The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER EIGHT: PROPOSED OPEN SPACE STANDARDS FRAMEWORK

Introduction

8.1 This research has involved extensive consultation with a range of relevant organisations, agencies, local authority officers and other stakeholders, which has been reinforced by a detailed literature review examining established practice and current standards in both the United Kingdom and Europe. The culmination of the consultations, interviews and workshops is the recommendation that the open space policy framework is further developed, building upon the current advisory guidelines of PAN65. This chapter summarises the findings of the consultation process and sets out a recommended policy framework for setting open space standards.

8.2 The research has established a clear consensus across a wide range of relevant organisations, agencies, local authority officers and other stakeholders on the need for a further strengthening of open space policy.

The Broad Consensus

8.3 The broad consensus amongst consultees was that the best approach to developing national minimum standards is one that supports and builds upon the current advisory guidelines of PAN65. This approach would require each local authority in Scotland to set open space standards in accordance with a strengthened policy framework defined by the Scottish Executive, which would add further impetus and support to the provision of high quality open space.

8.4 The consultation workshop (workshop number 2) allowed delegates to review and select preferences for designing an open space framework. It was clearly established that any new policy framework should offer flexibility of application and include the following:

• a requirement that all local authorities in Scotland develop an Open Space Strategy with a clear commitment to quality and the protection, provision and management of publicly accessible open space;
• Scottish Planning Policy should set a national Minimum Open Space Standard for new developments;
• local authorities should define locally relevant standards for both new and existing developments in the context of the national standard; and
• a national policy framework should seek to protect the flexibility of delivery and provide the scope for local authority and development partners to capture innovation, promote qualitative improvements, contribute to environmental management.

A Strengthened Policy Framework for Open Space Standards

8.5 It is recommended that Minimum Open Space Standards should be advanced through the publication of a new Scottish Planning Policy ( SPP) and future revision and updating of the Planning Advice Note ( PAN). A strengthened policy framework, including a new vision and minimum standards for open space, would substantially extend the scope and direction of the current NPPG 11, ensuring that the specific issue of open space provision and management is more fully addressed in planning policy. It would also provide a clear statement of ministerial policy, which would guide development plan preparation and be enforceable through development control, both at a national and local level.

National Application

8.6 It is recommended that a new SPP should:

• Set a national vision for open space in Scotland with a clear commitment to work through public, private and voluntary sector partnerships embracing community planning and the development plan process to create open spaces that can positively contribute to sustainable communities, competitive place and promote environmental quality;
• Set a requirement for local authorities to prepare comprehensive audits of all public and private open space, strategies and action plans and that such strategies, once completed, are reviewed regularly normally in parallel with the local plan process and the community planning framework; and
• Set national new-build standards for new residential and commercial development (to include: business / industrial / retail / leisure / other) where the scale of development exceeds defined thresholds. This measure would:
• ensure open space was provided across a broader spectrum of development types, addressing the need for a more sustainable environment within employment and larger retail and leisure centres and extending the contribution of other development sectors to open space; and
• establish a minimum open space provision as a national planning requirement meeting quantitative, qualitative and accessibility guidelines.

Local Application

8.7 The SPP should clearly place a requirement on local authorities to prepare an Open Space Strategy, accompanied by a detailed Action Plan, enforce a new minimum standard of open space provision for new development and define locally appropriate open space standards.

8.8 The advice in PAN65 remains relevant and will provide the major reference for advice and good practice relative to planning and open space both in advance of and following the publication of the new SPP11.

"Where the need for a type of space is broadly the same everywhere, or where the demand for a particular use is difficult to quantify it may be useful to use a standards based approach. However, any standards should be carefully tailored to the circumstances of the area and a single standard will not be suitable for all parts of the country. Very different standards are likely to be required for different functions such as play areas for children and teenagers and informal recreation areas."

Inevitably, an update to PAN 65 would usefully allow new information and new guidance to inform local authorities. PAN 65 recognises the importance of developing standards locally, that reflect local needs and opportunity and that are responsive to local concerns.

