Open Space Assessment and Strategy - Borough of Chorley · the Core Strategy and Local Development Framework process and helped to inform: Site allocation processes Supplementary

Open Space Assessment and Strategy

2014 - 2019 Document updated August 2017 Appendix A

CONTENTS 1.0 Background 1

1.1 Introduction

1.2 Why produce an Open Space Strategy? 1.3 Executive summary 10

2.0 Context

2.1 Local Context 2.2 Strategic Context

3.0 Key Issues and Objectives 12

3.1 Vision

3.2 Objectives

4.0 Methodology of open space assessment 13

5.0 Assessment Findings 16 5.1 Full assessment and recommendations of open space study by settlement

/neighbourhood area

SETTLEMENT NEIGHBOURHOOD AREA

Adlington - Southeast Parishes Buckshaw Village - Astley, Euxton and Buckshaw Chorley Town - Chorley Town East/West Clayton Brook/Green - Clayton and Whittle Clayton-le-Woods - Clayton and Whittle Coppull - Southern Parishes Eccleston - Western Parishes Euxton - Astley, Euxton and Buckshaw Whittle-le-Woods - Clayton and Whittle Withnell/Brinscall - Eastern Parishes

Other Villages 5.2 Assessment and Recommendations of Open Space by typology:

Parks and Gardens

Natural and Semi Natural Greenspace

Amenity Greenspace

Provision for children and young people

Allotments

Cemeteries/Churchyards

Civic Space

Green Corridors

5.3 Quality and Value Matrix by site.

6.0 Future Provision 52

6.1 Delivery of the deficiencies and key recommendations

Management and Development

Funding Sources.

How provision is to be made to address deficiencies

7.0 Strategy Review 57 APPENDICES

Appendix A: Maps showing typologies within settlements 58

Appendix B: Total open space provision by ward 68

1

1.0 BACKGROUND

1.1 Introduction This strategy sets out how Chorley Council plans to protect, manage, enhance and secure its

open spaces over the next five years and beyond. It focuses on sites that need to be improved

or sustained to mitigate against negative trends and recommends how any identified

deficiencies should be addressed.

It provides a rationale to help secure external funding for the improvement and additional

provision of open space and facilities, particularly via developer contributions.

1.2 Why produce an Open Space Strategy? The Open Space Strategy focuses on the findings of the Open Space Audit Report prepared by

consultants Knight, Kavanagh and Page (KKP) which was published in May 2012 (Central

Lancashire Open Space Study). This study was important in the contribution /development of

the Core Strategy and Local Development Framework process and helped to inform:

Site allocation processes

Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) on open spaces

The Strategy will:

Analyse and update the findings of the open space study 2012.

Recommend how future open space should be secured.

Identify any deficiencies or surpluses in provision and options for dealing with this now and

in the future.

Consider how the Council, in partnership with the local community and partner agencies,

can ensure total inclusion and improve existing provision for health and wellbeing.

Prioritise future spending on open spaces through action plans.

Provide information to inform the Council to make decisions on the distribution of developer

contributions, prioritising projects and sites according to a range of core criteria.

Ensure that any targets identified through the strategy are delivered in a clear, collaborative

and inclusive manner.

Ensure the Borough of Chorley demonstrates equality of accessibility across both the rural

and urban areas.

Consider how sustainability and Climate Change can be addressed.

An assessment of the quantity, quality and accessibility of open space provision was carried out

in 2012 by consultants and re visited by Chorley Council in 2014 and 2017. This was carried out

in accordance with the companion guide to Planning Policy Guidance Note 17 (PPG17)

‘Assessing Needs and Opportunities’ using the same methodologies for consistency. The study

covers the open space typologies identified in the table below.

As part of the Central Lancashire Development Plan consultants are currently in the process of

being appointed to review and reassess all sites across Chorley, Preston and South Ribble to

write an updated strategy 2020 – 2025 linking into the forthcoming local plan review and

evidence base.

2

PPG17 Typology Primary Purpose

Amenity greenspace Opportunities for informal activities close to home or work or enhancement of the appearance of residential or other areas.

Parks and gardens

Accessible, high quality opportunities for informal recreation and community events. Does not include Country Parks due to their more natural characteristics. They are included in natural and semi-natural greenspaces.

Natural and semi-natural greenspaces

Wildlife conservation, biodiversity and environmental education and awareness. Includes urban woodland and Country Parks.

Allotments Opportunities for those people who wish to do so to grow their own produce as part of the long term promotion of sustainability, health and social inclusion.

Green corridors Walking, cycling or horse riding, whether for leisure purposes or travel and opportunities for wildlife migration.

Cemeteries/churchyards Quiet contemplation and burial of the dead, often linked to the promotion of wildlife conservation and biodiversity

Civic spaces Providing a setting for civic buildings, public demonstrations and community events.

NB: The assessment and improvement strategy for typology ‘Provision for children and young people’ (areas

designed primarily for play and social interaction involving children and young people such as equipped play areas, ball courts, skateboard areas and teenage shelters) can be found in the Play Area Strategy.

This document analyses the assessment of quantity, quality and value and accessibility of the

above typologies on a settlement basis with cross references to neighbourhood areas and sets out the planning policy approach to securing future provision and how to make improvements to health and wellbeing of residents within Chorley Borough. The study focuses on the settlement hierarchy within the Core Strategy. It assesses open space provision within the following locations:

Key Service Centre – Chorley Town.

Urban Local Service Centre’s – Adlington, Clayton Brook/Green, Clayton-le-Woods, Coppull, Euxton and Whittle-le-Woods.

Rural Local Service Centre’s – Brinscall/Withnell and Eccleston. In accordance with national guidance a size threshold of 0.2 hectares was applied to amenity

greenspaces and natural/semi-natural greenspaces as it is considered that sites below this size have less recreational value to residents. Only sites identified as being of significance below this threshold were included. The Study recommends that all sites below the threshold and not included in the Study continue to be protected as they provide valuable visual amenity but they will not be included in the quantity and accessibility standards.

Public footpath networks were also not assessed in the original study but have been highlighted

going forward.

3

1.3 Executive Summary

General Summary

In total there are 235 sites identified in Chorley as open space provision. This is an equivalent of over 850 hectares across the area.

Most typologies are set as having an accessibility standard of 10 minute walk time. The typologies of allotments, parks and gardens and natural and semi-natural greenspace also have a drive time catchment applied.

The majority of typologies are perceived as having a good level of availability, with the exception of allotments. In particular.

Nearly two thirds of all open spaces score high for quality. More natural and semi-natural sites score low for quality compared to any other typology. This is due to sites of this type being outside of the typical open space classifications (i.e. woodland buffer zones). General maintenance of open spaces is considered to be of a good standard.

The majority of all open spaces are assessed as being of high value. Reflecting the importance of provision; nearly all allotments, cemeteries, parks and provision for children and young people score high for value. All civic spaces are rated as high value. In addition, more amenity greenspace and natural and semi-natural sites are viewed as high for value.

A number of parish councils identify demand for new or improved open spaces.

Summary Table

Typology Number Size Standard ha/1000

population

Quality High/Low

Value High/Low

New provision needed to

meet standard by

2026

Parks and Gardens 16 200.442 1.91 13/3 16/0 17.760

Natural/Semi-natural Greenspace

36 492.547 4.64 32/4 36 /0 41.860

Amenity Greenspace 129 84.051 0.73 112/17 128/1 4.125

Allotments 16 8.609 0.07 16/0 16/0 0.685

Cemeteries/Churchyards 19 44.491 - 18/1 19/0 -

Green Corridors 16 30.577 - 15/1 15/1 -

Civic Space 3 0.978 - 3/0 3/0 -

TOTALS 235 861.695 209/28 233/2 64.430

Identified deficiencies

New allotment provision should be sought at a minimum size of 1.6 hectares in the areas

identified with deficiencies – Adlington, Croston, Euxton and Whittle-le-Woods. Seek to address lack of amenity greenspace provision identified in Eccleston. Explore potential to formalise sites of a different typology in Whittle-le-Woods to address lack

of parks provision. For example, Carr Brook Linear Park (green corridor) or Meadow Lane (amenity greenspace) could be improved to meet the identified deficiency.

4

Summary of the recommendations and key actions of open space study by settlement

Key: √ means there is a deficit of open space

X means there is adequate or surplus open space

ADLINGTON / (SOUTHEAST PARISHES)

BUCKSHAW VILLAGE / (ASTLEY, EUXTON AND BUCKSHAW)

Key Actions

Protect all existing open spaces in Adlington.

Deliver the proposed extension to Adlington cemetery.

Deliver the allocated allotment site at Harrison Road

Summary

Typology Deficit in quantity? Deficit in

accessibility?

Amenity greenspace √ √

Parks and gardens √ √ Natural/semi-natural greenspace √ √ Allotments √ √ Green corridors N/A N/A

Cemeteries/churchyards N/A N/A

Civic spaces N/A N/A

Key Actions

Protect all existing open spaces in Buckshaw Village.

Summary


accessibility?

Amenity greenspace x x




5

CHORLEY TOWN / (CHORLEY TOWN WEST AND CHORLEY TOWN EAST)

CLAYTON LE WOODS / (CLAYTON AND WHITTLE)

Summary


accessibility?


Parks and gardens √ √ Natural/semi-natural greenspace √ √ Allotments x √ Green corridors N/A N/A



Key Actions Protect all existing open spaces in Chorley Town.

Summary


accessibility?


Parks and gardens √ √ Natural/semi-natural greenspace x x Allotments √ √ Green corridors N/A N/A



Key Actions Protect all existing open spaces in Clayton-le-Woods.

6

CLAYTON BROOK/GREEN / (CLAYTON AND WHITTLE)

COPPULL / (SOUTHERN PARISHES)

Key Actions Protect all existing open spaces in Clayton Brook/Green.

Summary


accessibility?


Parks and gardens √ √ Natural/semi-natural greenspace √ x Allotments √ √ Green corridors N/A N/A



Summary


accessibility?

Amenity greenspace √ x

Parks and gardens √ √ Natural/semi-natural greenspace √ x Allotments √ √ Green corridors N/A N/A



Key Actions Protect all existing open spaces in Coppull.

7

ECCLESTON

EUXTON

Summary


accessibility?


Parks and gardens √ x Natural/semi-natural greenspace √ √ Allotments √ √ Green corridors N/A N/A



Key Actions Protect all existing open spaces in Eccleston.

Key Actions Protect all existing open spaces in Euxton.

Deliver the new site for allotments at Sylvester’s Farm.

Summary


accessibility?


Parks and gardens √ √ Natural/semi-natural greenspace x x Allotments √ √ Green corridors N/A N/A



8

WHITTLE-LE-WOODS (CLAYTON AND WHITTLE)

WITHNELL AND BRINSCALL (EASTERN PARISHES)

Summary


accessibility?





Key Actions Protect all existing open spaces in Whittle-le-Woods.

Summary


accessibility?


Parks and gardens √ x Natural/semi-natural greenspace √ x Allotments x x Green corridors N/A N/A



Key Actions Protect all existing open spaces in Withnell/Brinscall.

9

OTHER VILLAGES

The table below identifies whether there are any deficiencies in quantity in the other defined rural villages in the Borough.

Village

Deficit in quantity?

Amenity greenspace

Parks and gardens

Natural and semi-natural

Allotments

Abbey Village √ √ √ x

Bretherton x √ √ √ Brindle √ √ x √ Brindle - Gregson Lane

√ √ √ √

Charnock Richard √ √ √ √ Croston x √ √ √ Higher Wheelton √ √ √ √ Hoghton √ √ √ √ Hoghton Gib Lane √ √ √ √ Mawdesley √ √ √ √

Wheelton √ √ √ x

The table below identifies whether there are any deficiencies in accessibility in the other defined rural villages in the Borough.

Village

All of settlement within accessibility standard?

