Forest Park Feasibility Study 2009

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study (Final Draft) For: Test Valley Borough Council
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study (Final Draft) For: Test Valley Borough Council Phil Lomax 24th August 2009
Copyright of Test Valley Borough Council
Green Dimensions Ltd. 24 August 2009 Green Dimensions is a private limited company no. 6586385 Green Dimensions Ltd. 3 Mill Lane, Nursling, Southampton, SO16 0YE Telephone: 023 8073 8097 E-mail: phil.lomax@green-dimensions.co.uk Information: www.green-dimensions.co.uk
th
Contents
1. Introduction 2. Executive Summary 3. Background and Justification for the Proposed Forest Park Reducing Recreational Pressures on the New Forest The Draft South East Plan Appropriate Assessment of the South East Plan Green Infrastructure The Views of Natural England The Role and Views of the New Forest National Park Authority Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Test Valley Borough Council Core Strategy The Southampton City Council Core Strategy and Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Core Strategy Summary Providing New, Locally Accessible Green Spaces for the Residents of Southern Test Valley, Eastleigh and Southampton and Increasing Access to the Countryside for these Residents Green Space Strategy and Standards Countryside Access Encouraging Healthy Lifestyles 4. The Forest Park Achieving the Objectives. Identification of Critical Success Factors Visiting Patterns to National Parks in England Visitor Characteristics of the New Forest National Park How Many Visitors Are There, and Where Do They Come From? How Do They Get There? Who Are the Visitors? What Are the Main Reasons for Visiting? What Are the Features that Visitors Particularly Value? What Facilities Do Visitors Use? What is the Frequency and Duration of Visits? Critical Success Factors for the Proposed Forest Park 5. The Forest Park Evaluation and Options Appraisal Evaluation of Key Attributes 1. Location and Accessibility Location and Accessibility by Car Options for Road Access and Car Parking Location and Accessibility for Pedestrians, Cyclists and Horse Riders Options for Extending Local Access to the Forest Park
Page 7 8 10 10 11 12 14 23 24 28 29 30
31 32 33 36 40 40 40 46 46 48 48 51 54 55 56 59 65 65 65 68 70 71
4
Evaluation of Key Attributes 2. Size and Capacity Evaluation of Key Attributes 3. Ambience Scenery, Landscape and Views Peace, Quiet and Crowding Good for Walking, Dog Walking and Cycling Diversity of Wildlife and Natural Interest Visitor Patterns to Countryside and Woods and Forests Summary of Evaluation of Key Attributes 6. Key Management Objectives and Options for the Forest Park Recreation Management Visitor Access Management Brief Overview of Transport Strategy Sustainable Visitor Access Walking and Cycling Public Transport National Strategy on Cycling and Walking Sustainable Visitor Access Targets Travel by Car and Car Parking Toilets Waymarked Routes Eating and Drinking Out Other Recreation Opportunities Welcoming, Inclusive, Clean and Safe Safety Conservation Biodiversity Built and Historic Heritage Marketing, Information, Education and Community Involvement Marketing, Publicity and Promotion Information and Interpretation Visitor Centre Education and Community Involvement Management Organisation Costs and Funding 73 78 79 83 84 86 87 88 91 92 92 92 96 97 98 99 100 100 103 104 105 105 106 107 107 107 108
108 108 109 109 109 111 111
List of Tables
Table 1 Estimated Increase in Visitor Numbers to the New Forest up to 2026 Table 2 Open Space Deficit in Southern Test Valley Table 3 Leisure Day Visits to National Parks in England Table 4 All Visits to National Parks in 2005 Table 5 Visitor Days Per Annum to National Parks in 2008 Table 6 ACORN Classification of National Park Visitors, 2005 Table 7 Reasons for Choosing to Visit National Parks Table 8 Information Sources Used on National Park Visit Table 9 Age and Gender Profile of Visitors to the New Forest National Park Table 10 Socio- economic Profile of Visitors Table 11 Group Composition and Average Group Size Table 12 Main Purpose of Leisure Visit to the New Forest Table 13 All Other Reasons for Leisure Visits to the New Forest Table 14 Attributes of the New Forest Particularly Liked by Visitors Table 15 Use of Facilities by Visitors Table 16 Frequency of Visits to the New Forest National Park Table 17 Mean Duration of Visits to the New Forest by Activity Table 18 ACORN (socio-economic) Classification for 20 Minute Drivezone Table 19 Participation in Sport and Leisure Activities in the 20 minute Drivezone Table 20 Estimate of Increase in Recreational Visits to the New Forest by 2026 Table 21 Estimate and Profile of Current Visits to the New Forest by Test Valley Residents Table 22 Estimate of Additional Visits to the New Forest by Test Valley Residents by 2026 Table 23 Estimates of Current Visits Per Head (vph) to the New Forest for Hampshire Districts Table 24 Estimated Growth in Visits to the New Forest from Hampshire Districts by 2026 (Method 1) Table 25 Estimated Growth in Visits to the New Forest from Hampshire Residents by 2026 (Method 2) Table 26 Summary of Ecological Survey Data for the Forest Park Table 27 Comparison of Visit Destinations for Leisure Activities
Page 28 32 41 41 42 42 44 45 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 58 67 67 74 74 75 76 77 77 86 88
List of Figures
Figure 1 Main Activity on Leisure Visits to National Parks Figure 2 Duration of Leisure Visits to National Parks Figure 3 Summary Profile of Visitors to the New Forest National Park Figure 4 Comparison of Facility Use by Different Types of Visitor Figure 5 Frequency of Visits to the New Forest National Park Figure 6 Mean Duration of Visit by Activity
Page 43 44 47 56 57 58
List of Maps
Map 1 Proposed Forest Park Map 2 GI Concept Plan for Southern Hampshire Map 3 Green Network Plan for South Hampshire Map 4 Location and Accessibility of the Forest Park Map 5 20 Minute Drive Time Catchment of the Forest Park Map 6 Major Public Countryside Sites near the Forest Park Map 7.1 Potential Access Routes into Lordswood Map 7.2 Potential Access Routes in to Rownhams Wood Map 7.3 Potential Access Routes into Hut Wood Map 7.4 Potential Access Routes into Nightingale Wood Map 8 Potential Locations for Car Parks/Toilets/Visitor Centre Map 9.1 Access to Natural Greenspace Standard ANGSt for Forest Park Map 9.2 Woodland Access Standard WASt for Forest Park Map 9.3 20 Minute Cycle Ride Catchment from Forest Park Map 10.1 Public Rights of Way Around the Forest Park Map 10.2 Cycleway Network Around the Forest Park
Page Appendix 1 18 19 Appendix 1 66 Appendix 1 Appendix 1 Appendix 1 Appendix 1 Appendix 1 Appendix 1 Appendix 1 Appendix 1 Appendix 1 Appendix 1 Appendix 1
1. Introduction
1.1 This report was commissioned by Test Valley Borough Council with the purpose of assessing the feasibility of establishing a new Forest Park in the south of the borough. The Forest Park is proposed within the Councils Core Strategy Development Plan Document (Preferred Development Options) January 2008, with the principal objective of mitigating recreational visitor pressures on the New Forest National Park, which may arise from the increase in the local population up to 2026 as a result of the proposed development of 8,910 new houses in the borough. 1.2 The New Forest contains habitats and species of European nature conservation significance and importance, which are protected by the designation under the EC Habitats Directive as a SAC (Special Area of Conservation), and under the EC Birds Directive as a SPA (Special Protection Area) and a Ramsar site under the international Ramsar Convention. 1.3 The Appropriate Assessment of the Draft South East Plan, as well as those for the TVBC Core Strategy, and that for the neighbouring Southampton City Council Core Strategy, have all identified the potential for residential development and population growth to lead to increased visitor pressures in the New Forest, which may have a significant effect on these designated areas. 1.4 To seek to mitigate these potential effects, the amended South East Plan, supported by a draft Green Infrastructure Strategy for South Hampshire and supported by Natural England, proposes the provision of alternative natural green space of sufficient scale and suitably located to absorb visitor pressures on the New Forest. 1.5 To this end, TVBC has identified almost 400ha of woodland and commercial forest in the south of the borough as a potential Forest Park. TVBC also views the Forest Park as an opportunity to increase the provision of green space and access to the countryside for the residents of southern Test Valley and neighbouring districts and thereby contribute towards wider objectives e.g. on health and sustainability. 1.6 This report sets out the findings of the feasibility study in relation to the brief from TVBC which required that the study should: Advise on the justification for the Forest Park; Consider its potential capacity ; Advise on the accessibility of the area by motor vehicles and non-vehicular modes of transport; Advise on the options for recreation opportunities and their merits; Advise on the management issues of recreation in the area; Advise on the potential delivery of the Forest Park; Advise on the feasibility of the proposal.
2. Executive Summary
2.1 The main approach taken in this study, was to analyse current patterns of visitors to National Parks in England and to the New Forest National Park in particular, and to identify the characteristics of the visitors and their activities, and to identify the particular attributes of these National Parks which were of value to visitors and attracted them to return time and again. 2.2 Having identified these key attributes, the proposed Forest Park site was evaluated against them, to assess to what extent it could potentially provide what visitors desired. It is believed this approach by identifying the critical success factors and evaluating the proposed site against them, gives a good indication as to the likely success of the proposed Forest Park in achieving its principal objective of providing a viable alternative to visiting the New Forest. 2.3 The main key attributes identified, are connected to the innate characteristics and qualities of the proposed site:
Key Attributes Necessary for the Forest Park: 1. Location and Accessibility including the location of the proposed site in relation to the target catchment, and the ease of accessing the site by different modes of transport; 2. Size and Capacity the proposed site needs to be sufficiently large and robust to accommodate the likely visitor numbers required to mitigate the effects of population growth from new residential development; 3. Ambience this relates to the atmosphere, character and environmental attributes of the proposed site, and how they compare to the New Forest experience based on the characteristics most valued by visitors, including scenery, landscape and views, peace and quiet and wildlife diversity. 2.4 The evaluation found that the proposed Forest Park performs well against all these critical success factors. It is well located in relation to the target catchment in Hampshire, being effectively, at the gateway between the New Forest and the rest of Hampshire. It is well located in relation to the motorway and major road networks, all of which pass through or around the site. Within a 20 minute drive time of the site, there are over 600,000 people. 2.5 The site has good potential access by road, and by the existing network of public rights of way, several of which cross the site. It will benefit from the TVBC plans to extend the cycleway network in southern Test Valley. There is a large potential population of visitors, including the urban centres of Southampton, Eastleigh and Romsey, within a 20 minute cycle ride. 2.6 Whilst no suitable car parking areas were identified within the Forest Park itself, potential locations were identified adjacent to the road network through the site. The Park and Ride facilities proposed in the Southampton City Council Core Strategy DPD, offer the potential for a Park and Ride bus service to the proposed Forest Park. 2.7 At almost 400ha, the site is large by the standards of comparable country parks in Hampshire. The study estimates that Green Infrastructure and alternative green
spaces in south Hampshire will need to attract between 176,643 and 431,375 visits a year away from the New Forest by 2026 in order to fully mitigate the potential effects of development and population growth. The study suggests that the proposed Forest Park has the capacity to meet all of this growth at the lower estimate and around half of the higher estimate. 2.8 The study also finds that the proposed Forest Park has many of the environmental characteristics which visitors to the New Forest particularly value, such as peace and quiet, a diversity of wildlife and natural interest, attractive scenery and landscape. The existing extensive network of forest tracks and rides provides great potential to meet other valued characteristics of the New Forest; that it is good for walking, good for walking dogs and good for cycling. Finally, it meets another criteria valued by New Forest visitors, that the site should be easy to get to and close to home. Most local day visitors from Hampshire could save at least 10km on a round trip to the Forest Park instead of the New Forest. 2.9 The study then assessed the potential of the Forest Park to provide for other identified key attributes of visits to the New Forest as well as criteria derived from the Draft PUSH Green Infrastructure Strategy, the TVBC Green Spaces Strategy, the Countryside Access Plans for the area, and other relevant objectives, which are summarised below: that the Forest Park should have good walking and cycling access and good access for horse riding from local communities; that this access should link into a network of routes in the surrounding countryside; that it should provide opportunities for informal recreation; the layout, design and management of the Forest Park should seek to achieve the green space standards set out in the TVBC Green Spaces Strategy, including: it should be a welcoming place; it should be healthy, safe and secure; it should be clean and well maintained; it should be managed sustainably; natural and built heritage should be conserved; there should be community involvement in the management ; it should be well marketed and promoted; there should be a management plan.
2.10 These are attributes, which unlike those above, can be influenced by the way in which the site is planned and managed, given the necessary investment. The study finds that the Forest Park has the capability of being managed in such a way as to achieve all of these requirements. 2.11 The study concludes that the proposed Forest Park can provide a viable alternative to visits to the New Forest and provide a valuable new green space for local communities between Romsey, Eastleigh and Southampton, given the right investment and management.
3. Background and Justification for the Proposed Forest Park

3.1 The Test Valley Borough Council Core Strategy Development Plan Document (Core Strategy DPD) Preferred Development Options 20081 sets out at paragraph 11.11 and Preferred Option 16,the proposed establishment of a new Country Park as follows:
The southern part of the borough lies adjacent to the internationally important New Forest National Park. A Green Infrastructure Study is being undertaken for the Partnership for Urban South Hampshire. Provision of a country park could enhance access to informal recreation for the southern area and help to relieve recreational pressure on the New Forest National Park. Designation of a country park would therefore play a wider role in protecting the distinctiveness of the New Forest in the sub-region as well as meeting local informal recreational needs.
10
Following consultation on its role and function, the proposed country park is now referred to as a Forest Park. The location and extent of the proposed Forest Park is shown at Map 1 in the appendices. 3.2 From this Preferred Option, four key inter-related objectives can be discerned: 1. Reducing recreational pressures on the New Forest, by : 2. Providing new, locally accessible green spaces for the residents of Southern Test Valley, Eastleigh and Southampton; 3. Increasing access to the countryside for these residents; and 4. Encouraging healthy lifestyles.
3.3 These objectives are themselves, rooted in other policies and proposals in the Core Strategy DPD and other national, regional and local policy documents. These links are explored in greater detail below, in order to clarify the rationale and justification for the Forest Park.
Reducing Recreational Pressures on the New Forest

3.4 The New Forest National Park was designated in 2005 and covers an area of 57,100ha. Over half of this area is of European nature conservation importance, including the New Forest Special Area of Conservation (SAC) at 29,262ha2 and the overlapping New Forest Special Protection Area (SPA)3 and Ramsar site4 at 28,002 ha. 3.5 The most recent comprehensive visitor survey of the New Forest National Park was undertaken in 2005 for the then Countryside Agency(now part of Natural
1
The Test Valley Borough Council Core Strategy Development Plan Document (Core Strategy DPD) Preferred Development Options, January 2008. 2 http://www.jncc.gov.uk/ProtectedSites/SACselection/sac.asp?EUCode=UK0012557 3 http://www.jncc.gov.uk/pdf/SPA/UK9011031.pdf
4
http://www.jncc.gov.uk/pdf/RIS/UK11047.pdf
England) by Tourism South East Research Services.5 The survey, known as the PROGRESS survey estimated that some 13.345 million visits are made to the New Forest each year. Of these visitors 35% (4.671 million) were local day visitors, originating from within the National Park itself and from within an area of 8km around the park. A further 25% (3.336 million) were from non-local day visitors. Of these non-local day visitors, 52% (0.902 million) were from within Hampshire.
11
The South East Plan 3.6 The New Forest is one of Englands smallest National Parks by area, but has one of the highest proportions of land of European nature conservation importance and simultaneously has one of the highest volumes of visitors of all the National Parks. This combination of high recreational volume in a relatively small and internationally important area, is recognised in the Regional Spatial Strategy for the South East6 . At Section D7 paragraph 1.7 the South East Plan states:
The Government recognises that each National Park is different, so although the overarching policy framework needs to uphold generic National Park standards and objectives, these need to be informed by more locally specific issues. There are special circumstances in the New Forest that warrant a tailor-made policy approach, due to the fact that it has the highest proportion of area in international nature conservation designations of any National Park; it is the smallest National Park; and is under intense pressure. There is also a need to protect areas outside the National Park for back-up commoning land to sustain grazing in the open forest. Further work needs to be undertaken (perhaps by the New Forest National Park Authority) to provide advice to local planning authorities with regard to protecting the setting of the Park and safeguarding land with a functional relationship to it.
3.7 Policy C1a of the South East Plan recognising these pressures, states:
THE NEW FOREST NATIONAL PARK High priority should be given to conserving and enhancing land within the New Forest National Park. The local planning authority and other partners should also develop supportive sustainable land management policies, both inside the National Park and within the zone of New Forest communing activity, including protection of grazing land outside the National Park which is needed to support National Park purposes.
3.8 In its comments on the Draft South East Plan following the Examination in Public7, the Panel of Inspectors supported the retention of this policy for the following reasons:
12.10 The first of the countryside policies relates to the New Forest National Park. ........ For that same reason i.e. repetition of national policy, GOSE argues that the first part of Policy C1a should be deleted. Nonetheless, on balance we favour its retention, since it calls for high priority consideration from local authorities, a factor which is particularly necessary in the New Forest given the proximity of urban areas that are planned for significant growth. We recommend additional wording to the first part of the policy to emphasise the aim of conserving the specific character of the New Forest.
5 6
Visitor Survey of the New Forest National Park, 2004-05, Tourism South East A Clear Vision for the South East: The South East Plan, March 2006, South East England Regional Assembly 7 Panel Report On The Regional Spatial Strategy For South East England,6th August 2007
12.11 The Park Authority argued that the area immediately outside the Park should receive some further degree of protection from development to conserve the setting of the Park. We agree that this is important, particularly in view of the acute pressures of urbanisation in the area. Although a number of authorities are undoubtedly already doing this, for the sake of clarity we recommend an addition to the policy to mirror the provision in Policy C2 on AONBs where the setting is to be a material factor in planning decisions.
12
3.9 The Panel again recognises the importance of the New Forest and the pressures it is under when commenting on the South East Plan policies for South Hampshire:
16.1 As E1, paragraph 1.1 of the draft Plan outlines, South Hampshire is the largest urban area in the region and is home to almost one million people. The sub-region covers the whole districts of Eastleigh, Fareham, Gosport, Havant, Portsmouth and Southampton, and parts of East Hampshire, New Forest, Test Valley and Winchester. The two main centres of Portsmouth and Southampton are at its core but a number of adjacent, smaller settlements play complementary roles and together form an almost continuous, loose-knit urban area close to the Solent coastline. New Forest National Park lies immediately to the west and the proposed South Downs National Park to the northeast. 16.6 The economic target is generally accepted as aspirational (see discussion in 16.16 below) but some participants feared that it would place the areas significant environmental assets under extreme pressure. The SA and the AA provide the basis for concerns, for example, about the impact on water quality and biodiversity in the Solent SPA and SAC, and on the SPA and SAC in New Forest National Park, due to any increased recreational pressure. The relationship with the proposed South Downs National Park is also a particular concern.
Appropriate Assessment of the South East Plan 3.10 The AA referred to in this statement, is the Appropriate Assessment of the Draft South East Plan. Schedule 1 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2006,8 incorporates a new Part IVA into the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations 19949, and transposes into English law, the requirement in the European Habitats Directive10 to carry out Appropriate Assessment (AA) for all land use plans. These land use plans include Regional Spatial Strategies (such as the South East Plan) and Local Development Plan Documents (such as the Test Valley Borough Council Core Strategy DPD). 3.11 This process is described in the guidance produced by the DCLG 11 Planning for the Protection of European Sites, as follows:
1.2 The purpose of Appropriate Assessment (AA) of land use plans is to ensure that protection of the integrity of European sites is a part of the planning process at a regional and local level. The requirement for AA of plans or projects is outlined in Article 6(3) and (4)
8 9
the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2006 The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations 1994 10 Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora 11 Planning for the Protection of European Sites: Appropriate Assessment under The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &C) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2006 Guidance For Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents, August 2006
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study of the European Communities (1992) Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (Habitats Directive).
13
3.12 The Articles referred to above are further described as follows:

Habitats Directive Article 6(3) Any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination with other plans and projects, shall be subject to appropriate assessment of its implications for the site in view of the sites conservation objectives. In light of the conclusions of the assessment of the implications for the site and subject to the provisions of paragraph 4, the competent national authorities shall agree to the plan or project only after ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site concerned and, if appropriate, after having obtained the opinion of the general public. Article 6(4) If in spite of a negative assessment of the implications for the site and in the absence of alternative solutions, a plan or project must nevertheless be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature, the member states shall take all compensatory measures necessary to ensure that overall coherence of Natura 2000 is protected. It shall inform the Commission of the compensatory measures adopted. Where the site concerned hosts a priority natural habitat type and/or priority species, the only considerations which may be raised are those relating to human health or public safety, of beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment or, further to an opinion from the Commission, to other imperative reasons of overriding public interest.
3.13 The DCLG guidance summarises the AA process as:

