Chapters
1 Introduction 5 1.1 Rotherham's Local Plan 5 1.2 Site Allocations for New Development 8 1.3 Development Management Policies 8 1.4 Designations and other Local Projects 9 2 Where are we now? 10 2.1 Introduction 10 2.2 Previous Stages of Preparation 10 3 Green Belt Review 13 3.1 Green Belt Review 13 3.2 Safeguarded Land 14 4 How have we Identified Site Allocations? 15 4.1 Summary of our Approach 15 4.2 Methodology 17 4.3 Evidence Base Studies 19 4.4 Site Changes Since 2013 Consultation 26 4.5 Meeting Core Strategy Settlement Targets 33 5 Integrated Impact Assessment 36 6 Designations and other Local Projects 38 6.1 Local Wildlife Sites 38 6.2 Regionally Important Geological Sites 38 6.3 Area of High Landscape Value 38 6.4 Conservation Areas 39 6.5 Green Infrastructure Assets 39 7 Policies Map 41 8 Draft Development Management Policies 43
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.1 Development Within the Green Belt 44 8.2 Creating mixed and attractive places to live 52 8.3 Supporting a dynamic economy 56 8.4 Movement and accessibility 75 8.5 Managing the natural and historic environment 80 8.6 Creating safe and sustainable communities 123
Appendices : Proposed Sites
1 Proposed Development Sites in Rotherham Urban Area 146 1.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy) 146 1.2 Settlement Profile 147 1.3 Bassingthorpe Farm (Core Strategy Strategic Allocation) 150 1.4 Location Maps of Rotherham Urban Area 154 1.4.1 North West Rotherham 154 1.4.2 Rawmarsh / Parkgate 157 1.4.3 Aldwarke 159 1.4.4 Thrybergh 161 1.4.5 East Rotherham 163 1.4.6 Lower Don and Rother Valley 165 1.4.7 Rotherham Town Centre 167 1.5 Schedule of Sites 169 2 Proposed Development Sites in Dinnington, Anston and Laughton Common 174 2.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy) 174 2.2 Settlement Profile 175 2.3 Location Map of Sites 176 2.4 Schedule of Sites 178 3 Proposed Development Sites in Wickersley, Bramley and Ravenfield Common 181 3.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy) 181
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 3.2 Settlement Profile 182 3.3 Location Map of Sites 182 3.4 Schedule of Sites 184 4 Proposed Development Sites in Wath-upon-Dearne, Brampton and West Melton 186 4.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy) 186 4.2 Settlement Profile 187 4.3 Location Map of Sites 188 4.4 Schedule of Sites 190 5 Proposed Development Sites in Kiveton Park and Wales 192 5.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy) 192 5.2 Settlement Profile 193 5.3 Location Map of Sites 193 5.4 Schedule of Sites 196 6 Proposed Development Sites in Maltby and Hellaby 198 6.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy) 198 6.2 Settlement Profile 199 6.3 Location Map of Sites 200 6.4 Schedule of Sites 202 7 Proposed Development Sites in Aston, Aughton and Swallownest 204 7.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy) 204 7.2 Settlement Profile 205 7.3 Location Map of Sites 206 7.4 Schedule of Sites 208 8 Proposed Development Sites in Swinton and Kilnhurst 210 8.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy) 210 8.2 Settlement Profile 211 8.3 Location Map of Sites 212 8.4 Schedule of Sites 214
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 9 Proposed Development Sites in Catcliffe, Orgreave, Treeton and Waverley 215 9.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy) 215 9.2 Settlement Profile 216 9.3 Location Map of Sites 217 9.4 Schedule of Sites 219 10 Proposed Development Sites in Thurcroft 221 10.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy) 221 10.2 Settlement Profile 221 10.3 Location Map of Sites 222 10.4 Schedule of Sites 224 11 Proposed Development Sites in Non-Green Belt Villages : Thorpe Hesley, Todwick, Harthill, Woodsetts and Laughton-en-le-Morthen 225 11.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy) 225 11.2 Settlement Profiles 226 11.3 Location Map of Sites 227 11.4 Schedule of Sites 235 12 Methodology: Identification of Site Allocations 237 13 Retail Centres 256 14 Glossary 266
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 1 Introduction
1.1 Rotherham's Local Plan
1.1 Rotherham’s Local Plan will guide future development in the Borough until 2028. It is progressively replacing Rotherham's existing Unitary Development Plan (UDP). The Council is preparing its Local Plan in two key stages these are the Core Strategy and this, the Sites and Policies document.
Core Strategy
1.2 The Core Strategy sets the vision, objectives and strategic policies for the Borough up to 2028. The Core Strategy sets out, in broad terms, where new homes and jobs should be provided in the Borough. In doing so it sets targets for new housing and employment land for each of the Borough's settlements. The Examination in Public into the Core Strategy to ensure the soundness of the Core Strategy, was completed by June 2014. The Examination in Public was conducted by an independent planning inspector appointed by government.
1.3 The target for any given settlement depends on its position in the Core Strategy's 'settlement hierarchy'. This position is influenced by, amongst other factors, its relative size, role, availability of services and access to public transport and employment. The Inspector in his final report following the Examination in Public has determined the housing target for the Borough. The Borough assists in meeting the housing and employment requirements identified for the wider Sheffield City Region.
1.4 Local Plan documents must conform with the Core Strategy and the changes that are proposed within that document to ensure the Plan is sound.
1.5 Table 1 below shows the distribution of housing, employment and retail growth across the borough, as set out in the Core Strategy.
Table 1 Distribution of housing, employment and retail growth
Housing Provision Employment Provision Retail Provision
Settlement Percentage Approx. Percentage of Approx. Gross square of borough Number of borough Hectares metres of requirement dwellings requirement of land floorspace
Main location for new growth
Rotherham urban area (including 38% 5,471 30% 71 7,500 sqm Bassingthorpe Farm Strategic convenience goods Allocation 11,000 sqm comparison goods (Rotherhamtown centre)
Principal settlements for growth
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 5 1
Housing Provision Employment Provision Retail Provision
Settlement Percentage Approx. Percentage of Approx. Gross square of borough Number of borough Hectares metres of requirement dwellings requirement of land floorspace
Dinnington, Anston and Laughton 9% 1,300 16% 38 0 Common (including Dinnington East Broad Location For Growth)
Wath-upon-Dearne, Brampton 9% 1,300 7% 16 0 Bierlow and West Melton
Bramley, Wickersley and 6% 800 7% 16 1,500 sqm Ravenfield Common convenience goods
Principal settlements
Waverley 17% 2,500 18% 42 0
Maltby and Hellaby 5% 700 2% 5 0
Aston, Aughton and Swallownest 4% 560 8% 19 0
Swinton and Kilnhurst 4% 560 0% 0 0
Wales and Kiveton Park 3% 370 4% 9 0
Local service centres
Catcliffe, Treeton and Orgreave 1% 170 5% 12 0
Thorpe Hesley 1% 170 0% 0 0
Thurcroft 2% 300 3% 7 0
Todwick 1% 170 0% 0 0
Harthill to meet the 0% 0 0 needs of Woodsetts smaller local 0% 0 0 service centres Other villages and other 0% 0 0 villages Laughten en le Morthen 0% 0 0
Harley 0% 0 0
Green belt villages 0% 0 0% 0 0
Note: The figures above are not ceilings.
Sites and Policies Document
1.6 The role of the Sites and Policies document is to identify specific sites - the site allocations for each settlement to meet the Core Strategy targets, for new housing and employment land. In doing so, it will define the precise policy boundary for Rotherham's Green Belt. Chapter 7 includes
6 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 further drafts of the emerging development management policies that will guide determination of planning applications and implementation of the site allocations.
1.7 All comments received, have been read and relevant planning considerations taken into account in refining the policies in this document and in selecting the preferred site allocations. The Council has published a Feedback Report into the consultation in 2013 which is available to download from the consultation web portal. Responses to individual representations in the consultation portal have also been prepared and are published to coincide with this current round of consultation.
1.8 Decisions on planning applications will be informed by a series of environmental designations, such as local nature conservation sites. The Local Plan has high expectations for development’s role in delivering a net gain for biodiversity, demonstrating our commitment to sustainable development. This is necessary to overturn the cumulative impacts of development, population growth and climate change on our natural environment. Key delivery methods will include the use of the nationally accepted mitigation hierarchy and the creation of buffer zones between new development and important sites and sensitive features.
1.9 The Sites and Policies document supports the delivery of the Core Strategy, guiding the management of development. In terms of the natural environment this document will set out the expectations for conservation and enhancement for wildlife, geology and landscape, it will provide for the protection and expansion of our green infrastructure and it will ensure that development incorporates best practice for green design and construction and for sustainable drainage.
1.10 The Council is promoting changes to current Unitary Development Plan residential and employment allocations that remain undeveloped; specifically at Greenlands Plantation at Maltby known as the Muddies, (site reference LDF0276) where it is proposed to change the residential allocation to an Urban Greenspace designation to reflect the value of the site for Great Crested Newts. It is hoped that if this approach to its proposed allocation is successful; in the future consideration will be given to designating the site as a Local Nature Reserve. The Council is also seeking to amend the boundaries of the employment allocation at Aldwarke Sewage Treatment Works to better reflect its designation as a Local Wildlife Site and at Centenary Riverside Nature Park at Templebrough to reflect its recent designation as a Local Nature Reserve and in providing a flood alleviation scheme designed to protect Rotherham Town Centre from any potential future flooding event. These sites will become Urban Greenspace. Consideration is being given to identifying land at the Warren, Aston LDF0413 as urban greenspace.
1.11 The Council is promoting a change in the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) allocations (H6) of land at Thorpe Hesley: references LDF0542, LDF0776, LDF0517 and including the land within the Green Belt.
1.12 The draft Policies Map, prepared to accompany the Sites and Policies Document, includes all designations that influence spatial decision-making.
1.13 This consultation is seeking your views on:
the final site options to provide sufficient land to meet the borough's new homes and jobs requirements in accord with the Core Strategy targets;
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 7 1
sites allocated for retail purposes: town district and local centre boundaries and the primary and secondary shopping frontages; the review of mixed use areas and their menus of appropriate uses. the Policies Map has incorporated changes to the land use designations in the Unitary Development Plan and representations are sought on any further changes that may be required. the proposed environmental designations used to influence planning decisions (Chapter 5); and the final draft development management policies (Chapter 7). the Integrated Impact Assessment 2014. 1.2 Site Allocations for New Development
1.14 As already noted this stage of the Sites and Policies document invites comments on sites identified for new housing and employment development, and as noted above there are also some sites that have been identified as Urban Greenspace or are proposed to be included within the Green Belt.
1.15 The Council in preparing this document has undertaken a thorough Borough-wide survey of all possible site allocations. This has included:
an invitation for the submission of potential sites to landowners and other interested parties (a "call for sites"); a thorough Employment Land Review (including all existing, former and potentially future industrial and employment areas and other brownfield sites); a study, in partnership with the house building industry, called the ‘Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment’, to identify housing sites which have been market tested for their likelihood of being developed; and a Borough-wide survey and sustainability appraisal of all potential sites, that is included within the Integrated Impact Assessment.
Core Strategy Strategic Allocation and a Broad Location for Growth
1.16 Policy CS1 of the Core Strategy, identifies a strategic allocation at Bassingthorpe Farm, and a broad location for growth at Dinnington East. Planning permission has also been granted for a new community at Waverley near to Catcliffe and Orgreave. Significant growth is proposed at Bassingthorpe Farm and Waverley. These areas are essential to delivering the Borough's strategy for new development and essential to meeting local housing needs. It is considered that Rotherham and Dinnington town centres along with Wath upon Dearne provide a significant level of social and community infrastructure and a range of jobs and local employment opportunities that will support future growth in these communities. The new community at Waverley is adjacent to a strategic regeneration area that will provide significant and high quality employment opportunities and will meet its own social and community infrastructure requirements as evidenced by the grant of planning permission. 1.3 Development Management Policies
1.17 The current document also invites comments on development management policies. These policies provide further detail to the Core Strategy strategic policies and will guide determination
8 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 of individual planning applications and facilitate implementation of the site allocations. The policies have been amended in the light of the 2013 Integrated Impact Assessment and consultation undertaken on the Draft Sites and Policies Document 2013. 1.4 Designations and other Local Projects
1.18 We are also seeking views on a range of designations, to safeguard particular environmental interests including wildlife, geology and conservation areas. The Council is also promoting a green infrastructure approach to the delivery of new development.
1.19 The natural environment is a precious, dynamic resource and there are many pressures on it. The production of the Local Plan has relied on available information to make decisions on land availability for development and for conservation; there is a need to maintain, and preferably increase, our environmental evidence base and to use it to develop better tools to measure green infrastructure, ecological networks and ecosystem services, all of which are needed to secure a diverse, healthy and resilient natural environment and to maintain our quality of life.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 9 2
2 Where are we now?
2.1 Introduction
2.1 This Sites and Policies document is based upon work undertaken since 2005 to prepare Rotherham’s Local Plan.
2.2 In the future the Council will consult on a further draft, the Publication version of the Sites and Policies Document. This next stage of consultation will take into account the views of all stakeholders including members of the public, environmental interests, land owners and potential developers, and key government agencies and statutory consultees: English Heritage, Natural England and the Environment Agency. The results from this current stage of consultation may lead to further refinements to current policy wording and may lead to changes in the selection of the sites for potential future development. 2.2 Previous Stages of Preparation
November 2005
Core Strategy objectives agreed following engagement with stakeholders and interested parties.
February 2006
Workshop held to discuss emerging Core Strategy ‘spatial options’ for the Borough.
15 May to 16 June 2006
We consulted on four Core Strategy ‘spatial options’ for Rotherham via an online questionnaire and workshops. Results given in subsequent Feedback Reports (July 2006).
5 February to 23 March 2007
Major consultation on the Core Strategy Preferred Options document (Jan 2007) and its accompanying Sustainability Appraisal report.
May 2007 (and November 2010)
An Employment Land Review was published following consultation – updated in 2010.
September 2007
Feedback Reports published on the consultation into the Core Strategy Preferred Options document.
January 2007 to November 2008
We invited suggestions for site allocations.
23 November 2007
10 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Workshop held with interested parties to discuss and agree how we would undertake surveys to identify possible site allocations.
April to September 2008
Borough wide survey to identify possible site allocations and to undertake a review of the boundaries and extent of the Green Belt.
May to August 2009
Major consultation on the Core Strategy Revised Options including the release of possible site allocations and major urban extensions into Green Belt.
December 2009 and March 2010
Interim and Final Feedback Reports on the consultation into the Core Strategy Revised Options published.
July to September 2011
Major consultation on the Draft Core Strategy June 2011 and Sites and Policies Issues and Options June 2011 including initial indication of 'preferred' sites for development.
January 2012
Feedback Report on the consultation into the Draft Core Strategy and Sites and Policies Issues and Options documents published.
March 2012
Adoption of Barnsley, Doncaster and Rotherham Joint Waste Plan
June to August 2012
Consultation on Publication Core Strategy June 2012
January to February 2013
Core Strategy Focused Changes January 2013, consultation on minor changes to the Publication Core Strategy prior to submission.
June 2013
Submission of Core Strategy to Planning Inspectorate - Examination in Public Commences.
May 2013 to July 2013
Consultation on the draft Sites and Policies Document
June 2014
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 11 2
Inspector's final report on the Core Strategy received - Examination in Public Closes
September 2014
Core Strategy adopted by Council
12 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 3 Green Belt Review
3.1 Green Belt Review
3.1 The detailed Green Belt Review follows on from the Strategic Green Belt Review published in 2012. The Core Strategy indicates that a more detailed Green Belt review will be undertaken to identify the actual boundaries of site allocations in the Sites and Policies Document. This more detailed review will also help determine the detailed boundaries of site allocations in the Broad Location for Growth as well as deciding which areas to designate as Safeguarded Land.
3.2 The Strategic Green Belt Review applied a set of criteria, derived from the purposes for including land within the Green Belt, to parcels of Green Belt land the findings of which were taken into consideration in the production of the Core Strategy and the sites selection process for the Sites and Policies Document. The Detailed Green Belt Review informs the allocation of sites and safeguarded land in the Sites and Policies Document. While the results of the review are taken into account as part of the final site selection process it should be noted that Green Belt considerations are one factor among many to be taken into account.
3.3 The Strategic Green Belt Review states: Paragraph 2.5 "It is stressed that the Strategic Green Belt Review is only part of the process of the identification of land for development as part of preparation of the Local Plan. Local Plan preparation involves a statutory duty to contribute to more sustainable development and the Council is seeking to combine the consideration of sustainable locations with an assessment against Green Belt purposes." Further paragraph 2.6 states: "In view of the Government’s clear steer to promote sustainable development, the identified Preferred Sites will be taken forward unless their development would so harm the integrity of the Green Belt and the fulfilment of the purposes for which it was designated. In such cases this would outweigh other sustainability considerations leading to the selection of other land and the promotion of less sustainable patterns of development.”
3.4 The Detailed Green Belt Review looked at over 100 sites and, as would be expected, the results varied widely. There are some sites being considered for allocation which the review identifies as having significant impact on the openness of the green belt, at a local level. There were many others where only moderate or low level impacts were likely to occur. In all cases the systematic assessment enables decisions to be made as to whether potential harm to the wider Green Belt outweighed the reasons for proposing any given allocation, and to determine whether the most appropriate boundaries have been drawn. Key sites have been considered in terms of the best options for alterations to the Green Belt; these were the large Unitary Development Plan housing allocation at Thorpe Hesley, and the former Maltby Colliery.
3.5 An assessment of the large allocation to the South of Thorpe Hesley, is allocated for housing in the UDP along with associated greenspace, retail and community facilities. Residential development of this scale is no longer considered sustainable in this location and it is considered that the Green Belt boundary be amended to include this area in the Green Belt. Paragraph 82 of the National Planning Policy Framework provides national policy relating to creation of new Green Belts. Although this case does not involve the creation of a new Green Belt but an alteration of the Green Belt boundary, the proposed change is of such a scale that it was considered useful to assess the proposal in terms of this policy. The study concludes that if this site were de-allocated as a residential site
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 13 3 then including the area in the Green Belt would be the best option. To ensure that the Local Plan strategy for the sustainable distribution of growth throughout the borough is implemented the site needs to be afforded the same level of protection from development as the rest of the borough’s countryside, The alternatives, such as allocating the area as urban greenspace, do not provide the necessary level of protection necessary from future development.
3.6 Following the closure of Maltby Colliery in 2013, consideration was given to the best future planning designation of the site. If the site is removed from the Green Belt to allow regeneration of the site, consideration needs to be given to where the most appropriate place to draw the boundary is. Three options were considered from a very broad area including the pit tip and the area between Maltby and the colliery to the most constrained option, this being the pit yard, associated buildings and access. The review concludes that, in order to demonstrate the exceptional circumstances required to remove the area from the Green Belt only the land that we would wish to be re-developed i.e. the most constrained option, should be removed from the Green Belt. 3.2 Safeguarded Land
3.7 The Council has also identified safeguarded land. This is land that is removed from the Green Belt and set aside as a reserve to be fully considered in the preparation of the next Local Plan. The purpose of Safeguarded Land is to ensure that having reviewed the Green Belt boundary as part of this Local Plan, we do not have to do so again before the end of the Plan period or immediately after.
3.8 One of the aspects of the Green Belt is its permanence and therefore the Green Belt boundary is drawn up to last longer than a 15 year plan period. The National Planning Policy Framework sets out the requirement to identify Safeguarded Land and demonstrate the permanence of the Green Belt.
3.9 During this Plan period 2013-2028 the land set aside as Safeguarded Land is not allocated for development nor is it proposed to release it. The only way it could be released for development is where house building rates have risen dramatically and the supply of allocated sites has diminished earlier than expected. Even if this were the case, there would still be a need to carry out a review of the Local Plan, prepare an accompanying Integrated Impact Assessment, undertake public consultation and participate in an Examination in Public, to allocate new sites for development.
3.10 Core Strategy Policy CS5: Safeguarded Land sets out the policy approach to this important issue. Safeguarded Land will be identified, in areas between the Green Belt and Settlements, in the Sites and Policies Document to meet possible longer term development needs equivalent to 5 years beyond the current Core Strategy Plan period. Safeguarded Land will be removed from the Green Belt but not allocated for development. The principles of protection enshrined in national Green Belt policy will apply to Safeguarded Land during the current Plan period.
14 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 4 How have we Identified Site Allocations?
4.1 Summary of our Approach
4.1 Within this document sites are proposed to be allocated for development in recognition of their positive attributes such as their relationship to the existing built settlement and to meeting the settlements role and targets established in the Spatial Strategy (detailed in policy CS1 of the Core Strategy). Whilst it is acknowledged that there will most likely be identified constraints associated with the allocation of some development sites, it is anticipated that these issues and constraints will be suitably mitigated within any future resolutions to grant planning permission.
4.2 A number of sustainability factors including known constraints identified as part of the ongoing evidence base preparation, have been evaluated to establish the site’s suitability to accommodate future development. The Integrated Impact Assessment (IIA) 2014 has been prepared to accompany this document and summarises the sustainability appraisal, the site selection process and the results for each site.
4.3 A detailed Site Selection Methodology (appendix 12 refers) has therefore been prepared to guide the decision-making process. The application of the site selection methodology from stage 2 (the Sustainability Appraisal of individual sites) has systematically assessed each site put forward for consideration and the "likely significant effects" arising and, at stage 3, (the prioritisation of sites) its potential suitability for allocation as a development site in the Local Plan. While the site selection methodology aimed to select the most suitable sites, other attributes had to be taken into consideration which in some circumstances led to sites which performed well not being allocated.
4.4 Of particular relevance is that the Sites and Policies must provide sufficient allocations to meet the requirements for each settlement grouping as set out in Policy CS1 of the Core Strategy. The Core Strategy has pre-determined the level of growth which is sustainable for each settlement based on the characteristics of that settlement. As such, decisions to allocate sites across the Borough must be taken on a ‘settlement by settlement’ basis as well as a ‘site by site’ basis.
4.5 The following is a summary of the three stages of the Site Selection Methodology:
Stage 1 represents an initial sieving exercise. The objective is to filter out at an early stage all those sites that have a significant overriding constraint(s) to development or are already developed. It also enables the “reasonable alternatives” to be defined in order to meet a requirement of the SEA Regulations. Any constraints identified at this stage are considered so significant that development is highly unlikely to be appropriate. The constraints relate to whether or not the site broadly conforms to the Rotherham Local Plan Core Strategy settlement hierarchy and a number of key environmental and heritage considerations. (See Sites and Policies IIA Report Part 2: Appendix D: Results of Stage 1 – Sites Excluded).
Stage 2 considers the remaining sites and looks at more detailed site specific considerations and constraints. The aim of Stage 2 is to assess all sites that are deemed suitable under Stage 1 against a number of detailed site-specific sustainability factors and potential constraints to development, and by doing this, to comply with SA / SEA requirements. These relate to a variety of social, economic and environmental issues which conform to the statutorily agreed SA
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 15 4
Framework. A simple Red / Amber / Green assessment for each of the criteria is used. (See Sites and Policies IIA Report Part 2: Appendix E: Results of Stage 2 – SA of Individual Sites). SA is not a decision-making tool, but rather SA informs decision-making. While the SA Objectives must be taken into account, other planning considerations must also influence decisions. Red / Amber / Green SA overall ‘scores’, one covering socio-economic considerations and one covering environmental considerations, will be given to each site and considered as part of the Stage 3 site prioritisation. New or further evidence on constraints and possible mitigation could alter the scoring / outcome in the future.
Stage 3 aims to prioritise all the sites that have progressed through from stage 1 and gone through the SA process. This will enable sites to be compared against each other and will prioritise those sites that are the most sustainable for development and best meet the priorities as per the Core Strategy. This stage will look at Green Belt / non Green Belt, type of urban extension to settlements, deliverability and other known physical constraints, including the proposed HS2 route. The SA cumulative effects of development will also be considered / rated here. (See Sites and Policies IIA Report Part 2: Appendix F: Results of Stage 3 – Site Prioritisation).
4.6 A red, amber green rating of sustainability indicators has been undertaken as part of this site selection process, and enables site by site comparison. At stage 3 the potential for mitigation to avoid a major adverse effect was taken into consideration. As paragraph 5.54 of the IIA notes "If there were any potential major adverse effects which could not be avoided, this had to be considered against the alternatives and the potential benefits offered by the site." For each site considered there is a summary record which clarifies the type of development that is acceptable on the development site or the reason why a site has not been taken forward as a development site allocation. These site summary records are available to download as supporting evidence base information to this document. Generally there are no insurmountable issues to the allocation of the development sites but by its nature the Site Selection Methodology tends to highlight constraints and this can bring out the potential negatives more than the potential positives.
4.7 It should therefore be noted that even some sites which appear less sustainable may still be allocated for development at the Stage 3 site prioritisation assessment. This is because they still represent the best alternative sites available to meet the development needs for each settlement grouping identified within the Core Strategy. Sites which have been identified as sustainable when measured against these criteria and based on current knowledge of constraints, could still be considered for allocation in the next review of the plan or if circumstances changed as a result emerging SHMA. For those sites that are being proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt a further assessment will be undertaken in respect of the four Green Belt purposes. A site which falls within a parcel of land that scored ‘Red’ against either (or both) purposes 1 and 3 or purposes 2 and 4 in the Strategic Green Belt Review will be subject to a detailed assessment of that site using the criteria developed in the Strategic Green Belt Assessment. This can then be used as part of the overall site assessment and in comparing potential Green Belt sites, but should not override broader sustainability considerations.
4.8 The Council has followed a transparent and robust methodology in undertaking site assessments as referenced in the Flow Chart at Figure 2-1 in the IIA Non- Technical Summary and reiterated as Figure 3-1 in the Main Report of the IIA. The Council has also undertaken desk based and on site surveys, and has supplemented its evidence base with further research work where relevant.
16 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 4.9 The Council has carefully weighed all of the information available and reviewed any additional work undertaken to determine the final development site allocations:
a review of the baseline information including the SA/IIA and detailed Green Belt Review; engagement with local landowners, agents and developers to ensure that those sites proposed to be allocated are deliverable; a Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment SHLAA has been prepared. To be considered deliverable, sites should, at the point of adoption be:
Available – the site is available now and free of ownership constraints; Suitable – the site offers a suitable location for development now and would contribute to the creation of sustainable, mixed communities; Achievable – there is a reasonable prospect that housing will be delivered on the site within the time-frames identified;
site visits and surveys have been undertaken on a number of occasions; consultation on all Local Plan documents has been carried out over a number of years and this has enabled the Council to refine its approach and choose the most appropriate sites.
4.10 Following the Sustainability Appraisal, the Council has selected those development sites for allocation it considers are most appropriate to meeting the following factors:
meet the future needs of existing communities as set out in the Core Strategy; take best advantage of existing services and facilities including educational, health, social and leisure facilities, good transport links and good accessibility by sustainable transport means including public transport, walking and cycling and good access to potential employment opportunities; allocate sites that relate well in locational terms to existing communities taking into account the impact of site allocations on the openness of the Green Belt, local landscape and topography; where appropriate enable the development of new sustainable communities; allocate employment sites that relate well to the national highway network and to local communities to take advantage of an accessible workforce; provide employment opportunities for the benefit of the local economy.
4.11 Finally the Council has listened carefully to the concerns of local people and determined an appropriate policy response, where there is no over-riding physical, social or political constraint or objection to its allocation as a development site. 4.2 Methodology
4.12 The methodology or way in which we have identified the possible site allocations in the Borough’s settlements is briefly summarised below and set out in detail in Appendix 12. (This methodology has been independently appraised as discussed in the Appendix).
Draft Survey Criteria
4.13 In 2007 work began to identify the potential capacity and opportunities for new development in the Borough. A set of draft survey criteria was prepared based upon an analysis of the Sustainability Appraisal Objectives given in Rotherham’s LDF Sustainability Appraisal General Scoping Report (March
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 17 4
2006). This aimed to ensure the balanced consideration of all three (social, economic and environmental) aspects of sustainability. This initial work has been further refined in subsequent Sustainability Appraisals of the Local Plan.
