of life in urban areas and in helping to deliver wider and longer term social, economic and environmental benefits. • Parks and green spaces should be at the heart of policy development and action. • Greater investment in urban parks and green space is worthwhile, not only in adding value to regeneration, renewal and housing development, but also in saving costs in other areas such as health, education and environmental management. • Planners and planning mechanisms to take better account of the need for and benefits of urban parks and green spaces, and the interests of the communities they serve. • There is a need for each site to be seen as part of a continuous network of urban parks and green spaces to serve the needs and aspirations of communities. • The links between local and national government strategies are necessary to achieve a continuous network of urban parks and green spaces.

Improving Urban Parks, Play Areas and Green Space (DTLR, 2002)

3.2.5 The DTLR report accompanies the Green Spaces, Better Places (2002) Report summarised above. It looks at patterns of use, barriers to open space, the ideal open space and the wider role of open space in urban renewal.

Open Space Strategies – Best Practice Guidance (CABE, 2004)

3.2.6 The CABE guidance sets out that great parks, squares and streets make for a better quality of life. A network of well-designed and cared for open spaces adds to the character of places where people want to live, work and visit.

3.2.7 The document provides guidance for local authorities in producing an open space strategy and highlights the benefit of preparing a strategy to protect and create a network of high quality open spaces that can:

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

• Reinforce local identity and civic pride; • Enhance the physical character of an area, shaping existing and future development; • Improve physical and social inclusion, including accessibility; • Provide connected routes between places for wildlife, recreation, walking and cycling, and safer routes to schools; • Protect and enhance biodiversity and ecological habitats; • Provide green infrastructure and ecosystems; • Provide for children and young people’s play and recreation; • Raise property values and aid urban regeneration; • Boost the economic potential of tourism, leisure and cultural activities; • Provide cultural, social, recreational, sporting and community facilities; • Protect and promote understanding of the historical, cultural and archaeological value of places; • Contribute to the creation of healthy places, including quiet areas; • Provide popular outdoor educational facilities; • Promote the opportunities for local food production; • Help mitigate and adapt to climate change; • Improve opportunities to enjoy contact with the natural world.

3.2.8 The Value of Public Space highlights how cities in the UK and around the world have found economic, health and social benefits from making the best of their public spaces.

Planning for Open Space (Sport England, 2002)

3.2.9 Planning for Open Spaces provides guidance on good practice, based upon PPG17: Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation. The key points raised are:

• Sport England’s policy is normally to oppose the loss of playing fields from development however it is noted there are exceptions to this rule. • Sport England should be consulted on development proposals affecting playing fields. • It is important that local standards are set for open space, sport and recreation provision.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

• Advice from ‘Towards a Level Playing Field: A manual for the production of Playing Pitch Strategies’ should be taken into consideration when undertaking a playing pitch assessment.

National Play Strategy for England (Department for Children, Schools and Families, 2008)

3.2.10 The Government’s aim is for all children to be able to enjoy a range of safe and exciting places to play close to where they live. Through children and communities’ involvement in the design and planning of these spaces, play areas will be valued locally and continue to reflect the distinct needs of each community.

3.2.11 The Strategy sets out the means of delivering the following vision for 2020:

• In every residential area there are a variety of supervised and unsupervised places for play, free of charge; • Local neighbourhoods are, and feel like, safe, interesting places to play; • Routes to children’s play space are safe and accessible for all children and young people; • Parks and open spaces are attractive and welcoming to children and young people, and are well maintained and well used; • Children and young people have a clear stake in public space and their play is accepted by their neighbours; • Children and young people play in a way that respects other people and property; • Children and young people and their families take an active role in the development of local play spaces; and • Play spaces are attractive, welcoming, engaging and accessible for all local children and young people, including disabled children, and children from minority groups in the community.

‘Nature Nearby’ Accessible Natural Greenspace Guidance (Natural England, 2010)

3.2.12 The three underlying principles of the Access to Natural Greenspace Standard (ANGSt) are:

a) Improving access to greenspaces, b) Improving naturalness of greenspaces, and

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

c) Improving connectivity with greenspaces.

3.2.13 Assessing the current provision against ANGSt will help local authorities to identify where adequate provision is being made for natural greenspace, and where action needs to be taken to deliver appropriate levels of natural space close to people’s homes.

3.3 Regional Policy

Regional Spatial Strategy: The South East Plan (DCLG, 2009)

3.3.1 The South East Plan was published in May 2009 and replaced the Regional Planning Guidance for the South East. This is the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) for the South East. The RSS are expected to be abolished following the Royal Ascent of the Localism Bill in November 2011, however at the time of writing the South East Plan is still a material consideration.

3.3.2 The Region’s strategic vision for 2026 is for a socially and economically strong, healthy and just South East that respects the limits of the global environment. To achieve this, the Region must facilitate the development of health, education, cultural and leisure amenities, necessary to meet the needs of a growing population and manage the implications of demographic and settlement change.

3.3.3 The policies that are important to take into consideration are:

Policy SP1: Supporting Healthy Communities Local development documents should embrace preventative measures to address the causes of ill health by reflecting the role the planning system can play in developing and shaping healthy sustainable communities, including:

i. Community access to amenities such as parks, open spaces, physical recreation activity and cultural facilities ii. Mixed and cohesive communities, with a particular focus on access to housing for socially excluded groups iii. Healthier forms of transport, by incorporating cycle lanes and safe footpaths in planned developments.

Policy CC8: Green Infrastructure Local authorities and partners will work together to plan, provide and manage connected and substantial networks of accessible, multifunctional greenspace.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Networks should be planned to include both existing and new green infrastructure. They need to be planned and managed to deliver the widest range of linked environmental and social benefits including conserving and enhancing biodiversity as well as landscape, recreation, water management, social and cultural benefits to underpin individual community health and ‘well being’. They will be created and managed as a framework of greenspaces and other natural features that will boost the sustainable development of settlements and increase the environmental capacity of the locality and region as a whole, helping communities to be more resilient to the effects of climate change.

The provisions of this policy apply region-wide. However, the successful designation and management of green infrastructure will be particularly important in areas designated as regional hubs, where growth may impact on sites of international nature conservation importance or where there is a need to enhance the existing environmental capacity of an area.

Policy S5: Cultural and Sporting Activity Increased and sustainable participation in sport, recreation and cultural activity should be encouraged by local authorities, public agencies and their partners through local development documents and other measures in order to improve the overall standard of fitness, enhance cultural diversity and enrich the overall quality of life.

Provision for cultural and sporting activity should:

i. Be based on an up to date strategy for the selected provision which should cover aspects such as the arts, heritage, the museums, libraries and archive sectors and sporting activity ii. Be based on an audit of current supply and an assessment of this supply against estimated demand/growth. The audits should cover the quantitative, qualitative and accessible nature of provision. Authorities should encourage formal partnership working to put in place effective programmes of provision and management.

Local development documents should include policies relevant to local needs designed to:

i. Encourage participation by disadvantaged and socially excluded persons/groups ii. Locate facilities sustainably where they can be accessed by a range of modes of transport particularly healthy forms of transport i.e. walking and cycling 22

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

iii. Make joint service provisions where appropriate iv. Give special attention to cultural provision in supporting economic growth and urban regeneration, which may be the subject of area action plans v. Include policies encouraging workplace and other everyday provision for increased physical activity.

South East Green Infrastructure Framework from Policy into Practice (2009)

3.3.4 The Framework seeks to establish green infrastructure as an integral and essential component of sustainable communities, develop a common understanding of the role and importance of green infrastructure, and provides detailed guidance on how green infrastructure can be delivered through the planning system and local partnerships, including securing funding for its creation and long term maintenance.

3.3.5 Definition of Green Infrastructure:

For the purposes of spatial planning the term green infrastructure (GI) relates to the active planning and management of sub-regional networks of multi-functional open space. These networks should be managed and designed to support biodiversity and wider quality of life, particularly in areas undergoing large scale change.

The following areas can form part of networks of green infrastructure:

• Parks and gardens – including urban parks, country parks and formal gardens • Natural and semi-natural urban greenspaces – including woodlands, urban forestry, scrub, grasslands, wetlands, open and running water, wastelands and derelict open land and rock areas • Green corridors – including river and canal banks, cycleways and rights of way • Outdoor sports facilities (with natural or artificial surfaces, either publicly or privately owned) including tennis courts, bowling greens, sports pitches, golf courses, athletic tracks, school and other institutional playing fields, and other outdoor sports areas • Amenity greenspace (most commonly, but not exclusively, in housing areas) – including informal recreation spaces, greenspaces in and around housing, domestic gardens and village greens

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

• Provision for children and teenagers – including play areas, skateboard parks, outdoor basketball hoops, and other more informal areas • Allotments, community gardens and city (urban) farms • Cemeteries and churchyards • Accessible countryside in urban fringe areas • River and canal corridors • Green roofs and walls.

3.4 Local Policy

Hart’s Sustainable Community Strategy (2008-2018)

3.4.1 The 2008-2018 Sustainable Community Strategy replaced Planning the Future of Hart Together (Hart’s Community Strategy 2005-2016). The new Strategy sets out the following vision for Hart District:

‘To improve, sustain and promote the social, economic and environmental well-being of the communities in Hart District.’

3.4.2 From this six priorities for the District have been identified and are intended to be the means of coordinating the delivery of specific outcomes for the long term benefit of the district.

3.4.3 The priorities are:

• An Environmentally Conscious Community and a Sustainable District; • Affordable, Safe, Well Maintained, Sustainable Housing; • One of the Safest Districts in the South East; • A Beacon of Good Health; • A Diversified and Balanced Economy; • A Sustainable and Accessible Transport System.

Hart District Local Plan (Replacement) 1996-2006

3.4.4 The Hart District Local Plan contains the saved policies from 2009. From those saved the following policies apply to open space, sport and recreation provision within the District:

URB21 Loss of amenity and recreation open space:

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

The development of existing or proposed amenity open space or recreational land (defined on the Proposals Map and included in the schedule in Appendix E [of the Local Plan]) will only be permitted:

(i) Where there is a local excess of amenity open space or recreational land, measured against the council’s standards; or (ii) For sporting or recreational uses which retain the open character of the land.

URB22 Change of use of small open space areas: In the interests of local amenity, the change of use of small areas of open space within housing estates and in other locations in the main settlements will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that the parcel of land is of minimum benefit in terms of its impact on local amenity and recreation.

URB23: Open space requirements with new developments: New housing developments of 20 or more dwellings will only be permitted where open space is provided on site in accordance with the standards set out in the plan. Developments of between 5 and 19 dwellings will be expected to make provision in accordance with the standards, having regard to the level of deficiency of open space in the locality. In either case, the provision of offsite open space in substitution will be considered in relation to the needs of the development for open space, for children’s play and other recreational purposes, the local availability of appropriate existing or proposed open space to serve the residents of the development and other circumstances of the development.

PPG17 Assessment (Kit Campbell Associates, 2006)

3.4.5 In 2006 a PPG17 Assessment for the District was carried out by consultants on behalf of the Council to form part of the evidence base for the Local Development Framework (LDF), now known as the Hart Local Plan.

3.4.6 The report sets out quality, quantity and accessibility standards based upon the findings from an audit of provision and consultation with local residents, town and parish councils and key stakeholders. The key recommendation from the report is that the Council’s priority should be to enhance quality rather than quantity.

3.4.7 In terms of planning policies for open space, sport and recreation the report recommends that, due to the need to enhance provision across the District, the Council should adopt a more positive approach and that one of the Council’s core LDF objectives should be to ensure that Hart has a network 25

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

of accessible, high quality greenspaces and sport and recreation facilities which meet local needs and enhance the ‘liveability’ of the District, promote sustainability, support biodiversity and make the best use of land.

3.4.8 The report pulls together the key conclusions and recommendations under three broad headings:

• Policy Issues • The evidence base for open space, sport and recreation policies • Keeping the local community informed and involved.

3.4.9 These are summarised below.

Policy Issues

3.4.10 The main policy message from the 2006 Study is that the quality and accessibility of provision are far more important than the amount of it. The priorities for open space, sport and recreation provision are likely to be:

• The development and enhancement of a limited number of high profile strategic sites, designed to serve a wide range of community needs. The upgrading or reconstruction of existing pitches and related changing and the provision of artificial turf pitches. • The improvement of provision for teenagers. • The development of a new approach to children’s play. • The development of more walking and cycling routes within and between the main settlements.

The Evidence Base

3.4.11 In order for an assessment of this kind to be fully PPG17 compliant it is necessary to undertake a comprehensive audit of local provision. We recommend that the Council should:

• Seek to obtain the views of those Parish and Town Councils that did not respond through the consultation process • Develop and maintain a comprehensive database of local provision.

Keeping the Community Informed and Involved

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

3.4.12 Many Hart residents contributed to the assessment highlighting that the provision of open space, sport and recreation in the District is important to many local people. The need is to keep residents better informed regarding what the Council is doing and why, and the opportunity is for the Council to get local communities more involved in greenspace management and maintenance across the District.

3.4.13 As the 2006 Study for the District forms the basis of this PPG17 Assessment Update the findings are discussed in further details throughout the other sections.

Hart District Council – The Leisure Strategy 2007-2017

3.4.14 The Leisure Strategy sets out a mission statement that aims to enable the provision of a range of high quality and accessible facilities, services and opportunities which meet the leisure, sport, health and physical activity needs of the District’s communities. It focuses on the provision of indoor sport and leisure, outdoor sport and play, parks, open spaces and commons, and inland waters. Relevant to the planning process it sets out a strategy for the provision of open space, sport and recreation facilities with new development.

Hart District Council Feasibility Study – Replacement Leisure Centre (Strategic Leisure, 2010)

3.4.15 In 2010 Strategic Leisure consultants were appointed by the Council to undertake a review of potential options for the development of a replacement Hart Leisure Centre in Fleet. The study highlights that there is already identified pressure on the existing Hart Leisure Centre with the pool reaching programmed capacity and waiting lists for swimming lessons. This pressure will increase as new homes are built in Hart and the immediate surrounding areas. The Sport England Facility Calculator was used to identify future provision requirements taking into consideration the profiled increase in population. This provides figures for both the District as a whole and looks at the replacement need for the Hart Leisure Centre with a 20 minute walk catchment.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

4.0 GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR LOCAL ASSESSMENTS

4.1 The previous planning policy guidance, before being superseded by the NPPF was Planning Policy Guidance Note 17 (PPG17). The 2006 Study was based upon the principles within PPG17. The 2012 Assessment provides an update to the 2006 Study therefore it is considered appropriate to cover the original principles to ensure a similar approach is undertaken for the 2012 Assessment.

4.2 PPG17 set out four guiding principles for completing a local assessment which have been taken into consideration in the production of this study. These are:

• Local needs vary considerably from one place to another, even within a single authority area, according to the different socio-demographic and cultural characteristics of local communities and the number and type of visitors. • The delivery of a network of high quality, sustainable open spaces, sport and recreation facilities depends not only on good planning but also on creative urban and landscape design and effective management. • In many areas, delivering the objectives set out in PPG17 will depend much more on improving and enhancing the accessibility and quality of existing provision than on new provision. • The value of open space, sport and recreation facilities, irrespective of who owns them, depends primarily on 2 things: the extent to which they meet clearly identified local needs and the wider benefits they generate for people, wildlife, biodiversity and the wider environment.

4.3 There are three key attributes underpinning the guiding principles:

• Accessibility – how easily a site can be accessed • Quality – ensuring the site is fit for purpose in terms of needs and expectations, design, management and maintenance. • Quantity – amount of provision in an area.

4.4 To ensure the 2006 and 2012 Assessments are comparable these elements have formed the basis for this assessment of provision of open space, sport and recreation.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

4.4 Having established the guiding principles there is a need to establish which sites should be included in the assessment. PPG17 defined open space as ‘all land designed for pedestrian use, both publicly and privately owned that provides amenity value to the community, through accessibility of visual benefits’.

4.5 PPG17 set out a typology of provision that an authority may wish to include within their assessment. It is noted that variations of the typology may be used by the local authority. In the 2006 Study the following typology was used:

• Accessible countryside in urban fringe areas • Allotments • Amenity greenspace • Churchyards and cemeteries • Civic spaces • Green corridors • Natural and semi-natural urban greenspaces • Outdoor sports facilities, split into: bowling greens, pitches and tennis or multi-courts • Parks and gardens • Provision for children and teenagers.

4.6 However not all of the sites within the District were assessed; only a sample audit of sites, selected by Council officers broadly representative of local provision. In particular there was only limited work carried out on the accessible countryside in urban fringe areas, green corridors, natural and semi-natural urban greenspace. These areas will not be assessed in this updated assessment but will be picked up under the accessible natural greenspace work that will be carried out as part of the green infrastructure work for the Hart Local Plan. Those sites that were assessed including Common Land and the Basingstoke Canal will form the best available information until the accessible natural greenspace work has been completed.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

5.0 CONSULTATION

5.1 Background

5.1.1 Three consultations have been undertaken which will support this Assessment update. The first was undertaken for the 2006 Study and the other two in 2010 as part of the evidence base for this update and in determining contributions for leisure/community facilities until a new open space policy has been produced through the Hart Local Plan.

5.2 2006 Consultation Findings

5.2.1 For the 2006 Study a comprehensive consultation was undertaken to identify community needs and achieve a successful greenspace and sports facilities network that people feel proud of and enjoy using. Four main methods of consultation were undertaken:

• Analysis of local resident’s views through the Council’s Project Greenspace Survey; • Telephone interviews with key local stakeholders including Council staff, local sports clubs, youth workers and amenity bodies; • A self-completion questionnaire survey of Parish Councils, supplemented by a meeting with councillors for the non-parished areas of Fleet and Church Crookham; • A presentation and discussion with local councillors.

5.2.2 The full set of responses can be viewed in the 2006 Study. An overview is provided below.

Local Residents consultation

5.2.3 The Project Greenspace Survey was undertaken through Hart News and on the Council’s website. In total the questionnaire generated 1445 responses, equivalent to 1.7% of District residents, which was noted at the time to be a high response representing a good spread across the District.

5.2.4 The consultation highlighted the potential for serious problems for the Council if under-investment in the provision, management and maintenance of community infrastructure continued. 30

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

5.2.5 In terms of the quantity, quality and accessibility of provision the following points were raised during the consultation:

Quantity of provision

5.2.6 Satisfaction with the quantity of provision was fairly low, although generally higher than the ratings for quality of provision. The main local needs identified were:

• More and better football pitches and changing provision; • More and better provision for children and teenagers; • Better access to the countryside; • Opportunities for active recreation in the countryside and possibly a country park for countryside activities; • More and better indoor sports provision.

5.2.7 It suggested that the Council’s priority should be to enhance quality rather than quantity; if it boosts quantity, its available revenue funding will be spread over a greater quantity of provision and quality is then bound to suffer. It was noted that there needs to be some provision made for motorised and noisy sports as only 16% of respondents’ satisfaction with the quantity of provision was very low.

Quality of Provision

5.2.8 The majority of respondents found the overall quality of most forms of provision to be fairly low or worse. Many people commented that the quality of public facilities and sport pitches as very poor. However, 58% of respondents rated the quality of provision at nature conservation sites as fairly high/very high. The recommended areas to focus improvement on were:

• Improving pitches and changing accommodation; • Enhancing parks and other high profile sites; • Better provision for children and teenagers; • Creating more cycle and footpaths, linking towns and villages, and within the countryside.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Accessibility of provision

5.2.9 Car use is the mode of transport used by the vast majority of residents travelling to facilities such as large parks, outdoor local sports facilities, indoor leisure centres and countryside sites. More than 14% walk and around 10% cycle to large parks and countryside sites. Bus use was the most insignificant in terms of current leisure travel patterns, however public transport in the area is poor. The most effective measure would be to make pedestrian and cycle access easier and more convenient.

Parish and Town Councils consultation

5.2.10 The Parish and Town Councils responses recognised that access to the countryside and countryside facilities are generally good but there was a widespread need for more or better provision of:

• Cycle paths and bridleways; • Children’s play areas; • Youth facilities.

5.2.11 A number of Parish and Town Councils identified specific needs for their area (which can be viewed in the 2006 Study). These specific needs also support the local residents’ views that while Hart is a good area in which to live, open space, sport and recreation provision does not contribute as much to the quality of local life as it could and should.

5.3 2010 Consultation Findings

5.3.1 In 2010 two separate consultations were undertaken with the Parish and Town Councils regarding local provision. The first was carried out in June 2010 requesting the Parish and Town Councils identify open space projects to inform spending priorities for developer contributions. This highlighted the requirements the Parishes felt were needed in their area to improve local provision. A large number of schemes were suggested, some of which were considered to be suitable in respect of the 2006 Study and are currently being used to support developer contributions for open space at the current time, until a revised policy basis is established through the Hart Local Plan.

5.3.2 The second consultation was undertaken from August to October 2010, with a further request for outstanding responses during February and March 2011. This formed the start of this assessment. As part of the audit work a desk top

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

study was carried out to identify the sites within the District. These sites were broken down by parish and the relevant one sent to each Parish and Town Council to check all sites within their boundary had been included. The Parish and Town Councils were also sent a questionnaire which asked them to rate each site in terms of quality and value, to provide information on the ownership of the site, and provide suggestions for improvements needed. The majority of Parishes did respond to the consultation and provided comprehensive responses particularly in terms of sites identified. The full set of responses is set out in Appendix 1.

5.3.3 The responses from the Parish and Town Councils have helped to inform the following sections of the report and informed the overall findings.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.0 QUANTITY ASSESSMENT

6.1 Background

Purpose of the Quantity Assessment

6.1.1 This section sets out the existing provision of open space, sport and recreation facilities within Hart District. This will enable assessment of the current provision and whether this level of supply is sufficient to meet the needs of the current and future populations of the District, as well as identifying areas within the District where there is an over or under supply of provision.

6.1.2 Quantity is the amount of open space within the District. This is calculated for each typology by head of population.

Methodology

6.1.3 The first stage was to carry out a desk-top study. The 2006 Study was used as the starting point, along with existing data mapped on the Council’s Geographical Information System (GIS), and websites such as Sport England to identify as many of the sites as possible within the District. Once the list had been drawn up these were divided by Parish boundary. As part of the consultation exercise each Parish and Town Council were sent a questionnaire listing the sites identified within their boundary. As well as assessing each site the Parish and Town Councils were asked to provide details of any further sites that had been missed during the desk-top study and the ownership to establish access to these sites by the general public. The original list was then updated to create a comprehensive list of provision within the District and mapped on the GIS system. The majority of Parish and Town Councils responded to the questionnaire however in the few instances where a response was not received a site visit was made to confirm the list produced at the desk-top study stage.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.2 Quantity Assessment – District Wide

6.2.1 In the 2006 Study only a sample audit of sites was undertaken which identified the following:

• Allotments: 1 • Bowling Greens: 5 • Equipped Play Areas: 26 • Multifunctional Greenspaces: 86 • Pitches and Courts: 20

6.2.2 This audit of provision within the District has identified 247 sites. A number of the sites have multiple functions e.g. the main function is a recreation ground but also has a play area and tennis courts. Where the site has more than one function these have been identified separately to ensure there is an accurate list of provision within the District. All of the sites have been identified on Map 1.

Typology Number of sites identified (2010) Allotments 2 Amenity Greenspaces 21 Artificial Turf Pitches 5 Bowling Greens 6 Cemeteries 21 Formal Parks and Gardens 31 Grass Pitches 47 Play Areas and Playgrounds 37 Recreation Grounds 36 Tennis and Multi-courts 29 Youth Facilities 3 Indoor sports Facilities 9 Total number of Sites 247 Table 1: Number of identified sites by typology

6.2.3 Although accessible natural greenspace does not form part of the typology for this study a number of these sites were identified by the Parish and Town Councils and due to the rural nature of the District play an important role in the open space provision. These sites however will be subject to their own study that will form part of the evidence base for the Hart Local Plan alongside this assessment, and will be assessed at a later stage.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 1: All identified sites with the District

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.2.4 Having identified the sites within the District these were categorised dependent on access:

Accessibility Level Description Unrestricted access Sites have unrestricted public access (but potential restrictions from dusk-dawn) Limited access Sites may be publicly or privately owned but access is limited to certain times, membership, school access etc. Restricted access Sites are not accessible to the general public Table 2: Accessibility Breakdown

6.2.5 The unrestricted sites are shown on Map 2 over the page.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 2: Unrestricted sites within the District 38

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.2.6 The following tables set out the amount of open space provision within the District. The first table shows the amount across all unrestricted, restricted and limited access, with the second table showing the amount of unrestricted provision with the District. Please note that sizes have been taken from the Council’s Geographical Information System (GIS).

