frome open spaces survey · 2014. 10. 15. · frome open space survey page 2 version 1 june 2014 1...

Frome Open Spaces Survey Identification and Protection of Public Open Space in Frome, Somerset

!!"#$%!!&'()!*+),!&+'-)./!"$#0)!!!1$#23-)2!45%!!

"#$!%&'()*+!

,%-./!,0*1/!2,3405!

"'##6!7#89)!

5)&:!;&*)!

4&*9+'#<!

"=>!>?2!

!

@>>!ABC!DE>FGHBIH>!

BEFJG!HJDDIJ!

$#$K9&'()*+L(M&.NO-#M!

!

!

P&+)Q!!DE+R!S8*)!JBD>!

CONTENTS

!"#$%#$&'1! INTRODUCTION......................................................................................2!2! PROTECTIVE MECHANISMS.................................................................3!3! FROME OPEN SPACES SURVEY..........................................................8!4! ACTIONS TO SAFEGUARD TOP PRIORITY SITES............................15!5! CONCLUSIONS.....................................................................................25!6! APPENDICES ........................................................................................26!

Appendix 1: Sites Identified in the Frogs Survey ............................................27!Appendix 2: Other Sites Identified ..................................................................28!Appendix 3: Map of All Identified Sites ..........................................................29!Appendix 4: Prioritisation Results ..................................................................30!

Frome Open Space Survey Page 2 Version 1 June 2014

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Frome Save Open Spaces (SOS) is an independent group established to

protect open spaces in Frome. Across the town there is a network of open

green spaces which are used and loved by local people. These spaces are of

enormous value: they help form the character and identity of Frome; they

provide important open spaces for people to relax, exercise and spend time

outside; and they provide vital habitat and corridors for wildlife. Whilst some

sites are locally important others also add significantly to the character of the

town and ought to be preserved as Frome grows.

1.2 Because these spaces are so important, SOS want to ensure that they are

given as much protection as possible to be used and loved as community

spaces in perpetuity. This project was therefore established to understand how

the protection processes work, what evidence is needed to apply for protection

and how applications can be made. These mechanisms include Assets of

Community Value, Village Green application, Rights of Way and Access Land.

1.3 There are many sites of all sizes in and around Frome and it is not necessary

or feasible for a small group to protect all of them. A way of focussing effort on

the really important sites is therefore needed, and a prioritisation process has

been developed to provide a more objective assessment of the importance of

the identified open spaces.

1.4 The aims of this first part of the project are to:

• Understand the mechanisms and procedures for protecting open spaces

• Work with relevant partners to identify and map all appropriate open spaces in Frome

• Prioritise and identify how each site can be protected and plan for making these applications


2 PROTECTIVE MECHANISMS Common Land

2.1 Common land should be open and accessible to the public, and the law

restricts the kind of works that can be carried out on commons. Registers of

common land are held by the Commons Registration Authorities, generally the

county council or unitary authority for the area. Commons in the Frome area

are registered by Somerset County Council.

2.2 There are no registered commons in the parish of Frome according to the

compiled spreadsheet produced by DEFRA1.

2.3 The Commons Act 2006 established a mechanism by which the registers could

be amended and new commons added. A pilot scheme was introduced in a

few areas to assess implementation of the process of registering new

commons but this section of the Act has not been implemented across

England. A statement from DEFRA in January 20142 announced that it will be

brought into force in North Yorkshire and Cumbria but not elsewhere until

“resources allow”. However, the section allowing correction and removal of

common land from the registers is being enacted across England, from October

2014.

2.4 Registration as common land is therefore unlikely to be a mechanism for

protecting open space in Frome for the foreseeable future.

Town and Village Greens 2.5 Town and Village Greens (there is no legal distinction) are a special type of

common land which can be designated under the Commons Act. Such

designation has been frequently used by local groups to prevent proposed

1 Database of Common Land in England, downloaded from https://www.gov.uk/common-land-management-protection-and-registering-to-use on 10 January 2014

2 Commons Act 2006 Implementation Update No 28, downloaded from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/270537/cla-imp-update-201401.pdf on 10 January 2014


development and legislation and guidance for registering village greens has

been rapidly changing over the past few months following the Growth and

Infrastructure Act 2013 which modified the Commons Act 2006. These

changes are summarized in recent3 guidance.