Amenity greenspace

Parks and gardens


Allotments

Abbey Village √ √ x √ Bretherton √ √ x √ Brindle x √ x √ Brindle - Gregson Lane

x √

x √

Charnock Richard x √ √ √ Croston √ √ x √ Higher Wheelton x √ √ √ Hoghton x √ x √ Hoghton Gib Lane √ √ x √ Mawdesley √ √ x x

Wheelton √ √ x √

Key Actions Protect all existing open spaces in other Villages.

Deliver the new site for allotments at Land East of Station Road, Croston.

10

2.0 CONTEXT 2.1 Local Context Chorley is a predominantly rural area, with approximately two thirds of the Borough being open

space and countryside. This defines the Borough’s character and the protection of open space

from future encroachment is important for all residents of Chorley. Chorley has a population of

109,100 (2012 estimate) who have access to 229 sites classed as open space, covering over

850 hectares. Open spaces can vary from a doorstep green, to a town park, allotments, nature

reserve or large playing field. Much of the open space is owned and maintained by Chorley

Council but residents also have permitted use of a range of privately owned spaces, such as

school playing fields and private sports grounds.

Chorley is identified as a growth area in Lancashire with an estimated 6,000 dwellings to be built

by 2026 with a population expected to rise to between 114,200-118,000. New open spaces will

be created as part of this development.

In general, maintenance of greenspace in Chorley is regarded as being good or excellent quality by residents. Examples of high quality sites are Yarrow Valley Country Park (322 hectares), Astley Park (40 hectares) and Coronation Recreation Ground (1.78 hectares). Parks and open spaces also contribute to our sense of civic pride and provide areas for communities to meet, play and hold a wide range of events. The quality of our parks and open spaces is reflected by the award of Green Flag accreditation for five of our sites; Astley Park, Withnell Local Nature Reserve, Yarrow Valley Country Park and Coronation Recreation Ground and Tatton Recreation Ground.

Parks and open spaces are increasingly recognised as a vital component of successful towns,

cities and villages. Research shows that parks and open spaces are some of the most widely

used facilities provided by local authorities. Urban and semi-rural environments in Chorley offer

a diverse range of open space opportunities, along with the close proximity to beautiful

countryside, the Leeds Liverpool Canal and 317 miles of public rights of way. These

opportunities can help contribute to the health and wellbeing of residents, provide visual and

aesthetic quality, opportunities for formal and informal recreation, contact with wild-space,

multiple environmental benefits and a safe refuge for wildlife and natural habitats.

Chorley was granted membership of the UK Healthy Cities Network in 2013. It is well

documented that there are strong links between health, well-being and open space. Natural

open space and green space demonstrate economic, social, environmental and health benefits

within society.

Studies have shown open space provision helps cool the environment and lowers the impact of climate change this is a result from shade from trees and evapo-transpiration from areas of grassland. The need to protect and increase the amount of open space globally has been heightened through climate change as we increasingly have to deal with hotter summers and wetter winters. Open spaces and green infrastructure have an impact on mitigating against surface and storm water runoff and are a vital component of flood mitigation.

11

2.2 Strategic context

The following key documents are relevant to the Chorley context.

National

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG)

NI 199 – national indicator for play

Play Strategy for England (2008)

Regional

Central Lancashire Core Strategy

Strategic Framework for play in Lancashire – LCC, 2010

Central Lancashire PPG17 Open Space Study - May 2012

Local

Chorley Council Corporate and Strategic Priorities

A Sustainable Community Strategy for Chorley (2007 – 2025)

Chorley Health Profile 2012

Chorley Community Safety Partnership

Neighbourhood Plans

Chorley Council’s Vision

The Corporate Strategy vision is “An ambitions Council that achieves more by listening

to the whole community and exceeding their needs.”

Key Themes

To have clean, safe and healthy communities.

High quality play areas, parks and open spaces.

A wide range of quality recreational activities.

To involve residents in improving their local area and equality of access for all.

Easy access to high quality public services.

All residents are able to take an active part in their community.

Residents who take pride in where they live and their achievements.

Measures and targets

% of people satisfied with parks and open spaces. Target 75%.

% of people satisfied with their neighbourhood as a place to live. Target 85%.

12

3.0 KEY ISSUES AND OBJECTIVES 3.1 Vision To create and manage a diverse network of quality, sustainable and accessible open spaces to

serve the needs and aspirations of the residents of Chorley.

3.2 Objectives

To consult with the public, local groups and organisations to implement the Open Space

Action Plans and priorities for all 8 Neighbourhood Areas/Settlements.

To protect and allocate open spaces where possible in the Local Plan.

To increase user satisfaction in our parks and open spaces over the next 5 years, as measured by a biannual residents open space survey.

To invest annually to improve open spaces through developer contributions, grants and

capital works.

To retain 4 Green Flag parks and open spaces over the next 5 years.

To increase the amount of allotment sites across the Borough focusing on the areas with

identified deficiencies by 1.6 hectares before the end of 2019.

Focus on identified deficiencies - particularly around quality, quantity and

accessibility – and improve identified open spaces as per action plans.

To increase community involvement in open space management by supporting at least one new group or individual per year over the next 5 years

13

4.0 METHODOLOGY OF OPEN SPACE ASSESSMENT

In total 235 open spaces have been identified, plotted on GIS and assessed to evaluate quality

and value. Each open space is classified based in its primary open space purpose, so that each

type of open space is only counted once.

Quality and value are fundamentally different and can be unrelated. For example, a high quality

space may be in an inaccessible location and, thus, be of little value; while a rundown (poor

quality) space may be the only one in an area and thus be immensely valuable. As a result

quality and value are treated separately in terms of scoring.

This will also allow application of a high and low quality/value matrix to further help determine

prioritisation of investment and to identify sites that may be surplus to a particular open space

typology.

Quantity Standards The Open Space Study recommends quantity standards for the provision of different types of open space per 1,000 population. These standards have been calculated taking into account the current provision, current population, any identified deficiencies and the estimated population in 2026 (the end date of the Core Strategy and Local Plan).

Typology Recommended Standard (ha/1000

population)

Amenity greenspace 0.73

Parks and gardens 1.91

Natural and semi-natural 4.64

Allotments 0.07

Green corridors -

Cemeteries/churchyards -

Civic spaces -

No quantity standards are set for green corridors, churchyards/cemeteries or civic spaces. The

Open Space Study states that it is not appropriate to set provision standards for green corridors

in terms of quantity because of their linear nature and the demand for cemeteries/churchyards is

determined by demand for burial space. Civic spaces are normally provided on an opportunistic

and urban design led basis therefore no quantity standard is set.

Quality Assessment

Data collated from site visits is based upon those derived from the Green Flag Award scheme (a

national standard for parks and green spaces in England and Wales, operated Tidy Britain). This

is utilised to calculate a quality score for each site visited.

The quality criteria used for the open space assessments carried out are summarised in the

following table.

14

Quality criteria for open space site visit (score)

Physical access, e.g. public transport links, directional signposts, Personal security, e.g. site is overlooked, natural surveillance Access, e.g. appropriate minimum entrance widths Parking, e.g. availability, specific, disabled parking Information signage, e.g. presence of up to date site information, notice boards Equipment and facilities, e.g. assessment of both adequacy and maintenance of provision such

as seats, benches, bins, toilets Location value, e.g. proximity of housing, other greenspace Site problems, e.g. presence of vandalism, graffiti Healthy, safe and secure, e.g. fencing, gates, staff on site Maintenance and cleanliness, e.g. condition of general landscape & features Groups that the site meets the needs of, e.g. elderly, young people Site potential

Value Assessment

Using data calculated from the site visits and desk based research a value score for each site is

identified. Value is defined in PPG17 in relation to the following three issues:

Context of the site i.e. its accessibility, scarcity value and historic value. Level and type of use. The wider benefits it generates for people, biodiversity and the wider environment. The value criteria set is derived from PPG17. It is summarised below:

Value criteria for open space site visits (score)

Level of use (observations only), e.g. evidence of different user types (e.g. dog walkers, joggers, children) throughout day, located near school and/or community facility

Context of site in relation to other open spaces Structural and landscape benefits, e.g. well located, high quality defining the identity and

character of the area Ecological benefits, e.g. supports/promotes biodiversity & wildlife habitats Educational benefits, e.g. provides learning opportunities on nature/historic landscapes, people &

features Social inclusion and health benefits, e.g. promotes civic pride, community ownership and a sense

of belonging; helping to promote well-being Cultural and heritage benefits, e.g. historic elements/links (e.g. listed building, statues) and high

profile symbols of local area Amenity benefits and a sense of place, e.g. attractive places that are safe and well maintained;

helping to create specific neighbourhoods and landmarks Economic benefits, e.g. enhances property values, promotes economic activity and attracts

people from near and far

Value - non site visit criteria (score)

Designated site such as LNR or SSSI Educational programme in place Historic site Listed building or historical monument on site Registered 'friends of group' to the site

15

Quality and Value Scores A threshold was applied to the results to identify whether the site is of high or low quality/value. Green indicates high quality/value (above 40% and 20% respectively), red indicates low quality/value (below 40% and 20% respectively). The Open Space Study recommends what action to take based on the quality and value ratings of a site as follows:

High quality/High value Site should be protected. High quality/Low value Preferred policy approach should be to enhance its value.

If this is not possible the next best policy approach is to consider whether it might be of high value if converted to a different type of open space. If this is also impossible, only then is it acceptable to consider a change of use.

Low quality/High value Preferred policy approach should be to protect site and enhance its quality.

If there is a surplus of sites within that typology, and the site is not needed to remedy a deficiency in another typology, disposal of the site with the lowest value should be considered.

Low quality/Low value If there is an identified shortfall, the policy approach should be to enhance its

quality, provided it is also possible to enhance its value. If there is a surplus of sites within that typology, changing the site to another typology should be considered. If there is no shortfall in other typologies, the open space may be surplus to requirements and a change of use should be considered.

Accessibility Assessment

The Open Space Study sets accessibility standards for the different typologies of open space in order to identify areas that are not currently served by existing facilities. They are based on distances residents would be willing to travel to access different types of open spaces. The table below identifies the accessibility standards for each typology. It must be noted that accessibility must be looked at on a site by site basis, for example if access to a site means crossing busy roads, railways or waterbodies it may be more appropriate to provide sites on both sides of these transport links to avoid unnecessary threats to site users.

Typology Accessibility Standard

Amenity greenspace 10 minute walk time (800m)

Parks and gardens 12 minute walk time (1000m)

Natural and semi-natural 10 minute walk time (800m)

Allotments 10 minute walk time (800m) 10 minute drive time

Green corridors No standard set.

Cemeteries/churchyards No standard set.

Civic spaces No standard set.

No accessibility standards are set for green corridors, churchyards/cemeteries or civic spaces. This is because it is difficult to assess green corridors against catchment areas due to their linear nature and usage. Provision of cemeteries/churchyards should be determined by demand for burial space therefore it is not appropriate to set an accessibility standard. The companion guide to PPG17 states that there is no realistic requirement to set catchments for civic spaces as the provision will not be appropriate in every environment and cannot be easily influenced through planning policy.

16

5.0 ASSESSMENT FINDINGS

5.1 Full assessment and recommendations of open space study by settlement /neighbourhood area

ADLINGTON / (SOUTHEAST PARISHES)

Quantity Assessment

The table below shows the recommended provision of each typology in Adlington and the hectares that will be needed to meet the recommended quantity standard. This is then compared to the current provision to identify whether there is a surplus or deficit in provision (green indicates surplus, red indicates deficit).

Typology

Recommended Standard (ha/1000

population)

Recommended Provision up to

2026 (ha)

Current Provision (ha)

Projected Surplus/ Deficit

by 2026 (ha)

Amenity greenspace 0.73 3.967 2.245 -1.722

Parks and gardens 1.91 10.381 0.112 -10.269

Natural and semi-natural 4.64 25.218 0.625 -24.593

Allotments 0.07 0.380 0 -0.380

Green corridors - - 0.885 -

Cemeteries/churchyards - - 3.106 -

Civic spaces - - 0 -

As can be seen from the table above, there is a deficit in provision of all typologies in Adlington.