Thurcroft Pilot Study
4.14 The draft survey criteria were used to undertake a pilot survey (undertaken in Thurcroft in April 2007). A revised version was consulted on via a methodology workshop in November 2007. This workshop was attended by more than 60 people from a range of Council service areas and external organisations and interests.
Site Allocations
4.15 The original site survey work that took place during 2007-2008 and refined at each stage of Local Plan preparation has been further updated to inform preparation of this Sites and Policies document.
Site Surveys and Database
4.16 The site survey criteria were captured in a Site Survey Form with accompanying completion instructions. A Site Allocations Database was developed to record and analyse the subsequent survey work. The outcome is a database of sites with a clear recommendation regarding any potential future land use allocation or designation or its retention in its current use. Refreshed site survey sheets will be available to download from the Local Plan web pages during the consultation.
Sources of Potential Site Allocations
4.17 Representations received as part of the preparation of the Unitary Development Plan during the 1990s and commencement of its subsequent review in the early 2000s yielded a long standing source of sites for consideration as Site Allocations. As part of preparation of the Local Plan, between January 2007 and November 2008, the Council invited expressions of interest from people who own land in Rotherham that they consider might be suitable for future development. This also included dialogue with the Council's Asset Management Team.
4.18 Further sources of potential site allocations included technical studies undertaken by the Council, including the Urban Potential Study (2004), Employment Land Review (2007, updated 2010) and those Masterplans developed as part of the Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder programme. Council officers also suggested areas for investigation.
Green Belt Review
4.19 The housing and employment targets for Rotherham determined in the Core Strategy requires the Council to identify potential allocation sites within and outside of the main urban areas. In Rotherham this has required a detailed review of land that currently has a Green Belt designation (previously designated in the Unitary Development Plan). Further explanation of this is provided in the Strategic Green Belt Review Paper (2011) and the detailed Green Belt Review 2014, prepared to support consultation on this document and available to download from the Local Plan web pages.
Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment
18 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 4.20 Rotherham's Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) has revealed several additional sites. The SHLAA is a detailed process involving the house building industry which seeks to identify sites that are suitable, available and achievable for allocation in the Sites and Policies Document. The SHLAA provides key evidence to demonstrate that there is enough land to support the housing growth targets set out in the Core Strategy.
Gypsy and Traveller Sites
4.21 A small number of potential Gypsy and Traveller sites have previously been identified during the survey work. However, a more comprehensive exercise may still be required to identify possible suitable sites to meet the needs of Gypsies and Travellers. Revised national policy guidance for Gypsy and Traveller sites has also been prepared.
Barnsley, Doncaster and Rotherham Joint Waste Plan Adopted March 2012
4.22 The Barnsley, Doncaster and Rotherham Councils’ adopted Joint Waste Plan is a separate Development Plan Document that identifies existing and proposed sites that will accommodate waste facilities and the detailed planning considerations that will inform future waste management proposals.
4.23 The sites in Rotherham to be designated for major waste management facilities for the three authorities are:
Bolton Rd, Manvers, Wath-upon Dearne; and a reserve site within the Aldwarke (Tata plc) Steelworks Complex at Aldwarke Lane, Parkgate. This site should provide rail and river access via river wharf and railhead to handle bulk waste. Proposals must include a sustainable urban drainage / flood alleviation scheme and minimise any impact on the significance of historic assets (including consideration of the impact upon views from the historic park and gardens at Wentworth Woodhouse) through appropriate design and landscaping.
4.24 The Joint Waste Plan also proposes to safeguard the following existing waste management and landfill sites:
Sheffield Road Templeborough, Rotherham (treatment and recycling plant). South Yorkshire Navigation, Eastwood, Rotherham (British Waterways dredging site). Rotherham Road, Beighton, Rotherham (Sheffield City Council recycling). Harrycroft Quarry, near South Anston, Rotherham (landfill site). Kingsforth Lane, Thurcroft, Rotherham (landfill site).
4.25 Full details of the sites are available in the adopted Joint Waste Plan (2012) and are identified on the Policies Map. 4.3 Evidence Base Studies
4.26 A number of background papers and evidence base studies have been prepared to support consultation on the Sites and Policies Document and to guide future planning application decision-making:
Detailed Green Belt Review
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 19 4
Rotherham Biodiversity Action Plan
Heritage Impact Assessment of a number of proposed sites within or on the edge of Conservation Areas
Archaeological Studies
Landscape Capacity and Sensitivity Study
Background Papers:
Protected Sites and Species and designations of the Local Wildlife Sites and Regionally Important Geological Sites and Ecological Survey Results
Flood Risk Sequential Assessment
Minerals
Economy
Retail
Mixed Use areas
The following Good Practice Guidance Notes have also been published:
Transport assessments, Travel Plans and Parking Standards
Delivering Air Quality
Local Wildlife
Landscape Capacity and Sensitivity Study
4.27 Detailed assessment of the landscape sensitivity and capacity of potential site allocations has been undertaken and this work further develops the project undertaken by the Landscape Partnership (2010) at the Borough-wide scale, who undertook a Landscape Character Assessment of the rural parts of the borough and a Landscape Capacity Assessment for key urban extension sites.
4.28 Using the same methodology as that developed and used by the Landscape Partnership (2010), this additional Study assesses the potential allocations in greater detail; a total 165 sites have been assessed over the last two years; it also provides advice and guidance to aid decision-making on future planning applications. The Studies provides useful advice and guidance to developers to aid their understanding of the Council’s approach to emerging planning applications.
4.29 The Landscape Capacity Assessment considers the Landscape Character Sensitivity, the Visual Sensitivity and the Landscape Value, along with the possible form of development. The assessment
20 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 looks at topography, existing vegetation cover, the condition or quality of the landscape, the visibility of the site from public and private vantages, and makes judgements about the scope to mitigate the development in the future, including the potential impact on designations such as Area of High Landscape Value (AHLV).
4.30 Of the 165 sites assessed 13 were found to be either already consented for development and/ or already developed or under construction. Of the remaining 152 sites, only 8 were assessed as being of low to medium capacity to accommodate development. The remaining sites are either medium capacity, or medium to high capacity.
4.31 The Landscape Character Assessment has provided a better understanding about the quality, condition, sensitivity and value of the borough’s rural landscape and provides an important benchmark against which future landscape restoration, conservation and mitigation and management can be assessed. The Landscape Capacity Assessments provide a greater understanding of the significance of potential landscape and visual impacts of proposed future development sites. The results of which will feed into the Integrated Impact Assessment for site allocations.
Local Wildlife Sites Framework
4.32 RMBC Cabinet approved the adoption of the Rotherham Local Wildlife Site system and the initial series of site boundaries in 2008. The system consists of a framework document containing information that supports the purpose of the system, a selection criteria document that identifies how site value will be established and mapping of identified site boundaries. The framework document has now been updated to reflect current national planning policy framework. The updated document establishes that the changes are solely to reflect current national planning policy, these changes do not alter the weight of the designation or the way that the system is applied.
4.33 The LWS Framework document provides the link between legislation and Government policy and the need for the Local Wildlife Site system in Rotherham. At the time of the framework production the key planning policy in place was PPG9, which was replaced by PPS9. This guidance has now been replaced by the National Planning Policy Framework (2012). The NPPF maintains the importance of locally designated sites within the planning process.
4.34 The Local Plan Sites & Policies document makes reference to Local Wildlife Sites as a non-statutory planning designation and includes development management policy that reflects the weight of the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) in determining applications that may affect designated sites.
4.35 Within the Unitary Development Plan sites of nature conservation interest were included in the ‘Known Interest outside statutory sites’ designation. The LWS framework provides an updated and more robust system to replace this aspect of planning policy.
4.36 It is also important to note that Rotherham Biodiversity Action Plan, was updated in 2012 to reflect changes to national biodiversity action plan priorities and delivery.
Archaeological Study
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 21 4
4.37 Wessex Archaeology has undertaken scoping studies of 251 potential sites for inclusion in the Rotherham Local Plan (Wessex Archaeology 2012, 2013, 2014). The specific aims for the studies have been as follows:
Table 2
Aim 1 To collate existing digital data in order to provide an evidence base for assessment.
Aim 2 To compile a geodatabase to identify heritage assets within each preferred site and its study area.
Aim 3 To identify the significance of heritage assets and historic landscapes within each preferred site and its study area.
Aim 4 To assess the archaeological potential of each preferred site and its study area.
Aim 5 To make recommendations as to the suitability of each preferred area for potential allocation and future development in terms of heritage constraints.
Aim 6 To prepare a report identifying, for each preferred area, heritage assets and their significance; archaeological potential; and suitability for allocation.
4.38 Each site has been allocated a significance level of International, National, Regional, high Local, medium Local, low Local, Negligible or Unknown depending upon the factors described in the table below.
Table 3
Significance Factors Determining Significance
International World Heritage Sites
Assets of recognised international importance
Assets that contribute to international research objectives
National Scheduled Ancient Monuments
Grade I and Grade II* Listed Buildings
Grade I and Grade II* Registered Parks and Gardens
Undesignated assets of the quality and importance to be designated
Assets that contribute to national research agendas
22 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Significance Factors Determining Significance
Regional Grade II Listed Buildings
Grade II Registered Parks and Gardens
Assets that contribute to regional research objectives
Local (Low/Medium/High) Locally listed buildings
Assets compromised by poor preservation and/or poor contextual associations
Assets with importance to local interest groups
Assets that contribute to local research objectives
Negligible Assets with little or no archaeological/historical interest
Unknown The importance of the asset has not been ascertained from available evidence
4.39 Each potential site has been assessed for heritage constraints against four recommendation categories:
Table 4
Recommendation Archaeological Archaeological Archaeological Scoping Studies of Scoping Studies of Scoping Studies of Site Allocations Additional Site Additional Site (Wessex Allocations (Wessex Allocations Archaeology 2012) Archaeology 2013) (Wessex findings findings Archaeology 2014) findings
Major archaeological 3 (2%) of sites 1 (1.5 %) of sites 6 (14%) objections to allocation
Potential archaeological 17 (11%) of sites 16 (22.5%) of sites 10 (22%) objections to allocation
Uncertain archaeological 72 (46%) of sites 36 (51%) of sites 23 (51%) objections to allocation
Little or no archaeological 65 (41%) of sites 18 (25%) of sites 6 (13%) objections to allocation
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 23 4
4.40 The recommendations of the reports have been used in the Local Plan site selection methodology to inform allocation site selection in the final draft Sites and Policies Document 2014. Sites that would significantly affect nationally important archaeological sites were automatically discounted from the local plan site selection process.
4.41 Generic guidelines have been provided for the four recommendation categories giving guidance on planning application submissions should the sites eventually come forward in the Local Plan process.
Heritage Impact Assessment
4.42 Following consultation on the draft Sites and Policies Document (2013) several sites whose development would involve the loss of open spaces within or immediately adjacent the boundaries of Conservation Areas were identified. The National Planning Policy Framework clarifies that the significance of heritage assets, such as Conservation Areas, can be harmed through development within their setting. Proposed site allocations will need to be evaluated for their contribution, if any, these areas make to the character or setting of the respective Conservation Area and why the development of these areas is considered to be acceptable.
Setting
4.43 English Heritage guidance relevant to this assessment includes “The Setting of Heritage Assets” (English Heritage 2011). The guidance states that an assessment of the impact of a proposed development should identify whether the development would be acceptable in terms of the degree of harm to an asset’s setting. This can be identified by using a broad 5-step approach that identifies:
which assets and settings are affected;
how and to what degree these settings make a contribution to the significance of the heritage asset;
assess the effects of the proposed development;
explore ways to minimise harm and maximise enhancement; and
how to document the decision and monitor outcomes.
4.44 There are a number of factors to consider when determining how, and to what degree an asset’s setting contributes to its significance; these factors include an appraisal of the asset’s physical surroundings including topography, layout, land use and history; the experience of the asset which includes views to and from including inter-visibility with other assets; the wider landscape character; visual dominance of the asset, and the sense of place. Other factors of setting that can contribute to significance embrace attributes such as a level of historical or cultural association with other assets and local, social and cultural traditions.
Assessing impact
24 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 4.45 The term ‘impact’ is used to refer to changes or perturbations arising from a proposed development e.g. loss of heritage asset or changes affecting an asset’s setting. The effect experienced by a heritage asset as a consequence of an impact can be assessed as being beneficial or adverse. In this way, the same impact may result in a beneficial effect from the perspective of one asset, and an adverse effect from the perspective of another.
4.46 A heritage asset might be affected by direct physical impact, including destruction, demolition and alteration, but may also be affected by changes to its setting. This could include changes to the historic character of an area, or alterations to views to and from a site which can give rise to an adverse effect on the asset’s setting. Factors for measuring the magnitude of a potential impact are described below.
Factors for measuring the magnitude of impact
High
4.47 The significance of the asset is totally altered or destroyed. Comprehensive change to setting affecting significance, resulting in changes in our ability to understand and appreciate the resource and its historical context and setting.
Medium
4.48 The significance of the asset is affected. Changes such that the setting of the asset is noticeably different, affecting significance resulting in changes in our ability to understand and appreciate the resource and its historical context and setting.
Low
4.49 The significance of the asset is slightly affected. Changes to the setting that have a slight impact on significance, resulting in changes in our ability to understand and appreciate the resource and its historical context and setting.
Minimal
4.50 Changes to the asset that hardly affect significance. Changes to the setting of an asset that have little effect on significance and no real change in our ability to understand and appreciate the resource and its historical context and setting.
No change
4.51 The development does not affect the significance of the asset. Changes to the setting do not affect the significance of the asset or our appreciation of it.
Assessing the sites
4.52 Eight sites have been assessed against this criteria. Of the eight, the following two have been scored at medium impact:
LDF0785 Land at Moorhouse Lane, Whiston
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 25 4
LDF0773 Land east of Brampton Road, Brampton en le Morthen
4.53 Following site visits and ongoing negotiations with English Heritage, it is considered that mitigation measures could significantly reduce the impact of any development east of Brampton Road on the Conservation Area at Brampton en le Morthen thereby removing their potential objection.
4.54 However, it is considered that any development on the site at Moorhouse Lane, Whiston would have a detrimental effect on both the setting of Whiston Conservation area and more significantly, the Grade II* listed Church of St Mary Magdelene. It is not proposed to allocate this site for future development.
Flood Risk Sequential Assessment
4.55 The NPPF and accompanying Planning Policy Guidance provides policy guidance in relation to the allocation of development sites in areas at risk of flooding. The overall approach is that inappropriate development should be avoided in areas at risk of flooding. This is achieved by directing development away from areas at highest risk. Where development is necessary, it should be made safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere.
4.56 The overall site selection process has enshrined the principles of directing development to areas with the lowest risk of flooding. As a result, with the exception of a small number of sites the Council have been able to allocate the vast majority of development in Flood Zone 1. However in order to meet the borough’s development requirements (as set out in the Core Strategy) in accordance with the broader principles of sustainable development, it has been necessary to identify some sites in areas at higher risk from flooding. An assessment has therefore been undertaken to apply the sequential test as set out in national planning policy.
4.57 This assessment is set out in the Flood Risk Sequential Assessment. Nineteen sites identified for allocation fall wholly or partly within Flood Zones 2 or 3, as do eight of the proposed mixed use areas. Sites which have partly implemented planning permissions have been excluded from further assessment as flood issues and any required mitigation will have been assessed as part of the planning application process. Sites which fall partly within Flood Zones 2 and 3 but where development can appropriately be accommodated on parts of the site at lower risk of flooding (in line with Core Strategy Policy CS25) have also been excluded from further assessment. The remaining 10 sites and 7 mixed use areas have been assessed further and it has been demonstrated that the sequential and exception test approach outlined in the NPPF has been applied as necessary and met. It has shown that development can, in principle, be delivered appropriately in relation to flood risk. The majority of sites allocated for development are at low risk of flooding (Flood Zone 1) and where sites are within higher risk flood zones this is to support the sustainability objectives of the Local Plan. 4.4 Site Changes Since 2013 Consultation
4.58 The following table shows those sites that were put forward by the Council as a development site in the summer 2013 consultation but which, due to further investigation / evidence from representations received during consultation, are no longer considered as suitable for development.
26 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Table 5 Proposed Development Sites (shown in 2013 Draft Consultation) DELETED
Site Site Name Settlement Reason for deletion Reference Group LDF0413 THE WARREN ASTON / AUGHTON This site is allocated in the UDP as / SWALLOWNEST residential, in 2013 the site was incorrectly identified as safeguarded land; it is proposed to allocate as Urban Greenspace if no progress can be made on the achievement of planning permission. The draft Policies Map identifies this site as Urban Greenspace.
LDF0279 EAST OF STATION ROAD BRAMPTON / WEST Objection from Yorkshire Water re MELTON / WATH proximity of site to sewage treatment works
LDF0280 CADMAN STREET BRAMPTON / WEST Objection from Yorkshire Water re MELTON / WATH proximity of site to sewage treatment works
LDF0757 WINCANTON SITE, MALTBY / HELLABY Owners of site now wish to keep as ROTHERHAM ROAD, business use MALTBY
LDF0523 LAND AT JUNCTION OF OUTLYING Objections from Parish Council who GILDINGWELLS ROAD AND SETTLEMENTS own the site WORKSOP ROAD, WOODSETTS
LDF0544 LAND TO NORTH EAST OF OUTLYING Site falls within a Local Wildlife Site GOOSE CARR LANE, SETTLEMENTS - ecological concerns TODWICK
LDF0022 FORMER JOB LOT SITE, ROTHERHAM Environment Agency concerns due CANKLOW ROAD URBAN AREA to high flood risk and suitability for residential uses.
LDF0140 LAND EAST OF ROTHERHAM Objection from Yorkshire Water re MEADOWHALL ROAD URBAN AREA proximity of site to sewage treatment works
LDF0770 LAND SOUTH OF ROTHERHAM Objection from Yorkshire Water re MEADOWHALL RD, URBAN AREA proximity of site to sewage treatment KIMBERWORTH works
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 27 4
Site Site Name Settlement Reason for deletion Reference Group LDF0785 LAND AT MOORHOUSE ROTHERHAM Objection from English Heritage due LANE, WHISTON URBAN AREA to impact on conservation area that could not be satisfactorily mitigated against
Sites previously shown / proposed for Safeguarded Land but now deleted:
LDF0261 OFF FLATTS LANE AND BRAMPTON / WEST Immediately adjacent to Local BROOME DRIVE MELTON / WATH Wildlife Site, close to listed building and public right of way across site.
LDF0263 LAND BETWEEN BRAMPTON / WEST Incorrectly identified as Safeguarded PONTEFRACT ROAD AND MELTON / WATH Land, retain Urban Greenspace BARNSLEY ROAD designation. Settlement target has LDF0211 LAND TO THE SOUTH OF DINNINGTON Sibeente r emotemet. from facilities and no WOODSETTS ROAD longer required as settlement target has been met. LDF0215 LAND TO THE NORTH OF DINNINGTON Site remote from facilities and no RACKFORD ROAD longer required as settlement target has been met. LDF0379 FIELDS OFF GOLDEN SWINTON / Major archaeological objections to SMITHIES LANE, SWINTON KILNHURST development
LDF0433 SOUTH OF BRAMPTON THURCROFT Incorrectly identified as Safeguarded MEADOWS Land, retain Urban Greenspace designation. Settlement target has LDF0773 EAST OF BRAMPTON ROAD THURCROFT Concernbeen met. from English Heritage due to impact / proximity to Brampton en le Morthen conservation area. 4.59 The table below shows those sites that were not originally proposed as development sites in the summer 2013 consultation but which, due to further investigation / evidence from representations received and the need to provide additional flexibility in meeting the borough and/or individual settlement housing targets, have been brought forward in this final draft.
Table 6 Proposed Development Sites (additional to those shown in 2013 Draft Consultation) ADDED
Site Site Name Settlement Group Reason for addition / Reference allocation
LDF0772 LAND TO NORTH OF ASTON ASTON / AUGHTON / Safeguarded Land BYPASS A57, EAST OF CHURCH SWALLOWNEST LANE
28 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Site Site Name Settlement Group Reason for addition / Reference allocation
LDF0391 LAND OFF ALLOTT CLOSE BRAMLEY / Residential Development Site WICKERSLEY
LDF0288 LAND TO NORTH OF ELSECAR BRAMPTON / WEST Safeguarded Land ROAD MELTON / WATH
LDF0335 LAND OFF DENMAN ROAD BRAMPTON / WEST Residential Development Site MELTON / WATH
LDF0208 LAND TO EAST OF PENNY DINNINGTON Residential Development Site PIECE LANE
LDF0223 LAND OFF UNDERGATE ROAD DINNINGTON Residential Development Site
LDF0242 LAND OFF ATHORPE ROAD DINNINGTON Residential Development Site
LDF0717 LAND OF LODGE LANE (2) DINNINGTON Safeguarded Land
LDF0830 TODWICK NORTH (north of DINNINGTON Employment Development A57) Site
LDF0296 RECREATION GROUNDS AND MALTBY / HELLABY Residential Development Site ALLOTMENTS TO EAST OF HIGHFIELD PARK
LDF0828 PARK HILL LODGE MALTBY / HELLABY Residential Development Site
LDF0512 LAND AT THORPE COMMON, OUTLYING Residential Development Site THORPE HESLEY SETTLEMENTS
LDF0730 LAND TO THE WEST OF OUTLYING Residential Development Site KIVETON LANE, TODWICK SETTLEMENTS
LDF0575 LAND TO WEST OF WESTGATE ROTHERHAM TOWN Residential Development Site CENTRE
LDF0020 OFF WEST BAWTRY ROAD ROTHERHAM URBAN Safeguarded Land AREA
LDF0129 FORMER CRICKET GROUND OFF ROTHERHAM URBAN Safeguarded Land BRECKS LANE AREA
LDF0192 LAND NORTH OF ST GERARDS ROTHERHAM URBAN Residential Development Site CATHOLIC SCHOOL, WEST OF AREA DONCASTER ROAD
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 29 4
Site Site Name Settlement Group Reason for addition / Reference allocation
LDF0822 LAND OFF MUNSBROUGH LANE ROTHERHAM URBAN Residential Development Site AREA
LDF0826 FOSTERS GARDEN CENTRE, ROTHERHAM URBAN Residential Development Site THRYBERGH AREA
LDF0403 OFF LAWRENCE DRIVE, SWINTON / KILNHURST Residential Development Site PICCADILLY
LDF0827 CHARNWOOD HOUSE SWINTON / KILNHURST Residential Development Site
LDF0469 LAND OFF KEETON HALL ROAD WALES / KIVETON Residential Development Site PARK
4.60 The table below show new sites that have been put forward as part of / subsequent to the summer 2013 consultation for consideration as development sites. Note that this represented the last opportunity for new sites to be put forward for consideration as part of the selection process.
Table 7 Additional Sites (post 2013 Draft Consultation) put forward for consideration
Site Site Name Settlement Group Decision (for reasons please Reference see individual site record)
LDF0815 LAND TO NORTH OF ASTON / AUGHTON / Not considered suitable for WORKSOP ROAD SWALLOWNEST development
LDF0809 RUBY COOK RECREATION BRAMLEY / Not considered suitable for GROUND WICKERSLEY development
LDF0825 LAND SOUTH OF MOAT BRAMLEY / Not considered suitable for FARM WICKERSLEY development
LDF0832 LAND ADJACENT TO KING BRAMLEY / Taken forward as Retail HENRY PUBLIC HOUSE WICKERSLEY Development Site
LDF0810 SOUTH OF DONCASTER BRAMPTON / WEST Not considered suitable for ROAD, WEST OF CALLFLEX MELTON / WATH development
LDF0812 LAND TO NORTH OF BRAMPTON / WEST Not considered suitable for ELSECAR ROAD MELTON / WATH development
LDF0819 LAND TO SOUTH OF BRAMPTON / WEST Not considered suitable for DONCASTER ROAD MELTON / WATH development
LDF0830 TODWICK NORTH (north of DINNINGTON Taken forward as Employment A57) Development Site
30 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Site Site Name Settlement Group Decision (for reasons please Reference see individual site record)
LDF0831 LAND OFF LITTLEFIELD DINNINGTON Taken forward as Retail ROAD Development Site
LDF0816 BUFFER ZONE NORTH MALTBY / HELLABY Not considered suitable for ADJACENT TO CLAY PIT development WORKS OFF FORDOLES HEAD LANE
LDF0817 LAND TO EAST OF HELLABY MALTBY / HELLABY Not considered suitable for LANE development
LDF0828 PARK HILL LODGE MALTBY / HELLABY Taken forward as Residential Development Site
LDF0803 LAND SOUTH OF PEREGRINE OUTLYING Not considered suitable for WAY SETTLEMENTS development
LDF0805 LAND EAST OF SCHOLES OUTLYING Not considered suitable for LANE SETTLEMENTS development
LDF0806 LAND EAST OF KIRKSTEAD OUTLYING Not considered suitable for ABBEY MEWS SETTLEMENTS development
LDF0808 LAND EAST OF HARD LANE OUTLYING Not considered suitable for SETTLEMENTS development
LDF0813 LAND TO NORTH OF A57, OUTLYING Not considered suitable for WORKSOP ROAD, AT ASTON SETTLEMENTS development COMMON
LDF0814 LAND TO SOUTH OF A57, OUTLYING Not considered suitable for WORKSOP ROAD SETTLEMENTS development
LDF0823 DERELICT BUILDINGS ROTHERHAM TOWN Taken forward as Retail CORPORATION STREET CENTRE Development Site
LDF0824 OUTDOOR MARKETS ROTHERHAM TOWN Taken forward as Retail CENTRE Development Site
LDF0807 LAND WEST OF DONCASTER ROTHERHAM URBAN Site split into north (not ROAD AREA considered suitable for development) / south area (LDF0192 boundary extended to cover south portion) proposed as Residential Development Site.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 31 4
Site Site Name Settlement Group Decision (for reasons please Reference see individual site record)
LDF0820 LAND TO NORTH OF ROTHERHAM URBAN Not considered suitable for MEADOWHALL ROAD J34 AREA development NORTH
LDF0821 LAND OFF ROTHERWAY ROTHERHAM URBAN Not considered suitable for AREA development
LDF0822 LAND OFF MUNSBROUGH ROTHERHAM URBAN Taken forward as Residential LANE AREA Development Site
LDF0826 FOSTERS GARDEN CENTRE ROTHERHAM URBAN Part of site taken forward as AREA Residential Development Site
LDF0811 FIELDS OFF GOLDEN SWINTON / Not considered suitable for SMITHIES LANE (WEST OF KILNHURST development LDF0379)
LDF0827 CHARNWOOD HOUSE SWINTON / Taken forward as Residential KILNHURST Development Site
LDF0818 LAND BETWEEN M1 AND THURCROFT Not considered suitable for M18 development
LDF0804 LAND NORTH OF WESLEY WALES / KIVETON Not considered suitable for ROAD PARK development
4.61 The Bassingthorpe Farm urban extension was identified as a broad location for growth in the submission Core Strategy. At the Examination of the Core Strategy the Inspector was satisfied that the detailed evidence supporting the future development of Bassingthorpe Farm was sufficient that the site could be formalised as a strategic allocation. This is what he subsequently recommended in his final report.
4.62 Following the Inspector’s decision, Bassingthorpe Farm can come forward before other sites in the Sites & Policies document, providing a sustainable urban extension for the wider Rotherham Urban Area. In total, the development will provide around 2,400 new homes with 1,700 homes being delivered in this Plan period (up to 2028). The development will also provide around 11 hectares of land for employment together with associated infrastructure requirements. The Bassingthorpe Farm strategic allocation is shown as an “inset” boundary on the Policies Map that accompanies the Sites and Policies document. Please refer to the Core Strategy for more details of this strategic allocation. All individual sites previously part of this allocation have been deleted from the Sites and Policies Document. A masterplan for the development will be finalised before pursuing an outline planning application for the site.