2.6 Applications are made to Somerset County Council and need to be

accompanied by evidence that the area has been in use for at least 20 years by

the public for recreational purposes without “permission, force or secrecy”.

Registration of town and village greens can now only be accepted where there

is no current planning application and a period of only one year is allowed after

public access is prevented in which to make an application.

2.7 This therefore presents a possible way to protect open space but only in a

proactive way. As soon as a planning application is made for development on

the land then it cannot be used. Suitable areas identified in the project should

therefore be considered for urgent action, particularly if a future planning

application is possible.

2.8 There are currently considerable delays in obtaining Town and Village Green

status. Somerset County Council is not resourcing the processing of

applications and there is currently a three year backlog before they are even

considered. This is unlikely to improve in the near future, but applying for

Town and Village Green status might be of benefit in some cases. Submitting

a large number of applications is not likely to be successful, and a measured

approach, identifying areas in particular need, is more likely to ultimately bear

fruit. Reference to the Mendip Open Space Study4, which specifically

recognized a deficit in large open space in the south-west of the town, might

also be helpful.

Local Green Space Designation

3 DEFRA Guidance “Town and village greens: how to register” last updated 14th March 2014 and available at https://www.gov.uk/town-and-village-greens-how-to-register

4 Mendip District Council Open Space Study, Jun 2012.


2.9 There is an alternative means of protecting land through the planning system.

The new Local Green Space designation empowers local communities to

protect green spaces of local importance without the need to meet strict

statutory criteria. Sites may be designated for a variety of reasons, including

their setting, nature conservation benefits, or their quietness.

2.10 Guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) suggest the Local

Green Space designation will not be appropriate for most green areas or open

space. The designation should only be used:

• where the green space is in reasonably close proximity to the community it serves;

• where the green area is demonstrably special to a local community and holds a particular local significance, for example because of its beauty, historic significance, recreational value (including as a playing field), tranquillity or richness of its wildlife; and

• where the green area concerned is local in character and is not an extensive tract of land.

2.11 Local communities are able to identify green spaces through their local and

neighbourhood plans, which will then receive protection equivalent to Green

Belt, ruling out new development other than in very special circumstances.

Consideration within the local planning process will ensure that the new

designation will complement and not undermine investment in homes, jobs and

other essential services.

2.12 This mechanism may therefore be of use in protecting small special areas in

urban settings. The current Frome Neighbourhood Plan predates this

legislative change and does not recognise this designation.

Assets of Community Value 2.13 The ability to identify important community assets is provided in the Localism

Act and is designed to help communities retain assets it feels are important. It

was intended to be principally for buildings and services such as shops and

pubs, which can have a large social impact on a small community when lost.

Land can also be designated, and it is through similar legislation on Scotland


(the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003) that large parts of the Western Isles

have been purchased by the local community.

2.14 Under the Localism legislation, voluntary and community organisations and

parish councils can nominate an asset to be included in a ‘list of assets of

community value’. If the owner of a listed asset then wants to sell the asset a

moratorium period of six months will be triggered during which the asset cannot

be sold. This is intended to allow community groups time to develop a proposal

and raise the required capital to bid for the property when it comes onto the

open market at the end of that period.

2.15 A building or piece of land will be deemed to have community value only if:

• · The use of the land or building currently, or in the recent past, furthers the social well- being or cultural, recreational or sporting interests of the local community.

• · This use (as described above) of the building will continue to further the social well- being or interests of the local community.

• · The use of the building or land must not be deemed ‘ancillary’, i.e. of secondary purpose. This means that the use of the land or building to further social well-being or interests of the community must be its principle use.

2.16 Applications are made to the local authority ie Mendip District Council (MDC),

who maintain a list of agreed assets. MDC considers applications and decides

whether a suitable case exists for an application to be added to the list. An

application is more likely to succeed if supported (or made) by the parish

council and not made at the time of a sale.

Rights of Way 2.17 Rights of way are minor public highways that exist for the benefit of the

community at large, in much the same way as the public road network does.

They are the most widely recognised opportunity for the public to enjoy the

English countryside.

2.18 Public rights of way are identified on the “definitive map” which is maintained by

Somerset County Council as the Highway Authority. New public rights of way

can be created by a landowner, but more commonly they are brought about by


demonstration of unimpeded public access for a period in excess of 20 years.