2.1 It is possible to summarise the AA process prescribed in Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive into three main tasks: 1. likely significant effects (AA task 1); 2. appropriate assessment and ascertaining the effect on site integrity (AA task 2); 3. mitigation and alternative solutions (AA task 3);
3.14 The AA of the Draft South East Plan12 included an assessment of the planned development in the South East Plan on the New Forest SAC and SPA/Ramsar sites. For both sites the AA concluded that:
it was not possible to conclude no adverse effect due to increased recreational pressure associated with developments under the South East Plan, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects.
3.15 The AA went on to outline possible avoidance and mitigation measures for recreational pressures on the New Forest SAC and SPA/Ramsar sites.
Avoidance of recreational impacts at European sites involves location of new development away from such sites. Mitigation involves a mix of access management, habitat management and provision of alternative recreational space.
12 st
Appropriate Assessment of the Draft South East Plan. Final Report, 31 October 2006. Scott-Wilson, LevettTherivel.)
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study Provision of alternative recreational space can help to attract recreational users away from sensitive European sites and reduce additional pressure on them.......However the location and type of alternative space must be attractive for users to be effective; some recreational use may be less amenable to attempts at Relocation; and some European sites (e.g. Ashdown Forest, New Forest) attract people from beyond a local area, and those people are unlikely to be easily diverted to alternative recreational space.
14
3.16 The AA went on to make a number of recommendations for modifications to the South East Plan to avoid or mitigate for recreational pressure on European sites such as the New Forest. These included:
Generally strengthens its approach to recreational provision, perhaps through the inclusion of a region-wide policy to address recreational impacts; Restricts development abutting those sites listed (e.g. the New Forest) that are already subject to recreational pressure that affects site integrity, by provision of a buffer zone of no development; Encourages the establishment of large new parks and other green areas in the region, possibly acting as stepping stones to other open spaces, possibly as part of a green infrastructure policy. Such parks would also help to support other RSS objectives, e.g. robustness to climate change; Considers whether other forms of new or enhanced recreational space is needed in line with the normal planning consideration of open space provision as directed by PPG17. As with all necessary infrastructure, such green infrastructure should be in place prior to development for which it is designed to mitigate predicted effects; Promote multi-local authority working to assess whether recreational pressures are likely to have a significant impact on the integrity of those European sites listed(e.g. the New Forest); where this is likely to be a problem, agree and implement a S106 funding regime for improved habitat management where appropriate; and where this is unlikely to preserve site integrity, assess and implement the provision of alternative recreational space where appropriate. Any such alternative recreational space must be provided in advance of development that could affect the integrity of the European site, and in locations that would be attractive to users. Promote access management in European sites.
It is likely that these measures, together, would prevent significant in combination impacts on European sites related to recreational disturbance.
Green Infrastructure 3.17 The South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA), accepted these recommendations and introduced modifications to the South East Plan to enact them. Of most direct relevance to this feasibility study, SEERA introduced a new policy on Green Infrastructure. This new policy was accepted by the Panel of Inspectors at the Examination in Public of the South East Plan and subsequently, by the Secretary of State to whom the Panel reported its findings and recommendations. Following proposed amendments by the Panel and the Secretary of State13, and the publication of the Regional Spatial Strategy for the South East 14 the policy (CC8) now reads as follows:
Policy CC8: Green Infrastructure
13
Secretary of States Proposed Changes to the draft Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) for the South East, 17 July 2008 14 The Regional Spatial Strategy for the South East, DCLG, May 2009.
th
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study Local authorities and partners should work together to plan, provide and manage connected and substantial networks of accessible multi-functional green space. Networks should be planned to include both existing and new infrastructure. They should be managed with the primary aim of maintaining and improving biodiversity, but should also deliver recreational and cultural benefits and ensure that an improved and healthy environment is available for the benefit of present and future communities. The provisions of this policy apply region-wide. However, the successful designation and management of Green Infrastructure will be particularly important in areas designated as regional hubs, in areas close to sites of international ecological importance and in areas identified for significant growth (Strategic Development Areas). For the purposes of spatial planning the term Green Infrastructure relates to the active planning and management of sub-regional networks of multi-functional open space. These networks should be managed and designed to support biodiversity and wider quality of life, particularly in areas undergoing large scale change. Whilst provision and maintenance of Green Infrastructure will be particularly important on the urban fringe and within new development, consideration of the value of Green Infrastructure networks will necessarily extend across all spatial scales, from the neighbourhood to the wider region, with the creation and maintenance of linkages between spaces being a prime concern. Consideration of planning and management of Green Infrastructure must be undertaken with the following multi-functional objectives in mind: Preservation and enhancement of biodiversity, including the need to mitigate the potential impacts of new development Creating a sense of place and opportunities for greater appreciation of valuable landscapes and cultural heritage Increasing recreational opportunities, including access to and enjoyment of the countryside and supporting healthy living Improved water resource and flood management and sustainable design Making a positive impact to combating climate change through adaptation and mitigation of impacts Sustainable transport, education and crime reduction.
15
Policy CC8 is included in this plan to ensure that connected networks of green spaces around new built environment are treated as integral to a planning and design process which is conscious of its place within Green Infrastructure networks. Green Infrastructure should not just be considered as an adjunct to new development, and policies and strategies relating to Green Infrastructure assets in Local Development Frameworks should have spatial expression and not just be restricted to its definition. Future revisions to this RSS should work to identify and map existing regionally and subregionally significant networks of Green Infrastructure in the South East. One mechanism to help towards this goal will be the Framework for Green Infrastructure in the South East which is currently being prepared by Natural England and its partners.
3.18 The critical role and responsibilities of Natural England in respect of the AA of the South East Plan and Local Development Frameworks is discussed later. In regard to Policy CC8S requirements that, local authorities and partners should work
together to plan, provide and manage connected and substantial networks of accessible multi-functional green space, and work to identify and map existing regionally and sub-regionally significant networks of Green Infrastructure, the Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH) has taken the lead in this task for the South Hampshire sub-region. PUSH is currently engaged in the production of a Green Infrastructure Strategy for South Hampshire. A considerable volume of background work has already being undertaken in connection with this strategy by consultants TEP and published as Towards a Green Infrastructure Strategy for South Hampshire: Advice to PUSH, TEP, July 200815. 3.19 The advice to PUSH is summarised in the recommendations to the above report in Section 6, The Spatial Framework. This is shown below, with the recommendations of greatest relevance to this feasibility study, highlighted in bold type: Section 6 Recommendation to PUSH: Spatial Framework
Arising out of the green infrastructure vision for South Hampshire, the following green infrastructure goals are suggested, which list the priorities for delivering multifunctional green infrastructure and guide the subsequent green infrastructure Concept and Network Plans: 1. All people should live within 20 minutes cycle of a locally-valuable green space; 2. From such locally-valuable green spaces, people should be able to reach the coast, the nearest river and the rural hinterland (the Forest of Bere) along a green access network (this concept is defined as a Green Loop); 3. Urban areas should be leafy and walk able, and people should live within 300m of a natural green space; 4. A network of strategic multifunctional parks should be available within 20 minutes drive zone (approximately 10km) of all residents. The following types of park are envisaged, and in many cases several of these can be integrated into each strategic park unit: a. Marine parades and promenades b. Coastal natural parks c. Civic plazas and central parks d. Sporting and outdoor recreation parks e. River parks (navigation, leisure, biodiversity, landscape) f. Country Parks g. Urban commons and community woodlands h. Nature Reserves i. Linear Parks (e.g. along watercourses, transport corridors) j. Vistas and landmarks k. Local food-growing l. Parks forming the setting for built and maritime heritage m. Formal gardens 5. The distinctive landscape and heritage characters of our coastal promenades, our civic green spaces, our built heritage and the rural hinterland (Forest of Bere) should be enhanced and interpreted;
15
16
Towards a Green Infrastructure Strategy for South Hampshire : Advice to PUSH, TEP, July 2008
6. The waterfront is perceived as a regional park, where its green assets are planned, created and managed in an integrated way; 7. Major multi-purpose inland regional parks should be available to deliver sport, recreation, tourism and environmental benefits and take pressure off the New Forest, the South Downs and the natural coast; 8. Economic gateways should be celebrated through landmarks and high quality landscapes; into our major urban areas and into the South of England from the ports; 9. All new development and regeneration should follow eco-towns principles; safeguarding existing assets, increasing vegetation and surface porosity; and enjoying access to the green network; 10. Refuges for sensitive biodiversity and tranquillity should be protected, managed and (where necessary) created, integrating management across the network of refuges to adapt to and mitigate against continuing coastal and climatic change; 11. Near-continuous biodiversity networks should be established; a. from east to west along the coast b. from the New Forest, to the Forest of Bere and the South Downs c. from the Solent into the Forest of Bere; 12. The green infrastructure network will consist of healthy soils in urban and rural catchments, with green spaces and green streets being used to manage floods, attenuate surface water flows and mitigate urban heat islands; 13. Investment to create the proposed green network should use existing assets and partnerships; which are generally strong. Co-provision of the green network alongside investment in sport, health and flood management is particularly desirable; 14. Priority areas for intervention should be where green infrastructure will benefit communities in need, based on deprivation, health, demographic and mobility criteria; 15. Early intervention will be needed in existing urban areas, because these will be the focus for most growth in the period to 2020.
17
3.20 The plans below are taken from the TEP recommendations to PUSH and show the spatial proposals for GI provision in South Hampshire. The first plan Map 2 shows the GI Concept Plan, consisting of a network of inter-linked multi-functional green spaces, including blueways along river corridors and stepping stones. The plan shows a major concentration of multi-functional GI in southern Test Valley, between Romsey, Eastleigh and Southampton, and centred around the area proposed by TVBC for the Forest Park which is the subject of this feasibility study.
Map 2 GI Concept Plan for South Hampshire. TEP/PUSH, 2008
18
3.21 Map 3 below shows the Green Network Plan a more detailed interpretation of the spatial Concept Plan. The Green Network consists of a number of proposed key initiatives of regional significance supported by a range of more local projects. These proposals include: Green Infrastructure Gateways
At least two proposed inland Regional Parks would serve the recreational, leisure, health, sport and biodiversity needs of the two major urban areas. For the west, a suitable area is between the Rivers Test and Itchen (i.e. between Southampton and Eastleigh). For the east, the most likely location is at Staunton Country Park/Havant Thicket; but the River Meon / Whiteley Woods/West Walk area may also be suitable. These inland regional park proposals are shown as Green Infrastructure Gateways (specifically numbers 2, 4,5 & 9). Other strategically-significant green infrastructure gateways are major civic spaces, important country parks and woodlands of city-regional importance for a variety of functions. Most are already accessible to the public, but some are opportunities requiring further feasibility study. The essence of green infrastructure gateways is multi-functional management. They would deliver significant public benefit by virtue of their offer in social, economic and environmental terms, would be highly accessible and sustain a diversity of
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study uses, accepting there will be zones of environmental sensitivity where access may be restricted.
19
(Green Infrastructure Gateway 2 shown in Map 3 includes the Forest Park proposed by TVBC.) Green Access Network This includes the Southampton-Eastleigh Gap, shown as route number 7 in Figure 3, linking the Test Valley at Romsey, through to the Itchen Valley in Eastleigh, via a loop around the proposed TVBC Forest Park; Urban Wildlife Corridors These include the Tanners Brook corridor, linking the proposed TVBC Forest Park to the north, with Southampton Water to the south. Heritage Hubs These are areas of significant natural, built or cultural heritage, and include (at number 1 in Figure 3) Romsey, the River Test and Broadlands, which are adjacent to the proposed TVBC Forest Park. Map 3 Green Network Plan for South Hampshire. TEP/PUSH, 2008
3.22 In its comments on the chapter of the South East Plan dealing specifically with issues in the South Hampshire sub-region, the Panel of Inspectors for the EiP, considered the proposals for GI in South Hampshire, to be significant in seeking to
mitigate the possible effects of recreational and other pressures on important European sites:
16.1 As E1, para 1.1 of the draft Plan outlines, South Hampshire is the largest urban area in the region and is home to almost one million people. The sub-region covers the whole districts of Eastleigh, Fareham, Gosport, Havant, Portsmouth and Southampton, and parts of East Hampshire, New Forest, Test Valley and Winchester.......... 16.6 The economic target is generally accepted as aspirational (see discussion in 16.16 below) but some participants feared that it would place the areas significant environmental assets under extreme pressure. The SA and the AA provide the basis for concerns, for example, about the impact on water quality and biodiversity in the Solent SPA and SAC, and on the SPA and SAC in New Forest National Park, due to any increased recreational pressure. The relationship with the proposed South Downs National Park is also a particular concern. 16.7 However, it is difficult to accept that the draft Plan is not capable of addressing these issues. As the documentation supplied by PUSH to the Assembly in 2005 demonstrates, the immense natural advantages of the sub-region and the range of potential environmental impacts have been factored into the development of the overall strategy. And the AAs recommendations on avoidance and/or mitigation measures, as reflected in our proposed amendments to a number of policies, should provide the means to protect Natura 2000 sites from the likelihood of any significant adverse impact. It is noteworthy in this regard that PUSH has taken the lead in its promotion and development of a strategy for green infrastructure. We set out recommendations below that would address certain environmental and/or economic strands in the detailed subregional policies and recommend the deletion of the final sentence of Policy SH1 but otherwise, taking Policy SH1 in the round, we find it is generally sound. It could be made clearer that it is based on an integrated approach by inserting the word sustainable before economic in the first sentence of the policy, and by ensuring that the illustrative spatial diagram that we recommend (in Chapter 4) for each sub-region shows such important environmental designations as the New Forest National Park and the proposed South Downs National Park.
20
South East Green Infrastructure Framework 3.23 This was published in June 200916.Its purpose is to:
The Framework seeks to establish green infrastructure as an integral and essential component of sustainable communities, develop a common understanding of the role and importance of green infrastructure, and provides detailed guidance on how green infrastructure can be delivered through the planning system and local partnerships, including securing funding for its creation and long term maintenance.
3.24 The Framework document defines green infrastructure as:

For the purposes of spatial planning the term green infrastructure (GI) relates to the active planning and management of sub-regional networks of multi-functional open space. These networks should be managed and designed to support biodiversity and wider quality of life, particularly in areas undergoing large scale change.
3.25 The key functions of green infrastructure are described as:
16
South East Green Infrastructure Framework, Land Use Consultants. June 2009
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study Conservation and enhancement of biodiversity, including the need to mitigate the potential impacts of new development. Creating a sense of place and opportunities for greater appreciation of valuable landscapes and cultural heritage. Increasing recreational opportunities, including access to and enjoyment of the countryside and supporting healthy living. Improved water resource and flood management and sustainable design. Making a positive contribution to combating climate change through adaptation and mitigation of impacts. Sustainable transport, education and crime reduction. Production of food, fibre and fuel.
21
These therefore form key objectives for the proposed Forest Park. 3.26 In the context of the delivery of green infrastructure, the Framework sets out the following key messages:
Green infrastructure evidence gathering and analysis must inform the strategic vision within the Local Strategic Partnerships Sustainable Community Strategy and related Local Area Agreement targets. In order to deliver green infrastructure effectively and meet Local Area Agreement targets, it is essential that green infrastructure is fully integrated into the plan-making process, that consideration of green infrastructure begins at the earliest stages of that process and that green infrastructure provision is considered in relation to the particular functions most relevant in each area. Local authorities should take the lead in forming partnerships which utilise partners expertise, financial resources and land-ownership to contribute to the planning, provision and maintenance of local green infrastructure, whilst addressing the diverse objectives of the constituent organisations.
Strategy for Englands Trees, Woods and Forests 3.27 In A Strategy for Englands Trees, Woods and Forests17, Defra sets out the aims as:
provide, in England, a resource of trees, woods and forests in places where they can contribute most in terms of environmental, economic and social benefits now and for future generations ensure that existing and newly planted trees, woods and forests are resilient to the impacts of climate change and also contribute to the way in which biodiversity and natural resources adjust to a changing climate protect and enhance the environmental resources of water, soil, air, biodiversity and landscapes (both woodland and non-woodland), and the cultural and amenity values of trees and woodland increase the contribution that trees, woods and forests make to the quality of life for those living in, working in or visiting England improve the competitiveness of woodland businesses and promote the development of new or improved markets for sustainable woodland products and ecosystem services where this will deliver identifiable public benefits, nationally or locally, including the reduction of carbon emissions.
17
A Strategy for Englands Trees, Woods and Forests. Defra, 2007.
3.28 Realising the social and recreational benefits of trees, woodlands and forests are an important part of the strategy. The key Government objectives in this context are set out as:
involving local people in planning, managing and using local woodlands and the trees in streets and green spaces, to help achieve more cohesive communities and to show how individuals can contribute to environmental sustainability; making it easier for people to use and enjoy woodlands particularly in ways that benefit their physical and mental health, learning and personal development; creating liveable neighbourhoods, towns and cities by using trees and woodlands as part of the green infrastructure which frames and connects urban and rural areas, improves the quality of a place, and regenerates brownfield and derelict land; using trees and woodlands to help minimise the impacts of climate change in built-up areas.
22
3.29 The relevant polices to help achieve these objectives are set out as:
help people to engage with the ownership, design, management, maintenance and use of their local trees and woodlands as part of their vision for their own neighbourhood (especially those groups and individuals who are difficult to reach or not currently involved); promote and support the role of trees and woodlands as a catalyst for community capacity building, bringing together different members of the community through formal and informal activities; support healthy living policies by encouraging people to use woodlands (in public, private, and voluntary and community sector ownership) for physical activities ranging from recreation and play to organised sport and conservation volunteering; the priority will be to provide high quality access near where people live, integrated with other statutory and permissive access where appropriate; provide, for everyone who could benefit, information about the accessibility and public use of local woodlands; support the use of trees and woodland as a resource for lifelong learning, including implementing policies on teaching and learning outside the classroom; pursue opportunities to increase public recognition, enjoyment and understanding of the historic, archaeological and cultural value of trees and forests, particularly of our ancient woodlands and veteran trees.
Forestry Commissions Role in Green Infrastructure Delivery 3.30 Following on from the above strategy, and as its contribution towards the development of a PUSH Green Infrastructure Strategy, the Forestry Commission (which is responsible for managing the majority of the forest within the proposed Forest Park) has produced its own delivery strategy.18 3.31 The key messages from this document are that:
1. The productive landscapes FE provides can deliver multifunctional benefits with strong social and environment outcomes, within a financial framework that minimises net cost. 2. Forest Enterprise can be a key partner in delivering cost effective green infrastructure at a local and landscape level. 3. Investment (capital and revenue) in Forest Enterprise's existing landholding or in acquiring/creating new sites can provide considerable additional multifunctional benefits and enhanced landscape connectivity.
18
Forest Enterprises Delivery of Green Infrastructure. Forestry Commission, 2008.
3.32 One of Forest Enterprise's key roles is being an exemplar land manager, able to balance the multi-purpose use of its estate to meet local, regional and national needs in conventional and in innovative ways. One of Forest Enterprise's principle objectives is to increase day visitor numbers to the countryside. The Views of Natural England 3.33 It is important to note that Natural England has a statutory role in the planning process in connection with the conservation of sites and species of nature conservation importance, especially sites of national importance ( Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and sites of European importance (SACs and SPAs ). ODPM Circular 06/200519 reminds local planning authorities at paragraph 7 that :
A planning authority is required, under the General Development Procedure Order 1995 (the GPDO), to consult English Nature (now Natural England),and, under the provisions of section 281 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, to notify English Nature before granting planning permission for development likely to damage a SSSI, even if the development is not located in the SSSI.
23
3.34 The Circular goes on at paragraph 8 to state that:

In responding, English Nature will advise if the SSSI forms part of a European site or is otherwise of significance in terms of the Birds or Habitats Directives or the Ramsar Convention. English Nature will also advise whether, in its opinion, the proposed development would be likely to significantly affect the ecological value for which the site was notified as a SSSI or classified internationally, whether in connection with the proposal there may be reasonable steps that could be taken to further the conservation and enhancement of the SSSI and if appropriate, will suggest what measures might be taken to avoid any damaging effects.
3.35 At paragraph 17 reference is made to the need to consult Natural England in relation to any AA to ascertain if there is any likely significant effect of a plan or project, on any European site. This advice is reinforced in the DCLG guidance Planning for the Protection of European Sites: Appropriate Assessment (see previous reference 10 above) which states that:
Natural England (previously English Nature) is the statutory nature conservation body for AA. It must be consulted from the beginning of the process alongside any other relevant environmental bodies....
3.36 The views of Natural England on the potential effects of the quantum of proposed residential development in the South East Plan on European sites, was summarised by Mr. Andy Gordon at a workshop organised by the New Forest National Park Authority on 2nd December 2008. The workshop, entitled Core Strategies Recreational Impacts and Implications for Habitats Regulations Assessments, had the following objectives: To engage Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) within 20km of the New Forest SPA/SAC/Ramsar and raise awareness of the findings of local research on the New Forest designated sites;
19
Circular 06/2005 (Biodiversity and Geological Conservation Statutory Obligations and Their Impact Within th the Planning System, ODPM, 16 August 2005
To enable Natural England to communicate their advice on Habitats 24 Regulations issues relating to recreational impacts and the New Forest SPA/SAC/Ramsar; To initiate debate on the levels of mitigation required, roles and linkages to the PUSH Green Infrastructure Strategy and other regional initiatives.
3.37 Andy Gordon summarised the views of Natural England as:

That the predicted increase in the number of visitors, as a result of in-combination effects of housing development up to 2026, up to 20km from the New Forest National Park boundary, will have a likely significant effect on European site features of interest including: New Forest SPA and Ramsar; New Forest SAC; Solent and Southampton Water SPA and Ramsar; Solent Maritime SAC.
3.38 He went on to explain, that in respect of Natural Englands statutory role:

We need to be able to conclude no adverse effect in order to support that the LDF (Local Development Framework, which for Test Valley is currently at the Core Strategy Submission stage) is sound at EiP and to fulfil the legal duties under the new Habitats Regulations (2006,Section 85).
3.39 To achieve this outcome, he urged the PUSH authorities in association with the New Forest National Park Authority (NPA), to agree the following package of measures: A joint agreement and funding pot that secures: Future management across South Hampshire and the New Forest National Park, of the priority biodiversity/recreation sites; Creation and management of new GI sites; Monitoring and research. The Role and Views of the New Forest National Park Authority 3.40 The New Forest National Park was created in March 2005 and the New Forest National Park Authority (NPA) took up its full powers in April 2006. Its purposes are: To conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the Park To promote opportunities for understanding and enjoyment of its special qualities. 3.41 It is the eighth national park in England, the first in the south-east of England and the first to be created for nearly 50 years. The National Park lies mainly in southwest Hampshire from east of the Avon Valley to Southampton Water and from the Solent coast to the edge of the Wiltshire chalk downs.
3.42 The NPA has produced the New Forest National Park Plan20. At chapter 2 (Pressures, trends and opportunities) the plan refers to the current and predicted future pressures on the important features of the National Park:
Economic growth within the Park and in the surrounding areas brings both pressures and opportunities for the area. Easy access from the large conurbations nearby is already creating a high recreational demand and potential conflicts with the conservation of internationally important habitats and species... There is a continued demand for new development, both within and immediately adjacent to the Park, with implications for the rural character of the area, its visual setting and the conservation of its rich historic and natural heritage. Trends over the next 20 years are likely to include: Major housing growth in South Hampshire and South East Dorset, bringing increased traffic and recreational pressure. Close working with neighbouring authorities is needed to mitigate the adverse impacts of development and to find ways for the National Park to benefit positively from the buoyant economy of the region.
25
3.43 With specific reference to the recreational pressures, the plan notes that:
Both residents and surrounding communities have clear, and often varying, expectations of what the Park should provide for their enjoyment and recreation. Over the next 20 years trends are likely to include: Increasing tensions between residents and visitors over the use of the New Forest for recreation and the measures needed to conserve its qualities of remoteness and tranquillity
The National Park does have the potential to meet many of the physical, mental and spiritual needs of its communities, but this will need carefully considered, positive and flexible management of recreation both within and outside the Park.
3.44 The plan puts forward the following objectives and policies in seeking to address these pressures:
Objective C2 Protect the cultural landscapes, biodiversity and character of the built environment from the impacts of development pressure within and beyond the National Park The New Forest lies between two of the major growth areas in southern England. The South Hampshire sub-region (including Southampton, Portsmouth, Totton and the Waterside) has a target of 80,000 new houses by 2026. An additional 2,400 houses are proposed in New Forest District outside the National Park. The south east Dorset conurbation of Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole has a planned total of 34,000 houses over the same period, the creation of 42,000 new jobs and the major expansion of Bournemouth airport. This represents a significant increase in population and economic activity which will have impacts on the fabric of the National Park, its visual setting and peoples enjoyment of the area. There will be an estimated 12% increase (an additional 1.6 million visitor days) in people using the National Park for recreation by 20267, together with a substantial growth in commuter and through traffic. The latter may well lead to pressure to improve the existing road and service infrastructure. While development is inevitable, and may in some cases have positive benefits for the National Park, much greater effort is needed to manage the increasing demands made on
20
New Forest National Park Plan Consultation Draft, New Forest National Park Authority,2008)
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study the Park and create a better understanding of its sensitivities, as well as its positive benefits, in nearby authorities. Working together, practical mitigation measures must be agreed and become an integral part of new development proposals, including new green infrastructure close to centres of population. The quality of the surrounding landscapes, visual impacts from outside the Park and the requirement for back-up land for communing beyond the boundary should also be considered as neighbouring authorities develop their land use and development proposals. Policy CP2.1 Work with surrounding authorities (and regional decision makers) to maintain the integrity and value of the Special Qualities of the National Park, through: improving awareness of Section 62 responsibilities, the requirements of European nature conservation legislation and the need for protection of the setting of the National Park influencing external policies and development proposals at an early stage providing the necessary infrastructure close to the development itself (such as green space, community facilities and local services). A range of mitigation measures should be developed to minimise the impacts of agreed development on the Special Qualities of the Park, including design considerations, green infrastructure and traffic management. Where appropriate developer contributions will be sought for visitor management and sustainable transport to offset development impacts. Objective U3 Manage the impacts of recreation on the environment and communities of the National Park Policy UP3.3 Work with nearby authorities and land managers to identify and establish countryside sites outside the National Park, close to population centres. This should include country parks or similar sites located in particular to the north east of the National Park, close to Southampton, Totton and the Waterside. New sites should provide a high quality countryside experience and form part of a wider green infrastructure network of informal open spaces for use by local people.
26
3.45 The NPA has also produced a draft recreation management strategy for the New Forest National Park which seeks to address similar issues, through the way in which the National Park21 is managed. The following are extracts from the strategy, relevant to this feasibility study:
Future challenges In the coming years further challenges will face the New Forest National Park. Change is inevitable and the challenge will be to maintain the essence of what makes the New Forest special recognising that its character will nevertheless change. Climate change is introducing considerable uncertainty and serves as a key driver to ensure protected sites are well managed. Higher temperatures and an emphasis on carbon reduction may result in more people holidaying i n the UK. Climate change is likely to increase the vulnerability of environmental resources. Significant population growth within a 50km (30 mile) radius of the New Forest is likely as a result of new housing provision and projections suggest that this alone could increase the number of visitor days spent in the New Forest by 12% or 1.6 million by 2026. An increasing proportion of these visitors is more likely to be in the older age range. Nevertheless this
21
Draft Recreation Management Strategy for the New Forest National Park, 2008
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study figure may be significantly increased or reduced depending on changing lifestyles; here projections of past trends forward are often unreliable. Increasing traffic volumes appear inevitable as a consequence of surrounding population growth unless there is a radical change in national transport policy and fuel pricing. National policy underlines the importance of outdoor recreation for healthy living and wellbeing
27
3.46 The relevant strategic aims of the strategy include:

The Strategy uses four complementary approaches to the future management of outdoor recreation in the New Forest to meet the Strategic Aims: a spatial approach influencing visitor behaviour managing recreation demand working with and through others. To some extent these approaches are complementary and will overlap. Of the four approaches, the most significant change is an increasing emphasis on considering the spatial distribution of recreation and the facilities needed to support it. This complements the approach to location of development, land management and transport management in the National Park Plan: 1. Ensure that the right activities take place in the right place and at the right time in order to maximise visitor experience, enhance tranquillity, and minimise pressure on the most fragile areas and local communities of the National Park. 2. Promote behaviour that helps to improve peoples experience and deepen their understanding and stewardship of the Forest 3. Manage recreation demand in the New Forest by anticipating likely increases in different types of recreation and planning for this: setting limits on capacity where increased provision would be to the detriment of the New Forest and working with others to develop destinations which provide attractive alternatives for everyday recreational activity.
3.47 To inform its work on planning and managing the National Park, the NPA has commissioned a number of studies. The most relevant to this feasibility study, is the study undertaken by Footprint Ecology22.The findings of this study will be considered in more detail in subsequent sections of this report. For the current purposes, it is important to note the magnitude of current visitor numbers to the New Forest, and estimates of potential future numbers, in order to begin to appreciate the recreational pressures on the National Park:
22
Changing patterns of visitor numbers within the New Forest National Park, with particular reference to the New Forest SPA. Joanna Sharp, James Lowen and Durwyn Liley, 16th May 2008
Current 20km
All Visitors Staying Visitors Day Visitors Day Visitors at Least Weekly Day Visitors at least weekly with a dog 6,235,829 263,287 5,972,552 2,694,717 1,756,425
2026 50km
6,898,474 576,051 6,322,423 2,705,319 1,763,493
Difference 50km
7,943,720 676,218 7,267,502 3,058,344 1,989,800
20km
7,167,244 308,577 6,858,667 3,046,028 1,981,549
20km
931,405 45,290 886,115 351,311 225,124
50km
28
1,045,246 100,167 945,079 353,025 226,307
Table 1 Estimated Increase in Visitor Numbers to the New Forest up to 2026 3.48 The table above (Table 1) shows current visitor patterns and numbers within a 20km and 50km radius from the National Park and estimates of how those visitor numbers will change by 2026, as a result of proposed residential development in the South East. Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Test Valley Borough Council Core Strategy 3.49 Just as with the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) for the South East (the Draft South East Plan) Local Development Plan documents must also be subjected to assessment in relation to the Habitats Regulations (see Appropriate Assessment of the South East Plan at paragraph 3.10 above). 3.50 The Core Strategy (Preferred Development Options) was screened in relation to the Habitats Regulations by Test Valley Borough Council in January 200823.This initial screening assessment concluded an uncertain effect of the preferred options for residential development in Test Valley, in relation to the New Forest SAC and SPA Ramsar. The uncertainty centred around whether the new residential development, by increasing the population of Test Valley, would also increase recreational visits to the New Forest, and whether the quantum of these additional visits, either alone or in-combination with other pressures, was likely to have a significant effect on the special interest features of the New Forest. 3.51 In order to investigate and clarify the uncertainty of the effects of proposed development on the New Forest (and other European sites within and close to the Test Valley) the Council commissioned a further screening assessment24. 3.52 This assessment examined in detail current visitor patterns from the Test Valley to the New Forest and estimated future visitor numbers, based on these trends and projections of future population growth in the borough. It also examined the current condition and status of the habitats and species of European conservation importance, and examined the evidence for the effects of recreational visitor pressure on these important features. It estimated that proposed residential development in Test Valley would generate some 25,916 additional visits to the New
23 24
Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) Screening Report, TVBC, January 2008 Test Valley Borough Council Core Strategy, Preferred Options. Habitats Regulations Assessment, Further Screening Report, Phil Lomax, Green Dimensions, July 2008
Forest each year by 2026. Whilst it found little direct evidence of adverse effects of current visitor numbers on the special European sites, it did find evidence that the populations of some key species of birds had fluctuated unusually, and were not in line with national and regional trends for these species, which had generally showed a continued expansion in numbers and range. 3.53 When considered in combination with the potential effects of other plans and projects particularly residential development in the South East it was estimated that new residential development in total, may generate up to 386,741 additional visits each year to the New Forest by 2026. It was concluded that this scale of additional visitor pressure, could be mitigated, if the GI required in the South East Plan was to be provided to the scale and in the broad locations proposed in the advice to PUSH (especially the proposed Regional Parks see paragraph 3.21 above) and incorporating the Forest Park proposed in the TVBC Core Strategy along with other measures such as those set out in the New Forest NPA plans (see paragraph 3.30 above). 3.54 TVBCs Pre-Submission (Draft) Document Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) Report October 200825 took account all of the above guidance in this section The Southampton City Council Core Strategy and Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Core Strategy. 3.55 Southampton City Councils Core Strategy DPD26, also makes reference to the Forest Park proposed by TVBC in its Core Strategy. Policy CS 22 - Promoting Biodiversity and Protecting Habitats sets out the following objectives and proposed actions:
Effective protection of biodiversity cannot be achieved by focusing solely on land within the city. The council will work with other PUSH authorities to achieve a sub-regional approach, in particular through the Green Infrastructure Strategy for South Hampshire. Within Southampton the city council will promote biodiversity through: 1. Safeguarding international, national and local designated sites from inappropriate development; 2. Giving appropriate consideration to internationally and nationally protected and important habitats and species; 3. Safeguarding and extending the existing Green Grid to provide a network of wildlife corridors and stepping stones between areas of green space within the city and linking to the surrounding countryside; 4. Ensuring that development retains, protects and enhances features of biological interest and provides for the appropriate management of these features; 5. Ensuring development seeks to produce a net gain in biodiversity by designing in wildlife and ensuring any unavoidable impacts are appropriately mitigated for.
29
Developer contributions may be sought from relevant developments to support the provision and improvement of green infrastructure in accordance with Policy CS 25.
25
Pre-Submission (Draft) Document Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) Report, Test Valley Borough Council, October 2008 26 Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document Proposed Submission Document, Southampton City Council, December 2008
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study Green infrastructure is a network of multifunctional green spaces which help to provide a natural life support system for people and other living creatures.
30
3.56 More specifically, under Policy CS 21 Protecting and Enhancing Open Space , the City Council Core Strategy states that:
To relieve pressure on the New Forest and to provide residents with nearby accessible informal open space, the city council is working with Test Valley Borough Council to develop a new forest park at Lords Wood on the edge of and adjacent to the northern city boundary .
3.57 The background to these policies is in the Southampton City Council Core Strategy Appropriate Assessment Screening Report December 200827 carried out by consultants Halcrow. Section 7.3 of the AA deals with the potential of recreational pressures on European sites and possible mitigation measures:
Avoidance and possible mitigation measures for CS policies 7.3.1 Recreation impacts (CS1, CS2, CS4, CS5, CS6, CS8, CS12, CS18, CS19, CS21) Provision of alternative space The draft PUSH Green Infrastructure Study and Southamptons draft Green Space Strategy should outline future areas that could be used to divert recreational pressure away from International Sites, such as the Solent European Marine Sites and the New Forest. Both of these aim to allow for more and better provision of green space that may alleviate recreational impacts on International Sites, providing recreation takes place outside of International Sites or is well managed if occurring within the Sites.
3.58 The AA goes on to propose that:

Test Valley Borough Council are proposing a Forest Park at Lords Wood as part of their mitigation for recreation impacts. SCC could explore the possibility of there being enough capacity at Lords Wood to also compensate for the impacts of their Core Strategy and continue to work through PUSH and other measures to ensure that adequate mitigation is secured.
Summary 3.59 From the analysis of the above guidance, policy, plans and assessments, it is clear that the proposed Forest Park is critical to future residential development, not only in Test Valley, but in South Hampshire and the South East of England. There is a general consensus that the proposed scale of residential development in the South East Plan is likely to lead to increased recreational visitor pressure on the New Forest (and other European sites).Estimates of the likely increase in annual visitor numbers vary, but all authorities agree that they may be of a volume which presents a risk to the habitats and species of European conservation importance within the New Forest. This assessment is set against a background of existing concerns over the current levels of recreational visits and their effects. 3.60 There is also a consensus on the means of mitigating both current and potential future recreational pressures on the New Forest. These can best be
27
Southampton City Council Core Strategy Appropriate Assessment Screening Report, Halcrow, December 2008
summarised with reference to a key objective of the New Forest NPA Management Strategy (see paragraph 3.35 above):
Manage recreation demand in the New Forest by anticipating likely increases in different types of recreation and planning for this: setting limits on capacity where increased provision would be to the detriment of the New Forest and working with others to develop destinations which provide attractive alternatives for everyday recreational activity.
31
3.61 This approach was summarised by Andy Gordon of Natural England as:
Future management across South Hampshire and the New Forest National Park, of the priority biodiversity/recreation sites; Creation and management of new GI sites; Monitoring and research.
The provision of new green spaces which provide an alternative to recreational visits to the New Forest is accepted as being a key component of the mitigation strategy. It is also a fundamental requirement of strategy and policy for GI. The advice to PUSH on GI for South Hampshire identifies the area between Romsey, Southampton and Eastleigh as providing an opportunity to create and manage a new Regional Park to help provide for the recreational needs of existing and future residents. It is in this area that TVBC has identified and proposed specific areas of woodland that could be managed as a Forest Park which is the subject of this feasibility study. Southampton City Council has also identified this same area in its Core Strategy and is seeking to work with TVBC on establishing the new Forest Park. 3.61 There is therefore, a consensus that the Forest Park proposed by TVBC in its Core Strategy is needed to meet current and future recreational needs in South Hampshire, and so as to help mitigate visitor pressures on the New Forest, and there is also a consensus, that the location proposed for the Forest Park is satisfactory for these purposes. Section 4 of this feasibility study will seek to test the suitability of the Forest Park concept and location against these strategic objectives.
Providing New, Locally Accessible Green Spaces for the Residents of Southern Test Valley, Eastleigh and Southampton and Increasing Access to the Countryside for these Residents
3.62 Having considered the main reason for creating the proposed new Forest Park, it is important to also consider the subsidiary objectives from the summary list at paragraph 3.2 above. The objectives of providing new locally accessible green spaces and increasing access to the countryside are both considered together since they are mutually supportive. As the proposed Forest Park is within the countryside between the built up areas of Romsey, Southampton and Eastleigh, increasing access to it will effectively increase access to the countryside. The Forest Park would also constitute a significant new green space, that with improved access could be become accessible to local communities from the built up areas.
Green Space Strategy and Standards 3.63 The TVBC Borough Local Plan sets out the standards for the provision of open 32 space in the borough. It requires the provision of 2.8ha of open space per 1000 population broken down as follows: Sports Ground/Formal Recreation 1.0ha Parkland 0.4ha Informal Recreational Areas 0.8ha Childrens Playspace 0.6ha 3.64 The Draft Green Space Strategy for Test Valley 2007 201728 produced by TVBC incorporates a Public Open Space Audit which identifies a number of parishes and wards in southern Test Valley which are deficient in open space provision. These deficiencies will be addressed by TVBC in considering future proposals for new residential development in these areas and in seeking developers contributions for open space provision. The Council has identified the following deficiencies in those parishes and wards in southern Test Valley, which are within or adjacent to the proposed Forest Park: Parish/Ward Sports Ground/ Formal Recreation - 5.18 - 7.12 - 2.75 Parkland Informal Recreation - 2.79 - 7.47 + 3.0 Childrens Playspace - 3.1 - 7.86 - 3.16
Chilworth North Baddesley Nursling and Rownhams TOTALS
- 2.10 - 2.7 - 2.14
- 15.05
- 6.94
- 7.14
- 14.12
Table 2 Open Space Deficit in southern Test Valley 3.65 Whilst the proposed Forest Park cannot contribute towards meeting the significant local deficiency in sports grounds and formal recreational space, informal recreational space and the deficiency of 14.12ha of childrens play space, it could make a significant contribution to the net shortfall of 6.94ha of parkland. 3.66 In the adjacent local authority areas, Southampton City Councils Green Space Strategy Summary and Action Plan, Green spaces great places, 200729, acknowledges the need to provide more open space for the growing city population but at the same time. Recognises the significant constraints in seeking to achieve this in such a densely developed city:
Initial research and feedback has highlighted that there is a need to address the overall quantity and quality of our green spaces. The distance from your home to a good quality green space is important and the current provision has been mapped. However more work on how locally accessible green spaces are in terms of distance
28 29
The Draft Green Space Strategy for Test Valley 2007 2017, Test Valley Borough Council,2007 Green spaces great places, Green Space Strategy Summary and Action Plan, Southampton City Council,2007
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study from your home is proposed.
33
3.67 The City Council has also set standards for green space provision for its residents, for example that there should be 1.8ha of natural or semi-natural areas per 1000 population, and that all residents should be within 10 minutes walk (600 metres) of a District Park or 2km from a natural or semi-natural area of at least 20ha. As the proposed Forest Park is adjacent to the northern boundary City of Southampton, it can potentially also help to meet the City Councils aspirations and standards for green space access for its residents. 3.68 There are currently no comparable green spaces to the proposed Forest Park in Test Valley. For example, there are no country parks, the nearest being Lakeside and Itchen Valley Country Parks provided by neighbouring Eastleigh Borough Council to the east, or Farley Mount near Winchester provided by Hampshire County Council to the north. There are several major parkland areas such as Broadlands, Mottisfont and the Hillier Arboretum in southern Test Valley, however all of these are privately owned and managed and a fee is charged for access. Countryside Access 3.69 Under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, all highway authorities must produce a Rights of Way Improvement Plan which contains: an assessment of: - the extent to which local rights of way meet the present and likely future needs of the public, - the opportunities provided by local rights of way for exercise and other forms of open-air recreation and enjoyment, - the accessibility of local rights of way to blind or partially sighted persons and people with mobility problems. a statement of the action the authority proposes to take for the management of local rights of way, and for securing an improved network of local rights of way. 3.70 The highways authority for these purposes in Test Valley, is Hampshire County Council. In undertaking the duty to produce a rights of way improvement plan, the County Council is assisted by the Hampshire Countryside Access Forum and by local landowners, groups and organisations, with an interest in the particular areas under review. 3.71 The process involves the review of existing rights of way in consultation with the above identifying issues and actions to address them. The process results in the production of a Countryside Access Plan. Actions arising from the completed Countryside Access Plans will be implemented in partnership with others such as district councils, parish councils and both private and public land owners and managers. Priorities for implementation of six of the area plans will be agreed in consultation with members of the Hampshire Countryside Access Forum, with guidance from area working groups made up of local users, landowners and access managers. 3.72 There are two Countryside Access Plans relevant to southern Test Valley and the area covered by the proposed Forest Park; the New Forest & South West
Hampshire Countryside Access Plan Draft April 2006 30 and the Test & Itchen DRAFT Countryside Access Plan August 200731 .The first of these plans covers the new Forest as well as adjacent areas of southern Hampshire, including parts of Test Valley. The vision and aims of the plan are described as:
In line with the Vision for the Strategy for the New Forest, the vision for countryside access in this part of Hampshire is: to provide a network of access to the countryside where local people and visitors continue to gain pleasure and inspiration from the countryside within South West Hampshire, while understanding and respecting its landscape, wildlife and cultural heritage. Taking account of aims and objectives within the New Forest District Local Plan, New Forest Transport Strategy and Forestry Commission Access and Recreation Plan, the aim of this Countryside Access Plan is to ensure that access within the area provides a functional, sustainable network of sites and routes for local people and visitors to enjoy the countryside of this part of Hampshire, is managed in a way that takes account of the need to protect the environment and working landscape, is managed in a strategic, coordinated way by the range of agencies, organisations, communities and individuals involved, supports the development of a wider range of transport options within the area for local people and visitors. This plan also supports the overall vision for the Hampshire Local Transport Plan of a strategy that enhances quality of life and economic prosperity by connecting people, communities, employment, goods, services and amenities.
34
3.73 The plan identifies one of the major issues as the effects of recreational pressure on the New Forest:
Issue 1 There is a shortage of accessible open space for recreation and routine exercise outside the New Forest National Park, within or close to the major settlements. Research commissioned by the New Forest Committee found that it is unlikely that local residents might be persuaded to reduce their use of the New Forest unless a viable alternative is offered. Ease of access is the most important reason for locals using the New Forest, with most avoiding honeypot sites and favouring those nearest to where they live. Both the Strategy for the New Forest and the New Forest District Council Local Plan highlight the need to identify and develop new sites for informal recreational access outside the New Forest to help reduce visitor pressure on the Open Forest.
3.74 The second of these plans covers the area (between the Rivers Test and Itchen) within which the proposed Forest Park is situated. The vision and aims of this plan are:
To provide local people and visitors with a high quality, sustainable network of rights of way and other access to the countryside that meets the needs of walkers, cyclists and equestrian users, including people with limited mobility, for a safe and coherent system of routes
30
The New Forest & South West Hampshire Countryside Access Plan Draft , Hampshire County Council, April 2006 31 Test & Itchen DRAFT Countryside Access Plan, Hampshire County Council, August 2007
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study makes the most of existing access seeks to create new routes that will improve the utility and enjoyment of the network invites exploration and appreciation of the landscape and its diverse ecological and historic heritage encourages responsible enjoyment of the countryside, that takes account of the needs of those who live and work there is developed and managed in a way that balances the needs of local people and visitors with the protection of the environment, biodiversity and working landscape of the area is managed and promoted in a coordinated way by the various organisations, agencies and authorities involved supports the development of a wider range of transport options within the area for local people and visitors.
35
3.75 The main issues arising out of consultation which the new plan will seek to address are:
Issue 1 Local people are relatively dependent on the car for transport between the main conurbations, rural settlements and the countryside Issue 2 Countryside users are forced to use or cross busy roads to link up rights of way and other off-road access Issue 3 Surface conditions on some routes are creating difficulties for everyone Issue 4 Local people would like to see improved connections within the countryside access network, to enable them to plan a range of circular routes Issue 5 Motorised vehicles are driven legitimately on Byways Open to All Traffic (BOATs) in the area but they are often not welcome in the countryside Issue 6 Public access on their land represents a burden to many farmers and land managers Issue 7 There is a demand for more access to, along and on the waterways of the area; landowners and managers are concerned about how this would affect conservation and fishing Issue 8 Good information is needed to facilitate and promote enjoyment of the countryside for all and to encourage responsible use.
The proposals for a new Forest Park could help to address some of these issues. 3.76 In the context of considering improving access to the countryside and to green spaces, it is also relevant to consider the TVBC Cycle Strategy and Network 32 Supplementary Planning Document. The objectives of the SPD are to: increase the use of cycling as a means of transport; improve the safety of cyclists; increase the use of cycling as a leisure activity.
32
TVBC Cycle Strategy and Network Supplementary Planning Document (Draft), Test Valley Borough Council, May 2008
3.77 The cycle network for Test Valley is being developed in consultation with neighbouring local authorities to ensure co-ordination and continuity of routes across boundaries. 3.78 An extensive new network of both on road and off road cycle route is proposed in southern Test Valley, linking into and connecting, the current fragmented cycle routes in the area. These proposals would significantly improve access for cyclists to the surrounding countryside, from Romsey, North Baddesley, Nursling and Rownhams, Chilworth and Valley Park. In particular, they would significantly improve access by cycle to the proposed Forest Park, with residents in all of these settlements (and with neighbouring Southampton and Eastleigh), having direct cycle links from their homes, into the Forest Park.
36
Encouraging Healthy Lifestyles

3.79 The Test Valley Community Plan33 contains 8 key themes one of which is Health and Wellbeing. The plan aims to:
promote and improve the physical, mental and social health and well-being of residents in Test Valley.
3.80 This aim will be achieved by focusing on the following outcomes:

People adopt healthier lifestyles and stay healthier for longer Children and young people have a healthy start in life People in the most deprived wards of Test Valley have improved health and life
expectancy People have access to information and advice to improve their health and well-being
3.81 In particular, the plan sets out the following targets which are of relevance to the proposed Forest Park:
A reduction in the percentage of people aged 15-75 with a Body Mass Index (BMI) of more than 30 An increase in the number of adults participating in moderate physical activity for at least 30 minutes five times a week A reduction in the number of children aged under 11 classified as being overweight in targeted schools A reduction in the percentage of children aged 11 classified as being obese in targeted schools A reduction in premature mortality from heart disease and stroke A reduction in premature mortality from cancer.
3.82 Numerous studies have now provided good evidence, that regular physical activity is an essential component of good mental and physical health and wellbeing.
33
Test Valley Community Plan Test Valley Partnership, June 2007
A particular landmark in this respect, was the publication in 2004 of At least five a week - Evidence on the impact of physical activity and its relationship to health 34.
The message in this report is clear. The scientific evidence is compelling. Physical activity not only contributes to well-being, but is also essential for good health. People who are physically active reduce their risk of developing major chronic diseases such as coronary heart disease, stroke and type 2 diabetes by up to 50%, and the risk of premature death by about 20-30%. The annual costs of physical inactivity in England are estimated at 8.2 billion including the rising costs of treating chronic diseases such as coronary heart disease and diabetes. This does not include the contribution of inactivity to obesity an estimated further 2.5 billion cost to the economy each year. This report must be the wakeup call that changes attitudes to active lifestyles in every household. Being active is no longer simply an option it is essential if we are to live healthy and fulfilling lives into old age. The recommendations for physical activity are supported by the scientific evidence. For general health, a total of at least 30 minutes a day of at least moderate intensity physical activity on five or more days of the week reduces the risk of premature death from cardiovascular disease and some cancers, significantly reduces the risk of type 2 diabetes, and it can also improve psychological well-being. The research demonstrates that the 30 minutes of physical activity necessary for health benefit can be built up in bouts of 10 minutes or more. For example, it can be made up of three 10-minute brisk walks rather than catching the bus for short journeys. The recommendation for adults of at least 30 minutes of activity a day is for general health. However, it is likely that, for many people, 45-60 minutes of moderate intensity physical activity a day will be needed to prevent obesity. For children and young people, a total of at least 60 minutes of at least moderate intensity physical activity each day is needed, and at least twice a week this should include activities to improve bone health (activities that produce high physical stresses on the bones), muscle strength and flexibility. The evidence also clearly demonstrates that achieving the weekly recommendation is not the preserve of the sports enthusiast. We all can and should be more active. A shift in societys attitudes and behaviour The evidence of the potential health gains from active lifestyles is clear. We now need a culture shift to achieve these goals. Changing inactive lifestyles and levels of inactivity presents a tremendous public health challenge a challenge we must rise to if we are to improve health. The solution does not lie in any single innovation. Nor does it lie in advances in medical science. Current levels of physical activity are a reflection of personal attitudes about time use and of cultural and societal values. They also reflect how conducive our homes, neighbourhoods and environments have become for more inactive living. A mass shift in current activity levels is needed. This will only be achieved if people see and want the benefits but also if opportunities are created by changing the physical and cultural landscape and building an environment that supports people in more active lifestyles. If people of all ages can be engaged in a new way of thinking about active lifestyles, better health can be a realistic goal for all. Physical activity needs to be seen as an opportunity for enjoyment, for improved vitality, for a sense of achievement, for fitness, for optimal weight, and not least for health. It needs
34
37
At least five a week - Evidence on the impact of physical activity and its relationship to health A report th from the Chief Medical Officer, 29 April 2004.
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study to be seen as enjoyable, and as fun not as unnecessary effort. Perceptions also need to be changed too many people think they are already active enough. The future: choosing a more active lifestyle But more needs to be done. Effective solutions need the engagement of a wide range of agencies. No single organisation will have sufficient impact alone. We will need concerted effort from a range of key partners Government (at national, regional and local levels), leisure and sports services, schools and colleges, town and regional planners, transport planners and providers, architects, countryside agencies, the NHS and social care, voluntary and consumer groups, employers and the media. All will need to work in a coordinated and comprehensive way to influence the way we live.
38
3.83 The Chief Medical Officers report goes on to suggest ways in which this increased physical activity, vital for the health of the nation, can be achieved, some of which are of particular relevance in the context of this report: Primary Care Trusts working with the local authority and voluntary sector to provide information on local facilities, parks, and cycle and walking routes. Local authorities and communities - local transport plans to give particular consideration to walking and cycling as means of commuting and personal travel. Local authorities to take steps to make neighbourhoods and communities more activity friendly pleasant and safe for walking, cycling and playing. Town planners, architects and engineers to ensure that physical activity is facilitated, and not discouraged, in new buildings, streets, housing developments and schools. Schools and colleges - walking to school and college to be supported and encouraged Employers and workplaces - employers to encourage active travel to work, and ensure that appropriate facilities, such as showers or secure cycle storage, are available. Parents and families - Parents to encourage children to be active, and set active role models themselves. Sedentary, housebound activities to be reduced and more active, outdoor pursuits increased.
3.84 The message is simple and clear. To improve the health of the nation, we all need to become more active. The recommended increased physical activity levels can be achieved simply by encouraging and enabling people to walk and cycle to school, to work and as a leisure activity. Improving the local networks of footpaths and cycleways can therefore play a major part, not only in creating more sustainable communities and reducing carbon emissions from vehicles, but simultaneously improve the health and wellbeing of the community. 3.85 There is also evidence to show that exercise and in particular access to green space, has positive benefits on mental health and wellbeing and social behavior. In its State of the Environment Report, Natural England refers to a review of the benefits of regular access to green space undertaken by Newton, 2007 who found: populations in areas with higher levels of greenery have higher levels of physical activity and lower levels of obesity;
green exercise enhanced mood, improved self esteem and lowered blood pressure more effectively than exercise alone; reduced stress and improved recovery from stress; improved mental alertness, attention and cognitive performance; reduced levels of depression; reduced levels of aggression and violent behaviour; enhanced social interaction.
39
This dovetails neatly with another of the 8 key themes of the Community Plan on Leisure and Culture which aims to:
enable all residents and visitors to enjoy a wide range of high quality leisure and cultural activities.
3.86 This aim will be achieved by focussing on the following outcomes:

People of all ages regularly take part in sport, recreational and cultural activities People are better informed, with a wider range of available options, to support healthy lifestyle choices A thriving leisure and creative economy in the borough
4. The Forest Park Achieving the Objectives. Identification of Critical Success Factors.
4.1 Having considered the background to the proposed Forest Park and its main objectives, this section of the report investigates what attributes and facilities, the proposed Forest Park site needs to have, in order that it can meet these objectives. These are effectively the critical success factors. 4.2 The primary objective is to help reduce the recreational pressures on the habitats and species of European importance in the New Forest, by providing a viable alternative recreational attraction. In order to assess the extent to which the proposed Forest Park can achieve this challenging objective, it is first necessary to have a detailed understanding of: why people visit the New Forest National Park? what do visitors do in the New Forest? how long do they stay? who visits? how often do they visit? how do they get there? where do they come from? 4.3 By understanding the behaviours of current visitors, it should be possible to identify the key characteristics of the New Forest visitor experience, which an alternative area would need to meet in order to satisfy the needs of those same visitors. Whilst it is not possible to predict how many people may use such an alternative area, it is possible to assess to what extent the proposed Forest Park could satisfy visitor needs and preferences. This assessment can then provide a good indication of how viable and successful the proposed site will be in meeting its primary objective. Visiting Patterns to National Parks in England 4.4 Before considering in detail the pattern of visits and visitor characteristics in the New Forest National Park itself, it is worth taking an overview of the picture nationally. Such an overview is provided in the England Leisure Visits Survey 200535.
40
35
England Leisure Visits Survey 2006, Natural England et al 2006
4.5 It is estimated, that in 2005, a total of 3.57 billion leisure day visits were made in 41 England by 63% of the adult population of which 42.3 million (1.17%) were to National Parks. The breakdown of proportions of visitors to each National Park is shown in Table 3 below:
% age of all Leisure Day Visits Any National Park 1.17 Peak District 0.35 Lake District 0.21 North Yorks Moors 0.16 Dartmoor 0.14 Yorkshire Dales 0.12 New Forest 0.09 The Broads 0.05 Northumberland 0.04 Exmoor 0.03 Table 3 Leisure Day Visits to National Parks in England
4.6 In the 12-month period of the 2005 survey there were an estimated 35.4 million trips from home to a National Park in England. The total number of visits to a National Park from home or during a holiday was 42.3 million. When these 42.3 million total visits are broken down to individual Park level, it is possible to see the distribution of these visits, as shown in Table 4 below:
All Leisure Visits (millions) All National Parks 42.3 Lake District 10.5 Peak District 10.1 North Yorks Moors 7.3 Dartmoor 4.3 New Forest 4.3 Yorkshire Dales 3 Northumberland 1.2 Exmoor 0.8 The Broads 0.7 Table 4 All Visits to National Parks
4.7 There is a cautionary note attached to this data in the Leisure Visits Survey, as it is based only on a one week snapshot, form a small sample of visitors. The State of the Natural Environment 200836, report shows the breakdown of visitors to English National Parks to be as shown in Table 5 below:
Visitor Days Per Annum (millions) All National Parks 74.8 Lake District 22 Peak District 22 North Yorks Moors 9.5 Dartmoor 4 New Forest Not Available Yorkshire Dales 9 Northumberland 1.5 Exmoor 1.4 The Broads 5.4 Table 5 Visitor Days Per Annum to National Parks in England
42
4.8 The characteristics of visitors to National Parks include: they tend to be older people, with 57% of visitors over the age of 45; they tend to own a car, with 87% of visitors from a car owning household; they tend to be white (96%); they are mostly able-bodied (only 9% of visitors had a disability when the England population as a whole has 17% disability); 4.9 In terms of socio-economic status, National Park visitors tend to be wealthy achievers or comfortably off as shown in Table 6 below:
ACORN Classification All Adults in England (%) National Park Visitors Wealthy Achievers 17 31 Urban Prosperity 9 4 Comfortably Off 22 27 Moderate Means 11 8 Hard Pressed 14 10 Table 6 Socio-economic Status of Visitors to National Parks
36
The State of the Natural Environment 2008, Natural England, 2008.
4.10 In total, expenditure on trips to National Parks was 407 million, which equates to an average expenditure per trip from home to a National Park of 11.50 The major proportion of this expenditure (around 46%) was on food and nonalcoholic drinks totalling an estimated 185 million. This is significant in that for other types of leisure trips e.g. to the coast, or to a town or city, expenditure on food and non-alcoholic drinks is only half this, at around 22%. 4.11 This expenditure pattern is also significant when viewed in the context of the main reasons why people say they visit National Parks, with only 11% giving eating or drinking out as the main purpose of their visit. The main reasons given for visiting a National Park are shown in Figure 1 below:
43
Main Activity of Leisure Visits