Defining a National Minimum Standard for Open Space in New Developments

8.9 In developing a national minimum standard for new build development, it is necessary to establish the potential scope of the application and the level of provision. Consultations have indicated a strong belief that open space provision should extend across a range of development types and not be restricted solely to residential development. This study recommends that open space standards be extended to apply to employment, leisure, retail and other developments. In developing a minimum standard, the following should be considered:

• development types required to provide open space;
• type of open space to be provided within the varied development classes;
• quantum of open space provided.

Development Types Required to Provide Open Space

8.10 National minimum standards for the provision of public open space within new development would form part of the development planning and development control process and therefore should be structured to relate to the nature of development rather than the type of open space. A minimum standard for provision of open space would address new development within the Use Classes Order 1997 and as tabulated below with thresholds set to exempt small single unit and restricted scale developments where the application of open space requirements would be difficult to apply.

* Note: Indicative thresholds have been outlined for information only. The information illustrates a potential model that will require wider consultation. Areas refer to gross floor areas (gfa)

8.11 Although no detailed consultation on the principle or level of thresholds was discussed in the workshops, the application of thresholds has been widely used (The Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999, NPPG17 Maximum Parking Standards) to set an appropriate scale of development to which standards should apply. The objective has been to ensure that small scale development and changes of use, where the scale of provision would not be significant, are exempt.

8.12 The thresholds have been set to capture all major developments within which best practice and a clear need for open space provision exists. In developing the threshold, particular reference has been made to The Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 1999 addressing urban development projects, including shopping centres, sports stadium and multiplex cinemas (refer to Circular 15/1999, Annex A, A18/19, page 42).

8.13 The development types required to provide public open space indicated above, include the major forms of development likely to require on-site provision or that could be reasonably expected to make demands on open space provision. A case could readily be argued, that all development sectors should contribute to open space including financial services (Class 2), Food and Drink (Class 3) Hotels and Hostels (Class 7), Residential Schools/ Colleges (Class 8) and Non-Residential Institutions (Class 10). The reason for not including them at this time was that the number of developments in these classes in the 3-5ha range likely to offer a scale where open space provision was meaningful is more limited and the user need less clear. This position could be reviewed through further consultation.

Range of Potential Open Space to be Provided

8.14 Each of the types of development (Use Classes) noted above has a range of potential user needs, reflecting the nature and use of the site and suggest differing priorities in terms of the provision of open space.

8.15 Open spaces are frequently multi-functional and whilst the PAN65 typology identifies nine categories each category can and frequently will, meet a range of uses (eg. amenity space may provide secondary play spaces, provide natural and semi-natural environments, form a 'pocket-park' and be part of a wider green corridor or connected park network). Tabulated below is an indication of the types of open space considered applicable to the differing types of development.

* Note: Indicative types of open space have been outlined for information only. The information illustrates a potential model that will require wider consultation.

8.16 The type and nature of the contribution to open space and whether this is provided on-site, off-site or through a financial contribution is discussed below. The matrix provides an indication of the varied relationship of use needs and development type. The actual provision would need to be agreed locally within the development control process.

Quantum of Open Space to be Provided within New Build

8.17 The quantum of public open space set within a national minimum standard for new development is just that - a minimum standard. The intent is to establish a consistent and common understanding of the minimum requirement that new development should be required to contribute.

8.18 Contributions may be quantitative or qualitative. Indeed frequently the key issue is one of quality and sustainable long-term management rather than simply quantity. However, within a minimum standard is the need to offer clarity on the level of provision required. It is our view that this is most readily delivered through a simple quantity of provision that sets a level or benchmark that thereafter can be negotiated and agreed locally within the development control process to determine whether this is most effectively delivered by new provision, upgrading of existing provision, enhanced management or other mechanisms.

8.19 Minimum standards that are prescriptive can be inflexible. Minimum standards set as a 'yardstick' to define a basis of contribution, and that allow for local agreement on the detailed means by which such a contribution is best provided, can combine the consistency established by national policy with the flexibility of local delivery. (see following section: Flexibility of Delivery - Sequential Test).