Provision type Number of Total area in % of total area % of total existing sites Hectares (sqm) of District provision Allotments 2 0.77 (7739) 0.004% 0.04% Amenity Greenspaces 21 19.57 (195676) 0.09% 0.91% Artificial Turf Pitches 5 3.02 (30203) 0.01% 0.14% Bowling Greens 6 0.86 (8577) 0.004% 0.05% Cemeteries 21 10.27 (102724) 0.05% 0.48% Formal Parks and 31 1902.32 8.8% 89.65% Gardens (19023155) Grass Pitches 47 94.65 (946521) 0.44% 4.41% Recreation Grounds 36 103.23 (1032292) 0.5% 4.81% Play Areas and 37 1.97 (19696) 0.005% 0.09% Playgrounds Tennis and Multi-courts 29 6.81 (68109) 0.03% 0.32% Youth Facilities 3 0.99 (9921) 0.005% 0.05% Indoor Sports Facilities 9 1.37 (13691) 0.006% 0.06% Total 247 2145.83 9.94% 100% (21458304) Table 3: Total unrestricted, restricted and limited access provision within the District

Provision type Number of Total area in % of total area % of total existing sites Hectares (sqm) of District provision (All sites) Allotments 0 0 0% 0% Amenity Greenspaces 21 19.57 (195676) 0.09% 0.91% Artificial Turf Pitches 0 0 0 0 Bowling Greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 21 10.27 (102724) 0.05% 0.48% Formal Parks and 5 315.58 (3155834) 1.47% 14.71% Gardens Grass Pitches 22 24.22 (242161) 0.11% 1.13% Recreation Grounds 26 84.45 (844485) 0.39% 3.94% Play Areas and 37 1.97 (19696) 0.009% 0.09% Playgrounds Tennis and Multi-courts 9 1.21 (12084) 0.006% 0.05% Youth Facilities 3 0.99 (9921) 0.005% 0.05% Indoor Sports Facilities 0 0 0 0 Total 144 458.23 (4582278) 2.13% 21.36% Table 4: Total unrestricted access provision with the District

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.2.7 A total of 247 open space, sport and recreation sites were identified across the District with a total land area of approximately 2145.83 ha (21458304sqm). Of this 144 sites are considered to have unrestricted access. These cover an area of 458.23ha (4582278sqm) and make up 21.36% of the total provision of sites, and 2.13% of the total area of the District.

6.2.8 Table 5 sets out the amount of hectares of existing open space, sport and recreation provision per 1,000 head of population Provision is calculated as follows:

Hectares of provision by type x 1000 = Hectares per 1000 head of population District Population

Provision Type Total area of all Amount of sites provision (all sites) ha (sqm) per 1000 population ha (sqm) Allotments 0.77 (7739) 0.009 (87.41) Amenity greenspaces 19.57 (195676) 0.22 (2210) Artificial Turf Pitches 3.02 (30203) 0.03 (341) Bowling Greens 0.86 (8577) 0.01 (97) Cemeteries 10.27 (102724) 0.12 (1160) Formal Parks and Gardens 1902.32 (19023155) 21.48 (214863) Grass Pitches 94.65 (946521) 1.07 (10691) Recreation Grounds 103.23 (1032292) 1.17 (11660) Play Areas and Play Grounds 1.97 (19696) 0.02 (222) Tennis and Multi Courts 6.81 (68109) 0.77 (769) Youth Facilities 0,99 (9921) 0.01 (112) Indoor Sports Facilities 1.37 (13691) 0.02 (155) Total 2145.83 (21458304) 24.24 (242367) Table 5: All provision (unrestricted/limited/restricted access) per head of population

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision Type Total area of Amount of unrestricted sites provision ha (sqm) (unrestricted) per 1000 population ha (sqm) Allotments 0 0 Amenity Greenspaces 19.57 (195676) 0.22 (2210) Artificial Turf Pitches 0 0 Bowling Greens 0 0 Cemeteries 10.27 (102724) 0.12 (1160) Formal Parks and Gardens 315.58 (3155834) 3.56 (35645) Grass Pitches 24.22 (242161) 0.27 (2735) Recreation Grounds 84.45 (844485) 0.95 (9538) Play Areas and Play Grounds 1.97 (19696) 0.02 (222) Tennis and Multi Courts 1.21 (12084) 0.01 (136) Youth Facilities 0.99 (9921) 0.01 (112) Indoor Sports Facilities 0 0 Total 458.26 (4582581) 5.18 (51758) Table 6: Unrestricted access provision per head of population

6.2.9 Within Hart District there is a population of 88536 (Hampshire County Council, 2010), therefore there is 24.24 hectares (242367sqm) of open space, sport and recreation provision per 1,000 population of all provision within the District (with unrestricted, restricted and limited access). The total amount of unrestricted access sites equals 5.18 ha (51758sqm) per 1,000 population of provision. By 2017 the population is expected to increase to 89319 which, if the amount of provision remained the same, would be 5.13ha (51306sqm). This would decrease again slightly at the long term population to 2026 of 89887 people with 5.10ha (50982sqm).

6.2.10 The pie charts below show the breakdown of provision by the number of sites and by the area they cover as a percentage of all sites.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

All Sites

Chart 1: Breakdown of all sites by number

Chart 2: Breakdown of sites by area they cover within the District as percentage of all sites

6.2.11 In terms of the number of sites the largest quantity of provision types are the formal parks and gardens, grass pitches, recreation grounds, and play areas. In terms of area covered it is clear from the graph that the formal parks and gardens cover the largest area, with the other sites covering much smaller areas in comparison.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Unrestricted Sites

Chart 3: Breakdown of unrestricted sites by number

Chart 4: Breakdown of sites by area they cover within the District as percentage of all sites

6.2.12 In terms of unrestricted sites the number of formal parks and gardens has reduced drastically, whereas the provision of grass pitches and recreation areas – although seeing some decrease – still have a fairly high number of sites. All of the play areas have unrestricted access and therefore has remained the same. In terms of area the formal parks and gardens, although

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

decreased in number make up the largest coverage of sites. This is followed by the recreation areas and the amenity greenspace.

6.3 Quantity Assessment - By Parish

6.3.1 The following section sets out the breakdown of quantity by each Parish within the District. This is calculated using the Small Area Population Forecasts compiled by Hampshire County Council. These figures provide a breakdown of population by Parish and a breakdown within each Parish by age estimated up to 2017.

6.3.2 The quantity of provision by Parish has been calculated as the amount per 1000 head of population

Hectare/Square Metre of provision within the Parish x 1000 Parish population

6.3.3 The two key types of provision aimed at a particular age group are the play areas (aimed at 12 years and under) and the youth facilities (aimed at 13-18 years). All other provision can be used by all age groups. These two types of provision have been assessed in more detail in terms of overall population increase in these age groups.

6.3.4 Please note that all sizes have been taken from the Council’s GIS system.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Blackwater and Hawley

6.3.5 Table 7 sets out the level of provision by type in the Parish of Blackwater and Hawley.

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of ha (sqm) 1000 head of ha (sqm) unrestricted parish population Of provision per ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision parish population ha (sqm) Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity Greenspaces 0 0 0 0 Artificial Turf Pitches 0 0 0 0 Bowling Greens 0.14 (1435) 0.03 (305) 0 0 Cemeteries 0.24 (2406) 0.05 (512) 0.24 (2406) 0.05 (512) Formal Parks and Gardens 0.22 (2175) 0.05 (463) 0 0 Grass Pitches 11.70 (116953) 2.49 (24884) 0.99 (9865) 0.21 (2099) Recreation Grounds 1.67 (16724) 0.36 (3558) 1.67 (16724) 0.36 (3558) Play Areas and Play grounds 0.07 (677) 0.01 (144) 0.07 (677) 0.01 (144) Tennis and Multi-courts 0.90 (8903) 0.19 (1894) 0 0 Youth Facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor Sports Facilities 0.05 (514) 0.01 (109) 0.05 (514) 0.01 (109) Other Activities 0.79 (7970) 0.17 (1696) 0 0 Total Provision 15.78 (157757) 3.36 (33565) 3.02 (30186) 0.64 (6423) Table 7: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Blackwater and Hawley

6.3.6 Within the Parish of Blackwater and Hawley 10 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total 15 different types of provision were identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 15.78ha (157757sqm). In terms of access, the number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 3, which equates to 7 different types of provision, covering an area of approximately 3.02ha (30186sqm).

6.3.7 In 2010 the population of the Parish of Blackwater and Hawley was estimated to be 4700, therefore the total provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 0.64ha (6423sqm).

6.3.8 By 2017 the total population is expected to decrease by 84 people to a total of 4616. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a slight increase to 0.65ha (6539sqm).

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.3.9 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 661 people aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Blackwater and Hawley only 1 play area was identified. The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and the population of 12 and under is expected to see a decrease of 64, with an estimated 597 children.

6.3.10 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 421 and it is expected by 2017 to see a slight increase of 23 to 444.

6.3.11 Although there is only one specific type of provision (the play area) aimed at the specific age group it should be noted that there is approximately 1.67ha (16724sqm) of recreation space available.

Bramshill

6.3.12 Table 8 sets out the level of provision by type in the Parish of Bramshill. 1 main site was identified at Bramshill Park. This site is multi-functional but its main function is as the Police Training College. The site is a Deer Park but also contains tennis courts, as well as the college buildings. In total this area covers approximately 250ha (2502845sqm). However, as the site is owned and used by the Police Training College this site is not publicly accessible and therefore classed as restricted. No other sites have been identified for open space, sport and recreation provision through the Council’s desktop survey or by the Parish Council.

6.3.13 The population of Bramshill in 2010 was estimated to be 142 people and is expected to increase by 8 people to 150 by 2017. The total number of children aged 12 and under is 6, which is expected to increase to 17 by 2017, whilst the age group of 13-18 is expected to decrease by 9 from 14 in 2010 to 5 in 2017.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Church Crookham

6.3.14 Table 9 sets out the level of provision by type in the Parish of Church Crookham.

6.3.15 Within the Parish of Church Crookham 8 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total 12 different types of provision were identified. These cover an area of approximately 17.42ha (174202sqm). In terms of access, the number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 2, covering an area of approximately 5.92ha (59143 sqm).

6.3.16 In 2010 the population of Church Crookham Parish was estimated to be 8507, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 0.70ha (6952sqm).

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of ha (sqm) 1000 head of ha (sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population ha (sqm) Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity Greenspaces 0 0 0 0 Artificial Turf Pitches 0 0 0 0 Bowling greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 0 0 0 0 Formal Parks and 0.13 (1312) 0.02 (154) 0 0 Gardens Grass Pitches 13.92 (139209) 1.64 (16364) 4.39 (43896) 0.52 (5160) Recreation Grounds 1.39 (13891) 0.16 (1633) 1.39 (13891) 0.16 (1633) Play Areas and 0.14 (1356) 0.02 (159) 0.14 (1356) 0.02 (159) Playgrounds Tennis and Multi- 1.84 (18434) 0.21 (2167) 0 0 courts Youth Facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor Sports 0 0 0 0 Facilities Other Activities 0 0 0 0 Total Provision 17.42 (174202) 2.05 (20477) 5.92 (59143) 0.70 (6952) Table 9: Breakdown of provision by size in the Parish of Church Crookham

6.3.17 By 2017 the total population of Church Crookham Parish is expected to increase by 1842 people to a total of 10349. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a decrease to 0.57ha (5715sqm).

6.3.18 It should be noted that part of the pitches and multi courts provision is made up from that currently at the Queen Elizabeth Barracks site to the south of Church Crookham. This site is allocated within the Local Plan for housing and at the time of writing is subject to a planning application that will bring forward housing and open space provision. The increase in the population of the parish of Church Crookham, (an overall increase of 1842 is expected) is estimated with the consideration that this site will be granted permission and built out during this timeframe. Although the pitches and multi-courts will be lost at the site, the current application proposes a large amount of open space to be brought forward including a 19 Local Areas for Play (LAP), 4 Locally Equipped Areas for Play (LEAP) and 1 Nationally Equipped Area for

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Play (NEAP) to meet the needs of the new development, as well as large areas of open space as part of the mitigation for the Thames Basin Heath Special Protection Area (SPA).

6.3.19 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 1548 people aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Church Crookham Parish 2 play areas were identified. The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and for the population of 12 and under is expected to see an increase of 303, with an estimated 1851 children.

6.3.20 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 609 and it is expected by 2017 to see an increase of 49 to 658.

6.3.21 It should be noted that although there is no specific youth provision there is approximately 3.49ha (34896sqm) of recreation space available.

Crondall

6.3.22 Table 10 sets out the level of provision by type in the Parish of Crondall.

6.3.23 Within the Parish of Crondall 4 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total 9 different types of provision were identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 5.04ha (50394sqm). In terms of access, 3 sites are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted).

6.3.24 In 2010 the population of Crondall Parish was estimated to be 1357, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 3.61ha (36010sqm).

6.3.25 By 2017 the total population of Crondall Parish is expected to decrease by 243 people to a total of 1114. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see an increase to 4.40ha (43864sqm).

6.3.26 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 240 people aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Crondall Parish only 1 play area was identified. The population breakdown up to 2017 for 12 and under is expected to see a decrease of 101, to an estimated 139 children.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of Hectares (Sqm) 1000 head of Hectares (Sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity Greenspaces 0 0 0 0 Artificial Turf Pitches 0 0 0 0 Bowling greens 0.15 (1529) 0.11 (1127) 0 0 Cemeteries 0.38 (3839) 0.29 (2829) 0.39 (3839) 0.29 (2829) Formal Parks and 0 0 0 0 Gardens Grass Pitches 0.85 (8469) 0.63 (6241) 0.85 (8469) 0.63 (6241) Recreation Grounds 3.41 (34136) 2.51 (25155) 3.41 (34136) 2.51 (25155) Play Areas and 0.07 (745) 0.05 (549) 0.07 (745) 0.05 (549) Playgrounds Tennis and Multi- 0.14 (1311) 0.10 (966) 0.14 (1311) 0.10 (966) courts Youth Facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor Sports 0.04 (365) 0.03 (269) 0.04 (365) 0.03 (269) Facilities Other Activities 0 0 0 0 Total Provision 5.04 (50394) 3.71 (37136) 4.90 (48865) 3.61 (36010) Table 10: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Crondall

6.3.27 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 81 and it is expected by 2017 to see a slight decrease of 5 to 76.

6.3.28 Although there is only one specific type of provision (the play area) aimed at a specific age group it should be noted that there is approximately 4.16ha (41654sqm) of recreation space available.

Crookham Village

6.3.29 Table 11 sets out the level of provision by type in the Parish of Crookham Village.

6.3.30 Within the Parish of Crookham Village 3 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total 5 different types of provision were identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 3.73ha (37315sqm). In terms of access, the number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 1, covering an area of approximately 3.17ha (31747 sqm).

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of ha (sqm) 1000 head of ha (sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population ha (sqm) Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity Greenspaces 0 0 0 0 Artificial Turf Pitches 0 0 0 0 Bowling greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 0 0 0 0 Formal Parks and 0.44 (4393) 0.11 (1144) 0 0 Gardens Grass Pitches 1.00 (10033) 0.26 (2613) 1.00 (10033) 0.26 (2613) Recreation Grounds 2.1 (21005) 0.55 (5470) 2.1(21005) 0.55 (5470) Play Areas and 0.07 (709) 0.02 (185) 0.07 (709) 0.02 (185) Playgrounds Tennis and Multi- 0.12 (1175) 0.003 (31) 0 0 courts Youth Facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor Sports 0 0 0 0 Facilities Other Activities 0 0 0 0 Total Provision 3.73 (37315) 0.97 (9717) 3.17 (31747) 0.83 (8276) Table 11: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Crookham Village

6.3.31 In 2010 the population of Crookham Village Parish was estimated to be 3840, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 0.83ha (8276sqm).

6.3.32 By 2017 the total population of the Parish of Crookham Village is expected to decrease by 223 people to a total of 3617. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a slight increase to 0.88ha (8777sqm).

6.3.33 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 851 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Crookham Village Parish 1 play area was identified. The population breakdown to 2017 for the population of 12 and under is expected to see a decrease of 215, with an estimated 636 children.

6.3.34 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 307 and it is expected by 2017 to see a slight increase of 22 to 329. 51

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.3.35 Although there no specific youth facilities identified and there is only one play area aimed at a specific age group it should be noted that there is approximately 2.1ha (21005sqm) of recreation space available.

Dogmersfield

6.3.36 Table 12 sets out the level of provision by type in the Parish of Dogmersfield.

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of Hectares (Sqm) 1000 head of Hectares (Sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity Greenspaces 0.24 (2394) 0.98 (9771) 0.24 (2394) 0.98 (9771) Artificial Turf Pitches 0 0 0 0 Bowling Greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 0.26 (2625) 1.06 (10714) 0.26 (2625) 1.06 (10714) Formal Parks and 340.52 (3405152) 1389.88 0 0 Gardens (13898579) Grass Pitches 1.17 (11734) 4.78 (47894) 1.17 (11734) 4.78 (47894) Recreation Grounds 0 0 0 0 Play areas and Play 0 0 0 0 grounds Tennis and Multi- 0.16 (1609) 0.65 (6567) 0 0 courts Youth Facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor Sports 0.16 (1567) 0.65 (6396) 0 0 Facilities Other Activities 0 0 0 0 Total Provision 342.51 (3425089) 1398 (13979955) 1.67 (16753) 6.82 (68380) Table 12: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Dogmersfield

6.3.37 Within the Parish of Dogmersfield 7 different sites were identified with 8 different types of provision identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 342.51ha (3425089sqm). The majority of this is made up from Dogmersfield Great Park, this has been excluded from the unrestricted sites as there is only limited access on the rights of way running through the site. In terms of access, the number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 5, covering an area of approximately 1.67ha (16753sqm).

6.3.38 In 2010 the population of Dogmersfield Parish was estimated to be 245. Therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 6.82ha (68380sqm). 52

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.3.39 By 2017 the total population of Dogmersfield is expected to increase by 11 people to a total of 265. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a slight decrease to 6.30ha (63068sqm).

6.3.40 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 32 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Dogmersfield Parish no play areas were identified. The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and the population of 12 and under is expected to see a decrease of 1, with an estimated 31 children.

6.3.41 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 15 and it is expected by 2017 to see a slight decrease to 13.

Elvetham Heath

6.3.42 Table 13 sets out the level of provision by type in the Parish of Elvetham Heath.

6.3.43 Within the Parish of Elvetham Heath 6 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total 12 different types of provision were identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 60.8ha (608188sqm). In terms of access, the number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 5, covering an area of approximately 3.03ha (30396sqm).

6.3.44 In 2010 the population of Elvetham Heath Parish was estimated to be 4781, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 0.64ha (6358sqm).

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of ha (sqm) 1000 head of ha (sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population ha (sqm) Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity Greenspaces 0.79 (7871) 0.16 (1646) 0.79 (7871) 0.21 (1646) Artificial Turf Pitches 0 0 0 0 Bowling greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 0 0 0 0 Formal Parks and 0 0 0 0 Gardens Grass Pitches 0.35 (3504) 0.07 (733) 0.35 (3504) 0.07 (733) Recreation Grounds 1.61 (16106) 0.33 (3369) 1.61 (16106) 0.33 (3369) Play Areas and 0.11 (1067) 0.02 (223) 0.11 (1067) 0.02 (223) Playgrounds Tennis and Multi- 0.18 (1848) 0.04 (387) 0.18 (1848) 0.04 (387) courts Youth Facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor Sports 0 0 0 0 Facilities Other Activities 57.77 (577792) 12.08 (120852) 0 0 Total Provision 60.81 (608188) 12.72 (127209) 3.04 (30396) 0.64 (6358) Table 13: Breakdown of provision by size in the Parish of Elvetham Heath

6.3.45 By 2017 the total population of Elvetham Heath Parish is expected to decrease by 326 people to a total of 4455. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a slight increase to 0.68ha (6823sqm).

6.3.46 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 1341 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Elvetham Heath Parish 5 play areas were identified. The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and the population of 12 and under is expected to see a decrease of 298, with an estimated 1043 children.

6.3.47 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 285 and it is expected by 2017 to see an increase of 101 to 286.

6.3.48 It should be noted that as well as the 5 play areas identified there is also 2.39ha of amenity greenspace and recreation provision within the Parish.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Eversley

6.3.49 Table 14 below sets out the level of provision by type in the Parish of Eversley.

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of ha (sqm) 1000 head of ha (sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population ha (sqm) Allotments 0.23 (2331) 0.14 (1464) 0 0 Amenity Greenspaces 21.65 (216574) 13.60 (136039) 21.65 (216574) 12.64 (136039) Artificial Turf Pitches 0.36 (3560) 0.23 (2236) 0 0 Bowling Greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 0.67 (6658) 0.42 (4182) 0.67 (6658) 0.42 (4182) Formal Parks and 32.05 (320528) 20.13 (201337) 0 0 Gardens Grass Pitches 1.46 (14589) 0.92 (9164) 1.46 (14589) 0.92 (9164) Recreation Grounds 1.12 (11175) 1.07 (10713) 0 0 Play Areas and 0.19 (1904) 0.12 (1196) 0.19 (1904) 0.12 (1196) Playgrounds Tennis and Multi- 0.11 (1105) 0.63 (694) 0 0 courts Youth Facilities 0.55 (5491) 0.34 (3449) 0.55 (5491) 0.34 (3449) Indoor Sports 0.03 (361) 0.02 (227) 0.03 (361) 0.02 (227) Facilities Other Activities 0 0 0 0 Total Provision 58.42 (584276) 36.70 (367008) 24.55 (245577) 15.42 (154257) Table 14: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Eversley

6.3.50 Within the Parish of Eversley 13 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total there were 22 different types of provision identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 58.42ha (584276sqm). In terms of access, the number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 9, covering an area of approximately 24.55ha (245577sqm).

6.3.51 In 2010 the population of Eversley Parish was estimated to be 1592, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 15.42ha (154257sqm).

6.3.52 By 2017 the total population is expected to increase by 8 people to a total of 1600. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a decrease to 15.34ha (153486sqm).

6.3.53 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 270 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Eversley Parish 4 play areas were identified. The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and the population of 12 and under is expected to see a decrease of 5, with an estimated 265 children.

6.3.54 In terms of youth facilities there has been some provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 133 and it is expected by 2017 to see a slight decrease of 5 to 128.

6.3.55 There is however a large area of amenity green space and recreation space totalling a coverage of 21.82ha (218287sqm) within the Parish boundary.

Ewshot

6.3.56 Table 15 sets out the level of provision by type in the Parish of Ewshot.

6.3.57 Within the Parish of Ewshot 3 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total there were 5 different types of provision identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 1.74ha (17434sqm). In terms of access, all of the sites identified are publicly accessible.

6.3.58 In 2010 the population of Ewshot Parish was estimated to be 600, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 2.9ha (29057sqm).

6.3.59 By 2017 the total population of Ewshot Parish is expected to increase by 10 people to a total of 610. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see limited change with 2.85ha (28580sqm).

6.3.60 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 66 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Ewshot Parish one play area was identified. The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and the population of 12 and under is expected to see an increase of 5, with an estimated 71 children.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in ha Amount per Total area in Amount of (sqm) 1000 head of ha (sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per Ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population ha (sqm) Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity Greenspaces 0.07 (719) 0.12 (1198) 0.07 (719) 0.12 (1198) Artificial Turf Pitches 0 0 0 0 Bowling Greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 0 0 0 0 Formal Parks and 0 0 0 0 Gardens Grass Pitches 0 0 0 0 Recreation Grounds 1.48 (14768) 2.47 (24613) 1.48 (14768) 2.47 (24613) Play Areas and 0.09 (923) 0.15 (1538) 0.09 (923) 0.15 (1538) playgrounds Tennis and Multi- 0.10 (1024) 0.17 (1707) 0.11 (1024) 0.17 (1707) courts Youth Facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor Sports 0 0 0 0 Facilities Other Activities 0 0 0 0 Total Provision 1.74 (17434) 2.91 (29057) 1.74 (17434) 2.91 (29057) Table 15: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Ewshot

6.3.61 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 42 and it is expected by 2017 to see a decrease of 13 to 29.

6.3.61 It should be noted that there is a recreation area located next to the play area as well as an informal area on the junction of Church lane and Broomhill. The Parish Council notes that the informal area is highly valued by the young as another recreation area which may indicate a need for further children and youth facilities provision in this area.

Fleet

6.3.62 Table 16 sets out the level of provision by type in the Parish of Fleet.

6.3.63 Within the Parish of Fleet Town Council 19 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total there were 32 different types of provision identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 87.68ha (876988sqm). In terms of access, the number of sites

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 11, covering an area of approximately 67.63ha (683488sqm).

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of ha (sqm) 1000 head of ha (sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population ha (sqm) Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity 0 0 0 0 Greenspaces Artificial Turf 0 0 0 0 Pitches Bowling Greens 0.23 (2347) 0.01 (110) 0 0 Cemeteries 1.53 (15318) 0.07 (720) 1.53 (15318) 0.07 (720) Formal Parks and 24 (240000) 1.13 (11285) 24 (240000) 1.13 (11285) Gardens Grass Pitches 12.11 (121088) 0.56 (5694) 3.82 (38215) 0.18 (1797) Recreation Grounds 46.45 (464400) 2.18 (21837) 35.66 (363599) 1.68 (17097) Play Areas and 0.37 (3749) 0.02 (176) 0.37 (3749) 0.02 (176) Playgrounds Tennis and Multi- 0.98 (9811) 0.05 (461) 0.33(3293) 0.02 (155) courts Youth Facilities 0.05 (531) 0.002 (25) 0.05 (531) 0.002 (25) Indoor Sports 0.48 (4910) 0.02 (231) 0.39 (3949) 0.02 (186) Facilities Other Activities 1.48 (14834) 0.07 (698) 1.48 (14834) 0.07 (698) Total Provision 87.68 (876988) 4.12 (41237) 67.63 (683488) 3.18 (32138) Table 16: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Fleet

6.3.64 The new Country Park at Hitches Lane has been included within these calculations as publicly accessible space. At the time of publication the construction of the Country Park is underway, and although not currently accessible, is expected to be available within the next year.

6.3.65 In 2010 the population of the Parish of Fleet was estimated to be 21267, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 3.18ha (32138sqm).

6.3.66 By 2017 the total population is expected to decrease by 203 people to a total of 21064. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a slight increase to 3.21ha (32448sqm).

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.3.67 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 3282 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Fleet Parish 4 play areas were identified. The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and for the population of 12 and under is expected to see a decrease of 203, with an estimated 21064 children.