32 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 4.5 Meeting Core Strategy Settlement Targets
4.63 The table below shows the Core Strategy target number of homes for each settlement group less the outstanding planning permissions (at the start of the Plan Period 31st March 2013) to give a balance required. The last column shows the estimated number of homes that are expected to be built on the new (i.e. without current planning permission) development sites that have been suggested to be allocated. The capacity of a site has been estimated using a net developable area and an appropriate density. However these are only estimates and may not reflect the actual number of units delivered on site following the grant of any future planning permission. To meet the requirements of Core Strategy Policy CS34 'Housing Delivery and Ongoing Co-operation' the Council has a clear approach to joint working with Sheffield City Council and the other local authorities within the Housing Market Area, to prepare an up to date Strategic Housing Market Assessment. This assessment work is underway and will input into the Publication Sites and Policies Document if appropriate.
4.64 It is worth noting that Rotherham Urban area figure only assumes that 1,700 homes would be built within the Bassingthorpe Farm Strategic Allocation within the Plan Period, an additional 700 homes would be expected to be built beyond the Plan Period (i.e. after 2028).
4.65 Similarly an additional 1,358 homes would be expected to be built at Waverley beyond 2028 (only 2,500 homes assumed within the Plan Period).
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 33 34 4 Table 8 Targets, Permissions and Development Site Residential Numbers
Settlement Group: Core Strategy Less Planning Balance Development Sites Target Permissions Required: (without planning (expected to be built permission) in Plan Period)
Aston, Aughton and Swallownest 560 126 434 572
Catcliffe, Orgreave, Treeton 170 102 68 75
Waverley 2,500 2,500 0 0
Dinnington, Anston and Laughton 1,300 549 751 794 Common
Green Belt Villages 0 32 -32 0
Kiveton Park and Wales 370 205 165 369
Maltby and Hellaby 700 46 654 728
Non-Green Belt Villages 170 48 122 186
Thorpe Hesley 170 19 151 210 Si tes Rotherham Urban Area 5,471 1,021 4,450 4,786 and Swinton and Kilnhurst 560 481 79 134
P ol icies Thurcroft 300 389 -89 79
Final Wath-upon-Dearne, Brampton & West 1,300 1,271 29 171
Dr Melton aft
2014 Si tes Settlement Group: Core Strategy Less Planning Balance Development Sites and Target Permissions Required: (without planning
P (expected to be built permission) ol icies in Plan Period)
Final
Dr aft
Wickersley, Bramley & Ravenfield 800 239 561 648 2014 Common
TOTAL: 14,371 7,026 7,345 8,752 35 5
5 Integrated Impact Assessment
5.1 The Integrated Impact Assessment (IIA) sets out the overall approach in terms of how the sustainability appraisal assessment was undertaken of both policies and site allocation options and alternatives. Some of the sites considered by the Council were filtered out at Stage 1 of the Site Selection Assessment. This list of sites is included within the IIA.
5.2 The IIA describes the process which led to the identification of potential sites for allocation and summarises the likely significant effects as identified via the Stage 2 assessment under the site selection methodology. This methodology is included at Appendix 12. The full scoring summary sheets are included within an appendix to the IIA. All of the Stage 2 sites were considered to be reasonable alternatives for the purposes of the SEA regulations.
5.3 Stage 2 of the site selection assessment considered the remaining sites in terms of more detailed site specific sustainability factors and potential constraints to development. This approach complies with SA/SEA requirements.
5.4 The sites assessed at Stage 2 were considered further by the IIA to identify if any reasonable alternatives would result from the potential for combined effects from groups of individuals sites. The IIA provides a step-by-step breakdown of how the "in combination" alternatives were identified relative to environmental and/or socio-economic issues.
5.5 The results of the assessment have been fed into Stage 3 of the site selection methodology. The IIA describes the reasons for choosing the allocations and safeguarded land, in light of the environmental effects identified. This stage compared sites to prioritise those sites that were the most sustainable for development and best meet the strategic objectives for each settlement grouping. The summary sheets for the Stage 3 assessment under the site selection methodology are included within an appendix to the IIA.
5.6 Stage 3 looked at the potential impact on the Green Belt, the type of urban extension to settlements, deliverability and other known physical constraints, including the proposed High Speed 2 (HS2) the UK's proposed high speed rail network to the north of England and Scotland. The Sustainability Appraisal cumulative effects of development were also considered and scored here.
5.7 The appendices to the IIA in effect provide a summary of the decisions taken in selecting the development allocations.
5.8 The IIA Report considers the theoretical links between the policies and significant issues / environmental problems, and analyses potential risks and opportunities. Policies will minimise identified effects whilst recognising that external factors such as Government legislation on building regulations will be the primary determinant as to the approach to issues such as access for the disabled.
5.9 The IIA also assessed the likely significant effects of the Sites & Policies document as a whole – including the combination of allocations and policies. Any residual risks which remain are identified within the IIA and further mitigation recommended as appropriate to reduce risk or enhance opportunities. A suggested monitoring framework is proposed to ensure that early remedial action can be taken.
36 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 5.10 The IIA and accompanying appendices are available to download from the Local Plan web pages.
5.11 A summary of the process that has enabled us to identify site allocations and safeguarded land is included at Appendix 12.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 37 6
6 Designations and other Local Projects
6.1 The Policy Map illustrates a number of designations, which relate to specific development management policies. Designations may highlight a particular feature of the built or natural environment or the wider character or historic interest of a landscape or area; these often reflect national planning requirements.
6.2 Development will be expected to conserve and enhance designated interests and they should be viewed as beneficial to development, providing individual settings and unique selling points, rather than as a constraint. The associated development management policies provide further detail on how proposals affecting designations will be assessed. 6.1 Local Wildlife Sites
6.3 Local Wildlife Sites are sites of substantive local nature conservation interest; the designation is intended to be comprehensive and the supporting system allows for the inclusion of new sites and changes to existing sites throughout the plan period. The LWS system provides a scientific, systematic and robust process for the identification of sites in compliance with legislation and national best practice. The system reflects the Rotherham Biodiversity Action Plan and is maintained by RMBC and is overseen by a panel of independent experts. 6.2 Regionally Important Geological Sites
6.4 Regionally Important Geological Sites (RIGS) are a local planning designation that recognises the geological conservation interest of a site. RIGS are sites of substantive local nature conservation interest: the designation is intended to be comprehensive and the supporting system allows for the inclusion of new sites and changes to existing sites through the plan period. The Rotherham Regionally Important Geological Sites system for planning purposes is managed by the Council's Planning Policy Team and overseen by a panel of local experts. Rotherham Geological Records are currently administered by Sheffield Area Geology Trust. RIGS were originally designated through Unitary Development Plan Policy ENV2.2. Although not shown specifically on the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) Proposals Map they were included as the geological element of the ‘Known Interests Outside Protected Sites’.
6.5 These sites were re-surveyed in 2010 under the guidance of a local panel of experts, the Rotherham Local Geological Sites Panel and the series approved by Members of the Council. It is anticipated the RIGS, and, in the future a Local Geological Sites System incorporating RIGS and integrated with the Local Wildlife Site system, will further enhance the evidence base of the Rotherham Local Plan. 6.3 Area of High Landscape Value
6.6 Areas of High Landscape Value are a local planning designation used to identify land of particularly high landscape quality. Originally the Areas of High Landscape Value (AHLV) designation were referred to as Areas of County Landscape Value and identified in the South Yorkshire Structure Plan (1980). The Structure Plan identified two Areas of County Landscape Value within Rotherham Borough; subsequently criteria from the County Study were used at the smaller Borough scale to
38 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 assist with defining the boundaries of the Areas of County Landscape Value which resulted in an additional three areas being identified and published in the Rotherham Green Belt Local Plan (1990). The boundaries related to features on the ground such as field boundaries and lanes. These designated areas were retained in the 1999 Unitary Development Plan and minor ‘drafting changes’ were made to the boundaries at that time; they were also renamed Areas of High Landscape Value.
6.7 Whilst there is historical reference to the origins of the AHLV, there is no detailed justification of the boundaries of these areas and whilst based on best practice at that time, this approach is no longer the accepted approach to identifying sensitive or valued landscapes. The work to date on a Landscape Character Assessment for Rotherham Metropolitan Borough suggests that the Areas of High Landscape Value no longer fully match the most sensitive landscapes in the Borough. The use of detailed character assessments, together with guidelines and, where necessary, sensitivity and capacity assessments, can serve to provide suitable protection of existing features and encourage appropriate improvements and / or mitigation.
6.8 The descriptions and guidelines provided within the Landscape Character Assessment, provide more specific measures to test the appropriateness of a development and its acceptability in landscape terms. The use of Landscape Character Assessment is now widely advocated as a strong basis for identifying sensitive landscapes.
6.9 The Council will continue to provide the highest level of protection to Areas of High Landscape Value, as proposed to be amended. 6.4 Conservation Areas
6.10 A Conservation Area is an area of special architectural or historic interest, the character of which is desirable to preserve or enhance. They are often, but not exclusively, centred on listed buildings. However, it is the character of the area, including its landscape qualities, rather than the presence of individual buildings, which justifies designation as a Conservation Area.
6.11 Under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, every Local Planning Authority has a duty to consider designating Conservation Areas. Within Rotherham Borough there are currently 28. The majority were designated by Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council following local government reorganisation in 1974.
6.12 Policy ENV2.10 of the Unitary Development Plan identified certain settlements within the Borough for potential designation as new Conservation Areas. Character Appraisals have now been carried out on all the areas identified. These appraisals assess the area’s special historic, archaeological and architectural interest through mapping, photography and analysis of the area’s development.
6.13 As a result of these appraisals it was decided to proceed with the possible designation of 11 new Conservation Areas; 2 of which, Letwell and Ulley, have now been designated. 6.5 Green Infrastructure Assets
6.14 Green infrastructure is defined by the National Planning Policy Framework to be a network of multi-functional green space, urban and rural, which is capable of delivering a wide range of environmental and quality of life benefits for local communities.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 39 6
6.15 Rotherham Core Strategy, section 5.6.3 lists a range of typical green infrastructure assets. Green infrastructure is both urban and rural and will permeate from the core of the built environment out to rural areas. Green infrastructure operates at a range of scales from individual street trees (neighbourhood and local level), to designated and non designated landscapes (at the regional level and beyond).
6.16 Green Infrastructure functions in many different ways and provides multiple benefits for local communities including: promoting improved health and well being of people, mitigating climate change such as flood alleviation and urban cooling, providing benefits to the local economy through a high quality environment to help attract further economic investment and benefits to biodiversity through the strengthening of ecological networks. It provides an opportunity to deliver and coordinate future growth and environmental improvements, this can encourage external investment into the Borough, promote access to the countryside and recreation as well as protect and enhance settlement character and quality.
40 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 7 Policies Map
7.1 As part of the Local Plan process the NPPF requires all local authorities to produce a Policies Map (formerly called a Proposals Map) showing a variety of land use designations and the location of allocated development sites for housing, employment and other uses. This will eventually replace the current Unitary Development Plan adopted Proposals Map.
7.2 A draft Policies Map has now been produced showing a number of land use designations / areas (e.g. Green Belt, residential, business use, retail centres, mixed use areas etc) and known environmental designations (e.g. Sites of Special Scientific Interest, Local Nature Reserves, local wildlife sites, regionally important geological sites, sites of historic heritage importance) and highlights those sites currently preferred by the Council to be allocated for development and/or to be identified as Safeguarded Land.
7.3 The Policies Map also identifies minerals resources and minerals infrastructure for safeguarding as well as strategic sites for waste facilities and existing waste management and landfill sites.
7.4 In addition a number of other changes have been made to the former Unitary Development Plan (UDP) Proposals Maps to better reflect the current use of the site and the conclusions established within the LDF site summary conclusions: for example only, land adjoining Swinton Interchange (LDF0396) is to be reallocated from employment to Community Facilities and Greenspace.
7.5 Specifically with regard to greenspaces, a review of the fully developed residential development sites allocated within the UDP has established that various areas of new provision have been created since 1999 and examples of this such as at Woodlaithes (Bramley) and Russett Court (LDF0421 Anston), Gala Crescent (LDF0315 Maltby) and Amory's Holt (LDF0303 Maltby) have been reflected on the Policies map.
7.6 Consideration has also been given to those areas larger than 0.4ha identified in Rotherham's Green Space Audit which are not currently allocated as urban greenspace, nor are within the Green Belt and have not been identified as an allocation site. This yielded several additional areas where it was felt appropriate for them to be allocated as urban greenspace on the Policies Map; namely Barber Balk Road (Kimberworth Park), Wath Wood Road (Wath), Wetherby Drive (Swallownest) and Back Lane (North Anston).
7.7 Resulting from these various approaches, specific sites proposed as green space include:
Greenlands Plantation at Maltby known as the Muddies, (site reference LDF0276) reflecting the value of the site for protected species;
Amendments to the boundary of the employment allocation at Aldwarke Sewage Treatment Works to exclude the Local Wildlife Site of most value and to allocate as Urban Greenspace;
Centenary Riverside Nature Park at Templebrough;
Part of the former Unitary Development Plan residential allocation H9 at Munsbrough Lane, Rotherham (remainder site reference LDF0158 to continue be allocated residential), is to be
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 41 7
designated urban greenspace to reflect its value as a buffer to the Bassingthorpe Spring Ancient Woodland.
Former Unitary Development Plan residential allocation off Brecks Crescent and Gibbing Greave Road, Listerdale (site reference LDF0114) included within Listerdale Woodland Local Wildlife Site.
Change of the Mixed Use Area allocated in the UDP, at Fitzwilliam Fields, Manvers to Urban Greenspace (site reference LDF0744).
Site to r/o 14 - 24 Middlefields Drive, Whiston to Urban Greenspace (site reference LDF0043)
Site at Matthews Avenue, Wath to Urban Greenspace (LDF0336)
Land to north of St Margaret's Church at Swinton to Urban greenspace (site reference LDF0383)
Land adjacent to South Yorkshire Navigation at Northfield (site reference LDF0030) to Urban Greenspace
Land adjacent to the Silverwood Centre, Doncaster Road, Dalton to Urban Greenspace (site reference LDF0136)
7.8 It is also proposed to remove land from the Green Belt and allocate it as urban greenspace to enable the creation of strong Green Belt boundaries; for example only, it is proposed to re-designate Waleswood Cricket Ground; however, it is important to emphasise that if the adjacent proposed employment allocation (LDF0483) is not ultimately allocated, then Waleswood Cricket Ground will retain its Green Belt designation.
7.9 A number of inset maps have also been prepared to support the policies within this document and should be read alongside the appropriate policies. They have the same status as the Policies Map. The constraints of reproducing these spatial policy requirements on the printed Policies Map has necessitated a pragmatic approach to enable a clear and transparent Policies Map to be prepared and printed. These inset maps include:
South Yorkshire Forest Partnership Green Infrastructure Projects; Green Infrastructure Key Projects: Living Don Rotherham Rivers Key Project, Lower Don Valley Masterplan, Dearne Valley Green Heart Nature Improvement Area and Eco-Vision Key projects; Biodiversity Opportunity Mapping Areas Town and District Centre boundaries including the identification of the primary and secondary shopping frontages.
7.10 The Council is also working to prepare an electronic version of the Policies Map to enable the individual spatial constraints and opportunities to be viewed independently or collectively. The electronic Policies Map can be accessed and viewed through our www.rotherham.gov.uk/localplan pages.
42 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8 Draft Development Management Policies
8.1 The Core Strategy sets out the strategic framework and policies that will guide spatial decision-making. The Core Strategy groups the strategic policies under the following broad themes:
Delivering development in sustainable locations; Creating mixed and attractive places to live; Supporting a dynamic economy; Movement and accessibility; Managing the natural and historic environment; Creating safe and sustainable communities; and Infrastructure.
8.2 The Core Strategy sets out over-arching strategic policies and in some areas provides detailed policy guidance. With the exception of the Bassingthorpe Farm Strategic Allocation it does not establish how individual site allocations may be implemented. This, along with more detailed "development management" policies are delegated to this, the Sites and Policies document. Further detailed guidance may be prepared separately as Supplementary Planning Documents or Good Practice Guidance to assist the delivery of the strategic spatial objectives of the Local Plan.
8.3 The Council is now seeking views on the final draft detailed Development Management policies which follow. The policies should be considered having regard to the following principle:
All policies should be read together and proposals will need to satisfy the requirements of all relevant policies. This means that individual Development Management policies need to be considered together along with the policies set out within the Core Strategy and at a national level.
8.4 The policies will be applied during the planning application process. Planning conditions, planning obligations and Community Infrastructure Levy will be used, where appropriate, to ensure protection, enhancement and appropriate long-term management and maintenance of any green infrastructure, landscaping, sustainable urban drainage scheme or improvements to the public realm.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 43 8
8.1 Development Within the Green Belt
Policy SP 1
General Principles
Inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances. In considering planning applications for new development, including improvements to essential infrastructure such as operational Waste Water Treatment Works, within the Green Belt and to ensure proposals minimise the impact of the development on the openness of the Green Belt particular regard will be had to the following factors: the size, scale, volume, height, massing, position, lighting and any proposed enclosures of the proposals; and demonstrate that regard has been had to the appropriate Landscape Character Area management strategy for the area.
All new buildings, should be well-related to existing buildings and should be of a size commensurate with the established functional requirement. Effective siting, screening and high standards of design appropriate to the setting of the proposals can minimise the impact of future development on the openness of the Green Belt. Where possible proposals should reflect the architectural style of original buildings if appropriate, and / or the vernacular styles in the locality.
All proposals for development should satisfy other relevant policies of the Plan and National Guidance.
All proposals will require careful assessment and agreement prior to their submission, as to their impact and appropriateness and to their long term sustainability. Consideration will be given to the location of the site in relation to other settlements outside of the Green Belt.
Explanation
8.5 The NPPF supports the continued protection of the Green Belt from inappropriate development (paragraph 87 refers), and proposals should not be approved except in very special circumstances. This policy ensures that if very special circumstances can be demonstrated consideration is given to the impact development proposals will have on the openness of the Green Belt. It is considered that the factors identified in this policy, are those likely to have the greatest impact on the openness of the Green Belt. Prior to the granting of permission for development to proceed on site, balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss likely to occur and to any proposals to minimise the scale of any harm and limit the impact of development on the openness of the Green Belt. Proposals within the Green Belt are most likely to be rural or remote and careful consideration will need to be given to their infrastructure requirements including drainage, water supply, energy generation and transport requirements, to ensure that sufficient consideration is given to the sustainability of the proposals.
8.6 Broad landscape character area management strategies are referenced in paragraphs 3.12-3.14 and figure 8 of the Rotherham Borough Landscape Character Assessment and Landscape Capacity
44 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Study (January 2010) prepared by the Landscape Partnership to support the Local Plan. Broad landscape character areas are identified along with their sensitivity to change.
Policy SP 2
Rural Workers Dwellings in the Green Belt
New houses in the Green Belt require special justification for planning permission to be granted and should relate to the essential need for a rural worker to live permanently at or near to their place of work. The applicant will be required to establish a functional need for a new dwelling to support rural business activity, and demonstrate this in support of the planning application. Applicants must demonstrate through the provision of evidence that the business is financially viable. Consideration will be given to approving permission for temporary accommodation in the first instance until the business is established and stable and the need for a permanent dwelling proven.
Where a permanent house is proposed to be built, high standards of design appropriate to the setting of the proposal are required and the impact of the proposed development on the openness of the Green Belt is minimised. In considering a planning application for new development regard will be had to the size, scale, position, screening, enclosures, lighting and design of the proposals to ensure they minimise the impact of the development on the openness of the Green Belt. Where possible, new dwellings should be well-related to existing farm buildings or other dwellings and should be of a size commensurate with the established functional requirement.
Explanation
8.7 To demonstrate an essential functional need, applicants will be required to provide evidence that the business a new dwelling would support is financially stable and justifies a permanent dwelling. Where the need to provide accommodation for rural workers has been accepted and is justified, then it will be necessary to ensure that dwellings are kept available for meeting this need for as long as it exists and the Council will apply an appropriate occupancy condition to ensure the long term future of the dwelling to meet the needs of rural workers. It may be more appropriate to provide temporary accommodation in the short term until the business is established and the need for a permanent dwelling proven. Further guidance to assist the applicant applying for a rural worker's dwelling is provided in the Development in the Green Belt Supplementary Planning Document.
8.8 The Council will expect the applicant to demonstrate the recent pattern of use of the land and buildings and provide information on any dwellings, or buildings suitable for conversion have recently been sold separately from the farmland or rural business. Such a sale could constitute evidence of lack of need for a new dwelling.
8.9 Removal of the occupancy condition will require the applicant to show that the worker no longer needs to live close to the relevant activity and to state why this is the case, and to demonstrate that there is no need or demand for a rural worker's home in the area. Evidence will be required to demonstrate that the home has been put up for sale with a land agent at a price that reflects the
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 45 8 occupancy condition attached to the property for at least 12 months and that there has been no reasonable offer.
8.10 The Council expects a high standard of design that minimises the impact of any new development on the openness and character of the Green Belt. This policy will ensure that applicants building a permanent home to house a rural worker have due regard to the impact new development will have on the openness of the Green Belt.
Policy SP 3
Extensions to Buildings in the Green Belt
In the Green Belt the extension or alteration of an existing building may be appropriate provided that it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building. Consideration will be given to the size, scale, position, screening, enclosures, lighting and design of any such extensions or alterations to existing buildings, to ensure that proposals reflect the architectural style of the original building and / or the vernacular styles in the locality.
Explanation
8.11 Proposals will be assessed in the light of their impact on the Green Belt. The Council issues further guidance (Development in the Green Belt Supplementary Planning Document and with the Householder Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document) to assist applicants in submitting their planning applications and will have regard to to the degree to which proposals are compatible with the guidance issued. The Council considers that an increase in excess of 33% in the volume of the original building would make the proposals disproportionate and therefore inappropriate development in the Green Belt and very special circumstances would need to be demonstrated.
Policy SP 4
Alternative Uses for Buildings within the Green Belt
The change of use or conversion of a building in the Green Belt is acceptable in principle providing that the proposals preserve the openness of the Green Belt and do not conflict with the purposes of including land within the Green Belt. All proposals requiring planning permission will require careful assessment as to the impact and appropriateness of such changes to ensure that all designated and non- designated heritage assets such as the historic, architectural, natural history or landscape value of the building and its setting are taken into account in determining the application. Prior to any conversion of a building it should be demonstrated that the building is of permanent and substantial construction and that, in the case of recreation and sporting facilities, the building is surplus to requirements for its sporting use or for use in connection with sport.
46 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Explanation
8.12 Conversions to other uses of buildings in the Green Belt offer an opportunity to retain assets of character in the countryside. Many buildings are of significant value both in relation to landscape character and natural history. There is a need to protect the landscape character of the countryside and any intrinsic character that the building itself derives from style, layout, materials, detailing and setting. Re-use or adaption of buildings can help to reduce demands for new buildings in the countryside, can encourage new enterprises and can provide jobs in rural areas. Applications for conversions that affect, directly or indirectly designated and non-designated heritage assets, need to be carefully assessed, having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and to ensure that essential features are retained and the details of the conversion are in keeping with the surroundings, in accord with paragraph 135 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
8.13 The Council will need to be assured that the building can withstand conversion without extensive repairs and new build that threaten the vernacular character of the building. The applicants should ensure that the new use is sympathetic to the rural character. The creation of a residential curtilage around newly converted buildings can sometimes have a harmful effect on the openness of the Green Belt, proposals should therefore demonstrate that change of use of a rural building to residential use does not impact on the openness of the Green Belt. The Council may remove permitted development rights to ensure that harm to the Green Belt is minimised.
8.14 An application for building conversion will require a full measured survey including structural and condition surveys. For a building to be of permanent and substantial construction it must have walls and a roof, be structurally sound and not require significant re-building, cladding or significant external alterations. The Council has prepared further guidance to assist and advise applicants in preparing their proposals, set out in the Development in the Green Belt Supplementary Planning Document.
8.15 The re-use of an existing building for other purposes should not result in a significantly greater effect than the present use on the openness of the Green Belt. Diversification of the land will not justify activities that harm the openness of the Green Belt.
8.16 Alternative uses requiring planning permission will need to meet the requirements of other policies, appropriate to the use proposed, within the Local Plan.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 47 8
Policy SP 5
Replacement Buildings in the Green Belt
The replacement of buildings within the the Green Belt is not inappropriate provided that the new building is in the same use and not materially larger than the one it replaces. However replacement buildings will not be permitted where they would result in the loss of a building which makes a positive contribution to the surrounding landscape character or the building is of local architectural or historic interest - a non designated heritage asset. Replacement buildings must not be significantly more visible than the existing building or buildings. A new permanent structure will not be allowed to replace a temporary building / structure.
Proposals for replacement buildings should not detrimentally affect the character or openness of the Green Belt and all proposals requiring planning permission will require careful assessment as to the impact and appropriateness of the development; consideration will be given to the size, scale, position, screening, enclosures, lighting and design of replacement buildings, to ensure that proposals reflect the vernacular styles in the locality. In considering applications that affect directly or indirectly designated and non-designated heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset.
Explanation
8.17 This policy reflects guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework and advice from English Heritage and is intended to enable the continued protection of the openness and character of the Green Belt and to prevent the loss of a building which makes a positive contribution to the surrounding landscape character or where the building is of local architectural or historic interest. The Council publishes guidance outlining detailed criteria to enable the successful replacement of buildings within the Green Belt in the Development in the Green Belt Supplementary Planning Guidance. This guidance indicates that the Council considers that an increase in excess of 10% in the volume of the existing building would make the proposals materially larger and therefore inappropriate development in the Green Belt and very special circumstances would need to be demonstrated.
48 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Policy SP 6
New Agricultural or Forestry Buildings or Structures in the Green Belt
Planning applications for new agricultural or forestry buildings or structures must demonstrate that the building or structure is needed, designed and constructed solely for the purposes of agriculture or forestry. The use of appropriate planning conditions will ensure that any new building not used for agricultural purposes within ten years of its construction shall be removed. New agricultural buildings should be kept close to existing buildings, relate well to those buildings and make best use of trees, walls and other landscape features. New agricultural or forestry buildings should not detrimentally affect the character or openness of the Green Belt and all proposals will require careful assessment as to the impact and appropriateness of the development; consideration will be given to the size, scale, position, screening, enclosures, lighting and design of the buildings, to ensure that proposals are justified, and that any harm or potential harm to the openness of the Green Belt is minimised.
Explanation
8.18 Planning applications for new agricultural or forestry buildings or structures should be accompanied by a full explanation of the agricultural or forestry proposals with which they are associated, to enable a thorough and proper assessment of the need for the new agricultural or forestry building or structure. The Council will expect proposals for new buildings and or structures to reflect the requirements of this policy and be proportionate in size to meet the functional need of the building.
Policy SP 7
Infilling Development within the Green Belt
In Green Belt villages, identified below, limited infilling, may be acceptable where the proposals can demonstrate that the character of the area will not be eroded. Infilling means the filling of a small gap in an otherwise built up frontage. Any development that does take place should not detract from the character and appearance of such villages.
Explanation
8.19 The Council defines a small gap as a gap which fronts onto a highway and has a width less than 20 metres between the existing buildings. Any proposals for such development should be discussed with the Local Planning Authority before the submission of a planning application. Further guidance is set out in the Development in the Green Belt Supplementary Planning Document.
8.20 The villages to which this policy applies are: Brampton-en-le-Morthen, Firbeck, Gildingwells, Hooton Levitt, Hooton Roberts, Letwell, Ravenfield, Thorpe Salvin, Ulley, Wentworth. Core Strategy
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 49 8
Policy CS7 also sets out the circumstances in which affordable housing within Green Belt villages may be acceptable.
