|
Resolution
number FR/2014/190
MOVED by Member MA Kay, seconded by Deputy
Chairperson AJ Naysmith:
That the Franklin Local Board provides the following feedback on
the proposed Interim Open Space Provision Guidelines:
General comments
a)
The Franklin Local Board
does not support the proposed Interim Open Space guidelines as it considers
them to be prescriptive and too detailed. The Board is concerned the
proposed guidelines as currently drafted will be used as rules rather than
being used for guidance.
b)
The Franklin Local Board requests
a briefer, principle-based document for provision of open space that enables
the needs of local communities to be met.
Distribution of open space
c)
The Franklin Local Board
has concerns about the prescriptive walking distance targets - 400m walk to a
local park for high density areas and 600m walk to a local park for other
residential areas. People may feel comfortable walking much longer
distances.
d)
Industrial areas: the Franklin Local Board supports flexibility in
considering public open space in those areas e.g. Highbrook and Drury South
industrial areas have been planned with good open space. They should be
considered on a case by case basis – provision can often suit nearby
residential areas as well. Use of the stormwater network should be maximised
for recreational purposes.
e)
Pocket parks: the Franklin Local Board requests flexibility in
considering these – small parks can work well in some environments (e.g.
heavily populated areas like New York have some successful small parks).
However it was also recognised that it may be better to co-locate/agglomerate
a number of small parks to make one larger park with more uses.
Quantity of open space
f)
The Franklin Local Board expresses
its concern that the map in the guidelines outlining open space shortfalls
may mean that the wider context is not considered – for example, that people
travel across local board boundaries to parks or that less space is required
for open space where people have larger private sections.
g)
The Franklin Local Board
requests that the guidelines provide flexibility when considering greenfield
developments. The board is concerned that guidelines such as these may
reduce flexibility and create a prescriptive approach. For example, they may
be used to require developers to provide open space that is not suitable in
the context or over-provide open space.
h)
The Franklin Local Board
suggests that school fields and private open space could fulfil some open
space needs and could therefore be included in the guidelines, although it is
acknowledged that school fields are not always open to the community.
i)
The Franklin Local Board
believes partnerships with schools, for the community to use their sports
fields, should be encouraged.
j)
There are maintenance
cost implications when acquiring open space (including stormwater network);
the Franklin Local Board supports encouraging ‘friends of’ groups to take
care of local reserves.
k)
Sports fields: the Franklin Local Board suggests that it may be
better to expand existing parks in one location rather than purchase new land
just to fulfil a quota or improve existing sports fields to cater for more
users/uses.
Configuration of open space
l)
The Franklin Local Board
supports some variation in types of land acquired e.g. not just flat areas;
steeper areas can give valuable play adventure experiences.
m) The Franklin Local Board notes that assets are not
always needed on a park to make it valuable open space to the community.
n)
The Franklin Local Board
supports the inclusion of connections as open space in the guidelines as they
are often used by older people and people with disabilities.
CARRIED
|