6.3.68 In terms of youth facilities there has been some specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 3282 and it is expected by 2017 to see a decrease of 40 to 3242.

6.3.69 Although there is only a one specific type of provision (the play area) aimed at the specific age group of 12 and under it should be noted that there is approximately 33.11ha (331701sqm) of unrestricted recreation space available.

Greywell

6.3.70 Within the Parish of Greywell no sites were identified. In 2010 the population of Greywell Parish was estimated to be 152 and is expected to see a decrease by 2017 of 28 people to 1 24. The age group of 12 and under is 23 and a decrease of 5 to 18 children is expected by 2017. Between 13-18 in 2010 there were 7 people which is expected to see a slight increase to 8 by 2017.

6.3.71 Although there is no provision there is only a very small population and is located close to the Parish of Odiham and the facilities available there. However there are some young children within the Parish and although expected to see a decrease would ideally still have some local play facility within walking distance of the residential properties.

Hartley Wintney

6.3.72 Table 17 sets out the level of provision by type in the Parish of Hartley Wintney.

6.3.73 Within the Parish of Hartley Wintney 11 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total there were 13 different types of provision identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 170.95ha (1709366sqm). In terms of access, the number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 5, covering an area of approximately 3.40ha (33997sqm).

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of ha (sqm) 1000 head of ha (sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population ha (sqm) Allotments 0.54 (5408) 0.11 (1076) 0 0 Amenity 0.21 (2099) 0.04 (417) 0.21 (2099) 0.04 (417) Greenspaces Artificial Turf 0 0 0 0 Pitches Bowling Greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 1.21 (12053) 0.24 (2397) 1.21 (12053) 0.24 (2397) Formal Parks and 149.41 29.72 (297150) 0 0 Gardens (1494070) Grass Pitches 1.96 (19518) 0.39 (3882) 1.96 (19518) 0.39 (3882) Recreation Grounds 1.66 (16649) 0.33 (3311) 1.66 (16649) 0.33 (3311) Play Areas and 0.04 (464) 0.01 (92) 0.04 (464) 0.01 (92) Playgrounds Tennis and Multi- 0 0 0 0 courts Youth Facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor Sports 0 0 0 0 Facilities Other Activities 18.03 (180312) 3.59 (35862) 0 0 Total Provision 173.06 34.42 (344187) 5.08 (50783) 1.01 (10100) (1730573) Table 17: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Hartley Wintney

6.3.74 In 2010 the population of Hartley Wintney Parish was estimated to be 5028, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 1.01ha (10100sqm).

6.3.75 By 2017 the total population of Hartley Wintney Parish is expected to increase by 348 people to a total of 5376. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a decrease to 0.94ha (9446sqm).

6.3.76 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 849 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Hartley Wintney Parish 2 play areas were identified. The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and the population of 12 and under is expected to see an increase of 58, with an estimated 907 children.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.3.77 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 364 and it is expected by 2017 to see an increase of 33 to 397.

Heckfield

6.3.78 Table 18 below sets out the level of provision by type in the Parish of Heckfield.

6.3.79 Within the Parish of Heckfield 6 different sites were identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 664.41ha (6644116sqm). In terms of access, there is only one site that is publicly accessible which is Heckfield Cemetery (i.e. classed as unrestricted), covering an area of approximately 0.28ha (2831sqm).

6.3.80 In 2010 the population of Heckfield Parish was estimated to be 348, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 0.80ha (8135sqm).

6.3.81 By 2017 the total population is expected to decrease by 7 people to a total of 341. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a slight increase to 0.08ha (8302sqm).

6.3.82 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 40 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Heckfield no play areas were identified. By 2017 the population of 12 and under is expected to see a decrease of 7, with an estimated 341 children.

6.3.83 The population for 13-18 year olds is expected to see a decrease of 15 to 28 by 2017 and as can be seen from the table below no specific provision has been identified for this age group and no recreation ground provision.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of ha (sqm) 1000 head of Hectares (Sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population ha (sqm) Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity 0 0 0 0 greenspaces Artificial Turf 0 0 0 0 Pitches Bowling greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 0.28 (2831) 0.80 (8135) 0.28 (2831) 0.80 (8135) Formal Parks and 664.13 (6641285) 1908.42 0 0 gardens (19084152) Grass Pitches 0 0 0 0 Recreation Grounds 0 0 0 0 Play Areas and 0 0 0 0 Playgrounds Tennis and multi- 0 0 0 0 courts Youth facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor sports 0 0 0 0 facilities Other Activities 0 0 0 0 Total Provision 664.41 (6644116) 1909.22 0.28 (2831) 0.80 (8135) (19092287) Table 18: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Heckfield

Hook

6.3.84 Table 19 sets out the level of provision by type in the Parish of Hook.

6.3.85 Within the Parish of Hook 10 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total there were 15 different types of provision identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 2030ha (202884qm). In terms of access, the number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 8, covering an area of approximately 19.26ha (192585sqm).

6.3.86 In 2010 the population of Hook Parish was estimated to be 7707, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 2.68ha (26741sqm).

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of ha (sqm) 1000 head of ha (sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population ha (sqm) Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity 0.51 (5082) 0.07 (659) 0.51 (5082) 0.07 (659) greenspaces Artificial Turf 0 0 0 0 Pitches Bowling greens 0.18 (1764) 0.02 (229) 0 0 Cemeteries 0.27 (2702) 0.04 (351) 0.27 (2702) 0.04 (351) Formal Parks and 12.94 (129359) 1.68 (16785) 12.94 (129359) 1.68 (16785) Gardens Grass Pitches 1.59 (15908) 0.03 (317) 0 0 Recreation Grounds 4.22 (42152) 0.55 (5469) 4.22 (42152) 0.55 (5469) Play Areas and 0.20 (2047) 0.13 (266) 0.20 (2047) 0.13 (266) Playgrounds Tennis and multi- 0.32 (3181) 0.04 (413) 0.21 (2082) 0.03 (263) courts Youth facilities 0.39 (3899) 0.05 (506) 0.39 (3899) 0.05 (506) Indoor sports 0 0 0 0 facilities Other Activities 0 0 0 0 Total Provision 20.62 (206094) 2.68 (26741) 19.26 (192585) 2.50 (24988) Table 19: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Hook

6.3.87 By 2017 the total population of Hook Parish is expected to decrease by 461 people to a total of 7246. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a slight increase to 2.66ha (26578sqm).

6.3.88 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 1481 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Hook Parish 5 play areas were identified. The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and the population of 12 and under is expected to see a decrease of 342, with an estimated 1139 children.

6.3.89 In terms of youth facilities 2 sites were identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 580 and it is expected by 2017 to see a decrease of 7 to 573.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.3.90 It should be noted that 5.78ha (57682sqm) of amenity and recreation space, as well as a formal country park, has been identified which is publicly accessible for recreation.

Long Sutton and Well

6.3.91 Within the Parish of Long Sutton and Well 5 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total there were 10 different types of provision identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 9.78ha (98376sqm). In terms of access, the number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 4, covering an area of approximately 1.98ha (19844sqm). These are shown in Table 20.

6.3.92 In 2010 the population of Long Sutton and Well Parish was estimated to be 414, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 4.78ha (47932sqm).

6.3.93 By 2017 the total population is expected to decrease by 91 people to a total of 323. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a slight increase to 6.13ha (61437sqm).

6.3.94 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 84 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Long Sutton and Well 1 play area was identified. By 2017 the population of 12 and under is expected to see a decrease of 32, with an estimated 52 children.

6.3.95 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 73 and it is expected by 2017 to see a slight decrease of 5 to 68.

6.3.96 It should be noted that there is also 1.54ha of recreation space available within the parish that does provide a recreational facility for children and teenagers.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of ha (sqm) 1000 head of ha (sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population ha (sqm) Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity 0 0 0 0 greenspaces Artificial Turf 0.84 (8362) 2.03 (20198) 0 0 Pitches Bowling Greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 0.27 (2726) 0.65 (6585) 0.27 (2726) 0.65 (6585) Formal Parks and 0 0 0 0 Gardens Grass Pitches 7.10 (70989) 17.15 (171471) 0.45 (4499) 1.09 (10867) Recreation Grounds 1.09 (10900) 2.63 (26329) 1.09 (10900) 2.63 (26329) Play Areas and 0.07 (694) 0.17 (1676) 0.07 (694) 0.17 (1676) Playgrounds Tennis and multi- 0.31 (3694) 0.75 (8923) 0.10 (1025) 0.24 (2476) courts Youth facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor sports 0.10 (1011) 0.24 (2442) 0 0 facilities Other Activities 0 0 0 0 Total Provision 9.78 (98376) 23.62 (237623) 1.98 (19844) 4.78 (47932) Table 20: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Long Sutton and Well

Mattingley

6.3.97 Within the Parish of Mattingley 1 site was identified which was Mattingley Cemetery. This covers an area of approximately 0.42ha (4218sqm) and is classed as publicly open space. There were a number of other sites as identified by the Parish Council but these are classed as Accessible Natural Greenspace (ANGs) and therefore do not form part of this assessment.

6.3.98 In 2010 the population of Mattingley Parish was estimated to be 608, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 0.69ha (6938sqm).

6.3.99 By 2017 the total population of Mattingley Parish is expected to increase by 2 people to a total of 610. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a slight decrease to 0.68ha (6915sqm).

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of Hectares 1000 head of Hectares (Sqm) unrestricted (Sqm) population Of provision per UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity 0 0 0 0 greenspaces Artificial Turf 0 0 0 0 Pitches Bowling greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 0.42 (4218) 0.69 (6938) 0.42 (4218) 0.69 (6938) Parks and formal 0 0 0 0 gardens Pitches 0 0 0 0 Recreation Grounds 0 0 0 0 Play areas and play 0 0 0 0 grounds Tennis and multi- 0 0 0 0 courts Youth facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor sports 0 0 0 0 facilities Other Activities 0 0 0 0 Total Provision 0.42 (4218) 0.69 (6938) 0.42 (4218) 0.69 (6938) Table 21: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Mattingley

6.3.100 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 98 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and for the population of 12 and under is expected to see an increase of 1, with an estimated 99 children. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 45 and it is expected by 2017 to see a slight increase of 4 to 49. There was no specific provision for young children or youth facilities identified within the Parish.

Odiham

6.3.101 Within the Parish of Odiham 13 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total there were 22 different types of provision identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 19.76ha (197613sqm). In terms of access, the number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 9, covering an area of approximately 5.96ha (59547sqm).

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of Hectares 1000 head of Hectares (Sqm) unrestricted (Sqm) population Of provision per UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity 0.06 (591) 0.01 (108) 0.06 (591) 0.01 (108) greenspaces Artificial Turf 1.18 (11837) 0.22 (2159) 0 0 Pitches Bowling greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 2.08 (20805) 0.38 (3794) 2.08 (20805) 0.38 (3794) Parks and formal 1.28 (12821) 0.23 (2338) 0 0 gardens Pitches 9.84 (98371) 1.79 (17941) 1.73 (17295) 0.32 (3154) Recreation Grounds 4.27 (42651) 0.78 (7779) 1.61 (16076) 0.29 (2932) Play areas and play 0.27 (2667) 0.05 (486) 0.27 (2667) 0.05 (486) grounds Tennis and multi- 0.56 (5635) 0.10 (1027) 0.21 (2113) 0.04 (385) courts Youth facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor sports 0.22 (2235) 0.04 (408) 0 0 facilities Other Activities 0 0 0 0 Total Provision 19.76 (197613) 3.60 (36041) 5.96 (59547) 1.09 (10860) Table 22: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Odiham

6.3.102 In 2010 the population of Odiham Parish was estimated to be 5483, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 1.09ha (10860sqm).

6.3.103 By 2017 the total population of Odiham is expected to increase by 313 people to a total of 5710. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a decrease to 1.04ha (10429sqm).

6.3.104 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 1032 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within the Parish of Odiham 5 play areas were identified. The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and the population of 12 and under is expected to see a decrease of 10, with an estimated 1022 children.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.3.105 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 334 and it is expected by 2017 to see a slight increase of 28 to 362.

6.3.106 There is also 1.20ha of recreation space and 0.06ha of amenity greenspace available for recreation use.

Rotherwick

6.3.107 Within the Parish of Rotherwick 6 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total there were 11 different types of provision identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 185.70ha (1856963sqm). In terms of access, the number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 2, covering an area of approximately 3.40ha (34011sqm).

6.3.108 In 2010 the population was estimated to be 536, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 6.34ha (63453sqm).

6.3.109 By 2017 the total population of Rotherwick Parish is expected to decrease by 34 people to a total of 502. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a slight increase to 6.77ha (67751sqm).

6.3.110 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 84 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Rotherwick did have a play area however this has been removed. The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and for the population of 12 and under is expected to see a decrease of 20, with an estimated 64 children.

6.3.111 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 39 and it is expected by 2017 to see an increase of 5 to 44.

6.3.112 There is no specific areas for under 18 years within the village of Rotherwick but there is a recreation area covering an area of 0.95ha (9498sqm).

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of ha (sqm) 1000 head of ha (sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population ha (sqm) Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity 0.47 (4671) 0.88 (8715) 0.47 (4671) 0.88 (8715) greenspaces Artificial Turf 0 0 0 0 Pitches Bowling Greens 0 0 0 00 Cemeteries 0 0 0 0 Formal Parks and 142.90 (1428970) 266.60 (2665989) 0 0 Gardens Grass Pitches 1.92 (19281) 3.58 (35972) 1.92 (19281) 3.58 (35972) Recreation Grounds 0.95 (9498) 1.77 (17720) 0.95 (9498) 1.77 (17720) Play Areas and 0 0 0 0 Playgrounds Tennis and Multi- 0.06 (561) 1.87 (1047) 0.06 (561) 1.87 (1047) courts Youth facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor sports 0 0 0 0 facilities Other Activities 39.40 (393982) 73.50 (735041) 0 0 Total Provision 185.70 (1856963) 346.46 (3464483) 3.40 (34011) 6.34 (63453) Table 23: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Rotherwick

South Warnborough

6.3.113 Within the Parish of South Warnborough 3 different sites were identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 4.16ha (41573sqm). In terms of access, the number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 2, covering an area of approximately 0.85ha (8485sqm).

6.3.114 In 2010 the population of South Warnborough Parish was estimated to be 420, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 2.38ha (20202sqm).

6.3.115 By 2017 the total population expected to decrease by 85 people to a total of 335. If the provision within the parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a slight increase to 2.54ha (25328sqm).

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of ha (sqm) 1000 head of ha (sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population ha (sqm) Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity 0 0 0 0 greenspaces Artificial Turf 0 0 0 0 Pitches Bowling Greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 0.46 (4574) 1.11 (10890) 0.46 (4574) 1.11 (10890) Formal Parks and 3.31 (33088) 7.88 (78781) 0 0 Gardens Grass Pitches 0 0 0 0 Recreation Grounds 0.39 (3911) 0.93 (9312) 0.39 (3911) 0.93 (9312) Play Areas and 0 0 0 0 Playgrounds Tennis and Multi- 0 0 0 0 courts Youth facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor sports 0 0 0 0 facilities Other Activities 0 0 0 0 Total Provision 4.16 (41573) 9.90 (98983) 0.85 (8485) 2.38 (20202) Table 24: Breakdown of provision by size in the Parish of South Warnborough

6.3.116 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 68 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within South Warnborough no play areas were identified. The population breakdown by 2017 is expected to see a decrease of 16, with an estimated 52 children.

6.3.117 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 28 and it is expected by 2017 to see a decrease of 12 to 16.

6.3.118 Although there is no specific provision it should be noted that there is an area of 0.39ha (3911sqm) which is publicly accessible for recreation purposes.

Winchfield

6.3.119 Within the Parish of Winchfield 6 different sites were identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 1.8ha (18941sqm). In terms of access, the

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 3, covering an area of approximately 1.10ha (11025sqm).

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of ha (sqm) 1000 head of ha (sqm) unrestricted population Of provision per ha (sqm) UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population ha (sqm) Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity 0 0 0 0 greenspaces Artificial Turf 0 0 0 0 Pitches Bowling Greens 0 0 0 0 Cemeteries 0.14 (1352) 0.48 (4678) 0.14 (1352) 0.48 (4678) Formal Parks and 0.69 (6889) 2.39 (23837) 0 0 Gardens Grass Pitches 0.95 (9451) 3.46 (32702) 0.95 (9451) 3.46 (32702) Recreation Grounds 0 0 0 0 Play Areas and 0 0 0 0 Playgrounds Tennis and Multi- 0 0 0 0 courts Youth facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor sports 0 0 0 0 facilities Other Activities 0.02 (222) 0.07 (768) 0.02 (222) 0.07 (768) Total Provision 1.8 (18941) 6.54 (65539) 1.10 (11025) 3.81 (38149) Table 25: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Winchfield

6.3.120 In 2010 the population was estimated to be 289, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 3.81ha (38149sqm).

6.3.121 By 2017 the total population is expected to decrease by 50 people to a total of 239. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a slight increase to 4.60ha (46130sqm).

6.3.122 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 70 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Winchfield no play areas were identified. The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and the population of 12 and under is expected to see an increase of 148, with an estimated 218 children.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.3.123 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 311 and it is expected by 2017 to see an increase of 45 to 76.

Yateley

6.3.124 Within the Parish of Yateley 20 different sites were identified. A number of these sites are multi-functional therefore in total there were 32 different types of provision identified. In total these cover an area of approximately 352.95ha (3529494sqm). In terms of access, the number of sites that are publicly accessible (i.e. classed as unrestricted) is 13, covering an area of approximately 318.52ha (3185224sqm).

6.3.125 In 2010 the population was estimated to be 20241, therefore the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population is 15.74ha (157365sqm).

6.3.126 By 2017 the total population of Yateley Parish is expected to decrease by 579 people to a total of 19662. If the provision within the Parish remained the same the provision of unrestricted open space, sport and recreation per 1000 head of population would see a slight increase to 16.20ha (161999sqm).

6.3.127 Using the breakdown of population statistics in 2010 there was an estimated 3093 children aged 12 and under (Hampshire County Council). Within Yateley Parish 3 play area were identified. The population breakdown is available up to 2017 and for the population of 12 and under is expected to see a decrease of 87, with an estimated 3006 children.

6.3.128 In terms of youth facilities there has been no specific provision identified at the age group of 13 -18 years. The population in 2010 aged 13-18 was 1693 and it is expected by 2017 to see decrease of 285 to 1408.

6.3.129 There is also 23.55 ha of amenity greenspace and 6.21ha of recreation space available.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Provision type Total area in Amount per Total area in Amount of Hectares 1000 head of Hectares (Sqm) unrestricted (Sqm) population Of provision per UNRESTRICTED 1000 head of provision population Allotments 0 0 0 0 Amenity 1.57 (15675) 0.08 (774) 1.57 (15675) 0.08 (774) greenspaces Artificial Turf 0.64 (6444) 0.03 (318) 0 0 Pitches Bowling greens 0.15 (1502) 0.007 (74) 0 0 Cemeteries 2.06 (20617) 0.10 (1019) 2.06 (20617) 0.10 (1019) Parks and formal 280.03 (2800269) 13.83 (138346) 278.65 (2786475) 13.83 (138346) gardens Pitches 28.74 (287424) 1.42 (14200) 1.84 (18350) 0.09 (907) Recreation Areas 30.54 (305446) 1.51 (15090) 26.51 (265070) 1.31 (13096) Play areas and play 0.23 (2285) 0.01 (113) 0.23 (2285) 0.01 (113) grounds Tennis and multi- 0.73 (7328) 0.04 (362) 0.10 (1041) 0.005 (51) courts Youth facilities 0 0 0 0 Indoor sports 0.35 (3454) 0.02 (171) 0.26 (2620) 0.01 (129) facilities Other Activities 8.28 (82842) 0.05 (4093) 0 0 Total Provision 353.32 (3533286) 17.46 (174561) 311.22 (3111683) 15.38 (153732) Table 26: Breakdown of provision by amount in the Parish of Yateley

6.4 Setting Quantity Standards

6.4.1 Table 27 sets out the quantity of provision in other local authority areas in comparison with the amount available within Hart District and the standards recommended in the 2006 Study.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

All Site Provision Unrestricted Sites Hart District’s Surrey Heath Standards per 1000 existing in Hart Provision existing 2006 PPG17 Borough Mid Sussex New Forest persons District in Hart District Recommendations Council Council Havant Council Council Allotments 0.009ha / 90sqm 0ha (0sqm) 0.075ha / 750sqm 0.14ha / 1400sqm 0.17ha 0.10ha / 1000sqm 0.03ha / 300sqm /1700sqm Amenity Greenspace 0.22ha / 2210sqm 0.22ha / 2210sqm No standard 0.90ha / 9000sqm No standard No standard 0.023ha / 230sqm Artificial Turf Pitch 0.03ha / 341sqm 0ha (0sqm) 0.025ha / 250sqm No standard 0.05ha / 500sqm 0.025ha / 250sqm No standard Bowling Greens 0.01ha / 97sqm 0ha (0sqm) 0.011ha / 110sqm No standard 0.017ha / 0.017ha / 170sqm No standard 170sqm Cemeteries 0.12ha / 1160sqm 0.12ha / 1160sqm No standard1 Formal Parks and 21.48ha / 3.56ha / 35645sqm 1.80ha / 18000sqm2 0.035ha / 300sqm 0.202ha / No standard No standard Gardens 214863sqm 2000sqm Grass Pitches 1.07ha / 10691sqm 0.27ha / 2735sqm 01.90ha / 19000sqm 1.19ha / 1.22ha / 0.54ha / 5400sqm 1.25ha / 12500sqm 19000sqm 12250sqm Recreation Grounds 1.17ha / 11660sqm 0.95ha / 9538sqm 1.80ha / 18000sqm3 0.35ha / 3500sqm No standard 0.054ha / 540sqm No standard Play Areas and 0.02ha / 222sqm 0.02ha / 222sqm 0.05ha / 500sqm No standard 0.065ha / 0.05ha / 500sqm 0.02ha / 200sqm playgrounds 650sqm Tennis and Multi 0.77ha / 769sqm 0.01ha / 136sqm 0.025ha / 250sqm No standard 0.04ha/400sqm 0.026ha / 260sqm No standard Courts Youth facilities 0.01ha / 112sqm 0.01ha / 112sqm 0.03ha / 300sqm 0.08ha / 800sqm 0.03ha / 300sqm 0.04ha / 400sqm No standard Indoor Sports 0.02ha / 155sqm 0ha (0sqm) No complete No standard No standard No standard No standard Facilities standard4 Table 27: Comparison of level of provision within District with 2006 Standards and other Local Authority standards – per 100 head of population

Nb: Due to the nature of access for allotments, ATPs, Bowling Greens and Indoor Sports facilities these have been considered to be of limited access, therefore no unrestricted provision is shown above. In these cases the level of provision will be compared to the ’all site’ provision.

1 No standard has been applied for cemeteries as their primary function is the provision of burial space and not the provision of open space. 2 This is a combined standard with playing fields and recreation grounds. 3 See footnote 2 4 Please see paragraph xx which discusses the indoor provision standard from the 2006 Study. 74

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.4.2 The standards recommended in the 2006 Study were based upon the following evidence:

• Analysis of quantity of provision across the District; • Local views as established through the survey of local residents, parish and town councils; • ‘First principles’ calculations; • The Sport England Sports Facilities Calculator.

6.4.3 Using the previous standards and those of the other local authorities as a basis a comparison can be made with the existing provision levels. These have been looked at individually for each type of provision below.

Allotments

6.4.4 The standard set previously was 0.075ha (750sqm) per 1000 people. This figure was taken from the English Allotments Survey 1997 which recommended a standard of 1500 sqm per 1000 however the 2006 Study considered Hart to be more prosperous than areas in which allotment gardening is a long standing tradition and the standard was considered too high. Therefore it was reduced to 0.075 ha (750sqm) per 1000 people but noted that this standard need not be used for developments in which dwellings have sufficiently large gardens to grow produce.

6.4.5 Only two allotment sites have been identified within Hart District and during the 2010 consultation with the Parish and Town Councils that requested a ‘shopping list’ of needs for each parish only Hook Parish Council requested the need for an allotment. Since this update was started there has been a new scheme for allotments approved within Hook.

6.4.6 In comparison with other local authorities standards the standard set for Hart is lower for all accept one other authority area. Although in recent years allotments have become more popular there was no great demand highlighted for them by the Parish and Town Councils. Having more allotments throughout the District would benefit more people however as the current area is already much lower than recommended, the amount has not increased within the 5 years since the previous audit was undertaken, and the parish councils have only highlighted a need to the western side of the District in Hook and Odiham, it would not be realistic to raise this standard. Rather than reduce the standard it is considered more appropriate to retain

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

the 2006 standard but take into consideration the type of new development coming forward and the space provided with it for growing own produce.

Amenity Greenspace / Recreation Grounds / Formal Parks and Gardens

6.4.7 In the 2006 study the provision for recreation grounds and formal parks and gardens were grouped together under a standard for parks, gardens and commons. In this assessment commons have been removed from the assessment as these will form part of the Accessible Natural Greenspace (ANGs) study.

6.4.8 Therefore it is appropriate to compare the existing provision of parks and formal gardens, and recreation areas against the standard. Amenity greenspace was not a specific standard but are often used for similar activities to recreation grounds therefore have also been included here.

6.4.9 The total sites of formal parks and gardens, playing fields including recreation grounds, and amenity greenspace per 1000 people is 22.96ha (229500sqm). Taking account of only the unrestricted access sites the amount per 1000 people is 4.82ha (48210sqm). The standard set in 2006 was for 1.80ha (18000sqm) per 1000 people. In terms of all sites (irrespective of access) and for all unrestricted sites the amount clearly already exceeds this standard.