8.21 Development proposals should demonstrate that pathways both official and unofficial within the village, will be maintained to enable local people to continue to access green space and to move around within the village without obstacles from new development.
Policy SP 8
Previously Developed Sites within the Green Belt
In instances where existing activities are located within the Green Belt, proposals for limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites, whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), may be considered acceptable, provided that they would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purposes of including land within it, than the existing development. All proposals will require careful assessment and agreement prior to their submission, as to the impact and appropriateness of such changes and to the long term sustainability of the proposals including the location of the previously developed site.
Consideration will be given to the size, volume, massing, scale, position, siting, screening, enclosures, lighting and design of new buildings or structures to ensure that any harm or potential harm to the openness of the Green Belt is minimised.
Explanation
8.22 Future development proposals for these sites will be carefully scrutinised to ensure that there will be no greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purposes of including land within it than the existing development. Any proposals for partial redevelopment should be put forward in the context of comprehensive, long-term plans for the site as a whole. For the purposes of this policy, infill will be taken as development between existing permanent buildings. One example is Aven Industrial Park, east of Maltby, located in the Green Belt. Over previous years the Council has considered it appropriate to approve rationalisation and improvement proposals for this site and this approach may also be pursued with other previously developed sites if appropriate and sustainable. Policy CS1 of the Core Strategy sets out the Spatial Strategy and Settlement Hierarchy to guide the delivery of new development in the Borough and regard will be had to the location of development proposals within the Green Belt. It is highly unlikely that it will be appropriate to grant planning permission for residential development on previously developed sites that do not accord with the settlement hierarchy; are remote from existing services and facilities including public transport networks and would promote commuting by private vehicles. Further guidance is set out in the Development in the Green Belt Supplementary Planning Document.
50 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Policy SP 9
Proposals for Outdoor Sport, Outdoor Recreation and Cemeteries in the Green Belt.
Provision of appropriate facilities for outdoor sport, outdoor recreation and cemeteries, will be acceptable as long as they preserve the openness of the Green Belt and do not conflict with the purposes of including land within it providing that:
a. proposals will not give rise to undue disturbance caused by an increase in noise, the attraction of significant numbers of additional people into the area, or an increase beyond current levels of traffic at any one time; b. they are sited and designed so as to avoid any adverse impact on identified landscape character, heritage, nature conservation or agricultural interests; c. the proposals would not pollute surface and groundwater; and d. they can satisfy other relevant policies of the Plan and National Guidance; e. the applicant will need to demonstrate that the impact of the proposals will not be detrimental to the preservations of the openness of the Green Belt or to its character.
Applicants will will be expected to prepare appropriate Management Plans for new sports development or extensions to existing sports facilities in the Green Belt, careful consideration will need to be given to an appropriate lighting strategy.
Explanation
8.23 Many outdoor sport and recreational activities are compatible with protecting the openness of the Green Belt. However, some sporting activities can be difficult to locate in the countryside, because of their scale, likely increase in noise and traffic disturbance and, conflict with nature conservation interests. The environmental impact of the proposed activity needs careful consideration and proposals for development of facilities should demonstrate that they will preserve the openness of the Green Belt. Consideration will be given to the impact on other land-uses in the locality, especially agriculture and forestry, and on areas of heritage, nature conservation or landscape value. Regard will also be had to the site and its location within the wider Green Belt. In assessing impact, the level and type of vehicular, cycle and pedestrian traffic likely to be generated will be taken into account and careful consideration will need to given to the preparation of a lighting strategy. A robust Management Plan will demonstrate how mitigation measures can be put in place to overcome detailed concerns and issues.
8.24 Proposals for new buildings or extensions to existing buildings, to accommodate ancillary facilities in support of outdoor sport and recreation should not detrimentally affect the character or openness of the Green Belt. All proposals will require careful assessment as to the impact and appropriateness of the development; consideration will be given to the size, scale, position, screening, enclosures, lighting and sustainable design and construction of new buildings and the provision of measures to improve access for the disabled. In general, it will be important that outdoor elements predominate in any scheme and, where ancillary indoor elements are proposed, they should respect the existing landscape in their scale and prominence. Where ancillary buildings are necessary, they
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 51 8 should wherever possible relate to an existing grouping of buildings, rather than introduce new, built development into an open landscape.
8.25 It is acknowledged that cemetery developments can cause contamination of surface and groundwater and when considering the location of cemeteries regard should be had to advice contained in the Environment Agency GP3: Groundwater Principles and Practice Note 2012. 8.2 Creating mixed and attractive places to live
Policy SP 10
Housing Delivery
Five Year Housing Supply
The Council is committed to assessing the five year supply against the five year requirement plus 20% until it can be demonstrated that the Council is consistently meeting its housing requirement. The Council shall consider that it is consistently meeting its housing requirement if:
a. The Council can demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable sites plus 20%: and b. In the same year the Council has equalled or exceeded its annual target for net additional dwellings per annum for three consecutive years.
From the following year onwards the Council will assess the five year supply against the five year target plus 5%, unless the Council fails to reach its target for net additional dwellings for three consecutive years.
Explanation
8.26 Core Strategy Policy CS6 sets out our approach to the release of allocated housing land. Policy SP10 sets out how the Council will ensure that an adequate supply of housing land is maintained and, as far as is possible, ensure that the most sustainable sites are delivered.
8.27 Where local planning authorities have consistently failed to meet housing targets, National Planning Policy requires the addition of a 20% buffer to the five year target against which Local Planning Authorities compare the supply of deliverable sites. It follows, therefore that when a local planning authority is meeting its housing targets they can revert to the standard 5% buffer required by the NPPF and this policy sets out the conditions under which this buffer will no longer be applied.
8.28 The rate of delivery of housing will be monitored and positive action taken to ensure that a continuous five year, plus 20%, supply of deliverable housing land is maintained, in accordance with Core Strategy Policy CS34
52 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.29 The five year target is calculated by taking five times the annual target of 850 net additional dwellings per annum plus a five year share of the remaining shortfall against the target since 2008; with any shortfall being distributed evenly through the remaining years of the plan period.
Policy SP 11
Development in Housing Areas
Residential areas identified on the Policies Map, whether existing or undeveloped housing allocations, shall be retained primarily for residential uses. All residential uses shall be considered appropriate in these areas and will be considered in light of all relevant planning policies.
Non residential uses will be considered in light of the need to maintain the housing land supply and normally only permitted where they:
a. Are ancillary to the residential nature and function of the area; and b. Are no larger than is required to meet the needs of local residents; and c. Will not have an unacceptable impact on the residential amenity of the area; and d. Satisfy the requirements all other relevant planning policies; and e. Demonstrate how they will be of benefit to the health and well-being of the local population.
Explanation
8.30 Existing residential areas need to be protected to maintain their amenity and character and to ensure that these areas continue to meet ongoing housing needs. Allocated housing sites need to be protected to ensure that planning applications for non-residential uses do not compromise the supply of land for new housing.
8.31 Certain non-residential uses will be allowed in residential areas where they are ancillary and complementary to the main residential use. Such uses could include proposals for convenience shops serving the local area only, social and community facilities, public houses, amenity and local recreational open space. Residential areas are generally considered to be suitable locations for Class B1 employment uses, development proposals will be resisted if the scale of the building and the intensity of use, particularly traffic movements, are detrimental to the appearance and character of the residential area.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 53 8
Policy SP 12
Development on Residential Gardens
Proposals involving development on a garden or group of gardens, including infill of corner plots, will only be permitted where:
a. The proposals would still allow for a comprehensive scheme to be achieved; and b. the proposal does not harm the amenity of existing properties by overlooking, loss of privacy or obtrusiveness; and c. development would not result in harm to the character of the area.
Explanation
8.32 Small housing sites within residential areas can make an important contribution to the borough’s housing provision. However it has been recognised for many years that residential development on back land areas can present problems in terms of residential amenity and convenience of access.
8.33 Gardens are an important part of the character of housing areas and contribute towards the quality of life enjoyed by residents. They provide a setting for buildings and allow for privacy and amenity to be enjoyed by residents. Careful planning is therefore required to ensure development on garden land is acceptable especially if the new buildings are to be successfully integrated into existing residential areas.
8.34 The nature of garden sites can mean that they are often in multiple ownerships, which can present issues of land assembly. The Council is keen to ensure that where permission is granted a comprehensive scheme could be delivered in the future. Developers will therefore be required to demonstrate that a comprehensive scheme can be implemented.
8.35 The Council will need to be satisfied that the proposed development will not affect the amenity of existing properties by overlooking, loss of privacy, or obtrusiveness. This will require careful consideration of the type, scale and massing of the proposals, the location of habitable rooms with windows, provision of sufficient space for gardens if these are appropriate, and landscape screening to sensitive boundaries.
8.36 Development proposals will not be acceptable where they are detrimental to the character of the area. Consideration will be given to the contribution the site makes to its surroundings, taking account of the house types in the area, the street pattern, the grain of development and landscaping. The proposed layout should provide appropriate spacings between the new dwellings to complement the existing pattern of development in the area.
8.37 Access to the proposed development will be critical. This can often be dependant upon the loss of an existing property on the street frontage to enable suitable road access and if appropriate to adoptable standards, into the site. Consideration will be given to whether the creation of an access road would result in the loss of amenity for existing residents or visually disrupt the character and
54 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 appearance of an existing street frontage, taking account of the form and rhythm of development, and the presence and pattern of trees in the street scene.
8.38 Given the sensitive issues above the Council will also give consideration to the removal of permitted development rights for extensions, window or door insertion and the conversion of integral garages to living accommodation. (Permitted development rights define the amounts and type of development that do not require express planning permission.)
Policy SP 13
Gypsy and Traveller Sites
Proposals for Gypsy and Traveller sites will be supported in towns and villages on sites suitable for residential uses. When considering proposals the suitability of sites shall be considered in accordance with the criteria in Core Strategy Policy CS3, with particular consideration given to the following matters:
a. no significant harm to the built or natural heritage including trees, hedgerows, and biodiversity; b. no significant harm to local amenity, infrastructure or agriculture; c. safe and convenient access to the highway network; d. good access to community services by non-car modes; e. no development within areas with a high probability of flooding.
In all cases sites will be expected to meet the following requirements:
f. sufficient space for the planned number of caravans, commercial vehicles, play space, amenity blocks and the safe circulation of vehicles; g. the scale of the site should not dominate the nearest settled community; h. good existing screening of the site and/or the carrying out of suitable landscaping.
Explanation
8.39 The criteria presented in this policy have been formulated with regard to "Planning Policy for Traveller Sites" (DCLG, March 2012) which states that criteria based policies should be fair and should facilitate the traditional and nomadic life of travellers while respecting the interests of the settled community. Furthermore, the Council expects that any future Gypsy and Traveller provision will follow the principles of design laid out in “Designing Gypsy and Traveller Sites: Good Practice Guide” (DCLG, 2008), or any future replacement guidance.
8.40 This policy shall be applied both when selecting sites for allocation and for proposals on unallocated land.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 55 8
8.3 Supporting a dynamic economy
Policy SP 14
Land Identified for Business Use
Within areas allocated for business use on the Policies Map, development proposals falling within Use Class B1b, and B1c will be permitted. Offices falling within Use Class B1a will only be acceptable where they are ancillary to the main proposed use or the proposals satisfy the requirements of Policy CS12 and other relevant planning policy.
Development proposals within Use Classes B2 and B8 will not be acceptable. Other uses will be considered on their merits in line with Policy SP16.
Explanation
8.41 Within sites allocated for business use on the Policies Map development will be restricted to uses falling within the B1 business use class, which comprises industry, research and development and office uses (excluding those falling within class A2) which can be carried out in a residential area.
8.42 Offices are identified in national planning policy as main town centre uses and as such where offices falling within Use Class B1 form the main use of any proposed development they are subject to the sequential approach set out in Core Strategy Policy CS12 and the NPPF. Such office development proposals will only be acceptable where they satisfy the requirements of these policies. However it is also acknowledged that office use can form a key part of business operations. This Policy recognises this, and where it is demonstrably ancillary to the main development, office use will be acceptable within sites allocated for business or industrial and business use.
8.43 Business use sites are situated within or close to residential areas or close to other environmentally sensitive areas such as the Green Belt or community facilities. We continue to support the allocation of such sites particularly where they can help provide local employment opportunities for residents. However these sites are not suitable for other industrial or business uses which may compromise the amenity of adjacent land uses or the amenity of businesses.
Policy SP 15
Land Identified for Industrial and Business Uses
Within areas allocated for industrial and business use on the Policies Map, development proposals falling within Use Classes B1b and B1c, B2 and B8 will be permitted. Offices falling within Use Class B1a will only be acceptable where they are ancillary to the main proposed use or the proposals satisfy the requirements of Policy CS12 and other relevant planning policy.
Development proposals within Use Classes C1, C2, C3 and C4 will not be acceptable. Other uses will be considered on their merits in line with Policy SP16.
56 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Explanation
8.44 Sites allocated for industrial and business use are suitable for a wider range of activities. As well as proposals falling within the B1 business use class, uses within Use Class B2 (for general industrial use) and Use Class B8 (for storage and distribution) will be acceptable in principle. B1, B2 and B8 activities can generally co-exist perfectly satisfactorily.
8.45 Offices are identified in national planning policy as main town centre uses and as such where offices falling within Class B1 form the main use of any proposed development they are subject to the sequential approach set out in Core Strategy Policy CS12 and the NPPF. Such office development proposals will only be acceptable where they satisfy the requirements of these policies. However it is also acknowledged that office use can form a key part of business operations. Policy SP15 recognises this, and where it is demonstrably ancillary to the main development, office use will be acceptable within sites allocated business or industrial and business use.
8.46 Residential uses within Use Classes C2, C3 and C4 will not be acceptable within industrial and business areas due to the amenity and land use conflicts likely to arise.
Policy SP 16
Other Uses Within Business, and Industrial and Business Areas
Within areas allocated for business, or industrial and business use on the Policies Map, uses other than those identified in Policies SP14 and SP15 will be considered on their merit having regard to other relevant planning policies and:
a. their contribution to the range and quality of employment opportunities in the borough; b. compatibility with adjacent existing and proposed land uses and any impact on amenity; c. that adequate provision of employment land would remain within the borough and the locality of the site based upon an assessment of existing land supply (including amount, type, quality and use of land) and current and future demand; and d. that there is compelling evidence which clearly demonstrates that the site is no longer viable for employment use on the basis that:
i. The site or premises have been marketed to the Council's satisfaction for at least 12 months and included both traditional and web-based marketing, and regular advertisement in local, regional and/or national publications as appropriate; and ii. opportunities to re-let premises have been fully explored; and iii. The premises/site have been marketed at a price which is commensurate with market values (based on evidence from recent and similar transactions and deals) and iv. it has been demonstrated that the terms and conditions set out in the lease are reasonable and attractive to potential businesses, and that no reasonable offer has been refused.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 57 8
Explanation
8.47 Policies SP14 and SP15 set out the uses which will be acceptable and unacceptable within business, and industrial and business use areas. These areas encompass sites allocated for new economic development and sites where business, or industrial and business uses are predominant or will be considered acceptable.
8.48 In order to ensure that sufficient suitable employment land remains available whilst allowing flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances, Policy SP16 establishes that proposals for alternative uses will be considered on their merits and take account of a range of factors.
8.49 The impact of the proposed development on the character of the area, and the compatibility with adjacent existing and proposed land uses will be considered, along with any impact on amenity.
8.50 Proposed uses may be acceptable within areas allocated for other uses. Therefore the Council will require evidence that there are no suitable alternative locations available or likely to become available within a reasonable period of time for the proposed development. This should be considered on a borough-wide basis unless compelling evidence can be provided justifying the location of the proposed development within a particular locality.
8.51 The Council also needs to be satisfied that viable employment sites are not lost and that alternative development does not jeopardise the Local Plan’s strategy for meeting the borough’s employment requirements. We will therefore require evidence that adequate provision of employment land would remain within the borough and the locality of the site based upon an assessment of existing land supply (including amount, type, quality and use of land) and current and future demand. This should have regard to the Council’s latest Employment Land Review.
8.52 To ensure that viable employment sites are not lost to alternative uses applicants should provide evidence that the land or property has been advertised on the open market for at least 12 months. The Council expects marketing to have taken place at least four times at roughly equal periods over the year, at a realistic price which reflects its value as employment land or an employment enterprise and that no reasonable offer has been refused.
8.53 The Council will seek evidence that a range of appropriate marketing methods have been employed, that opportunities to re-let premises have been fully explored and that the terms and conditions set out in the lease are reasonable and attractive to potential businesses.
58 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014
Policy SP 17
Industrial and Business Development in Relation to Sensitive Areas of Land- use
Where occupied housing or other sensitive land uses are situated within or close to areas allocated for industrial and business use or Mixed Use Areas, all development must have regard to the presence of the sensitive land-use and be designed in such a way that residential amenities or the special characteristics of the sensitive area are not adversely affected. Sensitive land uses should not be located close to industrial and business uses where the environmental needs of residents or other occupiers or users of the proposed development would constrain the neighbouring business or industrial activities.
Explanation
8.54 In some areas, the Local Plan provides for a change in land-use character, with a past predominant land-use being replaced by another. This may, of necessity, be a gradual process where the transition takes place over several years. Policy SP17 ensures that where sensitive land uses are close to areas allocated for industrial and business use or Mixed Use Areas, that amenity considerations are taken into account in any development proposals. Sensitive uses could include, but are not limited, to housing, residential institutions, hotels, hostels, community facilities including health and education, certain leisure uses, land allocated as Green Belt, and wildlife, geology and heritage sites.
8.55 In instances where a residential area or other ‘sensitive’ area such as Green Belt or a Heritage Site adjoins an industrial and business area, development of land in close proximity to the ‘sensitive’ area will be restricted to Class B1 use or other uses which do not harm the amenity or character of the area. Wherever possible, the amenity of adjoining areas will be protected from the effects of industrial activity by a requirement in any new development for suitably landscaped and contoured buffer strips and appropriate boundary treatment, including screen walls or fences.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 59 8
Policy SP 18
Waverley Advanced Manufacturing Park
To protect and enhance this regionally important cluster development within the Advanced Manufacturing Park, as shown on the Policies Map, will be restricted to proposals within Classes B1(b) research & development / studios / laboratories / high-tech, B1(c) Light Industry; and B2 general industry (specifically advanced manufacturing / engineering) which can demonstrate that they contribute towards the advanced manufacturing and materials sector. Proposals for B1(a) offices will only be acceptable where they are ancillary to the main use of the Advanced Manufacturing Park.
Alternative employment proposals within Classes B1 and B2 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order, 1987 (as amended) will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that:
a. The proposed use would be ancillary to and support the existing and future occupiers of the Advanced Manufacturing Park; or b. there is no reasonable prospect of the site being developed for advanced manufacturing and materials purposes, and c. development would not compromise the development of other sites within the Advanced Manufacturing Park for uses within the advanced manufacturing and materials sector, and d. there are no other sites suitable for the proposed development which are available or will become available within a reasonable period of time
Explanation
8.56 The Advanced Manufacturing Park (AMP) at Waverley has developed as a regionally important cluster contributing towards Rotherham's economic transformation. It provides land for new jobs within the priority advanced manufacturing and materials sector. Core Strategy Policy CS9 encourages the development of this cluster by supporting proposals for complementary uses. Policy SP18 makes clear that the Council, in determining planning applications, will support development proposals which demonstrate that they contribute towards the advanced manufacturing and materials sector. This may include research and development intensive space; development proposals that are suitable for delivering the roll out of high technology, research and development and hybrid space. Proposals that encompass a mix of industrial space and offices, ideal for modern manufacturers providing ‘manu’-services, and in growth sectors such as low carbon industries and medical technology will all be supported.
8.57 In helping to maintain and enhance this cluster, the site is not considered suitable for more general employment uses which could be accommodated in other locations. Therefore alternative uses within Use Classes B1 and B2 will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that they would be ancillary to and support the existing and future occupiers of the Advanced Manufacturing Park; or the site has no reasonable prospect of being developed for advanced manufacturing and materials purposes, and that there are no other suitable sites suitable for the proposed development which are available or will become available within a reasonable period of time. It will also be important
60 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 to ensure that any alternative development does not compromise the development of other sites within the Advanced Manufacturing Park for the preferred uses identified in Policy SP18.
Policy SP 19
Former Maltby Colliery
The reuse of land and premises at Maltby Colliery as shown on the policies map, for employment purposes will be supported in principle; in particular, where they utilise the existing rail head and National Grid connections. Appropriate uses will include:
a. B2
b. Sui Generis waste, energy or other uses not falling clearly into Use class B2
A masterplan for these uses will be required to ensure the comprehensive redevelopment of the site.
8.58 Mining operations at the colliery had been anticipated to continue for much of the plan period. However, due to a range of geological, technical and safety issues associated with underground mining, operations in the mine are now to cease. This has resulted in a fully serviced, rail connected site becoming available which has been subject to significant development. Allied to this, the potential also exists to create a low carbon development as the site is fully serviced and has existing infrastructure to capture mine methane and to export resultant power generated to the National Grid.
8.59 Uses related to waste, energy and composting are likely to be needed within the plan period and making provision for these on a site which has historically seen non-confirming / bad neighbour uses is considered appropriate. Consequently, the site is not suitable for more general employment uses (B1/B8) which may compromise the development of the preferred uses identified in SP19 and could be accommodated in other locations around the Borough.
8.60 Any proposals need to make best use of the site's unique assets to achieve an exemplar scheme. Production of a Masterplan is therefore advocated to spatially illustrate how such proposals will be created.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 61 8
Policy SP 20
Todwick North
Within the site, as shown on the Policies Map, development proposals for B1b, B1c (business) and B2 (general industry) will be permitted and should form the majority of floorspace within the area. Some limited B8 (storage and distribution) will also be acceptable. Offices falling within Use Class B1a will only be acceptable where they are ancillary to the main proposed use or the proposals satisfy the requirements of Policy CS12 and other relevant planning policy. Other uses will not be permitted.
The site is intended to attract major inward investment by accommodating one or more large users or through the development of smaller plots which comprise a high quality business park. Where smaller plots are developed the preferred outcome is the creation of a cluster responding to the borough’s economic priorities set out in Core Strategy Policy CS9.
Development will be of a high quality of design and of an appropriate scale that is sensitive to its surroundings. A high quality landscaping scheme will be required, incorporating and enhancing natural environmental features. Appropriate mitigation of adverse impact on ecological interests will be required.
Masterplanning will be required in line with Core Strategy Policy CS2, to enable a comprehensive vision for development of this area.
Explanation
8.61 The Council’s strategy has provided a range of types and qualities of development site. Numerous other sites are available to provide for more general industrial and business needs. This site is allocated to help attract major inward investment into Rotherham and the City Region, and deliver a premium business park with opportunities for high quality office, business and industrial development.
8.62 The Council will seek to ensure that the opportunities presented by the site are maximised. The site offers potential for a single, or several large occupiers whose requirements cannot be met on other sites. Alternatively it also offers an opportunity for smaller plots to be developed. Where this is the case the preference is for the site to contribute towards the borough’s economic priorities.
8.63 Development here will take advantage of recent improvements to upgrade the stretch of the A57 between Junction 31 of the M1 and Todwick Crossroads. There are also bus services in South Anston with stops on Sheffield Road (A57) that could serve the development but further provision may be required.
8.64 In delivering a high quality, prestigious business location the Council will pay particular attention to the quality of design and landscaping, and how this incorporates and enhances natural environmental features. Masterplanning will be vital to ensure that a comprehensive vision for the site’s development is achieved.
62 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.65 Recent ecological surveys of the wider area confirm the presence of a number of priority habitats forming a valuable farmland mosaic. The site is likely to support a range of wildlife including bat species. The wintering bird survey recorded 52 species with 49 species actively using the site for feeding, resting or roosting; 15 of these species are designated or are of, conservation concern. The site should be considered of importance to these species for winter foraging but also, for the majority of these species, as a breeding site. The large site and mosaic of habitats support a significant range and number of bird species. Taking account of this the Council will ensure that appropriate mitigation of adverse impact on ecological interests is in place as part of any planning permission.
Policy SP 21
Tourism and Visitor Developments
All proposals for tourism and visitor developments will be assessed against the capacity of the area to cope with the pressures generated and will be required to demonstrate that:
a. they do not conflict with policies to conserve the landscape, the natural environment including Green Belt policies and the Borough’s heritage;
b. they have regard to agricultural and other rural land-use interests and the need to conserve the best and most versatile farmland;
c. they make adequate arrangements for the storage of plant, goods and materials;
d. they have regard to the opportunities available for the provision of public transport;
e. conflict with adjoining land-uses with particular regard to pollution, nuisance, health, safety and visual intrusion has been minimised; and
f. proposals comply with all other relevant planning policies.
Explanation
8.66 Core Strategy Policy CS11 identifies the important role that tourism and the visitor economy play in contributing to the diversification of Rotherham's economy and enhancing Rotherham as a visitor location. Whilst proposals for tourism and visitor developments will be strongly encouraged, it is recognised that there will be pressures for development in sensitive locations. It is vital that these developments do not exceed the capacity of the immediate environment to accommodate them. In addition to Policy CS11, Policy SP21 sets out the factors which development proposals will be required demonstrate.
8.67 Proposals should demonstrate that they do not conflict with policies to conserve the landscape, the natural environment and the Borough’s heritage including Green Belt policy, and that they have regard to agricultural and other rural land-use interests, including the need to conserve the best and most versatile farmland. The design of proposals should ensure that appropriate arrangements are
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 63 8 in place for the storage of plant, goods and materials. Compliance with other Local Plan policies will ensure that proposals are suitable in terms of the ability of the highway network to cope with the traffic generated in terms of the number, type and size of vehicles involved, during construction and after occupation, and that they make adequate arrangements for site access, local traffic circulation, parking and servicing.
8.68 Proposals should show that the potential for the provision of public transport to serve the development has been considered. Given the potentially sensitive nature of some locations it will be particularly important that conflict with adjoining land-uses is minimised, especially with regard to pollution, nuisance, health, safety and visual intrusion.
64 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Policy SP 22
Development Within Town, District and Local Centres
1 Main Shopping Areas
Main shopping areas, consisting of primary and, where they are defined, secondary shopping frontages, identified on the inset maps, included at Appendix 13, are the priority locations for new and existing shopping facilities. New retail development within these areas will be supported. Non-retail uses at ground floor level will only be supported where the requirements of Policies SP23 and SP24 are met. Proposals for residential use above ground floors will be supported providing that the development would not compromise the successful operation of the ground floor premises for commercial uses.
2 Acceptable uses
Within Town, District and Local shopping centres but outside of Main Shopping Areas, development proposals for the following uses will be acceptable in principle subject to meeting the requirements of other relevant planning policies:
a. A1 shops b. A2 financial and professional services c. A3 restaurants and cafes d. A4 drinking establishments e. A5 hot food takeaways f. B1 offices g. D1 non-residential institutions h. D2 assembly and leisure i. C1 hotels j. C3 dwelling houses k. Theatres l. Retail warehouse clubs m. Casinos n. Amusement arcades o. Taxi booking offices p. Public toilets, baby changing and breast feeding facilities.
