Agenda item

The Parks Services Manager and Parks Development Manager delivered the presentation on the Parks and Green Space Strategy Update. Key points raised included:

?       A new parks and green space strategy was being developed to replace the existing strategy from 2008. Engagement with stakeholders had taken place through workshops and other research and the strategy was at the drafting stage.

?       An overview of the Vision (“A city where everyone benefits from excellent quality parks and green spaces”), Guiding Principles, Priority Themes, and Attributes of a quality park were provided. These had been developed based on stakeholder input.

?       The importance of Parks to the Health and Wellbeing of a population was emphasized.

?       A new quality framework was being proposed.

?       Mapping work was taking place around identifying the relationship between quality of parks and social need, and around assessing land use according to priority.

?       The mapping work would contribute to quality improvement plans that prioritized the greatest needs.

Commission Members commented and raised questions regarding the report. The Director for Management of Place, Parks Services Manager and Parks Development Manager provided responses.

?       It was noted that the information provided was high level and therefore difficult for Members to envision specific applications.

?       A Member queried whether the strategy would provide a basis for the development of new parks, suggesting Temple Quarter as a potential area. Officers stated that the process for developing a new park would be included, but the first principle was to identify deficits through mapping and address. There would be viability tests for development, and where a deficit was identified but new development not possible a second hierarchy providing other resources would be put in place. In the specific example of Temple Quarter another Member suggested that green space would be considered through the Local Plan.

?       It was clarified that there was no intention to go to Consultation on the new strategy based on the existing engagement work that had already taken place. This had consisted of workshops / facilitated sessions on the suggested themes with stakeholders in attendance. The proposals had also been submitted to various relevant forums and committees. Officers emphasised that the work was deliberately being undertaken as part of a suite of other strategies in development (e.g., tree strategy, allotments strategy) so wider information had been gathered from other pieces of work. Members expressed disappointment over the lack of consultation, and identified interest groups (such as the Parks Forum) willingness to be involved.

?       A separate discussion regarding previous funding commitments was held. It was agreed that the discussion was outside of the remit of the Communities Scrutiny Commission.

?       The Green Flag standards was discussed intending that the new strategy will adopt this method as an independent measure of parks quality.

?       Members recommended that the final strategy would need to be definitive about what would and would not happen and why; the information currently provided was not ‘user friendly’ about what actions could be taken by local neighbourhoods around their own parks. Officers clarified that the mapping work would help to clarify some of this with a technical overlaying of portfolios that describe opportunities on the ground. The Green Infrastructure Strategy would likely address local interpretations for specific neighbourhoods. Officers emphasised that the strategy was intended to clarify principles and an approach, not necessarily provide details for every parcel of land.

?       A Member noted that in the previous strategy some amendments to sites were suggested that Councillors knew were likely to be unsuccessful in their aims (e.g., a youth shelter placed in woodland), and suggested that Councillors be consulted before similar amendments be made. Officers stated that that level of granularity would not be part of the new strategy, but instead show where health inequalities would point to high priority areas.

?       A Member suggested clarifying that deprivation is not just economic but can also refer to lack of access. Officers noted this suggestion.

?       Officers clarified that the standards for assessing provision had not fundamentally changed from the previous strategy. It was recommended that this be made explicit. Officers noted this suggestion.

?       A Member noted that reference to children’s play spaces should be included. Officers stated that the Green Flag standard requires these spaces, although this was not made clear. Officers noted the suggestion.

?       Members of the public present for the meeting strongly urged reconsideration of a consultation, and this was supported by Members. One stakeholder who had attended the consultation workshop had found that the process was not conducive to appropriate participation by restricting attendees with poor accessibility. Officers noted the feedback.

The Officers were thanked for the report and presentation.

RESOLVED; That Officers note the comments of the Communities Scrutiny Commission for consideration, including recommendations to i) clarify deprivation of access as well as economic deprivation, ii) clarify that standards for provision would remain unchanged, iii) make references to children’s play areas explicit, and iv) reconsider a consultation process.