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 % age of All Visits
Figure 1 Main Activity on Leisure Visits to National Parks
4.12 The stand out main reason for visiting a national park was walking given as the main reason by 52% of visitors, with eating and drinking out (11%), driving (10%) cycling (6%) and visiting an attraction(6%), being the other main reasons. 4.13 Trips to National Parks are characterised by longer than average travel times (and therefore distances) to and from the Park and longer than average time actually spent on activities at the Park. These characteristics are summarised in Figure 2 below.
Duration of Leisure Visits to National Parks

5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Average Duration Average Stay at (Hours) Destination (Hours) Visit Type
44
Hours
All Leisure Visits Rural Leisure Visits National Park Visits
Figure 2 Duration of Leisure Visits to National Parks 4.14 The average round trip travel time to and from the National Park of choice was 35.4 miles (around 53km) therefore the average distance travelled from home to the Park was 17.7 miles (around 26.5 km).Total round trip times averaged 4.6 hours with an average of 2.6 hours spent at the Park itself. 4.15 Given the long average travel times, it is not surprising that 78% of all trips were made by car, with a smaller, but significant 17% on foot. The foot visitors are likely to be people local to the National Park they visit and who visit on a regular basis. This is supported by the statistics for frequency of visit to the National Park of choice with 17% (the same as the proportion of foot visitors) saying that they visited the Park over 20 times a year. By contrast, 31% of visitors stated that they had only visited once in that year. 4.16 The factors which influenced the choice of a leisure visit to a National Park are particularly instructive and relevant to this study and are summarised in Table 7 below:
Main Reasons for Choice Percentage of Respondents Easy to Get To 80 Good for Walking/Cycling etc. 79 Safe Environment 79 Visitors Welcome 78 Peace and Quiet 76 Visited Before 73 Special Landscape 72 Personal Recommendation 48 Table 7 Main Reasons for Choosing to Visit a National Park
4.17 Notably, despite the longer than average journey times for this type of leisure day visit, 80% of respondents said their choice of National Park was largely influenced by the ease of getting to it. Given that there are currently only 9 National Parks in England it is presumed that most visitors chose that which was nearest to them, where they could get to and from the Park in a single day trip in a reasonable time. 4.18 Other main reasons for visiting a National Park given by around three quarters of all respondents were: 79% - good for walking, cycling and outdoor activities 79% - they provide a safe environment 78% - knowing that visitors are welcome 76% - for the peace and quiet 73% - because they had been there before and were familiar with what it had to offer 72% - because it was a special landscape.
45
4.19 These would all therefore appear to be important characteristics of any alternative green space if people who normally visit a National Park are to be attracted away from it. 4.20 It is also worth noting the sources of information people used to select and get to their choice of National Park, and these are shown in Table 8 below:
Information Source Percentage of Respondents Previous Knowledge of Area 79 Personal Recommendation 37 Map 34 Guidebook 14 Tourist Information 9 Media Article 7 Website 4 TV/Radio 4 Holiday Guide 3 Table 8 Information Sources Used on National Park Visit
4.21 It is notable that most visitors were influenced by their personal knowledge of the area 79%, which closely matches those respondents (73%) who said their choice of park was influenced by being familiar with it and having been there before. Conventional forms of information and marketing seem to have had a relatively little influence on the choice of the destination. This again has implications for seeking to promote alternative green spaces to National Parks. In this respect, personal recommendation seems to play a significant part in the choice, implying that as an area builds a good reputation, that reputation spreads by word of mouth.
Visitor Characteristics of the New Forest National Park 4.22 The most recent and most comprehensive survey of visitors to the New Forest National Park, (Visitor Survey of the New Forest National Park 200-05, referred to as the PROGRESS survey), was undertaken by Tourism South East (see reference 5 above).This section of the report relies heavily on the data gathered from that survey and in particular, the data gathered from surveys of actual visitors. The data gathered from separate household surveys, is not used significantly in this report, since it does not represent the views and characteristics of actual known visitors. 4.23 It provides a wealth of data that helps to answer the questions posed at the start of this section namely: why people visit the New Forest National Park? what do visitors do in the New Forest? how long do they stay? who visits? how often do they visit? how do they get there? where do they come from? 4.24 A total of 3838 visitors were interviewed across the New Forest and the data analysed by Tourism South East (TSE). It was found that of these visitors 1329 were local day visitors coming from home (i.e. people living within the New Forest or within 8km of the National Park boundary), 970 were other day visitors (non-local day visitors) and 1539 were staying visitors (i.e. who were away from home and either in accommodation in the New Forest or elsewhere in the south of England). How Many Visitors Are There and Where Do They Come From? 4.25 A summary of the breakdown of visitors types is shown in Figure 3 below, along with an estimate of the total annual visitor numbers in each type based on an extrapolation of factors such as the mean size of the groups accompanying the interviewee, and the stated frequency of visits of that interviewee group. This extrapolation was carried out by TSE and was summarised by Footprint Ecology as part of its investigation into Changing patterns of visitor numbers within the New Forest National Park, with particular reference to the New Forest SPA.( Joanna Sharp, James Lowen and Durwyn Liley, Footprint Ecology: 16th May 2008 see reference 18 above, Figure 1 page 42).Figure 3 below illustrates the summary of key profile of visitors to the New Forest.
46
Figure 3 Summary Profile of Visitors to the New Forest National Park
47
TOTAL VISITS PER ANNUM 13.345 million
STAYING TOURISTS 40% 5,338,000 visits
DAY VISITORS 60% 8,007,000 visits
NON-LOCAL (Beyond 8km of Park boundary) 25% 3,336,250 visits
LOCAL (Within 8km of Park boundary) 35% 4,670,750 visits
PROFILE Tend to visit urban centres and honey-pot sites more Visit infrequently (3 visits per annum per interviewee) 6% dog walking
PROFILE 52% (1,734,850 visits) from Hampshire residents Average 45 visits per annum, per interviewee 17% dog walking
PROFILE 30% from Totton and east 20% from south coast (New Milton, Sway etc) Average 257 visits per annum, per interviewee 49% dog-walking
4.26 In connection with this study, it is the local day visitor characteristics that are of particular interest. As stated earlier, it is not an objective of the proposed Forest Park 48 to provide an alternative to the New Forest as a tourism (i.e. staying visitor) destination. Rather, the Forest Park is proposed to provide a suitable alternative to the New Forest for day visitors from their own homes. As the diagram above shows, such day visitors make up 60% of all visits to the New Forest, an estimated total of over 8 million visits a year. 4.27 The survey data revealed that for all day visitors 70% live in Hampshire, a further 18% come from Dorset, 7% from Wiltshire and the remaining 5% from elsewhere. Of the 70% of day visits from within Hampshire, the largest proportion of visitors (46% ) were from within the New Forest National Park or the areas around the boundary of the Park. Of the remaining Hampshire visits from outside the National Park and its immediate neighbouring settlements, 12% were found to originate from the north-east of the New Forest in the Southampton, Eastleigh and Chandlers Ford area; Portsmouth, Fareham, Havant and Gosport to the east at 4%; elsewhere in Hampshire and north Hampshire 5% and Winchester to the north at 3%. 4.28 Visits to the New Forest from Hampshire, constitute 83% of all local day visits and 52% of all other non-local day visits from over 8km from the National Park boundary. In the latter category it is notable that the majority of the estimated 1.735 million visits, come from those parts of Hampshire to the north and east of the New Forest, where the proposed Forest park is located .This is a point which will be discussed in greater detail later in this study. How Do They Get There? 4.29 78 % of all visits are by car with a further 16% on foot. These figures are remarkably similar to the figures for travel to National Parks in England as a whole (78% and 17% respectively). Vehicle travel increases significantly to 92% for nonlocal day visitors but is lower at 64% for local day visitors of whom 28% walk. Who Are The Visitors? 4.30 Table 9 below shows the age and gender profiles of visitors to the New Forest excluding staying visitors (tourists). There are several notable features of these profiles. First, the overwhelming majority of visits are from adults , 86% for local day visitors (LDVs) and 82% for other non-local day visitors (ODVs).The second point of note, is that the majority of visits are from people over the age of 45 (62% of LDVs and 52% of ODVs). Thirdly, the majority of visits are from females (53% LDVs and 52% ODVs).
Table 9 Age & Gender Profile of Visitors to the New Forest National Park Total Local day Other day Staying visitors visitors visitors from from home (staying in home New Forest or elsewhere) Base (groups) * 3832 1326 970 1536 Total people 9839 2663 2617 4559 represented Age profile 0-15 yrs 1818(18%) 366 (14%) 461 (18%) 991 (22%) 16-24 yrs 448 (5%) 81 (3%) 148 (6%) 219 (5%) 25-34 yrs 956 (10%) 196 (7%) 277 (11%) 483 (11%) 35-44 yrs 1541(16%) 364 (14%) 385 (15%) 792 (17%) 45-54 yrs 1465(15%) 429 (16%) 416 (16%) 620 (14%) 55-64 yrs 1817(18%) 549 (21%) 462 (18%) 806 (18%) 65+ yrs 1794(18%) 678 (25%) 468 (18%) 648 14%) Adults/children % Adults 8021(82%) 2297(86%) 2156 (82%) 3568 (78%) % Children under 16 1818(18%) 366 (14%) 461 (18%) 991 (22%) years Gender profile Males 4661(47%) 1256(47%) 1268 (48%) 2137 (47%) Females 5178(53%) 1407(53%) 1349 (52%) 2422 (53%)
49
4.31 Table 10 below shows the socio-economic profile of LDVs and ODVs. Based on the occupation of their households highest income earner, 27% of all LDVs and 22% of ODVs interviewed at the survey sites fell into the affluent AB socioeconomic group (higher and intermediate managerial/ professional occupations) and 44% and 48% respectively were C1s (all other white collar occupations). 19% of all visitors surveyed fell into the skilled manual worker category (C2) and 9% and 11% respectively were in the DE group (semi-skilled and unskilled manual occupations plus long-term unemployed). 4.32 These results are consistent with those for National Parks as a whole, where 31% of visitors were in the Wealthy Achievers ACORN category, 4% in the Urban Prosperity and 27% in to the Comfortably Off category. 4.33 Of further note, is the fact that 8% of all visitor groups contained at least one person with a disability. Exactly three quarters of the reported disabilities were physical (74% for LDVs and 76% for ODVs).
Table 10: Socio-economic Profile of Visitors Total Local day visitors from home Base (groups) * AB C1 C2 DE 3697 867 (24%) 1768(48%) 708 (19%) 354 (10%) 1276 346 (27%) 567 (44%) 243 (19%) 120 (9%)
50
Other day visitors from home 933 209 (22%) 445 (48%) 176 (19%) 103 (11%)
Staying visitors (staying in New Forest) 780 171 (22%) 391 (50%) 149 (19%) 69 (9%)
Staying visitors (staying elsewhere) 708 141 (20%) 365 (52%) 140 (20%) 62 (9%)
4.34 As shown in Table 11 below, 44% of all LDVs visited alone with a further 37% of visitors accompanied by another adult. This is in contrast to the ODVs where lone visitors made up only 16% of the total and two adult groups made up 47%. ODV groups were almost twice as likely to have children accompanying them as LDV groups ( 25% and 14%) respectively. Possibly for this reason, the average group size for ODVs was significantly higher than for LDVs at 2.62 persons per group as opposed to an average of 1.89 per group. 4.35 Another notable difference between LDVs and ODVs is in the number of visitors with dogs. 63% of LDV groups had one or more dogs with them , over twice as many as for ODVs at 30%. Putting together the fact that a large proportion of ODV groups (81%) consist of a single adult or two adults and that 63% of these groups has a dog with them, indicates that LDVs are predominantly using the New Forest as a local recreational space to exercise their dogs.
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study Table 11 Group Composition (Adults/Children) & Average Group Size Total Local day Other day visitors visitors from home from home Base (groups) * One adult Two adults Three adults Four or more adults Sub-total Adult only groups One adult with one child One adult (with two or more children) Two adults with one child Two adults (with two or more children) Three adults with one child Three adults (with two or more children) Four or more adults (with one or more children) Sub-total Groups with children (under 16) Proportion of groups including one or more dogs Maximum group size (people) Average group size (people) Average group size (excl. groups of 10 or more) 3832 851 (22%) 1753 (4%) 169 (4%) 193 (5%) 2966 (77%) 67 64 (2%) (2%) 1326 583 (44%) 492 (37%) 30 (2%) 33 (3%) 1138 (86%) 35 (3%) 24 (2%) 28 (2%) 70 ( 5%) 7 (1%) 6 (1%) 18 (1%) 188 (14%) 835 (63%) 970 156 (16%) 456 (47%) 64 (7%) 56 (6%) 732 (75%) 14 (1%) 23 (2%) 51 (5%) 75 (8%) 15 (2%) 18 (2%) 42 (4%) 238 (25%) 288 (30%)
Staying visitors (staying in NF or elsewhere) 1536 112 (7%) 805 (52%) 75 (5%) 104 (7%) 1096(71%) 18 (1%) 17 (1%) 78 (5%) 194 (13%) 28 (2%) 27 (2%) 78 (5%) 440 (29%) 306 (20%)
51
157 (4%) 339 (9%) 50 (1%) 51 (1%) 138 (4%) 866 (23%) 1429 (37%)
51 2.57 2.43
36 2.01 1.89
21 2.70 2.62
51 2.97 2.78
What Are the Main Reasons for Visiting? 4.36 The primary and secondary reasons for visits to the New Forest from LDVs and ODVs are shown in Table 12 below. For LDVs 49% of visits are to walk the dog , as was suggested by the data on visitor group profiles discussed above. This contrast with only 17% of visits from ODVs for which the main stated purpose was to walk the dog. For the ODVs going for a walk is the main purpose for a visit to the New Forest with 36% of trips being for this purpose. This is slightly higher than the 29% of LDV visits for which walking was the primary purpose. 4.37 Some way behind walking and dog walking, another main reason for visits was given as relaxing/enjoying the views, picnicking, etc. This accounted for 6% of LDV visits and 15% of all ODV visits. Watching wildlife and enjoying nature was next
accounting for 2% of all LDV visits and 4% of all ODV visits. Recreational cycling accounted for a similar proportion of visits, at 3% of all LDV visits and 4% of ODV visits.
52
Table 12 Main Purpose of the Leisure Visit to the New Forest Total for Local day Other day all visitors visitors visitors from from home home Short walk ( up to 1 hour) 12% 13% 14% Walk (1-2 hours) 11% 11% 14% Long walk (over 2 hours) 7% 5% 8% Walking the dog 24% 49% 17% Jogging or running 1% 1% 1% Driving around sightseeing 3% 1% 3% (from car) Relaxing/ enjoying views/ 13% 6% 15% picnicking etc. Watching wildlife/ nature/ 3% 2% 4% ponies Visiting a tourist attraction 2% 0% 2% Visiting a town or village 7% 1% 4% Cycling recreational off road, 5% 3% 4% on tracks Cycling on roads mainly 1% 0% 0% Mountain-biking - off road, off 1% 0% 1% track Horse-riding 1% 1% 0%
4.38 The secondary reason given by visitor respondents for their trips to the New Forest, both reflects the primary reasons given above, but also shows some interesting additional reasons. However, it should be noted that 27% of LDVs and 21% of ODVs stated that there was no secondary reason for their visit. It should also be noted that multiple responses were accepted to this question as opposed to the single response required for main trip reason. The percentages quoted refer to the percentage of all respondents giving that characteristic as a subsidiary reason for their visit. Of those that did give a secondary reason, walking was again prevalent for 29% of LDVs and 21% of ODVs and walking the dog accounted for a further 9% of secondary reasons for the visit both from ODVs and LDVs. 4.39 The main secondary reasons for visits were relaxing/enjoying the views, picnicking etc. at 36% for both ODVs and LDVs; and watching wildlife and enjoying nature, accounting for 32% of secondary trip reasons for LDVs and 30% for ODVs. Next came visiting a pub, cafe or tea rooms accounting for 7% for LDVs and 20% for ODVs; and visiting a town or village accounted for a further 3% of LDV visits and 12% of ODV visits
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study Table 13 All Other Reasons for the Leisure Visit to the New Forest Total of all Local day Other day visitors visitors visitors from home from home None/ no reply 21% 27% 21% Short walk ( up to 1 hour) Walk (1-2 hours) Long walk (over 2 hours) Walking the dog Jogging or running Driving around sightseeing (from car) Relaxing/ enjoying views/ picnicking etc. Watching wildlife/ nature/ ponies Visiting a tourist attraction Visiting a town or village Visiting a pub, caf or tea-room Cycling recreational off road, on tracks Cycling on roads mainly Mountain-biking - off road, off track Horse-riding 14% 8% 2% 9% 1% 6% 35% 29% 3% 12% 18% 2% 1% 1% 1% 18% 10% 1% 9% 1% 2% 36% 32% 1% 3% 7% 1% 1% 0% 1% 11% 7% 3% 9% 1% 7% 36% 30% 2% 12% 20% 1% 1% 1% 0%
53
4.40 Interestingly, specialist activities, sports and hobbies including horse riding, fishing, sailing and canoeing, were the main or secondary reasons for trips for only a small minority of visitors. 4.42 Whilst the main and secondary purposes of a visit to the New Forest may change for each visitor or group of visitors on different occasions and over time (e.g. if visitors have family staying with them or they have a family or get a dog), nevertheless, the scale and consistency of the findings of the TSE survey indicate quite clearly, that day visits to the New Forest are for relatively simple, informal and inexpensive purposes such as walking, walking the dog, relaxing, enjoying the scenery and the wildlife, and then perhaps having a picnic, snack or a meal and a drink. 4.43 Given that these type of activities can be accommodated in a variety of other locations and types of landscape and countryside, it is important to understand why so many people choose to visit the New Forest. For local people (LDVs) one main reason is certain to be the proximity of the New Forest, giving ease of access to it, and therefore a relatively short trip time to get into it. For many local people, the New Forest may well be their nearest green space and effectively therefore, their local park.
What Are the Features of the New Forest that Visitors Particularly Value? 4.44 Table 14 below sets out the top ten features of the New Forest that day visitors particularly like and value about it. Interview respondents were able to give more than one reason and so the percentages quoted refer to the percentage of all respondents giving that characteristic as something they particularly valued. Most notably, the top two reasons given were the scenery, landscape and views referred to by over half (54%) of LDVs and ODVs; and the peace and quiet and the fact that the New Forest is not too crowded (45% of LDVs and 44% of ODVs). 4.45 As suggested above, the ease of access is quoted as valuable to them by 52% of LDVs and to a much lesser extent by ODVs (24%).The wildlife, birds and animals were appreciated by around one third of all day visitors (30% LDVs and 31% ODVs) and this ties in well with the 36% of all day visitors who said that enjoying the wildlife was their secondary reason for visiting. 4.46 Good for walking and good for dog walking were not surprisingly, given as reasons for liking the New Forest, given that these are the activities that dominate the reasons for visiting. It can only be postulated what constitutes good in this context, but presumably relates to factors such as the quality of paths, good access, and interesting and convenient route options. 4.47 The general ambience of the New Forest, and visitors familiarity with it were also referred to by a high percentage of all day visitors. Again, it can only be postulated why familiarity should be so highly valued, but this is presumably connected with knowing how to get there, what is available and recalling that past visits were satisfying.
Features Liked by Total for all Local Day Visitors Visitors Visitors from Home Scenery, landscape, views 51% 54% Peace and quiet, not too crowded 42% 45% Good for walking 32% 38% Easy to get to/close to home 29% 52% Wildlife/ nature 29% 30% Good for dog walking 19% 35% General ambience 19% 15% Familiarity/know it well 16% 23% Good for cycling 7% 5% Table 14 Attributes of the New Forest Particularly Liked by Visitors Other Day Visitors from Home 54% 44% 35% 24% 31% 16% 20% 18% 6%
54
What Facilities Do Visitors Use? 55 4.48 Interestingly, factors such as ease of car parking, safety and toilet availability all scored low on respondents reasons for liking the New Forest as a place to visit. It is difficult to interpret whether this is because they did not perceive them to be of good quality, or that they just took these things for granted. As a cross reference in this respect, it is interesting to examine the type of facilities that visitors to the New Forest said that they used on their visit. These are shown in Table 15 and Figure 4 below.87% of LDVs and 89% of ODVs used a car park, reflecting the high number of visitors who arrive by car. 31% of ODVs and a lesser 11% of LDVs also used toilet facilities. Similarly, 30% of ODVs used local pubs, inns, cafes or tea rooms to get refreshments whilst on their visits, with a lesser 11% of LDVs. It is interesting to speculate whether the almost identical proportions of visitors getting refreshments and using toilets (31% and 31% for ODVs and 11% and 11% respectively for LDVs) is a significant correlation. But what is undoubtedly significant, is that nearly one third of all non local day visitors do seek refreshments and toilets. 4.49 A further 23% of ODVs as well as 12% of LDVs also visit a local shop whilst on their trips. It is not known however, how many of these visits result in purchases. The TSE surveys did though establish levels of expenditure by visitors to the New Forest. ODVs spent an average of 2.71 per head/visit on the purchase of food and drinks from pubs, inns, cafes, and tea rooms whilst LDVs spent less at 1.48 head/visit. There was a similar pattern to expenditure in local gift shops with ODVs spending on average 1.72 head/visit and LDVs 1.56. 4.50 Returning to the facilities used by visitors, 39% of LDVs and 33% of ODVs used waymarked footpaths on their visits; and 2% and 9% respectively used information boards, with a similar number (2% of LDVs and 8% of ODVs) using picnic sites. Finally, a notably high proportion of visitors said that they had used waymarked bridleways (11% of LDVs and 9% of ODVs).Given that only 1% of LDVs and less than 1% of ODVs go to the New Forest for horse riding, this must indicate that walkers and off-road cyclists are making good use of the bridleway network.
Facilities Used by Total for All Visitors Visitors Car parks 83% Waymarked footpaths 34% Waymarked bridleways 9% Waymarked cycleways 11% Toilets 31% Information Boards 10% Picnic sites 6% Local pubs/inns 16% Local cafes/tea rooms 15% Table 15 Use of Facilities by Visitors Local Day Visitors 87% 39% 11% 7% 11% 2% 2% 7% 4% Other Day Visitors 89% 33% 9% 11% 31% 9% 8% 16% 14%
FacilitiesUsed by Visitors
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
56
Pecentage
Total for All Visitors Local Day Visitors Other Day Visitors
Facilities
Figure 4 Comparison of Facility Use by Different Types of Visitors
What is the Frequency and Duration of Visits? 4.51 Knowing what day visitors do in the New Forest, in completing the analysis, it is of importance to know how long they spend on these activities and how frequently they visit. Table 16 and Figure 5 below show the frequency of visits by the different types of visitor.
Frequency Daily Twice a week Once a week Once a fortnight Once a month Less than 12 visits
Total for all Visitors 17% 9% 8% 6% 9% 52%
Local Day Visitors 46% 21% 13% 8% 7% 4%
Other Day Visitors 4% 7% 10% 12% 20% 46%
Table 16 Frequency of Visits to the New Forest National Park
Frequency of Visits
60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Percentage
57
Total for all Visitors Local Day Visitors Other Day Visitors
Frequency
Figure 5 Frequency of Visits to New Forest National Park
4.52 What is immediately obvious from these visitor frequency patterns, is that the graphs for LDVs and ODVs are almost mirror images of each other. LDVs have a higher frequency of visits daily and weekly and less fortnightly and monthly, whilst ODVs have a higher frequency of visits monthly and fortnightly and far less weekly and daily. What is most notable in the context of the purpose of this study, is the frequency of ODVs visits to the New Forest, since it is mainly ODVs which may be encouraged to use an alternative area such as the proposed Forest Park. Only 4% of ODVs visit the New Forest daily; 7% twice each week; and 10% at least once each week. Therefore, 21% of ODVs visit the New Forest once a week or more. A further 12% visit once a fortnight on average and 20% at least once a month. This indicates a relatively high frequency of visits with over half ODVs visiting the New Forest monthly or more frequently. It has been estimated (see Figure 3 above) that given the number of ODV visitors and the frequency of their visits, that ODVs average 45 visits per year and generate a total of 1.735 million visits, with 52% of these coming from Hampshire.
4.53 Table 17 and Figure 6 below show the mean duration of visit in relation to the main purpose of the visit. The TSE data shows the mean length of stay for LDVs is 1.3 hours, whilst that for ODVs is significantly higher at 2.3 hours. This reflects the different main purposes of the visits (see Tables 12 and 13 above) with local visitors going for shorter walks often with dogs, whilst ODVs tend to make fewer longer walks and less often with dogs.
Mean Duration of Visit (Hours)