Explanation
8.69 Retail and service centres are much more than a collection of shops. Associated services and outlets providing for visiting members of the public are appropriate and essential; banks, cafes, pubs, estate agents and take-aways are just a few examples, all of which can reinforce pedestrian flows and are preferable to long-term vacancies. The following centres are defined on the Policies Map:
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 65 8
Table 9 Hierarchy of Retail Centres
Hierarchy Centre
Principal town centre Rotherham town centre
Town centre Dinnington Maltby Wath-upon-Dearne
District centre Kiveton Park Parkgate Swallownest Swinton Wickersley
Local centre Bassingthorpe Farm - Urban Village (indicative) Woodlaithes Road / Acorn Way, Bramley Main Street / Cross Street, Bramley East Bawtry Road, Brecks Brinsworth Lane, Brinsworth Herringthorpe Valley Road/Wickersley Road, Broom Middle Lane, Clifton Doncaster Road, Dalton Doncaster Road/ Far Lane, East Dene Fitzwilliam Road, Eastwood Union Street, Harthill Chaucer Road, Herringthorpe St Johns Green, Kimberworth Park Hangsman Lane, Laughton Common Muglet Lane, Maltby Kilnhurst Road/Queen Street, Rawmarsh Kilnhurst Road, Rawmarsh The Parade, Rawmarsh Bellows Road, Rawmarsh Harding Avenue / Symonds Avenue, Rawmarsh Swallow Wood Road / Sheffield Road, Swallownest Church Street, Swinton Woodhouse Green, Thurcroft Green Arbour Road, Thurcroft Rotary Drive, Wath Orgreave Square, Waverley (indicative) Waterfront, Waverley (indicative)
8.70 The Core Strategy identifies the need to plan for 9,000 sqm of convenience goods and 11,000 sqm of comparison goods floorspace. To meet this requirement the following have been identified as development sites:
Rotherham town centre
Rotherham outdoor markets complex (5,000 sqm) Drummond Street car park (5,000 sqm) Land at Corporation Street (1,000 sqm)
66 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Dinnington Town Centre
Land at Constable Lane / Littlefield Road (3,500 sqm)
Bramley Local Centre (Main Street / Cross Street)
Land at Main Street / Bawtry Road (6,000 sqm)
Rawmarsh
Land at Harding Avenue / Symonds Avenue (5,200 sqm.
8.71 The markets complex in Rotherham town centre provides a mix of indoor and outdoor markets plus a number of individual units. The markets are an important asset in Rotherham town centre however the outdoor market is under-utilised and there is potential for these stalls to be relocated should a redevelopment opportunity come forward. Redevelopment to include new retail units has the potential to enhance the vitality of the markets complex. Drummond Street car park lies adjacent to the new Tesco store and is well placed to provide opportunities for further development at the northern end of Rotherham town centre. Land at Corporation Street consists of properties which have been vacant for a number of years following fire damage. The sites are detrimental to the quality of the town centre environment and redevelopment would improve the street scene and contribute towards the vitality and viability of the town centre.
8.72 The site at Dinnington town centre has some constraints given the surrounding roads and roundabout; however it is well placed to accommodate further accessible development, situated some 50m from the bus interchange.
8.73 Land at Main Street / Bawtry Road, Bramley is currently subject to an application for planning permission for convenience food retail. The site is well placed within an existing local centre to meet the requirements of the Core Strategy.
8.74 Land at Harding Avenue / Symonds Avenue is allocated for development as a Local Centre.
8.75 These sites are shown on the Polices Map, however for clarity due to their smaller size, the sites at Corporation Street, Rotherham and Constable Lane / Littlefield Road, Dinnington are shown on the inset maps below.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 67 8
Map 1 Retail Development Site: LDF0823 Corporation Street, Rotherham
Map 2 Retail Development Site: LDF0831 Littlefield Road / Constable Lane, Dinnington
68 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.76 Core Strategy Policies CS12 and CS13 support Rotherham's retail and service centres as the main locations for retail, leisure and other town centre uses. In line with these policies the borough's town, district and local centres are defined on the Policies Map. Within town and district centres Main Shopping Areas consist of Primary Shopping Frontages (which include a high proportion of retail uses) and where appropriate Secondary Shopping frontages (which provide opportunities for a diversity of uses). These are defined on the maps at appendix 13. Local centres are considered too small to require the identification of such areas.
8.77 In line with National Planning Policy, Main Shopping Areas are the areas within Rotherham's centres where retail development is concentrated, and will be the primary locations for new shopping developments. Whilst the emphasis will be upon retaining and encouraging new retail developments within the Primary Shopping Area, it is recognised that other non-retail uses can contribute to the vitality and viability of centres. Policies SP23 and SP24 therefore set out the approach to development within Primary and Secondary Shopping Frontages. For the purposes of this policy retail is defined as uses falling within Class A1 of The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended).
8.78 Policy SP22 sets out the uses which will be acceptable in principle within town, district and local centres. It recognises the role that housing can play in supporting the vitality and viability of centres by supporting residential proposals within centres. Whilst acknowledging that residential uses within centres may be subject to levels of noise and activity not experienced in traditional housing areas, the Council will seek to ensure the amenity of residents; for example through mitigation measures such as sound proofing. Housing will be limited to above ground floor level within Main Shopping Areas, recognising the importance of these areas as the focus for shopping facilities. This also recognises the need to support mixed use development within centres, with active uses at ground floor level. Therefore housing proposals in Main Shopping Areas will only be supported where the development would not compromise the successful operation of the ground floor premises for commercial uses.
8.79 Recognising the need to promote welcoming, family friendly environments, Policies SP22, SP23 and SP24 clarify that proposals which deliver accessible public toilets, baby changing and breast feeding facilities will also be supported within town, district and local centres. In particular the Council will encourage and support the provision of 'Changing Places' toilets in addition to standard accessible toilets. These toilets have enough space for disabled people and their carers or personal assistant(s), and the right equipment, including a height adjustable changing bench and hoist.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 69 8
Policy SP 23
Primary shopping frontages
To protect and enhance the concentration of A1 shops within Primary Shopping Frontages proposals for A2 financial and professional services and A3 restaurants and cafés uses at ground floor level will be supported where they would:
a. not dilute the concentration of A1 shops in the Primary Shopping Frontage below 70%; and
b. not result in three or more non A1 uses in adjoining premises, or add to existing concentrations of non-A1 uses; and
c. not detract from the appearance and character of the frontage; and
d. retain an active frontage and where the proposal relates to a premises with an existing shop front, the shop window would continue to be used for display purposes
Uses other than those identified above (except for public toilets, baby changing and breast feeding facilities) will not normally be supported.
Explanation
8.80 Within town and district centres Primary Shopping Frontages have been defined which include a high proportion of retail uses. These represent the main shopping areas within centres. The Council’s policy is not to prevent uses which genuinely complement shops and shopping, and which contribute to the attractiveness, convenience and general sense of liveliness of centres, nor to restrict them unreasonably to upper floors and secondary frontages. However a certain degree of regulation is necessary to ensure that non-shop uses do not undermine the retail attraction of the centre.
8.81 In order to maintain the shopping focus within these areas the Council will seek to ensure that A1 shop uses in Primary Shopping Frontages are not diluted below 70%; considered on a street basis rather than the percentage across the whole Primary Shopping Frontage. For the purposes of this policy the Council will assess the impact of proposed development on the percentage of A1 units in the specific street within the Primary Shopping Frontage, taking account of units on both sides of the street.
8.82 The Council will also seek to ensure that proposals do not result in three or more units being in non-A1 use, or that proposals do not add to existing concentrations of non-shop uses.
8.83 The quality and appearance of shopping areas is vital to ensure that they remain attractive to visitors. The Council will therefore expect non-A1 uses to contribute positively to the vitality of the Main Shopping Area and not detract from its character and appearance. Uses should retain an active frontage and where there is an existing shop front, the shop window should continue to be used for display purposes.
70 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.84 The Council will support A2 and A3 uses within Primary Shopping frontages, subject to the requirements above. However other town centre uses are not considered appropriate; in particular new drinking establishments and hot food takeaways are more appropriately located within other parts of town or district centres. This does not affect existing uses already within centres, but will be applied to new development or proposals for a change of use.
8.85 Maps showing the defined Primary Shopping frontages are included at appendix 13.
Policy SP 24
Secondary Shopping Frontages
Within Secondary Shopping Frontages in addition to A1 shops, proposals for A2 financial and professional services, A3 restaurants and cafés, A4 drinking establishment uses, D1 non-residential institutions and D2 assembly and leisure at ground floor level will be supported where they would:
a. not dilute the concentration of A1 shops in the Secondary Shopping Frontage below 25%; and
b. make a positive contribution to the vitality of the main shopping area; and
c. not detract from the appearance and character of the frontage; and
d. retain an active frontage and where the proposal relates to a premises with an existing shop front, the shop window would continue to be used for display purposes
Uses other than those identified above (except for public toilets, baby changing and breast feeding facilities) will not normally be supported.
Explanation
8.86 Within Secondary Shopping frontages, whilst the Council wishes to retain the overall shopping character there will be greater flexibility to accommodate other supporting uses at ground floor level; namely A2, A3, and A4 uses, along with D1 and D2 uses.
8.87 The Council will seek to ensure that A1 shop uses in Secondary Shopping Frontages are not diluted below 25%; considered on a street basis rather than the percentage across the whole Primary Shopping Frontage. For the purposes of this policy the Council will assess the impact of proposed development on the percentage of A1 units in the specific street within the Secondary Shopping Frontage, taking account of units on both sides of the street.
8.88 As with Primary Shopping Frontages non-A1 uses will be acceptable where they contribute positively to the vitality of the Main Shopping Area and do not detract from its character and appearance. Uses should retain an active frontage and where there is an existing shop front, the shop window should continue to be used for display purposes.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 71 8
8.89 Maps showing the defined Secondary Shopping frontages are included at appendix 13.
Policy SP 25
Hot Food Takeaways
Hot food takeaways will be permitted within town, district and local centres (but outside of Main Shopping Areas) where they:
a. Would not result in more than 10% of the ground floor units within a defined centre being hot food takeaways; and b. Would not result in more than two A5 units being located adjacent to each other; and c. There are no less than two non-A5 units between hot food takeaways; and d. they will not negatively impact upon the amenity of surrounding businesses or residents
Hot food takeaways will not be permitted where they are within 800 metres of a primary school, secondary school or college, except where they are within a defined town, district or local centre and satisfy the requirements above.
Proposals for hot-food takeaways will be considered in light of their impact on amenity and any mitigating measures. This will include taking account of highway safety and parking, hours of operation, control of odours and cooking smells, litter and waste disposal, and crime and anti-social behaviour.
Explanation
8.90 National planning policy encourages local planning authorities to support local strategies to improve health and wellbeing and help create a healthier built environment. Policy SP25 seeks to address the proliferation of takeaways to help maintain the economic vitality and viability of town, district and local centres and promote healthy lifestyles.
8.91 Hot food takeaways can contribute to the vitality and viability of centres by providing accessible services and promoting linked trips; however they are not supported within Main Shopping Areas, where the retention of the shopping character is considered of central importance. Unless adequately controlled takeaway uses can result in harmful impacts to the vitality and viability of centres, through shutters being closed throughout the day and clustering of premises which detract from an area's character and function. Takeaways will therefore only be permitted where they do not result in more than 10% of the ground floor units within a defined centre being hot food takeaways. To reduce the impact of clustering, proposals will not be permitted where they would result in two or more A5 units being located next to each other, and where there would be less than two non-A5 units between hot food takeaways.
8.92 The Policy also ensures that permission will only be granted where hot food takeaways will not negatively impact on the amenity of nearby businesses and residents, taking account of issues such as litter, smells, anti-social behaviour, noise and general disturbance, parking and traffic problems.
72 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.93 Rotherham's Health Profile (2013, Department for Health) shows that about 20.5% of Year 6 children (age 10/11) are classified as obese, higher than the average for England. It also shows that healthy eating adults and the number of obese adults are significantly worse than the England average. The Child Health Profile (Child and Maternal Health Observatory, 2012) also shows that 8% of reception age children (age 4/5) are obese. Data from the National Obesity Observatory shows a strong association between deprivation and the density of fast food outlets, with more deprived areas having more fast food outlets per 100,000 population. It reveals that as of 2013 Rotherham had 88.9 hot food takeaways per 100,000 population (compared to 86 for England as a whole).
8.94 Policy SP25 therefore seeks to ensure that new hot food takeaways do not increase the exposure of school children and young adults to these uses. Hot food takeaways will only be permitted within town, district and local centres. The Council is aware that proposals may be submitted as a departure to the plan and that other material considerations may be taken into account in determining planning applications. To ensure that access to hot food takeaways are controlled the policy also makes clear that such uses will only be permitted within 800 metres of a primary or secondary school or college where they are within a town, district or local centre and meet the requirements of the policy. For the purposes of this policy 800m will be measured in a direct line from the school/college gate used by pupils.
Policy SP 26
Out-of-Centre Retail Parks and Other Out of Centre Developments
Planning permission for the expansion of the existing out of centre facilities or new out of centre retail development will not be supported unless the proposal satisfies the requirements of Core Strategy Policy CS12.
The Council will seek to ensure that development of main town centre uses (as defined in national planning policy) in out of centre locations remains complementary to defined centres by mitigating the impact of any development. This will be achieved by imposing appropriate conditions including on the use of land and premises, the scale of development, the sub-division of units, and the goods that can be sold from any retail outlet.
Explanation
8.95 Whilst current national planning policy seeks to direct shops towards town, district and local centres, over the years Rotherham has seen the development of a number of free-standing retail units and the establishment of a number of retail parks in out-of-centre locations. Rotherham’s three retail parks, defined on the Policies Map, are located at:
Cortonwood Parkgate Shopping Park, Parkgate Great Eastern Way, Aldwarke
8.96 It is acknowledged that retailers of some ‘comparison’ goods such as carpets, furniture, electrical appliances and DIY products, find it advantageous to move to off-centre or out-of-centre
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 73 8 locations. However our retail parks now tend to include a range of occupiers, including those selling comparison goods which should be located within centres. Along with competition from neighbouring authorities, this has had an impact on the vitality and viability of Rotherham's centres. The independent analyst PMA ranks Rotherham town centre as experiencing the greatest level of competition amongst the 200 UK centres within its Competition Indicator Model (Property Market Analysis, Rotherham PROMS Retail Report, August 2010).
8.97 Whilst acknowledging the role of retail parks and other out-of-centre developments, the Council gives priority to ensuring the vitality and viability of defined town, district and local centres.
8.98 In line with national planning policy the Local Plan policies seek to direct main town centre uses to defined town, district and local centres in the first instance. Core Strategy Policy CS12 sets out how the sequential test will be applied within Rotherham. In particular, it sets out that in the case of bulky goods proposals which may not be able to find sites either in or on the edge of centres, the availability, suitability and viability of vacant premises in retail parks to accommodate the proposed development must be assessed.
8.99 Policy SP26 clarifies that retail parks and other out-of-centre developments should remain complementary to the borough's existing defined centres. To ensure this the Council will mitigate the impact of development and ensure that it does not subsequently change its character unacceptably over time through the use of appropriate planning conditions. These will be dependant upon the development proposed however they could include conditions relating to the use of land and premises, the scale of development, the sub-division of units, and the goods that can be sold from any retail outlet.
74 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.4 Movement and accessibility
Policy SP 27
Sustainable transport for development
Development proposals will be supported where it can be demonstrated that:
a. As a priority, the proposals make adequate arrangements for sustainable transport infrastructure; promoting sustainable and inclusive access to the proposed development by public transport, walking and cycling, including the provision of secure cycle parking, and other non-car transport and promoting the use of green infrastructure networks where appropriate;
b. local traffic circulation, existing parking and servicing arrangements are not adversely affected;
c. the highway network is suitable to cope with the traffic generated in terms of the number, type and size of vehicles involved, during construction and after occupation;
d. schemes take into account good practice guidance published by the Council including transport assessment, travel plans and compliance with local Residential and Commercial Parking Standards to ensure there is a balance struck between access for motor vehicles and the promotion of sustainable access;
The Council expects that other measures to increase and encourage sustainable travel and movement habits through travel plan incentives, such as: bus service enhancements, bus priority schemes, improved or additional bus services, better information and subsidised ticketing, multi modal multi operator, cross boundary travel, are provided. Improvements to existing and new infrastructure, ensuring that any public transport stops are easily accessible by active means, and that opportunities to further enhance walking, cycling and appropriate measures to promote inclusive access, will be sought as appropriate.
Explanation
8.100 This policy strongly prioritises the need for sustainable transport infrastructure for walking, cycling, public transport or other non-car transport and access as set out in Core Strategy Policy CS14. This emphasis captures the key concerns and outcomes arising from the Integrated Impact Assessment. The strong priority to sustainable transport infrastructure will maximise equitable access to services, facilities and employment, minimise reliance on the car and resultant noise and air emissions with potential for significant impacts on biodiversity and the historic environment including improvements and benefits to health.
8.101 The highway network has constraints on the volume and type of traffic that it can accommodate. These relate to the type of road and the volume of traffic which is already using it.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 75 8
A transport assessment is the usual way of determining whether the network can accommodate the traffic generated by a proposed development. This would normally include modelling of the effects on local junctions. Access to a road that already has heavy traffic will probably require some mitigation measures to avoid exacerbating existing problems.
8.102 Core Strategy Policy CS14 was developed to ensure that new development is deliverable but with maximum progression towards the use of sustainable and affordable local transport and with minimum disruption to the transport network. The aim of this policy is to satisfy the requirements of Core Strategy Policy CS14 'Accessible Places and Managing Demand for Travel' and other relevant planning policies including the National Planning Policy Framework. Key to any new development is the transport and highways access for employees, residents and visitors. The local authority’s obligation is to protect people from additional traffic congestion, danger and pollution as a result of new development by ensuring that developments of all sizes and locations include the following:
Sustainable access to the development by public transport, walking and cycling, including measures to improve disabled access. As an example, this could include bus priority schemes, improved or additional bus services, better information and subsidised ticketing or new / improved cycling and walking routes. Measures to ensure that access to and the efficiency of the local and strategic network are not adversely affected and proposals to enhance transport network capacity are put in place where sustainable alternatives cannot deliver the full level of access needed. For example, new road junctions, new roads, traffic management schemes. On-site measures to accommodate car, motorcycle and cycle parking (and occasionally bus, coach or HGV parking) and including park and ride where other sustainable travel choices cannot deliver benefits. Compliance with local Residential and Commercial Parking Standards to ensure there is a balance between access for motor vehicles and the promotion of sustainable access.
8.103 To meet this obligation, Transport Statements, Transport Assessments and Travel Plans will be required as part of the planning process. There are specific thresholds / circumstances that trigger when these are needed:
In most cases a transport statement or transport assessment will be required for all developments likely to have an impact on the local area. In many cases a travel plan will also be required. Any proposed development which doesn't conform to relevant Local Plan policies will be expected to trigger the need for a transport assessment and a travel plan. Other developments generating 30 or more two-way vehicle movements in any hour or 100 per day will require a transport assessment. This will also be a requirement if a development is proposed in an air quality management area; is likely to generate significant freight, HGV or abnormal load movements per year. Other developments generating less than 30 two-way vehicle movements in any hour or 100 per day will require a transport statement.
8.104 Detailed thresholds can be found in the Council’s Transport Assessments, Travel Plans and Parking Standards: Good Practice Guidance that has been published alongside this Document to provide further advice to developers in preparing their proposals. Further work will be undertaken to adopt this guidance, as appropriate as a Supplementary Planning Document.
76 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.105 Transport Assessments and Travel Plans are a valuable tool to mitigate traffic from developments. They should include mitigation measures against agreed trip generation levels, target setting (e.g. for cycling, walking and bus use), monitoring and enforcement. In addition to the trip levels agreed and transport and highways measures put forward through the planning process, the development will be monitored to ensure that the agreed trip levels are not exceeded. All developments that trigger a transport assessment will be required to propose appropriate measures and funding in the event that post development monitoring demonstrates trip generations above the levels agreed through the planning process. Such proposals to be calculated based on the mitigation measures that could deliver either further sustainable measures, network improvements or a combination of the two. The mechanisms used to assess and secure such contributions are outlined in other policies.
8.106 The level of developer contribution requirements will be determined by a number of factors including the existing access to the road, public transport and active travel network, the post development maintenance requirements and the size and nature of development. Developer contribution requirements will be informed by the outputs of the Transport Assessment and subsequent works through the Travel Plan. All mechanisms in the Travel Plan with financial implications must be included in a legal agreement.
8.107 In the event that the trip generations put forward through the Transport Assessment and Travel Plan are exceeded, the local planning authority may enforce use of the funding or agreement for works towards mitigating such impacts and or schemes to reduce the impact in the future.
8.108 It is important to recognise that the move towards sustainable travel will only be achieved if everyone plays their part. Rotherham Borough Council is involved with many projects at grass routes level through School Travel Plans. These plans help raise awareness of sustainable travel amongst school children as well as issues about obesity and inactivity. Many of todays school age generation may grow up to find that motorised travel is less freely available and more expensive than it is now. It is important that within new development transport networks accommodate this likelihood.
Policy SP 28
Development affecting designated “Highways Development Control Lines”
Where a development proposal is likely to affect designated highways development control lines the developer will be required to show how their proposed development will accommodate the relevant future highways improvements or potentially deliver that improvement as part of the development.
Explanation
8.109 Highways Development control lines have been established to protect the alignments of future improvements to the highway network. This process was formalised and the lines are recorded in reports to Cabinet and are included on the Policies Map.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 77 8
8.110 Where a development proposal is likely to affect one of these alignments a developer will be required to show how their proposed development will accommodate the future improvements or potentially deliver that improvement as part of the development.
Policy SP 29
Development affecting Key Routes and the Strategic Road Network
Careful consideration will be given to any potential adverse impacts of development on the Key Transport Routes and the Strategic Road Network. Where a proposal is likely to have transport implications, applicants must set out suitable mitigation measures in their Transport Assessment.
Explanation
8.111 The Key Routes and Strategic Road Network are the main arteries allowing the transport of goods and people to and through the borough. As such they must be protected from the adverse effects of development. These effects primarily take the form of additional vehicle trips that cause congestion and increased queueing at junctions. The analysis of the likely effects of a development on the roads should be addressed by means of a transport assessment. This will identify the scale and nature of the adverse effects. Mitigation should be proposed and modelled as part of the planning application and secured by means of a planning agreement. Where the effects of the development are not severe the developer will be expected to contribute to a future scheme of mitigation where costs are apportioned on the basis of the number of extra trips that the development adds to the network.
Policy SP 30
Delivering Transport Schemes
The Council may in the future identify schemes to improve the borough's transport network. Development involving, or in the vicinity of these schemes, will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that:
a. the land is no longer required for, or meets the needs of, transport schemes; or b. development will not prejudice the ability of the site to meet its requirements as part of any transport scheme; or c. an alternative, appropriate site provides capacity for delivery of the transport scheme; or d. the need for the proposed development outweighs the need to protect the site for transport schemes
Explanation
8.112 Sites identified by the Council, Highways Agency, Network Rail, or the Canal and River Trust for specific schemes (or where a prior transport use is evident) may be required to deliver transport
78 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 schemes as part of the future transport network of the borough. To ensure the deliverability of these schemes Policy SP30 sets out how proposals for unrelated development on, or in the vicinity of any transport scheme will be considered.
8.113 Any form of development which involves or is in close proximity to land required for transport schemes, should consider whether the site is necessary or whether a different location might be more appropriate. Development will be supported where the site is no longer required for, or meets the needs of the transport scheme, or where development will continue to allow delivery of the transport scheme. Development will also be permitted where it can be demonstrated that alternative, suitable sites would allow delivery of the transport scheme or where the proposed development can be shown to outweigh the need to protect the land for transport schemes.
8.114 Some land such as rail track beds which are no longer in use, may be useful in the future for either light rail or freight. Allowing development on such a site would be expensive in the long term. Similarly, canal side locations may be suitable for freight related uses, consequently uses such as retail and housing may not be appropriate.
8.115 Sustainable transport of bulk goods by rail or canal will be more important in future as fossil fuel powered road transport becomes increasingly expensive. The protection of sites suitable for infrastructure to support sustainable bulk transport is important.
Policy SP 31
Motorway Service Areas
The Council will consider proposals for the establishment of additional facilities to meet clearly identified and evidenced needs of motorway travellers on their merits and in the light of Policy SP1 and subject to the other provisions of the Local Plan to mitigate the impact of development on the local road network, landscape, heritage resources and local amenity. Proposals for services should include sustainable refuelling infrastructure.
Explanation
8.116 Motorway service areas provide facilities for travellers alongside motorways and motorway junctions. It is recognised that within Rotherham opportunities for motorway service areas are most likely to occur in the Green Belt where there is a presumption against inappropriate development and planning permission will only be given in exceptional circumstances. Proposals for motorway services will be considered on their merits and the Council will be mindful of the range of facilities for motorway users which already exist in and adjoining the motorway corridors within the Borough and wider sub-region and expect developers to clearly demonstrate the need for additional facilities in seeking to justify exceptions to Green Belt policy. Furthermore, the Council will require developers to mitigate the likely impact of development on the local road network, landscape, heritage resources and local amenity. The Council is keen to encourage sustainable travel options and reduce carbon emissions, therefore proposals for service areas should include sustainable refuelling infrastructure which accommodate alternative means of refuelling such as electric charging points, LPG autogas, compressed natural gas and biodiesel.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 79 8
8.5 Managing the natural and historic environment
Policy SP 32
Canals
The Council will be supportive of proposals for the sensitive restoration and maintenance, to navigable status, of the canals within its boundaries and will, wherever feasible, seek to protect the lines of those canals or an alternative, designated route from developments likely to prejudice any such future restoration and maintenance.
Explanation
8.117 Canals can be a great source of recreational potential, particularly for leisure boating, fishing and walking. The Council recognises the contribution that the canals could make to the overall recreational provision in the Borough and the potential to attract tourists to the area. For the canals in Rotherham to realise this sort of potential a great deal of restoration work will be necessary. Wherever possible and feasible the Council will seek to protect the lines of canals and will be supportive of sensitive restoration proposals.
80 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Policy SP 33
Green Infrastructure and Landscape
The Council will require proposals for new development to provide, as appropriate, green infrastructure and landscape. In preparing planning applications consideration should be given to:
a. the creation, protection, enhancement and management of multi-functional green infrastructure assets and networks proportionate to the scale and impact of the development and to meeting needs of future occupants and users. Opportunities to deliver Green Infrastructure projects identified in the sub-regional strategy for South Yorkshire, refer to the Inset Maps included in the explanatory text below, and other local initiatives as appropriate, should be explored and suitable proposals included within the planning application. The preparation of a Green Infrastructure masterplan for development proposals dependent on their scale and/ or the impact potential development may have on the Green Infrastructure Network and Objectives, will aid decision-making and ensure that appropriate and commensurate consideration is given to Green Infrastructure.
b. sensitively managing change in the landscape through the minimisation of adverse impacts and enhancement of the beneficial impacts of new development.
c. contributing, where appropriate, to the enhancement of the urban fringe and other degraded areas in accordance with identified Landscape Character Area management strategies.
Where development proposals, will most likely result in a significant impact on the Borough's green infrastructure, landscape and visual amenity, the proposals should assess the potential impact and propose how any negative effects will be minimised. In doing so consideration should be given to:
d. alternative site selection;
e. the scale, massing, design, form, layout, orientation and/ or operation of the development;
f. the incorporation of suitable mitigation measures or;
g. where appropriate mitigation measures are not achievable, then development should provide an adequate level of compensation off site.
For major development of more than 10 dwellings, or more than 1,000 square metres of floorspace applicants are expected to undertake site survey, assessment and evaluation of their proposals prior to submission of any planning application, to set out how they have considered the elements listed below, and to clearly set out appropriate mitigation/ remediation and enhancement measures:
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 81 8
h. topography, geology, natural patterns of drainage and proposed water management;
i. the type, location and composition of wildlife habitats and ecological networks;
j. the location and function of green infrastructure including an assessment of existing and potential links and the potential to contribute to wider green infrastructure networks and initiatives;
k. the presence, pattern and composition of existing historic landscape features including hedgerows, field boundaries, ancient and semi-natural woodland and veteran trees;
l. the pattern, distribution and relationship of footpaths, cycleways and roads to settlements;
m. the special qualities and landscape features which contribute to landscape character, local distinctiveness and the setting of neighbouring settlements; and where relevant, adjacent landscape character areas;
n. the visual aspects of the landscape setting including visually sensitive skylines, settlement edges, and the opportunities available to safeguard and enhance important views to and from landscape & historic features of significant local value;
o. proposals should be of an appropriate scale and density for their location;
p. in designing the layout and orientation of development proposals, consideration will need to be given to the function and end use of any proposals;
q. the use of reclaimed materials, vernacular materials and locally occurring species;
r. provision for sustainable long term maintenance and management including climate change adaptation;
Where the prime function of green infrastructure is for recreational open space, development proposals will be primarily considered by Policies 38 to 40 as appropriate.
