01 How did a PPG17 open space assessment work in practice?
A PPG17 open space assessment worked by combining a desk review of existing policy and data with new field survey. Surveyors recorded every open space site, its type, size, condition and access points, then audited what each site offered against local need. The results were mapped with catchments drawn around each site so a council could see which households were served and which were not.
The method came from Planning Policy Guidance 17, published by the UK government in 2002 and later replaced by the National Planning Policy Framework. It gave local authorities a common structure: audit, assess need, set provision standards, map the result. Consultants ran the process for councils that lacked in-house capacity, and the archived work of one such practice, PPG17 open space assessment carried out by Ashley Godfrey Associates between 2007 and 2019, shows the shape of the job in practice.
It ran in stages, and each stage fed the next.
First came inception. The council and the assessor agreed the study area, the types of open space to include, and the timetable. PPG17 listed typologies to consider: parks and gardens, natural and semi-natural green space, amenity green space, provision for children and young people, outdoor sports facilities, allotments, cemeteries and churchyards, and civic spaces. Not every type mattered equally in every district, so the list was trimmed and agreed in writing.
Second came the audit. Fieldworkers visited every known site and any site found on the way. Each was given a unique reference, a grid reference, a boundary drawn on a map, and a record of its features. Photographs were taken. Access points, paths, bins, benches, play equipment, pitches and planting were noted. Condition was graded against a written scale so that two surveyors would reach the same score.
Third came the needs assessment. This used household surveys, school and youth consultations, and meetings with user groups. Residents were asked which sites they used, how they travelled, how often, and what stopped them using a site more. The answers set the local standard, not a national figure.
Fourth came the standards. The assessor proposed a quantity standard, usually hectares per thousand people, a quality standard drawn from the audit scores, and an accessibility standard expressed as a distance or travel time. These were tested against the audit and the consultation before being recommended.
Fifth came the mapping and the report. Sites, catchments and shortfalls were plotted, and the findings were written up with recommendations for the local plan and for developer contributions.
The whole exercise typically took several months. The fieldwork season mattered: a play area surveyed in February looks different from the same play area surveyed in July.
02 What do surveys and audits of local provision measure?
An audit measures the site. A survey measures the people. The two are kept separate because they answer different questions.
The audit records, for each site:
- Type, using the agreed typology.
- Size in hectares, measured from the boundary.
- Condition, scored against a written scale.
- Features: play equipment by age group, pitches by sport, paths, seating, lighting, bins, dog bins, signage.
- Access: number and quality of entrances, whether step-free, whether lit.
- Safety and security: sightlines, fencing, vandalism, evidence of antisocial behaviour.
- Maintenance: grass length, litter, wear, broken fittings.
The survey records, for each respondent or group:
- Which sites are used and how often.
- How people travel and how long it takes.
- What they value and what they would change.
- Barriers: distance, safety, lack of facilities, lack of information.
- Unmet demand: sports pitches needed, play equipment wanted, allotment waiting lists.
Quantity is then calculated by adding site areas by type and dividing by population. Quality is summarised from the audit scores. Accessibility is tested by drawing catchments and counting the households inside them. A site can pass on quantity and fail on quality, which is why the three measures are reported side by side rather than blended into one figure.
Playing pitch work follows a parallel method. A pitch assessment counts pitches, records their condition and drainage, and models demand from team numbers and match schedules. National benchmarks for playing pitches and green space, published by Fields in Trust, are used as a reference point, not as a substitute for local evidence.
03 How is open space mapped with its catchments?
Mapping starts with the site boundary. Each site is drawn as a polygon in a geographic information system, not as a point, because area is needed for the quantity calculation. The polygon is checked against aerial imagery and against the council's own records.
Catchments are then drawn around each site. The shape depends on the standard being tested:
- A straight-line buffer is the simplest. A 400 metre radius around a play area, for example, marks the households within a short walk.
- A network distance buffer follows paths and roads. It is more accurate where a river, railway or motorway breaks the direct line.
- A travel-time catchment uses walking speed over the path network and can account for crossings and gradients.
Once catchments are drawn, they are intersected with population data. Output areas or postcodes inside the catchment are counted, and the population served is compared with the population the site is meant to serve. Gaps appear where catchments do not reach, or where they overlap so heavily that one site is carrying more households than its size and condition can support.
Deprivation and access data are sometimes layered on top. A catchment that covers a large population but sits in an area with few private gardens carries more weight than the same catchment elsewhere. This is a judgement, and the report should say so.
Mapping also exposes duplication. Two play areas 200 metres apart may serve the same households, leaving a neighbouring estate unserved. The map makes that visible in a way a table of site areas does not.
04 What did the final report contain?
A PPG17 study ended with a document a council could use. Typical contents:
- The study area, the typology used and the method.
- A site-by-site audit schedule with scores and references.
- Maps of sites, catchments and shortfalls.
- Consultation findings, with the number of respondents stated.
- Proposed quantity, quality and accessibility standards.
- An assessment of existing provision against those standards.
- Recommendations for the local plan, for site protection and for developer contributions.
The standards were the practical output. Once adopted, they gave planning officers a defensible basis for asking a developer for play space, or for refusing a loss of green space. Without them, each application was argued from scratch.
05 What changed after PPG17?
PPG17 was cancelled in 2012 and replaced by the National Planning Policy Framework. The NPPF kept the principle that plan-making should rest on an up-to-date assessment of open space, sport and recreation, but it removed the detailed typology and the prescribed method.
In practice, much of the old method survived. Councils still commission open space audits, still consult residents, still set provision standards and still map catchments. Playing pitch strategies continue under their own guidance. The vocabulary shifted from PPG17 to open space assessment or playing pitch strategy, but the fieldwork, the audit schedule and the catchment map look much the same.
For anyone reading an old study, the useful checks are the same as they were then: was the typology stated, was the audit scored against a written scale, was the consultation sample described, and were the catchments drawn on a stated basis. A study that answers those four questions can be relied on. One that does not should be read with care.
06 What this means for a home brewer reading it
Very little, directly. But the method has a familiar shape. An audit is a record of what is there. A survey is a record of what people do. A standard is a decision about what counts as enough. Anyone who has weighed grain, measured gravity and written down the result already works this way. The difference is scale, and the fact that a council has to defend its numbers in public.
The pandemic shift in online retail did not vanish when shops reopened. Baskets settled at a different size, returns stayed high, and mobile ordering held its share. Payments and last-mile delivery now run on terms a small shop can plan around. For a homebrew shop, the useful question is which of these habits stayed and which quietly faded. An English article, what the pandemic shift left, sets out what proved permanent, how basket, returns and mobile use changed, and where a shop can check its own figures.
Source: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-planning-policy-framework