These paths will then be entered onto the definitive map and thereafter remain

a public right of way in perpetuity.

2.19 This process of new path creation will terminate in 2026, the deadline set under

the Countryside and Rights of Way (CROW) Act. There is therefore a limited

period for establishment of new rights of way by this process, and where

evidence exists that a path has been in use for at least 20 years without

restriction then designation should be sought in the near future. After 2026

new rights of way can still be created, but this has to be with the agreement of

the landowner, except where a local authority exercises compulsory powers to

do so.

2.20 Those in the urban area are likely to have been in use for a clearly defined

period and could be added to the definitive map through an application to the

Highways Authority. Those across open areas would require evidence of use

for 20 years before this course can be taken. Where access to identified high

value open space is via such a path then collection of evidence has been

identified in the action plan.

Permissive Access 2.21 Permissive access to land and permissive rights of way can be created by a

landowner, usually as part of a larger agreement under the Environmental

Stewardship scheme or similar where grants are provided for environmental

management of land and public access is part of the agreement.

2.22 Such permissive rights are not permanent and could be changed or withdrawn

by the landowner at the end of the agreement. For some areas permissive

rights may provide a relatively long-term solution, though this cannot be relied

upon. Access provided through a permissive agreement would not count as

public access for a later application for a village green.

Ownership 2.23 The ultimate way of protecting a site would be to purchase it. This would bring

a number of responsibilities as a landowner and should not be taken lightly.

Ownership through a trust would avoid personal responsibility and could protect


land in perpetuity, depending on the establishing principles of the trust

agreement. A trust would need trustees who would take responsibility for the

functioning of the trust and organize necessary maintenance and so on.

2.24 The main problem with ownership is raising the funds to purchase the land

within a short time-frame. Registering land as an asset of community value can

provide 6 months to raise funding, but it still requires a large effort and public

commitment to find the substantial sums of money involved.

2.25 A considerable amount of land is already in public ownership, by being owned

by local authorities, mainly Mendip District Council and Frome Town Council.

Whilst these areas may currently be considered safe from development a

change in political or economic circumstances could lead to some of them

being sold into private ownership. A trust set up specifically to manage public

open space in Frome could potentially be gifted local authority land to protect it

from future changes in public policy.

3 FROME OPEN SPACES SURVEY 3.1 Open land of importance to the people of Frome has been identified in two

ways.

3.2 A survey of open land by FROGS was collated and mapped. FROGS

volunteer surveys visited most open land in the built up area of Frome and

recorded for each site:

• Name and location

• Size (Large, Medium, Small or Linear)

• Current Uses and Accessibility

• Description

• Wildlife Interest

• Ownership

• Management


• Problems

• Potential

• and any other information.

3.3 Forty two sites were identified, and these are summarized in Appendix 1. Many

of these sites are small areas left over in the development of residential areas,

and FROGS focused on these as potential play areas. Areas such as these

are unlikely to be lost to pubic access, but several other identified sites are

potentially important and at risk.

3.4 Further sites were identified at a meeting of volunteer groups and the Frome

Town Council in October 2013. These sites were collated by Frome Town

Council, together with additional sites identified by the Council itself, and are

shown in Appendix 2. These sites tend to be larger areas on the outskirts of

the town, and thus complement the smaller, more urban areas surveyed by

FROGS. There is no use or other detailed information available for the sites.

Prioritising Sites 3.5 Combining these two datasets has produced a list of 53 sites ranging from

small residential play areas to large fields on the outskirts of Frome. These are

shown in Appendix 3. It is not feasible or desirable to seek to protect all of

these sites so they need to be prioritized. This was done using a mechanical

process of assessing each identified site against agreed important criteria. An

initial prioritization has been done and is presented here. This may require

refinement to incorporate different criteria as information becomes available, or

to weight criteria differently to give particular emphasis to criteria that are

considered more important.

3.6 It will also be important to consider each site from a more subjective point of

view bearing in mind the use, attractiveness and risk of development of the

sites and considering any other information that is not captured in the

assessment (such as a covenant that prohibits development, for instance). The

initial prioritization is useful, however, in challenging agreed beliefs regarding

well-known sites and perhaps bringing other sites to the attention. These two


methods, the objective and subjective, can then be combined to generate an

agreed priority list of sites that is based on sound justification.