Explanation
Green Infrastructure
8.118 Green infrastructure is defined by the National Planning Policy Framework to be “a network of multi-functional green space, urban and rural, which is capable of delivering a wide range of environmental and quality of life benefits for local communities”. The Framework requires that Local Plans should set out a strategic approach towards green infrastructure, planning positively for its creation, protection, enhancement and management.
82 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.119 Reference to Core Strategy Policy CS19, highlights that green infrastructure is composed of a network of different assets which can be natural or man made and can perform multiple functions providing a multi-functional network of habitats, green and blue spaces.
8.120 Development proposals which coincide with or have a boundary with existing Green Infrastructure assets, linkages and initiatives will be required to ensure they plan positively for multi-functional Green Infrastructure network protection, enhancement and management, particularly in the Strategic Corridors and Key Project areas.
8.121 A Green Infrastructure Masterplan may be required for major development proposals, or where a significant impact is likely; regard should be had to the following, as appropriate:
the existing and proposed location, assets, links and functions of Green Infrastructure, at a strategic, sub-regional and local level, and the potential development impacts;
the creation of new and enhancement of existing Green Infrastructure to enhance links, increase function, connect places, and to address deficits, priorities, needs and opportunities;
8.122 The Local Plan’s Green Infrastructure policies including Core Strategy Policy CS19, are overarching “umbrella” policies should be read and interpreted in conjunction with a suite of other policies including, green space, biodiversity, flood risk, sustainable design, managing climate change.
8.123 Green Infrastructure corridors and the identification of key projects, have been determined based on evidence work carried out by the Natural England’s Yorkshire and Humber Mapping Project 2010. Developments affecting identified Green Infrastructure assets, links and functions within the Strategic Corridors are considered capable of having a wider impact on the regional and sub regional Green Infrastructure network. The Natural England Mapping Project informed the development of the South Yorkshire Green Infrastructure Strategy and resultant Delivery Plan which identifies Key Projects at a sub regional level to provide opportunities for new, and enhancement of existing, Green Infrastructure to deliver benefits for local communities.
8.124 The development of a local Green Infrastructure Strategy and an interim alert map is being considered but will be subject to available resources.
8.125 The South Yorkshire Green Infrastructure Strategy (2011) has identified a number of ambitious, high-level goals, supported by proposals for their delivery. It includes a Master Plan highlighting priority areas for improvement. Part 2 of this Strategy sets out a five-year programme for delivery of projects that will be revised and updated on a rolling basis. A Delivery Programme (2013) for the period to 2016, has been prepared for South Yorkshire and this includes the identification of Key Projects in Rotherham.
8.126 These Key Projects reflect sub regional green infrastructure priorities and are cross boundary in nature. The 46 project opportunities identified in the South Yorkshire Green Infrastructure Strategy document, have been clustered into 16 key landscape-scale programmes of activity. These Key Projects reflect sub regional, cross boundary, green infrastructure priorities and opportunities to improve the area’s green network for the benefit of our communities, businesses and natural environment.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 83 8
Table 10 South Yorkshire Green Infrastructure Strategy Delivery Programme Key Projects (2013)
South Yorkshire Green Description Infrastructure Strategy Key Projects from the Delivery Programme (2013) in Rotherham
Sheffield, Rotherham A Master plan outlines the substantial redevelopment of the Lower Don Valley and seeks to capitalise on its assets to attract inward River Don Corridors investment and promote economic growth including a large District Heating scheme, tram train route, promotion of sustainable transport routes and the development of a cross boundary Sheffield - Rotherham Green Infrastructure Strategy.
Green Routes Network A Green Routes Network for South Yorkshire, connecting links and networks across the region seeking multiple recreation, health and wellbeing benefits.
Dearne Valley Green Heart Nature Improvement Area – a landscape scale programme in the & Eco-vision Dearne Valley.
Rotherham town centre The aim is to create a green network of high quality open spaces and assets within the town centre (including links to Wentworth Woodhouse).
Magnesian limestone This corridor is a distinct strip of magnesian limestone on the eastern edge of the Pennines and includes areas of attractiveness Corridor and beauty (e.g. Don Gorge) as well as major transport routes.
Rotherham Rivers Living Landscape project (also known as the Living Don: Rotherham Rivers); to create a naturalised green corridor along the rivers Rother and Don in Rotherham as part of strategic rivers programme. A regional biodiversity priority area.
8.127 The Key Projects are currently at various stages of progression. A map showing the South Yorkshire Green Infrastructure Strategy Delivery Programme Key Projects is given below. (reproduced with permission of South Yorkshire Forest Green Infrastructure Partnership)
84 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 3 South Yorkshire Green Infrastructure Strategy Delivery Programme Key Projects (2013) and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 85 8
8.128 The map below shows the three established Green Infrastructure Key Projects that fall (in part) within Rotherham Borough. These projects are: the Dearne Valley Green Heart Nature Improvement area and Eco-Vision Key project; the Living Don Rotherham Rivers Key Project and the Lower Don Valley Masterplan. Given the complexity in creating a printed version of the Policies Map able to demonstrate all known constraints and opportunities, it has not been possible to clearly show these projects on the Policies Map itself. Reference to Policy SP33 'Green Infrastructure and Landscape' and Core Strategy Policy CS19 'Green Infrastructure' will guide the implementation of schemes within these Green Infrastructure key project areas.
86 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Map 4 Green Infrastructure Key Projects
Landscape
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 87 8
8.129 Landscape is arguably one of the most significant components of Green Infrastructure and it is vital that consideration is given to the protection of existing features and to the assessment of development impact.
8.130 This policy seeks to protect significant landscape and historic features of particular local value including:-
• country parks,
• other major outdoor recreation areas,
• historic churches,
• conservation areas,
• historic parks and gardens,
• important gateway features
• landmarks of local value.
8.131 The significance of landscape and visual effects is determined by assessing the magnitude of change within the context of the landscape quality or sensitivity to change. In determining significance of effect, other key criteria should be taken into account: the extent or scale of the effect, the duration and nature of the effect, the angle of view or location in relation to the main activity of the receptor, and the distance of the viewpoint from the proposed development. Significance of effect is arrived at using clear assessment criteria in accordance with best practice guidance (currently “Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment", third edition, Landscape Institute and the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment, 2013 and “Design Manual For Roads & Bridges, Volume 11”, Highways Agency, 2008) and in the context of a specific set of development proposals. For each impact professional judgement will be required to explain the significance of the effect and to justify the decision taken.
8.132 For those significant proposals requiring Environmental Impact Assessment, the Town & Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regs 2011, Schedule 4 part 1 sub section 2 sets out the requirement for consideration of alternative sites, "An outline of the main alternatives studied by the applicant and an indication of the main reasons for the choice made, taking into account the environmental effects." Sub section 5 refers to the need to take measures to prevent (avoid), reduce (mitigate) or where possible offset (compensate for) any significant adverse affects. Compensation includes those measures implemented off site to offset significant adverse effects, which can not be avoided or reduced through mitigation measures on site.
Guidance on Landscape scheme requirements
8.133 Landscape scheme preparation shall be appropriate to the scale of the development and its impact, and shall have regard to appropriate technical standards. Consideration shall be given to:
• Potential future climate change
88 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 • Existing soil resources and the requirements for ground preparation
• Retention of existing vegetation
• Appropriate species selection and spatial requirements
• Site utilities, services and circulation
• Tree planting sizes, specifications and accessories
• Sustainable drainage, including use of green roofs, rain gardens and rainwater harvesting.
• Community involvement, access and safety issues
• Maintenance and management including replacements of failed stock
8.134 The Council has limited resources for the management and maintenance of green space and planting schemes, and there is currently a presumption against adoption of areas for maintenance (except through Flood and Water Act 2010 implementation). Developers, subsequent owners and occupiers of development will be required to assume long term management and maintenance responsibility.
8.135 In planning for development, reference should be made to the Rotherham Borough Landscape Character Assessment and Landscape Capacity Study January 2010 by the Landscape Partnership, which identifies broad landscape character areas and their sensitivity to change. In particular paragraph 3.12-3.14 and figure 8 refer to broad landscape character area management strategies. In order to assess a landscape's potential ability to adapt to change without losing its intrinsic character, it is necessary to analyse the condition of the landscape together with it's strength of character. The aim of this policy is to ensure a quality transition between urban and rural areas.
8.136 Policy delivery will be achieved through assessment of the adequacy of development proposals, planning conditions attached to consents/ permissions and through developer contributions as necessary.
8.137 Delivery plans will need to demonstrate long term adoption, governance and management of assets created; management plans should be agreed by the local planning authority and be based on relevant good practice to provide secure, long term achievement of management goals. Appropriate management of the Borough’s green infrastructure will be encouraged and supported by the Council and other organisations, including the South Yorkshire Local Nature Partnership, South Yorkshire Forest Partnership, agencies, land managers, the private sector and local communities.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 89 8
Policy SP 34
Conserving the natural environment
Development should conserve and enhance existing and create new features of biodiversity and geodiversity value.
Where it is not possible to avoid negative impact on a feature of biodiversity or geodiversity value through use of an alternate site, development proposals will be expected to minimise impact through careful consideration of the design, layout, construction or operation of the development and by the incorporation of suitable mitigation measures.
Where, despite mitigation, there will be residual adverse impact on biodiversity or geodiversity value or on wider ecological networks, development should provide an adequate level of compensation. The aim of mitigation and compensation should be to respond to impact or loss with something of greater value; the minimum requirement will be to maintain ‘no net loss’.
Planning permission will not be granted for development that is likely to, directly or indirectly, result in the loss or deterioration of sites, habitat or features that are considered to be irreplaceable due to their age, status, connectivity, rarity or continued presence.
Development will be expected to enhance biodiversity and geodiversity on-site with the aim of contributing to wider biodiversity and geodiversity delivery including, where appropriate, direct contribution to Ecological Networks, the Green Infrastructure network, Biodiversity Opportunity Areas, Nature Improvement Areas and Living Landscapes see Inset Map for details.
Development that contributes to the preservation, restoration and creation of priority habitats or geological features, ecological networks, ecosystem services and the protection and recovery of priority species populations, will be supported.
The Council will protect individual and groups of trees by the declaration of Tree Preservation Orders where it is important in the interest of visual amenity or there is reason to believe that trees are under specific threat.
Explanation
8.138 Rotherham contains a rich variety of sites and features of nature conservation value, many of these have been identified and are well recorded, whilst other aspects remain, as yet, undiscovered or little studied. Throughout the borough, and not just within defined sites, this resource should be conserved.
8.139 Development proposals will be required to establish their impact on the natural environment (Biodiversity and Geodiversity); development will be required to safeguard any substantive nature conservation interest and will be expected to incorporate best practise in respect of enhancing the natural environment. The Council has published Good Practice Guidance to provide further advice
90 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 to developers in preparing their planning application proposals. Consideration will be given to adopting the Good Practice Guidance as a Supplementary Planning Document in the future.
8.140 The responsibility will lie with the developer to demonstrate that proposals identify and consider their effect on the natural environment through the provision of ecological and geodiversity impact assessment, including the submission of detailed, timely and up to date survey, evaluation and records relevant to the proposed development.
8.141 Development should not only aim to incorporate those features (or species) that are protected by statute or through land-use planning mechanisms but also those which contribute more widely to ecological networks and the nature conservation value and landscape character of the area. Features of biodiversity value, within or outside of protected sites, include:
Ancient woodland
Aged or veteran trees outside of ancient woodlands
Hedgerows and field boundaries,
Trees, woodlands, plantations and shelter belts, including those subject to Tree Preservation Orders
Rivers and other waterways, including canals, and their associated corridors,
Wetlands, ponds and reservoirs,
Habitats of national and/or local importance,
Habitats or features supporting species of principle importance or conservation concern
Orchards,
Natural rock outcrops and exposed rock features, caves and karst, and natural stone within the built environment.
8.142 The preferred option is to retain the interest intact and in situ. Sympathetic design should be used to safeguard the interest and should demonstrate that its conservation will be improved or enhanced. Provision should be made to enable the interest to mature, expand and adapt as it would under natural circumstances.
8.143 If significant harm to the natural environment resulting from a development cannot be avoided, adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused.
8.144 Development will be required to make a positive contribution to the natural environment by incorporating biodiversity gain, sustainable design and renewable energy technology. The principles, objectives and available mapping of Ecological Networks, the Green Infrastructure network, Biodiversity Opportunity Areas, Nature Improvement Areas, Living Landscapes, National Character Areas and
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 91 8
River Catchment Management Plans, which are designed to have benefits at a landscape scale and coordination across local planning authority boundaries, should be used to identify appropriate measures and demonstrate delivery.
8.145 Biodiversity Opportunity Mapping has been considered in the Rotherham Biodiversity Action Plan (RBAP) as a method for identifying suitable biodiversity mitigation and enhancement measures for any given site or area within the borough. The Map below illustrates the key ‘ecozones’ which are based on underlying geology and established character area data. Each ecozone will support a different range of habitats whose restoration or creation may be considered to be suitable mitigation or enhancement for development within that zone. The Biodiversity Opportunity Map is not intended to imply that the delivery of biodiversity opportunities is a blanket requirement across the borough but that, where appropriate, there are preferred approaches that, if taken, will result in suitable, sustainable biodiversity enhancement schemes. Further information is available in the RBAP 2012 Introduction document.
Applications for any works to protected trees or woodland should be submitted to the planning system where the suitability of the proposals will be assessed; where permission is granted the permission may be subject to conditions. The removal or destruction of hedgerows may be subject to the Hedgerow Regulations 1997. Where any replacement planting is required, issues such as biodiversity will be taken into account. Replanting with native species will be encouraged to allow ecological networks to remain functional and to prevent the isolation of trees and woodlands within the landscape; new tree planting will be considered for protection.
92 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Map 5 Rotherham Biodiversity Opportunity Area Map
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 93 8
Policy SP 35
Sites Protected for Nature Conservation
Development or changes of use on land within or outside a statutorily protected site (either individually or in combination with other developments) which would adversely affect the interest, fabric or setting of the statutorily protected site will not be permitted.
Development that would either directly or indirectly, adversely affect a non-statutorily protected site will not normally be permitted. An exception should only be made where the need for the development in that location outweighs both the impact on the site’s intrinsic interest and any broader impacts on the national network of protected sites, and that adequate mitigation and/or compensation measures can be delivered.
Before any development or land use change that may affect a protected site is commenced any measures considered necessary to mitigate or compensate for any harm to the site or its features of interest must be agreed and put in place.
Development adjacent to a protected site will be expected to incorporate adequate buffer zones or other measures to support the conservation of protected sites.
Explanation
8.146 Statutorily protected sites for nature conservation in Rotherham include Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Local Nature Reserves (LNR), which are protected and designated under national legislation due to their special value for nature conservation and, where possible, for their educational and community value.
8.147 Non-statutorily protected sites, i.e. those designated within the planning system for nature conservation, include, but are not limited to, the following:
Local Wildlife Sites
Local Geological Sites including Regionally Important Geological Sites
8.148 It is acknowledged that activity in Rotherham may also have an impact on sites protected at a European, National or Local level outside the borough; this policy will be used to guide activity that may have an impact on these sites.
8.149 In the case of statutorily protected sites the views of the relevant statutory agency will be sought. The Council will only support proposals where there will be no adverse effect on the reasons for designation and then only on the express advice of the statutory agency concerned.
8.150 In the case of non-statutorily protected sites the adequacy of mitigation and / or compensation measures will be assessed in accord with the provisions of policy SP34.
94 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.151 The provision and design of buffer zones within developments adjacent to protected sites should aim to prevent continual adverse impact throughout the lifetime of the development, e.g. by encroachment, increased access or abuse. Natural England recommends a 15m buffer is provided for ancient woodland sites.
8.152 Sites that are under consideration for statutory or non-statutory designation (including candidate local sites) and sites that are subsequently found to have equivalent value to designated sites will receive the same level of protection as designated sites. If a development proposal is received for a candidate site the planning process should facilitate data collection and analysis to establish the suitability of the site for designation.
Policy SP 36
Protected and Priority Species
Planning permission for development likely to have a direct or indirect adverse impact on the following will only be granted if it can be demonstrated that there is an overriding need for the development in that location and that mitigation and/or compensation measures can be put in place that enable the status of the species to be maintained or enhanced.
a. Protected species b. Species of principle importance for the conservation of biodiversity c. Species prioritised for action within the Rotherham Biodiversity Action Plan d. Populations of species associated with statutorily protected sites
Measures to mitigate and, or compensate for, any impact must be agreed prior to development commencing and should be in place by the time development is brought into use.
Explanation
8.153 When considering a development proposal that is likely to result in harm or disturbance to protected species the views of the relevant statutory agency will be sought and respected, and regard will be given to the requirements of relevant legislation.
8.154 Development should enable the protection and recovery of protected and priority species populations. Assessment of impact on such species will be expected to follow available best practise and mitigation / compensation measures should relate to the specific species affected.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 95 8
Policy SP 37
Soil Resources
Development will be required to demonstrate the sustainable use of soils during construction and operation stages, where appropriate and to be determined in discussion with the local planning authority. Applicants should demonstrate, in their proposals, that there are feasible and appropriate methods, locations and receptors for the temporary storage and reuse of high quality soils. Built development should be designed and sited with an appreciation of the relative functional capacity of soil resources and threats to soils with the aim of preserving or enhancing identified soil functions.
Measures to incorporate green space and sustainable drainage elements that retain permeable surfaces, allow water infiltration, reduce soil erosion and maintain natural soil functions will be supported. Measures that waste soil resource, reduce soil quality, compact or pollute soils or that create a predominantly impermeable surface should be avoided.
Where development is permitted on the best and most versatile agricultural land it should, as far as possible, use the lowest grade of land suitable for the development and should demonstrate adequate measures to conserve the soil resource and functions in agreement with the local planning authority. Where appropriate, developers should provide up-to-date detailed assessment to determine the quality of soils and to identify sustainable re-use for soils which are to be translocated.
Proposals that promote careful management practises to conserve the character of the borough’s soils will be supported. The use of imported soil and aggregates in development proposals should be avoided where possible. Where use is necessary consideration will need to be shown of the impact on local geodiversity and associated biodiversity.
Explanation
8.155 Soil resources need to be conserved for the continuation of ecosystem services, including food production, water management and nutrient cycling. Once land has been developed, even temporarily, it is often impractical to return it to agricultural use. Inappropriate storage and handling of soils can reduce soil quality; the temporary storage and reuse of high quality soils should follow best practice in order to prevent this.
8.156 The best and most versatile agricultural land is that in grades 1, 2 and 3a. As a national resource for the future, considerable weight is given to protecting such land from the adverse effects of development.
8.157 Proposals for development should demonstrate that there are feasible and appropriate methods, locations and receptors for the temporary storage and reuse of high-quality soils with appropriate consideration given to the height and duration of soil storage mounds to ensure these are viable alongside construction compounds and work sites. Loss of soil quality which is directly due to the inappropriateness of its handling prior to reuse will not be acceptable.
96 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.158 Development should avoid the introduction of calcareous aggregates to areas with undisturbed soils in the Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Yorkshire Coalfield National Character Area and should avoid the introduction of acidic aggregates to areas with undisturbed soils in the Southern Magnesian Limestone National Character Area.
8.159 The above policies will be applied during the planning application process. Planning conditions, planning obligations and Community Infrastructure Levy will be used, where appropriate, to ensure protection, enhancement and appropriate long-term management.
Policy SP 38
New and Improvements to Existing Green Space
Residential development proposals will be expected to make a contribution to green space in line with the following approach:
a. For schemes exceeding one hectare or greater than 35 dwellings, additional green spaces should be provided in new development at a rate of 55 square metres per dwelling only where there would otherwise be a gap in provision as defined by the accessibility standards of all new homes being within 280m of a Green Space. b. Where new greenspace is required, the applicant will be expected to consider the Borough-wide standards for playing pitches and play spaces to determine as appropriate, the composition of any provision that will assist in achieving these standards; specifically:
i. The Rotherham Playing Pitch Strategy recommendations (subject to periodic review) for provision of mini-soccer, junior & senior football, cricket, and rugby union & league pitches ii. Whether the site is within 840 metres of an equipped play area (which includes a variety of experiences for different age groups) and 280 metres of an unequipped play area
c. Where new homes are already served by existing Green Spaces, then there should be a developer contribution, to enhance existing Green Space based on an assessment of need within the local area. d. New Green Space will be accompanied by either (i) provision for maintenance by a landscape management company or similar, to standards agreed with the Local Authority for a period of not less than fifty years, or (ii) a financial contribution by way of a commuted sum equivalent to the cost of maintaining new Green Space or enhancements to existing Green Space for a period of thirty years.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 97 8
Table 11 Typical characteristics for accessible Green Space
Type and main Characteristics function
Borough Green Large areas and sites with intrinsic special interest, e.g. heritage, landscape, Spaces wildlife, children’s amusements, available sporting activities. Good level of visitor facilities. Several events per annum. Attracts people from a wider Weekend and catchment area. Car parking provision at key locations. occasional visits by car or public transport
Neighbourhood A well maintained landscape setting with a variety of features and facilities Green providing for a range of activities, e.g. outdoor sports facilities and playing fields, children’s play and informal recreation pursuits. Occasional events. Spaces Site signs.
Weekend, early morning,after school and evening visits by foot, cycle, car and short bus trips
Local Green Spaces Protected and appropriately maintained site providing safe and clean areas for walking, informal recreation and play, sitting out areas and playing Regular use mainly by fields - if the sites are large enough. pedestrian visitors, including preferred routes to school, shops, work etc
Explanation
8.160 The Council expects developers to consider the level of existing provision of green space as part of their residential development proposals. Providing new green space within new development should be an integral part of the proposals. However providing green space in residential proposals can be complex as there are various types of green space that will meet different functions and provide varying benefits to the local community.
8.161 Green spaces within or adjacent to residential areas are the most regularly and intensively used types of open space. They comprise one or more character types supporting a variety of uses including informal grass areas, children's play facilities, sport pitches, multi-use games areas, skate parks and tennis courts. In considering proposals for new, or enhancing existing provision, consideration should also be given to other forms of green space or green infrastructure which include
98 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 more diverse character areas such as woodlands, wildlife conservation areas, allotments and green corridors; particular regard should be had to Policy SP33 Green Infrastructure and Landscape.
8.162 Where new homes are developed outside the catchments of existing green spaces, then in all development proposals of 35 dwellings or more, or sites exceeding one hectare, new green space will need to be provided on site to ensure the proposed accessibility standards are met. In situations where the scheme is smaller, or where it may be physically impossible to achieve green space provision on site, such as possibly within Rotherham Town Centre, then the Council will consider the appropriateness of developer contributions, to enhance existing green space based on an assessment of need within the local area.
8.163 Walk times of five minutes and fifteen minutes for equipped and unequipped play spaces respectively have been converted to walk distances assuming an average walk speed of 3mph (4.8kph). These walk distances (of 400m and 1.2km) have then been converted to straight line (or ‘radial’) distances to take into account the fact that walking routes have to follow roads and paths which do not normally follow a straight line.
8.164 Green space requirements in new development have been calculated by applying a figure of 24m2 per resident to a standard occupancy rate multiplier of 2.3 persons per dwelling. Gaps in provision are defined as those where any part (irrespective of size) of the site is not covered by the accessibility standards detailed in Policy SP38.
8.165 It is important therefore that developers respond to local demand where necessary by providing green space of appropriate scale and types within development proposals. We will liaise with the developer to agree area specific priorities for the development proposal. We will also agree with the developer how the green spaces will be protected, managed and maintained.
8.166 The standards in this policy take account of Rotherham's Green Space Strategy (September 2010) which reviewed the current (at that time) and potential value of Green Spaces to local people and environment of Rotherham. Accordingly, the Strategy’s intent was to take stock of current Green Space provision across the Borough, to agree new Green Space standards including delivery of a minimum size threshold, and to recommend how these can be achieved.
8.167 Allied to this, the Rotherham Playing Pitch Strategy (2009) presents a strategic framework for the development of playing pitches with community access across Rotherham and this allows for determining whether a specific type of playing pitch is required. It is also important to emphasise that regard has been had to the guidance presented by Fields in Trust in establishing the standards detailed within Policy SP38.
8.168 Priority will be given to securing open space as part of development proposals, if necessary by planning condition, where this is not possible developer contributions will be sought. On introduction of Rotherham’s Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), the CIL Charging Schedule and accompanying documents (in the form of its ‘Regulation 123 list of infrastructure to be funded by CIL’ and an accompanying Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document) will clearly establish how CIL and Section 106 Planning Obligations will be used.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 99 8
Policy SP 39
Protecting Green Space
Development proposals that result in the loss of Green Space, including sports pitches and children’s play areas will only be allowed, where:
a. An assessment shows its loss would not detrimentally affect the existing and potential Green Space needs of the local community; or b. An appropriate replacement green space of at least equivalent community benefit, accessibility and value is provided in the area which it serves; or c. The development is for facilities of appropriate scale and type needed to support or improve the proper function of the remaining green space.
Development proposals within the immediate vicinity of green space must not impact negatively on the amenity, ecological value and functionality of the Green Space. All adverse impacts must be negated through the design of the scheme.
Development that results in the loss of any small incidental areas of Green Space, not specifically identified on the Policies Map, but which make a significant contribution to the character of residential areas and/or green infrastructure, will not normally be permitted.
Explanation
8.169 The recreational quality of green spaces can be eroded by insensitive development or incremental loss of a site. This policy and the accompanying Policies Map identifies those areas that are protected. The provision of new ancillary sports facilities, and play equipment may be supported on open space policy areas provided the development proposal improves the site and results in no significant loss of valuable open space used for recreational purposes . Appropriate development on green space may include a new play area, a multi-use games area (MUGA), a sports pavilion, or changing room improvements or extensions. Ultimately the development has to result in an overall improvement to the site, be sensitive to the local situation and provide significant benefits to the users.
8.170 It should be noted that urban areas include numerous green and open spaces which are too small to be mapped. These areas tend to be amenity road verges, landscaped or ‘grassed’ incidental open spaces around buildings and residential areas and have little or no recreational value. They can however make an important contribution to the environmental quality of the area and as such contribute positively to the urban aesthetic. Furthermore as development takes place over the life of this plan, new open spaces will be created which are not shown on the Policies Map. Therefore, it is essential that proposals for building on ‘non-designated’ green and open space, demonstrate why the need for the development outweighs the loss of the green and open space.
8.171 Development proposals which result in the loss of green and open space will normally be presumed to be unacceptable. However, it is acknowledged that not all green and open space is of value to the local community. In such cases an assessment will be required to identify whether the
100 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 site is suitable for a different type of green space use. Permanent loss of green space will require careful consideration as this can result in increased pressure on remaining facilities.
8.172 Allotment gardens provide a valuable recreational resource for the community. Some allotment gardens have statutory protection, but this policy seeks to extend protection, where appropriate to all allotments within the Borough. There will be a general presumption against the development of allotment gardens, unless it can be demonstrated that there is no need for the facility in the locality and the site has no other green space value or where suitable and enhanced alternative provision is made.
Policy SP 40
Design and Location of Green Space, Sport and Recreation
Proposals for green space, sport & recreation and children’s play space within new and existing developments should be designed to incorporate the following principles:
a. able to deliver green space to the recommended accessibility standards & typical characteristics set out in SP38; b. landscaped and sited on land suitable for the purpose; c. located away from busy roads and car-parks, or separated from them by suitable boundary treatments; d. attractive and sited in open locations, easily observed by non-users; e. the facilities are accessible to as many potential users as possible; f. easily accessed by pedestrians and cyclists; g. linked to other green spaces either directly or via green infrastructure corridors; h. ensures ease of maintenance, operational sustainability (repair and replacements), and affordable quality management for the lifetime of the equipment;
Additionally in the case of Play Spaces:
i. provides for risk and challenge, without putting users in danger of serious harm; j. provides appropriate buffer zones; k. accounts for industry standards and practice.