6.4.10 It is noted in the previous study that the amount of both common land and historical parks and gardens is very much an accident of history and cannot be assumed to represent a response to meet local ‘need’. Moreover, the historic parks and gardens are not generally managed by public bodies, they serve an area much wider than the District and have an income to support their maintenance. Accordingly they should be excluded from provision standards although they are an important component of local provision and contribute significantly to the local quality of life. Commons, however, do need upkeep at public expense and any investment in upgrading then will generally fall on the public purse. However it is unrealistic to set a provision standard if 200sqm per person [the amount identified during the previous audit] and it is unlikely that many will be enhanced. Therefore the standard of 1.81ha (18000sqm) was specified for the ‘other’ parks and gardens category.

6.4.11 This assessment does not take into account common land as discussed earlier. As with the previous standard if the historic parks and gardens are removed from the provision calculation the provision figure for the District is 6.03ha (60340sqm) per 1000 people, for unrestricted sites it is recalculated as 5.82ha (58150sqm) per 1000 people. In comparison with the 2006 76

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

standard this is higher for all of the sites (irrespective of access) and for all the unrestricted access sites. In comparison with the other local authorities areas (adding together the amenity greenspace and playing fields/recreation standards as necessary) the original standard set is a lot higher, however this may be due to the availability of open space within Hart District due to its rural nature. It should be noted that some caution should be taken in comparing the 2006 standard within the amount identified in this section as it is unclear whether amenity greenspace was included previously.

6.4.12 Within this calculation the country parks are heavily skewing the amount per 1000 people. Since the 2006 Study was undertaken a new country park is currently underway as part of the development at Hitches Lane, west Fleet. This is coming forward as a Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) as part of the need to mitigate the effects of residential development on the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area5. As well as providing a mitigation mechanism this will also be publicly accessible and therefore meets one of the local needs highlighted through the 2006 Study and is in line with the Sustainable Community Strategy.

6.4.13 Removing the country parks from the calculation equates to all sites provision of 2.74ha (27440sqm) per 1000 people with unrestricted provision at 1.26ha (12600sqm) per 1000 people.

6.4.14 During the consultations none of the Parish and Town Councils requested further recreation grounds, parks or amenity greenspace provision. The majority of the requests were around the need for improvements on site to improve condition and increase usage. It is recommended that the previous standard is increased to 2.74ha (27440sqm) (excluding country parks) per 1000 people to ensure that the existing provision is not lost. The majority of country parks within the District are protected due to their designations and, as with the Hitches Lane Country Park will be retained in perpetuity as a SANG.

Artificial Turf Pitches

6.4.15 In 2006 a standard of 0.025ha (250sqm) per 1000 people was recommended for the District. The current provision identified within the District is 0.03 (340sqm) per 1000 people. Since the 2006 Study the number of ATPs has

5 For further information please see the Councils Avoidance Strategy for the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area. 77

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

increased therefore this target has been met. These standards were based on the Sport England guidelines.

6.4.16 Using the Sport England Provision Calculator there is a need for 2.64 synthetic pitches within the District, based upon the 2010 population statistics. With the estimated population increase by 2017 this would increase to 2.66, and to 2.68 by 2026. This equates to approximately 0.02ha (210sqm) per 1000 people. The current provision exceeds this but it should be noted that some of these pitches are restricted for use by the schools. It is recommended that the original standard is maintained due to the cost of providing the pitches. There is a need to increase the number of pitches more widely available – however this could be met by enabling the school pitches to be available for use outside of school hours.

Bowling Greens

6.4.17 0.01ha (100sqm) per 1000 people of bowling green provision has been identified within the District. This is slightly below the standard specified in the 2006 study of 0.011ha (110sqm) per 1000 people. The standard is lower than the other local authorities’ standards. It was noted in the 2006 Study that a couple of parish councils thought there was a need for at least one additional green within the District and therefore the standard was set slightly higher to accommodate this need. Within the last five years there has been an additional bowling green provided within the District. The 2010 consultation did not highlight a further need for bowling greens. It is recommended that the standard remains the same, therefore reflecting that no further need has been identified, however the existing provision should not be lost.

Cemeteries

6.4.18 No specific standard was set in 2006 or has been set by other local authorities. Although cemeteries form part of the open space provision within the District it is not their primary function and therefore a standard should not be set based on open space requirements, but on the need for further burial space provision.

Grass Pitches

6.4.19 The 2006 standard for Hart District was set at 1.90ha (19000sqm) per 1000 people which aligns with a number of the other authorities’ standards. It was noted that the District can not afford to ‘lose’ any of its grass pitches and the 78

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Parish and Town Councils in Church Crookham, Eversley, Fleet, Hartley Wintney, Hook and Mattingley indicated a need for more pitch provision in their area.

6.4.20 Through the 2010 consultation it was indicated that further grass pitch provision is needed in Eversley, Hartley Wintney, and Hook, with improvements needed to the pitch at Blackwater and Hawley Leisure Centre.

6.4.21 The current provision within the District is lower than the standard specified when grouping all of the sites together and reduced again when only taking account of unrestricted sites.

6.4.22 It is recommended that due to the highlighted need overall within the District and as the standard aligns with other local authority areas that the original standard be retained.

Play Areas and Playgrounds (up to 12 years of age)

Areas for Play can be divided into 3 categories:

• Local Area for Play (LAP): an unsupervised area for play activities designated for young children (4-6 years of age) enclosed by fencing or other barriers and overlooked by housing, adjacent to pedestrian routes, or other well used public facilities. It should be located within 1 minute walking time from home and may contain some play equipment. • Local Equipped Area for Play (LEAP): an unsupervised play area equipped for children of early school age (4-8 years of age) with consideration for the needs of supervised children from birth to 4 years and unaccompanied children slightly older than 8. It is enclosed by fencing with self closing gates, overlooked by housing, pedestrian routes or other well used public facility and be within 5 minute walking time from homes. It should contain at least 5 types of play activity, with some seating for accompanying adults. • Neighbourhood Equipped Area for Play (NEAP): an unsupervised site equipped mainly for older children (8-14 years of age) with consideration for slightly younger supervised or accompanied children, older children, and those with special needs. It should contain at least 8 types of play activity, enclosed by fencing and self closing gates. It should include a kick-about area and opportunities for wheeled play such as skateboards, roller-skating, and bikes. There

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

should be seating for accompanying adults or for teenagers as a meeting place. It should service a substantial residential area and be within 15 minute walking time from home.

6.4.23 36 play areas were identified within the District covering an area of 19.74ha (197370sqm). The original standard was calculated on the basis of how much provision existed compared to the National Playing Fields Association Six Acre Standard for ‘playing space.’ It was noted in the study that the NPFA Six Acre Standard was unrealistic. A conceptual model was used to calculate the standard for aged 8 years and below and for 8-12 years based on a minimum size threshold, housing density and average dwelling occupancy. Together these two standards create a recommendation of 0.05ha (500sqm) per 1000 people.

6.4.24 The current provision level is currently approximately half this standard. The 2010 consultation highlighted the need for at least 4 new play areas within the District. The key need was for the enhancement of many existing play areas.

6.4.25 It is recommended that the original play area and playground provision should not be increased as although there is a need for more the original standard has not yet been met. This may however be due to LAPs not being identified during the survey with Parish and Town Councils as many are informal areas created by children. It is also difficult to place a specific size requirement on new play areas as it depends on the area it will serve and the type of play facility. In many cases a LAP would work well and these can be small areas with limited equipment but provide a focal point for play. One of the aims of the National Play scheme is to have a play area within every region to ensure all children have access to play. Due to the need for play areas to be in close proximity to residential areas and therefore within easy walking distance for small children it is recommended that the standard is not reduced as further play areas would improve access for all children closer to their home and provide a greater choice.

Tennis Courts and Multi-Courts

6.4.26 Compared to the standard of 0.025ha (250sqm) there is higher provision than the standard previously set, but once all the sites that are considered to have limited or restricted access the amount have been discounted the amount available is the same as the recommended standard. Compared to

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

the other authorities one has a standard that is only 10sqm higher whilst the other is 150sqm higher.

6.4.27 Through the 2010 consultation a number of parish councils indicated that there was a greater need for public tennis courts and multi use courts within the District.

6.4.28 The 2006 Study highlighted that an average court size was 666sqm, which could be multi-functional. As the original standard has already been met and there is still an indicated need it is recommended that the standard per 100 people is increased to 0.035 (350sqm) to accommodate this need. This would potentially provide 14 extra tennis/multi-courts within the District that were highlighted as a need by the parish and town councils. It is recommended that these are multi-courts so they a wider choice of sports provision can be provided within the District.

Youth Facilities

6.4.29 Only four specific sites were identified within the District for teenagers. There are a number of recreation grounds however these have very limited facilities for the teenagers. A standard was originally set for 0.03ha (300sqm) per 1000 people. This was based on a minimum size of 16000sqm and providing a greater choice than a single site per area.

6.4.30 Through the consultation a number of parishes within the District indicated the need for more youth provision and current provision is very limited. Areas were also recommended for improvements and to incorporate more facilities on a number of sites.

6.4.31 Taking into account the existing provision and using the minimum size threshold above to calculate the extra need highlighted by the parish and town councils the requirement would come in slightly below the original standard. Given that the 16000sqm is only a minimum size it is recommended that the 0.03ha (300sqm) standard is retained due to the need.

Indoor Provision

6.4.32 In the 2006 Study standards were only specified for specific indoor facilities such as indoor swimming pools and indoor bowls.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.4.33 Based on the current population and the potential population increase up to 2026 the Sport England provision calculator sets out that the following indoor provision would be needed for the District.

Year Pool Sports Hall Indoor Bowls 2010 878.19 sqm 24.72 courts 5.69 rinks 16.53 lanes 6.18 sports halls 0.95 centres 4.13 pools 2017 885.96 sqm 24.94 courts 5.74 rinks 16.68 lanes 6.24 sports halls 0.96 centres 4.17 pools 2026 891.49 sqm 25.10 courts 5.77 rinks 16.78 lanes 6.27 sports halls 0.96 centres 4.20 pools Table 28: Provision needs based on estimated population increases (Source: Sport England Facilities Calculator)

6.4.34 The 2006 Study highlighted that the District would have a deficiency in pool provision of about 367sqm of water area (approximately 25m x 6 lane pool) if RAF Odiham was not included in the calculation. The need for further swimming pool provision was also supported by the local residents. However the Study noted that there was no significant centre of population in which it would be sensible to site a pool therefore a quantitative standard was not set. The Council are currently looking into the feasibility of a new leisure centre to replace Hart Leisure Centre. The feasibility study recommends that there is a need of 168.18sqm of water space within a 20 minute walking catchment of the centre.

6.4.35 In terms of indoor bowling provision the 2006 Study recommended a standard of 0.013sqm of bowling surface per person. This was based on the Sports England Facilities Calculator and it is recommended that as there has been no change since the previous study and no specific need raised by the parish and town councils that this is retained.

6.4.36 Within the District there is provision of 9 different indoor facilities. The Sport England calculator recommends 6.18 halls. However, as noted in the guidance to the calculator the amount of provision recommended should not be simply compared with the facilities within the area as it also depends on such things as the quality of the provision, opening hours, access to the provision. Therefore the need for further indoor facilities will be looked at further through the feasibility work for a new leisure centre within the District rather than setting a specific standard here.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Parish Provision

6.4.37 In terms of the breakdown by parish a comparison can be made about the amount of provision per 1000 head of population (Table 29). The Parish with the most amount of provision per 1000 head of population is Yateley with 15.74ha. Both Bramshill and Greywell have no identified provision that falls within the typology for this assessment and can be classed as unrestricted. Where there is an estimated increase in population it is highly likely (depending upon the actual amount of increase) that further provision will be needed to meet this demand.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Table 29: Comparison of parish provision per 1000 head of population

Type of Provision

Sites Unrestricted Unrestricted All Unrestricted All Unrestricted All Unrestricted All Unrestricted All Blackwater 0ha 0ha 0.40ha 0.36ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha 0.03ha 0ha 2.49ha 0.21ha and Hawley (0sqm) (0sqm) (4021sqm) (3558sqm) (0sqm) (305sqm) (0sqm) (24884sqm) (2099sqm)

Bramshill 0ha 0ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha (0sqm) 0ha (0sqm) 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Church 0ha 0ha 0.18ha 0.16ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha 0ha 0ha 1.64ha 0.52ha Crookham (0sqm) (0sqm) (1781sqm) (1633sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (16364sqm) (5160sqm)

Crondall 0ha 0ha 2.51ha 2.51ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha 0.11ha 0ha 0.63ha 0.63ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (25155sqm) (25155sqm) (0sqm) (1127sqm) (0sqm) (6241sqm) (6241sqm)

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Type of Provision

Parish Allotments Amenity Greenspace / Recreation Ground / Formal Parks and Gardens Artificial Turf Pitches Bowling Greens Grass Pitches Recommended 0.075ha 2.74ha 0.025ha (250sqm) 0.01ha (100sqm) 1.90ha (19000sqm) Standard per (750sqm) (27440sqm) 1000 head of population Crookham 0ha 0ha 0.66ha 0.55ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha 0ha 0ha 0.26ha 0.26ha Village (0sqm) (0sqm) (6614sqm) (5470sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (2613sqm) (2613sqm)

Dogmersfield 0ha 0ha 1390.86 0.98ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha 0ha 0ha 4.78ha 4.78ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (13908351 (9771sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (47894sqm) (47894sqm) sqm) Elvetham 0ha 0ha 0.50ha 0.50ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha 0ha 0ha 0.07ha 0.07ha Heath (0sqm) (0sqm) (5015sqm) (5015sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (733sqm) (733sqm)

Eversley 0.14ha 0ha 34.43ha 12.64ha 0.23ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0.92ha 0.92ha (1464sqm) (0sqm) (344395sqm) (136039sqm) (2236sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (9164sqm) (9164sqm)

Ewshot 0ha 0ha 2.58ha 2.58ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (25812sqm) (25812sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Fleet 0ha 0ha 3.31ha 2.81ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha 0.01ha 0ha 0.56ha 0.18ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (33122sqm) (28382sqm) (0sqm) (110sqm) (0sqm) (5694sqm) (1797sqm)

Greywell 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Hartley 0.11ha 0ha 30.09ha 0.37ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha 0ha 0ha 0.39ha 0.39ha Wintney (300879sqm) (3729sqm)

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Type of Provision

Parish Allotments Amenity Greenspace / Recreation Ground / Formal Parks and Gardens Artificial Turf Pitches Bowling Greens Grass Pitches Recommended 0.075ha 2.74ha 0.025ha (250sqm) 0.01ha (100sqm) 1.90ha (19000sqm) Standard per (750sqm) (27440sqm) 1000 head of population (1076sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (3882sqm) (3882sqm)

Heckfield 0ha 0ha 1908.42ha 0ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (19092287sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Hook 0ha 0ha 2.29ha 2.29ha 0ha (0sqm) 0ha 0.02ha 0ha 0.03ha 0ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (22913sqm) (22913sqm) (0sqm) (229sqm) (0sqm) (317sqm) (0sqm)

Long Sutton 0ha 0ha 2.63ha 2.63ha 2.03ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 17.15ha 1.09ha and Well (0sqm) (0sqm) (26329sqm) (26329sqm) (20198sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (171471sqm) (10867sqm)

Mattingley 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Odiham 0ha 0ha 1.02ha 0.30ha 0.22ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 1.79ha 0.32ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (10225sqm) (3040sqm) (2159sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (17941sqm) (3154sqm)

Rotherwick 0ha 0ha 269.25ha 2.65ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 3.58ha 1.77ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (2692423sqm) (26435sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (35972sqm) (17720sqm)

South 0ha 0ha 8.81ha 0.93ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha Warnborough (0sqm) (0sqm) (88093sqm) (9312sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Type of Provision

Parish Allotments Amenity Greenspace / Recreation Ground / Formal Parks and Gardens Artificial Turf Pitches Bowling Greens Grass Pitches Recommended 0.075ha 2.74ha 0.025ha (250sqm) 0.01ha (100sqm) 1.90ha (19000sqm) Standard per (750sqm) (27440sqm) 1000 head of population Winchfield 0ha 0ha 2.39ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 3.46ha 3.46ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (23837sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (32702sqm) (32702sqm)

Yateley 0ha 0ha 15.42ha 15.15ha 0.03ha 0ha 0.007ha 0ha 1.42ha 0.09ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (154211sqm) (151535sqm) (318sqm) (0sqm) (74sqm) (0sqm) (14200sqm) (907sqm)

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Type of Provision

Sites All Unrestricted All Unrestricted All Unrestricted All Unrestricted Blackwater 2.49ha 0.21ha 0.01ha 0.01ha 0.19ha 0ha 0ha 0ha and Hawley (24884sqm) (2099sqm) (144sqm) (144sqm) (1894sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Bramshill 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 1.76ha 0ha 0ha 0ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (17465sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Church 1.64ha 0.52ha 0.02ha 0.02ha 0.21ha 0ha 0ha 0ha Crookham (16364sqm) (5160sqm) (159sqm) (159sqm) (2167sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Crondall 0.63ha 0.63ha 0.05ha 0.05ha 0.10ha 0.10ha 0ha 0ha (6241sqm) (6241sqm) (549sqm) (549sqm) (966sqm) (966sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Crookham 0.26ha 0.26ha 0.02ha 0.02ha 0.003ha 0ha 0ha 0ha Village (2613sqm) (2613sqm) (185sqm) (185sqm) (31sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Dogmersfield 4.78ha 4.78ha 0ha 0ha 0.65ha 0ha 0ha 0ha

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Type of Provision

Parish Grass Pitches Play Areas and Play Grounds Tennis and Multi Courts Youth Facilities Recommended 1.90ha (19000sqm) 0.05ha (500sqm) 0.035ha (350sqm) 0.03ha (300sqm) Standard per 1000 head of population (47894sqm) (47894sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (6567sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Elvetham 0.07ha 0.07ha 0.02ha 0.02ha 0.04ha 0.04ha 0ha 0ha Heath (733sqm) (733sqm) (223sqm) (223sqm) (387sqm) (387sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Eversley 0.92ha 0.92ha 0.12ha 0.12ha 0.63ha 0ha 0.34ha 0.34ha (9164sqm) (9164sqm) (1196sqm) (1196sqm) (694sqm) (0sqm) (3449sqm) (3449sqm)

Ewshot 0ha 0ha 0.15ha 0.15ha 0.17ha 0.17ha 0ha 0ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (1538sqm) (1538sqm) (1707sqm) (1707sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Fleet 0.56ha 0.18ha 0.02ha 0.02ha 0.05ha 0.02ha 0.002ha 0.002ha (5694sqm) (1797sqm) (176sqm) (176sqm) (461sqm) (155sqm) (25sqm) (25sqm)

Greywell 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Hartley 0.39ha 0.39ha 0.01ha 0.01ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha Wintney (3882sqm) (3882sqm) (92sqm) (92sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Heckfield 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Type of Provision

Parish Grass Pitches Play Areas and Play Grounds Tennis and Multi Courts Youth Facilities Recommended 1.90ha (19000sqm) 0.05ha (500sqm) 0.035ha (350sqm) 0.03ha (300sqm) Standard per 1000 head of population Hook 0.03ha 0ha 0.13ha 0.13ha 0.04ha 0.03ha 0.05ha 0.05ha (317sqm) (0sqm) (266sqm) (266sqm) (413sqm) (263sqm) (506sqm) (506sqm)

Long Sutton 17.15ha 1.09ha 0.17ha 0.17ha 0.75ha 0.24ha 0ha 0ha and Well (171471sqm) (10867sqm) (1676sqm) (1676sqm) (8923sqm) (2476sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Mattingley 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Odiham 1.79ha 0.32ha 0.05ha 0.05ha 0.10ha 0.04ha 0ha 0ha (17941sqm) (3154sqm) (486sqm) (486sqm) (1027sqm) (385sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Rotherwick 3.58ha 1.77ha 0ha 0ha 1.87ha 1.87ha 0ha 0ha (35972sqm) (17720sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (1047sqm) (1047sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

South 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha Warnborough (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Winchfield 3.46ha 3.46ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha 0ha (32702sqm) (32702sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

Yateley 1.42ha 0.09ha 0.01ha 0.01ha 0.04ha 0.005ha 0ha 0ha (14200sqm) (907sqm) (113sqm) (113sqm) (362sqm) (51sqm) (0sqm) (0sqm)

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Parish Unrestricted amount of Population provision per 1000 head of increase/decrease by 2017 population – ha (sqm) Blackwater and Hawley 0.86ha (8850sqm) Decrease – 84 Bramshill 0.00ha (0sqm) Increase – 8 Church Crookham 0.70ha (695sqm) Increase -1842 Crondall 4.00ha (40050sqm) Decrease – 243 Crookham Village 0.83ha (8270sqm) Decrease – 223 Dogmersfield 7.09ha (70900sqm) Increase – 11 Elvetham Heath 0.63ha (6360sqm) Decrease -326 Eversley 8.18ha (81800sqm) Increase – 8 Ewshot 2.91ha (29060sqm) Increase – 10 Fleet 3.13ha (31250sqm) Decrease – 203 Greywell 0.00ha (0sqm) Decrease – 4 Hartley Wintney 0.59ha (5880sqm) Increase – 348 Heckfield 0.81ha (8140sqm) Decrease – 7 Hook 2.49ha (24990sqm) Decrease – 461 Long Sutton and Well 5.88ha (58800sqm) Decrease – 91 Mattingley 0.69ha (6940sqm) Increase – 2 Odiham 1.05ha (10540sqm) Increase – 313 Rotherwick 8.76ha (87590sqm) Decrease – 34 South Warnborough 2.02ha (20200sqm) Decrease – 85 Winchfield 3.82ha (38150sqm) Decrease – 50 Yateley 15.74ha (157360sqm) Decrease - 579 Table 30: Comparison of parish provision by 100 head of population

Nb. The population figures are estimates produced by Hampshire County Council based on the best available information at the time of publishing – at this time the strategic housing sites to be brought forward through the Core Strategy therefore there may be some discrepancies in the likely increases/decreases in population.

6.4.38 The overall quantity assessment identified a particular need for further outdoor provision of children play, youth facilities and grass pitches. In terms of actual new provision need identified by the Parish and Town Councils (i.e. excluding those facilities in need of updating) the following were identified:

• Blackwater and Hawley – Youth Shelter • Crondall – Skate Park • Church Crookham – Multi Use Games Area (MUGA), Skate Park • Crookham Village – New Play Area • Eversley – Tennis Courts, Football Training Facility • Hook – Allotments, Football Pitches • South Warnborough – MUGA/hard surface area

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.4.39 The majority of requests were for improvements to existing facilities rather than new provision. This highlights that there is a reasonable level of provision already within the District that should be retained, and in many cases upgrades to these would suffice over the provision of new facilities. However as identified by the overall assessment for the District any proposal that supports the particular need for children’s play and youth facilities should be looked at favourably as this is an identified need, in particular as these should be easily accessible on foot by young people and children and therefore within close proximity to residential areas.

6.4.40 The following Parishes have been identified as having no play areas for children under the age of 12 and should be prioritised if funds become available:

• Bramshill • Dogmersfield • Greywell • Heckfield • Mattingley • South Warnborough • Winchfield

6.4.41 Although there is limited youth provision within the District amenity greenspace and recreation areas are highly valued for teenage recreation. However it has been noted that within the following parishes there is no youth or recreation area facility:

• Bramshill • Greywell • Heckfield • Mattingley • Winchfield

6.4.42 These identified Parishes should be prioritised for children and youth provision depending on identified need by the parishes.

Conclusions

6.4.43 The recommended standards to take forward are:

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

6.4.44 Schemes for new development will need to take account of the impact on provision within the parish they will be located as well as neighbouring parishes as appropriate.

6.4.45 The main quantity need identified is to increase the number of children’s play areas and youth provision within the District to ensure there is a wide choice for residents within the District. Although not a large number of sites have been identified with future population growth expected this will need to be addressed, particularly in the parishes where there is already a high population aged 18 and under and is estimated to see an increase in this age category.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

7.0 QUALITY ASSESSMENT

7.1 Background

Purpose of the Quality Assessment

7.1.1 This section sets out the quality of the existing provision open space, sport and recreation within the District. Identifying the quality of sites is important to ensure that open space, sport and recreation provision meets the needs of residents by providing desirable locations to visit.

Previous findings

7.1.2 The strategic conclusions drawn from the quality audit of sites undertaken in 2006 were:

• The quality of provision in Hart is broadly comparable with other areas in which audits have been undertaken audits using the same basic audit forms and methodology. However, there is a need to improve the quality of a number of playing pitches and related changing accommodation and a general need to enhance the quality of multi-functional greenspaces.

• The value of Hart’s greenspaces – to the local community and in relation to wider issues such as wildlife and biodiversity – is generally good, but there are many sites where it will be desirable to enhance value if at all possible. This will require a number of site-specific responses which range from general environmental improvements to better opportunities for formal and informal recreation use, managing sites in a way which will be of greater benefit to wildlife, improving paths and encouraging greater use.

• Although play areas in the District achieved a reasonable average quality score, it is clear that there is a need significantly to improve a number of sites. The long term play value and attractiveness of many play areas was questioned – especially in the context of their fairly high maintenance costs. However, play provision also has to be highly accessible on foot and this inevitably implies a need for a fairly closely spaces network of play spaces.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Methodology

7.1.3 The quality assessment is based on the rating of each site in terms of the quality and value. A scoring system (set out below) was used taken from the previous 2006 Study to ensure consistency.