Prioritisation 3.7 The aims of the project are to preserve open spaces that:

• Provide leisure, recreation and enjoyment opportunities for Frome residents

• Ensure everyone living in Frome has ready access to open spaces

• Seek to protect areas perceived to be at risk

• Focus on areas of existing or potential good environmental quality

Criteria 3.8 Measures are required for each of these attributes, and they can be weighted

so that their relative importance can be made explicit. A set of measures has

been derived through consultation, as set out below, and some notes are

provided about how they might be quantified in any future refinement.

3.9 Proximity to people: Areas that are near to dense urban areas should score

highly. This measure was accorded a double weighting to reflect its

importance. Areas that are isolated sites with few nearby alternatives are also

important so this was also chosen as a criterion. Proximity to key leisure routes

was considered important, and sites lying along the River Frome walkway and

on a “green chain” route currently proposed across the north of Frome were

also scored.

3.10 Useage: It is assumed that currently used areas are accessible with no

keep out signs, locked gates etc. Evidence of useage (public consultation

responses, surveys, FROG’s survey of usage) was used where available, and

accorded a double weighting to focus protection efforts were there is a real

need. Surveys of usage at high priority sites will be needed where this is not

currently available.

3.11 At Risk: Sites which are for sale are a high priority. Those in private

ownership are probably at higher risk, though in the longer term public sites are


vulnerable to changes in policy and budget. Where ownership is not known it

has been classed as private. Sites which are apparently developable (eg not in

the flood plain, no rocky slopes, good access to roads or services also score

highly. Small areas in recent housing areas which are obviously part of the

Public Open Space requirement are considered not developable. Where part

of a site is not developable it is still scored if the remainder appears to be so

3.12 Quality: Sites recognised as having a high wildlife value, eg

recognized Nature reserve, meadow/high diversity area, or with a Somerset

Wildlife Trust recommendation, should be scored highly, though it is also

accepted that neglected areas can also be valuable if they are left alone. Sites

adjacent to open water, rivers, and streams tend to be highly diverse because

of the variety of habitat and are accorded a double weighting. Quality can also

be measured in term of play value (eg trees and bushes, play equipment,

natural or provided). FROGS also recognize the value of isolated areas for

young people to get away from direct adult supervision.

Weighting 3.13 Some measures are considered more important than others and the scores are

weighted. At this stage a double weighting has been given to the following

criteria:

• Proximity to dense urban areas

• Evidence of usage

• Proximity to watercourses.

3.14 Non- weighted criteria were simply scored as 1 for “yes” and 0 for “no”, and

weighted scores 2 for “yes”. The results were summed to provide an overall

score.

Results 3.15 Appendix 4 shows the results of the prioritisation assessment, using the

information available. This initial assessment suggests the sites shown in

Table 3.1 to be top priority and all have a score over 8.


ID Name NGR %-#')! Description

FG09 The Dippy ST776472

DD!

Paths are hard surfaced with some steps Wide variety of established trees Very over-grown with nettles and brambles Open water channel runs through Main activity – walking through and dog walking Swing-rope on tree Evidence of drinking parties Short grass where grazed

FG33 Off forest Road

ST787490

DB!

A row of grassy mounts running parallel to a small brook. Alders and willows along the stream. Seat and bin at the Forest Road end.

SS06 Rodden Lake Stream Meadows

ST790482 F!

Large area used for informal recreation. Survey data available. Meadow information available

SS02 Low Water ST770489

G!

Large area adjacent to River Frome identified in FTC meeting as being well used for dog walking etc. Potential river corridor extension

SS05 Feltham Hill ST785467

G!

Large area on west bank of River Frome, upstream of urban area. Comprises floodplain and steep hillside, currently grazed by ponies. Thought to be unimproved pasture. Flood plain area identified in river corridor strtaegy as potential future country park area for Frome

FG23 Newington Close

ST775474

G!

A small fenced play area with two additional grassy patches at either end. Climbing frame and two rockers, seat and rubbish bin. For under 6 years and no ball games.

Table 3.1 Top Scoring Sites

!

3.16 The sites in Table 3.2 below all score “7” as the current system cannot easily

distinguish between them:



FG08 Welshmill to Weylands

ST776487

E!