8.20 Much of the informal discussion within the workshops and previously published research on open space has focussed on the various methodologies for establishing provision (supply led/ demand led/ standards led) and the complexity of achieving a properly considered 'fit' between the level of provision relative to need and the respective requirement for quality and quantity. Indeed much of the criticism of an NPFA type standard is its questionable validity in correctly addressing need. Such need is highly variable and requires a proper understanding of existing supply (parks/ natural & semi-natural spaces/ play spaces/ civic space), demand (sports provision / green corridors / play spaces/ functional green-space) and community needs and aspiration. This debate however needs to accept that:

1) Any nationally defined minimum standard will always only offer a broad and inevitably basic threshold above which all development must comply;
2) The standard needs to be regarded as the minimum contribution that development must make towards public open space provision and that the form of contribution can be defined and agreed locally, reflecting local need and opportunity; and
3) That a national minimum standard can only (if it is to facilitate local decision making) set a threshold and to offer simple clarity and applicability, a quantitative area based standard is therefore required.

8.21 The research has not addressed the detailed level of provision that might be appropriate to Scotland other than by reference to existing standards in use in other countries or by local authorities in Scotland and the wider UK. The research has not identified any precedents for the wider application of open space standards to industrial, retail and leisure centres.

8.22 A starting point for the preparation of the quantity of provision was consideration of the National Playing Fields Standard for residential development. The combined level of outdoor sport and children's play space equates to 57m ² open space per household (based on a national average occupancy rate of 2.36 people per household). Research into local authority standards in Scotland and England has established typical open space standards for new residential development range between 40m ² to 60m ² of open space per household. The majority of English local authorities contacted advised that their standard for open space for residential developments was based, or informed by, the NPFA standard.

8.23 In seeking to set a quantitative minimum standard, it is important to remind ourselves of our objective. The intent in setting a minimum standard is to create a readily applicable, flexible and progressive mechanism that drives up standards and secures a minimum level of provision for all communities. Our approach is essentially pragmatic and has, like most local authorities, taken its base from the NPFA standard. Residential development requires the highest level of provision on the basis of need and we have outlined a hierarchy of reducing open space provision, related to different Use Classes and their intensity of use and anticipated need.

* Note: Indicative thresholds have been outlined for information only. The information illustrates a potential model that will require wider consultation.

8.24 The level of provision is indicated within a range to reflect the diversity and nature of development. It may be that a single square metre quantity could be agreed following further consultation on this approach and examination of the research findings. It may also be worthwhile to test whether minimum open space standards should apply to all categories of the Use Class Order (Scotland) 1997 and that the thresholds indicated can secure a broad consensus of support.

Local Authorities and Open Space Strategies

8.25 As mentioned earlier, we recommend that a new SPP should require each local authority to prepare an Open Space Strategy and set open space standards. The questionnaire and interview consultation, as outlined in Chapters 4 and 5, found that there is currently no consistent approach to the preparation of Open Space Strategies. The tables below set out a model for the process of open space provision at a local level, differentiating between the use of locally derived standards for existing open space and the application of a national minimum standard for new development.

Local Authority Open Space Strategies

8.26 Local authority open space strategies should set a clear local vision for open space, referenced back to the national policy framework (currently NPPG11 and PAN65) and updated within the new SPP and PAN. The local authority open space strategy prepared in open consultation within the development plan and community plan consultative process, will establish the arrangements for the provision, conservation, enhancement and management of existing open space resources throughout the local authority area. Strategies should:

• include a detailed methodology establishing the approach to the audit and needs assessment identifying both local need and opportunity of open space provision in existing settlement and in connection with new developments;
• provide detailed information on the development of the Open Space Strategy in terms of local engagement through the community plan and development plan processes and recording consultations with council departments, stakeholder group and the local community throughout the process;
• set out the detailed aims and objectives that underpin the strategy including a detailed Action Plan setting out specific tasks, priorities and targets for a 5-10 year period and the relationship to other relevant strategies (access / biodiversity housing / transportation / health and well being / sustainability); and
• establish a formal target and monitoring framework.