Quality Score Relates to the range of No changes required 1 features or facilities on Only minor improvements needed, undertaken as 2 side and their part of improved maintenance condition There is a clear need for some capital investment 3 in upgrading The space of facility should be redesigned 4

Value Score Refers to the value of Very well used and highly valued by local people as 1 site to people and a real community asset biodiversity, and its Fairly well used, enhanced its local area and 2 cultural and heritage supports wildlife value Poorly used and contributes little to the area in 3 which it is located The space or facility is an eyesore and serves no 4 useful purpose Tables 32 & 33: Quality and Value Scoring System

7.1.4 The basis for the quality audit was taken from the responses received from the parish and town councils during the consultation due to their expansive knowledge of their local area and the usage of the sites. Where responses were not received from the Parish and Town Councils the previous 2006 consultation responses were taken into consideration along with a site visit to assess the sites.

7.1.5 The full set of quality and value scores for each site as rated by the Parish and Town Councils is set out in Appendix 1. The results take into account all sites regardless of access.

7.2 Quality Assessment – District Wide

7.2.1 The following information shows how the quality and value of provision is rated for the whole of the District, and broken down into provision type.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 5: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores District Wide

7.2.2 From Chart 5 it can be seen that less than half of the provision types scored 1 in terms of quality, with a score of 2 and 3 being fairly evenly split and only 1% receiving a quality score of 4, highlighting that just over half of all the sites are considered to need some improvements.

7.2.3 The value scores for all of the provision within the District saw that three quarters of all sites are highly valued with a score of 1 with the remaining quarter receiving mainly a score of 2, followed by 3. As with the quality score, only 1% received a score of 4.

7.2.4 Chart 6 shows the breakdown of average scores by provision type for the District.

Chart 6: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the District

7.2.5 Overall the average scores for both quality and value have remained below a score of 3. In terms of quality the average score fell between 1.5 and 2. The 96

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

majority of value scores remained below 1.5. Although all of the sites scored reasonably well it must be noted that this is only the average scores and can hide individual sites that are considered to be lower quality and require updating. In response to this the sites have been broken down by parish in the following section.

7.3 Quality Assessment – By Parish

7.3.1 The following information shows how the quality and value of provision is rated per parish boundary, and broken down into provision type. This takes in to account all of the scores given to the sites within the District.

Blackwater and Hawley Town Council Area

7.3.2 The full list of sites assessed by Blackwater and Hawley Town Council for their quality and value rating is set out in Appendix 1. The areas that are classified as Accessible Natural Greenspace (ANGs) and fall outside the typology provision types and have not formed part of the quality assessment. These will be assessed through an ANGs study for the Council.

Chart 7: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Blackwater and Hawley

7.3.3 The majority of sites within the Parish of Blackwater and Hawley have been rated as with a quality score of 2 which means that it is considered only minor improvements are needed to be undertaken as part of improved maintenance. All of the sites were given a value rating of 1 which classifies all of the sites as very well used and valued by local people as community assets.

7.3.4 The following types of provision have been identified by the Town Council:

• Bowling greens • Cemeteries

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

• Grass pitches • Play Areas and Play grounds • Recreation Grounds • Multi-courts

7.3.5 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

Chart 8: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Blackwater and Hawley

7.3.6 The type of sites considered to be of the highest quality are the play areas, cemetery and bowling green as these all scored an average of 2, requiring only minor improvements. The grass pitches and multi court areas were scored the lowest quality with 3 highlighting the need for some capital investment in upgrading. The recreation grounds scored a slightly better average score of 2.5 however it should be noted that there are only 2 recreation grounds identified within Blackwater and Hawley with one scoring 2 and the other 3.

7.3.7 In terms of value all of the site types received a score of 1, as mentioned earlier, highlighting that the Town Council consider all of their sites to be very well used and highly valued community assets.

7.3.8 There is some variance between the average scores for value and quality for the sites identified. All of the site types have an average score of 1 in terms of their value to the community but for quality received lower scores with all scoring 2 or more.

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Bramshill Parish

7.3.9 The full list of sites assessed for their quality and value rating is set out in Appendix 1. A response was not received from Bramshill Parish Council. The 2006 Study did not have any site assessments for Bramshill. All of the sites identified through the desk top study form part of the Bramshill Police Training College and therefore are not accessible by the general public. Due to the restrictions site visits were not possible.

7.3.10 The types of provision identified were:

• Formal park • Tennis courts.

7.3.11 As there were difficulties in assessing the site how the site is used has been taken into account and therefore, as the site is privately owned, it has been assumed that the types of provision would both score highly in terms of quality and value. The site however contributes little to the area due to nature in which it is used.

Chart 9: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Bramshill

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 10: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Bramshill

Church Crookham

7.3.12 The full list of sites assessed for their quality and value rating is set out in Appendix 1. A response was not received from Church Crookham Parish Council.

7.2.13 The 2006 survey was used as a basis for assessing these sites, along with site visits, and taking into account the improvements the Parish Council requested for the Parish during the 2010 consultation.

7.3.14 Chart 11 sets out the overall percentage of quality and value scores for provision within the Parish of Church Crookham.

Chart 11: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Church Crookham

7.3.15 The majority of sites, taking into account previous comments and the current condition were considered to be in need of some capital investment for upgrading. The percentage of sites that are considered to require no change

100

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

are privately owned with limited or restricted access. The majority of sites were given a value rating of 1 meaning that the majority of sites are well used and valued. No sites were considered to be of the lowest quality or value.

7.3.16 Through the desktop survey the following types of provision were identified:

• Amenity greenspace • Recreation Area • Play Area • Sports Ground • Formal Park and Gardens • Tennis Courts • Grass Pitches

7.3.17 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below in Chart 12.

Chart 12: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Church Crookham

7.3.18 The types of provision considered to be of the highest quality are the grass pitches and the formal garden, however as noted before these are privately owned, with limited/restricted access. All of the other sites scored an overall quality score of 3 with a need for some improvements.

7.3.19 In terms of value the most highly valued are the amenity greenspace, pitches and play areas.

101

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Crondall Parish

7.3.20 The full list of sites assessed for their quality and value rating during the consultation process by Crondall Parish Council is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value ratings for sites identified within the Parish boundary is set out below.

Chart 13: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Crondall

7.3.21 The majority of sites within Crondall Parish have been rated by the Parish Council with a quality score of 1 which means no changes are required. This is followed by a score of 2 (only minor improvements needed) and 3 (a clear need for some investment). The majority of sites were also given a value rating of 1 which means that the majority of sites are well used and highly valued by local people, followed by the remaining 11% of sites being awarding a value rating of 2 (fairly well used).

7.3.22 Apart from the site that has been scored a quality rating of 3 (which correspond with the value rating of 2) the sites within Crondall seem to be of reasonable quality and in need of only limited improvements and meet the needs of residents as the majority are highly valued sites.

7.3.23 The following types of provision have been identified within the parish boundary:

• Bowling Greens • Cemeteries • Play Areas and Play Grounds • Grass Pitches • Indoor Facilities • Recreation Grounds • Tennis and Multi-Courts.

102

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

7.3.23 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

Chart 14: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Crondall

7.3.24 The type of sites considered to be of the highest quality are the play areas and cemeteries as these scored an average score of 2 and therefore requiring some minor improvements. The recreation grounds scored average quality score of 1.5 with the other sites all scoring an average of 1 (no changes required).

7.3.25 In terms of value all of the sites, apart from play areas, scored an average of 1 meaning they are very well used and highly valued. The play areas scored an average of 2 meaning it is fairly well used.

7.3.26 The majority of sites correlate with each other in terms of their average quality and value rating with the majority receiving average ratings of 1 for both.

Crookham Village Parish

7.3.27 The full list of sites assessed for their quality and value rating is set out in Appendix 1. A response was not received from Crookham Village Parish Council.

103

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

7.3.28 The 2006 survey was used as a basis for assessing these sites, along with a site visit, and taking into account the improvements the Parish Council requested for the Parish during the 2010 consultation.

7.3.29 Chart 15 sets out the overall percentage of quality and value scores for provision within the Parish of Crookham Village.

Chart 15: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Crookham Village

7.3.30 All of the sites were scored a quality and value score of 1 meaning there is no changes to the existing sites needed.

7.3.31 Through the desktop study the following types of provision were identified:

• Play Area • Recreation Ground • Tennis Courts

Chart 16: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Crookham Village

104

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

7.3.32 As noted previously all of the sites were assessed as being of high quality and high value. The tennis courts are a restricted provision as part of the school and the other two types of provision form part of the Zebon Copse recreation area which has undergone refurbishment.

Dogmersfield Parish

7.3.33 The full list of sites assessed by Dogmersfield Parish Council, during the consultation process, in terms of their quality and value rating is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value ratings for all of the sites are set out below.

Chart 17: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Dogmersfield

7.3.34 The majority of sites within the Parish, with just over half, have been rated with a quality score of 2 meaning only minor improvements are needed. There is a fairly even spread between the other score ratings. In terms of the value rating the majority have been scored 2 however this is less than half the sites. Following this the next largest amount of sites have been given a value rating of 3.

7.3.35 The following types of provision have been identified within the Parish boundary:

• Amenity greenspace • Cemeteries • Grass pitches • Formal Parks and Gardens • Tennis courts

7.3.36 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

105

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 18: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Dogmersfield

7.3.37 The types of sites considered to be of the highest quality are the cemeteries, grass pitches and formal parks and gardens. These have all scored an average quality rating of 2 with only minor improvements needed. The other sites identified – tennis courts and amenity greenspaces – have both received a scoring of 3. None of the sites have been scored with 1 – no changes required, or 4 – the space should be redesigned.

7.3.38 In terms of value the formal parks and gardens have been scored the highest value rating of all the sites with a score of 1 highlighting that they are very well used and highly valued as a community asset. The other sites identified have scored an average value rating of 2 or 3.

7.3.39 There is a correlation between the level of use of the site and its quality. The only exception is the formal parks and gardens category which has a rating of 2 but a value of 1.

Elvetham Heath Parish

7.3.40 The full list of sites assessed for their quality and value rating by Elvetham Heath Parish Council during the consultation process is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value rating for the sites are set out below.

106

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 19: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Elvetham Heath

7.3.41 The majority of sites were scored 2 in terms of quality but with the second highest overall scoring being 1. This highlights the majority of sites need only some minor improvements or none at all. Although Chart 19 shows that no sites were assessed as a 4 there was one score of 3 or 4, but shown here as 3. In terms of the value rating there was a more even split between the scores of 1 and 2, and overall only 1 site scoring 3. It is clear from the chart that the majority of the sites within Elvetham Heath are fairly to very well used and are considered to be important to the local people by the Parish council.

7.3.42 The following types of provision have been identified with the Parish boundary:

• Amenity greenspace • Play Areas • Grass Pitches • Tennis Courts • Recreation Grounds • Golf Course

7.3.43 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

107

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 20: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Elvetham Heath

7.3.44 The recreation grounds, golf course and amenity greenspaces received a high quality average score of 1, with the lowest average scores being given to the grass pitches.

7.3.45 In terms of the value the high average score of 1 have been given to the tennis courts, golf course and amenity greenspace.

7.3.46 There is some variance between the quality and value ratings. In terms of value the majority of provision types scored a better rating than in terms of quality. This suggests that these sites are well used and may benefit from some upgrading to ensure they continue to meet the needs of the local people.

Eversley Parish

7.3.47 The full list of sites assessed by Eversley Parish in terms of their quality and value rating is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value ratings for all of the sites are set out below.

108

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 21: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Eversley

7.3.48 The quality scoring is fairly evenly split between the scores of 1, 2 and 3. Although only by 5% the majority of the sites score 3 meaning there is a clear need for some capital investment in upgrading. In terms of the value scoring the majority of sites were given a score of 1 highlighting that the majority of sites are very well used and highly valued. The remaining sites were fairly evenly split between scores of 2 and 3 with the none of the sites considered be an eyesore or serving no purpose.

7.3.49 The following types of provision have been identified within the parish boundary:

• Allotments • Amenity greenspace • Artificial Turf Pitches • Cemeteries • Play areas • Formal Parks and Gardens • Recreation Grounds • Tennis and Multi-Courts • Youth facilities • Indoor facilities

7.3.50 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

109

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 22: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Eversley

7.3.51 Only one type of provision – Artificial Turf Pitches - scored an overall average score of 1 for quality, whereas half of the provision types scored an average of 1 as a value rating. Allotments and formal parks and gardens scored the lowest rating in terms of quality with an average of 3.

7.3.52 There is a clear variation between the quality and value rating of two types of provision – the allotments and formal parks and gardens – with the quality being 3 but value having an average of 1, showing a need to improve these areas to meet the same standard as that placed as value upon them.

Ewshot Parish

7.3.53 The full list of sites assessed by Ewshot Parish Council in terms of their quality and value rating is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value ratings for all of the sites are set out below

Chart 23: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Ewshot

110

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

7.3.54 There is a 75:25% split between the quality scores with the majority scoring 3 (requiring some capital for upgrading) and the remainder scoring 1 (no changes required). In terms of the value rating given by the parish the majority of sites have been scored 1, with the remaining being scored 2, meaning that overall the majority of sites are very well used with some fairly well used sites.

7.3.55 The following types of provision have been identified within the Parish boundary:

• Amenity greenspace • Play Areas and Play Grounds • Recreation Grounds • Tennis courts

7.3.56 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

Chart 24: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Ewshot

7.3.57 Within the breakdown of provision by type the majority have scored an average of 3 for their quality with only amenity greenspace scoring a quality average of 1. This correlates with the value score average score of 1 for the amenity greenspace. However for the play areas and recreation ground there is a clear difference between the average quality rating of 3 and the value score of 1, highlighting that the sites are considered to be of high value in terms of a community asset but are in need of improvements. The provision of tennis courts is the only typology that scored a value rating of two showing they are fairly well used but the quality of provision needs to be improved. 111

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Fleet Town Council

7.3.58 The full list of sites assessed by Fleet Town Council in terms of their quality and value rating is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value ratings for all of the sites are set out below.

Chart 26: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Fleet

7.3.59 The majority of sites have been rated by the Town Council with a quality score of 2, with the other sites being scored at 3. This highlights that the majority of sites only need minor improvements but one third have a clear need for some capital investment to upgrade.

7.3.60 In terms of the value of the sites the Town Council consider half of the sites to be rated with a score of 2 meaning they are fairly well used, followed by a scoring of 3 – sites are poorly used, and the remaining 17% being of a score 1 and therefore very well used and highly valued.

7.3.61 The following types of provision have been identified within the Town Council boundary:

• Cemeteries • Play Areas and Play Grounds • Tennis courts and Multi-Courts • Recreation Grounds • Youth facilities

7.3.62 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

112

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 26: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Fleet

7.3.63 All of the types of provision assessed by Fleet Town Council have been given an average score between 2 and 2.5 for both the quality and value average scores. There appears to be some comparison between the average quality and value rating with the sites needing only minor improvements and being fairly well used.

7.3.64 It should be noted that work on a new park has been completed at Ancells Farm replacing the existing play area since the parish consultation was undertaken. This is being replaced by a new climbing frame, slide, swing and other equipment, whilst retaining the zip wire.

Greywell Parish Council

7.3.65 Other than fields and meadows within the Parish of Greywell, which will inform the Accessible Natural Greenspace study, no open space, sport or recreation provision under the typology has been identified by the Council or Parish Council to be assessed.

Hartley Wintney Parish

7.3.66 The full list of sites assessed by Hartley Wintney Parish Council in terms of their quality and value rating is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value ratings for all of the sites are set out below.

113

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 27: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Hartley Wintney

7.3.67 The Parish Council has scored the majority of the quality of the sites as a rating of 1 with the remaining 40% of the sites evenly split between the rating of 2 and 3. This highlights that the majority of the sites are considered to need no changes however 20% would benefit from some minor improvements and the remaining 20% would benefit from some capital investment in the upgrading of the site.

7.3.68 In terms of value two thirds of the sites have been scored 1 showing that the majority of sites are highly valued, whereas the remaining one third have been assessed to have a score of 2 meaning that these sites are fairly well used.

7.3.69 The following types of provision have been identified within the Parish boundary:

• Allotments • Cemeteries • Play Area • Recreation Grounds

7.3.70 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

114

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 28: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Hartley Wintney

7.3.71 Within the breakdown of provision the majority of types received an average score of 1 for the quality of provision, with these being the allotments, play areas and recreation grounds. Cemeteries scored a slightly lower score of 2, however all types of provision require no or limited improvements.

7.3.72 In terms of value the majority of types of provision scored an average of 1, with only the play areas scoring an average of 2. This shows that all types of provision are very to fairly well used within the Parish.

Heckfield Parish

7.3.73 The full list of sites assessed by Heckfield Parish Council in terms of their quality and value rating is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value ratings for all of the sites are set out below.

Chart 29: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Heckfield

7.3.74 All of the sites were given a quality score of 1 highlighting no changes required. The sites were also given a value score rating of 1 meaning all sites

115

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

within Heckfield are very well used and highly valued by local people as community assets.

7.3.75 The following types of provision have been identified within the parish boundary:

• Cemetery • Country Park • Formal Parks and Gardens

7.3.76 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

Chart 30: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Heckfield

7.3.77 As can be seen by the graph and from the overall scoring of all types of provision have received an average score of 1 for both the quality and value aspects. For Heckfield cemetery no score was given for its value.

Hook Parish Council

7.3.78 The full list of sites assessed by Hook Parish Council in terms of the quality and value assessment is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value ratings for all sites are set out below.

116

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 31: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Hook

7.3.79 The chart shows that the same values have been given in terms of the quality and value scores overall. The majority of sites have been scored 1 in quality and value terms demonstrating that the Parish Council consider the majority of sites do not require any changes and are very well used, highly valued sites. The remaining sites have been divided into scoring 2 or 3 for both their quality and value.

7.3.80 The following types of provision have been identified within the Parish boundary:

• Amenity Greenspace • Bowling club • Cemeteries • Play Area • Recreation Ground • Tennis Courts and Multi-Use Courts • Youth Facilities

7.3.81 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

117

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 32: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Hook

7.3.82 It is clear from the graph that the majority of types of provision scored an average of 1 in terms of both quality and value. The tennis and multi courts scored just lower that 1 with an average of 1.25. In terms of value the tennis and multi-courts scored the lowest average with just over 1.5 and play areas of 1.25. All other sites scored an average of 1.

7.3.83 Although reference has been made to types that have scored 1 none of the types of provision scored poor rating of 3 and 4 with only one type of provision scored an average of 2 for quality. Therefore it is clear that the types of provision overall require limited improvements however from individual site records some were scored at 3 for quality and value and should be looked at individually.

Long Sutton and Well Parish

7.3.84 The full list of sites assessed in terms of quality and value by Long Sutton and Well Parish Council is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value ratings for all the sites are set out below.

118

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 33: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Long Sutton and Well

7.3.85 All of the sites were given a quality score of 2 highlighting that some minor changes are needed to the provision. In terms of value all of the sites were scored 1 meaning the Parish Council consider all of the sites to be very well used and highly valued by local people as community assets.

7.3.86 The following types of provision have been identified within the Parish boundary:

• Recreation ground • Tennis courts

7.3.87 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

Chart 34: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Long Sutton and Well

7.3.88 As noted from the pie charts both types of provision identified have been scored a quality score of 2 and value score of 1.

Mattingley Parish

7.3.89 Mattingley Parish Council did respond to the consultation however all of their sites apart from the cemetery fall outside the typology for this assessment. The cemetery, although identified was not given a score by the Parish. However from a site visit the cemetery is maintained and due to the nature of the site can be considered to be valued by the local residents, 119

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

therefore an assumption has been made that this site should score a rating of 1 for quality and 1 for value, meaning there is no change required. The Parish did comment that the burial ground has reached capacity however this falls outside the remit for assessing the quality of an open space site.

Odiham Parish

7.3.90 The full list of sites assessed for their quality and value rating during the consultation process by Odiham Parish Council is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value ratings for sites identified within the Parish boundary is set out below.

Chart 35: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Odiham

7.3.91 The majority of the sites within Odiham Parish have been scored with a quality score of 1 with two thirds of the site highlighting that the majority of sites require no changes. The remaining third of sites have been scored evenly with ratings of 2, 3, and 4, showing that a number of sites do require some upgrading. In terms of value the majority of sites were assessed as 1 and therefore highly valued and well used sites. The remaining site scored a value rating of 3 highlighting that the site is poorly used and contributes little to the area in which it is located.

7.3.92 The following types of provision have been identified within the Parish boundary:

• Bowling green • Cemetery • Grass Pitches • Play Areas and Playgrounds • Recreation grounds • Sports Hall • Tennis Courts

120

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

7.3.93 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

Chart 36: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Odiham

7.3.94 The types of sites considered to be of the highest quality are the provision of bowling greens, play areas, grass pitches, sports hall and tennis courts. All of these have a value rating of 1. These types of provision are clearly classed highly in terms of both quality and value to the local community. The type of provision that scored the worst in terms of quality was the recreation ground provision. These scored and average overall rating of 3.5 meaning that they would benefit the most from capital investment to upgrade or potential be redesigned to form a better facility for local people, in particular as the average value rating of these sites is 2 showing that the Parish Council consider these sites to be fairly well used and enhances the local area.

Rotherwick Parish

7.3.95 The full list of sites assessed by Rotherwick Parish Council in terms of their quality and value rating is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value ratings for the sites is set out below.

121

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 37: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Rotherwick

7.3.96 It is clear from the pie charts that the in terms of both quality and value all of the sites within the parish were scored with a rating of 2. This means that the Parish Council consider all of the sites to only require minor improvements and that all of the sites are fairly well used and enhance the local area.

7.3.97 The following types of provision were identified within the parish boundary:

• Recreation Ground • Tennis courts

7.3.98 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

Chart 38: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Rotherwick

7.3.99 As noted from the pie charts, and as can be clearly seen in the graph above both types of provision identified have received the same score rating in terms of quality and value.

122

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

South Warnborough Parish

7.3.100 The full list of sites assessed for their quality and value rating during the consultation process by South Warnborough Parish Council is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value ratings for sites identified within the parish boundary is set out below.

Chart 39: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of South Warnborough

7.3.101 There is a clear split between the sites identified within South Warnborough Parish in terms of quality with 50% being scored as 1 with no changes required and 50% being scored 3 where there is a clear need for some capital investment in upgrading. In terms of value all sites were valued as very well used and highly valued by local people as a real community asset.

7.3.102 The following types of provision were identified within the Parish boundary:

• Recreation ground • Cemetery

7.3.103 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

123

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 40: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of South Warnborough

7.3.104 It is clear from the graph above that the type of provision that scored the lowest was the recreation ground provision with a score of 3 highlighting the clear need for improvement of this provision, in particular due to the site being well used by the local residents. The cemetery scored the best overall score with 1 for both quality and value.

Winchfield Parish

7.3.105 The full list of sites assessed for their quality and value rating during the consultation process by Winchfield Parish Council is set out in Appendix 1. The overall quality and value ratings for sites identified within the Parish boundary is set out below.

Chart 41: Quality and Value Scores – Overall Scores for the Parish of Winchfield

7.3.106 The chart setting out the quality score has a clear 3 way split in the way that the sites have been assessed. All of the sites were scored either 1, 2, or 3 rating. This shows that there is a mix of need to improve some sites substantially to there being no changes required. In terms of value rating the majority of sites received a rating of 1 whilst the remaining third received a

124

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

rating of 2 highlighting that all of the sites within Winchfield are either very or fairly well used.

7.3.107 The following types of provision have been identified within the Parish boundary:

• Cemetery • Grass Pitches

7.3.108 The average quality and value rating for each type of provision is set out below.

Chart 42: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Winchfield

7.3.109 Overall the cemetery provision scored the lowest with 3 in terms of quality however it is a fairly well used area. Pitches scored an average overall rating of 2 for quality and 1 for value. There is a clear mix in terms of average quality for the sites but with no sites scoring lower than 2 for the value it is clear that these sites are considered to be of benefit to the parish and improvements would be worthwhile where necessary.

Yateley Parish

7.3.110 The full list of sites assessed for their quality and value rating is set out in Appendix 1. A response was not received from Yateley Town Council.

125

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

7.3.111 The 2006 survey was used as a basis for assessing these sites, along with a site visit, and taking into account the improvements the Parish council requested for the parish during the 2010 consultation.

7.3.112 Chart 43 sets out the overall percentage of quality and value scores for provision within the Parish of Yateley.

Chart 43: Quality and Value Scores – Overall scores for the Parish of Yateley

7.3.113 The majority of the sites scored 1 in terms of quality, with remaining sites scoring 2 or 3. This highlights that the majority of sites do not require improving, however a number of these sites are part of the school sites within Yateley and therefore not publicly accessible.

7.3.114 In terms of value the majority of sites are highly used therefore has been given a rating of 1 demonstrating that the majority of sites are highly valued. None of the sites were scored lower than 2 for value.

7.3.115 From the desktop study the following types of provision were identified:

• Amenity Greenspace • Cemeteries • Play Areas • Formal Parks and Gardens • Grass Pitches • Recreation Grounds • Tennis courts

126

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Chart 44: Breakdown of average scores by provision type for the Parish of Yateley

7.3.116 Looking at each type of provision shows that on average the majority of sites scored highly in terms of quality and value. Although only very slightly the ‘lower’ quality sites include amenity greenspace and play areas.

7.4 Setting Quality Standards

7.4.1 From the 2006 Study it was highlighted that there was a need to improve the number of playing pitches and related changing accommodation and a general need to enhance the quality of multi-functional greenspaces. In particular, although scoring an average score, play areas need to be improved with the District. In terms of value it was considered overall most sites were highly valued but a number of sites may need site specific enhancements including environmental improvements, more opportunities for formal and informal recreation use, managing sites in a better way to benefit wildlife, improving paths and encouraging greater use.