Quality and Value Assessment The qualitative and value rating of all open spaces in Adlington is set out in the table below.

KKP ref

Site name PPG17 Typology Size (ha)

Quality rating

Value rating

1298 Rear of Chester Place/ Croston Avenue Amenity greenspace 0.275

1510 Waterford Close Playground Amenity greenspace 0.088 3

1831 Adjacent Fairview Community Centre Amenity greenspace 0.722 3

1967 Jubilee Fields, Station Road Amenity greenspace 0.660 3

1968 Rear of Chapel Street/ Park Road Amenity greenspace 0.146

2013 Adjacent Fairview Drive Amenity greenspace 0.157

2014 Adjacent Meadow View Amenity greenspace 0.187

1702 St Joseph’s Church, Bolton Road Cemeteries/churchyards 0.279

1716 St Paul's Church, Railway Road Cemeteries/churchyards 1.209

1717 Adlington Cemetery, Chapel Street Cemeteries/churchyards 1.618

2012 Rear of Fairview Drive Green Corridor 0.885

1852 Rear of Outterside Street Natural/semi-natural greenspace

0.625

1744 War Memorial Garden, Railway Road Parks and Gardens 0.073 3 3

2018 Leonard Fairclough Memorial Garden, Chapel Street Parks and Gardens 0.039

17


The table below identifies the accessibility standards for each typology and whether there are any deficiencies in provision in Adlington.

Typology Accessibility Standard Deficiencies?

Amenity greenspace 10 minute walk time (800m) A small area to the east of the settlement is not within 10 minutes’ walk of an amenity greenspace.


An area to the north of the settlement and an area to the south west of the settlement are not within 10 minutes’ walk of a park or garden.


The northern half of the settlement is not within 10 minutes’ walk of a natural/semi-natural greenspace.


None of the settlement is within 10 minutes’ walk of an allotment. All of the settlement is within 10 minutes’ drive time of an allotment.

Green corridors No standard set. N/A

Cemeteries/churchyards No standard set. N/A

Civic spaces No standard set. N/A

The table above shows that most residents within Adlington are within the accessibility standards for amenity greenspace and parks and gardens. Deficiencies are identified in relation to access to natural/semi-natural greenspaces and allotments as there are currently none within

the settlement.

18

BUCKSHAW VILLAGE / (ASTLEY, EUXTON AND BUCKSHAW) Quantity Assessment

The table below shows the recommended provision of each typology in Buckshaw Village and the hectares that will be needed to meet the recommended quantity standard. This is then compared to the current provision to identify whether there is a surplus or deficit in provision (green indicates surplus, red indicates deficit).

Typology


population)


2026 (ha)



by 2026 (ha)

Amenity greenspace 0.73 1.897 3.012 +1.115

Parks and gardens 1.91 4.964 0 -4.964

Natural and semi-natural 4.64 12.059 0 -12.059

Allotments 0.07 0.182 0 -0.182


Cemeteries/churchyards - - 0 -


As can be seen from the table above, there is a surplus of provision of amenity greenspace and a deficit in provision of all other typologies in Buckshaw Village.

Quality and Value Assessment

The qualitative and value rating of all open spaces in Buckshaw Village is set out in the table below.

KKP ref


Quality rating

Value rating

1963 Guernsey Avenue Amenity greenspace 0.663 3 3

1971 Rear of Community Centre, Unity Place Amenity greenspace 1.038 3

2007 Maltby Square Amenity greenspace 0.579

2009 Shannon Close Amenity greenspace 0.732

1965 Between Perthshire Grove/Grenadier Walk Green corridors 0.426

1966 Between Guernsey Avenue/ Buckinghamshire Place Green corridors 0.209

1972 Liverpool Walk Green corridors 0.729

2008 Between Unity Place/Maltby Square Green corridors 0.557

Consultants to check what new open spaces have been created since study was completed and include new provision in strategy 2020 - 2015.

19


The table below identifies the accessibility standards for each typology and whether there are any deficiencies in provision in Buckshaw Village.


Amenity greenspace 10 minute walk time (800m) All of the settlement is within 10 minutes’ walk of an amenity greenspace.


None of the settlement is within 12 minutes’ walk of a park or garden.


Only areas to the north and west of the settlement are within 10 minutes’ walk of a natural/semi-natural greenspace.


None of the settlement is within 10 minutes’ walk of an allotment. All of the settlement is within 10 minutes’ drive of an allotment.




The table above shows that all residents within Buckshaw Village are within the accessibility standard for amenity greenspace. Deficiencies are identified in relation to walking time to parks and gardens, natural and semi-natural green spaces and allotments.

20

CHORLEY TOWN / (CHORLEY TOWN WEST AND CHORLEY TOWN EAST)

Quantity Assessment

The table below shows the recommended provision of each typology in Chorley and the hectares that will be needed to meet the recommended quantity standard. This is then compared to the current provision to identify whether there is a surplus or deficit in provision (green indicates surplus, red indicates deficit).

Typology


population)


2026 (ha)



by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 2.389 3.633 +1.244



Civic spaces - - 0.978 -

As can be seen from the table above, there is a significant surplus of provision of amenity greenspace and a small surplus of provision of allotments but a deficit in provision of all other typologies in Chorley.


The qualitative and value rating of all open spaces in Chorley is set out in the table below.

KKP ref


Quality rating

Value rating

1326.2 Rangletts Allotments Allotments 0.490

1640 Allotments off Crosse Hall Lane Allotments 1.023

1642 Allotments off Dunscar Drive Allotments 1.074

1643 Hallwood Road/ Moor Road Allotments Allotments 0.277

1645 Sandringham Road Allotments Allotments 0.727

1646 Allotments rear of Worthy Street Allotments 0.042

1314 Coronation Recreation Ground, Devonshire Road Amenity greenspace 1.617

1315 Between 6 and 8 Dorking Road, Great Knowley Amenity greenspace 0.341

1316 Opposite 155 Draperfield, Eaves Green Amenity greenspace 0.085

1326 Rangletts Recreation Ground, Brindle Street Amenity greenspace 1.631

1330 Tatton Recreation Ground Amenity greenspace 1.498

1436 Adjacent 94 Deerfold Amenity greenspace 0.345

1437 Adjacent Buckshaw Primary School, Chancery Road Amenity greenspace 0.661

1439 Adjacent Derian House, Chancery Road Amenity greenspace 2.593

1459 Adjacent Cottage Fields Amenity greenspace 0.737

1520 Adjacent 26 and 36 Redwood Drive Amenity greenspace 0.208

1521 Adjacent 77 Redwood Drive Amenity greenspace 0.720

1528 Rear of Amber Drive Amenity greenspace 0.202

1532 Opposite 26-29 The Bowers Amenity greenspace 0.031

1540 Between Chancery Road/ Hallgate Amenity greenspace 0.295

21

KKP ref


Quality rating

Value rating

1542 Between Heather Close and Eaves Lane Amenity greenspace 0.286

1543 Adjacent 57 Cowling Brow/ Rear of Ridge Road Amenity greenspace 0.845

1545 Fell View Park, Cowling Brow Amenity greenspace 3.408

1546 Mayflower Gardens, Eaves Green Amenity greenspace 0.252

1547 Rear of Fir Tree Close, Eaves Green Amenity greenspace 1.496

1549 Between Lower Burgh Way/ Draperfield, Eaves

Green Amenity greenspace 0.636

1550 Adjacent Lower Burgh Way, Eaves Green Amenity greenspace 0.681

1554 Adjacent Weldbank House, Weldbank Lane Amenity greenspace 0.314

1556 Clematis Close Play Area, Off Euxton Lane Amenity greenspace 0.095

1558 Playground rear of 36 Foxcote Amenity greenspace 0.421

1678 Adjacent 53 Broadfields Amenity greenspace 0.269

1687 Adjacent Chancery Road/ Wymundsley/ The

Farthings Amenity greenspace 7.379

1688 Adjacent Chancery Road Amenity greenspace 1.180

1718 Adjacent Millennium Way/ Preston Temple Amenity greenspace 0.221

1719 Adjacent Millennium Way/ M61 Junction Amenity greenspace 0.387

1760 Gillibrand, Off Burgh Wood Way Amenity greenspace 1.350

1769 Gillibrand, Keepers Wood Way/ Lakeland Gardens Amenity greenspace 3.103

1770 Gillibrand, Yarrow Valley Way Play Area, Adjacent

Woodchat Drive Amenity greenspace 0.435

1771 Gillibrand, Adjacent Walletts Wood Court Amenity greenspace 0.568

1903 Opposite 208-234 Preston Road Amenity greenspace 0.410

1921 Adjacent Northgate Amenity greenspace 0.100

1928 Adjacent 10 Oakwood View Amenity greenspace 0.237

1940 Rear of 19-21 Sutton Grove, Great Knowley Amenity greenspace 0.213

1941 Adjacent 26 Primrose Street Amenity greenspace 0.085

1957 Buttermere Avenue Play Area Amenity greenspace 2.318

1958 Adjacent Minstrel Pub, Lower Burgh Way, Eaves

Green Amenity greenspace 1.046

1959 Rear of 27-30 The Cedars, Eaves Green Amenity greenspace 0.486

1960 Adjacent 60 The Cedars, Eaves Green Amenity greenspace 0.672

1974 Spurrier Square Amenity greenspace 0.286

2011 Harpers Lane Recreation Ground Amenity greenspace 1.400

2016 Rosewood Close Amenity greenspace 0.203

1720 Chorley Cemetery, Southport Road Cemeteries/churchyards 9.732

1735 Preston Temple, Temple Way Cemeteries/churchyards 10.642

1746 St Gregory's RC Church, Weldbank Lane Cemeteries/churchyards 3.394

1435.3 Astley Park War Memorial Civic spaces 0.048

1993 Flat Iron Car Park Civic spaces 0.871

1995 Magistrates Court Square Civic spaces 0.059

1686 Between Chancery Road/ Westway Green corridors 2.253

1723 Opposite Railway Road Green corridors 1.217

22

KKP ref


Quality rating

Value rating

1724 Former Railway Line, Harpers Lane Green corridors 0.477

1336 Adjacent Chorley North Industrial Park and

Laburnum Road

Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 3.414

1683 Between Broadfields/ Euxton Lane Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.217

1725 Between St Gregory's Place/ Burgh Meadows Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.820

1762 Gillibrand, Nightingale Way Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.182

1764 Gillibrand, Adjacent Little Wood Close Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.142

1827 Plock Wood, Lower Burgh Way, Eaves Green Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 11.479

1828 Copper Works Wood, Stansted Road Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 2.822

1829 Adjacent Yarrow Valley Way Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 3.213

1435 Astley Park Parks and gardens 39.388


The table below identifies the accessibility standards for each typology and whether there are any deficiencies in provision in Chorley.




The southern and northern parts of the settlement are not within 12 minutes’ walk of a park or garden.


Central and eastern parts of the settlement are not within 10 minutes’ walk of a natural/semi-natural greenspace.


The northern part of the settlement and a small area to the south-east are not within 10 minutes’ walk of an allotment. All of the settlement is within 10 minutes’ drive of an allotment.




The table above shows that all residents within Chorley are within the accessibility standards for amenity greenspace. Small deficiencies are identified in relation to walking time to parks and gardens, natural and semi-natural greenspaces and allotments.

23

CLAYTON BROOK/GREEN / (CLAYTON AND WHITTLE) Quantity Assessment

The table below shows the recommended provision of each typology in Clayton Brook/Green and the hectares that will be needed to meet the recommended quantity standard. This is then compared to the current provision to identify whether there is a surplus or deficit in provision (green indicates surplus, red indicates deficit).