3 2.5 Hours 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Mean Duration of Visit (Hours)
58
Activity
Figure 6 Mean Duration of Visit by Activity
Mean Duration of Visit Main Purpose of Visit (Hours) Short walk 1.4 Medium walk 1.9 Long walk 2.8 Dog walking 1.1 Relaxing/enjoying views/picnicking 2.6 Watching wildlife/nature 2.1 Visiting a pub/cafe/tea room 2.1 Cycling off road 2.1 Cycling on road 2.8 Horse riding 2.1 Table 17 Mean Duration of Visit to the New Forest by Activity
Critical Success Factors for the Proposed Forest Park 4.54 Having examined the profile of day visitors to the New Forest and the purpose, 59 patterns and frequencies of their visits, it is possible to identify a number of criteria which any proposed alternative countryside area would need to meet, in order to satisfy the needs of existing visitors, and be successful in attracting them away from the New Forest experience with which they are both familiar and satisfied. These might be termed the critical success factors for the proposed Forest Park in that the extent to which they can be reproduced will be critical to the main objective of the Forest Park of attracting visitors and thereby visitor pressures, away from the New Forest. 4.55 In its report Changing patterns of visitor numbers within the New Forest National Park, with particular reference to the New Forest SPA.( Joanna Sharp, James Lowen and Durwyn Liley, Footprint Ecology: 16th May 2008 see reference 17 above) for the New Forest NPA, Footprint Ecology concluded by considering what characteristics, alternative green space sites would need to have, to successfully attract visitors away from the New Forest:
The provision of alternative green space is a measure being promoted in some other areas of the UK as a means of reducing visitor pressure on sites of nature conservation importance. We are not aware of any long term visitor monitoring of such sites to test the extent to which they can serve to attract people away from other sites. The likely success of any new provision, or modification to existing sites, will lie very much in the location and experience offered by the site. People interviewed as part of the Portsmouth Recreation Site Survey were asked where they might have gone had they not visited their chosen site that day. Over one third (38%) suggested that they would simply have gone elsewhere in the New Forest, 12% would have gone to the coast, while 19% would have stayed at home. Neither country parks nor tourist attractions featured as significant alternatives. The report authors suggest that this provides fairly conclusive evidence that there is no substitute for the New Forest. In order to compete with the New Forest, or attract people that would otherwise visit the National Park, any space must be very carefully considered. Intuitively, it should be less difficult to provide alternative destinations for visitors from outside the National Park (i.e. those living outside the New Forest National Park and its environs), and in particular those that visit for the day or for less i.e. not tourists who stay within the park. This would require the NFDC to work with neighbouring authorities to identify and establish suitable sites. The aim would be to attract day-visitors or those that visit for even shorter periods such as dog walkers. From the analysis presented in this report it is clear that development close to the park will have the greatest impacts on visitor pressure, with a high proportion of the increase being generated by development within 7km of the National Park boundary, and relatively little impact beyond 20km (Figure 3). In particular it is development to the west within Bournemouth, Poole, Boscombe, Winton, Kinson, Ferndown, Wimbourne or Verwood, to the north in Romsey, or to the east in Totton, Hythe, Southampton, Rownhams, Eastleigh or Hedge End that may give greatest cause for concern. Alternative sites would therefore need to be between these areas and the National Park. There is clear cross-over here with ongoing work in Dorset to provide green space sites to reduce pressure on the Dorset Heaths. In order to identify potential sites it will be necessary to audit potential locations and search suitable areas. In particular it may be worth focusing search effort on parts of the National Park that currently have no public access.
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study In order to attract dog-walkers, safe off-road parking and a range of routes and features will be necessary (for further details see Liley et al., 2006d). Perhaps crucially, locations where the perceived enjoyment of the dog is maximised, with elements such as other dog walkers (but not lots of non-dog walkers) likely to be particularly successful (Edwards & Knight, 2006). Measures aimed at proactively attracting dog walkers should also be combined with measures (such as keeping dogs on leads and clearing up mess) which push dog walkers off the sites of importance for nature conservation.
60
4.56 From this analysis, some guidance points begin to emerge for those authorities planning to provide viable recreational alternatives to the New Forest: the emphasis should be on providing alternatives for visitors from outside the New Forest National Park itself; the alternatives should be aimed at day visitors and short stay visitors such as dog walkers and not staying tourists; alternative sites would need to be located between the New Forest and those settlements where significant numbers of visitors already come from and where new residential development is planned in the future (e.g. Romsey, Southampton, Rownhams, Eastleigh and Hedge End to the north and east are specifically mentioned in this context); in order to attract dog walkers, safe off-road parking and a range of routes and features will be necessary.
4.57 From the previous analysis of the TSE data on the particular characteristics which are valued by local day visitors to the New Forest, the following attributes will also be important in any alternative sites:
scenery, landscapes and views that would generally be perceived as being attractive and interesting and are similar to those to be found in the New Forest; a relatively quiet and peaceful location and one that is not too crowded or is not perceived to be; an area that is good for walking, with a choice of routes and reasonable quality walking surfaces; an area that is good for dog walking and where dogs are accepted; a location which is easy to get to and reasonably close to home relative to the New Forest; an area that has a good diversity of wildlife and natural interest; an area that has an acceptable general ambience that is as close as possible to that to be found in the New Forest; an area that is good for recreational cycling and provides for cyclists; an area that has good pubs or cafes or similar places to eat and drink out.
4.58 Finally, from the analysis of the TSE data on the facilities and services which visitors to the New Forest most use, the following facilities would appear to be the most important: adequate car parking; waymarked footpaths, bridleways and cycleways; adequate toilet provision; facilities for eating and drinking out; places for buying gifts; information boards; picnic sites.
61
4.59 These then can be regarded as the critical success factors for the Forest Park proposed in the TVBC Core Strategy if it is to achieve its main objective of successfully attracting visitors and visitor pressures away from the New Forest. 4.60 Additionally, as the proposed Forest Park is to form a part of the PUSH GI strategy and provision, it is necessary to have regard to the requirements of the South East Plan Policy CC8 and to the TEP advice to PUSH on GI in South Hampshire. Policy CC8 requires that: Consideration of planning and management of Green Infrastructure must be undertaken
with the following multi-functional objectives in mind:
Preservation and enhancement of biodiversity, including the need to mitigate the potential impacts of new development Creating a sense of place and opportunities for greater appreciation of valuable landscapes and cultural heritage Increasing recreational opportunities, including access to and enjoyment of the countryside and supporting healthy living Improved water resource and flood management and sustainable design Making a positive impact to combating climate change through adaptation and mitigation of impacts Sustainable transport, education and crime reduction.
4.61 The advice from TEP on GI in South Hampshire is that:

Arising out of the green infrastructure vision for South Hampshire, the following green infrastructure goals are suggested, which list the priorities for delivering multifunctional green infrastructure and guide the subsequent green infrastructure Concept and Network Plans:
4.62 For the purposes of this study, the most relevant GI goals and priorities with respect to the proposed Forest Park (part of the proposed Regional Park in the TEP advice) are:
62
All people should live within 20 minutes cycle of a locally-valuable greenspace; A network of strategic multifunctional parks should be available within 20 minutes drivezone (approximately 10km) of all residents. Major multi-purpose inland regional parks should be available to deliver sport, recreation, tourism and environmental benefits and take pressure off the New Forest, the South Downs and the natural coast. Refuges for sensitive biodiversity and tranquillity should be protected, managed and (where necessary) created, integrating management across the network of refuges to adapt to and mitigate against continuing coastal and climatic change; Near-continuous biodiversity networks should be established; a. from east to west along the coast b. from the New Forest, to the Forest of Bere and the South Downs c. from the Solent into the Forest of Bere Investment to create the proposed green network should use existing assets and partnerships; which are generally strong. Co-provision of the green network alongside investment in sport, health and flood management is particularly desirable. Priority areas for intervention should be where green infrastructure will benefit communities in need, based on deprivation, health, demographic and mobility criteria; Early intervention will be needed in existing urban areas, because these will be the focus for most growth in the period to 2020.
4.63 However, as outlined above, the Draft Green Space Strategy for Test Valley 2007 2017, and the HCC Countryside Access Plans, set out other objectives for the Forest Park in that it should provide new, locally accessible green spaces for the residents of southern Test Valley, Eastleigh and Southampton and increase access to the countryside for these residents, and thereby assist in providing the opportunities for local people to lead more active and healthy lifestyles. Whilst many of the above critical success factors will apply equally to achieving these objectives, there are a number of others that may be specifically required to achieve them such as:
that the Forest Park should have good walking and cycling access and good access for horse riding from local communities; that this access should link into a network of routes in the surrounding countryside; that it should provide opportunities for informal recreation; the layout, design and management of the Forest Park should seek to achieve the green space standards set out in the TVBC Green Spaces Strategy, including: it should be a welcoming place; it should be healthy, safe and secure; it should be clean and well maintained; it should be managed sustainably; natural and built heritage should be conserved; there should be community involvement in the management ; it should be well marketed and promoted; there should be a management plan.
63
4.64 In order to facilitate the evaluation of the proposed Forest Park and its potential to achieve all of the above objectives, these objectives have been summarised into two distinct groups. The first group relates to the key attributes of the proposed Forest Park; those innate characteristics which come from its geography, biodiversity and past history of land use and management. These are the attributes which the Forest Park needs to have to be successful and which cannot be significantly influenced through the management of the site. Attributes such as the location, size, landscape and character of the proposed site cannot be changed.
Key Attributes Necessary for the Forest Park: 1. Location and Accessibility including the location of the proposed site in relation to the target catchment, and the ease of accessing the site by different modes of transport; 2. Size and Capacity the proposed site needs to be sufficiently large and robust to accommodate the likely visitor numbers required to mitigate the effects of population growth from new residential development; 3. Ambience this relates to the atmosphere, character and environmental attributes of the proposed site, and how they compare to the New Forest experience based on the characteristics most valued by visitors, including scenery, landscape and views, peace and quiet and wildlife diversity.
4.65 The second group are key objectives for the Forest Park drawn from the above analysis, that can be achieved through the way in which the proposed site is designed and managed: Key Management Objectives for the Forest Park: 1. Sustainability including its contribution to sustainable development, climate change targets, sustainable transport, heritage conservation, health, etc. 2. Recreation including the provision of a range of recreational opportunities, that are in keeping with the other objectives of the Forest Park, and the provision of the facilities necessary to support recreational use and enjoyment; 3. Conservation including protecting existing natural interest features, seeking opportunities for biodiversity gains, and contributing to the creation of biodiversity networks; and conserving and enhancing important built heritage features; 4. Welcoming, Inclusive, Clean and Safe these are some of the key objectives in providing a positive experience for visitors and which will encourage them to return; 5. Marketing, Information and Education and Community Involvement these are important in encouraging visitors to use the Forest Park and helping them to enjoy and get the maximum benefit from their visits.
64
5. The Forest Park Evaluation and Options Appraisal

Evaluation of Key Attributes 1. Location and Accessibility
Location and Accessibility by Car 5.1 Map 1 (Appendix 1) shows the location and extent of the proposed Forest Park. It consists of four component areas of forest and woodland along the M27 motorway between Southampton to the south, Eastleigh to the east North Baddesley to the north and Romsey to the west. Whilst it extends along the M27 to the north and south, it is not currently accessible directly from the motorway network. 5.2 The location and accessibility of the proposed Forest Park are critical to its potential to attract visitors that would otherwise visit the New Forest, and therefore in its probable success in achieving its main objective of reducing visitor pressures on the National Park. Map 4 (Appendix 1) shows the location of the proposed Forest Park in relation to the boundary of the National Park and major settlements adjacent to it. It lies in the centre of an approximate triangle between Romsey, Eastleigh and Southampton. This is a position of key strategic importance. It is at the gateway between the New Forest and the rest of the County of Hampshire close to the main north-south and east-west road routes into the New Forest, especially the M3 and M27 motorways. It is also located between the largest settlements in Hampshire and the New Forest. This is significant, because as discussed above ,after the New Forest itself, the main geographic areas in Hampshire from which day visitors travel to the New Forest are from the north and east. From the TSE surveys, 12% of all day visitors were found to originate from the north-east of the New Forest in the Southampton, Eastleigh and Chandlers Ford area; 4% from Portsmouth, Fareham, Havant and Gosport to the east; 5% from elsewhere in Hampshire and north Hampshire and 3% from Winchester to the north at. In other words, the proposed Forest Park is located in an area through which passes 24% of all the day visitors to the New Forest each year, some 1.92million each year based on the TSE data. 5.3 Depending upon their point of origin, and which part of the Forest Park they chose to visit, visitors from these locations could save between 5 and 10km on their journey distance by visiting the Forest Park instead of the National Park. (At its closest point in Nightingale Woods the Forest Park is about 5km from the National Park boundary and its furthest point in Hut Wood it is about 10km from the boundary).Given that 92% of non-local day visitors (ODVs) travel to the New Forest by car, every 1000 visits attracted to the Forest Park instead of going to the National Park, will result in 920 less car journeys into the New Forest and on a round trip, a saving of at least 4600 km travel. 5.4 Map 4 (Appendix 1) also shows the main road routes to the National Park from the north and east of Hampshire. Several of these routes pass through or close by the proposed Forest Park. This includes the M27 motorway and although there is currently no direct access by vehicle from the motorway into the Forest Park, there are potential options to facilitate such access. 5.5 The advice to PUSH on the South Hampshire GI strategy, is that :
65
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study A network of strategic multifunctional parks should be available within 20 minutes drivezone (approximately 10km) of all residents.
66
5.6 Map 5 below produced by CMA/CACI, illustrates the extent of the 20 minute drivetime catchment from the centre of the Forest Park, which for this purpose was taken as Chilworth Village. From this map the significant extent of the potential catchment for the Forest Park, based on the 20 minute drivetime is clear. It extends as far as Barton Stacey to the north in Winchester, Otterbourne and Colden Common to the east; Portchester and Stubbington and almost into Portsmouth in the south east; down as far south as Brockenhurst in the New Forest itself and Whiteparish to the west. CMA/CACI estimate a total of 616,465 people live within this 20 minute drivetime catchment. 5.7 Analysis by CMA/CACI37 has detailed the socio-economic status of the population within this catchment which is summarised in Table 18 below. It is notable that the catchment contains a significantly higher proportion of the ACORN categorised wealthy achievers ( 29% above the national average for Britain) and comfortably off (10% above the national average). This is significant because these households are likely to have two or more cars available giving greater mobility.It is also significant because surveys for the England Leisure Visits 2005 showed that visitors to National Parks are most likely to come from these ACORN categories, with 31% of all visitors to National Parks in England from the wealthy achievers category and 27% from the ,comfortably off category.
Map 5 20 Minute Drive Time Catchment from the Forest Park

37
Population Characteristics Within the 20 Minute Drivetime of Chilworth Village, CMA/CACI, March 2009
ACORN Categories Total Population Wealthy Achievers Urban Prosperity Comfortably Off Moderate Means Hard Pressed
Data for Area 616,465 196,895 67,521 187,883 63,575 88,482
Data as %age for Area 100 31.9 11 30.5 10.3 14.4
Data as %age for Base 100 24.8 12 27.7 13.8 20.8
Index (Average =100) 100 129 91 110 75 69 225
67
Unclassified 12,109 2 0.9 Table 18 ACORN (Socio-economic)Profile for 20 Minute Drive Time Catchment from Forest Park
5.8 Furthermore, there is a higher propensity for the catchment population to participate in outdoor sports and activities as shown in Table 19 below:
Target Area Sports & Leisure Aerobics/Keep Fit Athletics Badminton Cycling Golf Jogging Running Squash Swimming Tennis Ten-pin Bowling Weight Training/Weight Machines Yoga Football/Soccer Basketball Cricket Hockey Camping Climbing/Mountaineering Fishing Horse Riding Walking/Rambling Skiing Adult Count 86,872 11,993 36,882 87,981 54,099 61,052 38,388 16,062 146,392 29,176 85,682 51,475 28,444 56,755 9,281 19,440 4,841 67,720 17,220 31,760 17,517 163,682 21,573 % in Area 16.90% 2.30% 7.20% 17.10% 10.50% 11.90% 7.50% 3.10% 28.50% 5.70% 16.70% 10.00% 5.50% 11.00% 1.80% 3.80% 0.90% 13.20% 3.30% 6.20% 3.40% 31.80% 4.20%
National Average Ratio Index 16.20% 2.40% 6.70% 15.90% 8.90% 10.90% 7.10% 2.70% 26.30% 5.40% 15.70% 9.80% 5.30% 11.60% 2.00% 3.60% 0.90% 12.60% 3.20% 9.00% 3.20% 30.00% 3.90% 104 97 107 108 118 109 105 116 108 105 106 102 104 95 90 105 105 105 105 69 106 106 108
Table 19 Participation in Sport and Leisure Activities in the 20 Minute Drive Zone
5.9 In particular, participation in walking /rambling and horse riding is about 6% higher than the national average and participation in cycling about 8% higher. Thus within the Forest Park catchment there is a relatively high propensity for visits by car to the New Forest and therefore a high potential to attract such visits to the Forest Park. 5.10 Map 5 above is also notable in that it shows up significant concentrations of the ACORN categories hard pressed and moderate means around the Forest Park. The significance of this is discussed further later in this section when considering accessibility to the Forest Park on foot and by cycle. 5.11 Map 6 (Appendix 1) shows the location of the Forest Park in relation to other major countryside recreational sites open to the public in the area. This includes four country parks in Eastleigh. As the map shows, these countryside sites are also well located with respect to the major road network especially the M27 motorway. Though like the proposed Forest Park, they do not have any direct access from the motorway. The question this raises is why with so many other good quality public countryside facilities in this part of south Hampshire, does the New Forest continue to attract such large numbers of visitors and if these facilities have not reduced the visitor pressures on the New Forest, can the Forest Park succeed in that objective? Firstly, it could be argued that without these facilities, there would be much greater visitor pressure on the New Forest. Secondly, they are perhaps attracting visitors for different reasons than the New Forest, e.g. Lakeside Country Park has three lakes for water activities and a narrow gauge steam railway popular with families. Thirdly, it is notable that the majority of these sites are located to the north and east of Southampton, Eastleigh and Romsey i.e. not on the route from these major settlements into the New Forest. Indeed to visit most of these alternative facilities, residents of these settlements would actually be travelling away from the direction of the New Forest, not towards it. In that context the proposed Forest Park is probably better located to catch the passing trade to the New Forest than are any of these other public countryside facilities. 5.12 However, in order to attract visitors to the Forest Park it will be important to promote and market the Forest Park regionally as well as locally and ensure that it is well signed form the regional and local road networks. This is discussed further later in this report. 5.13 The Forest Park would therefore appear to be well located in relation to the main potential visitor catchment with its high levels of mobility and propensity to visit National Parks and participate in outdoor activities such as walking and well located on or close to the principal road routes into the New Forest National Park.
68
Options for Road Access and Car Parking in the Forest Park 5.14 Direct road access into the Forest Park is currently limited. No adopted roads actually pass through any of the four component sites that make up the Forest Park, though they do pass between them. There are some roads and tracks into the Forest Park, but these are generally narrow, single track roads, through residential areas and therefore not best suited to potentially significant volumes of car travelling
visitors. These roads are used for local access by residents and access for forestry operations. None of these roads and tracks currently leads to a car park and so even if car access was feasible, there would currently be nowhere for visitors to park their vehicles. This is significant, since it is not so much vehicular access into the Forest Park that visitors need, but access into car parks from which they can enjoy the Forest Park. 5.15 Maps 7.1 to 7.4 (Appendix 1) show all the current and potential access points into the component parts of the Forest Park. Those access points whose numbers are coloured red are either accessible by car or potentially accessible (e.g. if current gates and barriers were opened). These access points therefore create the potential to develop car parks to serve the Forest Park. Moreover, they are also potential access points for maintenance vehicles and emergency vehicles. Existing, limited roadside parking in connection with the Forest Park is also shown on these maps. 5.16 The options for vehicular access and car parking for the Forest Park are as follows: Option Positives Negatives
69
1. Rely upon existing limited parking spaces and roadside parking near access to the Forest Park.
This is the cheapest option.
2. Develop new car parks within the Forest Park
This would provide the most convenient access for visitors.
3. Develop new car parks outside the Forest Park itself, but close to key access points into the Park.
This option has the least potential for environmental harm and is potentially the most sustainable option. It would effectively create a park and walk scheme for visitors by car.
This is likely to be inadequate to accommodate the potential number of visitors by car. It may also lead to problems of access and congestion due to the volume of cars parked on local roads. Lack of adequate parking may deter visitors. It would involve the felling of significant areas of woodland and trees and introduce disturbance with related impacts on the woodland ecology. Relies upon finding and being able to use and develop the necessary land and may be the most expensive option.
5.17 In respect to Option 3, Map 8 (Appendix 1) shows two potential areas of search for off site car parks. Both of these locations are easily accessible via major roads and both are situated at points where two or more of the four component woodlands adjoin. They are also well connected to the existing public rights of way network and the proposed Test Valley cycleway network. They are therefore both at key transport and access hubs with respect to the Forest Park. These locations will be referred to later in this study in connection with potential locations for the development of public toilets and a visitor centre, which, to get the maximum usage and be of the most benefit, would need to be located where there was car parking and good access into the Forest Park. It should be noted that the locations shown in respect of Option 3 should not necessarily be viewed as either, or options. Subsequent sections of this report examine the size and capacity of the Forest Park against the potential volume of visitors and the potential for diffusing visitors across the Park so as seek to reduce overcrowding. The volume of car parking required, and issues such as security and charging are considered separately later in this report.
70
Location and Accessibility for Pedestrians and Cyclists and Horse Riders. 5.18 Map 9.1 (Appendix 1) shows the Forest Park is well located to serve local recreational needs, being effectively sandwiched between dense settlements at Southampton, Nursling and Rownhams to the south and North Baddesley, Chandlers Ford and Eastleigh to the north. As noted in the previous section, the CMA/CACI 20 minute drivetime catchment shows a concentration of hard pressed and moderate means households on the southern edge of the proposed Forest Park. These are therefore households that are unlikely to own or have access to a car and for whom therefore, easy access on foot or by cycle to the Forest Park would be of particular benefit. 5.19 This map also shows the potential extent of the local catchment of the Forest Park based on Natural Englands ANGSt standard (Accessible Natural Greenspace Standard). The standard provides guidance for local authorities on the provision of natural greenspace, both locally and regionally. The ANGSt criteria are that: No person should live more than 300 m from their nearest area of natural green space of at least 2 ha in size. There should be provision of at least 1 ha of Local Nature Reserve per 1,000 population. There should be at least one accessible 20 ha site within 2 km from home. There should be one accessible 100 ha site within 5 km. There should be one accessible 500 ha site within 10 km.
5.20 The 300 metre standard (a straight-line distance) is based upon a requirement to provide green space within 5 minutes walk. Alternatively, it is possible to calculate actual distances covered within a 5 minute walk taking into account real walking routes. 5.21 Map 9.1 plots these standards as distance contours around the proposed Forest Park. It reveals that residents of Chilworth in Test Valley and Lordswood in Southampton, will be the main beneficiaries as they will have the Forest Park within
300 metres of their homes. The 2km contour encompasses a significantly greater population catchment, taking in most of North Baddesley, Nursling and Rownhams, parts of Chandlers Ford and Eastleigh and a large quadrant of Southampton as far as Shirley Warren, Maybush and all of Bassett. 5.22 The 5km contour additionally incorporates all of Romsey, all of Chandlers Ford, about half of Southampton and half of Totton. A 10km contour was not plotted since the provisional area of the proposed Forest Park is approximately 400 ha. 5.23 Map 9.2 (Appendix 1) shows the Forest Park in relation to the similar WASt standard (Woodland Access Standard) developed by the Woodland Trust and the Forestry Commission. WASt is described as :
an aspirational benchmark intended as a tool to facilitate discussion and is focused on towns and cities, as this is where most people in the UK live.
71
The Woodland Access Standard (WASt) was developed because there were no standards
in policy planning guidance that were specific to woodland. Woodlands are an important habitat for a wide range of public benefits. Many studies have shown peoples appreciation of woodland and conclude that there is a case for more to be created particularly in close 38 proximity to large populations.
5.24 The WASt aspirational standard is : That no person should live more than 500 metres from at least one area of accessible woodland of no less than 2 hectares in size. There should also be at least one area of accessible woodland of no less than 20 hectares within 4 kilometres of peoples homes.
5.25 Map 9.3 (Appendix 1) shows the extensive catchment which is accessible to the Forest Park within a 20 minute cycle ride. The advice from TEP to PUSH on the Green Infrastructure Strategy for South Hampshire included: All people should live within 20 minutes cycle of a locally-valuable Green space.
Options for Extending Local Access to the Forest Park 5.26 Local access to the Forest Park does of course depend not only on it being within a convenient distance of local residents homes, but that there are convenient local access points into it, and convenient local routes leading to those access points. Maps 7.1 to 7.4 show the current and potential access points into the Forest Park. Some of these are related to the existing public rights of way network which is shown in Map 10.1(Appendix 1). There is a relatively extensive rights of way network in the area but it is somewhat fragmented and does not currently connect all four
38
Accessibility of woodlands and natural spaces .Addressing crime and safety issues. Report of a seminar organised by Forest Research supported by Lancashire Constabulary, CABE Space and English Nature. Liz OBrien and Paul Tabbush Social Research Group,Forest Research, Forestry Commission,2005
component parts of the proposed Forest Park or connect all surrounding communities with the Forest Park. 5.27 These were issues noted earlier in relation to the current review of countryside access in the Test to Itchen area and for which the draft Countryside Access Plan has the following objectives:
To provide local people and visitors with a high quality, sustainable network of rights of way and other access to the countryside that meets the needs of walkers, cyclists and equestrian users, including people with limited mobility, for a safe and coherent system of routes makes the most of existing access seeks to create new routes that will improve the utility and enjoyment of the network invites exploration and appreciation of the landscape and its diverse ecological and historic heritage encourages responsible enjoyment of the countryside, that takes account of the needs of those who live and work there is developed and managed in a way that balances the needs of local people and visitors with the protection of the environment, biodiversity and working landscape of the area is managed and promoted in a coordinated way by the various organisations, agencies and authorities involved supports the development of a wider range of transport options within the area for local people and visitors.
72
5.28 The establishment of the Forest Park could provide the catalyst for extending and linking the rights of way network in the wider area, both to better connect local communities with the Forest Park and with the wider countryside and connect together the loose components of the Forest Park itself. Potential options for developing the rights of way network in this way are shown in Map 10.1. Issues relating to routes for recreational walking, horse riding and cycling within the Forest Park are discussed later in this report as is the quality of routes. 5.29 There are similar issues affecting the local network of cycleways. Map 10.2 (Appendix 1) shows the extent of current and proposed cycle routes in southern Test Valley and is taken from the TVBC Cycle Strategy and Network Supplementary Planning Document March 200939 .There are currently short fragmented sections of cycleway which it is proposed to connect together to form a cycleway network throughout the area. Also in Map 10.2 are indicated some additional options to link the cycleway network into and through the Forest Park to improve local cycling access to it. It will be noted that some of these options coincide with options for extending and linking the footpath and bridleway network in the area and this shared use and the potential for conflicts and managing potential conflicts is discussed later in this report. 5.30 The Forest Park is well located in relation to existing settlements and communities in southern Test Valley, and in neighbouring Southampton and Eastleigh and can help serve the needs of a wide catchment for access to
39
The TVBC Cycle Strategy and Network Supplementary Planning Document, Test Valley Borough Council, March 2009
natural greenspace and woodland. By extending and linking existing rights of way and cycleways, a network of routes can be provided to give easy and sustainable local access to the Forest Park, without the need to use a car. 5.31 As with encouraging visitors by car, in order to attract local visitors to the Forest Park it will be important to promote and market the Forest Park locally and ensure that it is well signed from the local road networks and on the local footpaths, bridleways and cycle routes. This is again discussed further later in this report.
73
Evaluation of Key Attributes 2. Size and Capacity