Developments that provide private sports and recreation facilities should enter into a Community Use Agreement to promote and allow access by local communities.
Explanation
8.173 Within new developments green space (and green infrastructure) provision should be an integral part of the design process. It is essential that facilities, such as children’s play areas are safe, easily observed, accessible, provide challenges but are not unsafe, and do not lead to further nuisance. The long term sustainability of the proposals are also also important, and facilities should be cost effective to manage and maintain. As the character of green space is largely defined by its function,
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 101 8
reference should be made to Table 11 of SP38 which highlights typical characteristics of accessible green space.
8.174 In large scale major developments the preparation of a master plan/design code or appropriate design controls is required or encouraged by policy CS2; in all other instances a comprehensive Design and Access Statement is required and the developer should evaluate the facilities in the vicinity of the proposal, taking account of the quantity and accessibility of the facilities and assessing the quality and value to the local community in line with SP38. This will identify priorities in the area and allow for their inclusion in the development scheme.
8.175 For outdoor sport, informal play and recreation provision, all proposals should:
identify types of green spaces including access to and through natural and agricultural land, their locations and define the uses identify movement patterns for pedestrians, cycles and motor vehicles identify how the streets and open space are connected identify relationships between buildings (including indoor sports facilities) and public and private spaces
8.176 Community use agreements to enable the opening of school fields, clubs and private premises to the public, are encouraged to make the most efficient use of facilities. Issues can also be dealt with by adapting the outdoor environment to make it safer for pedestrians and cyclists, which in turn contributes toward a safer environment for children and young people to play.
8.177 Applicants are advised to liaise with the Council on proposed locations and refurbishment of play spaces & ensure that local children and young people have been consulted so that the intended space meets all expectations and responds to the needs of different age groups & abilities (including access for the disabled).
102 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Policy SP 41
Listed Buildings
Development proposals involving or likely to affect the setting of a Listed Building will be considered against the following principles:
a. special regard will be given to the preservation of Listed Buildings and structures. Therefore substantial harm to or demolition of a Listed Building will be strongly resisted; b. the significance of a Listed Building can be harmed by unsympathetic extensions or alterations to its appearance, plan form or replacement of windows. Extensions and alterations to a Listed Building will only be considered acceptable where they relate sensitively to the Listed Building and preserve or enhance the special interest and significance; c. the Council encourages the development of good quality, contextual design, including any development within the setting of Listed Buildings. Development which has an adverse effect on the setting of Listed Buildings will not be acceptable; d. the best use for a Listed Building is usually that for which it was designed, however other uses may be considered acceptable provided they do not harm the significance of the Listed Building. Where significant alterations are required that potentially harm the Listed Building it will be necessary to demonstrate that the original use of the Listed Building is no longer viable or sustainable and that the proposed alterations are necessary to secure the long term survival of the Listed Building; e. the Council will support proposals and alterations to Listed Buildings in order to mitigate climate change only where such proposals respect the significance of the Listed Building and do not have an adverse impact on its appearance, character or historic fabric; f. the Council will take necessary measures to ensure that neglected Listed Buildings are appropriately repaired and/or reused; g. where appropriate, proposals will be supported which enhance or better reveal the significance of a Listed Building or structure.
Explanation
8.178 Statutory Listed Buildings are buildings, objects or structures protected by the legislation in the Planning(Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. This requires that when considering whether to grant consent for any works affecting a Listed Building, special regard should be had to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. National planning policy provides for the protection of Listed Buildings.
8.179 Core Strategy Policy CS23 aims to protect and enhance Rotherham’s heritage and highlights that Rotherham has a rich historic environment.
8.180 Applications for development likely to affect a Listed Building must be accompanied by a heritage statement which demonstrates a clear understanding of the significance of the affected Listed Building and of the impact of any proposals on its character and appearance.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 103 8
8.181 There is a presumption in favour of retaining Listed Buildings so permission to demolish will be the exception and only allowed if all other options to retain the building are demonstrated to have been thoroughly explored.
8.182 The repair, renovation, alteration and extension of a Listed Building should not be at the expense of its intrinsic value. It is important to guard against unnecessary change or over-restoration. In any change, materials should be sympathetic to those used in the original building. In particular the Council will resist applications that result in the loss of traditional features that could be preserved.
8.183 Listed Buildings may become vacant and derelict if no acceptable alternative use can be found. The original use is likely to be the most appropriate and will be encouraged where possible. Where this is not practicable the alternative use proposed must not require alteration to the extent that the character and historical importance of the building is destroyed.
8.184 Where the Council considers that a proposal would have an impact on the setting of a Listed Building, it will require the submission of illustrative and technical material to allow that impact to be properly assessed. This will include details to show the existing situation and the precise effect on the fabric and character of the Listed Building and its setting.
8.185 Planning permission will be refused where the Council considers that the proposal would dominate the Listed Building or buildings within its curtilage by scale, form, mass or appearance or harm the visual relationship between the Listed Building and its formal or natural landscape surroundings.
104 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Policy SP 42
Development Within or Affecting Conservation Areas
Development proposals within or likely to affect the setting of a Conservation Area will be considered against the following principles:
a. developments are required to ensure the preservation or enhancement of the special character or appearance of Rotherham’s Conservation Areas and their settings; b. there is a presumption in favour of the preservation of buildings and structures, both listed and unlisted, which make a positive contribution to the special character or appearance of Conservation Areas. Permission will not be granted for the demolition of a building in a Conservation Area which makes a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the Area unless it can be clearly demonstrated that:
i. there is no realistic prospect of the building continuing in its existing use or that a suitable alternative use cannot reasonably be found; or ii. the building is in poor structural condition and the cost of repairing and maintaining it would be disproportionate in relation to its importance and to the value derived from its continued use; and iii. the demolition is part of a redevelopment proposal which would, in its own right, serve to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area;
c. spaces, street patterns, views, vistas, uses, trees and landscapes which contribute to the special character or appearance of a Conservation Area will be safeguarded. d. depending on the scale of the development and when deemed necessary, developers will be required to submit character statements to assess the impact of the development upon the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and to minimise the effect of development proposals though careful consideration of their design.
Explanation
8.186 Conservation Areas are defined as areas of special architectural or historic interest, the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance. Within Rotherham, twenty eight Conservation Areas have been designated as shown on the Policies Map.
8.187 Under Section 69 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, every local authority is required, from time to time, to determine which parts of their area are worthy of preservation and enhancement and designate them as Conservation Areas.
8.188 Opportunities to amend the boundaries of Conservation Areas can be considered as part of the Council's rolling programme of Conservation Area character appraisals. Article 4 Directions will be used, where appropriate, to protect or enhance the character and appearance of a Conservation Area. These Directions remove certain permitted development rights meaning that planning permission would need to be sought for work which normally does not need one.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 105 8
8.189 If a site lies within a Conservation Area, or is located nearby, planning permission will not be granted where development proposals neither preserve nor enhance the character or appearance of that area. Proposals will need to consider the Council’s Conservation Area character appraisals and any Supplementary Planning Documents or good practice guidance the Council publishes. The Council encourages pre-application discussions that will identify when the developer will be required to submit a character appraisal as part of the application. The Council will consider proposals against guidance contained within relevant English Heritage guidance documents on Conservation Areas, such as "Valuing Places: Good Practice in Conservation Areas" (English Heritage, 2011).
8.190 Within Conservation Areas there will normally be a presumption against the total or substantial demolition of non-listed buildings or non-designated heritage assets that make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the area.
8.191 In exceptional cases where it can be reasonably demonstrated that the building is as a whole incapable of accommodating an appropriate and viable, beneficial use, or that it is beyond viable repair, the merits of the proposed redevelopment of the site may be a material consideration when an application for demolition is considered. The applicant will be required to submit detailed proposals for the redevelopment of the site after demolition. Where appropriate a condition will be imposed that prevents the demolition of the building in question until a contract has been let for the approved redevelopment of the site.
8.192 The demolition of a building cannot be justified simply because it is economically more attractive to redevelop than to repair and re-use, or because a developer has acquired a building at a price that reflects the potential for redevelopment. In situations where owners may have allowed their buildings to deteriorate structurally over a period of time, less weight will be attached to the condition of the building when assessing a case for its demolition.
8.193 The demolition of buildings or structures within Conservation Areas can have a damaging effect by removing structures that contribute to their character or leaving unsightly gaps in the built-up environment. As with Listed Buildings, where buildings in Conservation Areas contribute positively to the character of the Conservation Area, there will be a presumption in favour of retention. However, where this is not the case, the criteria in the National Planning Policy Framework will ensure that demolition is allowed only when detailed plans for the site’s redevelopment have been approved, to ensure that the scheme will conserve and enhance the character of the area.
8.194 In exceptional circumstances, the fact that a development would bring substantial benefits to the local community may be weighed in the balance against arguments in favour of the preservation of the building.
8.195 The Council considers that landscaping and trees that contribute to the special character or appearance of the Conservation Area should be safeguarded and acknowledges that the street scene is very important but also consider that other, more private viewpoints are important if the Conservation Area is to retain its character and integrity. This means Conservation Area policies apply to all aspects of proposals for development within Conservation Areas, regardless of whether they can be seen from public areas.
8.196 Rotherham’s Conservation Areas vary considerably. Whilst some have similarities of form and design, others get their character from diversity. The policy is particularly relevant as this means
106 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 that the bulk, form and height of development within the area should conform to that character by reflecting the uniformity or diversity of the locality of the Conservation Area in question. Where uniformity forms part of the character of a street, it will not normally be appropriate to vary from it, while in other areas, where diversity exists, irregular building heights or form might be more appropriate.
8.197 The success of a design can often be dependent upon the skill in use of materials and detailing. If an area contains strong unifying elements, e.g. doors, windows, bays and gables, it may therefore be desirable to reflect these and their form, proportion and the relationship between solids and voids will be taken into account.
8.198 The special interest of a Conservation Area can depend on even minor development being in keeping with the character of that area. Therefore, the NPPF advises that consideration is given to the introduction of Article 4 Directions which would require planning permission for certain works which normally do not need it. The Conservation Area Appraisals will attempt to identify areas where Article 4 Directions might be beneficial.
8.199 In addition to Rotherham's Conservation Area Design Guidelines or other good practice guidance published by the Council, a programme of Conservation Area appraisals, management plans and enhancement schemes to manage change and guide development in Conservation Areas will be undertaken.
Policy SP 43
Archaeology and Scheduled Ancient Monuments
Development proposals involving archaeology, whether designated as a Scheduled Ancient Monument or undesignated, will be considered against the following principles:
a. development that would result in harm to the significance of a Scheduled Monument or other nationally important archaeological site will not be permitted; b. the preservation of other archaeological sites will be an important consideration. When development affecting such sites is acceptable in principle, the Council will seek preservation of remains in situ, as a preferred solution. When in situ preservation is not justified, the developer will be required to make adequate provision for archaeological recording to ensure an understanding of the remains is gained before they are lost or damaged, in accordance with Policy SP 44.
Explanation
8.200 Archaeological remains are known to survive across the borough, ranging in date from the prehistoric to the industrial period. These remains are a finite resource and contain irreplaceable evidence for the development of the borough’s landscapes and people. As such, the presence and significance of such remains must be considered as part of the planning process. This policy sets out the principles that will allow development affecting archaeological heritage assets to be assessed.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 107 8
8.201 The Council will consult with, and be guided by, the South Yorkshire Archaeology Advisory Service on the archaeological implications of development proposals.
Policy SP 44
Understanding and Recording the Historic Environment
Development proposals that affect known or potential heritage assets will need to provide supporting information in sufficient detail that the impact of the proposed scheme on those heritage assets can be established, in line with the following approach:
a. Sites identified as having ‘major’, ‘potential’ or ‘uncertain’ objections to allocation in the archaeology scoping reviews of proposed site allocations (see Wessex Archaeology reports 79970.01, 79971.01, 79972.01 and any subsequent reports) will need to be supported by a Heritage Statement that considers the impact of the specific development proposed with regard to: the setting of heritage assets on or in the vicinity of the site; detailed archaeological assessment; and the results of field evaluation; b. Sites and historic buildings and structure that were not considered in the above archaeology scoping reviews will also need to be supported by such a Heritage Statement if they affect a known or potential heritage asset.
In the exceptional circumstances that harm could be justified, resulting in the loss or damage of a heritage asset, appropriate recording will be required to an agreed standard in advance of any alteration, demolition or groundworks, to ensure that: an understanding of the remains is gained before they are lost or damaged, that the knowledge gained is widely disseminated, and that the resulting archive is deposited for long-term duration.
Explanation
8.202 This policy reinforces national policy in requiring proposals affecting heritage assets to be supported by an adequate Heritage Statement so that the significance of an asset is clearly understood and informs the development proposal. The policy explains when such a Heritage Statement is required, with reference to the scoping reviews of potential allocation sites carried out by Wessex Archaeology (reports 79970.01, 79971.01, 79972.01), which classified sites according to their identified archaeological interest as: major archaeological objections to allocation, potential archaeological objections to allocation, uncertain archaeological objections to allocation, and little or no archaeological objections to allocation, will be essential to understand the issues of concern to the local planning authority. The first three categories of site will require a supporting Heritage Statement if they are brought forward for development. Those sites identified as being of ‘little or no objection to allocation’ will not need to be accompanied by a Heritage Statement but any planning application must reference the relevant scoping review report. Sites brought forward for development that were not considered in an earlier scoping review may also require a supporting Heritage Statement, if they affect a known or potential heritage asset. Advice should be sought from the Local Planning Authority in advance of submission of such an application.
108 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.203 National policy explains that loss or damage to a heritage asset will require exceptional circumstances to be justified. Where such loss or damage has been agreed, the Local Planning Authority will require detailed recording, e.g. photographic recording of standing buildings, or archaeological excavation of buried remains, to ensure an understanding of the building or site is not lost as a result of development.
8.204 The policy explains that, where such recording has been carried out, the results must be written up and published and the resulting archive deposited with an appropriate repository. This will ensure that the knowledge gained is widely disseminated and that the results are kept and made available, long-term, for further study.
Policy SP 45
Historic Parks, Gardens and Landscapes
The Council will seek to ensure the protection and appropriate enhancement of the Borough’s historic parks and gardens. Development proposals should:
a. safeguard those features which form an integral part of the special character or appearance of the Park or Garden; b. ensure that development does not detract from the enjoyment, layout, design, character, appearance or setting of the Park or Garden, key views out from the Park, or prejudice its future restoration. Where development is likely to affect a Historic Park and Garden or its setting, applications should include a Heritage Impact Assessment setting out the likely impact which the development would have upon its significance and the means by which any harm might be mitigated.
Explanation
8.205 Historic parks and gardens are an important part of the Borough’s heritage and environment. They comprise a variety of features – the open space itself, views in and out, the planting, water features, built features and archaeological remains. There is therefore a need to protect historic parks and gardens and their wider landscape settings from new development, which would otherwise destroy or harm their historic interest and to encourage sympathetic management wherever possible. Five of the most important sites within the Borough have been included on the English Heritage 'Register of Historic Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest in England' 1983. These are: a. Wentworth Woodhouse (Grade II*) b. Sandbeck Park and Roche Abbey (Grade II*) c. Moorgate Cemetery (Grade II) d. Clifton Park (Grade II) e. Boston Park (Grade II)
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 109 8
Policy SP 46
Locally Listed Buildings
The Council will seek to ensure and encourage the preservation and enhancement of Locally Listed Buildings and will use its powers where possible to protect their significance, character and setting, by the following means:
a. consent will not normally be granted for the demolition of Locally Listed Buildings;
b. alterations and extensions should be based on an accurate understanding of the significance of the asset including the structure. Proposals should respect the architectural character, and detailing of the original building. The structure, features, and materials of the building which contribute to its architectural and historic interest should be retained or restored with appropriate traditional materials and techniques;
c. any proposals should protect and enhance the setting of Locally Listed Buildings;
d. taking a practical approach towards the alteration of Locally Listed Buildings to comply with the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 and subsequent amendments, provided that the building’s special interest is not harmed, using English Heritage advice as a basis.
Explanation
8.206 For heritage assets not specifically addressed in these policies, the Council will identify them in plans and decision-making, and in any Supplementary Planning Documents or good practice guidance published by the Council. When determining whether something is a heritage asset the Council will assess its significance based on its aesthetic, communal, historic and evidential value. This heritage value will be used to decide the most efficient and effective way of managing the heritage asset to sustain its overall value to society. This approach is set out by English Heritage in Conservation Principles Policies and Guidance for the Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment (2008).
8.207 These are buildings, groups of buildings or structures of historic or architectural interest which have been identified as contributing significantly to the townscape but are not on the statutory list. However, these buildings are of considerable local importance.
8.208 The list of Locally Listed Buildings (LLB's) will be produced and maintained by the Council. An appraisal of the architectural or historic interest of a building, followed by a process of public consultation, should be undertaken before the designation of a new building of merit. The following criteria will be used for designation of LLB's
1. Any building or structure which dates from before 1840; 2. Later buildings or structures which are considered to be of definite quality and character, including the work of important architects or builders. Particular attention will be paid to buildings which:
110 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Have important historic associations, in terms of famous people or events;
Illustrates an important aspect of social or economic history or use;
Represent an exceptionally good example of a specific and distinctive architectural style;
Demonstrate excellence in building craftsmanship, use of materials, technical innovation, architectural features and detailing;
Form part of a distinctive and cohesive group of buildings;
Retain its original architectural interest and integrity, and not subject to insensitive alterations;
Have landmark quality or make a unique and positive contribution to the quality of the townscape or an open space.
8.209 The Council has control over the demolition of those Locally Listed Buildings which are in Conservation Areas, but elsewhere its powers are more limited. There will be a presumption against demolition of Locally Listed Buildings; both for townscape and sustainability reasons. Consideration will also be given to the creation of Local Development Orders to control demolition and remove certain permitted development rights to buildings identified on a compiled Local List. However, should demolition prove necessary, a high standard of design, complementing the surrounding area, will be required in any replacement building.
8.210 Development proposals for alteration, extension or change of use to a Locally Listed Building or within its setting should protect the architectural integrity of the building, the existing balance between the building and its setting and be proportionate in scale to that of the original building. Architectural features, materials or detailing which contribute positively to the character of a Locally Listed Building, should be kept.
8.211 The Council will endeavour to protect the character and setting of Locally Listed Buildings by as far as possible treating proposals for works to or close to them, which would be visible from the street or any other place used by the public, as if they were Listed Buildings.
Policy SP 47
War Memorials
Where development proposals may impact upon the siting of War Memorials, Memorials should be retained in situ, if possible, or otherwise sensitively relocated following appropriate community consultation. Where demolition of structures which house War Memorials is undertaken developers should first inform, through Prior Notification, the Council of the presence of the War Memorials.
8.212 The Council has recorded all Borough War Memorials on a register and consider them to be heritage assets. Some of these could be designated as Locally Listed Buildings, others are already
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 111 8
part of the fabric of Statutory Listed Buildings. Some Memorials are in public places and others on private premises, such as those for companies. It is important to ensure that these significant features, and where appropriate their settings, are protected and restored where necessary. Whilst preservation in situ is the ideal option, as the location is often of significance to the Memorial, should it need to be removed the Council will require a sensitive relocation. Alternative suitable locations for siting should be established following appropriate community consultation.
8.213 In most cases planning permission for the demolition of buildings is not required, however the Council will need to approve how the demolition will be carried out (through a "prior approval application") where such activity involves a War Memorial. To ensure that War Memorials can be recorded and re-sited where possible, the Council will encourage notification of the presence of War Memorials where buildings are proposed for demolition but where planning permission is not required.
Policy SP 48
Understanding and managing flood risk and drainage
The Council will expect proposals to:
a. demonstrate an understanding of the flood route of surface water flows throughout the proposed development in an extreme event and where the design flows for the drainage systems may be exceeded, and incorporate appropriate mitigation measures; b. control surface water run-off as near to its source as possible through a sustainable drainage approach to surface water management (SuDS). The Council will expect applicants to consider the use of natural flood storage / prevention solutions (such as tree planting) in appropriate locations, and the use of other flood mitigation measures such as raised finished floor levels and compensatory storage; and c. consider the possibility of providing flood resilience works and products for properties to minimise the risk of internal flooding to properties.
The Lead Local Flood Authority will introduce a Sustainable Urban Drainage Approval Body to approve drainage systems in new developments.
A minimum of 8 metre maintenance strip commencing from the top of the bank should be maintained between proposed development and watercourses designated as ‘main rivers’, and similarly a minimum of 5 metre maintenance strip for watercourses designated as ‘ordinary’. There should be no encroachment into this maintenance strip during any stage of development. Where watercourses have flood defences an 8 metre easement from the top of the bank or from the landward toe of any flood defence should be left clear
Foul water should be disposed to public sewer wherever possible. Non-mains foul drainage disposal options will only be considered where it is robustly demonstrated that it is impracticable, unsustainable or too costly to do so, compared against the lifetime costs/impacts of the non-mains alternative. Any proposals involving non-mains drainage must be accompanied by a suitable foul drainage assessment.
112 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Explanation
8.214 Policy SP48 provides additional guidance on flood risk and drainage which should be read in conjunction with other Local Plan policies; in particular Core Strategy Policies CS24 Conserving and Enhancing the Water Environment and CS25 Dealing with Flood Risk.
8.215 In designing new development and any associated drainage systems the Council will expect applicants to demonstrate their understanding of surface water flows and where water flows will occur in extreme flood events. It will be important for applicants to understand where capacity of drainage systems may be exceeded. Applicants should take this information into account when designing development proposals, incorporating suitable mitigation measures where appropriate.
8.216 Surface water run-off should be controlled as near to its source as possible through a sustainable drainage approach to surface water management. SuDS involve a range of techniques including soakaways, infiltration trenches, permeable pavements, grassed swales, green roofs, ponds and wetlands. Such measures offer significant advantages over conventional piped drainage systems in reducing flood risk by attenuating the rate and quantity of surface water run-off from a site, promoting groundwater recharge absorbing diffuse pollutants and improving water quality. The variety of Sustainable Drainage techniques available means that most developments should be able to include a scheme based around these principles and provide multiple benefits, reducing costs and maintenance needs. SuDS can also contribute to Green Infrastructure delivery.
8.217 The Council will also encourage design which improves the flood resilience of properties, helping to minimise the damage from flood water and reduce the time required to recover damaged buildings. Such measures could include the provision of barriers (such as door guards), water resistant door and window frames and waterproofing of plaster or stone flooring.
8.218 Applicants should be aware of the need to obtain approval from the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) for all works both temporary and permanent, that will affect an ordinary watercourse, or to obtain approval from the Environment Agency (EA) for all works both temporary and permanent, that will affect a main river.
8.219 The Flood and Water Management Act establishes the introduction of a Sustainable Urban Drainage Approval Body (SAB). Once introduced by the Lead Local Flood Authority all proposed Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDs) and control of surface water management for developments must be approved by the SAB before construction can commence.
8.220 Maintenance strips are intended to ensure that watercourses remain accessible for maintenance and any future watercourse or defence improvements. Watercourses as defined by the Land Drainage Act 1991 include all rivers and streams and all ditches, drains, cuts, culverts, dikes, sluices, sewers (other than public sewers within the meaning of the Water Industry Act 1991) and passages, through which water flows. "Main rivers" are those watercourses shown as such on a main river map held by the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA). An "ordinary watercourse" is any other watercourse that does not form part of a “main river”. Map 6 'Rotherham Main Rivers' shows the main rivers within Rotherham as defined by DEFRA.
8.221 A minimum of 8 metre maintenance strip will be required for watercourses designated as "main rivers". For watercourses designated as "ordinary watercourses" the maintenance strip should
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 113 8
be a minimum of 5 metres. There should be no structures, fences or trees in this area, and no encroachment into this zone during any stage of the development; no materials should therefore be stored within this area during construction. For clarity maintenance strips will be measured from the top of the embankment or bank and not the centreline of an ordinary watercourse or main river. Where watercourses have flood defences an 8 metre easement from the top of the bank or from the landward toe of any flood defence should be left clear.
8.222 Foul water should be disposed to public sewers wherever possible. Non-mains foul drainage disposal options will only be considered where applicants provide robust evidence that it is impracticable, unsustainable or too costly to do so, compared against the lifetime costs/impacts of the non-mains alternative. This means that new public sewers may need to be laid in some areas. Sealed cess-pools will rarely be acceptable because of the sustainability implications of this option. Septic tanks discharging directly to watercourses will not be acceptable for water quality reasons. Any proposals involving non-mains drainage must be accompanied by a suitable foul drainage assessment.
8.223 Policy SP48 will be delivered through the determination of planning applications and applications for drainage approval. Where planning permission is required applications for drainage approval and planning permission can be lodged jointly with the planning authority but the SAB will determine the drainage application. The SAB will also be responsible for adopting and maintaining approved SuDS which serve more than one property.
114 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Map 6 Rotherham Main Rivers
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 115 8
Policy SP 49
Assessment of Mineral Extraction Proposals
Developers will be required to carry out development in accordance with an agreed scheme of working and restoration which will be approved as part of the grant of planning permission. Proposals for mineral working will be assessed with regard to the following considerations:
a. the effect on local amenity in terms of visual impact, blasting, dust, noise and other potential disturbance, taking into account any protective measures which are proposed;
b. the likely duration of working;
c. any adverse impact on biodiversity and geodiversity resources, ecological networks or features of importance for wildlife. Where it can be demonstrated that there are overriding benefits minerals development may be permitted subject to mitigation or compensation measures, including biodiversity creation and enhancement which must be put in place and managed;
d. the proposed final appearance and land form of the site. Proposals for new habitat creation and enhancement must have regards to priorities set out in the regional and local Biodiversity Action Plans and other appropriate strategies;
e. the effect of working and restoration on water resources, including pollution and possible disturbance to surface drainage and groundwater levels;
f. the impact on the best and most versatile agricultural land. The Council will require submission of a soil strategy. Where minerals development is proposed on such agricultural land involving restoration to agricultural use, the objective will be to restore this land to its previous agricultural quality or better if reasonably practical. Amenity or forestry may be appropriate alternatives to agricultural use, but in such cases restoration and aftercare steps should enable the retention of the land’s longer term potential as a high quality agriculture resource,
g. the amount of agricultural land take, with release of land being restricted to that which is reasonably required for carrying out the working in accordance with the best existing techniques;
h. the suitability of restoration and aftercare proposals to return the development site to a beneficial after-use once working has ceased. The Council will seek to ensure that the highest possible standards of site restoration are achieved in order to avoid creating any legacy issues for future generations to manage;
i. the effect on farm structure, the likely effectiveness of restoration proposals and the effect on agricultural productivity by reason of noise, dust or traffic disturbance, both of the land the subject of the proposal and adjoining agricultural land;
116 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 j. the effect which traffic generated by the proposal will have on road safety, property and the amenities of the people living in the vicinity of the development, or along the transportation routes likely to be used;
k. the availability or provision of adequate access to a suitable highway; and
l. the potential for non-road transport opportunities, the use of canal, rail, pipeline or conveyor facilities being encouraged in order to reduce disturbance caused by road traffic, wherever physical and economic factors permit.
Explanation
8.224 Policy SP49 sets out the factors which will be considered when determining proposals for mineral extraction, seeking to balance the requirements of the industry and the local environment. As minerals can only be worked where they occur this can result in the establishment of a heavy industrial use in the countryside, with the consequent disturbance which it may represent.
8.225 Mineral extraction need not be incompatible with Green Belt objectives provided that high environmental standards are maintained and that the site is well restored. Restoration and aftercare schemes will need to be agreed and resourced to ensure that, following extraction, land can be returned to its original characteristics. Consideration may be given to restoration schemes that provide for an alternate after use. Such cases will be considered on their merit having regard to relevant planning policies. Whatever the form of restoration, the Council will seek to ensure that it is to the highest possible standards in order to avoid creating any legacy issues for future generations to manage.