Typology


population)


2026 (ha)



by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.726 0.374 -0.352




As can be seen from the table above, there is a significant surplus of provision of amenity greenspace but a deficit in provision of all other typologies in Clayton Brook/Green.


The qualitative and value rating of all open spaces in Clayton Brook/Green is set out in the table below.

KKP ref


Quality rating

Value rating

2010 Manor Road Allotments Allotments 0.374

1339 Playing Field, Great Greens Lane Amenity greenspace 2.727

1346 Between Oakcroft/ Manor Road Amenity greenspace 0.388

1348 Off Clayton Green Road Amenity greenspace 2.048

1504 Off Wilderswood Amenity greenspace 0.264

1506 Off Radburn Brow Amenity greenspace 0.206

1507 Adjacent Near Meadow, Sandy Lane Amenity greenspace 0.447

1512 Meadow Lane, Off Preston Road Amenity greenspace 0.696

1515 Adjacent Gardenia Close Amenity greenspace 0.364

1631 Land off Meadow Lane Amenity greenspace 1.325

1705 Between Wood End Road/ Bearswood Croft Amenity greenspace 0.412

1706 Adjacent 19 Holly Close Amenity greenspace 0.441

1709 Adjacent 37 Sheep Hill Lane Amenity greenspace 0.218

1710 Off Back Lane Amenity greenspace 0.428

1711 Off Wood End Road, adjacent to reservoir Amenity greenspace 0.192

1778 Adjacent 44 Long Acre Amenity greenspace 0.211

1785 Adjacent 9 Brow Hey Amenity greenspace 0.026

1786 Between Carr Meadow/ Carr Barn Brow Amenity greenspace 0.996

1788 Adjacent 87 Daisy Meadow Amenity greenspace 0.224

24

KKP ref


Quality rating

Value rating

1793 Rear of 86-89 Greenwood Amenity greenspace 0.063

1798 Between Forsythia Drive/Homestead Amenity greenspace 0.293

1872 Adjacent Clayton Green Road Amenity greenspace 0.433

1873 Adjacent 454 Preston Road Amenity greenspace 0.434

1951 Opposite 4-6 Burghley Close Amenity greenspace 0.237

2023 Clayton Brook Village Centre Amenity greenspace 0.17

1703 Clayton Brook Community Church, Great Greens Lane Cemeteries/churchyards 0.414

1731 St Bede's Church, Preston Road Cemeteries/churchyards 0.508

1368 Carr Brook Linear Park, Adjacent Birch Field/Clover

Field Green corridors 4.785

1505 Carr Brook Linear Park, Westwood Road Green corridors 1.252

1509 Carr Brook Linear Park, Clayton Brook Road Green corridors 1.487

1704 Rear of Wilderswood Close Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 1.839

1855 Rear of 41-44 Woodfield Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.222

2028 Wilderswood Pond Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.01

1857 Opposite 34-37 Brow Hey Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.225

1858 Opposite 16-44 Carr Meadow Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.300

1861 Rear of School Field Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.223

1875 Rear of 16-28 Bearswood Croft Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.431

1876 Adjacent Blackthorn Croft Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.346

1952 Between Osborne Drive/ Chorley Old Road Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 1.437

1953 Between Wood End Road/ Rown Croft Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.276


The table below identifies the accessibility standards for each typology and whether there are any deficiencies in provision in Clayton Brook/Green.






All of the settlement is within 10 minutes’ walk of a natural/semi-natural greenspace.


Some of the settlement is within 10 minutes’ walk of an allotment. All of the settlement is within 10 minutes’ drive of an allotment.




The table above shows that all residents within Clayton Brook/Green are within the accessibility standards for amenity greenspace and natural/semi-natural greenspaces. Deficiencies are identified in relation to access to parks and gardens and walking time to allotments.

25

CLAYTON-LE-WOODS / (CLAYTON AND WHITTLE) Quantity Assessment

The table below shows the recommended provision of each typology in Clayton-le-Woods and the hectares that will be needed to meet the recommended quantity standard. This is then compared to the current provision to identify whether there is a surplus or deficit in provision (green indicates surplus, red indicates deficit).

Typology


population)


2026 (ha)



by 2026 (ha)



Natural and semi-natural 4.64 18.319 104.759 +86.440

Allotments 0.07 0.276 0 -0.276

Green corridors - - 0 -



As can be seen from the table above, there is a significant surplus of provision of amenity greenspace and natural/semi-natural greenspaces. The amount of natural/semi-natural greenspace identified for the settlement includes Cuerden Valley Park which is why there is a large surplus although only a small amount of the park falls within the settlement boundary. There is a deficit in provision of all other typologies in Clayton-le-Woods. Quality and Value Assessment

The qualitative and value rating of all open spaces in Clayton-le-Woods is set out in the table below.

KKP ref

Site name PPG17 Typology Size (ha) Quality rating

Value rating

2029 Kem Mill Lane Allotments Allotments 0.65

1349 Clayton Hall, Spring Meadow Amenity greenspace 0.503

1350 Cunnery Park, Cunnery Meadow Amenity greenspace 0.602

1352 Between 107and 108 Mendip Road Amenity greenspace 0.061

1354 Between 113 and 152 Mendip Road Amenity greenspace 0.080

1356 Between 164 and 172 Mendip Road Amenity greenspace 0.032

1461 Off Higher Meadow Amenity greenspace 1.938

1954 Off Cypress Close Amenity greenspace 0.984

1712 Off Spring Meadow Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.382

1714 Between Higher Meadow/ Cunnery Meadow Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.279

1810 Cuerden Valley Park Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 103.770

26


The table below identifies the accessibility standards for each typology and whether there are any deficiencies in provision in Clayton-le-Woods.




Only a small part to the east of the settlement is within 12 minutes’ walk of a park or garden.








The table above shows that all residents within Clayton-le-Woods are within the accessibility standards for amenity greenspace and natural/semi-natural greenspaces. Deficiencies are identified in relation to access to parks and gardens and walking time to allotments.

27

COPPULL / (SOUTHERN PARISHES)

Quantity Assessment

The table below shows the recommended provision of each typology in Coppull and the hectares that will be needed to meet the recommended quantity standard. This is then compared to the current provision to identify whether there is a surplus or deficit in provision (green indicates surplus, red indicates deficit).

Typology


population)


2026 (ha)



by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.479 0.470 -0.009




As can be seen from the table above, there is a deficit in provision of all typologies in Coppull.


The qualitative and value rating of all open spaces in Coppull is set out in the table below.

KKP ref


Quality rating

Value rating

2019 Tansley Avenue Allotments Allotments 0.470

1360 Brookside play area Amenity greenspace 0.247

1363 Longfield Avenue play area Amenity greenspace 0.341

1369 Hurst Brook play area Amenity greenspace 0.362

1370 Burwell Avenue play area Amenity greenspace 0.613

1373 Byron Crescent play area Amenity greenspace 0.504

1473 Between Chapel Lane/ Poplar Drive Amenity greenspace 0.181

1884 Clancutt Lane Amenity greenspace 0.497

1955 Between Spendmore Lane/ Station Road Amenity greenspace 0.249

1979 Tanyard Garden Amenity greenspace 0.107

1372 St Oswalds Church Tansley Avenue.

‘Off Tanyard Close’

Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.282

1468 End of Blainscough Road Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 1.983

1728 Reservoir, Mill Lane Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 1.109

1975 Hic Bibi LNR Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 7.744

1978 Coppull Memorial Garden Parks and gardens 0.069

2020 Berry Garden, Chapel Lane Parks and gardens 0.124

28


The table below identifies the accessibility standards for each typology and whether there are any deficiencies in provision in Coppull.

Typology Accessibility

Standard Deficiencies?



All of the settlement is within 12 minutes’ walk of a park or garden.




A small part to the east of the settlement is not within 10 minutes’ walk of an allotment. All of the settlement is within 10 minutes’ drive of an allotment.




The table above shows that all residents within Coppull are within the accessibility standards for amenity greenspace, parks and gardens and natural/semi-natural greenspaces. A small deficiency is identified in relation to walking time to allotments.

29

ECCLESTON / (WESTERN PARISHES) Quantity Assessment

The table below shows the recommended provision of each typology in Eccleston and the hectares that will be needed to meet the recommended quantity standard. This is then compared to the current provision to identify whether there is a surplus or deficit in provision (green indicates surplus, red indicates deficit).

Typology


population)


2026 (ha)



by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.295 0 -0.295




As can be seen from the table above there is a deficit in provision of all typologies in Eccleston.


The qualitative and value rating of all open spaces in Eccleston is set out in the table below.

KKP ref


Quality rating

Value rating

1388 Rear of 42 The Hawthorns Amenity greenspace 0.140

1499 Adjacent 275 The Green Amenity greenspace 0.039

1533 Middlewood Close Play Area Amenity greenspace 0.110

1670 Opposite 19 Bannister Lane Amenity greenspace 0.208

2015 Cortland Avenue Amenity greenspace 0.080

1668 Church of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Towngate Cemeteries/churchyards 1.470

1669 Rear of Larkfield Green corridors 4.419

1386 Millennium Green, Red House Lane Parks and gardens 1.363

1803 Jubilee & Bradley Lane Fields Parks and gardens 5.542

30


The table below identifies the accessibility standards for each typology and whether there are any deficiencies in provision in Eccleston.



Parks and gardens 15 minute drive time All of the settlement is within 15 minutes’ drive of a park or garden.


None of the settlement is within 10 minutes’ walk of a natural/semi-natural greenspace.






The table above shows that all residents in Eccleston are within the accessibility standards for amenity greenspace and parks and gardens. Deficiencies are identified in relation to access to natural/semi-natural greenspaces and walking time to allotments.

31

EUXTON

Quantity Assessment

The table below shows the recommended provision of each typology in Euxton and the hectares that will be needed to meet the recommended quantity standard. This is then compared to the current provision to identify whether there is a surplus or deficit in provision (green indicates surplus, red indicates deficit).

Typology


population)


2026 (ha)



by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.555 0 -0.555




As can be seen from the table above, there is a significant surplus of natural/semi-natural greenspace. The amount of natural/semi-natural greenspace identified for the settlement includes Yarrow Valley Country Park although only a small amount of the park falls within the settlement boundary. It also has a catchment well beyond Euxton. There is a deficit in provision of all other typologies in Euxton.


The qualitative and value rating of all open spaces in Euxton is set out in the table below.

KKP ref


Quality rating

Value rating

NEW Silvester’s Farm / Pear Tree Lane Allotments TBC

1394 Rear of 60 Hawkshead Avenue Amenity greenspace 0.149

1494 Balshaw Villa, Balshaw House Amenity greenspace 0.421

1495 The Cherries Play Area Amenity greenspace 0.294

1815 Adjacent 92 Mile Stone Meadow Amenity greenspace 1.294

1817 Adjacent 16 Gleneagles Drive Amenity greenspace 0.385

1818 Opposite 58-66 Wentworth Drive Amenity greenspace 0.294

1892 Adjacent Meadowcroft Green corridors 0.526

1696 Rear of Firbank Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 2.170

1697 Adjacent Euxton Hall Gardens Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.469

1730 Chapel Brook West Valley Park Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 3.265

1804 Adjacent 80 Princess Way Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 1.612

1807 Yarrow Valley Country Park Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 322.730

1897 Rear of 21-41 Empress Way Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 0.424

1613 Euxton Hall Park, Euxton Parks and Gardens 3.295

32


The table below identifies the accessibility standards for each typology and whether there are any deficiencies in provision in Euxton.


Amenity greenspace 10 minute walk time (800m) A small area to the west of the settlement is not within 10 minutes’ walk of an amenity greenspace.


The northern half of the settlement is not within 12 minutes’ walk of a park or garden.








The table above shows that all residents within Euxton are within the accessibility standards for natural/semi-natural greenspaces. Small deficiencies are identified in relation to access to amenity greenspace with more significant deficiencies in relation to access to parks and gardens and walking time to allotments.