Local Authority Standards

8.27 Whilst the national minimum standard applies only to new developments, local authorities should develop open space standards for both new developments and existing open space. The national minimum standard is intended to be simply a starting point from which local authorities can develop their own more stringent standards. The national minimum standard addresses only the quantity of open space provision and quality and accessibility standards must be addressed at the more appropriate local level.

8.28 The approach for setting standards for existing open space should differ from that for new developments and be developed through local consultation within the Development Plan and/or Community Planning process. Standards for existing open space provision should address quantity, quality and access issues, as set out in PAN65. Local standards for existing open space should be:

• relevant and appropriate to a locality and make the connections between open space audits, strategies, standards and management arrangements;
• a close fit with other national and local agendas such as the Community Plan, Local Housing Strategy, Biodiversity Action Plan ( LBAP), Transport Strategy ( LTS), Core Path Network and Access Strategy, etc.;
• well integrated into the Development Plan and development control process recognising that open space provides an essential part of community infrastructure and that this, in part, is sustained through development and appropriate planning gain mechanisms;
• clear on issues of long-term sustainability requiring developers to prepare Management Statements addressing future maintenance and commitments to after-care and site management;
• able to address the benefits of multi-functional open spaces, which are capable of responding to diverse needs and delivering a diversity of benefits within a single site;
• designed to promote and encourage quality through appropriate consideration of open space within site master planning and the preparation of design statements in accordance with PAN68 to ensure best practice is incorporated into the siting, access and design of facilities along with materials, finishes and site and environmental management;
• clear on accessibility standards that are linked to established local access strategies, core path networks and local transportation planning; and
• set in a manner that recognises the differences in open space characteristics of urban and rural areas and the importance that open space, whether rural or urban, offers connectivity with wider countryside, open space and other environmental networks.

8.29 As a minimum requirement, standards should address the following parts of the PAN65 typology.

Quality and Accessibility of Open Space Provision

8.30 Quality of provision and quality of maintenance and management is of high importance and is a key area for concern and one of the greatest areas for improvement if open space is to meet the needs of communities. Qualitative standards are however difficult to set and in practice even more difficult to deliver and enforce. Quality means creating open spaces fit for purpose and which are sustainable over the long term, requiring open space that is well designed, well built, carefully managed and that can adjust to changing user needs and requirements.

8.31 Achievement of these goals is difficult not least because the importance and understanding of quality is not always a shared or common interest. Participants or stakeholders (owner, user, provider, maintainer, and responsible authority) frequently have differing quality perceptions relating to their respective responsibility, needs and interests. Perceptions of quality also differ over time depending upon the duration of involvement and the allocation of responsibility for maintenance and renewal.

8.32 The research has highlighted the challenge of securing quality and the recognised difficulty of setting quality standards. Addressing quality needs better integration of Open Space Strategies with the planning system and development control process. This is consistent with the emphasis recently associated with urban design and architectural design quality.

8.33 Quality has commercial implications for the development industry and therefore open space standards need to:

1) form part of local open space strategies so that the qualitative requirement for open space and the mechanisms for provision are clearly defined providing a transparency that allows quality to be factored into the commercial evaluation of development values;
2) be approached in terms of raising standards by requiring the preparation of design Statements and encouraging good urban design, offering choice and variety and with the objective of securing high quality open space networks that are safe, welcoming, appealing, distinctive and offer well connected spaces, places and environments.
3) recognise that quality is often (but not always) related to levels of investment. Local authorities should be encouraged to outline costs that equate open space provision and open space maintenance with value and cost. This already exists in a number of local authorities and brings a transparency and clarity to the discussions with developers.

8.34 Greater transparency of the level of open space and costs, linked to a clearly set out methodology for handling the arrangements for its delivery would do much to simplify open space planning and ensure it is addressed like any other part of the infrastructure of new development. It is important that in setting quantitative minimum standards that these can form part of the mechanism that drives forward quality and provides for a reinvestment in open space.

Flexibility of Delivery - A Sequential Test

8.35 Critical to the debate on the application of standards is less the issue of how a standard is derived but rather how it can be applied consistently whilst providing flexibility and yet still deliver on the high level objective of improving the contribution, quality and level of open space provision. Such an approach needs to:

1) Utilise the national minimum standard as the baseline for setting local standards for new development including residential retail, business/commercial and leisure.
2) Identify local needs based on a locally prepared Open Space Strategy, allowing an assessment to be made as to the requirement and contribution of any prospective development to make to either on-site or off-site open space provision and/or the contribution to qualitative improvements and enhanced landscape management.