A path along the west bank of the River Frome, that links the Weylands area to Welshmill and thus to the town centre. A mum and toddler had used the path to get access to the river

FG22 Rossiters Hill/Lower Keyford

ST775473 E!

Grass, paths, trees, hedges

FG29 Masons Way

ST766464

E!

A triangular space, with walls / fences. Rubber matting and the frame for a swing, but no swing. A bin and seat. Shrubs and a very small bit of grass. Sign – Under 14’s only, no dogs

FG35 Hawksworth Play Area

ST794490

E!

Play area with 4 swings (2 for babies) and a bin. Walled / fenced with trees along northern side. There is a seat outside but overlooking the play area. For under 14’s only

FTC01 Showfield ST784487 E!

FTC03 Rodden Meadow

ST784482 E!

Table 3.2 Sites Scoring “7”

3.17 A subjective assessment of the sites in the above two tables is required to

remove sites which are at no threat or considered inappropriate for other

reasons. This should result in a more manageable list. It is suggested that the

following sites could be removed as they are small areas within residential

developments and unlikely to be developed:

FG23 Newington Close

FG29 Masons Way

FG31 Acorn Close

FG35 Hawksworth Play Area

3.18 This then leaves the sites in Table 3.3 as a suggested list of top priority sites.



FG09 The Dippy ST776472

DD!

Paths are hard surfaced with some steps Wide variety of established trees Very over-grown with nettles and brambles Open water channel runs through Main activity – walking through and dog walking Swing-rope on tree Evidence of drinking parties Short grass where grazed

FG33 Off forest Road

ST787490

DB!

A row of grassy mounts running parallel to a small brook. Alders and willows along the stream. Seat and bin at the Forest Road end.

SS06 Rodden Lake Stream Meadows

ST790482

F!

Large area used for informal recreation. Survey data available. Meadow information available

SS02 Low Water ST770489

G!

Large area adjacent to River Frome identified in FTC meeting as being well used for dog walking etc. Potential river corridor extension

SS05 Feltham Hill ST785467

G!

Large area on west bank of River Frome, upstream of urban area. Comprises floodplain and steep hillside, currently grazed by ponies. Thought to be unimproved pasture. Flood plain area identified in river corridor strtaegy as potential future country park area for Frome

FG08 Welshmill to Weylands

ST776487

E!

A path along the west bank of the River Frome, that links the Weylands area to Welshmill and thus to the town centre. A mum and toddler had used the path to get access to the river

FG22 Rossiters Hill/Lower Keyford

ST775473 E!

Grass, paths, trees, hedges

FTC01 Showfield ST784487 E!

FTC03 Rodden Meadow

ST784482 E!

Table 3.3 Finalised Top Priority Sties


4 ACTIONS TO SAFEGUARD TOP PRIORITY SITES 4.1 The top priority sites exhibit a wide range of features and a variety of protection

issues. Not all are in immediate danger of being lost to the community which

allows for a focus on those that may be.

4.2 A brief description of each of the priority sites and an indication of the options

for safeguarding these sites are outlined in the following pages.


The Dippy

4.3 This large site forms an attractive area either side of a small watercourse. It is

currently owned by Mendip District Council but may be transferred to Frome

Town Council in the future. An active resident’s group is working on a

management plan and seeking to engage more closely with local inhabitants.

4.4 The site would not appear to be currently at risk. Some assistance might be

offered to the local group but otherwise it would appear that little immediate

action is required. Long term, transfer to an open space trust might be

beneficial.


Off Forest Road

4.5 This is a linear park with a small stream to one side, owned and maintained by

Mendip DC. It is within a suburban area with few open areas and on the

proposed green chain footpath across Frome. It is therefore of considerable

value as an open space but would be difficult to develop and is unlikely to be at

risk. It could be designated in the Neighbourhood Plan as a Local Green

Space if protection is thought necessary.


Rodden Lake Stream Meadows

photo - Western Daily Press

4.6 This large site was previously in community use but has recently been fenced

following purchase by a new owner. There is a public footpath across part of

the site, also now fenced, and parts of it have been identified as valuable

meadow habitat. A large amount of usage data exists but public access has

been prevented since the latter part of 2013.