33

WHITTLE-LE-WOODS / (CLAYTON AND WHITTLE) Quantity Assessment

The table below shows the recommended provision of each typology in Whittle-le-Woods and the hectares that will be needed to meet the recommended quantity standard. This is then compared to the current provision to identify whether there is a surplus or deficit in provision (green indicates surplus, red indicates deficit).

Typology


population)


2026 (ha)



by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.314 0.856 +0.542




As can be seen from the table above, there is a significant surplus of provision of amenity greenspace but a deficit in provision of all other typologies in Whittle-le-Woods. Quality and Value Assessment

The qualitative and value rating of all open spaces in Whittle-le-Woods is set out in the table below.

KKP ref


Quality rating

Value rating

1648 Allotments rear of Bay Horse Hotel, Preston Road Allotments 0.206

1422 Opposite 43-73 Hillside Crescent Amenity greenspace 0.998

1428 Orchard Drive Play Area Amenity greenspace 1.749

1432 End of Foxglove Drive Amenity greenspace 0.544

1535 Rear of Delph Way/ Cross Keys Drive Amenity greenspace 0.219

1537 Dunham Drive Amenity greenspace 0.051

1659 Between Preston Road and Church Hill Amenity greenspace 0.277

1660 Adjacent Heather Hill Cottage, Hill Top Lane Amenity greenspace 0.422

1734 Between Preston Road and Watkin Road Amenity greenspace 0.485

1733 St John The Evangelist Church, Preston Road Cemeteries/churchyards 0.491

1423 Whittle Canal Basin, Mill Lane/ Chorley Old Road Green corridors 1.355

34


The table below identifies the accessibility standards for each typology and whether there are any deficiencies in provision in Whittle-le-Woods.






The southern half of the settlement is not within 10 minutes’ walk of a natural/semi-natural greenspace.


Small areas to the north and south of the settlement are not within 10 minutes’ walk of an allotment. All of the settlement is within 10 minutes’ drive of an allotment.




The table above shows that all residents within Whittle-le-Woods are within the accessibility standards for amenity greenspace. Small deficiencies are identified in relation to walking distance to allotments with more significant deficiencies in relation to access to parks and gardens and natural/semi-natural greenspaces.

35

WITHNELL AND BRINSCALL / (EASTERN PARISHES) Quantity Assessment

The table below shows the recommended provision of each typology in Withnell/Brinscall and the hectares that will be needed to meet the recommended quantity standard. This is then compared to the current provision to identify whether there is a surplus or deficit in provision (green indicates surplus, red indicates deficit).

Typology


population)


2026 (ha)



by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.167 0.511 +0.344




As can be seen from the table above, there is a surplus of provision of allotments but a deficit in provision of all other typologies in Withnell/Brinscall.


The qualitative and value rating of all open spaces in Withnell/Brinscall is set out in the table below.

KKP ref


Quality rating

Value rating

1637 Rear of 70-90 School Lane Allotments 0.060

1639 Rear of Pleasant View Allotments 0.451

1902 End of Pleasant View Amenity greenspace 0.403

1741 St Paul's Church, Bury Lane Cemeteries/churchyards 0.785

1692 Withnell Local Nature Reserve, off Bury Lane Green corridor 4.423

1693 Railway Park, rear of Railway Road Green corridor 5.577

1627 Railway Park, Off Withnell Fold Old Road Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 1.931

1694 Lodge Bank Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 2.664

36


The table below identifies the accessibility standards for each typology and whether there are any deficiencies in provision in Withnell/Brinscall.


Amenity greenspace 10 minute walk time (800m) All of Withnell is within 10 minutes’ walk of an amenity greenspace but none of Brinscall is.

Parks and gardens 15 minute drive time Both settlements are within 15 minutes’ drive of a park or garden.


Both settlements are within 10 minutes’ walk of a natural/semi-natural greenspace.


Both settlements are within 10 minutes’ walk of an allotment. Both settlements are within 10 minutes’ drive of an allotment.




The table above shows that all residents within Withnell and Brinscall are within the accessibility standards for parks and gardens, natural/semi-natural greenspaces and allotments. Small deficiencies are identified in relation to access to amenity greenspace in Brinscall.

37

OTHER VILLAGES

Quantity Assessment

The Open Space Study does not provide an analysis of quantity in rural settlements not defined as Rural Local Service Centres as they are not identified as areas of growth in the Core Strategy. Although significant housing development will not take place in these settlements, there is likely to be some small scale housing development which will be expected to contribute towards open space provision. In order to give an indication of whether there are any deficiencies in these settlements the current amount of open space has been calculated and then compared to the amount that would be required to meet the identified deficit.

Abbey Village

Typology


population)

Provision Needed to Meet standard (ha)



by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.017 0.720 +0.703




Bretherton

Typology


population)




by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.047 0 -0.047




Brindle

Typology


population)




by 2026 (ha)

Amenity greenspace 0.73 0.455 0 -0.455



Allotments 0.07 0.044 0 -0.044




38

Charnock Richard

Typology


population)




by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.829 0 -0.829




Croston

Typology


population)




by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.172 0 -0.172




Gib Lane

Typology


population)




by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.021 0 -0.021




Gregson Lane

Typology


population)




by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.028 0 -0.028




Higher Wheelton

Typology


population)




by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.017 0 -0.017




39

Hoghton

Typology


population)




by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.041 0 -0.041




Mawdesley

Typology


population)




by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.065 0 -0.065




Wheelton

Typology


population)




by 2026 (ha)




Allotments 0.07 0.057 1.070 +1.013





The table below identifies the quality and value ratings of all open spaces falling within the rural settlements identified above.

KKP ref

Site name Settlement PPG17 Typology Size (ha)

Quality rating

Value rating

1636 Rear of 41-73 Bolton Road Abbey Village Allotments 0.480

1650 Rear of Park View Terrace Abbey Village Allotments 0.240

1283 Adjacent Abbey Mill, Bolton Road Abbey Village Amenity greenspace 0.087

1739 The Apiary, Adjacent Bretherton

Parish Institute, South Road Bretherton Amenity greenspace 0.245

1736 Church of St John the Evangelist,

South Road Bretherton Cemeteries/churchyards 0.176

1737 The Methodist Chapel, South

Road Bretherton Cemeteries/churchyards 0.278

2026 Bank Hall Bretherton Amenity greenspace 4.96

1700 St James Parish Church, Water

Street Brindle Cemeteries/churchyards 0.388

1701 Denham Hill Quarry, Holt Lane Brindle Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 3.066

40

KKP ref

Site name Settlement PPG17 Typology Size (ha)

Quality rating

Value rating

1768 Charnock Richard Crematorium,

Preston Road Charnock Richard Cemeteries/churchyards 11.418

1844 Christ Church, Church Lane Charnock Richard Cemeteries/churchyards 0.618

2017 Orchard Garden Charnock Richard Parks and Gardens 0.263

1483 Jubilee Way Play Area Croston Amenity greenspace 0.118

1485 Between 3 and 33 Riverside

Crescent Croston Amenity greenspace 0.049

1487 Croston Walls, Castle Walk Croston Amenity greenspace 0.635

1609 Between 20 and 26 Riverside

Crescent Croston Amenity greenspace 0.139

2027 Village Green, Adj Out Lane and

Town Road Croston Parks and gardens 0.08

2016 Croft Field Croston Amenity Greenspace 2.12

1490 Opposite the Paddock Gib Lane Amenity greenspace 0.192

1742 Church of the Holy Trinity, Chorley

Old Road Hoghton Cemeteries/churchyards 0.361

1412 Tarnbeck Drive Play Area Mawdesley Amenity greenspace 0.082

1610

Millennium Green, Hurst Green Mawdesley Parks and gardens 1.511

1649 Rear of Maybank and Oakdene,

Withnell Fold

Outside defined

settlement Allotments 0.325

1402 Walmsley’s Farm, Town Lane,

Heskin

Outside defined

settlement Amenity greenspace 0.806

1478 Adjacent 9 Kittiwake Road,

Heapey

Outside defined


1481 Adjacent 3 Flag Lane, Heath

Charnock

Outside defined


1743 Rivington Parish Church, Horrobin

Lane, Rivington

Outside defined

settlement Cemeteries/churchyards 0.259

1691 Adjacent Leeds/Liverpool Canal,

Off March Lane, Withnell Fold

Outside defined

settlement Natural/semi-natural

greenspace 5.607

1416 Wymott Park Play Area, Ulnes

Walton

Outside defined

settlement Parks and gardens 0.865

1625 Millennium Green, Withnell Fold Outside defined


1689 Bothy Garden, Withnell Fold Outside defined


1690 Memorial Garden, Withnell Fold Outside defined


1750 Lever Park, Rivington Outside defined


1992 Copthurst Lane Allotments Wheelton Allotments 1.070

1420 Meadow St Play Area Wheelton Amenity greenspace 0.209

1806 St Chads RC Church, Town Lane Wheelton Cemeteries/churchyards 0.451

41


The table below identifies the accessibility standards of each typology.

Typology Accessibility Standard

Amenity greenspace 10 minute walk time (800m)

Parks and gardens 15 minute drive time


Allotments 10 minute drive time

Green corridors No standard set.

Cemeteries/churchyards No standard set. Civic spaces No standard set.

The table below identifies whether there are any deficiencies in accessibility in the other defined rural villages in the Borough.

Village All of settlement within accessibility standard?

Amenity greenspace

Parks and gardens


Allotments

Abbey Village √ √ x √ Bretherton √ √ x √ Brindle x √ x √ Brindle - Gregson Lane

x √

x √

Charnock Richard x √ √ √ Croston √ √ x √ Higher Wheelton x √ √ √ Hoghton x √ x √ Hoghton Gib Lane √ √ x √ Mawdesley √ √ x x

Wheelton √ √ x √

42

5.2 Assessment and Recommendations of Open Space by Typology

Parks and Gardens

There are 16 Parks and Gardens in Chorley covering 200.442 hectares. It must be pointed out

that residents consider Yarrow Valley Country Park to be in this typology because it provides a

similar function and facilities but it is classed as Natural and Semi natural greenspace.

Quality

13 sites scored high for quality including Astley Park, this site has a green flag award and

friends group. Four sites scored low for quality, these are Bothy Garden, and Memorial Garden

in Withnell Fold, Wymott Park in Ulnes Walton and Orchard Garden in Charnock Richard.

Value

All sites are considered to be high value and should be protected. They have high social

inclusion, health benefits, ecological value and sense of place. This is often a result of their role

in providing a range of events which appeal to a variety of users and their level of condition.

Accessibility

All sites are accessible for the catchment standard of 15 minutes’ drive time but gaps in the 12

minute walk time are noted to the South of Chorley and in the Whittle-le-Woods/Clayton-le-

Woods area. The Council should consider addressing these gaps, however South Chorley is

well served by sites such as Yarrow Valley Country Park and Whittle-le-Woods and Clayton-le-

Woods have good access to Cuerden Valley Park and have sufficient provision of amenity

greenspace sites which could be formalised in order to meet gaps.

Natural and Semi Natural Greenspace

There are 36 Natural and Semi Natural Green spaces in Chorley covering 488.028 hectares.

Many are also designated as Biological Heritage Sites for their value to nature conservation and

biodiversity.

Yarrow Valley Covers over 322 hectares and Cuerden Valley Country Park covers over 103

hectares. Chorley has two Local Nature Reserves (LNR’s), Hic Bibi in Coppull and Withnell

Nature Reserve, with Blainscough Nature Reserve proposed to be designated to address the

deficit of LNR provision across Central Lancashire. Chorley Council Ranger Service (team of 3

staff) manages Council sites following ecological management plans and carrying out practical

conservation work. They also facilitate local conservation groups and volunteer groups who help

in the high task of maintaining such a large geographical area of land.

Withnell Local Nature Reserve, Yarrow Valley Country Park and Cuerden Valley Country Park

have a Green Flag Award.