High Quality / High Value High Quality / Low Value

67% 3%

Low Quality / High Value Low Quality / Low Value

23% 7%

127

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

7.4.2 From the 2006 consultation with the local residents the majority of respondents found the overall quality of most forms of provision to be fairly low or worse. Many commented that the quality of public facilities and sports pitches as very poor. From the residents consultation the following improvements were recommended:

• Improvements to pitches and changing accommodation • Enhancing parks and other high profile sites • Better provision for children and teenagers • Creating more cycle and footpaths, linking towns and villages, and the countryside.

7.4.3 Overall sites are in reasonable quality however the average scores for the District can hide specific problems.

7.4.4 The Parish and Town Councils were asked in 2010 to provide a list of leisure needs for their community. The majority of these focused around enhancing existing facilities. Taking account of these needs and the scores provided during the consultation on quality and value the following sites have been highlighted as in need of improvement:

Up Green Village Green Needs ditch and drainage maintenance Ewshot Ewshot Recreation Ground Improvements to play area Ewshot Ewshot Tennis Courts Resurfacing needed Fleet Oakley Park Improvement to enhance access to facility for people with disabilities

The Views Improvements to play provision

Basingbourne Recreation Area Improvements to play provision

Ancells park recreation Ground Improvements to play provision 128

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

7.4.5 The 2006 standards were based around the Green Flag Standards. These have become nationally accepted standards for all types of greenspace. It is considered appropriate to continue to use these standards as measurement of the overall quality of the District’s spaces. The standards focus around the following headings and set out how potential ways of meeting the standard:

• A welcoming place • Healthy, safe and secure • Well maintained and clean • Sustainability • Conservation and heritage

7.4.6 Each site identified in this study would not be expected to meet all of the standards as it depends on the functionality of the site, the size etc, but the standards should be used as a benchmark for aiming to improve all sites within the District. The sites listed in Table 33 are key sites identified by the Parish and Town Councils for improvements that should be concentrated on first but all sites are likely to need some improvement over time and these should take account of the Green Flag Standards.

7.4.7 For further information on the Green Flag Standards and to view the manual please visit http://www.keepbritaintidy.org/GreenFlag.

129

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

8.0 ACCESSIBILITY ASSESSMENT

8.1 Background

Purpose of the Accessibility Assessment

8.1.1 The accessibility audit is the third section of the assessment of the provision of open space, sport and recreation within the District. Accessibility is the measure of the distance that households should be from an accessible open space. It is important to understand how accessible facilities are to the local residents. Although now superseded PPG17 Companion guide it is highlighted that ‘…accessibility normally comes first in importance for the simple reason that if a particular open space or facility is inaccessible it becomes irrelevant to those who may want to use it. At the same time, however, inaccessible open spaces can nonetheless contribute to the appearance, environmental quality and amenity of an area and contribute to biodiversity…’

8.2 Setting Accessibility Standards

8.2.1 To assess the accessibility of sites within the District it is necessary to devise distance thresholds.

8.2.2 The 2006 standards were derived from the following sources:

• The Project Greenspace survey of existing residents • Government guidance • National agency guidance • Research in other local authority areas • The nature of the District.

8.2.3 These are compared with other local authority standards in Table 34.

130

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Other Local Authority standards

Typology Hart (2006) Surrey Heath BC Harborough Oswestry Congleton Tamworth DC BC BC BC Allotments 15 mins walk/cycling 10-15 min walk 10 min drive 15 min walk 15 min walk 15 min walk (urban) / 15 min drive (rural) Amenity Greenspace 5 mins walk 5-10 min walk 10 min walk 10 min walk 5-10 min walk 5-10 min walk Cemeteries/churchyards No realistic requirement to set catchments (PPG17) Parks and gardens 10 min walk/cycle 10 min walk 10 min drive 15 min walk 15 min walk 15 min walk (urban) / 15 min drive (rural) Provision for children and young people 5 min walk 10 min walk 5-10 min walk 10 min walk 10 min walk 10 min walk (children) / 10 min (children) / (young people) 15 min walk walk/cycling (young people) Outdoor sports facilities 15-20 min 15 min drive 10 min drive 15 min drive 10-20 min 15 min drive walk/cycling drive (dependent on facility type) Table 35: Comparison of the 2006 Study Distance Threshold Standards with other Local Authority Standards

131

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

8.2.4 In comparison with standards set in the other authority areas the standards set in the 2006 Study do not vary considerably.

8.2.5 Since these original distance thresholds were devised visitor surveys for specific sites within the District have been undertaken. These are useful to highlight the distances people are willing to travel to sites and by what means and to form a comparison with the previous distance thresholds to clarify whether these are still considered relevant thresholds to maintain.

8.2.6 The first two visitor surveys were undertaken as part of the work to provide Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) as mitigation for the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area.

8.2.7 The first visitor survey was for an area known as Blackwater Park and Hawley Meadows located in the north east of the District. The site is approximately 39 hectares and provides an area of greenspace available for public use. Visitor surveys were carried out on site and the following results were drawn out:

Travel distance to site: • 43% of visitors live within 2km • 69% of visitors live within 4km • 93% of visitors live within 15km

Means of travel to site: • 73% of visitors travel by car/van • 20% of visitors travel on foot • 7% of visitors travel by bike

8.2.8 The second visitor survey was carried out on Hartley Wintney Common which are a number of common sites surrounding the village of Hartley Wintney towards the centre of the District. This site covers an area of 33ha. The following results were drawn out:

Travel distance to site: • 90% of visitors live within 1km • 98% of visitors live within 10km

Means of travel to site: • 89% of visitors travel on foot

132

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

• 7% of visitors travel by car/van • 4% of visitors travel by bike • 1% of visitors travel by horseback

8.2.9 The third visitor survey comes from a consultation carried out by the Citizens Panel in 2010 on the Elvetham Heath Nature Reserve to seek views on the way the site is managed. The Nature Reserve is approximately 26ha. The following results were drawn out:

Travel distance to site: • 84% of visitors live on Elvetham Heath • 4% of visitors live within ½ mile • 4% of visitors live within ½ - 1 mile • 5% of visitors live within 1-2 miles • 1% of visitors live within 2-5 miles • 2% of visitors live over 5 miles

Means of travel to site: • 87% of visitors travel on foot • 11% of visitors travel by bike • 1% of visitors travel by public transport • 0% of visitors travel by car • 1% of visitors travel by other means.

8.2.10 Taking into account the information from the more recent consultations, the standards used in the 2006 Study, average times for walking and cycling available online, and standards set by other local authorities the following thresholds have been set out to take account of accessibility to open space provision within the District.

133

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

8.2.11 A distance threshold has not been set for the provision of cemeteries. Although these form part of the accessible open space provision within the District this is not the primary function and therefore not appropriate to set specific access standards on the basis of accessing open space.

8.2.12 Driving thresholds have been given for sites where equipment may be taken with the user to the site for use during that activity. The anomaly to this is the formal parks and gardens provision which due to their size and function of these sites may encourage people to travel further.

8.3 Accessibility Assessment of District provision

8.3.1 Having established distance threshold standards that are considered suitable travel time distances, dependent on provision type, it is necessary to assess how much of the District has access to the different types of provision. This exercise is useful to identify areas, if any, are under-supplied from a particular type of provision.

8.3.2 In the 2006 this assessment was carried out, however it was noted that to undertake the assessment it is necessary to have a comprehensive database of existing spaces and facilities, but at that time the Council did not hold a

134

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

database to meet the requirement. The assessment was undertaken using GIS layers available from the Council, the sample audit information, Landline Ordnance Survey digital map data and information available on the Sport England website. It is noted that this approach may not have produced a comprehensive list but it was based on the best available information at the time.

8.3.3 From the desktop study and responses from the parish and town councils a more detailed list of provision has been created and distance thresholds applied. The accessibility maps are set out in Appendix 3. The following conclusions can be made.

Allotments

8.3.4 There is limited provision of allotments within the District therefore only a small area is within a reasonable distance to access allotments. Further provision in terms of accessibility would be beneficial for the District where there is limited garden space. The 2006 Study highlighted that additional allotments sites are needed across the District, especially in Hook and Yateley.

Amenity Greenspace / Recreation Grounds

8.3.5 Around the main settlements there is reasonable access to amenity greenspace, however there are limited sites within the southern part of Fleet and Church Crookham. There are also a number of recreation grounds that have unrestricted access to the general public within the District, however this is limited in some areas Eversley. In terms of activities that take place at these sites it would be reasonable to consider these types of provision together. The map shows that together the amenity greenspace and the recreation grounds cover most of the gaps within and around the settlements where one typology on its own may miss. The areas that have no provision are the rural areas to the north west and part of the central area down to the south of the District, within which there are a few rural settlements.

8.3.6 Within the majority of the District there appears to be adequate access to provision with a reasonable amount of access either on foot or bike. There may be some scope for further provision to improve access within the rural areas to reduce travel to reach available sites however this is likely to be by car. The level of provision will need to relate back to population of these areas and whether the individual parish considers there is need.

135

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Artificial Turf Pitches

8.3.7 The ATPs are spread out within the District and as noted within the previous study there is currently no provision within the Fleet area. The need for an ATP however may be met by further pitches being provided at the Hitches Lane development to the west of Fleet and if a replacement Leisure Centre comes forward within the District, which would take in a large catchment covering most of the District.

Athletics Tracks

8.3.8 The nearest athletics facility to Hart is at Down Grange in Basingstoke but it is beyond a 7.5km driving distance. Accordingly no Hart residents live within 7.5km of either a track or athletics training facility, hence the pressure for one.

Bowling Greens

8.3.9 There is some provision within the District that can be accessed by bike. Based on the drive time thresholds all of the sites could be accessed by car. However to aim for a more sustainable mode of transport there would be a need for further provision within Hartley Wintney and possibly Odiham.

Cemeteries

8.3.10 Distance thresholds have not been established for cemeteries therefore it is not appropriate to comment on the potential need for more to meet accessibility. However it can be noted that there is a number of sites throughout the District that contribute towards provision but are more appropriate as open space access to the settlement they fall within.

Play Areas and Playgrounds

8.3.11 A large number of play areas were identified but due to their size and use by children aged 12 and under they have limited accessibility thresholds by walking. A number of the smaller villages have no provision which could be easily accessed by children. The previous study stated that there may be opportunities to rationalise provision in parts of Yateley, Hook and Odiham. Although there may be a number of sites provided in these areas it must be remembered that these do not have large catchments zones and need to be easily accessed by children. Having a larger number of sites throughout the District would improve access. 136

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Grass Pitches (including football pitches and cricket greens)

8.3.12 The accessibility maps for grass pitches clearly show that the majority of the District has access to a grass pitch, even when excluding the limited/restricted sites. The area with no provision is to the north west of the District. However the entire District is within the drive time catchment to all of the pitches. The 2006 Study noted that there is little need for more grass pitches purely on accessibility grounds.

Formal Parks and Gardens

8.3.13 In terms of all the formal parks and gardens within the District there is a large number of sites that are easily accessible by walking, cycling and driving due to their scale. However it should be noted that a number of these are not publicly accessible or have limited access through rights of way across the land.

Tennis Courts and Multi-Courts

8.3.14 In terms of accessibility the majority of the District can access at least one of the tennis/multi courts available. This does reduce slightly, in particular in the north-west of the District where there is no reasonably accessible provision that is not limited or restricted. The 2006 Study noted that Hartley Wintney could potentially benefit from additional provision on accessibility grounds in Hartley Wintney, where there is no provision currently available.

Youth Facilities

8.3.15 There is limited accessibility to youth provision within the District. Hook has the majority of sites with 2 sites identified. However specific youth facilities should not be considered in isolation as the recreation grounds and amenity greenspace is also well used as open space for teenagers.

Indoor Provision

8.3.16 All of the indoor provision has been shown on the map as they have been classed as limited due to charges to use these sites. The restricted sites represent the schools within the District. There is provision around the District however the main sites accessible to the public are the leisure centres. It should be noted that indoor provision have larger catchments as many are willing to travel further to a facility, in particular, as can be seen by the current capacity at Hart Leisure Centre, by car. There is limited provision 137

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

in the rural areas of the District however it would not be viable to bring forward another indoor facility such as a leisure centre in these areas.

Conclusion

8.3.17 From the analysis of the accessibility maps there is a need for further play areas and youth provision, tennis courts, and allotments in terms of accessibility across the District.

8.3.18 The accessibility assessment of provision in 2006 highlighted that travel by car is the normal mode and public transport is poor. The most effective measure would be to make pedestrian and cycle access easier and more convenient.

138

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

9.0 Accessible Natural Greenspace

9.1 As discussed in previous sections of this report Natural England are undertaking an Accessible Natural Greenspace (ANGs) Study which will take account of all the natural greenspaces within the District, access restrictions to these sites, and determine the level of supply against Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards (ANGSt). The Council are awaiting this work which will feed into the overall Green Infrastructure network for the District. In the interim the best available information to use is the work carried out in the 2006 Study which sits alongside this report.

9.2 The results and recommendations that were set out in the 2006 Study are summarised below for ease of reference.

Local Need

9.3 As set out in Section 5 a consultation was held with the local residents and key stakeholders in 2006 to take account of local views in identifying community needs and achieving a successful greenspace and sports facilities network. The key points have been highlighted in Section 5, however it is useful to identify the key points raised for accessible natural greenspace here until updated by the ANGs study.

9.4 There was an identified desire for: • Better access to the countryside e.g. through enhancements to the Rights of Way network or the creation of more paths and cycleways. • Opportunities for active recreation in the countryside e.g. motorised sports and possibly a country park designed for countryside activities rather than quiet enjoyment.

9.5 The opportunities identified were: • There is a large amount of MoD land with high conservation value in the area, some of which may be available for extending existing open space sites. As the MoD is downsizing and selling off land conservation and recreation sites will become available.

9.6 The priorities identified were: • The Council cannot address all of the concerns. It would be better to focus resources on improving the quality of key sites rather than spreading resources thinly over more sites.

139

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

• The priority listed in respect of ANGs is to create more cycle and footpaths linking towns and villages, and with the countryside, in particular by seeking to influence the County Council’s Local Transport Plan.

9.7 When residents were asked what matters the most to them one of the key points was the proximity to the countryside, with nearly 90% of respondents classing the countryside as being of fairly or very high importance to them.

9.8 The issues raised regarding the countryside and cycling provision were: • Countryside provision is dominated by a desire to provide for quiet enjoyment and therefore there is poor provision for some sectors of the community such as young people and motor sports interests. As a result; there is a need for a country park, designed primarily for active recreation rather than conservation and providing facilities for BBQs, active sports, kite flying areas, a water area, and model boats. A country park offering opportunities for these and other similar activities will help to resolve existing conflicts between recreation and conservation, provided it is in a convenient location. • The footpath/Rights of Way network should be improved. A major problem is that much of the network is permissive and unmapped. • A sense of safety is a major issue in the countryside. Some people worry about being attacked on the footpath network. Others worry about theft of and from cars. There is a clear need to address these fears. • Need for some small car parks linked to access points in the Forest of Eversley. • West of the District needs more bridleways. • A proper footpath down to the canal bank; the wharf side should be tarmaced. • The Basingstoke Canal is a good route for cycling – as long as cyclists respect walkers and fishermen. • Kissing gates should not be used. • Cycling network should be better publicised. • Fleet and Farnborough/Aldershot are ideal cycling distances but key links are missing – there should be a cycle path opened up at Norris Bridge.

9.9 The consultation undertaken also involved a questionnaire to the Parish and Town Councils. The responses raised specific issues for individual parishes. Those relating to ANGS are set out below. 140

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Eversley • Lower Common woodland – selective thinning, pond restoration, and the creation of new informal footpaths needed.

Yateley • Desire to see quality improvements to rural footpaths, street trees, and parks and gardens.

Hook • More cycle and bridleways, and woodland areas needed.

Church Crookham • More bridleways and commons needed • Improvements to existing bridleways and footpaths.

Fleet • More bridleway and footpaths needed. • More country parks or common lands.

Mattingley • More bridleways and cycle paths needed. • Restoration of Mattingley Common.

Bramshill • There are few facilities but no further facilities are required. • Access to the surrounding countryside is good.

Greywell • Need better quality country parks and common land.

9.10 The general concerns raised by the Parish and Town Councils were: • Better countryside access needed. • Better access needed – people find some footpaths impassable due to broken kissing gates or difficult stiles. • More cycle paths needed. • Fleet Pond is over-used, sometimes causing a clash between conservation and recreation. • Need to manage use of paths by cyclists and walkers, and the use of commons by walkers and horses. • Better provision needed for people with disabilities. 141

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

9.11 A number of site specific issues were raised. Those sites that fall within the ANGs definition are below.

Fleet Pond • Needs an educational centre to bring people together and from which to co-ordinate youth group work. • Ranger service needs administration support. • Vandalism: overnight parties result in broken benches and burned seats; motorcycles on land. • Mountain bikers build ramps and cycle through sensitive areas. • The field east of Fleet Pond used for infantry training could be released for more public access.

Odiham Common • Needs a long term management plan, the rangers work is just marking time. • Needs better information and signage – people are frightened of getting lost. • The link between the Common and the Canal should be forged better. • Interest groups using bridleways/footpaths can clash. May not be enough bridleways to cope with increase in popularity of riding. • Vandalism – sporadic fly-tipping; occasionally problems with traveller visits.

Blackwater Valley • Needs an interpretation centre; ideally to be achieved in the Yateley area, in conjunction with contributions from gravel workings. • Given the nature of the valley, a 20 mile strip along the urban fringe, problems tend to involve burned out cars by sewage works near Darby Green Lane, damage caused by motorcycling, dumping of household items. • There are a few problematic sites which are suffering from problems of indecision caused by hope value, including Clarks Farm, downstream from Clarks Farm, east of Sandhurst Lane, and the Darby Green Meadows SSSI.

Hazeley Heath • Needs remedial work, the cap on the landfill site is wearing thin and causes offence when rubbish comes to the surface. 142

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

• Maintaining a ‘favourable’ condition of Hazeley Heath requires sustainable grazing as the key. Access for maintenance equipment is also a problem. • Problems with vandalism – in particular fire, stolen cars and graffiti.

Basingstoke Canal • Suggestion based on using some of the large amount of military land adjacent to the Canal for picnic areas to enable the public better access to, and use of, the Canal and other open spaces.

Accessibility Assessment

9.12 The accessibility assessment was undertaken using the sites identified through the audit and Ordnance Survey data. The following types of provision were assessed for the 2006 study:

Greenspaces and Outdoor Sports Facilities • Allotments • Artificial Turf Pitches • Bowling greens • Children’s play areas • Grass pitch sites • Parks, gardens and commons • Teenage areas • Tennis courts

Indoor Sports Facilities • Bowls halls • Sports halls • Swimming pools • Tennis halls

9.13 The accessibility to ANG sites has not been specifically assessed however common land does fall within the parks, gardens and common land category in the 2006 Study. The 2006 Study notes that Hart has a high number of high quality parks and gardens, mainly to the north of the M3, and a significant area of common land. Because a common can be thought of at least partly as a park serving a village, these were grouped within this category. Based on this the accessibility assessment showed that almost all of the developed parts of the District lie within 5min walk of at least one space in this category, with very few dwellings further than 10 min walk. The 143

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

recommendation was that the Council should seek to enhance a number of accessible spaces in order to make them into local parks.

9.14 In terms of quantity the amount of common land and historical parks and gardens is very much an accident of history and cannot be assumed to represent a response to local need. Many of the historic parks and gardens are not generally managed by public bodies; they serve a much wider area than the District, and often have an income to support their maintenance. Therefore these were removed from the provision standards even though they contribute towards the local quality of life. Common land will require upkeep and often falls to the public bodies to do so however it was considered unrealistic to set a provision standard and it is unlikely that many will have the funding to be enhanced.

Updating the 2006 information

9.15 The 2006 Study did not map all of the sites that fall within the ANGs definition. In total, (at Dec 2010) the District has the following conservation sites: 16 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), one Special Protection Area (SPA) known as the Thames Basin Heaths, 254 Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC), 1 National Nature Reserve (NNR), 3 Local Nature Reserve (LNR), plus numerous sites designated as common land and village greens. These will be subject to further work through the ANGs study where all natural greenspaces including open countryside will be assessed in terms of accessibility. Until then, the best available information is that set out in the 2006 Study and summarised above including the consultation held with the Parish and Town Councils in 2010 which requested sites and projects to be identified that, may be funded by developer contributions (see Section 5 for details of the consultation). This builds on the previous work by identifying specific sites considered to be in need of improvement and looks into the background and needs of these sites. These are set out below.

Hitches Lane, Country Park, Fleet

9.16 Hitches Lane Country Park is being brought forward as a Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG) as a mitigation measure for the potential impact of the housing development ‘Edenbrook’ to the west of Fleet, at Hitches Lane on the Thames Basin Heaths SPA. The aim of the SANG is to attract visitors away from the SPA which provides a habitat for the internationally important bird species of woodlark, nightjar and Dartford warbler. The site is not expected to mimic the features of the SPA but provide a space for recreation. This site has come forward since the 2006 Study was produced 144

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

which highlighted that there was a need for an area such as a country park for active recreation rather than conservation and providing facilities for BBQs, active sports, kite flying areas, a water area, and model boats. The provision of the country park meets this need and the priority for a new country park as set out in the Council’s Sustainable Community Strategy (See Section 3).

9.17 There are certain standards that a SANG must meet to be determined to be of SANG quality set out by Natural England. Before a SANG can come forward a management plan is needed setting out the works required to ensure the site is brought up to SANG quality and then maintained in perpetuity. This has been undertaken for this site and contributions are currently taken from new development as a mitigation measure for the SPA. However there is a difference between bringing the site up to SANG quality for mitigation purposes and additional features that could be included on the site that would attract further visitors and provide an area for recreation for all Hart residents. The following works were considered to be needed during the consultation exercise:

• Provision of additional sports pitches • Provision of a BBQ area • Bike area and play area for people with disabilities/special needs • Incidental seating • Sensory interpretation • Under 16 football pitch • Access controls • Notice/interpretation boards and waymarks • Junior and disabled play provision near car park • Main entrance artwork • Picnic site furniture.

Fleet Pond, Fleet

9.18 Fleet Pond Local Nature Reserve is a primary resource for informal recreation for residents of Fleet and the surrounding area. Visitor surveys confirm the value of the site for a range of informal activities, with walking, dog walking and cycling predominate. Visitors have mentioned peace, tranquillity and naturalness as the main attractions. The main feature of interest to visitors is the lake (a designated SSSI).

145

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

9.19 Aquatic flora and fauna has been largely lost as a result of silt pollution. Agreement between the owners Hart District Council and the Ministry of Defence towards measures to reduce silt inflow have been mostly successful in significantly reducing silt deposits. Heavy rain which causes flow through the traps results in the deposition of further silt. The potential for restoration of the aquatic life existing and a programme of dredging is required to improve the depth contours of the lake. Turbidity remains a problem until deeper water can be created and it might be necessary to include measures to reduce the Bream population and restock with other species.

9.20 The humid heath (Wood Lane Heath) would benefit from removal or substantial reduction of the dominant Molinia grass tussocks. A better diversity of flora would result. The Dry Heath would also benefit from measures to remove coarse grasses to increase diversity. It needs to be cleared of trees and scrub to deter the spread of Wood Ant colonies. These are depleting the diversity of other invertebrates. Both heaths need to be kept free of invading tree seedlings and scrub.

9.21 The dry woodland will improve naturally to climax woodland of oak with hazel under-storey. Little human intervention is required except for some thinning of the more dense stands of secondary woodland. The creation of glades within the woodland structure would encourage a diversity of invertebrate life.

9.22 The Nature Reserve, because it is so accessible, is the subject of intense pressure through the demand for recreational access. Not only is it suffering from the current levels of public access (damage to walkways, and erosion of footpaths etc) but new development will place greater demands on its relatively fragile physical infrastructure. This additional pressure must be mitigated as part of a comprehensive management plan.

9.23 There is an adopted Management Plan for Fleet Pond which addresses the impacts of visitor pressure and the conservation interests of the SSSI. The Council’s overall Management Plan objectives are to:

1. Manage Fleet Pond Local Nature Reserve in accordance with its status as a Site of Special Scientific Interest and designation as a Local Nature Reserve. 2. Maintain habitat diversity. 3. Safeguard all notable species. 4. Encourage the education use of the site. 146

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

5. Enable visitors to access the site without compromising nature conservation interests. 6. Provide informal recreation activities which enable a greater understanding of the Nature Reserve to be developed without compromising the nature conservation interests. 7. Provide interpretative facilities which develop an awareness of the natural history interest of the site.

9.24 Funding for the project has been identified from Natural England Higher Level Environmental Stewardship: Special Project and Natural England Higher Level Environmental Stewardship: Ordinary Project. The site does provide an important recreational site, often due to its conservation benefits, and therefore, as set out in the Management Plan, also needs managing as a recreational site. Therefore it is appropriate that open space contributions are made towards the site.

9.25 The following works were considered to be needed during the consultation exercise, based upon the Management Plan:

• Access management and Stage 1 Management Plan to include access track provision, parking provision, and bridge alterations. • Stage 2 Management Plan to include protective measures on ecological features as mitigation against damage from increase visitor pressure including fencing, restoration of damaged features etc. • Stage 3 Engineering works to remove silt from ponds to increase biodiversity and prevent loss of critical water mass.