4.7 As neither purchase nor landowner agreement is likely a village green

application would seem to be the only way to preserve community use of this

area. The size of the area, and its proximity to the Showfield, which currently

has an outstanding village green application, would make an application for the

whole site difficult to justify. However an application for a smaller area,

perhaps incorporating the fields adjacent to the Rodden Lake Meadow Stream

with have the highest habitat value, might be feasible. The closure of the site

to the public last year means there is a limited time in which to make an

application, so this should be considered urgently.


Low Water (Whatcombe Fields)

4.8 This is a large area to the north of the town, also known as Whatcombe Fields,

some of which is within the recognised flood plain. This site is currently

proposed for auction.

4.9 The southern areas, adjacent to current housing, could potentially be auctioned

separately and purchased if funding can be acquired. This would offer the best

option for protection if achievable. The site could best be considered alongside

the nearby Waylands area as their proximity means both would be difficult to

support through a village green application.


Feltham Hill

4.10 This site occupies the top of a hill, a steep hillside and the flood plain of the

River Frome. The lower area has been identified in the River Frome Strategy

as a potential site for a country park in view of the planned expansion of the

town to the south-west. Much of the site would be relatively difficult to develop,

but an Adderwell-style development might be possible in parts and the hill top

adjacent to existing housing is quite developable. The landowner has erected

signs to state that pubic access is permitted, though this could be withdrawn.

4.11 A longer-term solution may be for purchase of the lower-lying parts of the site

by the town council for the proposed country park. Meanwhile a watching brief

is recommended to ensure threats to the current public access, including

potential sale, are monitored.


Welshmill to Waylands

4.12 Parts of this site are close to the River Frome but the general level is no lower

than the nearby disused works site which is currently under development, and

the site is not in the recognized flood plain. The River Frome walkway passes

through the site, adjacent to the river in a deep channel. The area is adjacent

to housing and is used for leisure activities. The ownership of the site is not

known, but it is clearly regularly maintained. Ownership and ought to be

determined to establish if the site is likely to be at risk. If so, purchase or a

village green application could be considered, the latter supported by evidence

gathering. Either this site or the Low Water (Whatcombe) site should be

considered for a village green application to provide open space in the part of

the town, but it would be difficult to justify both areas.

4.13 An alternative might be to pursue a Green Open Space designation within the

Neighbourhood Plan. Though the site is quite large for this designation it could

be claimed to have an element of tranquillity due to its proximity to the

watercourse.


Rossiter’s Hill/Lower Keyford

4.14 This is a small site adjoining an old development, and is grassed with two

mature trees. It is enclosed, so forming a safe play environment in an urban

area but has not play equipment. Of local significance, but the risk of

development is probably slight. No action is probably required, beyond a

watching brief, but designation in the Neighbourhood Plan as a Green Open

Space would provide protection.


Showfield

4.15 This site is in the ownership of the Frome Agricultural Society and currently

tenanted by Mendip District Council. An application for Village Green status

has already been made by FROGS but seems unlikely to be progressed by

Somerset County Council in the near future. This would seem to defer any

potential loss of the site to the community, but a longer term contingency plan

should the application fail may be advisable.


Rodden Meadow

4.16 This site is in the ownership of Frome Town Council and is being managed to

provide leisure and habitat uses. It is at low risk of development, owing to its

position adjacent to the River Frome. A future Town Council might be less

benign and seek to sell or develop the area but the options for development

would appear to be few. In the longer term passing the area into ownership of

a trust might be feasible.


5 CONCLUSIONS 5.1 This report has identified a large number of open spaces actively used by the

community in Frome. These sites vary greatly in size, character and condition,

and are in both private and public ownership.

5.2 Mechanisms for preserving these sites for continued use by the community and

protecting them from development have been identified. Mostly these are

planning mechanisms such as village green status and designation as Green

Open Space within the Neighbourhood Plan but other alternatives such as

permissive agreements and outright ownership also exist.

5.3 Not all sites are at risk of development and with so many sites available in

Frome effort needs to be focussed on those sites considered the most likely to

be lost to community use.

5.4 The identified open spaces identified have been prioritised in terms of their

usage, proximity to need and degree of development risk to enable a

prioritisation of the sites and provide a focus for protection efforts.


6 APPENDICES

frome open spaces survey · 2014. 10. 15. · frome open space survey page 2 version 1 june 2014 1...

Documents