Quality

4 sites score low quality and 32 high quality. Some sites tend to score low for personal security

given their isolated location and not being overlooked. Many sites purposefully have little on-

going management in order to provide specific habitats. It must be noted that the highest quality

site in Central Lancashire was Yarrow Valley Country Park - a reflection of facilities, features

and ranger team.

43

Value

All sites are high value. They are valuable as wildlife habitat and buffer zones for motorways and

between urban areas.

Accessibility

All sites are covered by a 10 minutes’ drive time catchment. There are gaps identified in the 10

minutes’ walk time catchment. An area to the east of Chorley Town and the Rural Local Service

Centre of Eccleston are identified as not being covered by walk time catchment. Eccleston has

sufficient access to the surrounding countryside and continued access should be ensured. The

area to the east of Chorley is restricted by the M61. However, similar to Eccleston, the area is

also served by general countryside

Amenity Greenspace

There are 129 amenity greenspaces in Chorley covering 81.562 hectares. Most of these sites

are found in housing estates and function as informal recreation spaces or open spaces along

highways that provide a visual amenity. Sizes vary and more amenity greenspaces tend to be

present in urban areas as rural areas are served by countryside. They have a multi-purpose

function, offering opportunities for a variety of leisure and recreational activities and improving

the visual aesthetics of residential areas.

Most sites are maintained by Chorley Council, providing a fortnightly visit to sites.

Quality

111 sites score high for quality and 18 low for quality. Sites score high for the range of facilities

available as well as the high standard of appearance and maintenance. The lowest scoring

amenity greenspaces sites are: Adj Brow Hey, Clayton Brook and Bannister Lane, Eccleston.

This was due to lack of natural surveillance and safe entrances. Sites have restricted access

due to lack of maintenance and footpaths, litter was also an issue. They have potential to be of

high value to the community.

Harpers Lane Recreation Ground is classed as amenity greenspace and scores high for quality

with an overall good standard of maintenance. This site could be taken forward for Green Flag

but it may be beneficial to establish an associated ‘friends of group’ to assist with the award

process.

Value

The majority of amenity greenspaces are rated as being high value. Sites score low because

they have no ancillary features or use, mainly in areas acting as buffer zones. E

Accessibility

Areas of greater population density have good access to provision within a 10 minute walk time.

There are minor gaps identified in the settlements of Eccleston and Brinscall.

44

Allotments

There are 16 allotment sites in Chorley covering 7.959 hectares. 7 of these sites are owned and managed by Chorley Council, the rest are private sites. Crosse Hall and Windsor allotments are significant contributors of plots and half plots. Sites at Moor Road are not all strictly used for allotment gardening but as garden space for adjacent terrace housing. The National Society of Allotment and Leisure Gardeners (NSALG) suggests a national

standard of 20 allotments per 1,000 households (i.e. 20 allotments per 2,000 people based on 2

people per house) or 1 allotment per 200 people. This equates to 0.250 hectares per 1,000

population based on an average plot-size of 250 metres squared.

Based on the current population of 109,100 (2012 mid-term estimates), Chorley does not meet

the NSALG standard. Chorley has been allocated its own standard of 0.07 ha per 1000

population. Using the suggested Chorley standard, the minimum amount of allotment provision

for Chorley is 7.994 hectares. The existing provision means we are 0.035 hectares short. The

proposed allotments in Euxton will take this deficit to a surplus per 1000 population.

Chorley Council also has an allotment waiting list of 225 with an estimated 3 year waiting time to

be allocated a plot.

Chorley Council recognised this shortfall in provision and have been working hard to find new

sites. Manor Road was created in 2012 providing an extra 19 plots, St Oswalds Church in

Coppull in 2014 providing 30 plots and Rangletts in 2015 providing 30 plots. Other sites have

been identified and are being investigated.

Chorley has an Allotment Society and Chorley Council operates an Allotment Advisory Group to

help keep sites secure and well maintained, strengthen communication and prioritise areas of

action. Allotments in Chorley are well used by community groups. Community Food Growing

also plays an important part in social inclusion, health benefits, amenity value and sense of

place.

Quality

All allotment sites score high for quality.

Value

All allotment sites score high for value.

Accessibility

The 10 minute walk and drive time standard has been applied. All sites are covered by drive

time but a number of gaps are noted against the walk time standard. The areas of Euxton,

Croston and Adlington are identified as being deficient from the catchment mapping. A total of

1.2 hectares is recommended, an equivalent of 0.4 hectares for each gap. New allotment sites

have been allocated in the Local Plan in these settlements to address the deficiency.

45

Cemeteries and Churchyards

There are 19 cemeteries and churchyards in Chorley covering 44.491 hectares. Clayton Brook Community Church was identified but does not have any form of burial space. Provision of burial space is not a statutory requirement of Councils. However Chorley Council

manage and maintain active cemetery provision at Adlington Cemetery and Chorley Cemetery is

noted as having an onsite maintenance team. Adlington Cemetery is visited at a similar rate to

other types of open space. On average this is every two weeks.

In terms of burial capacity, the two sites managed by Chorley Council are both identified as

having remaining interment space for the next 50 years. This follows recent expansion works to

both sites. Additional land for further expansion is also identified at Chorley and Adlington

Cemeteries for potential future use. The Council recognises that further burial capacity could be

provided if the ratio of cremations continues to increase.

Quality

The majority of cemeteries in Chorley are rated as being high quality. Only 3 sites score below

the threshold; St Joseph’s Church Chorley, The Methodist Chapel Chorley and Rivington Parish

Church. This was due to lack of ancillary features such as seating and litter bins and low

personal security.

In general, the safety of memorial statues and loose headstones is highlighted through officer

consultation as a major concern. Chorley Council specifically identifies this as a common

problem throughout the Borough. Chorley Cemetery also suffers from drainage issues due to

being built on clay sub soil, a new pond has created a wildlife habitat and serves to resolve

some of the issues.

Chorley Cemetery is identified as having the potential to achieve Green Flag Status given its

quality score of 65%.

Value All sites were assessed to be of high value reflecting the role they provide. Sites such as Chorley Cemetery add value and importance to communities through catering for multi religion burials. i.e. Muslim burials. Accessibility There is no accessibility standard set. Instead provision should be based on burial demand.

46

Civic Space

There are 3 Civic Spaces in Chorley covering 0.978 hectares. Civic Spaces in Chorley include

the Flat Iron Car Park, War Memorial (Cenotaph) in Astley Park and the Magistrates Court

Square. There are also other sites that function as a secondary role in civic space provision, for

example Adlington War Memorial is used as civic space but is classed as amenity greenspace.

Quality All civic spaces are high quality. They have good general maintenance and are well served by public transport. The highest scoring site across Central Lancashire, with 84%, is the Flat Iron Car Park. It scores highly due to its high level of use and location in the heart of the Town. The site is also noted as having heritage provision through a memorial statue and being used to host a weekly market. Value All sites are assessed as high value reflecting that provision has cultural/heritage value whilst also providing a sense of place to the local community. Civic Spaces are attractive shopping and event spaces. Accessibility There is no accessibility standard set.

Green Corridors

There are 16 Green Corridors in Chorley covering 30.577 hectares. However, there is significantly more provision to be found in Central Lancashire through the Public Rights of Way Network (PROW). Lancashire has a total network of 3,716 miles of PROW, including 240 miles of Bridleways.

Quality

Most sites score high for quality. The highest scoring sites with a score of 54% are Former

Railway Line Harpers Lane and Between Perthshire Grove/Grenadier Walk Buckshaw Village.

Both sites receive a high score for their general appearance and maintenance as well as the

level of personal security and disabled access.

The lowest scoring site is the Rear of Larkfield, Eccleston, with a score of 29%. Its low quality

score is a reflection of the poor level of drainage observed at the time of the site visit. The site

was also observed as having a low level of personal security and provision of paths that could

be improved..

Value

The majority of green corridors are assessed to be of high value. Withnell Nature Reserve Park

receives the highest value score of 36%; a reflection of the sites designation as a local nature

reserve (LNR). The site’s value is further demonstrated by it being awarded Green Flag status.

One site scores low for value at the Rear of Larkfield Eccleston. The importance of green

corridors is highlighted in linking open space, sport and recreation facilities together. The sites

themselves provide recreational opportunities for activities such as walking and jogging and

wildlife havens.

Accessibility There is no accessibility standard set due to their linear nature. The footpath network contributes to accessibility.

47

5.3 Quality and value matrix

Assessing the quality and value of open spaces is used to identify those sites which should be

given the highest level of protection by the planning system, those which require enhancement

in some way and those which may be redundant in terms of their present purpose.

Allotments

Quality

High Low

Va

lue High

1326.2 - Rangletts Allotments, Chorley

1636 - Rear of 41-73 Bolton Road, Abbey Village

1637 - Rear of 70-90 School Lane, Brinscall

1639 - Rear of Pleasant View, Withnell

1640 - Allotments off Crosse Hall Lane, Chorley

1642 - Allotments off Dunscar Drive, Chorley

1643 - Hallwood Road/ Moor Road Allotments, Chorley

1645 - Sandringham Road Allotments, Chorley

1646 - Allotments rear of Worthy Street, Chorley

1648 - Allotments rear of Bay Horse, Preston Road, Whittle-le-Woods

1649 - Rear of Maybank and Oakdene, Withnell Fold

1650 - Rear of Park View Terrace, Abbey Village

1992 - Cophurst Lane Allotments, Wheelton

2010 - Manor Road Allotments, Clayton Brook/Green

2019 - Tansley Avenue Allotments, Coppull

2029 – Kem Mill Lane Allotments, Whittle-le-Woods

Low

48

Amenity greenspace

Quality

High Low V

alu

e

High

1283 - Adjacent Abbey Mill, Bolton Road, Abbey Village

1298 - Rear of Chester Place/ Croston Avenue, Adlington

1314 - Coronation Recreation Ground, Devonshire Road, Chorley

1326 - Rangletts Recreation Ground, Brindle Street, Chorley

1330 - Tatton Recreation Ground, Chorley

1339 - Playing Field, Great Greens Lane, Clayton Brook/Green

1346 - Between Oakcroft/ Manor Road, Clayton Brook/Green

1348 - Off Clayton Green Road, Clayton Brook/Green

1350 - Cunnery Park, Cunnery Meadow, Clayton-le-Woods

1360 - Brookside play area, Coppul

1369 - Hurst Brook play area, Coppull

1370 - Burwell Avenue play area, Coppull

1373 - Byron Crescent play area, Coppull

1402 - Walmsley's Farm Play Area, Town Lane, Heskin

1422 - Opposite 43-73 Hillside Crescent, Whittle-le-Woods

1432 - End of Foxglove Drive, Whittle-le-Woods

1437 - Adjacent Buckshaw Primary School, Chancery Road, Astley Village, Chorley

1478 - Adjacent 9 Kittiwake Road, Heapey

1494 - Balshaw Villa, Euxton

1520 - Adjacent 26 and 36 Redwood Drive, Chorley

1687 - Adjacent Chancery Road/ Wymundsley/ The Farthings, Astley Village, Chorley