5.32 The proposed Forest Park extends over approximately 400 ha of woodland and forest. The four component parts of the woodland are as follows: Hut Wood 74 ha Rownhams Wood 62 ha Lordswood 202 ha Nightingale Wood 56 ha TOTAL 394 ha 5.33 For comparison Itchen Valley Country Park in Eastleigh extends to about 180 ha and attracts around 220,000 visits each year, whilst Manor Farm Country Park, also in Eastleigh covers about 162 ha and attracts around 190,000 visits each year. Whilst there is no definite relationship between the area of a country park and the number of visitors it attracts (e.g the much smaller Lakeside Country Park in Eastleigh at around 25 ha attracted some 470,000 visits in 2007), these figures at least give some broad indication of the relationship between area and visitors. On this very crude basis, and all other things being equal, the Forest Park, based on its size, could attract and accommodate around 400,000 visits each year. 5.34 The primary objective of the proposed Forest Park is to provide an alternative to visiting the New Forest. As noted earlier in this report, local day visits to the New Forest are estimated to be in the region of 8 million each year. The AA of the South East Plan as well as those for the TVBC Core Strategy and Southampton City Council Core Strategy, were not able to conclude that the residential development proposed in theses local authority areas in combination with that in the rest of the South Hampshire sub region would not significantly affect the European interest features of the New Forest as a result of increased recreational pressures from the growing population. 5.35 Footprint Ecology, in its work for the New Forest NPA, estimated that the increase in visitor numbers to the New Forest by 2026, as a result of development proposals in the first 50km from the National Park boundary is 1.045 million visits a year, as shown in Table 20 below:
Column1 Visitor Type All Visitors Staying Visitors (Tourists) Day Visitors Day Visitors/weekly Day Visitors weekly with dog
Current 20km 50km
2026 20km 50km
Growth 20km 50km
74
6,235,829 6,898,474 7,167,244 7,943,720 931,405 1,045,246 263,287 576,051 308,577 676,218 45,290 100,167
5,972,552 6,322,423 6,858,667 7,267,502 886,115 945,079 2,694,717 2,705,319 3,046,028 3,058,344 351,311 353,025 1,756,425 1,763,493 1,981,549 1,989,800 225,124 226,307
Table 20 Estimate of Increase in Visits to the New Forest by 2026
5.36 The increase was most marked for day visitors, estimated at 945,079.Of these additional visits, 764,000 were estimated to come from within the first 10km of the National Park. 5.37 These estimates were based on the assumption that the average household size would remain the same as in 2001 for all new dwellings built i.e. 2.36 persons per dwelling. However, official population projections for Hampshire do not correlate with this assumption, a fact which the authors of the Footprint Ecology report acknowledge. 5.38 Green Dimensions estimated current visitor levels to the New Forest from Test Valley Borough and estimated the increase in future visits in its work for TVBC on the Habitats Regulations Assessment of the TVBC Core Strategy (see Reference 20 above). Based on the TSE visitor surveys, Test Valley residents made up 2.6% of all visitor interviews and 2.6% of all visitors in groups with those who were interviewed. On the assumption this was a representative survey sample it was therefore estimated that Test Valley residents constituted 2.6% of all visits (13.45 million) to the New Forest each year i.e. 346,970 visits per year. The visitor profile for Test Valley residents was constructed based on this figure and on detailed analysis of the questionnaire surveys completed by Test Valley residents as part of the TSE visitor survey of the New Forest. This visitor profile is shown in Table 21 below:
Visitor Group Type % Age of All Visits By Test Valley Residents 1.31 43.8 54.89 Total Table 21 Total Visits Per Annum
Staying Tourists Local Day Visitors Non-local Day Visitors
4545 151,972 190,451 346,970
Profile of Visits to the New Forest from Test Valley Residents
5.39 Using this profile it was estimated that on average, there were 3.1 visits per annum to the New Forest for every person in the borough. Using this information along with the official population projections for Test Valley up to 2026 ( a net population growth of 8,360 people) it was estimated that an additional 25,916 visits each year would be generated by Test Valley residents a shown in the Table 22 below:
Visitor Type Staying Visitors Local Day Visitors Non-local Day Visitors Totals % Age of Current Visitors 7 21 72 100 % Age of All Current Visits Made 1.31 43.8 54.89 100
75
Estimated Number of Future Additional Visits 339 11,352 14,225 25,916
Table 22 Estimate of Visits to the New Forest by Test Valley Residents by 2026
5.40 Therefore, in order to offset the potential growth in visitor numbers to the New Forest from residential growth in Test Valley, the proposed Forest Park would need to attract around 26,000 visits a year away from the National Park by 2026.As discussed above, given the location and the size of the proposed Forest Park this would appear to be well within its potential capacity 5.41 However, as the proposed Forest Park is referred to as a key element of the PUSH GI strategy, there is an expectation that it could not only absorb the additional visits generated by development growth in the Test Valley, but also absorb some of the additional visits generated by residential development in other parts of south Hampshire. Estimates of increased visits comparable to those shown above for Test Valley are not available for other Hampshire local authority areas. Therefore in order to get some idea of the scale of additional visits from these other authorities it is necessary to return to the TSE data and the estimates of Footprint Ecology. 5.42 It is estimated that 945,079 additional day visits to the New Forest could be generated by new residential development. It is known that of all day visits (8,007,000) 70% come from within Hampshire, a further 18% come from Dorset , 7% from Wiltshire and the remaining 5% from elsewhere. Of the 70% of day visits from within Hampshire, the largest proportion (46%) were from within the New Forest National Park or the areas around the boundary of the Park. Of the remaining Hampshire visits 12% were found to originate from the north-east of the New Forest in the Southampton, Eastleigh and Chandlers Ford area; 4% from Portsmouth, Fareham, Havant and Gosport to the east at; 3% from Winchester to the north and 5% from elsewhere in Hampshire. In other words 24% of all current day visits to the National Park originate from these areas, around 1.92 million visits. 5.43 If there is a similar ratio of new visits as a result of residential development and population growth in Hampshire as a whole outside of the New Forest, then it would be anticipated that of the 945,079 estimated growth in annual day visits, 24% of this would originate from Hampshire local authorities outside of the New Forest amounting to 226,818 additional visits per annum. If this figure were reasonably accurate, it would appear to be within the compass of the proposed Forest Park to
absorb. However, official population projections indicate a negative growth for the New Forest District of - 7,554, despite a proposed growth in housing of 4,138 dwellings. This was not allowed for in the estimates made by Footprint Ecology, which actually assumed a population growth of 9,765 based on 2.36 people per new dwelling. This is a difference of 17,319 people. Furthermore, the proposed growth in housing outside of the New Forest is of a scale far greater than that within it, so simply scaling up the estimate of visits based on current ratios would not appear to be statistically sound. 5.44 Therefore, as a test, and for the purposes of this report, two estimates of likely future growth in visits to the New Forest from population growth in Hampshire have been made based on a similar methodology to that used to estimate the likely future growth in visits from Test Valley above. Both estimates are based on the current vph (visits per head) to the New Forest generated by the existing population of a local authority area (as at 2006). This vph was then used as a multiplier; first against the official population growth projections for that same district in 2026; and secondly following the Footprint Ecology methodology, using a factor of 2.36 ppd (persons per dwelling) to estimate population growth against housing targets for 2026. The methodology is set out in more detail below: Estimate of vph (Vists Per Head) Average Total visits from that area of Hampshire (TSE data) Population of that area (2006) = vph Estimate 1 Official projection of population growth of an area up to 2026 vph for that area = estimate 1 of growth in visitor numbers. Estimate 2 Number of planned new dwellings in an area up to 2026 2.36ppd vph = estimate 2 of growth in visitor numbers. The results are shown in Tables 23, 24 and 25 below:
Percentage of all Day Visits to New Forest 2005 12 Estimated Combined Number of Visits 960,840
76
Hampshire Districts Southampton and Eastleigh Fareham, Havant, Gosport and Portsmouth Winchester
Combined Population 2006 342,412
Visits Per Head (vph) 2.8
497,285 240,210
4 3
320,280 240,210
0.64 2.12 0.89 3.1
Rushmoor, Hart, East Hants. And Basingsoke 450,059 5 400,350 Test Valley 112,397 4.3 346,970 Table 23 Estimates of Current Visitor Per Head (vph) for Hampshire Districts outside New Forest
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study Official Combined Population 2026 365,040 Estimated Increase in 77 Visits to New Forest 2026 63,358
Hampshire Districts Southampton and Eastleigh Fareham, Havant, Gosport and Portsmouth Winchester
Combined Population 2006 342,412
Projected Population Growth 22,628
vph 2.8
497,285 113,048
533,807 132,279
36,522 19,231
0.64 2.12
23,374 40,769
Rushmoor, Hart, East Hants and Basingstoke 450,059 476,158 26,099 Test Valley 112,397 120,757 8,360 TOTAL 1,515,201 1,628,041 112,840 Table 24 Estimated Growth in Visits to the New Forest by 2026 (1)
0.89 3.10
23,228 25,916 176,645
Hampshire Districts Southampton and Eastleigh Fareham,Havant, Gosport and Portsmouth Winchester
Projected Housing Increase to 2026 27,383
Estimated Population Increase (at 2.36 ppd) 64,623
vph 2.8
Estimated Increase in Visits to the New Forest in 2026 180,944
37,230 12,436
87,862 29,348
0.64 2.12
56,231 62,217
Rushmoor, Hart,East Hants and Basingstoke 31,899 75,281 0.89 Test Valley 8,910 21,027 3.1 TOTAL 117,858 278,144 Table 25 Estimated Growth in Visits to the New Forest by 2026 (2)
67,000 65,183 431,575
5.45 The results provide estimates of growth in visitors to the New Forest by 2026 of 176,645 based on official population projections; and, 431,575 based on 2.36 persons to every new dwelling built from 2006 to 2026. The figure of 226,818 derived by a simple apportionment of visitor growth based on existing visit patterns is actually some way between these two estimates. 5.46 On this basis, alternative green space in Hampshire would need to attract and accommodate between 176,645 and 431,575 additional visits from the New Forest by 2026, in order to offset the impact of proposed residential development and population growth over the 20 year period 2006 to 2026.
5.47 Returning to the earlier comparisons between the size and visitor numbers between the Forest Park and some nearby country parks, a new green space of almost 400 ha given its location between urban south Hampshire and the New Forest, would appear to be more than capable of attracting and accommodating 176,645 visits. However, there must be serious doubts as to whether on its own, the Forest Park could offset 431,575 visits each year. If household size therefore continues at 2.36 ppd for each new dwelling built up to 2026, the best that could reasonably be expected of the Forest Park is that it could offset the growth in visitor numbers generated by Test Valley, plus Southampton and Eastleigh combined i.e. 246,127 visits per annum. Furthermore, these would need to be visits that would otherwise have gone to the New Forest and not just local communities benefitting from the new local green space opportunity. It would certainly appear therefore, that other alternative green spaces will need to be provided elsewhere in the PUSH region and it is notable in this regard, that the advice to PUSH on the GI Strategy for South Hampshire, proposed a number of regional parks. 5.48 However, the proposed Forest Park concept could potentially be extended into the neighbouring Eastleigh Borough and City of Southampton. Both Eastleigh Borough Council and Southampton City Council are in the process of preparing their respective Local Development Plan Documents and may propose to include land within their authority boundaries as an extension of the Forest Park. This would both increase the overall area and capacity of the park and its accessibility to local communities.
78
Evaluation of Key Attributes 3. Ambience

5.49 In order to be successful in attracting visitors away from the New Forest in the first instance and then continue to attract return visits consistently, the proposed Forest Park must provide an ambience and visitor experience and recreational opportunities which are similar to those which visitors currently enjoy in the New Forest. 5.50 In Section 4, the main reasons why people enjoyed visiting the New Forest were identified based on the TSE survey results. These were summarised as some of the key attributes that the Forest Park would need to have if it was to successfully attract these visitors: scenery, landscapes and views that would generally be perceived as being attractive and interesting and are similar to those to be found in the New Forest; a relatively quiet and peaceful location and one that is not too crowded or is not perceived to be; an area that is good for walking, with a choice of routes and reasonable quality walking surfaces; an area that is good for dog walking and where dogs are accepted; a location which is easy to get to and reasonably close to home relative to the New Forest; an area that has a good diversity of wildlife and natural interest;
an area that has an acceptable general ambience that is as close as possible to that to be found in the New Forest; an area that is good for recreational cycling and provides for cyclists; an area that has good pubs or cafes or similar places to eat and drink out.
79
5.51 This section evaluates the proposed Forest Park in relation to these criteria. The factors relating to location and convenient access have already been addressed above and the liking for somewhere to eat and drink out is considered later in this report. Scenery, Landscape and Views 5.52 The principal landscape types found across the New Forest are open heathland, broadleafed woodland and conifer woodland. The main landscapes within the proposed Forest Park are conifer woodland and broadleaf woodland. The Forest Park therefore lacks the long open views afforded by the open heathland of the New Forest. For those New Forest visitors who enjoy this type of landscape, the Forest Park, dominated by woodland and with narrow enclosed views through the trees will be less appealing. However for those who enjoy visiting the woods and forests, the proposed Forest Park will offer them a very similar experience. 5.53 As part of the background work and evidence base for the TVBC Core Strategy, the Council commissioned a landscape sensitivity assessment 40. The area within which the proposed Forest Park lies is characterised as 2B North Baddesley and Chilworth Woodland Mosaic. The natural character of this landscape type is summarised as follows:
Landform This is a rounded rolling landscape with gentle slopes and some steeper inclines,sloping south towards Southampton Water. The undulation becomes steeper towards the south of the area. Medium sensitivity Habitats Deciduous woodland is an important habitat in this area and there are also extensive areas of coniferous and mixed plantation woodland. There is a strong habitat network of linked woodlands & hedgerows. Most of the grassland is improved, although there are some remaining areas of unimproved neutral grassland. Heathland occurs in small patches and as remnants within forestry plantations. Medium-high sensitivity Nature Designations This area contains Trodds Copse SSSI, which is an ancient semi-natural woodland. There are also 57 SINC designations including, ancient semi-natural woodland, pasture woodland, agriculturally unimproved grasslands, wet flushes, heathland remnants, scrub and sites which support notable species or an outstanding assemblage of species. Medium-high sensitivity Tree Cover Tree cover is a dominant element in this landscape and is characterised by interlocking woodland, of which a significant proportion is ancient semi-natural woodland, including Trodds Copse in the North-East of the area which is designated as a SSSI. Ancient semi40
Test Valley Lanscape Sensitivity to Built Development. Landscape Scale Assessment,Jonathan Porter and th Jemma Simpson, Countryscape, 6 December 2007.
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study natural woodland is more prevalent in the South of the character area than it is in the North. There are coniferous plantation woodlands in the area, these interlink with the broadleaved woodland. The most common species is Oak with Birch abundant. Sweet Chestnut is common in the area, much having been planted as coppice. Some broadleaved semi-natural woodlands have been developed for recreation, housing, industry and transport links, or replanted with non native species. Further fragmentation of this resource should be avoided. Medium-high sensitivity.
80
5.54 The cultural character of the landscape was described as:

Historic landscape This landscape was part of, or adjacent to the New Forest in the 11 th Century, a royal hunting forest, which means the changes that took place to create the current pastoral wooded landscape occurred after this time. Local people had rights of common on some of the land and it is likely that the denudation of the forest took place in response to the need for farm land. Assarting in this landscape is regular which suggests that this is late assarting (19 th 20 th Century) as part of the modern period. Later parliamentary field enclosure is also evident. There is a Scheduled Monument in this character area, in the South: Castle Hill Earthwork. Low-medium sensitivity
5.55 The perceptual character of the landscape is described as:

Enclosure This is a well enclosed landscape with few views, when there are views they tend to be filtered through trees and hedges. There are few distant views except from higher ground where there are some views of the wider landscape. The wooded framework that creates this sense of enclosure is essential to maintaining landscape character.
The photographs below show some typical views within the proposed Forest Park:
81
82
5.56 They illustrate the character of the four component woodlands and show the typical views along the path network, framed by the woodland on either side of the rides and tracks. Whilst the views are enclosed the rides are wide enough, and the tree planting density low enough, that walking through the woods is not claustrophobic or oppressive. There is good light penetration to the ground (although it should be noted that these photographs were taken in winter before the broadleaf trees came into leaf), which enables a variety of flora to thrive along the rides and in open areas. 5.57 These photographs also show something of the heathland history and associations of this landscape. In small pockets, heathland complete with heather still exists (such as around the Castle Hill ancient earthworks in Lordswood). In other areas the heathland has succeeded to silver birch/scots pine woodland with gorse scrub. Whilst most of the former heathland has therefore been replaced by woodland, there are still plenty of visual clues and reminders of the past heath. 5.58 Whilst a large part of the area has been converted to commercial conifer forest by the Forestry Commission, there is nevertheless a good visual and woodland variety within the forest created especially by the rolling landform and the many stream valleys along which broadleaf trees such as alder still remain; and the mixture of blocks of conifer and broadleaf tree species. Coppice woodland is a particular feature of the area especially within Nightingale Woods and Hut Wood. There are also a good many old and ancient trees including oak, yew and cedar. There are however, very few clearings or open areas within the forest. Peace, Quiet and Crowding 5.59 The Test Valley Landscape Sensitivity Assessment describes the area as follows:
Tranquillity This is generally a peaceful landscape with strong links to nature and wildlife, although tranquillity is reduced due to the network of roads which have both visual and noise impacts. Proximity to Southampton also reduces tranquillity, through noise and overt signs of human development. However, the landscape does provide some sense of calm and peace despite the network of roads and the clear signs of human development. Low-medium sensitivity
83
5.60 As the proposed Forest Park is effectively bisected by the M27 motorway, parts of the area are affected by this background noise. In particular those parts of Lordswood and Rownhams Wood which are immediately adjacent to the motorway and it is particularly noticeable where the motorway cuts along the southern edge of Hut Wood. There is a persistent background hum of traffic in these areas which detracts from the general peace and quiet of the area. 5.61 Nevertheless, for the most part, such traffic noise and indeed other noise from adjacent built settlements is largely absent. The dense woodland planting and the scale of the forest means that such noise is effectively filtered out. In most areas, the snapping of a twig or a burst of birdsong are clearly audible and the only sounds to break the silence.
5.62 As the motorway network is not visible from within the forest (except for a few distant glimpses through Rownhams Wood), there are no visual reminders of the proximity of it and no distraction by the movement of the traffic. 5.63 In general therefore, the proposed Forest Park provides a very peaceful and quiet environment where it is possible to feel completely isolated from the bustling world outside and completely at one with the wildness of the surrounding woods. 5.64 At present, there are few visitors to the woods and forest because they are all in private ownership. Lordswood, Rownhams Wood and Hut Wood are all owned by the Willis Fleming Estate and leased on a 150 year lease by the Forestry Commission, whose lease currently restricts public access. Nightingale Wood is owned by the Broadlands Estate. However, there are a few public rights of way through these areas and it is quite evident on the ground, that despite the restrictions, the public have been enjoying some limited access. There is widespread evidence on many tracks and rides of footprints, dog paw prints, hoof marks from horses and cycle tyre tracks. 5.65 Research has shown that woodlands and forests can have the following characteristics: Woodlands can screen out noise, for example, from nearby traffic; Many woodlands have the ability to absorb large numbers of people without seeming crowded.41 For these and other reasons (some of which are discussed later in this report) woodlands are therefore becoming increasingly popular places to spend leisure time, get away from it all, and relax. Good for Walking, Dog Walking and Cycling 5.66 These three attributes of the New Forest that were valued by a high proportion of visitors to the New Forest, are for convenience, considered here together as they are all related to the main activities which new Forest visitors enjoy. The main purpose of 49% of all LDV visits are to walk the dog; this contrasts with only 17% of visits from ODVs for which the main stated purpose was to walk the dog. For the ODVs going for a walk is the main purpose for a visit to the New Forest with 36% of trips being for this purpose. This is slightly higher than the 29% of LDV visits for which walking was the primary purpose. 5.67 Some way behind walking and dog walking, another main reason for visits was given as relaxing/enjoying the views, picnicking, etc. This accounted for 6% of LDV visits and 15% of all ODV visits. Watching wildlife and enjoying nature was next accounting for 2% of all LDV visits and 4% of all ODV visits. Recreational cycling accounted for a similar proportion of visits, at 3% of all LDV visits and 4% of ODV visits. The secondary reason given by visitor respondents for their trips to the New Forest, both reflects the primary reasons given above, but also shows some interesting additional reasons. However, it should be noted that 27% of LDVs and 21% of ODVs stated that there was no secondary reason for their visit. It should also
41
84
Trees and Woodlands Natures Health Service. Liz OBrien, Forestry Commission, 2005
be noted that multiple responses were accepted to this question as opposed to the 85 single response required for main trip reason. The percentages quoted refer to the percentage of all respondents giving that characteristic as a subsidiary reason for their visit. Of those that did give a secondary reason, walking was again prevalent for 29% of LDVs and 21% of ODVs and walking the dog accounted for a further 9% of secondary reasons for the visit both from ODVs and LDVs. 5.68 The main secondary reasons for visits were relaxing/enjoying the views, picnicking etc. at 36% for both ODVs and LDVs; and watching wildlife and enjoying nature, accounting for 32% of secondary trip reasons for LDVs and 30% for ODVs. Next came visiting a pub, cafe or tea rooms accounting for 7% for LDVs and 20% for ODVs; and visiting a town or village accounted for a further 3% of LDV visits and 12% of ODV visits. 5.69 Thus walking and walking the dog were significantly the main reasons for visits to the New Forest and it follows that to attract such visitors, the proposed Forest Park must provide adequately for these purposes. 5.70 Given the extensive network of tracks and rides through the four component woodlands, there are potentially many long and shorter routes for walking. Many of these rides and tracks are of a robust construction of a Type1or 2 gravel sub-base surfaced with a binding layer of fine crushed gravel and are well drained with ditches down one or both sides. These tend to be the main tracks used for forestry operations and over which heavy machinery has to travel. Other tracks are simply grass rides with no surfacing or drainage and consequently can be waterlogged and badly rutted. On some slopes, these tracks can be badly gulleyed and eroded as the tracks are effectively acting as surface water drainage channels. These issues are discussed further in the next section of this report. 5.71 The mean duration of trips to the New Forest was 1.3 hours for LDVs and 2.3 hours for ODVs. When the average duration of trips is correlated with the main purpose of the trip, these figures rise to 2.8 hours for a long walk and similarly, 2.8 hours for recreational cycling. These mean duration times are significant when evaluating the capacity of the proposed Forest Park to be a viable alternative to the New Forest. Given the size of the proposed Forest Park and the extensive network of tracks and rides, there is great scope to develop a variety of walking and cycling routes ranging in length from 1 hour through to 3 hours to cater for all potential visitors preferences. 5.72 Overall therefore, there is a good range of routes, the majority of which are in good condition and provide opportunities to explore and enjoy all the four component woodlands. As noted in the earlier section on accessibility, there are currently a number of existing and potential access points in the woodlands and several are existing public rights of way. The scale of the forest and the extensive network of tracks and rides provides considerable scope for creating a variety of recreational routes of sufficient length to suit all visitor preferences.
Diversity of Wildlife and Natural Interest 86 5.73 This was another key attribute valued by 30% of day visitors to the New Forest. Significant parts of the New Forest are SAC and SPA/Ramsar sites and are therefore of Europe wide ecological importance. The New Forest is one of the richest areas for wildlife diversity in England. 5.74 Whilst the proposed Forest Park cannot hope to match the New Forest in this respect, the area does have a significant diversity of wildlife of its own. Each of the four component woodlands is a SINC (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation) because they are ancient semi natural woodland sites, or plantations on ancient woodland sites. SINC sites are sites of county level importance for their biodiversity, and planning policy across Hampshire, seeks to protect such valuable sites from damage or destruction. Many SINC sites contain important habitats or species which are BAP (Biodiversity Action Plan) priority species both at the county and national level. 5.75 Survey records from HBiC (the Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre) are available for three out of the four component woodlands in the proposed Forest Park. These are summarised in the Table 26 below:
Woodland Site
Total No. of Plant Species
Total No. of Woodland Species
Total No. of Ancient Woodland Indicator Species
Nightingale Wood Lordswood Hut Wood
148
145
48 (16)
160 202
153 135
42 (11) 40 (11)
Table 26 Summary of Ecological Survey Data
5.76 In this table, the ratio of woodland species to total species is a good indication of overall habitat diversity. The number of Ancient Woodland Vascular Plant (AWVPs) indicates the degree of confidence that can be placed on the ancient origins of that woodland. In the south of England, there are 100 species of vascular plant that are regarded as good indicators of ancient woodland (AWVPs). The more of these species a woodland contains, the more confidence can be put on the assessment that the site is an ancient woodland. Of these 100 species, 36 are regarded as the most indicative of a long history of woodland on that site in that these species are never found other than in truly ancient woodlands. These particular species are shown in brackets in the above table. 5.77 From this data we can see that Hut Wood is the most diverse area in terms of habitat and therefore species variety, whilst Nightingale Wood is a more specialist
woodland of truly ancient origin. Lordswood lies between the two. Clearly past land use and management has played a large part in the habitats to be found today .Nightingale Wood has the least proportion of its total area disturbed by clearance of broadleaf woodland and re-planting with commercial conifers. Extensive areas of the wood have been traditionally managed as coppice which remains, in large part today, albeit derelict. This is reflected in the high ratio of woodland plants to nonwoodland plants, the high percentage of AWVPs (48%) and of these 16 species are amongst the 36 species recognised as the best indicators of truly ancient woodland sites. Wonderful and scarce species such as the wild service tree (Sorbus torminalis),sanicle (Sanicula europaea), and the exotically named lemon-scented fern (Oreopteris limbosperma) , are amongst the plants to be found there. 5.78 Lordswood on the other hand, has been extensively cleared and re-planted with commercial conifers. Nevertheless, it retains good remnants of its ancient woodland past with 42% of the ancient woodland indicator species and 11 of the 36 indicators of the most ancient woodland. Its spectacular woodland flora includes common cow-wheat (Melampyrum pratense),wood sorrel (Oxalis acetosella), and harts tongue,(Phyllitis scolopendrium). Lordswood has a greater diversity of habitat types, including small but significant relict areas of heath with heather(Calluna vulgaris) and bog areas with round leaved sundew (Drosera rotundifolia). 5.79 In addition to the woodland habitats, Hut Wood is the most diverse of the three sites in terms of habitat and species. It too has a high percentage of AWVPs at 40 % and like Lordswood, it contains 11 of the species indicative of the most ancient woodland. These include solomons seal (Polygonatum multiflorum).Hut Wood also contains significant areas of marsh and bog with Sphagnum sp. the bog moss. It is estimated that a further 3% of the site is remnant heath with heather Calluna vulgaris. 5.80 From this data there is no doubt that the proposed Forest Park contains habitat and species of great importance and significance especially ancient semi natural woodland, heathland, and bog. These are all typical of the habitats to be found in the New Forest. However for most visitors the scientific details of the area will not be how they would necessarily judge the wildlife interest and enjoyment. The casual visitor is more likely to simply enjoy a variety of habitat types and the sights, sounds and colours and scents of nature. There are for example several areas of dense spring bluebells in the proposed Forest Park; breeding buzzards soar and call over the trees; deer slots (footprints) throughout the area reveal the routes they take. 5.81 Visitors enjoyment of this diversity of nature can be enhanced with interpretation and carefully selected routes. The objective must be to enable visitors to enjoy nature whilst not having any harmful impacts on it, and this is an issue considered later in this report. Visitor Patterns to National Parks, Countryside, and Woods and Forests in England 5.82 It is important when considering the extent to which an area of woodland and forest could attract visitors away from such a nationally renowned area as the New Forest, to consider the broader picture of leisure day visits to the countryside in England. Results for the England Leisure Visits Survey, 2005, showed that 63% of
87
adults had made a leisure visit in the week prior to the survey. Of these 19% were visits to the countryside and only 1.2% were to National Parks. There were an estimated total of 699 million visits to the countryside as against only 35 million to National Parks. 18% of all leisure day visits in 2005 were for the purposes of going for a walk equal highest with eating and drinking out as the most popular reasons for a leisure visit. Putting these statistics together shows that for most people, going for a walk in the countryside is a popular leisure time pursuit. And for most people, the general English countryside is satisfactory for that purpose it does not have to be a National Park. Furthermore, of the total 699 million countryside visits, 187 million were to woods or forests exactly the same type of place as the proposed Forest Park. The number of day visits to woods and forests is therefore nearly five times greater than that for National Parks. 5.83 Table 27 below shows a comparison of visit characteristics of visits to National Parks, countryside sites and woods and forests:
88
All leisure visits 2005
Countryside visits
Woods/forest 187 6% 62% 8% 6%
National Park 35 11% 52% 2% 6%
All leisure visits (millions) 3569 699 To eat or drink out 18% 17% To walk 18% 36% Hobby or special interest 10% 11% Cycling 2% 2% Table 27 Comparison of Visit Destinations for Leisure Activities
5.84 What is most notable about this comparison, is that woods and forests actually appear to be the most popular locations for the nations most popular leisure activity walking. Secondly, they are equally popular with National Parks for cycling. However, woods and forest are not as popular a destination as National Parks or the wider countryside for eating or drinking out. However, this may simply reflect a lack of opportunities in that there are fewer pubs, cafes and restaurants. 5.85 From this data, it has to be concluded that for many of the activities that people visit the New Forest, a Forest Park could provide for them just as well, if not better.
Summary Evaluation of Key Attributes

