The Delivery and Maintenance of Public Urban Green Spaces

The benefits of green spaces have become more evident over recent decades as knowledge and awareness of their social, economic and environmental benefits increases. However, despite well documented and acknowledged benefits, a lack of policy to date suggests that urban green spaces are underappreciated among those with a responsibility for creating them. 

At the start of the first COVID-19 lockdown, the then Secretary of State for DLUHC Robert Jenrick, echoed the views of many in his comment ‘people need parks’. Shortly afterwards however, it was reported that 2.69 million people within Britain live more than 10 minutes’ walk from a green space.

Furthermore, in cities high population densities and low access to urban green spaces correlate, leading to the degradation and destruction of those green spaces which do exist. 

Planners have long attempted to incorporate elements of the natural environment and nature into urban areas, and the green city concept has gained exponential momentum since the introduction of ‘sustainable development’ and UN Sustainable Development Goal 11: ‘Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable’ introduced in 2015. 

All too often however, the short-term nature of political decision-making has led to an inconsistent implementation of urban green space policies. Additionally, implementation often conflicts with pressures of development, meaning that green spaces are not always provided on-site in new developments. 

Public Urban Green Spaces and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

The numerous official reports and guidance on the subject include PPG17 (Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation) and the NPPF. However, the National Audit Office (NAO) found that in 2006, four years after PPG17 was published, local planning authorities (LPAs) were making slow and minor progress on implementing the guidance. 

Since the introduction of the NPPF in 2012, LPAs have had the power to protect certain urban green spaces that are particularly valued by the community. This can be done through the preparation or review of local plans and neighbourhood plans. Nationally, 6,515 locally valued green spaces across England have been protected from inappropriate development due to local green space designation.

However, the NAO report found that councils encounter inter-departmental barriers which may interfere with the formulation of green space policies. Within a council, green spaces are the responsibility of multiple departments, frequently leading to conflict. Implementation is often contested between those who devise and formulate policies and those who are expected to abide by them. Literature suggests that a more successfully integrated approach would allow local authorities to overcome a number of challenges in the context of urban green spaces - such as allocation, number and size of green spaces and their management. It goes without saying that a dedicated statutory department is not feasible in the current economic climate, but the introduction of a liaison role which communicates with all of the relevant departments may eliminate inter-departmental issues and give green spaces greater priority within a Local Authority. 

 

Delivering more green spaces

So can the planning system help overcome these barriers? Now more than ever, planning authorities are under-staffed and under increased pressure from communities, councillors and developers. Following the introduction of austerity measures in 2010, LPAs were required to take stock of the services that they are legally and financially obliged to deliver. This has led to a reduction of the many services funded by the council which are not legally required, including green spaces. This is despite a clear benefit to public service provision, environment resource capacity and quality of life. As a result, councils in England spent almost £330 million less a year on parks and open spaces than they did a decade ago, with the most deprived areas experiencing the deepest cuts. 

Consequently, the creation of green spaces is often outsourced to private companies, with communities also taking a role, although frequently one which conflicts with that of the private companies. Voluntary organisations have successfully stepped in by fundraising or applying for funds, such as the Heritage Lottery Bid. However, small organisations have limited resources and even with voluntary organisations supporting a project financially, they may need the council’s assistance at a later stage of a process. 

Not only are there financial issues within councils threatening green spaces, there are also contentious issues regarding development and land. A central concern of land use planning is that the future of vacant land cannot always be accurately determined and often conflicts occur, such as in the protection of land for environmental reasons versus the utilisation of land for development. Communities tend to prioritise the retention of open spaces over large scale development, but the retention of open space is not always financially viable and carries its own liabilities. The question of how best to utilise undeveloped land is compounded by the national housing crisis and the impact of the Green Belt on city boundaries, and the combined demands for housing, green spaces, educational, health and other facilities results in developers being unable to comply with green space policies. Section 106, as a legal obligation to mitigate the impacts of a development proposal, frequently results in developers either supplying or making a financial contribution towards open spaces. But frequently off-site or financial contributions are made due to development pressures, in which case residents of new developments do not benefit from proximity to green spaces. 

In view of global issues including COVID-19 and climate change and the need to enhance urban resilience for the safety, comfort, happiness, and health of residents, there is a stronger argument than ever before for green spaces to be implemented at a strategic level. Despite this, the problem seems to have been exacerbated within many councils. 

While this issue presents a challenge in many councils, it should be recognised that many developers are increasingly using innovation and insight to provide multifunctional open spaces within new communities. The Environment Act, specifically the requirement for a minimum 10% biodiversity net gain, creates a legal requirement that has not existed previously. Among Carter Jonas’ clients, many are already achieving this to the benefit of local communities. Clearly the issue has achieved prominence and progress has been made. The challenge, as we enter an economic downturn is whether financial restraints, combined with this legal requirement, threaten the viability of those schemes which have the potential to deliver an improvement in green spaces for both new residents and the wider community.