1709 - Adjacent 37 Sheep Hill Lane, Clayton Brook/Green

1710 - Off Back Lane, Clayton Brook/Green

1718 - Adjacent Millennium Way/ Preston Temple, Chorley

1817 - Adjacent 16 Gleneagles Drive, Euxton

1818 - Opposite 58-66 Wentworth Drive, Euxton

1872 - Adjacent Clayton Green Road, Clayton Brook/Green

1873 - Adjacent 454 Preston Road, Clayton Brook/Green

1903 - Opposite 208-234 Preston Road, Chorley

1955 - Between Spendmore Lane/ Station Road, Coppull

1941 - Adjacent 26 Primrose Street, Chorley

1461 - Off Higher Meadow, Clayton-le-Woods

1473 - Between Chapel Lane/ Poplar

1363 - Longfield Avenue play area, Coppull

1388 - Rear of 42 The Hawthorns, Eccleston

1412 - Tarnbeck Drive Play Area, Mawdesley

1420 - Meadow St Play Area, Wheelton

1428 - Orchard Drive Play Area, Whittle-le-Woods

1507 - Adjacent Near Meadow, Sandy Lane,

Clayton Brook/Green

1547 - Rear of Fir Tree Close, Eaves Green, Chorley

1549 - Between Lower Burgh Way/

Draperfield, Eaves Green, Chorley

1660 - Adjacent Heather Hill Cottage, Hill

Top Lane, Whittle-le-Woods

1670 - Opposite 19 Bannister Lane,

Eccleston

1902 - End of Pleasant View, Whittle-le-

Woods

1940 - Rear of 19-21 Sutton Grove, Great

Knowley, Chorley

1960 - Adjacent 60 The Cedars, Eaves

Green, Chorley

2023 – Clayton Brook Village Centre

2025 - Croft Field, Croston

2026 - Bank Hall, Bretherton

49

Amenity greenspace

Quality

High Low

Drive, Coppull

1483 - Jubilee Way Play Area, Croston

1495 - The Cherries Play Area, Euxton

1506 - Off Radburn Brow, Clayton Brook/Green

1510 - Waterford Close Playground, Adlington

1515 - Adjacent Gardenia Close, Clayton Brook/Green

1521 - Adjacent 77 Redwood Drive, Chorley

1528 - Rear of Amber Drive, Chorley

1554 - Adjacent Weldbank House, Weldbank Lane, Chorley

1556 - Clematis Close Play Area, Off Euxton Lane, Chorley

1609 - Between 20 and 26 Riverside Crescent, Croston

1631 - Land off Meadow Lane, Clayton Brook/Green

1315 - Between 6 and 8 Dorking Road,

Great Knowley, Chorley

1316 - Opposite 155 Draperfield, Eaves Green, Chorley

1349 - Clayton Hall, Spring Meadow, Clayton-le-Woods

1352 - Between 107and 108 Mendip Road, Clayton-le-Woods

1354 - Between 113 and 152 Mendip Road, Clayton-le-Woods

1356 - Between 164 and 172 Mendip Road, Clayton-le-Woods

1436 - Adjacent 94 Deerfold, Astley Village, Chorley

1481 - Adjacent 3 Flag Lane, Heath Charnock

1485 - Between 3 and 33 Riverside Crescent, Croston

1504 - Off Wilderswood, Clayton Brook/Green

1535 - Rear of Delph Way/ Cross Keys Drive, Whittle-le-Woods

1543 - Adjacent 57 Cowling Brow/ Rear of Ridge Road, Chorley

1711 - Off Wood End Road, adjacent to reservoir, Clayton Brook/Green

1719 - Adjacent Millennium Way/ M61 Junction, Chorley

1739 - The Apiary, Adjacent Bretherton Parish Institute, South Road, Bretherton

1760 - Gillibrand, Off Burgh Wood Way, Chorley

1769 - Gillibrand, Keepers Wood Way/ Lakeland Gardens, Chorley

1771 - Gillibrand, Adjacent Walletts Wood Court, Chorley

1705 - Between Wood End Road/ Bearswood Croft, Clayton Brook/Green

1793 - Rear of 86-89 Greenwood, Clayton Brook/Green

1798 - Between Forsythia Drive/Homestead, Clayton

50

Amenity greenspace

Quality

High Low

Brook/Green

1831 - Adjacent Fairview Community Centre, Adlington

1957 - Buttermere Avenue Play Area, Chorley

1439 - Adjacent Derian House, Chancery Road, Chorley

1459 - Adjacent Cottage Fields, Chorley

1487 - Croston Walls, Castle Walk, Croston

1490 - Opposite the Paddock, Gib Lane

1499 – Adjacent 275 The Green, Eccleston

1512 - Meadow Lane, Off Preston Road, Clayton Brook/Green

1532 - Opposite 26-29 The Bowers, Chorley

1533 - Middlewood Close Play Area, Eccleston

1540 - Between Chancery Road/

Hallgate, Astley Village, Chorley

1542 - Between Heather Close and

Eaves Lane, Chorley

1545 - Fell View Park, Cowling Brow, Chorley

1546 - Mayflower Gardens, Eaves

Green, Chorley

1550 - Adjacent Lower Burgh Way,

Eaves Green, Chorley

1558 - Playground rear of 36 Foxcote,

Astley Village, Chorley

1659 - Between Preston Road and Church Hill, Whittle-le-Woods

1678 - Adjacent 53 Broadfields, Chorley

1688 - Adjacent Chancery Road,

Astley Village, Chorley

1706 - Adjacent 19 Holly Close, Clayton Brook/Green

1734 - Between Preston Road and Watkin Road, Whittle-le-Woods

1770 - Gillibrand, Yarrow Valley Way

Play Area, Adjacent Woodchat Drive, Chorley

1778 - Adjacent 44 Long Acre, Clayton Brook/Green

1786 - Between Carr Meadow/ Carr Barn Brow, Clayton Brook/Green

1788 - Adjacent 87 Daisy Meadow, Clayton Brook/Green

1815 - Adjacent 92 Mile Stone Meadow, Euxton

1884 - Clancutt Lane, Coppull

1921 - Adjacent Northgate, Chorley

1928 - Adjacent 10 Oakwood View, Chorley

1951 - Opposite 4-6 Burghley Close, Clayton Brook/Green

1954 - Off Cypress Close, Clayton-le-Woods

1974 - Spurrier Square, Chorley

1958 - Adjacent Minstrel Pub, Lower

51

Amenity greenspace

Quality

High Low

Burgh Way, Eaves Green, Chorley

1959 - Rear of 27-30 The Cedars,

Eaves Green, Chorley

1963 - Guernsey Avenue, Buckshaw Village

1967 - Jubilee Fields, Station Road, Adlington

1968 - Rear of Chapel Street/ Park Road, Adlington

1971 - Rear of Community Centre, Unity Place, Buckshaw Village

1979 - Tanyard Garden, Coppull

2007 - Maltby Square, Buckshaw Village

2009 - Shannon Close, Buckshaw Village

2011 - Harpers Lane Recreation Ground, Chorley

2013 - Adjacent Fairview Drive, Adlington

2014 - Adjacent Meadow View, Adlington

2015 - Cortland Avenue, Eccleston

2016 - Rosewood Close, Chorley

2024.1 – Barrow Nook Grove, Adlington

Low 1394 - Rear of 60 Hawkshead Avenue,

Euxton

1785 - Adjacent 9 Brow Hey, Clayton Brook/Green

Green Corridors

Quality

High Low

Va

lue High

1686 - Between Chancery Road/ Westway

1692 - Withnell Linear Park, off Bury Lane

1693 - Withnell Linear Park, rear of Railway Road

1723 - Opposite Railway Road

1724 - Former Railway Line, Harpers Lane

1892 - Adjacent Meadowcroft

1965 - Between Perthshire Grove/Grenadier Walk

1966 - Between Guernsey Avenue/Buckinghamshire Place

1972 - Liverpool Walk

2008 - Between Unity Place/Maltby Square

2012 - Rear of Fairview Drive

1669 - Rear of Larkfield

Low

52

Parks and gardens

Quality

High Low V

alu

e High

1386 - Millennium Green, Red House Lane, Eccleston

1435 - Astley Park, Chorley 1610 - Millennium Green, Hurst

Green, Mawdesley 1613 - Euxton Hall Park, Euxton 1625 - Millennium Green, Withnell

Fold 1744 - War Memorial Garden,

Railway Road, Adlington 1750 - Lever Park, Rivington 1803 - Jubilee & Bradley Lane

Fields, Eccleston 1978 - Coppull Memorial Garden,

Coppull 2018 - Leonard Fairclough

Memorial Garden, Adlington 2020 - Berry Garden, Chapel

Lane, Coppull 2027 – Village Green, Jct Out

Lane and Town Road, Croston.

1416 - Wymott Park Play Area, Ulnes

Walton

1689 - Bothy Garden, Withnell Fold 1690 - Memorial Garden, Withnell Fold 2017 – Orchard Garden, Charnock

Richard

Low

53

Natural and semi-natural greenspace

Quality

V

alu

e

1336 - Adjacent Chorley North Industrial Park and Laburnum Road, Chorley

1468 - End of Blainscough Road, Coppull

1683 - Between Broadfields/ Euxton Lane, Chorley

1691 - Adjacent Leeds Liverpool Canal, Off Marsh Lane, Withnell Fold

1694 - Lodge Bank, Brinscall 1701 - Denham Hill Quarry, Holt

Lane, Brindle 1704 - Rear of Wilderswood Close,

Clayton Brook/Green 1714 - Between Higher Meadow/

Cunnery Meadow, Clayton-le-Woods 1712 - Off Spring Meadow, Clayton-

le-Woods

1728 - Reservoir, Mill Lane, Coppull

1730 - Chapel Brook West Valley Park, Coppull

1762 - Gillibrand, Nightingale Way,

Chorley

1828 - Copper Works Wood,

Stansted Road, Chorley

1857 - Opposite 34-37 Brow Hey,

Clayton Brook/Green

1858 - Opposite 16-44 Carr Meadow,

Clayton Brook/Green

1804 - Adjacent 80 Princess Way, Euxton

1807 - Yarrow Valley Country Park, Chorley/Euxton

1810 - Cuerden Valley Park, Clayton-le-Woods

1829 - Adjacent Yarrow Valley Way, Chorley

1875 - Rear of 16-28 Bearswood Croft, Clayton Brook/Green

1897 - Rear of 21-41 Empress Way, Euxton

1975 - Hic Bibi LNR, Coppull 1372 - Off Tanyard Close, Coppull 1627 - Off Withnell Fold Old Road,

Withnell 1697 - Adjacent Euxton Hall

Gardens, Euxton 1725 - Between St Gregory's Place/

Burgh Meadows, Chorley 1764 - Gillibrand, Adjacent Little

Wood Close, Chorley 1855 - Rear of 41-44 Woodfield,

Clayton Brook/Green 1861 - Rear of School Field, Clayton

Brook/Green 1876 - Adjacent Blackthorn Croft,

1696 - Rear of Firbank, Euxton 1827 - Plock Wood, Lower Burgh

Way, Eaves Green, Chorley 1852 - Rear of Outterside Avenue,

Adlington

54

Natural and semi-natural greenspace

Quality

Clayton Brook/Green 1952 - Between Osborne Drive/

Chorley Old Road, Clayton Brook/Green

1953 - Between Wood End Road/ Rowan Croft, Clayton Brook/Green

2028 – Wilderswood Pond

55

6.0 FUTURE PROVISION

6.1 Delivery of the Deficiencies and Key Recommendations

Management and Development

The following issues should be considered when undertaking site development or enhancement:

Financial viability. Security of tenure. Planning permission requirements and any foreseen difficulties in securing permission. Gaining revenue funding from planning contributions in order to maintain existing sites. Gaining planning contributions to assist with the creation of new provision where need has

been identified. Analysis of the possibility of shared site management opportunities. The availability of opportunities to lease site to external organisations. Options to assist community groups/parish councils to gain funding to enhance existing

provision. Negotiation with landowners to increase access to private strategic sites.

Funding Sources

Outside of developer contributions there are also a number of potential funding

sources1available to community and voluntary groups. Each scheme is different and is designed

to serve a different purpose. In order for any bid to be successful consideration to the schemes

criteria and the applicant’s objectives is needed. Below is a list of funding sources that are

relevant for community improvement projects involving parks, open spaces and nature

conservation.

BIG Lottery Fund Awards for All Access to Nature (only eligible to existing Access to Nature projects) Heritage Lottery Fund Community Development Foundation Landfill Communities Fund Esmee Fairbairn Foundation Lloyds TSB Foundation Co-Operative Group Community Fund Forestry Commission – English Woodland Grant Scheme Biffa Awards Lancashire Environment Fund (LEF)

There will be other sources of funding available in addition to those listed above. Sources for

funding applications are continuously changing and regular checking of funding providers should

be undertaken.