5.86 The proposed Forest Park appears to perform well in relation to the key attributes it needs to have in order that it has a good probability of achieving its objectives, principally to provide an attractive alternative destination to visits to the New Forest, thus reducing visitor pressures on the important European wildlife sites there.
5.87 It is well located in relation to the New Forest National Park being only some 5km from its boundary. Critically, it is located on or adjacent to the major road routes along which most local day visitors travel to the National Park from most of Hampshire which makes up 24% of all local day visits and it is located between this important visitor catchment and the National Park. The 20 minute drivetime catchment of the proposed Forest Park encompasses most of southern Test Valley, all of Southampton, Eastleigh, Chandlers Ford and as far as Winchester. These areas alone contribute some 17% of all day visitors to the National Park and within the 20 minute drivetime catchment there is an estimated 616,465 people. Visitors intending to visit the New Forest effectively have to pass through or around the proposed Forest Park and whilst there are no direct links form the major road network into the Forest Park, there is a good local road network linking them. A trip to the proposed Forest Park instead of the National Park would save the great majority of visitors from Hampshire a round trip distance of at least 10km. 5.88 The proposed Forest Park is also well located to serve the local community as seen in the ANGSt and WASt catchments and to provide accessible countryside within a short walk or cycle distance of communities in Southampton, Romsey, Nursling and Rownhams, Chilworth, North Baddesley, Chandlers Ford and Eastleigh. In this respect, the fragmented nature of the Forest Park can be seen as a benefit, in that at least one part of the proposed Forest Park is located reasonably close to all these major settlements. Existing rights of way and cycleways connect into the proposed Forest Park and although currently fragmented, there is potential to link them up to for a network linking all local communities into and through the Forest park. 5.89 The proposed Forest Park would appear at nearly 400 ha would appear to have the requisite size to accommodate a significant proportion of the visitors which need to be attracted away from the New Forest. Based on official population projections the minimum estimate of an additional 176,643 visits to the New Forest generated by residential development in Hampshire by 2026, it would appear feasible that the Forest Park could accommodate this level of visits. Based on the worst case scenario of continued average household sizes of 2.36 ppd the Forest Park could possibly accommodate up to 246,127 visits each year (the estimated additional visits generated by Test Valley, Southampton and Eastleigh). 5.90 Evaluation of the character of the proposed Forest Park provides a high level of confidence that it has can offer the ambience which visitors to the New Forest particularly value. The landscape is reasonably varied and attractive and being former heathland like much of the New Forest, it retains sufficient evidence of this type of landscape to be perceived as similar. The extensive woodland cover again reflects the mix of ancient broadleaf woodland and conifer Inclosures to be found in the New Forest. 5.91 This forest has a network of tracks and rides to provide options for a variety of interesting and varied routes for walking, and dog walking which are the main activities of visitors to the New Forest, as well as providing for cycling and horse riding.
89
5.92 The area is also rich in species diversity and wildlife interest with significant evidence of ancient semi natural woodland still remaining despite decades of commercial forestry including broadleaf clearance and re planting with conifers.
90
6. Key Management Objectives and Options for the Forest Park

6.1 Having evaluated those key attributes which the proposed Forest Park must innately have to meet its objectives, this section examines those critical success factors which can be significantly influenced by the future design and management of the area. These are factors which either visitors to the New Forest particularly value, or factors which are important in achieving the objectives of providing new greenspace and increased access to the countryside to benefit local communities. The proposed Forest Park represents a potential physical resource for public recreation. In order for that recreational potential to be realised, the resource must be managed in an appropriate way. In particular, management must focus on achieving the conditions and facilities which visitors like and expect. It is about customer care and making all visitors feel welcome, comfortable and satisfied with their leisure experience. As with all leisure facilities, people have a range of choices as to where to spend their precious leisure time. If the visitor experience is positive, people will choose to return and if it is not they will try elsewhere. If the proposed Forest Park is therefore to be sustainable as a viable alternative to visiting the New Forest it needs to consistently attract visitors back. 23% of day visitors to the New Forest said that one reason why they go there is that they are familiar with it and know it well. This also implies that they know what they will get from the visit and that they are satisfied with what they will get. The England Leisure Visits Survey, 2005, found that 79% of visitors to National Parks in England were familiar with the place they were going to; a further 37% of responded that they had visited that National Park because of a personal recommendation. In other words, other visitors had enjoyed their visit so much, that they recommended it to their friends and families. These statistics illustrate how fundamentally important it is to get site and visitor management right. Positive experiences will not only encourage visitors to return but it will encourage them to recommend others to visit. 6.2 At the same time, site management must protect and conserve the conditions and features that attract visitors. This for example means balancing recreational demands with the need to conserve the landscape, the character, biodiversity and historic and built heritage. 6.3 At paragraph 4.65 above, the key management objectives were set out broadly as:
91
Key Management Objectives for the Forest Park: 1. Sustainability including its contribution to sustainable development, climate change targets, sustainable transport, heritage conservation, health, etc. 2. Recreation including the provision of a range of recreational opportunities, that are in keeping with the other objectives of the Forest Park, and the provision of the facilities necessary to support recreational use and enjoyment; 3. Conservation including protecting existing natural interest features, seeking opportunities for biodiversity gains, and contributing to the creation of
biodiversity networks; and conserving and enhancing important built heritage features; 4. Welcoming, Inclusive, Clean and Safe these are some of the key objectives in providing a positive experience for visitors and which will encourage them to return; 5. Marketing, Information and Education and Community Involvement these are important in encouraging visitors to use the Forest Park and helping them to enjoy and get the maximum benefit from their visits.
92
6.4 Sustainability is something which should underpin the whole design and management of the proposed Forest Park and so it is not considered here as an objective in itself ,rather it is a fundamental consideration which is included within the consideration of all the above management objectives. In seeking to achieve each of these other objectives, there will be management options which are more sustainable than others. 6.5 It is of course important when considering the future use and management of the proposed Forest Park, to recognise that much of the area is currently working forest which is commercially managed for timber production. This important forestry work must and will continue and therefore, all management options and decisions must be considered in this context and the advice of the Forestry Commission which manages the forest, should be sought on the future planning and management of the area.
Recreation Management
Visitor Access Management 6.6 Paragraphs 5.45 and 5.46 summarise the likely parameters of recreational visits that will need to be accommodated by alternative green spaces by 2026, to avoid any net additional recreational impact on the New Forest from recreational day visits from within Hampshire. By 2026, somewhere between 176,645 and 431,575 day visits may have to be accommodated by the proposed Forest Park. The first major management planning issue this presents, is how to get all these visitors to and from the Forest Park. 6.7 It is known that currently, 83% of all visitors and 92% of day visitors to the New Forest arrive by car. This volume of traffic is causing significant problems of traffic congestion and affecting air quality in and adjacent to the National Park. For these reasons, transport strategy in the New Forest is seeking to reduce car visits and promote and encourage the use of alternative modes of transport. 6.8 These traffic issues are not confined to the New Forest and transport strategy for the county of Hampshire as a whole is directed towards similar aims. Therefore, before considering what car parking capacity may need to be provided for the proposed Forest Park, below is set out a short review of this transport strategy which is relevant to the planning and management of visitor travel to and from the Forest Park. Brief Overview of Transport Strategy
6.9 Chapter 8 of the South East Plan the Regional Transport Strategy (RTS) for South East England to 2026. It is based on and replaces the existing RTS, published by the Government in July 2004. It sets out the vision and broad aims of regional transport strategy as follows:
Monitored travel information for the South East shows an increase in overall travel per person since 2004, including an increase in travel by car. Some of these changes are capable of being positively influenced by the South East Plan, the clearest example of this being the concentration of movement and development at a number of urban locations. Evidence suggests that pressure on the transport system is increasing and the urban focus can best support the re-balancing of the transport system toward more sustainable modes, while maintaining, and indeed improving, overall levels of accessibility. In so doing it will assist in reducing the impact of the transport system on both the natural and built environment. The need to re-balance the transport system in favour of sustainable modes is recognised throughout this Plan, accepting that it is unrealistic to achieve an absolute reduction in traffic within the life of the Plan. The RTS sets out to deliver the following: Our vision is a high quality transport system to act as a catalyst for continued economic growth and provide for an improved quality of life for all in a sustainable and socially inclusive manner; a regional transport system that progressively reaches the standard of the best in North West Europe." Translating this vision into a set of regionally specific objectives that integrate spatial and transportation planning at the regional level, the RTS seeks: i. to facilitate urban renaissance and foster social inclusion by re-balancing the structure and use of the transport system. In particular, bringing forward measures that encourage modal shift to more sustainable modes and significantly improve the attractiveness of local public transport services, walking and cycling; ii. to reduce the wider environmental, health and community impact associated with the transport system, by bringing forward management measures that reduce our reliance on single occupancy car use.
93
6.10 It sets out the following policies which are relevant to the consideration of managing visitor travel to and from the proposed Forest Park and which are critical in helping to achieve another major management objective of the Forest Park; sustainability:
POLICY T2: MOBILITY MANAGEMENT The policies and proposals set out in local development documents and local transport plans should include policies to achieve a rebalancing of the transport system in favour of sustainable modes based on an integrated package of measures drawn from the following: i. the allocation and management of highway space used by individual modes of travel ii. the scale of provision and management (including pricing) of car parking both off and on-street iii. the scope and management of public transport services iv. an integrated and comprehensive travel planning advice service v. improvements in the extent and quality of pedestrian and cycle routes vi. charging initiatives etc. POLICY T3: CHARGING
Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study Local transport authorities and particularly those responsible for the hubs should consider using the powers available under the Transport Act 2000 and Local Transport Act 2008, and Government funding, to test new charging initiatives. This may be done, where appropriate, jointly with other authorities. Road user charging should be considered as part of an integrated approach to support delivery of the regional strategy. In addition to being consistent with national guidance, any scheme within the region should be matched with promotion of sustainable alternatives to vehicle use, and be designed so as to avoid disadvantaging regeneration areas dependent on road access. POLICY T4: PARKING Local development documents and local transport plans should, in combination: i. adopt restraint-based maximum levels of parking provision for non-residential developments, linked to an integrated programme of public transport and accessibility improvements; ii. set maximum parking standards for Class B1 land uses within the range 1:30 m2 and 1:100m2; iii. set maximum parking standards for other non-residential land uses in line with PPG13: Transport, reducing provision below this in locations with good public transport; iv. include policies and proposals for the management of the total parking stock within regional hubs that are consistent with these limits; v. apply guidance set out in PPS3: Housing on residential parking, reflecting local circumstances; vi. support an increase in the provision in parking at rail stations where appropriate; vii. ensure the provision of sufficient cycle parking at new developments including secure cycle storage for new flats and houses which lack garages.
94
6.11 Cross Cutting Policy CC2 of the South East Plan, seeks to address climate change and includes the objective of:
Reducing the need to travel and ensuring good accessibility to public and other sustainable modes of transport.
6.12 The Hampshire Transport Strategy 42was published at about the same time as the original South East Plan in 2006 and covers the period from 2006-2011. It will therefore in due course, require reviewing and updating to reflect the new policies of the now approved South East Plan and like that plan, provide for the period up to 2026 and take into account changes in national strategy and policy such as the Local Transport Act 2008.However, its overall vision and many of its current policies are broadly similar in objective to those for the South East Plan:
The overall vision for this LTP is of a transport strategy that: Enhances quality of life and economic prosperity by connecting people, communities, employment, goods, services and amenities. The main objectives of this LTP are: 1 To increase accessibility 2 To promote safety 3 To reduce the impact and effect of congestion 4 To widen travel choice 5 To improve air quality 6 To support wider quality of life objectives 7 To encourage value for money and efficient asset management.
42
The Full Hampshire Transport Strategy, Hampshire County Council, March 2006.
6.13 Two key relevant policy targets in the context of the Forest Park are:
CHANGE IN AREA WIDE TRAFFIC MILEAGE (LTP2) To not exceed a 1% annual growth rate of all vehicular traffic on Hampshires road network (excluding trunk roads and motorways) by 2010/11 CYCLING TRIPS (LTP3) To halt the decline in cycling by 2007 from a 2004 base and increase the levels of cycling from 2007 back to 2004 levels by 2010.
95
6.14 The LTP is divided into sub regional strategies and those that are relevant to this study are those for the Solent and the New Forest:
SOLENT TRANSPORT STRATEGY Transport planning in the area is coordinated by the Solent Transport partnership on behalf of PUSH. The partnerships vision is: The Solent sub-region seeks to provide sustained economic vitality and viability with a high quality of life for all. Solent Transport will develop an integrated transport network that supports these key principles.
6.15 The Solent Transport Strategy notes that:

Overall levels of car ownership in the Solent area are higher than the national average with 84% of households in the strategy area owning one or more cars compared to the national average of 74%. Rownhams, North Baddesley and Chilworth all have relatively good links to the M27 and M27/M3 interchange. Local access via cycle routes has been developed including links into the Southampton cycle network and there remains a need to further consider and implement appropriate links of this nature. There is a balance to be met between protecting the environment and improving accessibility. Adequate access to the rural areas is essential in maintaining the tourist economy and protecting jobs and facilities in these areas. Recreational access to the countryside from the towns and villages is an important issue. Improved links by all transport modes including the needs and safety of particular rural groups such as horse riders and walkers are being considered. Local Rights of Way (RoW) such as bridleways and footpaths provide a valuable recreational resource and have the potential for short distance utility trips. This provides the opportunity to expand routes to provide access on foot, by bike or on horseback to a wider range of destinations and of linking RoWs with other transport networks. In Hampshire, RoW Improvement Plans will form part of the County Councils Countryside Access Plans. Therefore, the Solent programme will be integrated with the development of initiatives for the South Downs and Forest of Bere Countryside Access Plans.
6.16 The NEW FOREST AREA TRANSPORT STRATEGY is based substantially on the
New Forest Transport Strategy, which was developed in partnership with local stakeholders and adopted by the County Council in 2003. This serves as a robust strategic framework pending the redefinition or refinement of local objectives as the new National Park Authority becomes more established.
6.17 The New Forest Transport Strategy vision is:

To maintain and improve the areas distinctive character, while improving opportunities for sustainable travel for everyone through appropriate transport investment and greater integration. Enhancing the environment, the local economy and reduced social exclusion will be achieved through the integration of land use and transport policies, through an innovative approach to travel and the management of existing resources in the New Forest.
96
6.18 The strategy sets out a number of aims and objectives relevant to the LTP: Aims:
To help deliver the aims and objectives of the New Forest Committees Strategy for the New Forest.1 To support and maintain the vibrancy and economic vitality of local communities. To provide effective local transport solutions tailored to the needs of particular areas, which reduce impacts on the Forest environment. To reduce the adverse impacts of traffic on the environment and local communities especially in the designated National Park. To integrate land use and transport planning. To increase the opportunities for sustainable travel and accessibility for all, having regard for the particular sensitivity of remote areas.
Objectives:
To promote new and improved passenger transport, cycling and walking facilities that are accessible to all and that provide safe, reliable, affordable and attractive alternatives to the car. To provide imaginative local solutions that maintain the character of the New Forest and its towns and villages, contribute towards the development of a safe, attractive and cherished environment, reduce visual impact, noise and air pollution, and at the same time improve sustainable access to services, goods and markets for local people and businesses. To ensure that any new major development that is likely to generate significant additional traffic is located and planned to provide as far as possible alternative means of travel to the private car, preferably making use of existing services and interchanges. To investigate measures such as road closures and road pricing to manage the use of the New Forests highway network and reduce the undesirable effects of traffic on wildlife, outdoor recreation, the unique New Forest environment and the understanding and enjoyment of its special qualities. To raise awareness of transport issues and maintain support for the strategy to bring about changes in travel behaviour. To identify a range of targets and indicators that can be monitored, to assess the effectiveness of the strategys measures. To improve road safety and reduce the number of injuries to both people and animals. To ensure adequate accessibility for disabled people. To reduce the level and impact of through-traffic in the New Forest.
6.19 The New Forest National Park Authority (NPA) has endorsed and adopted the New
Forest Committees strategy for the New Forest.
Sustainable Visitor Access 6.20 All of the above policy objectives share common threads: Reduction in the growth of road traffic, and especially seeking to reduce the use of cars for short trips and trips with a single occupant; Reduction in emission of greenhouse gasses that contribute towards climate change and improvement of air quality;
To increase the number of trips that are undertaken by more sustainable modes of transport such as by public transport, cycling and walking.
97
6.21 The proposed Forest Park is a major policy proposal within the Test Valley Borough Council Core Strategy, and as such is subject to the policy objectives of the South East Plan and the Hampshire Local Transport Plan. Therefore, in planning for and managing visitor access to the Forest Park, it is necessary to examine ways of seeking to achieve the key policy objectives set out above. Whilst therefore recognising that currently, 92% of all day visits to the New Forest National Park are by car, planning for visitor access to the proposed Forest Park needs to start by examining the potential for more sustainable modes of transport. 6.22 Accordingly, the following paragraphs examine how visitor access to the Forest Park by car can be minimised and that by sustainable modes encouraged and facilitated. Walking and Cycling 6.23 At paragraph 5.18 above, the accessibility of the Forest Park by walking cycling and horse riding is assessed. Maps 9.1 and 9.2 show the catchments of the proposed Forest Park. At an average walking speed of about 4.5km/hr, the residential population up to 1km from the Forest Park could reach it on foot within 15 minutes walk. This would put large areas of North Baddesley, Chilworth, Nursling and Rownhams and Valley Park in Test Valley; Lordshill, Aldermoor,Lordswood, and Bassett in Southampton; and parts of Chandlers Ford and Eastleigh from Eastleigh Borough, all within 15 minutes walking time of a part of the Forest Park.If the Forest Park is extended eastwards into Eastleigh Borough (as considered at paragraph 5.48) then the residential areas easily accessible on foot could be extended to include large areas of Eastleigh Town. 6.24 However Map 10.1 shows that there are currently few rights of way to and through the Forest Park, although this Map does not show access by footways alongside the road network. Therefore to encourage and facilitate local visitors to walk to the Forest Park, the current rights of way network would need to be extended. How this might be achieved can to some extent be seen in Map 10.2 showing existing and proposed cycle routes although it should be noted that some of these are on-road routes with no associated footways and therefore would be unsuitable for pedestrians. 6.25 Map 9.3 shows an indicative 20 minute cycle travel distance from the Forest Park. This clearly demonstrates that most of the main urban centres with a potentially large population catchment in Southampton, southern Test Valley and Eastleigh are all within that cycle catchment. So too are Totton and the Waterside areas in New Forest District. 6.26 Map 10.2 shows existing and proposed cycleways including possible new routes put forward as a part of this study. These illustrate that there is significant potential to improve access by cycle to the Forest Park and thereby provide the potential for residents of all the surrounding towns and the City of Southampton to have good convenient access to the Forest Park, without having to travel by car.
Public Transport 6.27 No specific studies of current public bus services in the area of the Forest Park 98 have been undertaken as part of this study. However, given that all the four component woodlands within the Forest Park complex lie adjacent to major trunk roads, and on important commuter routes between the employment centres of Southampton, Eastleigh and Romsey, it is reasonable to assume that there are a number of bus routes which could potentially service the Forest Park. 6.28 Further studies would identify those bus services which could potentially be significant in providing access to the Forest Park. Such further studies would need to examine service frequencies at likely peak periods (e.g. weekends) and could also identify existing and potential new bus stops specifically to serve the Forest Park. 6.29 The City of Southampton Core Strategy DPD proposes the development of two new Park and Ride facilities; one at Nursling off the M271 and the other near Swaythling off the M27. Both of these facilities would be within approximately 2km of the proposed Forest Park and adjacent to major motorway/trunk road junctions. These Park and Ride facilities therefore offer the potential for serving visitors to the Forest Park both locally (within the Southampton city region) and from further afield in Hampshire. It may for example be possible to have one or two busses at peak visitor times (e.g. weekends) circling a route in opposite directions, linking the two Park and Ride facilities with the four component woodlands in the Forest Park complex. 6.30 Such a bus service has been operating successfully within the New Forest National Park. The New Forest Tour, a circular hop-on, hop-off tourist bus service, is moving from a two hourly to an hourly frequency. This will increase passenger confidence in the frequency of the service. It will also lead to a doubling in the number of spaces available on the cycle trailers attached to the busses allowing cyclists access to a wider area without the need to drive into the Forest first. Such cycling trailers could also be operated with a similar bus service around the proposed Forest Park, enabling visitors to cycle through the Forest Park from a given drop off point and meet the bus again at another stop where they can be collected and returned to their required destination, such as the Park and Ride facility where they initially parked their car. 6.31 In the TSE Visitor Survey 2004-05 all visitors to the New Forest were asked whether they would consider using a Park & Ride service when visiting in future. Overall, 22% of respondents would consider using such a facility. Visitors staying in the New Forest and those staying on holiday elsewhere were most likely to consider using a Park & Ride service (36% and 32% respectively). Lower proportions of local day visitors and other day visitors indicated they would use a Park & Ride facility (11% and 20% respectively).Those who had walked, cycled or travelled to the New Forest by public transport this visit were more likely to consider using a Park & Ride facility than those who had travelled by car or private vehicle. 6.32 Such transport and access initiatives which encourage and facilitate walking, cycling and bus travel could potentially attract and cater for a potentially large catchment area. This would have the effect of reducing car travel and providing access for those families and individuals which do not own a private car. Such
measures would reinforce and be reinforced by the traffic control measures and promotion of more sustainable modes of transport being considered within the New Forest itself. It is clearly important that the Forest Park is at least as accessible as the National Park if it is to successfully attract visitor pressures away from the National Park. 6.33 However changing attitudes to car travel and encouraging the adoption of more sustainable modes of travel will not be easy and could take many years. However, as the Forest Park would not need to be attracting its ultimate target number of visitors away from the National Park until 2026 (when the current house building targets in the South East Plan are scheduled for completion) there is time to develop and encourage a shift from car to more sustainable forms of access. Indeed, it would be good policy in this context, to encourage access by walking, cycling and public transport right from the outset, if the Forest Park goes ahead. However, it is not going to be easy to change attitudes and behaviours away from car travel to alternative more sustainable modes as the following analysis shows. National Strategy on Cycling and Walking 6.34 The first National Cycling Strategy was produced in July 1996. Its headline targets included: Doubling of cycling levels by 2002 Quadrupling of cycling levels by 2012 6.35 However when the Department for Transport reviewed the strategy in March 2005 43 it was found that cycling trips had fallen overall by one fifth between 1992-94 and 2002-03. Cycling currently makes up only 1% of all trips as a mode of transport. It has been found that there is a negative correlation between increasing car ownership and the use of bicycles. In 1991, twice as many people in household without a car travelled to work by bicycle as compared to those people in households with a car. 6.36 This is reinforced by the findings of the National Travel Survey which has been conducted annually by the DfT since 1988. Between 1992-94 and 1999-2001, the average number of bicycle trips per year fell from 20 to 17 per person in England. But in the south east, where car ownership is higher than the national average, trips per person fell from 28 per year (way above the national average) in 1992-94 to 19 per person (just above the national average) in 1999-2001. 6.37 In the White Paper The Future of Transport44 the original National Cycling Strategy targets were abandoned in favour of encouraging the development of soundly based local targets. The current target for Hampshire is to halt the decline in cycling by 2007 from a 2004 base and increase the levels of cycling from 2007 back to 2004 levels by 2010. 6.38 However, recreational cycling has shown a more encouraging pattern due in some considerable part to the development of the National Cycleway Network (NCN). 17% of cyclists on traffic free sections of the NCN were found to be novices
43 44
99
Delivery of the National Cycling Strategy: a review. DfT, March 2005 The Future of Transport. DfT, July 2004
and 41% of all cyclists on the NCN said they planned to cycle more. The England Leisure Visits Survey 2006 showed that 6% of visitors to National Parks and 9% of visitors to woods and forests went specifically for the purpose of cycling or mountain biking. However only 3% of trips to the New Forest National Park are actually made on a bicycle. 6.39 There is currently no national walking strategy for England. According to Living Streets/The Ramblers, walking, like cycling is in decline. In 2003, the average person in England walked 20% less than they did in 1993.In 1975, the average annual distance walked per person was 255 miles. By 2003 this average was down to 189 miles. 6.40 Again however, recreational walking would appear to run contrary to that trend. Walking was the most popular leisure activity accounting for 18% of all leisure day visits in 2005 a total of 628 million trips. In the New Forest, 54% of all leisure trips are taken primarily for the purpose of walking or walking the dog. And 16% of all visits to the National Park are on foot (with a very similar figure of 17% being the average for all National Parks in England). Sustainable Visitor Access Targets 6.41 Given the above evidence, changing attitudes and behaviours away from car travel to the countryside for recreational purposes in favour of more sustainable modes, will not be easy. Car ownership and use has been steadily rising whilst cycling, walking and bus use has been declining. 6.42 However, the evidence also shows that people have a greater propensity to use these alternative modes when it comes to recreational trips. Therefore, given that : 1. 16% of all visits to the New Forest are currently on foot; 2. 6% are by bus or bicycle; 3. 20% of other day visitors to the New Forest indicated in a TSE survey that they would use a Park and Ride service if it was available and Southampton City Council is proposing two such facilities close to the Forest Park; 4. That TVBC has adopted a Cycle Strategy and plans to develop a Cycle Network; 5. That there is a large potential population of visitors within a 15 minute walk and 20 minute cycle ride; 6. That the Forest Park would not need to achieve its estimated peak visitor numbers until around 2026; an initial target of 50% of visits to the Forest Park by means other than car would appear to be realistic. Travel by Car and Car Parking Provision 6.43 The provision of adequate car parking is likely to be fundamentally important to the viability and success of the proposed Forest Park. At paragraph 5.16 above, three different options for car parking were set out. If it is decided to provide new purpose built car parks (Options 2 and 3) then it will be necessary to know what car parking capacity is likely to be required.
100
6.44 Based on information kindly provided by Eastleigh Borough Council, an estimate of car parking spaces required to meet the capacity targets estimated above (between 176,643 and 246,127 visits per annum) has been made. Eastleigh Borough Councils Itchen Valley Country Park (IVCP) attracts around 220,000 visits per year. The peak visitor period is between April and October each year when the country park receives around 23,000 visits per month, or around 5,750 visits per week. 6.45 93% of visitors to IVCP arrive by car and therefore around 5,462 visits a week are by car. Each car carries an average of 2.4 persons and so there are around 2,276 car visits to the country park each week in summer. The peak period for visits during the week is Sunday when an estimated 46.6% of weekly visits occur. This equates to about 2,545 visits each Sunday in summer and at 2.4 visitors per car, this equates to about 1,060 car visits each Sunday. 6.46 IVCP is open for about 12 hours a day during the peak summer period, and visitors have a mean visit duration of about 2 hours. If visitors and their cars arrived evenly throughout the day (six 2 hour periods) around 176 car parking spaces will be required to accommodate them. 6.47 Whilst IVCP is not directly comparable to the proposed Forest Park (it is smaller in area, more isolated from local population centres, and has been established for over 20 years with a well developed infrastructure) its annual visitor totals are comparable with those which the Forest Park will be expected to generate and its visitor patterns are typical of countryside recreational sites, showing seasonal variations and peaks at weekends and Bank Holidays. 6.48 On this basis, the proposed Forest Park may need to provide between 150 and 200 car parking spaces to accommodate peak numbers. However, as noted above, a target of encouraging and facilitating 50% of visits by alternative more sustainable modes would, if successfully achieved, mean that car parking provision could potentially be halved, requiring the provision of only between 75 and 100 spaces. The options given at section 5 above include the possibility of two main car parks (see Map 8 Appendix 1); one in the Chilworth area and one in the Rownhams area. Therefore, not all the spaces potentially required, would need to be provided in one location. Indeed, given that the proposed Forest Park would not need to be achieving its target capacity for visits until 2026, the provision of car parking could be developed over time as visits grew in number. 6.49 Furthermore, car parking provision could potentially make use of existing parking capacity in the area. For example, there are large car parks on both the east and west bound Rownhams Services on the M27 both of which are central to the Forest Park and could potentially be linked into it by new footpaths/cycleways. There are off road lay-byes adjacent to Hut Wood and Home Wood on Winchester Road/Bournemouth Road each capable of accommodating about 15 vehicles. Similarly, there is an informal car parking area at the southern entrance to Lordswood at the end of Coxford Road which again could accommodate around 10 vehicles and a small off road parking area at the entrance to Rownhams Wood off Rownhams Lane which could accommodate a similar number.
101
6.50 At an estimated cost of 45,000 per 20 parking spaces, 100 car parking spaces would currently cost around 225,000 excluding design and supervision costs. 6.51 Serious consideration will need to be given as to whether to charge for car park use. If charging is to be introduced, it would be easier if it was introduced at the outset rather than after any car parks were established and opened to the public. This would require the installation of meters which could be put in place during car park construction thus avoiding the need to excavate through previously laid tarmac surfaces. Car parking charges can generate significant income towards covering the annual costs of maintaining the Forest Park. However car parking charges need careful consideration in the context of the main objective of the proposed Forest Park to attract visitors way from the National Park. Currently, there are no charges for parking in Forestry Commission car parks in the New Forest. Therefore, a coordinated approach to charges is essential, since introducing charges in the Forest Park, without the simultaneous introduction of charges in the National Park, would inevitably deter visitors to the Forest Park and undermine its main objective. However, the introduction of charges in the National Park with free parking at the Forest Park is likely to have a positive effect on attracting visitors away from the New Forest. 6.52 The supply and installation costs of car parking meters will depend on the choice of meter and location of the car park. However, they are likely to cost around 10,000 per meter to supply and install. Potential income could be around 30,000 per annum net, based on the volume of visitors and level of charges at Itchen Valley Country Park in Eastleigh. 6.53 Furthermore, if car parking charges are to be introduced, this would tend to encourage the creation of fewer larger car parks to reduce the costs of meter installation including electricity supply and car park patrols and meter emptying. This car parking strategy will also afford the greatest security against vehicle crime, especially if CCTV surveillance is installed.
102
Toilets 6.54 31% of visitors to the New Forest said that they had used toilet facilities during their visit. Like car parking, toilets would appear to be fundamentally important in consistently attracting large numbers of visitors. Given that visitors may be travelling up to 20 minutes to reach the site, and may stay at the site for 2 hours or more, it is reasonable to expect that a significant proportion of visitors will have need of toilet facilities. 6.55 Toilet provision would be expected by visitors to be close to the car parks so that they can be used either at the beginning or end of a journey. A single toilet block including access for the disabled, is likely to cost around 110,000 excluding mains connections cost, or septic tank.
Waymarked Routes 103 6.56 Given that the majority of visitors to the countryside in general (36%) and National Parks in particular (52%), go primarily to walk, and many visitors to the New Forest used and appreciated waymarked routes (53% used waymarked routes and 35% said they visited the area because it is good for walking) the provision of a network of waymarked routes would appear fundamentally important to the viability of the proposed Forest Park. 6.57 There is a need to balance public access against other objectives such as conservation (discussed below) and at the same time, to provide a sufficiently extensive network to accommodate the needs of different visitors (e.g. for short or long routes, for walking, cycling and horse riding) and to ensure that visitor pressures are not too concentrated in any one area leading to over crowding which would be detrimental to the visitor experience. 6.58 Ideally, a range of different routes with different surfaces should be provided for walkers, cyclists and horse riders. Not only would this provide the appropriate and safest surface type for each of these different activities, it would also separate out the different routes so that the chances of conflict and injury (a health and safety consideration) were minimised e.g. barking dogs frightening horses which may then throw their riders, or fast cyclists running into groups of walkers. However, this approach would require a significantly greater length of routes to be provided and maintained and it would mean disturbing larger expanses of the woods and forest. An alternative is for shared, wider routes so that for example. With a 3 metre wide path, there is room for pedestrians and cyclist to share the route in relative safety with sufficient width for passing, or to designate different sides of the same track for walkers and cyclists or horses. A further consideration is that many visits to the New Forest and the wider countryside generally, are by elderly people (18% of visits are by people over 65 years of age) and about 8% by people with a disability. The route surfaces, inclines, and route lengths, need to take account of these visitors. 6.59 A sensible and reasonable balance needs to be struck taking account of all of these considerations and of course consideration of costs. 6.60 As noted previously, some tracks and rides are currently in good condition, but some routes are badly drained and rutted. A detailed mapping and condition audit of all tracks and rides would be helpful in establishing those areas in need of improvement and in identifying a range of long and short and through routes for visitors. A useful objective would be to create a circular or square continuous main route around each component woodland site, that links in with all the current and proposed access points. This would enable visitors from any entrance to return to their starting point without having to recover their steps. These larger circular routes, should be dissected by other routes, giving visitors a choice of direction and length of journey. 6.61 As discussed again below, all routes should be well signposted throughout, and certainly at every junction and change of direction to re-assure visitors. The routes should also be displayed on information boards at entrances to each woodland. Given the scale and density of trees of the Forest Park, especially in
areas such as Lordswood, without adequate waymarking, it would be easy for visitors to get lost. 6.62 The cost of creating new paths and tracks of a high standard (including excavation, geotextile membrane,Type 2 gravel sub- base, crushed gravel binding surface layer) will be about 50 per square metre. Therefore, for every 1km of new track created at 3 metres wide, the cost would be around 150,000. This width would allow for access by maintenance and emergency vehicles. The most economic approach therefore to planning recreational routes, would be to make maximum use of the best of the current routes. Based on the path conditions observed on field visits for this report and the need to establish a minimum of one circular route in each of the four component woodlands, it is estimated that between 6 and 7 kilometres of path would need to be created or re-surfaced at a cost of around 975,000. Eating and Drinking Out 6.63 A significant proportion of visitors to the countryside and to National Parks in particular, include eating and drinking out as part of their leisure trip.30% of non local day visits to the New Forest included visiting a pub, cafe or tea rooms and a further 8% used picnic areas. Again therefore, provision for eating and drinking would appear to be fundamentally important for the viability of the Forest Park 6.64 The simplest form of provision would be a series of picnic areas with tables, around the Forest Park. Working on a ratio of one picnic table to every 10ha of land would provide a requirement for about 40 in total grouped in small numbers around the Forest Park (e.g. 10 groups of 4 tables). Picnic sites should be located along main waymarked routes and preferably on or near path junctions where they are accessible from more than one direction. At a cost of about 400 each, 40 tables would cost about 16,000. 6.65 The provision and hire of barbecue facilities could also be considered, although in a forest setting with a high risk of fire, such provision would require careful planning and management. Again, such facilities have the potential to make income for the park. 6.66 The provision of a purpose built cafe merits serious consideration. Such a facility would be a popular amenity and has the potential to earn significant income towards covering the annual costs of park management. If such a facility is to be provided, it could form a part of a Visitor Centre with toilets as discussed further below. Other Recreation Opportunities 6.67 Consideration could be given to the following facilities, services and activities: 1. Cycle Hire 2. Play Areas 3. A planned programme of events and activities such as guided walks, demonstrations, bird watching, arts activities, childrens activities etc. All of these can attract significant numbers of visitors and generate a small income.
104
Welcoming, Inclusive, Clean and Safe
105 Welcoming 6.68 78% of visitors to National Parks in England valued the fact that visitors are made to feel welcome. The Forest Park would therefore need to match that welcome if it is to be viable. Visitors must be made to feel welcome from the moment they arrive, including signage and information that gives them the confidence and certainty of knowing that the Forest Park is open to the public and what it has to offer, how it can be accessed, what the rules (byelaws)of access are, etc.
6.69 This welcome must be maintained throughout the site, including good quality, clearly waymarked routes and maps. A visitor centre would provide a good welcome to visitors and act as a friendly and helpful gateway into the Forest park, especially for those visiting for the first time. Inclusive 6.70 An important part of the welcome is that the park is inclusive and provides access and recreational opportunities to visitors of all ages, including young children and the elderly, and of all abilities. English law now requires that such inclusiveness is built into the planning, design and management of all public facilities. Cleanliness 6.71 Visitors will be put off by a park which is untidy and rubbish strewn, where there is evidence of graffiti, fly-tipping, abandoned vehicles, and vandalism. Management regimes will need to be considered which ensure that the Forest Park is kept clean and well maintained on a day to day basis. There is currently significant evidence of abuse and crime in the forest areas, including abandoned burnt out cars and motorcycles, which were probably stolen. On the day of a field visit to Hut Wood, a newly abandoned stolen car with broken windows was found at an entrance to the woods. Such sights will make visitors feel unsafe and insecure. An important aspect of site cleanliness, particularly given so many visitors are likely to be walking a dog, will be provision for the disposal of canine faeces.
106
Safety 6.72 79% of visitors to National Parks in England said that one reason for their choice was that National Parks provide a safe environment. Providing and maintaining a safe environment for visitors must therefore be a paramount objective of the management of the proposed Forest Park. 6.73 Safety includes minimising the risks of visitors coming to any harm from using the site, and minimising the risks of visitors being the victims of crime. A full and thorough Risk Assessment of the Forest Park including all infrastructure, services, activities and facilities provided for visitors will be required. 6.74 CCTV surveillance of car parks will need to be considered to protect against theft of vehicles and theft from vehicles. 6.75 Regular patrols of the Forest Park will be required to identify and deal with any risks that arise on a day to day basis and to help deter vandalism, abuse and crime. 6.76 The Forest Park would need to be secured against unauthorised access, especially by motor vehicles and motorcycles with appropriate gates and barriers at all entrances. At the same time, access will need to be maintained for emergency vehicles.
107
Conservation
Biodiversity 6.77 A major part of the proposed Forest Park is designated as a SINC (Site of Importance for Nature Conservation). Future management of the area must therefore seek to further the objectives of Policy CSP5 of the TVBC Core Strategy which states that: The Council will seek to maintain, enhance and restore biodiversity and geological interests in the Borough and in particular the biodiversity and geological interests of: internationally, nationally or locally important nature conservation sites; priority habitats listed in the UK Biodiversity Action Plan; ancient semi-natural woodlands (including ancient replanted woodlands which have the potential to be restored through appropriate management); features of the landscape that, by virtue of their linear and continuous structure or their function as stepping stones, are of major importance for the migration, dispersal and genetic exchange of wild species; biodiversity or geological interests of recognised local importance on sites proposed for development, including previously developed land; legally protected species; and species of principal importance for the conservation of biodiversity in England. 6.78 Ecological data provided by HBiC as well as observations from the field visits for this report, show that much of the proposed Forest Park is ancient semi-natural woodland or plantations on ancient woodland sites. Further information provided by HBiC based on work commissioned from the Geodata Institute of Southampton
University,45 shows the suitability of areas across the county for restoration to or the 108 re-creation of a particular habitat type. The Forest Park not surprisingly, shows a suitability for restoration of lowland broadleaf woodland. This should be considered as a major objective of the management of the Forest Park. Similarly, some of the area shows a suitability for restoration to lowland heath. Given that small, fragments of heathland habitat have survived within the area, the restoration of this habitat should also be a major objective. How these objectives can be pursued alongside the need to maintain the area as a viable forest for timber production will need to be carefully considered with the Forestry Commission which currently manages most of the area. 6.79 The management of the Forest Park should also seek to maintain and enhance species diversity and in particular support those species which are of conservation importance such as the southern wood ant (Formica rubra) which has been found in at least two of the four woodlands that comprise the proposed Forest Park. Built and Historic Heritage 6.80 The Forest Park contains Castle Hill a historic earthworks, believed to be the remains of an Iron Age Hill Fort or a cattle enclosure associated with the earthworks at the adjacent Chilworth Ring. The earthworks is a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM No.235). This is a feature of national importance with legal protection and should be maintained and enhanced as a major objective of the Forest Park management. The earthworks actually supports a viable heath community with a good stand of heather (Calluna vulgaris)and so could be managed to benefit both the biodiversity and historic heritage of the area , by clearing trees and scrub to reveal the full extent of the earthworks and support the spread of the heather. 6.81 The course of an old Roman Road from Winchester to the New Forest crosses the Forest Park from north eats to south west cutting through the north west tip of Hut Wood and the northern edge of Lordswood. This SAM (373) is another important feature of the area and one which could feature in the planned management. 6.82 Midway between Castle Hill and Ingersley an old occupation site believed to date back to the Stone Age was revealed by the find of many flint flakes, pot boilers, oyster and cockle shells in 1929. 6.83 These features provide an important link with the past of the site and could form a major plank of interpretation and promotion of the area as a visitor attraction.
Marketing, Information, Education, Community Involvement

Marketing Publicity and Promotion 6.84 If the proposed Forest Park is to successfully attract the target number of visitors away from the New Forest, marketing, publicity and promotion will be of great importance. The residents of Hampshire will need to be made aware of the Forest Park, where it is located and what it has to offer visitors. All available means of marketing and publicity should be considered including the local media, local Council web sites, tourist information centres and tourist information web sites, leaflets in
45
Hampshire Habitat Suitability Mapping, Geodata Institute, University of Southampton, February 2009
other leisure venues, etc. Co-operation with the New Forest NPA will be required to ensure that this marketing and publicity effort penetrates into the New Forest itself, which is where it is hoped to attract day visitors from. Information and Interpretation 6.85 As distinct from marketing and publicity, information here refers to information for visitors about the Forest Park, its history, past land uses and management, ecology etc. It should also include information on the recreational activities and visitor services on the site. The aim is to create a clear picture of what the attractions and opportunities are for visitors who are planning to visit or who have arrived at the Forest Park. This information can be in many different formats including information and interpretation boards on site, leaflets and booklets, a dedicated web site for the Forest Park, interactive displays, etc. Visitor Centre 6.86 A visitor centre could play a vital role in providing such information as well as providing a: destination and welcome point for visitors, and a building in which to locate a cafe, toilets, and gift shop; meeting rooms; exhibition space and office space for staff managing the Forest Park. 6.87 Most major countryside recreational attractions have a visitor centre for all of the above reasons. Local country parks in South Hampshire such as Itchen Valley, Lakeside, Royal Victoria and Manor Farm in adjacent Eastleigh Borough, all have visitor centres. 45 of the Forestry Commissions Forest Parks in the UK have visitor centres. 6.88 As noted at 6.14 and 6.23 above, with the average duration of stay for visitors likely to be around 2 hours, plus a journey time of 20 minutes each way, many visitors will require toilets and refreshments. 31% of visitors to the New Forest use toilet facilities and 30% purchase refreshments. 6.89 A visitor centre can also raise significant income from the sale of refreshments and light meals and the sale of goods from a shop. One local Country Park in Eastleigh receives between 50 -60,000 each year in income from the commercial activities based at its visitor centre. 6.90 Depending on its size and construction, such a visitor centre could cost between 500,000 and 1 million to construct, exclusive of design and supervision fees. The building could be constructed to the highest standards of sustainability with respect to energy conservation, water conservation, alternative energy generation, building materials and construction techniques, which could in themselves then be a feature for information and interpretation. 6.91 A visitor centre would need to be located in a place accessible both in respect of local transport routes, (roads, rights of way, cycleways) but also in relation to the four constituent parts of the Forest Park itself. It would also need to be served by a car park. The locations which best meet these criteria are similar to those discussed
109
in relation to car parks and are in the Chilworth and Rownhams areas (please see Map 8). 6.92 If the concept of a visitor centre is to be pursued, it will require a further more detailed feasibility study. This will need to take into account, the Local Development Documents for both neighbouring Eastleigh Borough and Southampton City which may propose extending the Forest Park concept in which case this could affect decisions on both the location and scale of a visitor centre. The feasibility study would also need to consider likely funding sources and funding availability, and the phasing of such a development within the overall programme for the development of the Forest Park as a whole. Education and Community Involvement 6.93 A Visitor Centre would also be an important resource if it is planned to use the Forest Park for education purposes, both for local schools and the local community. Having meeting/classroom space would provide a perfect base from which to explore the many facets of the area in classes ranging from biology, geography and history, through to the arts. It would be able to house educational resources and materials and could provide a base for outreach work in local communities and schools related to the Forest Park. 6.94 Like education, community involvement can be seen as an investment in the future of the Forest Park and the New Forest. In their report Open Space And Social Inclusion: Local Woodland Use In Central Scotland46 the authors identified their main finding as: The central importance of childhood experience is the key finding - the frequency of childhood visits to woodlands is the single most important predictor of how often people visit woodlands as adults. Those who visited woodlands often as children are more likely to go walking alone there as adults. This raises questions about use of open space by those who do not get the opportunity to experience woodlands as children. Woodlands need to be nearby and accessible for people to visit them regularly - The findings reinforce the value of community and urban woodlands because being nearby is the key factor for regular woodland use. Woodlands within walking distance of home are most likely to be visited. Easy access by car, bus or bike is a second best option, including good public transport access . 6.95 The implications from this research and findings are that for the Forest Park to be successful in meeting its objectives in the long term, and be an enduring and sustainable alternative to visits by car to the New Forest, local communities and especially local children must be encouraged and supported in using the Forest Park. If children within the catchment of the Forest Park grow up as regular visitors, not only will they reduce visits and pressures on the New Forest and reduce car travel for leisure trips in the future but they are also more likely to pass those same patterns of behaviour onto their children. Attracting visitors away from the New Forest is likely to be a marathon rather than a sprint.
46
110
Research Information Note May 2002 by Catharine Ward Thompson, Peter Aspinall, Simon Bell and Catherine Findlay
Management Organisation 6.96 From all of the preceding discussion it is clear that the management of the proposed Forest Park will require sufficient people of sufficient skills to plan, organise and undertake both the setting up and the future management of the area. It is difficult to envisage how the objectives of the Forest Park are to be achieved without an organisational framework and trained professional staff. 6.97 The organisational framework can be provided by any one of several existing organisations, either alone or in partnership. These include: 1. Test Valley Borough Council which has an experienced team of Countryside Officers who already manage many woodlands in the borough; 2. The Forestry Commission which currently manages forestry operations in three out of the four component woodlands and also has extensive experience in managing recreational use of forests; 3. Hampshire County Council which has a large and experienced Countryside Section which manages several major country parks and other countryside sites across Hampshire; 6.98 Whatever arrangement is considered to be the best, it must be able to plan, design, fund and deliver the Forest Park initially, and then manage it successfully in perpetuity. This may include publicity and marketing, the management of visitors, the maintenance of site infrastructure, health and safety responsibilities, conservation work, information provision, education, interpretation, community involvement, waste collection and management, car park management, visitor centre management, financial management, security, etc. 6.99 Given the size of the proposed Forest Park, the visitor targets and the scale of the management needed to successfully operate an operation of this scale, it is inevitable that trained professional staff will be required. To open the park all year round, including every weekend, it is likely that at least 4 full time Forest Rangers would be required. The likely costs for these staff, and all the resources they will need, including vehicles, tools and equipment, IT, communications, etc. including on costs and support costs, is likely to be around 150,000 each year. 6.100 This does not include the costs of accommodation, which can either be off site in an existing office base or on site in new purpose built accommodation, such as a visitor centre. The costs of running a visitor centre, including staffing, heating, lighting, water, cleaning, waste collection, etc. will depend on size, and design but are likely to be around a further 100,000 per annum. Income generation from a visitor centre (with a cafe and shop ) could reach as much as 50,000 each year. Costs and Funding 6.101 The total capital costs of achieving the above management objectives, and developing the necessary infrastructure to support visitors to the Forest Park could, depending on the options selected, be as much as 3 million. The annual management and maintenance costs of running the Forest Park could be as much as 300,000 gross, but income opportunities may potentially achieve around 90,000 per annum.
111
6.102 These costs will need to be met largely from developers contributions, the contributions required per dwelling towards the costs of providing the infrastructure needed to support that development. As the Forest Park potentially has a much wider catchment than Test Valley alone, PUSH may wish to consider co-ordinating contributions from across the south Hampshire sub region to draw together the necessary levels of funding.
112

Forest Park Feasibility Study 2009

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Forest Park Feasibility Study 2009

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study (Final Draft) For: Test Valley Borough Council

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Copyright of Test Valley Borough Council

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

108 108 109 109 109 111 111

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

3. Background and Justification for the Proposed Forest Park

Reducing Recreational Pressures on the New Forest

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

3.12 The Articles referred to above are further described as follows:

3.13 The DCLG guidance summarises the AA process as:

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Map 2 GI Concept Plan for South Hampshire. TEP/PUSH, 2008

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

3.24 The Framework document defines green infrastructure as:

3.25 The key functions of green infrastructure are described as:

A Strategy for Englands Trees, Woods and Forests. Defra, 2007.

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Forest Enterprises Delivery of Green Infrastructure. Forestry Commission, 2008.

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

3.34 The Circular goes on at paragraph 8 to state that:

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

3.37 Andy Gordon summarised the views of Natural England as:

3.38 He went on to explain, that in respect of Natural Englands statutory role:

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

3.46 The relevant strategic aims of the strategy include:

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

1,045,246 100,167 945,079 353,025 226,307

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

3.58 The AA goes on to propose that:

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Chilworth North Baddesley Nursling and Rownhams TOTALS

- 2.10 - 2.7 - 2.14

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Encouraging Healthy Lifestyles

3.80 This aim will be achieved by focusing on the following outcomes:

Test Valley Community Plan Test Valley Partnership, June 2007

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

3.86 This aim will be achieved by focussing on the following outcomes:

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

England Leisure Visits Survey 2006, Natural England et al 2006

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

The State of the Natural Environment 2008, Natural England, 2008.

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Main Activity of Leisure Visits

Figure 1 Main Activity on Leisure Visits to National Parks

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Duration of Leisure Visits to National Parks

All Leisure Visits Rural Leisure Visits National Park Visits

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study

Test Valley Forest Park Feasibility Study