8.36 Where the quantitative local need is already provided new development makes a financial contribution to address qualitative needs allowing investment in upgrading and long term management of open space resources in the wider local area. This would allow the open space contribution by the development to be provided flexibly to address established local need (quality, quantity or accessibility) and contribute to sustainable management. The developer would be encouraged to address the identified open space contribution through a combination of on-site, off-site, or financial contributions agreed within the Development Control process.

8.37 Flexibility of delivery would be secured by the following:

• all development covered by the National Minimum Standard for Open Space in new developments would be required to provide a range of open space in accordance with the minimum national standard (or locally set open space standards where these exceed national minimum) wherever the Open Space Strategy indicates an open space deficit in either quantity, quality or management.
• the developer could, by agreement with the local authority, make the contribution through a sequential preference model for provision in the following order:
• • provision on site in accordance with established open space standards complying with a national minimum standard;
  • provision off-site in accordance with established open space standards complying with a national minimum standard;
  • financial contribution to meet the need for off-site facilities in the local area;
  • financial contribution to meet the need for off-site quality improvements in the local area;
  • financial contribution to meet the needs for wider open space provision and management.

8.38 Broadly similar flexible delivery models are currently drafted or piloted by a number of local authorities in Scotland including Stirling, Dundee and Glasgow.

Financial Support for Open Space Strategies and Initiatives

8.39 Developing open space strategies, like good quality open space, requires investment and skilled resources. A criticism of NPPG11 and indeed of the ever increasing drive for improvements in service quality is the need to recognise the lag time in restructuring local authority departments and staffing to take forward initiatives. This is always most acute where actions are discretionary rather than clearly defined requirements set out as a statutory responsibility or clearly defined request.

8.40 The questionnaire responses and interviews have highlighted real concerns about resource availability and inter-departmental co-ordination. Underpinning these comments is a recognition of the need to ensure the Scottish Executive, local authorities and partner organisations are working together to simplify, streamline and facilitate the process. Improved guidance and more best practice information have been identified but other mechanisms could also be considered.

8.41 The precedent for further support exists within the CABEspace Open Space Enabling Scheme (operated in England) that supports seconded officers from CABEspace to join local authorities and support the delivery of Open Space Strategies. In a similar manner, Sportscotland gives support to local authorities in preparing Playing Field Strategies and Scottish Natural Heritage has offered limited support for the preparation of audits and Open Space Strategies in partnership with local authorities.

8.42 The preparation of Local Transport Strategies ( LTS) was significantly advanced through the supporting arrangements of the Challenge Fund/Public Transport Fund ( PTF) Bid arrangements that allowed local authorities, who had completed and submitted their strategy to the Scottish Executive, to annually bid for funding for a LTS priority project. Local authorities, members and local communities were provided with a clear incentive to:

• Complete the Strategy
• Put in place an appropriate management structure and resource
• Deliver meaningful demonstration and priority projects
• Promote and publicise their commitment to delivery

8.43 A similar, albeit more modest, Open Spaces Challenge Fund operated for a 5 year period could offer the carrot and a very real incentive to make meaningful advances in open space provision and ensure a series of quality, exemplar strategies and projects are achieved and implemented.

8.44 We believe that an Open Spaces Challenge Fund or some similar arrangement could offer the Scottish Executive a powerful incentive to drive forward delivery and substantially advance and secure improvements to open space planning. The establishment of such a mechanism would demonstrate a very clear commitment from the Scottish Executive to local communities and support the reinforcement of the planning policy and the added responsibility on local authorities to deliver mechanisms to protect, secure and enhance improvements to open space.

8.45 An Open Spaces Challenge Fund would also exemplify the public-private partnership required to deliver better quality public open spaces and places through the combination of a strengthened policy framework securing new monies from both public and private sectors.

« Previous | Contents | Next »