1 Source: Potential funding for community green spaces, DCLG

56

How Provision is to be made to Address Deficiencies

New housing developments in the Borough are required to contribute towards open space

provision. The requirements vary according to the type of open space to be provided. Collecting

contributions from developers will be undertaken through the following process.

Seeking developer contributions

The Open Space and Playing Pitch Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) was adopted on

the 17th September 2013. It sets out the Council’s approach to securing open space provision

and improvements through new housing development. The guidance forms the basis for

negotiation with developers to secure contributions for the provision or improvements of

appropriate facilities and their long term maintenance. Section 106 contributions can also be

used to improve the condition and maintenance regimes of playing pitches. A number of

management objectives will be implemented to enable the above to be delivered:

Continue to ensure that where sites are lost, through development or closure, that facilities of the same or improved standard are provided to meet the continued needs of residents.

Consider ring-fencing capital receipts from disposals of open spaces specifically for investment into other open spaces.

Planning consent should include appropriate conditions and/or be subject to a Section 106 Agreement. Where developer contributions are applicable, a Section 106 Agreement must be completed specifying the amount and timing of sums to be paid.

A ‘central pot’ for developer contributions across each authority should be established to invest in open space provision and maintenance.

Where significant new open spaces are provided, car parking should also be incorporated to service the site.

Determining contributions

Establishing whether open space provision is required and whether it should be provided on site

is detailed in the SPD. Elements to consider when determining this include:

the total amount of open space provision within the locality and whether the amount of provision will be above the quantity standards set for each typology following completion of the development

whether the locality is within the accessibility catchment standards as set for each open space typology

whether enhancement of existing provision is required if either or both the quantity and accessibility standards are sufficiently met.

In development areas where open space provision is identified as being sufficient in terms of

quantity, provision of new open space is not deemed necessary. It may be more suitable to seek

contributions for quality improvements.

Off-site contributions

In instances where it is not realistic for new provision to be provided on site or if there is a

surplus in the quantity of provision it may be more appropriate to seek to enhance the existing

quality of provision and/or improve access to sites. Standard costs for the enhancement of

existing open space and provision of new open spaces are clearly identified in the SPD and will

be revised on a regular basis by each local authority. A financial contribution should be, for

57

example, required principally but not exclusively for the following typologies; subject to the

appropriate authority providing and managing the following forms of open space provision:

Parks and gardens Allotments Amenity greenspace Provision for children/young people Natural/semi-natural greenspace

The wider benefits of open space sites and features regardless of size should be recognised as

a key design principle for any new development. Particularly in instances where it is not deemed

appropriate for new onsite provision or for contributions towards the enhancement of offsite

provision. The SPD sets out that appropriate provision of open space features (e.g. trees,

hedging, gaps in the built form) should be sought. These features and elements can help to

contribute to the perception of open space provision in an area whilst also ensuring an

aesthetically pleasing landscape providing social and health benefits.

The figure below sets out the processes needing to be considered when determining developer

contributions towards open space, sport and recreation provision.

58

Determining developer contributions

Decide if the number of dwellings proposed is required

to provide open space and the types of open space,

sport and recreation facilities required.

Determine whether, after the development, there will be a sufficient

amount of open spaces within the accessibility catchments of the

development site, including on site, to meet the needs of existing and new

populations based on the proposed local standards.

Does the quality of open spaces within the

accessibility catchments match the quality

thresholds in the Assessment?

Work out the requirement for each

applicable type of open space

Determine whether the open space

can/should be provided on site

No developer contribution

towards new or

enhancing open space

provision is normally

required

The developer will be

required to contribute to the

enhancement of offsite

provision within the

accessibility standards set

Determine whether

the open space

can/should be

provided on a

different site

Determine whether

the open space will

be designed and built

by the Council

No further action

Calculate the recommended contribution for

enhancing existing provision.

Calculate the developer

contribution for new

provision

Work out the

developer

contribution for

new provision

The developer should

design and build

provision onsite

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes Yes

No

No

No

No

No

No

59

Maintenance contributions

There is a requirement on developers to demonstrate that where onsite provision is to be

provided it will be managed and maintained accordingly. In some instances the site may be

adopted by the Council, which will require the developer to pay a sum of money in order to pay

the costs of the sites future maintenance. Often the procedure for Councils adopting new sites

includes:

The developer being responsible for maintenance of the site for 12 months or a different agreed time period.

Sums to cover the maintenance costs of a site (once transferred to the Council) should be intended to cover a period of 10 years.

The maintenance contributions required are set out in the SPD and are based on current

maintenance costs.

Calculating onsite contributions

The requirement for open spaces should be based upon the number of persons generated from

the net increase in dwellings in the proposed scheme, using the average household occupancy

rate of 2.4 persons per dwelling as derived from the Census 2001.

The next stage is to calculate the open space requirement by typology per dwelling. This is

calculated by multiplying the number of persons generated from the development by the quantity

standard for that typology (ha per 1,000 population). Using amenity greenspace in Chorley as an

example, the recommended standard is 0.73 ha per 1,000 population.

This figure is then divided by 1,000 to identify the amount of provision to be made as the

standards are set out as hectares per 1,000 population.

60

7.0 STRATEGY REVIEW

This report analyses and summarises the findings of the Open Space Study. It identifies where there are deficiencies and where further provision is required. It also identifies where improvements are needed to existing sites. The majority of sites are being protected through the Local Plan and improvements being made to the quality and/or value of these sites. The majority of deficiencies can be addressed by securing new provision from housing developments either on-site or by way of a financial contribution towards off-site provision. The Open Space Strategy does recommend allocating some sites to meet identified deficiencies. It recommends new allotment provision in Adlington, Croston and Euxton, sites have been allocated in the Local Plan.

As recommendations and deficiencies are addressed it is important to continually update the baseline data.

61

Appendix A

Maps Showing Typologies within Settlements

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

Appendix B

Total Open Space Provision by Settlement and Ward

Current provision by settlement (updated August 2017)

Settlement

Parks and Gardens -

current provision

Parks and Gardens -

surplus/deficit

Natural/ Semi-Natural - current

provision

Natural/ Semi-Natural -

surplus/deficit

Amenity Greenspace -

current provision


surplus/deficit

Provision for Children/Young People - current

provision

Provision for Children/Young

People - surplus/deficit

Allotments - current

provision

Allotments - surplus/deficit

Abbey Village 0 -0.450 0 -1.095 0.087 -0.085 0.131 +0.112 0.720 +0.703

Adlington 0.112 -10.269 0.625 -24.593 2.465 -1.502 0.466 +0.031 0 -0.380

Bretherton 0 -1.291 0 -3.137 0.245 -0.248 0.125 +0.071 0 -0.047

Brindle 0 -1.190 3.066 +0.175 0 -0.455 0 -0.050 0 -0.044

Buckshaw Village 0 -4.964 0 -12.059 3.012 +1.115 0.488 +0.280 0 -0.182

Charnock Richard 0.263 -1.998 0 -5.494 0 -0.864 0.102 +0.007 0 -0.829

Chorley Town 39.388 -25.789 22.289 -136.046 41.460 +16.549 3.500 +0.671 3.633 +1.244

Clayton Brook/Green 0 -19.816 5.399 -42.741 13.243 +5.669 0.307 -0.523 0.374 -0.352

Clayton-le-Woods 0 -7.541 104.759 +86.440 4.210 +1.328 0.285 -0.031 0 -0.276

Coppull 0.193 -12.886 11.118 -20.657 2.796 -2.176 3.226 +2.678 0.470 -0.009

Croston 0.080 -4.607 0 -11.387 3.151 +1.360 0.111 -0.085 0 -0.172

Eccleston 6.905 -1.149 4.419 -15.148 0.577 -2.501 0.637 +0.300 0 -0.295

Euxton 3.295 -11.857 330.670 +293.861 2.837 -2.954 0.569 -0.066 0 -0.555

Gib Lane 0 -0.583 0 -1.415 0.192 -0.031 0 -0.024 0 -0.021

Gregson Lane 0 -0.777 0 -1.888 0 -0.297 0 -0.033 0 -0.028

Higher Wheelton 0 -0.476 0 -1.155 0 -0.182 0 -0.020 0 -0.017

Hoghton 0 -1.125 0 -2.733 0 -0.430 0 -0.047 0 -0.041

Mawdesley 1.511 -0.273 0 -4.334 0.082 -0.600 0.190 +0.115 0 -0.065

Wheelton 0 -1.560 0 -3.791 0.209 -0.387 0.042 -0.023 1.070 +1.013

Whittle-le-Woods 0 -8.578 0 -20.838 4.745 +1.467 0.439 +0.080 0.856 +0.542

Withnell/Brinscall 0 -4.549 4.595 -6.457 0.403 -1.336 0.158 -0.033 0.511 +0.344

72

Current provision by ward (updated August 2017)

Ward

Parks and Gardens -

current provision

Parks and Gardens -

surplus/deficit

Natural/ Semi-Natural

- current provision

Natural/ Semi-Natural -

surplus/deficit


current provision


surplus/deficit

Provision for Children/

Young People - current provision

Provision for Children/

Young People - surplus/deficit

Allotments - current

provision

Allotments - surplus/deficit

Adlington and Anderton 0.112 -13.271 0.625 -31.887 2.377 -2.738 0.455 -0.105 0 -0.490

Astley Village and Buckshaw 0 -6.989 3.482 -13.496 15.881 +13.210 0.396 +0.103 0 -0.256

Brindle and Hoghton 0 -4.177 8.673 -1.475 0.192 -1.404 0 -0.175 0 -0.153

Chisnall 0.263 -7.546 2.265 -16.708 1.419 -1.566 3.064 +2.737 0.470 +0.184

Chorley East 0 -12.509 0 -30.387 6.324 +1.543 0.677 +0.153 1.065 +0.607

Chorley North East 0 -14.037 3.414 -30.685 3.072 -2.293 0.250 -0.338 1.074 +0.560

Chorley North West 39.388 +28.224 2.822 -24.299 1.617 -2.650 0.810 +0.342 0.727 +0.318

Chorley South East 0 -11.915 0 -28.944 3.107 -1.447 0.873 +0.374 0.490 +0.053

Chorley South West 0 -15.311 338.566 +301.372 14.102 +8.250 0.453 -0.188 0.277 -0.284

Clayton-le-Woods and Whittle-le-Woods 0 -13.603 4.429 -28.617 6.188 +0.989 0.679 +0.110 1.880 +1.204

Clayton-le-Woods North 0 -12.782 0.970 -30.081 10.663 +5.778 0.187 -0.348 0 -0.468

Clayton-le-Woods West and Cuerden 0 -8.381 104.759 +84.399 4.210 +1.007 0.285 -0.066 0 -0.307

Coppull 0.193 -12.025 8.853 -20.829 2.183 -2.486 0.695 +0.183 0 -0.448

Eccleston and Mawdesley 8.416 -0.352 4.419 -23.440 0.659 -3.724 0.820 +0.340 0 -0.420

Euxton North 0 -8.643 2.170 -18.826 1.973 -1.330 0.244 -0.118 0 -0.317

Euxton South 3.295 -4.383 2.505 -16.148 0.570 -2.365 0.315 -0.007 0 -0.281

Heath Charnock and Rivington 146.633 +142.452 0 -10.157 0.592 -1.006 0.011 -0.164 0 -0.153

Lostock 0.945 -10.702 0 -28.295 6.146 +1.695 0.272 -0.216 0 -0.427

Pennine 0 -4.393 0 -10.672 2.077 +0.398 0.048 -0.136 1.070 +0.782

Wheelton and Withnell 1.197 -6.655 4.595 -14.480 0.699 -2.302 0.331 +0.002 1.556 +1.393

Documents

Open Space Assessment and Strategy - Borough of Chorley · the Core Strategy and Local Development Framework process and helped to inform: Site allocation processes Supplementary