Basingstoke Canal

9.26 The Basingstoke Canal is of national importance for its wealth of wildlife. Most of the waterway has statutory protection as a SSSI. The Canal has other important features, being especially highly valued as a linear public park providing recreation and amenity. Its towpath is much frequented by walkers and provides a traffic-free ‘green corridor’ in urban, suburban and rural areas. The Canal’s easy public accessibility is particularly valuable because it runs through areas in which other accessible green spaces are limited and decreasing. Availability as a quiet and safe place to walk, cycle, picnic and exercise dogs is probably the Canal’s greatest asset, in terms of numbers of people and hours spent along the waterway.

147

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

9.27 Other recreational users include boaters and anglers. Although they are much smaller groups numerically, they are vital to the overall waterway scene, as well as gaining much enjoyment from their chosen activity and providing some income towards maintenance of the Canal.

9.28 National surveys have shown that public appreciation of canals as places to spend time is crucially dependent on those waterways being perceived as ‘living’, in the sense that they are well maintained navigations on which moving boats are seen on a more or less regular basis. There are no current user estimates of number of towpath users specifically for the Basingstoke Canal, but nationally the trend is upward. On the British Waterways system, towpath visits were estimated as 130 million in 1995 with an increase to 268 million in 2006. The Canal Authority assesses that regular users, particularly at the weekends, will travel up to 3 miles to access the Canal for recreational activities such as walking and cycling in particular.

9.29 The level of use has significant implications for the robustness of the towpath which is essentially unmetaled and prone to significant wear and tear through constant use by bicycles. This damage to the surface has implications for those who wish to walk and does on further to prejudice access by people with disabilities. There are therefore a series of significant on-going programmes involving canal towpath upgrades to accommodate additional access pressure created by new development. These programmes comprise part of the Canal’s Authority’s Capital Programme which is reviewed annually. For the year 2010/11 the Canal Authority Capital Programme for repairs and improvements is approximately £203,000.

9.30 Day-to-day management of the Canal is the responsibility of the Basingstoke Canal Authority, whose staff are employed by Hampshire County Council who, along with Surrey County Council, owns the Canal. The budget for the Basingstoke Canal Authority is made up from financial contributions from eight local authorities (including the County Councils) and from income from charges, grants, S106 contributions etc. The contributions are assessed annually under an agreed financial formula. The budget is approved by the Joint Management Committee which has delegated responsibility for managing the Canal.

9.31 The improvements highlighted as needed were:

• Enhancements to recreational towpath and woodland to improve access for pedestrians, cyclists, and people with disabilities.

148

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Hazeley Heath, Hartley Wintney

9.32 Hazeley Heath is one of the largest surviving remnants of lowland heathland, an internationally endangered habitat, in the Thames Basin region of north Hampshire. The extent of heathland on the site has declined in recent times due to encroachment by woodland and scrub. It is generally accepted that active management is required to ensure the continued viability and status of the site, but views have differed as to the best way to achieve this.

9.33 Hazeley Heath is considered to be a local amenity, mainly used by the residents of Hartley Wintney and Mattingley and associated hamlets for walking, horse riding and the enjoyment if nature and openness. This has been borne out by user surveys conducted in recent years in connection with the pattern of use of the Thames Basin Heaths and how this may be affected by additional development in the area.

9.34 The visitor surveys have shown that almost all users originate from the local communities, particularly from Hartley Wintney as this has by far the largest local population. Most users are dog walkers, arriving on foot from Hartley Wintney, who largely remain in the southern part of Hazeley Heath. Horse riding is also popular notwithstanding the lack of bridleways in the surroundings, including use by some of the owners and neighbours. This extends over most of the site to the east of B3011, with more use observed in the southern areas. Hazeley Heaths is well known and used by local naturalists, including birdwatchers. There are infrequent guided walks and visits by school groups. A small lay-by on the B3011 opposite Arrow Lane and small areas beside some of the access tracks are used for parking of visitors arriving by car.

9.35 A Management Plan has been prepared and adopted for Hazeley Heath. The consultation process is preparing the Management Plan suggested that there is little current conflict between the various users of Hazeley Heath, who generally agree that the needs of all users should be met in addition to nature conservation requirements. However, some users feel that horse riding causes disproportionate damage to some of the paths through wetter areas. The site was subject to illegal occupation by travellers in the 1980s, which has led to the provision of earthworks and timber posts to prevent vehicle access from the B3011 and some of the side roads and tracks. The view is that no further major changes are necessary and that any action taken should, therefore, be sympathetic and subtle.

149

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

9.36 Visitors, on the whole, treat Hazeley Heath as an asset to be enjoyed and respected and many of the access problems encountered on other sites are absent. However, there are occasional problems with motorbike scrambling and other unauthorised vehicles, fire starting and fly tipping, which need to be tackled. There is currently no comprehensive formal approach to dealing with these issues and managing access to Hazeley Heath for the benefit of both its users and nature conservation.

9.37 As Hazeley Heath is so accessible, it is the subject of pressure through the demand for recreational access. Not only is it suffering from the current levels of public access (damage to walkways, and erosion of footpaths, etc) but new development will place greater demands on its relatively fragile physical infrastructure. This additional pressure must be mitigated as part of a comprehensive management plan. This is underpinned by the adopted Management Plan. This in turn will increase the capacity of the Heath to accommodate any additional access pressure created by new development.

9.38 The success of the Hazeley Heath Management Plan will depend on funding being available. There are a number of potential sources of funding: • Funding towards the management of Hazeley Heath is already being provided by Natural England through existing Wildlife Enhancement Scheme (WES) agreements. • The Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) has two current funding schemes of interest – (i) Landscape Partnerships, which provides grants of between £250,000 and £2 million for partnerships representing a range of heritage and community interests to tackle the needs of landscapes, whose various elements may be in different ownership; and (i) Heritage Grants offers grants of £50,000 or more to projects (including nature conservation) that conserve and enhance our diverse heritage, encourage more people to be involved in their heritage, or both. • EU Life+ is the follow-on programme from the EU Life Programmes that finished at the end of 2006 and included funding for conservation projects. • Environmental Stewardship is a new agri-environment scheme which provides funding to farmers and other land managers in England who deliver effective environmental management on their land. • The Single Payment Scheme (SPS) may offer a potential avenue for funding for the common, if a joint approach can be agreed between the owners of the common and commoners.

150

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

• Hart District Council as the owner of the southern section of Hazeley Heath already funds dedicated staff and ongoing management initiatives. • Section 106 funds.

9.39 The works identified as needed are: • Access Management and Restoration.

Odiham Common

9.40 Odiham Common falls within the Odiham Common with Bagwell Green and Shaw Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) which was notified under Section 28 of the Wildlife Countryside Act, 1981 in 1992 on account of the many examples of rare flora and fauna.

9.41 In September 2010 the Council adopted a 10 year Management Plan for Odiham Common. The purpose of the plan is to present a series of management aims and actions for Odiham Common which have been agreed through consultation and which meet the aspirations of stakeholders and legislative constraints. The Management Plan recognises that the Common is highly valued for the many qualities it currently exhibits (particularly its tranquillity, wildlife and historic interest) which could be harmed by intrusive intervention. The various consultations that took place during the preparation of the Plan elicited strong responses from local people, with most individual respondents wishing to see no changes take place that would bring about a significant change in the current character of the Common. It is also clear that the Common is changing through processes of natural succession and human use which are altering its character in ways that concern many people and will alter its special qualities. Sensitive management, in many cases matching traditional activities that have taken place for centuries, is needed to maintain the character of the Common that is valued by so many people.

9.42 The consultation responses suggest that radical changes in the way the Common is managed would not be appropriate. Nor would a strategy of non-intervention since that would lead to change by default, would make the Common less accessible to local people and would run contrary to centuries old historic traditions of use and management by commoners and others.

9.43 As the Common is so accessible, it is the subject of pressure through the demand for recreational access. Not only is it suffering from the current

151

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

levels of public access (damage to walkways, and erosion of footpaths etc) but new development will place greater demands on its relatively fragile physical infrastructure. This additional pressure must be mitigated as part of a comprehensive management plan. This is underpinned by the adopted Management Plan. At the heart of it lies access management. It envisages carefully planned additions to the network of paths and tracks, supported by leaflets and on-line information and possibly the revival of a nature trail, will give a range of circular routes to be used by walkers, horseriders and cyclists. Vehicles can impact on the Common and people’s enjoyment of it – off-road motorcycling and car parking concern local people and need to be addressed by measures that remove or localise the problem and involve the community in the approaches that are taken.

9.44 The overall assumption in the Plan is that future changes to the way the Common is looked after should be gradual and incremental and that new practices should be assessed regularly to ensure they are helping to deliver the agreed vision for the Common.

9.45 The Common is mainly used for informal recreation by local people, largely on foot with a small number of users on horseback or cycling. This general analysis is supported through observations of use, views of users collected through previous consultation exercises and the recent collation of stakeholder data (the majority of local residents or people who live in the immediate local area and the greatest proportion of uses/interests mentioned were walking, interest in ecology/wildlife and dog walking).

9.46 Funding towards the management of Odiham Common comes from: • The Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) has two current funding schemes of interest – (i) Landscape Partnerships, which provides grants of between £250,000 and £2 million for partnerships representing a range of heritage and community interests to tackle the needs of landscapes, whose various elements may be in different ownership, and (ii) Heritage Grants offers grants of £50,000 or more to projects (including nature conservation) that conserve and enhance our diverse heritage, encourage more people to be involved in their heritage, or both. • EU Life+ is the follow-on programme from the EU Life Programmes that finished at the end of 2006 and included funding for conservation projects.

152

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

• Environmental Stewardship is a new agri-environment scheme which provides funding to farmers and other land managers in England who deliver effective environmental management on their land. • The Single Payment Scheme (SPS) may offer a potential avenue for funding for the Common, if a joint approach can be agreed between the owners of the Common and the commoners. • Hart District Council as the owner of the Common already funds dedicated staff and ongoing management initiatives. • Section 106 funding.

9.47 The improvements identified for Odiham Common are: • Access Management • Management Plan: projects include mitigation against damage from increased visitor pressure on site infrastructure, and ecology.

Hartley Wintney Commons

9.48 The Hartley Wintney Commons comprise the Central Common with Cricketer’s Green and Causeway Green, and to the south, the Phoenix Green Commons and the area to the west of the A30 known as the Nature Trail Common. The wildlife associated with the Commons is of considerable interest, but could be improved with some management. The veteran oak trees are outstanding, and stands of old hornbeam are unusual in Hampshire. Several local woodland plant species occur including broad-leaved helleborine and Solomon’s seal, and the nationally scarce chamomile is found in the grassland. Many uncommon and local invertebrates including ants, bees and beetles as well as nationally scarce and rare solitary wasps have also been recorded. Several interesting bird species have been recorded, including the red listed spotted flycatcher and amber listed tawny owl and woodcock.

9.49 The Commons are a popular place for visitors with a recent survey calculating that there are over 2500 visits a week with the majority going to the Central Common and the areas between Mitchell Avenue and Dilly Lane. Nearly 60% of visitors are dog walkers, with the other main reasons for visiting being walking, getting exercise and taking children for an outing, and with a number of visitors simply using the Common as a shortcut around the village. Most visitors come on foot from Hartley Wintney and Phoenix Green, visit every day all year round and stay less than an hour, although a small number arrive by vehicle from surrounding villages or further afield. The Commons are extremely important for local people who appreciate their informality and value their naturalness. Some areas are heavily used,

153

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

others much less so. On parts that are covered by a dense growth of trees and scrub, creating glades and clearings will allow visitors to enjoy more of the Commons.

9.50 A Management Plan was adopted in November 2010. At the heart of it lies access management. It envisages carefully planned additions to the network of paths and tracks, supported by leaflets and on-line information and possible the revival of a nature trail, will give a range of circular routes to be used by walkers, horseriders and cyclists. Vehicles can impact on the Commons and people’s enjoyment of them – off-road motorcycling and car parking concern local people and need to be addressed by measures that remove or localise the problem and involve the community in the approaches that are taken. The participation of local people in the future and management of these Commons is a vital element of this plan. Provision of information and collection of opinions through one-to-one contract, meetings, boards, newsletters and web-based material as well as providing opportunities for people to become actively associated with the management of the Commons are essential for their long-term future.

9.51 The accessibility of the Commons results in pressure through the demand for recreational access. Not only is it suffering from the current levels of public access (damage to walkways, and erosion of footpaths etc) but new development will place greater demands on their relatively fragile physical infrastructure. This additional pressure must be mitigated as part of a comprehensive management plan. This is underpinned by an adopted Management Plan.

9.52 Funding towards the management of Hartley Wintney Commons comes from: • Hart District Council as the owner of the southern section of the Commons already funds dedicated staff and ongoing management initiatives. • Section106 funds.

9.53 The work identified for Hartley Wintney Commons: • Project to include mitigation against damage from increased visitor pressure, on site infrastructure, and ecology.

154

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

10.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

10.1 Each assessment for quantity, quality and accessibility of provision within the District has so far been considered in isolation. It is necessary to make a fair assessment of the provision to consider all three assessments together.

10.2 The quantity assessment highlighted that there is a reasonable supply of provision within the District however there is a highlighted need for some further children’s’ play areas and youth provision. The accessibility map corresponded with this need highlighting that further provision across the District would benefit the younger population. It was also identified that further tennis courts and allotments would be needed. Although the previous standard for tennis courts had been met some of these sites were limited/restricted and with the identified need by the Parish and Town Councils it was recommended that the standard was increased to accommodate further provision. Although the provision of allotments is low within the District only Hook and Odiham Parish Councils identified a need for further allotments and as this study was being produced a new scheme came forward within Hook meeting this need.

10.3 The key to improving the provision of open space, sport and recreation within the District appears to lie with improving the quality of existing provision rather than increasing the quantity. The average overall scores showed that the majority of sites were in reasonable quality however this did hide some of the specific problems identified by the parish and town councils. The list of sites within the quality section should be the focus of the improvements in the first instance, however all other sites should be continued to be monitored to note any deterioration which is likely with age. As the population increases these sites are likely to experience increased usage and will therefore over time require quality improvements.

10.4 However there will be exceptions when large housing developments are proposed and on-site provision should be provided due to the impact of a large increase in resident population. Each site should be assessed on a case- by-case basis depending on the location of the development and the provision available in that area. Any on-site provision need should be assessed in terms of the accessibility and quality of existing provision and quantity standards, in discussion with the Council and the relevant town or parish council.

10.5 The next stage will be to take this study forward as part of the overarching Green Infrastructure Strategy for the District, which will also include the

155

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Accessible Natural Greenspace Study and the Biodiversity Action Plan. Together these will form a strategy for protecting and enhancing the greenspaces within our District, including the improvement of links between these sites.

156

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

11.0 APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Parish and Town Council Responses to 2010 Consultation Appendix 2: All sites identified within the District with facilities on site and accessibility level Appendix 3: Accessibility Maps – District Wide

157

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Appendix 1: Parish and Town Council Responses to 2010 Consultation

The scoring system for the quality and value of each site was as follows, (this followed the same approach used in the 2006 PPG17 Assessment consultations).

Quality Score Value Score Relates to the No changes required 1 Refers to the Very well used and highly valued by local 1 range of features value of site to people as a real community asset or facilities on Only minor improvements needed, 2 people and Fairly well used, enhanced its local area 2 side and their undertaken as part of improved biodiversity, and supports wildlife condition maintenance and its cultural There is a clear need for some capital 3 and heritage Poorly used and contributes little to the 3 investment in upgrading value area in which it is located The space of facility should be redesigned 4 The space or facility is an eyesore and 4 serves no useful purpose

158

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Space/Facility How do you rate How do you rate Ownership of site (if What works do you consider necessary to improve the quality of this the value of this known) the site, if any? space/facility? space/facility? Blackwater and Hawley Town Council Hawley Leisure Centre 3 1 Parish Council Accessibility – car park resurfaced (community recreation facility) Hawley Leisure Centre 3 1 Parish Council Drainage – changing rooms (outdoor sports pitches) Hawley Leisure Centre 3 1 Parish Council Artificial (Astro) Surface (outdoor floodlit multi-purpose hard court area) Hawley Green (community 2 1 Parish Council recreation area) Hawley Green (children’s play 2 1 Parish Council area) Hawley Memorial Hall 2 1 Parish Council (community recreation facility) Hawley Meadows (outdoor 3 1 Part Parish Council, Part Car park surface – accessibility nature and recreation area) Blackwater Valley Countryside Partnership Shepherd Meadows (outdoor 2 1 Part Parish Council, Part nature and recreation area) Blackwater Valley Countryside Partnership Blackwater Common (outdoor 2 1 Parish Council nature and recreation area) Hawley Cemetery 2 1 Part Parish Council Part Holy Trinity Church Hawley Bowling Club (bowling 2 1 Hawley Bowling Club green facility) Crondall Parish Council

159

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Farnham Lane Recreation 2 1 Parish Council The addition of showers in the pavilion a possibility – but Ground, Dippenhall Street not considered a high priority by the current main users, Crondall FC. Hard car parking a possibility but not in current plans or a priority Hook Meadows Children’s 3 2 Parish Council Several attractions need deep maintenance (rocking horse) Playground and swings may need replacement in future years. Fence and gates need preventative maintenance, with improvements to surface at these locations to reduce mud-bath. Signs need to be fitted. Hook Meadow, Croft Lane 1 1 Parish Council Note: (including tennis courts) • There is only one tennis court • Site includes a play area for young children (see above) • Site includes a cricket pitch and bowling green • Adjacent to site is a building used for badminton and some indoor sports

The facility is well maintained and regularly used. A highly valued ‘open space’. Requires regular and routine maintenance. No major development work currently planned. All Saints Church Cemetery 2 1 In part owned by Parish Site acceptable and maintained adequately by Parish Council Council. Pathways recently refurbished and need final top covering to complete project. Dogmersfield Parish Council Dogmersfield Cricket Green 2 2 We believe that it is This site appears to be used only be the Cricket Club and owned by the ‘Dower yet its position within the Village is such that it could be a House’ of Church lane more widely used resource. It is set up only for Cricket who has sublet the land and is not used in the winter. It is not available as an

160

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

to Dogmersfield Cricket informal recreation space. Dogmersfield Primary School Club. does not make use of it. The issue is whether the Cricket Club/The Dower House might be willing to make this resource more widely available to the local community – for example as does Hartley Wintney Cricket Club. Tennis Court, next to Cricket 3 3 Although the tennis It is a shame that what appears to be a public asset is in Green court is immediately fact held privately and is hardly ever used. To our behind The White knowledge, it is not currently available for hire. One House, we believe that it wonders whether the Parish Council might be able to is owned by the owner come to some agreement with the freeholder so that the of Wellwaters, also in tennis court could be used by the local community. Chatter Alley All Saints Church Cemetery 2 2 We believe that it is Cemeteries always require some work to be undertaken. owned by the Church of Perhaps the most important aspect from a public access England, but the point of view is the footpath that runs adjacent to the Parochial Church boundary of the Cemetery before traversing an adjoining Council should be field. Some work is required to upkeep this footpath. approached to confirm Dogmersfield Great Park 2 1 We believe that it is The only access is via the established rights of way and (including the smaller section of owned by Dogmersfield permissive paths. These are generally in a good state of Tundry Pond) Park Ltd (or one of its repair and afford good walking in conjunction with the associated companies) Basingstoke Canal. There is no access to the Great Park with some land owned for cycling. by the Four Seasons Hotel. There would seem to be scope for additional rights of way to be established within the Great Park and adjoining land. Pilcot Green South Side 2 2 This area of land was Some minor improvements, such as to the chain fencing. (Adjacent to the Queens Head) originally enclosed and gifted to the Parish by Re-registration as a Village Green. Lord Mildmay and

161

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

subsequently registered as Village Green with the reference VG73

Regrettably this registration was challenged by Hampshire County Council during the late 1960’s and the registration lapsed. It is currently under the ‘stewardship’ of the Parish Council and others and the Queens Head is allowed to use it for the siting of picnic tables for part of the year. There is a small area of land adjacent to VG73 containing some apple trees that is owned by the Queens Head. Basingstoke Canal 3 1 Hampshire and Surrey Regular maintenance to include ensuring that the canal County Councils towpath remains free of vegetation. Four Seasons Hotel Sporting 1 3 Four Seasons Hotel None. Some memberships are available by subscription. Facilities Pilcot Green North Side 4 4 This area of land was This land has been left to grow out of control. It could be (adjacent to the River Hart) originally enclosed and tidied up with winding gravel paths and benches for all to gifted to the Parish by share the beauty of the land and wildlife with minimal

162

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Lord Mildmay and impact on the environment. More wildlife could also be subsequently registered encouraged with the right planting etc. as Village Green with the reference VG73. Chatter Alley Common Land 2 2 This land is registered There are several paths that cross this land and lead to (west side adjacent to the Common Land under the Basingstoke Canal from Chatter Alley. These could be Basingstoke Canal) the reference CL113, made more accessible, thus providing another circular Currently there is no walk and also enabling the public not to have to walk on known owner and thus what can be a dangerous road. the land is under the ‘stewardship’ of Dogmersfield Parish Council, Hart District Council and Hampshire County Council Chatter Alley Common Land 3 3 This land is registered This could be tidied up and a path provided to link to the (east side from Ye Olde Common Land under west side common land. Boathouse to Old Bridge the reference CL113, Cottage and along the north Currently there is no The land opposite the school could also be cleared and side of Chatter Alley between known owner and thus made to look more attractive without detracting from its Acorns and The Lea) the land is under the natural state. ‘stewardship’ of Dogmersfield Parish Council, Hart District Council and Hampshire County Council Elvetham Heath Parish Council Elvetham Heath Community 3 1 Parish Council on 999 New kitchen and some minor reconfiguration. Programme Centre year lease from of maintenance/redecoration. developer

163

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Elvetham Heath Green Play 2 1 Parish Council Replacement of individual pieces of equipment over time Area together with general repairs. Tennis Courts, Elvetham Heath 2 1 Parish Council on 999 Replacement of tennis nets, year lease from developer The Mounts Open Space 1 2 Parish Council General repairs and replacement of individual pieced of (including Play Area) equipment as necessary. Fleet Golf Course 1 1 Private Giffard Lane Play Area 2 2 Parish Council General repairs and replacement of individual pieced of equipment as necessary Nature Reserve 1 2 Hart District Council Nature Reserve Play Area 2 2 Parish Council General repairs and replacement of individual pieced of equipment as necessary Twyford Close Play Area 2 2 Parish Council General repairs and replacement of individual pieced of equipment as necessary Village Green 1 1 Parish Council on 999 year lease from developer Sports Pitches and Pavilion 3 or 4 3 Parish Council on 999 Neither the pitches nor pavilion are used, The pitches year lease from need resurfacing to become playable. Pavilion is unlikely to developer be needed even if the pitches become used. Investment is needed to reconfigure the inside of the building so that it can be put to a better community use. Eversley Parish Council Warbrook Lane Garden Plots – 3 1 Hampshire County Needs improved rabbit/deer fencing Allotments Council Lower Common – Amenity 3 1 Eversley Parish Council Needs informal pathways opened up and maintenance by Greenspace thinning of mature trees. Great A (Village Green) – 3 1 Warbrook House – De Needs informal parking area and further security fencing. Amenity Greenspace Vere Venues Needs an agreed Management Plan

164

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Church Green (Common Land) 2 2 No known owner Needs more levelling work to informal parking area; ditch – Amenity Greenspace to be piped and filled. Eversley Centre (Village Green) 2 2 Eversley Parish Council Needs an upgrade and improved facilities – Amenity Greenspace Chequers Green – Amenity 3 1 Eversley Parish Council Needs further hedge planting; security bollards; tree and Greenspace hedge management Eversley Cross (Village Green) 2 1 Eversley Parish Council - Amenity Greenspace Up Green (Village Green) – 3 3 Eversley Parish Council Needs an agreed Management Plan for the woodland; also Amenity Greenspace ditch and drainage maintenance and upgrading St Neots School Playing Fields – 1 1 St Neots School Artificial Turf Pitch St Mary’s Churchyard - 1 1 Eversley and Bramshill Cemetery P.C.C Eversley Grave Yard - 2 1 Eversley and Bramshill Needs further work to bring hedgerows under control Cemetery P.C.C. and work to retained trees. Eversley Burial Ground - 3 1 Eversley Parish Council Needs (urgent) extension of the Burial Ground through Cemetery land purchase, jointly with Bramshill Parish Council Warbrook House Gardens – 3 1 Warbrook House – De Needs further work required to restore the historic Parks & Formal Garden Vere Venues gardens. Eversley Cricket Ground 1 1 Eversley Cricket Club (Village Green) – Playing Fields Eversley Sports Association 3 1 CEMEX Needs irrigation lake and pumping facilities for cricket Playing Fields pitches and games fields; Needs additional landscaping; Needs additional football facilities – stands, dug-outs etc – to enable team to qualify for higher leagues. St Neots School Playing Fields 1 1 St Neots School Charles Kingsley’s School 1 1 Charles Kingsley’s Playing Fields School Lower Common Play Area 3 1 Eversley Parish Council New Trim Trail project for 8-12 year group currently

165

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

being installed; needs further improved facilities for all abilities and new fencing. Centre Green Play Area (Village 2 1 Eversley Parish Council Need to upgrade facilities Green) Chequers Green Play Area 1 2 Eversley Parish Council Eversley Cross Play Area 1 1 Eversley Parish Council (Village Green) St Neots School – Tennis and 1 1 St Neots School Multi-Courts Frog and Wicket Petanque 2 3 Frog and Wicket Pitch Lower Common – Youth 3 1 Eversley Parish Council Needs climbing and balancing adventure trail for this age Facilities group. Needs informal cycle tracks and pathways. Chequers Green 2 3 Eversley Parish Council Needs invasive weeds eradicated from bark pits; Needs a review of underused equipment and possible replacements. Eversley Village Hall – Indoor 3 1 Eversley Village Hall Sports Facilities Charity Frog and Wicket Bowling Alley 2 2 Frog and Wicket Eversley Sports Association 1 1 Eversley Sports Indoor Cricket Nets Association Ambush paint-balling on 2 1 Corbin Estate – Warren Heath – Action Sports Economic Forestry Sites Eversley Village Hall – Arts 3 2 Eversley Village Hall Needs an update of the stage area and redecorating. New Venue Charity proposal for a history resource centre. St Mary’s Church – historic site 3 1 New proposal for a Community Arts and Technology and building Suite and a museum area at Charles Kingsley’s School. Warbrook House – historic site 1 1 Warbrook House – De and building Vere

166

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Cudbury Clump – historic site 3 3 Corbin Estate - Needs protection and interpretation board erected on Economic Forestry site. Firgrove Manor Lake – Lakes, 3 2 Hartley Wintney Fishing Needs woodland management around lake canals and rivers Club? St Mary’s Hall – Church Annexe 1 1 Eversley and Bramshill – Meeting Hall P.C.C Eversley Village Hall – Meeting 3 1 Eversley Village Hall Needs additional investment in storage to enable multi-use Hall Charity of annexe for play-school and committee room Eversley Sports Association 1 1 Eversley Sports Room Association Bramshill Forests – Motor 1 1 Corbin Estate, FE, Tracks Calthorpe Estate etc Castle Bottom – National 2 1 Hampshire County Needs greater management and scrub removal Nature Reserve Council and FE Thames Basin Heaths Special 3 2 Corbin Estate, FE, Needs investment in long-term management to reverse Protection Area Calthorpe Estate etc decline in ecological value ad increase important habitats. SSSIs 3 2 Corbin Estate, FE, Needs investment in long-term management to reverse Calthorpe Estate etc decline in ecological value ad increase important habitats. Rycroft Stables and Riding 2 1 W Hundley School Horns Farm Stables 2 1 P Blundell Brickhouse Farm Stables 2 1 R Povey Firgrove Farm Stables 2 2 W Jackson Firgrove Manor Stables 2 2 J Wheeler Watmore Farm Stables 1 1 M Hicks Footpaths – Rights of Way 3 1 Various Needs replacement of remaining stiles and kissing gates to improve access for the less able; needs a review of links or additional routes to enable safe, off-road circular walks; needs additional paths in the Blackwater Valley. Bridleways – Rights of Way 2 1 Various Needs investment to improve surfaces and drainage;

167

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

needs additional bridleway along the Blackwater. BOAT – Rights of Way 3 1 Hampshire County Needs undergrowth cut back and investment to improve Council surface and drainage Parish Pathways – Rights of 3 2 Various Needs surface maintenance and improved drainage Way Public Highways – Road Sports 1 1 Various Heath Warren – woods and 1 1 Corbin Estate, forest Calthorpe Estate Warren Heath 1 1 Corbin Estate, Calthorpe Estate Eversley Common 1 1 Forest Enterprise Lower Eversley Copse 3 1 CEMEX Needs registration of the customary public rights of way through the woodland. Ewshot Parish Council Ewshot Recreation Ground 3 1 Parish Council Play Area refurbishment and some equipment renewal (including tennis courts, play needed. area) Tennis Courts, Ewshot 3 3 Parish Council Resurfacing and/or possible conversion to MUGA Tennis Courts, Bushy Lease Private Landowner Not recognised as a public facility. Farm Informal play area at junction of 1 1 Unknown None Church Lane and Broomhill Open MOD land between 1 2 MOD None Ewshot Village and Queen Elizabeth Barracks sites, Known as Ewshot Marsh and formerly known as Ewshot Farm Open MOD land between 1 2 MOD None Beacon Hill Road (B3013) Odiham Road (A287) and

168

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

parish/county boundary Fleet Town Council Basingbourne Recreation 3 3 Fleet Parish Council Repair/replace some playground equipment. Get the Ground (including play area) pavilion up and running for community use. Sports Hall, Court Moor School n/a Calthorpe Park (including tennis 2 2 Fleet Parish Council Work on the access road needs to be maintained. Poor courts) quality football pitches. These cannot be sustained. New sites needed for pitches. Calthorpe Park School n/a (including pitch, sports hall, tennis courts) Hart Leisure Centre n/a The Views (including play area, 2 2 Fleet Parish Council Fleet Town Council’s vision is to turn this site into a skateboard park) formal park where community events can take place. Playground equipment needs replacing and variety to skate park. Oakley Park (including play 2 1 Fleet Parish Council Maintain woodland and wildlife areas. Look into paths for area) easier accessibility. Fir Close Bowling Green n/a Albert Street Bowling Green n/a Pitches Cody Technology Park n/a Tennis Courts Bramshot House n/a Ancells Park Recreation 3 3 Fleet Parish Council Pitch has drainage issues. Play area is being updated and in Ground (including pitch, play the future the use of the pavilion will be addressed. area) Beacon House Garden n/a Dinorban Court Park n/a Courtmoor House Park n/a Fleet Cemetery 2 2 Fleet Parish Council Drainage issues at the corner of the cemetery. Further plots and ashes plots will be needed.

169

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Greywell Parish Council No open space identified other than fields or meadows Hartley Wintney Parish Council Village Hall Allotments 1 1 Parish Council No Mitchells Avenue Recreation 1 1 Parish Council Equipment – trim trail, outdoor gym Ground (including Play Area) Springfield Avenue (including 1 2 Public Amenity Open Adjacent land under threat as being sold off by developer Play Area) Space given to HDC so accessibility may become an issue when estate was built and handed to the Parish Council to maintain and install play equipment Hartley Wintney Golf Club, Not Public open space – Park Corner Road privately owned by golf club so we do not have access to assess quality or value Elvetham Hall Historic Gardens Not Public Open Space – Privately owned part of a hotel so cannot rate Hartley Park Grange Not Public open space – privately owned cannot assess Hartley Wintney Common 3 1 Hart District Council Management Plan being drafted by HDC which lists improvement works. Weir’s Barn Garden Not Public Open Space – Private House The Croft Garden Not Public Open Space – Private House

170

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

St Mary’s Burial Ground 2 1 Parish Council Site needs extending – planning application submitted July – awaiting outcome. New site will need paths, drainage, fencing and grassing (currently a wheat field) exiting site needs pathways improving. West Green Park Not Public Open Space – Private House Heckfield Parish Council Wellington Country Park 1 1 Stratfield Saye Estate None (Including Play Area) Heckfield Cemetery 1 Full Church None Stratefield Saye Park 1 1 Stratefield Saye Estate None Heckfield Place 1 1 Privately owned by Hong Undergoing major £25 million redevelopment and will be Kong based closed until 2012 entrepreneur Highfield Park 1 1 Owned by a plc Hotel, conference and wedding venue Wellington Riding School 1 1 Stratfield Saye Estate Hook Parish Council Hook Recreation Ground (aka 1 1 Parish Council Hartletts Park) (including Play Area, tennis courts, MUGA and Skate Park) Birch Grove Open Space (aka 1 1 Parish Council Wellworth Park) (including Play Area) Play Area, John Morgan Close 1 2 Parish Council Hook Common 2 2 Private Hook Common tennis courts 2 3 Private Hook Bowling Club (including 1 1 Hart District, being Varndell Playarea and kickabout transferred to Parish area) Council

171

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Hook Community Centre 3 1 Parish Council The Parish Council is considering a makeover for the Community Centre Elizabeth Hall 1 1 Parish Council Hook Church 1 1 Church Cemetery 1 1 Parish Council King George V Playing Fields 1 1 Parish Council Anne Pitcher Playarea Holt 1 1 Parish Council Park Dave Deadman Play Area, Holt 1 1 Parish Council Park Bassetts Mead 1 1 Parish Council Long Sutton and Well Parish Council Lord Wandsworth College Unable to comment Unable to comment Lord Wandsworth The facility is available LWC staff, pupils and some villages (including Sports Hall, College by prior agreement. Swimming Pool, Artificial Turf For condition and quality of the facility please address Pitch, Tennis Courts) your survey to the Bursar. Long Sutton Recreation 2 1 Managed by Long Sutton The recreation ground is in good order. The pavilion Ground (including play area) and Well Parish Council. requires constant maintenance and although recently Leased from Lord refurbished inside will require some external repairs in the Wandsworth College near future. The playground equipment is the subject of ongoing expenditure and will require investment in the next 5 years. The PC has listed a fence around the playground as a project for consideration from the developer contribution funding. All Saints Church Unable to comment Unable to comment Unable to comment, your survey should be addressed to the All Saint’s Parochial Church Council Long Sutton Tennis Court 2 1 Managed by Long Sutton This is an excellent facility but has been the subject of Tennis Club, The facility vandalism and will require some investment to the surface is sub-leased from LS&W and fencing within 5 years.

172

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

PC. The PC has a lease with LWC. Footpaths 2 1 Local landowners The footpaths are well used and in reasonable condition. Minor repairs are undertaken as necessary in conjunction with the local land owners. Mattingley Parish Council Mattingley Green 3 3 or 4 Private This is common land CL105 and designated SINC. It is privately owned and the largest part is still retained by the manorial estate. The site is waterlogged, derelict and abandoned swamp with fallen trees. It is a disgrace to the Parish and District. Historically it was a well used Common and is of no benefit as an open space facility. Until recently the area adjacent to the Church was used as a Village Green and now even that is becoming overgrown and an eyesore. Funds should be made available to carry out certain works of drainage and clearance. Hound Green 2 or 3 1 Parish Council This is BG66 and designated SINC (an area of unrestored grassland?). This owned by the Parish Council and purchased from the manorial estate in 1995. It is an area of 4.5 acres approximately with approximately one-third of woodland of mature oaks and a central area. It is cut and maintained by the Parish Council. Chandler’s Green Private This was purchased from the manorial estate and was sold on to a third party and enclosed some time ago. It is not eligible as it is not open to the public. Hazeley Heath 1 1 Private CL100 SSSI/SPA. This is privately owned but is access land. Comments on this are that the Management Plan covers much of the work that is needed to be done on the Heath to get into and keep it in a favourable condition. However there are areas of the Heath which are not covered by the

173

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Management Plan but do need work and maintenance. For example Hazeley Lea which is recent times has fallen and Hazeley community but at the moment much of the site is overgrown and little or no benefit to the community. There are also parts of Hazeley Heath that run down to Hazeley Bottom which are not part of the SSSI and not covered by the Management Plan but do require work and therefore further funding to cover this work. Millennium Wood, Hound 1 1 Woodland Trust This is at Hound Green to the rear of Hound Green Green Close. This is owned by the Woodland Trust and for the benefit of the local community. The site is supposed to be maintained regularly by the Woodland Trust but since they are based in Suffolk little or no work is done on the site. It is of benefit to dog walkers but little else. Again consideration for support funding would be beneficial. Mattingley Church Graveyard This is maintained in a presentable manner and is not an issue at the moment. Odiham Parish Council Odiham Airfield (including 1 1 MOD Sports Hall, Pitches, Tennis Courts) Chamberlain Gardens (Including 1 1 Odiham Parish Council Play Area, Tennis Courts) Bowling Green (located off 1 1 Odiham Parish Council Some history of drainage problems Buryfields) Odiham Recreation Ground 3 1 Odiham Parish Council The play area needs some upgrading and the netball court needs complete repair Sports Hall and Indoor Courts, 1 Robert Mays School North Warnborough 4 3 Odiham Parish Council The Council is planning to create allotments site for

174

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Recreation Ground (including about 20 plots – the modest play area will be removed play area) Play area at Chapel Pond Drive, 1 1 Hart District Council North Warnborough Beacon/Hockey Field off Unused Odiham Parish Council Buryfields – small open area All Saints Church Cemetery The Odiham Cemetery, King 2 1 Odiham Parish Council Street, Odiham Tennis Courts off Buryfields 1 1 Odiham Parish Council Rotherwick Parish Council Tylney Park Private Not a concern of Parish Council Rotherwick Playing Fields 2 2 Parish Council New Children’s play facility. Renovate or renew pavilion. (including tennis courts) Lyde Green ? ? Common land in parish None South Warnborough Parish Council South Warnborough 3 1 Parish Council has long Upgrade of safety surfacing, new equipment as per the list Recreation Ground lease of site from private submitted to Hart. (Some of this will be achieved by landlord recent release of S106 funds). Addition of tennis/multi-court Tennis Courts, Swaines Hills Not known Not known Private Have no idea as this is a private facility not available to the Farm public. St Andrew’s Church Cemetery 1 1 Parish Council None at present Winchfield Parish Council Winchfield Hurst Cricket 3 2 The Cricket field is Ground behind The Barleymow Public House and is understood to be owned by Punch Taverns Winchfield House Gardens Private owner Access to gardens is confined to people attending

175

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

functions at Winchfield House whose private owner has a business providing the venue and catering for weddings, parties, business meetings etc. Winchfield Church and Burial 2 1 Church of England Grounds Winchfield Village Hall 1 1 Charity, Managed by Used for fencing, yoga, dance classes etc Winchfield Village Hall Management Committee

176

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Appendix 2: All sites identified within the District with facilities on site

All of the sites identified by the desk-top study and the consultation with the parish and town councils have been listed over the following pages, set out by the parish boundaries. These have been colour coded dependent upon which of the following categories they fall within as set out in the following table. Where a site provides more than one function these have been listed separately to enable analysis of provision of specific facilities within the District.

Allotments Amenity Greenspaces: informal recreation spaces, mainly in and around housing areas Artificial Turf Pitches Bowling greens Cemeteries Community Centre/Village Hall Grass Pitches: Football pitches, cricket greens Parks and formal gardens Playing fields: including recreation grounds Play areas and play grounds: equipped play areas intended for children up to the age of 12 Tennis and multi-courts: hard surfaced outdoor areas designed for sports such as tennis, netball and 5-a -side football Youth facilities: skateboard parks, outdoor basketball hoops and other informal areas intended primarily for teenagers Indoor sports facilities Accessible natural greenspace: Identified during the study but will form part of the Accessible natural greenspace study

This list takes into account all sites identified some of which fall outside the typology this study is to cover as set out in section 4.00. These have been detailed in the following table as they will inform future work, in particular the accessible natural greenspace work which will form part of the Green Infrastructure evidence base for the Core Strategy.

177

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Site Facilities available Blackwater and Hawley Town Council Boundary Hawley Leisure Centre Community recreation facility. Hawley Leisure Centre Outdoor sports pitches Hawley Leisure Centre Outdoor floodlit multi-purpose hard court area Hawley Green Community recreation area Hawley Green play area Hawley Memorial Hall Community recreation facility Hawley Meadows Outdoor nature and recreation area Shepherd Meadows Outdoor nature and recreation area Blackwater Common Outdoor nature and recreation area Hawley Cemetery Cemetery Hawley Bowling Club Bowling Green Facility Bramshill Parish Council Boundary Bramshill Park Parkland Bramshill Park Tennis Courts Bramshill Plantation Woodland Church Crookham Parish Council Boundary Crookham Junior School Pitches Haig Lines Play Area play area Peter Driver Sports Ground Greyfriars Garden Formal gardens Crondall Parish Council Boundary Farnham Lane Recreation Area Recreation ground Farnham Lane Recreation Area Football pitches, pavilion Hook Meadow Recreation Ground Hook Meadow Children’s play area Hook Meadow Tennis Courts Hook Meadow Cricket pitch Hook Meadow Bowling green Building adjacent to Hook Meadow Badminton, indoor sports All Saints Church Cemetery Cemetery Crookham Village Parish Council Boundary St Nicholas’ School Tennis Courts Zebon Copse Playing Field Playing Field Zebon Copse Playing Field play area Church Crookham Community Centre Community centre Dogmersfield Parish Council Boundary Dogmersfield Cricket Green Cricket Green Tennis Court, next to Cricket Green Tennis Courts All Saints Church Cemetery Cemetery Dogmersfield Great Park (including smaller Historic Parkland, footpaths section of Tundry Pond) Pilcot Green South Side (adjacent to the Informal Green, used for picnic tables at Queens Head public house) adjacent public house Four Seasons Hotel Sporting Facilities Hotel and indoor/outdoor facilities Pilcot Green North Side (Adjacent to the River Informal Green

178

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Hart) Chatter Alley Common Land (west side Common Land adjacent to the Basingstoke Canal Chatter Alley Common Land (east side from Ye Common Land Olde Boathouse to Old Bridge and along the north side of Chatter Alley between Acorns and The Lea) Elvetham Heath Parish Council Boundary Elvetham Heath Community Centre Community Centre Elvetham Heath Green Children’s Play Area Play Area Tennis Courts, Elvetham Heath Tennis Court The Mounts Open Space Recreation Area The Mounts Open Space Play Area Fleet Golf Course Golf Course Giffard Lane Children’s Play Area Play Area Elvetham Heath Local Nature Reserve Local Nature Reserve Elvetham Heath Local Nature Reserve Play Area Twyford Close Children’s Play Area Play Area Village Green Informal open space Sports Pitches and Pavilion Grass Pitches Eversley Parish Council Boundary Warbrook Lane Garden Plots Allotments Lower Common Amenity greenspace Lower Common play area Lower Common Youth facilities Great A Village Green Amenity greenspace Church Green Common Land/amenity greenspace Eversley Centre Village Green Amenity greenspace Eversley Centre Village Green play area Chequers Green Amenity greenspace Chequers Green play area Chequers Green Youth facilities Eversley Cross Village Green Amenity greenspace Eversley Cross Village Green play area Up Green Village Green Amenity greenspace St Neot’s School Artificial Turf Pitches St Neot’s School Playing Fields St Neot’s School Tennis and Multi-Courts St Mary’s Churchyard Cemetery St Mary’s Church Hall – Church Annexe Meeting Hall Eversley Grave Yard Cemetery Eversley Burial ground Cemetery Warbrook House Gardens Park and formal historic gardens Eversley Cricket Ground (Village Green) Cricket pitch Eversley Sports Association Playing Fields Eversley Sports Association Meeting Room Eversley Sports Association Indoor cricket nets Charles Kingsley’s School Playing Fields

179

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Frog and Wicket Petanque Pitch Petanque Pitch Frog and Wicket Bowling Alley Indoor bowling alley Eversley Village Hall Indoor sports facilities Eversley Village Hall Meeting hall Cudbury Clump Historic site Firgrove Manor Lake Lake Bramshill Forest Motor Tracks Warren Heath Wood/forest Warren Heath Paint balling Castle Bottom National Nature Reserve Nature recreation area Eversley Common Wood/forest Lower Eversley Copse Wood/forest Ewshot Parish Council Boundary Ewshot Recreation Ground Recreation ground Ewshot Recreation Ground Play Area Ewshot Recreation Ground Tennis Courts Tennis Courts, Ewshot Tennis Courts Tennis Courts, Bushy Lease Farm Tennis Courts Informal play area at junction of Church Lane Amenity space and Broomhill Open MOD land between Ewshot Village and Open MOD land Queen Elizabeth Barracks site aka Ewshot Marsh Open MOD land between Beacon Hill Road Open MOD land (B3013) Odiham Road (A287( and parish/county boundary) Fleet Town Council Boundary Basingbourne Recreation Ground Recreation Ground Basingbourne Recreation Ground play area Court Moor School Sports Hall Calthorpe Park Recreation area Calthorpe Park Tennis courts Calthorpe Park School Pitches Calthorpe Park School Sports Hall Calthorpe Park School Tennis Courts Hart Leisure Centre Leisure Centre The Views Recreation ground The Views Play Area The Views Youth facilities: Skateboard Park Oakley Park Recreation ground Oakley Park play area Fir Close Bowling Green Bowling Green Albert Street Bowling Green Bowling Green Cody Technology Park Grass Pitches Bramshot House Tennis Courts Ancells Park Recreation Ground Recreation Ground Ancells Park Recreation Ground Grass Pitch Ancells Park Recreation Ground Play Area

180

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Beacon House Garden Gardens Dinorban Court Park Parkland Courtmoor House Park Parkland Fleet Cemetery Cemetery Greywell Parish Council Boundary Greywell Moors Open land Hartley Wintney Parish Council Boundary Village Hill Allotments Allotments Mitchells Avenue Recreation Ground Recreation area Mitchells Avenue Recreation Ground Play Area Springfield Avenue Recreation Area Recreation area Springfield Avenue Recreation Play Area Hartley Wintney Golf Club Golf Club Elvetham Heath Historic Gardens Historic gardens Hartley Park Grange House and Gardens Hartley Wintney Common Open common/amenity space Weir’s Barn Garden House and gardens The Croft garden House and gardens St Mary’s Burial Ground Cemetery West Green Park House and gardens Wellington Country Park Country Park Heckfield Cemetery Cemetery Stratefield Saye Park Parkland Heckfield Place Parkland Highfield Park Parkland Hook Parish Council Boundary Hook Recreation Ground (Hartletts Park) Recreation area Hook Recreation Ground (Hartletts Park) play area Hook Recreation Ground (Hartletts Park) Tennis courts Hook Recreation Ground (Hartletts Park) MUGA Hook Recreation Ground Skate Park Birch Grove Open Space (aka Wellworth Park) Recreation Ground Birch Grove Open Space (aka Wellworth Park) Play area John Morgan Close play area Hook Common Common Land Hook Common Tennis Courts Hook Bowling Club Bowling Green Varndell Play area play area Varndell playing field Kickabout area Hook Community Centre Community centre Elizabeth Hall Community Hall Hook Church Cemetery Hook Cemetery Cemetery King George V Playing fields Recreation area, playing fields Holt Park Recreation area Holt Park – Anne Pitcher Play area play area Holt Park – Dave Deadman Play Area play area Bassetts Mead SINC 181

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Long Sutton and Well Parish Council Boundary Lord Wandsworth College Sports Hall Lords Wandsworth College Swimming Pool Lord Wandsworth College Artificial Turf Pitch Lord Wandsworth College Tennis Courts Long Sutton Recreation Ground Recreation Ground Long Sutton Recreation Ground play area All Saints Church Cemetery Long Sutton Tennis Court Tennis Courts Mattingley Parish Council Boundary Mattingley Green Common Land Hound Green SINC Chandlers Green Hazeley Heath SSSI/SPA Millennium Wood Woodland Mattingley Church Graveyard Cemetery Odiham Parish Council Boundary Odiham Airfield Sports Hall Odiham Airfield Pitches Odiham Airfield Tennis Courts Odiham Cricket Green Cricket green Chamberlain Gardens Recreation area Chamberlain Gardens play area Chamberlain Gardens Tennis courts Bowling Green (located off Buryfields) Bowling Green Odiham Recreation Ground Recreation ground Robert Mays School Sports Hall and Indoor Courts North Warnborough Recreation Ground Recreation ground North Warnborough Recreation Ground play area Park Corner Farm Tennis Courts Bufton Fields, North Warnborough play area Chapel Pond Drive, North Warnborough play area Dunleys Hill, North Warnborough Small planted area with seating Beacon/Hockey Field off Buryfields Small open area All Saints Church Cemetery Warnborough Green Horsedown Common Common Land Rye Common Common Land Rotherwick Parish Council Boundary Tylney Park Parkland Rotherwick Playing Field Playing field Rotherwick Playing Field Tennis courts Lyde Green Amenity Greenspace South Warnborough Parish Council Boundary South Warnborough Recreation Ground Recreation ground South Warnborough Recreation Ground play area?? Tennis Courts, Swaines Hills Farm Tennis Court St Andrew’s Church Cemetery Cemetery 182

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Winchfield Parish Council Boundary Winchfield Hurst Cricket Ground Cricket green Winchfield Church and Burial Ground Cemetery Winchfield Village Hall Village Hall – use for fencing, yoga, dance classes Yateley Town Council Boundary Frogmore Open Space Amenity space Frogmore Open Space Play Area Yateley Country Park Country Park Trilakes Country Park Country Park Darby Green House Tennis Courts Frogmore Leisure Centre Leisure centre St Peter’s Junior School Pitches Yateley County Infants School Pitches Monteagle Open Space Amenity greenspace Monteagle Open Space play area Yateley Green Village green Yateley Green play area Yateley Green Tennis courts Yateley Green Bowling green Yateley Playing Field Playing field Yateley School Complex Pitches Sean Devereux Park Grass Pitches Darby Green Playing Fields Playing fields Cranford Park, Winton Crescent Play Area Hearsey Gardens Recreation Ground Open Space for Churchill Crescent Amenity greenspace Old Wellmore Amenity greenspace Village Way open space Amenity greenspace Yateley Lodge Public Park Parkland Yateley Place Park Parkland St Peters church Cemetery St Swithins Church Cemetery Yateley Cemetery Cemetery

183

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Appendix 3: Accessibility Maps –District Wide

184

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 3: Allotments All Sites (all limited/restricted access)

185

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 4: Amenity Greenspace – All Sites (all unrestricted access)

186

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 5: Artificial Turf Pitches – All Sites (all limited/restricted access)

187

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 6: Bowling Greens – All Sites (all limited/restricted access)

188

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 7: Cemeteries – All Sites (for locational purposes only)

189

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 8: Play Areas and Playgrounds – All Sites (all unrestricted access)

190

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 9: Grass Pitches – All Sites

191

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 10: Grass Pitches – Unrestricted access sites

192

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 11: Formal Parks and Gardens – All Sites

193

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 12: Formal Parks and Gardens – Unrestricted access sites

194

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 13: Playing Fields and Recreation Grounds – All Sites

195

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 14: Playing Fields and Recreation Grounds – Unrestricted access sites

196

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 15: Tennis Courts and Multi- Courts –All Sites

197

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 16: Tennis and Multi Courts – Unrestricted access sites

198

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

Map 17: Youth Facilities – All Sites (all unrestricted access sites)

199

HDC Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment 2012

200