8.226 Minerals development should include or allow the recording of geo-diversity resources during extraction to increase and maintain relevant environmental evidence.
8.227 There is a need to conserve the best and most versatile agricultural land; therefore, the working of minerals on land of lower rather than higher agricultural quality is to be preferred, followed generally by restoration to an agricultural after-use where this is considered appropriate . A detailed assessment of land quality is normally made when individual planning applications for extraction are submitted. Amenity or forestry after use may be an appropriate alternative to agricultural use, but where the best and most versatile agricultural land is involved the restoration and aftercare steps should enable the retention of its longer term potential as a high quality agricultural resource. Policy SP37 provides further detailed guidance on soil resources and conserving the resource.
8.228 Mineral operations can be substantial generators of traffic, often in rural areas. In assessing applications to work minerals, the Council will consider such matters as vehicle routeing, access and wheel-washing provision. Adequate access to a suitable highway is necessary for mineral workings and the provision of rail and/ or canal transport facilities will be encouraged where these are available and provide a feasible alternative to road transport.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 117 8
Policy SP 50
Safeguarding Mineral Infrastructure
Permission for non-minerals development involving, or in the vicinity of safeguarded mineral infrastructure sites will be granted where it can be demonstrated that:
a. the infrastructure is no longer required or no longer meets the needs of the mineral or construction industry; or b. development will not prejudice the mineral infrastructure's operation or current or future use; or c. an alternative, appropriate, site provides capacity for delivery of the mineral infrastructure; or d. the need for the proposed development outweighs the need to safeguard the site for mineral infrastructure
The policy will also apply to sites in use for concrete batching, the manufacture of coated materials, other concrete products and the handling, processing and distribution of substitute, recycled and secondary aggregate material not identified on the Policies Map.
Explanation
8.229 As well as mineral resources, national planning policy advocates the safeguarding of sites for the transportation of minerals by rail and water in order to ensure their availability, and facilities used for the processing of minerals for the manufacture of products from minerals. Policy SP50 sets out how proposals for non-minerals development involving, or in the vicinity of, safeguarded mineral infrastructure will be considered.
8.230 Within Rotherham there are existing rail sidings and wharves which are not in use for mineral transportation but could have potential for such use in the future. The following wharves and rail sidings have been identified as safeguarded infrastructure sites on the Policies Map:
Masbrough rail sidings Maltby Colliery rail sidings AMA wharf (Rawmarsh Road) Stevenson’s wharf (Northfield Road) Tata steelworks (Aldwarke) Waddingtons dockyard (Swinton)
8.231 To ensure that sites which may allow opportunities for transport of minerals are appropriately safeguarded Policy SP50 will apply to all proposals involving these sites.
8.232 There are also supporting infrastructure sites such as cement and asphalt plants, which play an important role in the local economy. The Policy will apply to the following mineral infrastructure sites, identified on the Policies Map:
118 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Cement works (Hope Construction Materials), West Bawtry Road, Canklow Cement works (Lafarge), Mansfield Road, Aston Cement works (Tarmac Lafarge), Wath Road, Wath upon Dearne Cement works (Ecomix), Whitelee Road, Swinton Cement works (Cemex), Taylors Lane, Parkgate Asphalt plant (Steelphalt), Sheffield Road, Templeborough Kiveton Park Landfill and Recycling Centre, Dog Kennels Lane, Kiveton Park (secondary aggregates production) Lynskey Excavations Ltd, Common Lane, Wath-upon-Dearne (secondary aggregates production) Roy Hatfield Ltd, Fullerton Road, Templeborough (secondary aggregates production) Anstone Quarry (Forticrete), Kiveton Park (concrete products)
8.233 The Policy will also apply to other sites used for concrete batching, the manufacture of coated materials, other concrete products and the handling, processing and distribution of substitute, recycled and secondary aggregate material not identified on the Policies Map. This acknowledges that sites other than those identified above may be granted planning permission in future, and that the above identified sites may cease operation or planning permission for alternative uses may be granted in the future.
8.234 Proposals will be supported where the infrastructure is no longer needed or does not meet the needs of the mineral or construction industry, or the proposed use will not prejudice the mineral infrastructure's operation. Consideration will also be given to ensuring that opportunities for the future use of sites (in particular wharves and railway sidings) for the transportation of materials are not needlessly sterilised. The assessment of proposals will also consider whether alternative sites provide capacity for the delivery of the mineral infrastructure and whether the need for the proposed development outweighs the need to safeguard the site for mineral infrastructure.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 119 8
Policy SP 51
Exploration and Appraisal of Onshore Oil and Gas
Proposals for exploration and appraisal of onshore oil and gas will be permitted where:
a. they are supported by an overall scheme which allows for the exploration and appraisal of an oil or gas field together with any other fields in close proximity so far as is reasonable and practicable before production commences. This must include an indication of the extent of the resources and the extent of the area of search within the resource;
b. the integrity of the geological structure is demonstrated to be suitable;
c. infrastructure and associated facilities are sited in the least sensitive location from which the target resources can be accessed, so as to minimise the environmental and ecological impact of development;
d. any adverse impacts can be mitigated to an acceptable level, with safeguards to protect environmental and amenity interests put in place as necessary;
e. operations are for an agreed, temporary length of time; and
f. sites and associated facilities are restored in line with a scheme to be agreed by the Council at the earliest practicable opportunity if resources are not found in economically viable volumes, or they are developed within a time frame agreed.
Explanation
8.235 Oil and gas (hydrocarbons) are primary sources of energy in the UK. A recent study by the British Geological Survey considered the potential volume of shale gas in the Bowland Basin and indicates that reserves may be present throughout the borough (The Carboniferous Bowland Shale gas study: geology and resource estimation. British Geological Survey for Department of Energy and Climate Change, 2013). Onshore extraction of hydrocarbons may only take place if the operator has first obtained a petroleum licence and subsequently obtained both planning permission and other necessary permits and approvals. There are three phases of onshore hydrocarbon extraction: exploration, testing (appraisal) and production. Exploration aims to identify the presence (or absence) of hydrocarbons at a location. This is followed by the testing process to determine the scale of the resource and subsequently production where that is practicable. The nature of operations for oil and gas development is very different from conventional mineral working and potential impacts and planning issues vary according to the particular phase of activity. Policy SP52 sets out the criteria against which proposals for the exploration and appraisal phases will be considered.
8.236 Exploration can include a range of activities to assess prospective sites, such as geological mapping, geophysical/seismic investigations and the drilling of wells and boreholes. Appraisal may require further exploratory work including longer-term tests and the drilling of further wells. This may involve additional drilling at sites away from the exploration site.
120 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.237 Proposals for exploration and appraisal will need to be supported by an overall scheme which includes identification of the likely extent of resources and the area of search. The area of search is defined as the area within which the exploration or appraisal will take place in relation to the wider reservoir. The Council will require evidence which demonstrates that the geological structure is suitable for appraisal and exploration. Permission will only be granted where any identified impacts can be appropriately mitigated and where it can be demonstrated that infrastructure and facilities have been sited in the least sensitive location to enable access to the target resource. Proposals will be required to comply with other Plan policies and particular attention will be given to the proximity of dwellings or other sensitive land use. Proposals for drilling will not generally be acceptable close to dwellings unless noise levels can be reduced to an acceptable level. Careful consideration will be given to controlling vehicular activity and routing, controlling the disposal of mud and other drilling residue, and controlling noise and light emissions particularly in relation to night time activity. To minimise potential impacts the overall scheme should allow for the exploration and appraisal of adjacent oil or gas fields using existing well sites and facilities so far as is reasonable and technically feasible to do so.
8.238 Planning permission will be granted subject to an agreed temporary length of time and restoration scheme. Proposals should include a scheme for restoration to take place as early as practicable if oil and gas is not found. Where reserves are found in economically viable quantities, it is expected that development to the next stage will take place within a reasonable time frame.
Policy SP 52
Onshore Oil and Gas Production Facilities and Ancillary Development
Proposals for onshore oil and gas production and other related ancillary development, will be permitted where:
a. a full appraisal of the oil or gas field has been completed to the Council’s satisfaction;
b. they form part of a comprehensive scheme for the full development of the oil or gas field within an agreed timescale;
c. infrastructure and facilities are justified in terms of their number and extent, sited in the least sensitive location from which the target resources can be accessed, and designed and operated to minimise environmental and amenity impacts
d. any individual and cumulative adverse impacts can be mitigated to an acceptable level;
e. existing facilities are used for the development of any additional fields discovered unless the applicant satisfies the Council that this would not be technically feasible and any adverse impacts can be mitigated;
f. sites and ancillary facilities are restored, in line with a scheme to be agreed by the Council, at the earliest practicable opportunity when they are no longer required. The strategy for decommissioning and restoration should be in accordance with the scheme for development of the oil or gas field and include mitigation where necessary to address identified impacts.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 121 8
Explanation
8.239 If economic concentrations of oil and gas are found, then permission may be sought to develop the field commercially. The Council will expect any such proposals to be supported by evidence of a full appraisal of the oil or gas field and a comprehensive scheme which allows for the full development of the field.
8.240 Permission will only be granted where any identified impacts can be appropriately mitigated and where it can be demonstrated that infrastructure and facilities have been sited in the least sensitive location to enable access to the target resource. Proposals will be required to comply with other Plan policies and particular attention will be given to the proximity of dwellings or other sensitive land use. Proposals for drilling will not generally be acceptable close to dwellings unless noise levels can be reduced to an acceptable level. Careful consideration will be given to controlling vehicular activity and routing, controlling the disposal of mud and other drilling residue, and controlling noise and light emissions particularly in relation to night time activity. Planning conditions could also govern the timing and method of gas flaring, the means of disposal of unwanted gas and the method by which the end product is to be transported from the well site or gathering station.
8.241 To minimise potential impacts the overall scheme should allow for the exploration and appraisal of adjacent oil or gas fields using existing well sites and facilities so far as is reasonable and technically feasible to do so. Proposals should include a scheme for decommissioning and restoration to take place as early as practicable when they are no longer required. Depending on the size of the site and facilities present and number of components of a site, decommissioning can require a substantial amount of material to be taken away. In agreeing a scheme of decommissioning and restoration the Council will therefore carefully consider mitigation requirements including, but not limited to, traffic generation and pollution control.
122 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.6 Creating safe and sustainable communities
Policy SP 53
Pollution Control and Hazardous Installations
Development proposals that are likely to cause pollution, or be exposed to pollution, will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that mitigation measures will minimise potential impacts to levels that protect health, environmental quality and amenity. When determining planning applications, particular consideration will be given to:
a. the detrimental impact on the amenity of the local area, including an assessment of the risks to public health. b. the presence of noise generating uses close to the site, and the potential noise likely to be generated by the proposed development. Noise sensitive uses will not normally be acceptable adjacent to noisy transport or other industrial uses. A Noise Assessment will be required to enable clear decision-making on any planning application. c. the impact on national air quality objectives and an assessment of the impacts on local air quality; including locally determined Air Quality Management Areas and meeting the aims and objectives of the Air Quality Action Plan. d. any adverse effects on the quantity, quality and ecology features of water bodies and groundwater resources.
Development proposals which involve notifiable quantities of hazardous substances or which are in the vicinity of hazardous installations or other known hazards (in particular sensitive development which is likely to be exposed to hazardous processes or other potentially hazardous activities) will only be permitted if it can be demonstrated that:
e. the amount, type and location of hazardous substances would not pose adverse health and safety risks to the surrounding population and environment; and f. any necessary measures would be put in place prior to development to protect public health and safety.
Artificial lighting has the potential to cause unacceptable light pollution in the form of sky-glow, glare or intrusion onto other property and land. Development proposals should ensure that adequate and reasonable controls to protect dwellings and other sensitive property, the rural night-sky, observatories, road-users, and designated sites for conservation of biodiversity or protected species are included within the proposals.
Explanation
8.242 Where development proposals have the potential to result in pollution of the environment, including the demolition, construction phase and future use, the Council will expect details of appropriate mitigation measures to be submitted with the planning application. Where necessary the Council will use planning conditions and/or legal agreements to mitigate the impact of pollution arising from the proposed development for the benefit of the wider community.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 123 8
8.243 The impact of existing sources of pollution should also be taken into account when locating new development. New development sensitive to pollution will not be appropriate where existing sources of noise or other pollution cannot be satisfactorily mitigated. New development will not be appropriate where it would prejudice the viability of other important land uses by reason of its sensitivity to pollution. Residential development, for example, will not usually be appropriate in locations where its presence is likely to give rise to the imposition of undue operational constraints on existing safeguarded industrial uses that might prejudice their ability to continue operation.
8.244 Some uses are particularly sensitive to noise. For the purposes of this policy these include, but are not restricted to: housing & residential institutions, educational establishments, care establishments such as hospitals and nursing homes, public buildings such as libraries and museums, places of worship, places of audience based recreation, offices and research establishments.
8.245 Highways, railways and aircraft are a major source of noise nuisance. Noise generated may vary at different times, and there are maximum levels set out in government regulations that are considered to be reasonable. Measures can sometimes be incorporated into development to reduce noise to acceptable limits. Buildings can be sited away from the noise and constructed with materials that reduce noise.
8.246 Proposals for industrial development or other uses which are likely to generate noise will be assessed on their circumstances. Locational characteristics will be taken into account and consideration given to appropriate noise reduction. In noise sensitive locations applicants will be required to demonstrate through a Noise Assessment prepared to an acceptable and agreed standard, that the development is constructed to a standard and/or incorporates noise reduction measures which will ensure that the resulting noise levels at specified locations will not exceed acceptable maximum levels.
8.247 There are a number of sites within the Borough which are identified as dangerous substance establishments by virtue of the quantities of hazardous substances present. Whilst they are subject to stringent controls under existing health and safety legislation, it is considered prudent to control the kinds of development permitted in the vicinity of these installations.
8.248 Where hazardous processes are carried out the implications extend beyond the boundaries of the site. The release of toxic chemicals or effects of an explosion could be serious not only for those working on the premises, but to the wider community living and working in the vicinity. It will not be appropriate for new development to be permitted which could result in significant numbers of people living, working or congregating close to hazardous installations.
8.249 Sensitive development such as housing, educational establishments, hospitals, places of worship and community facilities are generally considered to be incompatible with hazardous processes or activities. Some development within proximity to hazardous installations may be appropriate however, and in these circumstances the Council may use planning conditions and/or legal agreements to prevent or control risk to public safety.
8.250 Proposals related to hazardous industry will receive careful consideration by the Council in consultation with the Health and Safety Executive.
124 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.251 The Council is concerned to ensure that all new development, particularly commercial, industrial and traffic generating uses (including the cumulative impact of a number of small developments), does not result in an unacceptable level of air pollution to the detriment of public health and other land uses. Developers will be expected to take proper account of air quality issues when drawing up their proposals. Within Air Quality Management Areas an air quality assessment will be required to be submitted with proposals for development and will be required to contribute to air quality improvement measures.
8.252 Development outside Air Quality Management Areas may also require an air quality assessment. The Council has produced an Air Quality Action Plan and Good Practice Guidance to advise developers in preparing their proposals who will be expected to take this into account when proposing development which could have an impact on air quality. Appropriate mitigation measures will be secured through planning conditions and/or legal agreements.
8.253 Future development proposals will be expected to address the key objectives of the Water Framework Directive, respond to the guidance and recommendations in the Humber River Basin Management Plan, the Don Catchment Flood Management Plan and relevant Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies. These documents are available from the Environment Agency; with the associated issues considered further in CS24 'Conserving and Enhancing the Water Environment'.
8.254 In order to balance the requirements for security whilst protecting amenity and minimising the impact on the environment, the Council will require that proposals for development include adequate information about floodlighting and other external lighting, taking full account of the NPPG on Light Pollution.
8.255 Environmental Impact Assessment will be required where development proposals are likely to have a significant effect on the environment. The types of development for which Environmental Impact Assessment may be required is listed in the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999 and Circular 2/99 provides guidance on the procedures to be followed.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 125 8
Policy SP 54
Contaminated and Unstable Land
Where land is known to be or suspected of being contaminated, or development may result in the release of contaminants from adjoining land, or there are adverse ground conditions caused by unstable land, development proposals should:
a. demonstrate there is no significant harm, or risk of significant harm, to human health or the environment or of pollution of any watercourse or ground water; b. ensure necessary remedial action is undertaken to safeguard users or occupiers of the site or neighbouring land and protect the environment and any buildings or services from contamination during development and in the future; c. demonstrate that adverse ground conditions have been properly identified and safely treated; d. clearly demonstrate to the satisfaction of the local planning authority, that the land is suitable for its current or proposed use.
Explanation
8.256 The Council will encourage the full and effective use of land in an environmentally acceptable manner. Where built development is involved, difficulties may occasionally arise where local geology and topography, frequently influenced by past industrial practices, such as mineral workings (especially underground coal mining), tipping and other made ground, and engineering activity, has created potential or actual ground instability, these issues need to be addressed to enable development to proceed.
8.257 Broad categories for the causes of instability include:
the effects of underground cavities; these may be of natural origin or due to mining or civil engineering works unstable slopes; these may be natural or man made whether excavated, as in quarries or cuttings, or constructed, as in tips and embankments, ground compression; this may be of natural origin due to peat, alluvial, estuarine or marine soils; or due to human activities, e.g. made ground, landfill or restored opencast mines; ground movements due to shrinking and swelling clays.
8.258 Ground movements vary in intensity and extent and in their effects on surface land use. Instability may occur whether or not there is any development on the surface. It is important to recognise that the development itself or the intensification of development may be the triggering factor which initiates instability problems. Consequently land and/or slope stability risk assessments should be undertaken in accordance with NPPG on Land Stability.
8.259 Where a proposed development site is known or suspected of being contaminated, developers will be expected to provide a full assessment of the contamination and proposals for any necessary remediation work. Development will be permitted where it can be demonstrated that the contamination
126 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 will not cause a threat to public health, safety or the environment following the implementation of remedial measures.
8.260 Where a site is affected by contamination or land stability issues, responsibility for securing a safe development rests with the developer and/or landowner.
Policy SP 55
Design Principles
All forms of development are required to be of high quality, incorporate inclusive design principles and positively contribute to the local character and distinctiveness of an area and the way it functions. This policy applies to all development proposals including alterations and extensions to existing buildings.
In considering development proposals regard will be had to the following:
a. the setting of the site, including the size, scale, mass, volume, height, orientation, form, and grain of surrounding development; b. that an assessment of local building materials, their colour and architectural detailing has been undertaken and submitted with the application; c. the use of appropriate materials and landscaping and utilisation of natural features, such as topography, watercourses, trees, boundary treatments, planting and biodiversity to create visually attractive high quality development; d. proposals reinforce and complement local distinctiveness and create a positive sense of place; public art should be incorporated into proposals where appropriate; e. the legibility and permeability of development to promote ease of movement, the creation of safe, secure and accessible environments and provide clear distinction between public and private spaces - lighting of the public realm and the built development will be particularly important; f. the provision of satisfactory arrangements for the storage and collection of refuse, recyclable materials and garden waste to enable easy and convenient recycling and composting; g. the design and layout of buildings to enable sufficient sunlight and daylight to penetrate into and between buildings, and ensure that adjoining land or properties are protected from unacceptable overshadowing; h. new public and commercial developments are encouraged to include baby changing, breast feeding and accessible ‘Changing Places’ toilet facilities in addition to standard accessible toilets.
Design and Access Statements, and where appropriate detailed masterplanning, will be expected to encompass these broad aims and principles. Applicants are strongly encouraged to demonstrate an appropriate level of community engagement in their preparation; to comprehensively consider health and equalities impacts and safety and security issues and, clearly demonstrate through their submission, how these issues and any impacts arising, have influenced the final design solution.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 127 8
Explanation
8.261 This policy sets out the overarching elements of architectural and urban design that need to be satisfied for high quality sustainable development to be achieved. These elements will be applicable to the majority of development, however the scale and nature of a development will determine the relevance of particular aspects. Compliance with Policy SP55 will demonstrate that the site and its context has been sufficiently analysed and understood during the design process and that this knowledge has been used in the proposed design of the development.
8.262 The context (setting) of a site or area needs to be analysed and understood so that it informs the design of development that appropriately maintains and enhances the site’s sense of place. This will be achieved by development that complements and builds further coherence into the positive features of Rotherham's locally distinct patterns of development, land use and communities, and help define its unique character.
8.263 Developments with outstanding or innovative design that raise the standard of design in the area will be supported, providing they comply with all other relevant policies in this document.
8.264 Site design should ensure that the site can be accessed, understood and used to the greatest extent possible by all people regardless of their age, size, ability or disability. By considering people's diverse needs and abilities throughout the design process, which reflects the life cycle approach, environments that meet the needs of all can be achieved.
8.265 Legible developments are easily understood by their users - they help people to find their way around both the development and the wider area, and aid understanding of how a place works and functions. Developments that promote a successful relationship between public and private spaces have clear public fronts and private backs of buildings, giving a clear indication of ownership and management responsibility for these spaces. For residential schemes in particular it is important that plot boundaries (front, back and side) are demarcated with robust boundary walls, fences, railings or hedges appropriate to the area.
8.266 National policy (see NPPG on Design) and Rotherham's Core Strategy (see CS28 Sustainable Design) recognise that safety and security are essential in creating successful development. In general it is desirable to have a level of permeability that offers a variety of attractive, convenient and safe routes through an area. However, if an area is too permeable it can have its own problems - it can lead to underused routes which attract crime and anti-social behaviour and make moving through an area difficult and confusing. Therefore, developments are encouraged to meet the principles set out in current good practice guidance: "Safer Places - The Planning System and Crime Prevention" and "Secured by Design" .
8.267 Waste storage and recycling facilities should be integrated into new developments; applicants should demonstrate how they have considered innovative ways to reduce the disposal of waste to landfill. Applicants will also need to demonstrate how their proposals encourage easy and convenient recycling and 'plain sight' collection facilities in locations within the site that are accessible to all. In considering their development proposals applicants will be expected to reference the Barnsley, Doncaster, Rotherham Joint Waste Plan (March 2012) and to demonstrate how they have taken on board the requirements of this development plan.
128 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.268 Landscape design is not something that can be considered after a building has been designed or built, it is integral to the design and functioning of the whole development and wider area. The landscape and proposed buildings need to be considered together from the start of the design process. Car parking spaces should be well defined and integrated with good quality surfacing materials and landscaping within the public realm whilst not letting parking dominate the environment. Reference to policy SP33 Green Infrastructure and Landscaping is essential.
8.269 Development proposals will be required to demonstrate that they have appropriately taken account of and mitigated against any site constraints which may have a detrimental impact upon amenity, including privacy, direct sunlight or daylight. The design and layout of buildings must enable sufficient sunlight and daylight to penetrate into and between buildings, and ensure that adjoining land or properties are protected from unacceptable overshadowing. The Building Research Establishment (BRE) provides good practice guidance in "Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight: a guide to good practice" (BRE, 2011.)
8.270 As well as contributing to the visual quality of development, the use of natural screening (rows of trees or foliage) in industrial areas and where development adjoins more sensitive land uses, helps to reduce the impact of noise and air pollution on surrounding areas. Consideration will therefore be given to how proposals have used natural screening.
8.271 The use of public art will be encouraged, and the merits of such provision will be considered on a case by case basis. Public art provision should be considered at the outset to ensure that local communities have an opportunity to contribute to and influence their public realm through this medium.
8.272 Pylons and cables inevitably have an impact on the visual amenity of their surroundings. Recognising the access and safety considerations of these installations and the proximity of development to them will be dependent upon a combination of factors including the development concerned, the type of overhead power line and the topography of the land where the development is proposed. Applicants will be expected to demonstrate how they have considered this issue.
8.273 Other considerations include those that do not relate to amenity, but to operations on adjoining sites such as impacts on renewable or low carbon energy supply, i.e. by detrimentally overshadowing solar panels. Where negative impacts are identified, the design should be modified to avoid adverse impacts.
8.274 The facilities provided by new developments can help contribute to establishing a friendly, accessible environment. New public and commercial buildings (such as civic buildings, leisure centres, shopping complexes and entertainment venues) are encouraged to meet the needs of users and visitors by providing baby changing, breast feeding and accessible ‘Changing Places’ toilet facilities in addition to standard accessible toilets. 'Changing Places' toilets have enough space for disabled people and their carers or personal assistant(s), and the right equipment, including a height adjustable changing bench and hoist. Developments providing public spaces are encouraged to offer a comfortable area where one or more mothers can feed their babies, in line with the recommendations in the Rotherham Breast Friendly Public Places guidance.
8.275 Further guidance on design matters is provided in the South Yorkshire Residential Design Guide (consideration will be given to adopting this document, all or in part, as a Supplementary
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 129 8
Planning Document). Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD's) will also be created for Householder Development (Extensions) and Backland & Tandem Development. Review by applicants of the Homes & Communities Agency document 'Urban Design Lessons: Housing Layout and Neighbourhood Quality' may also be valuable.
8.276 Design and Access Statements or if more detailed Masterplans are prepared, the level of detail should relate to the scale & complexity of the proposal. Design and Access Statements should demonstrate how health and equalities impacts and safety and security issues of proposals have been addressed. Engagement with South Yorkshire Police's Architectural Liaison Team is also encouraged. Allied to this, masterplans or Design and Access Statements should demonstrate that the needs of neighbouring communities have been considered with the aim of increasing equality more widely in the area. This could apply to transport infrastructure, as well as to greenspace, green infrastructure and any new services and facilities.
8.277 Rotherham's Statement of Community Involvement has established guidelines for potential applicants, land owners and developers for involving the public, communities of interest and key stakeholders in proposals. These consultations should be carried out at an early stage in the design process to ensure that pivotal issues are tackled and that the concerns of local people, stakeholders and communities of interest are addressed, and mitigation measures put in place where feasible.
130 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Policy SP 56
Housing Standards
1 Housing Development
All new housing developments (including changes of use, houses in multiple occupation, and sheltered housing) will meet the following criteria:
a. accommodation of adequate size meeting the space standards both internal and external of the South Yorkshire Residential Design Guide, with due consideration to aspect, outlook from habitable rooms, noise, ventilation, privacy, light; b. functional and usable space that has good provision for play, amenity and garden space; c. built to be accessible and adaptable to meet changing occupier circumstances over the lifetime of the development; and d. Design and Access Statements will have regard to Building for Life toolkit, or the most up to date guidance;
Additionally for flats and apartment developments:
e. avoiding access paths against ground floor windows; f. ensuring amenity space is secured and directly accessed through the building; and g. create inviting entrances with access not dominated by motor vehicles.
2 Car Parking Layout
In terms of car parking, residential layouts must be designed to:
h. reduce the visual impacts of parking on the street-scene and provide defined visitor parking on-street; i. discourage the obstruction of footways by kerb parking, and parking that compromises the operation of the highway; and j. ensure in-curtilage/on plot parking does not result in streets dominated by parking platforms to the front of the property or large expanses of garage doors fronting the street.
No amendments have been made to SP56 'Housing Standards' as a consequence of the outcomes of the draft Sites & Policies consultation, pending an evaluation of the nationally described standards set to be established in due course under the National Planning Policy Framework.
Explanation
8.278 New homes should be constructed to be accessible and adaptable to meet changing circumstances over a person's lifetime, in developments that are attractive to, and safe for, all. Homes that can adapt to change as new occupants move in, families grow, and occupants age or experience ill health, are at the heart of the South Yorkshire Residential Design Guide. Flexible and adaptable housing design reduces unwanted moves and allows sustainable communities to develop. It can also
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 131 8
avoid unsightly adaptations and extensions to accommodation and costly ancillary aids and services. Accordingly schemes should perform well when reviewed against all sections of Building for Life toolkit and any issues arising should be highlighted early on and resolved.
8.279 In order to protect the living conditions and well-being of future occupants, applications for residential development must demonstrate how the proposed accommodation is functionally fit for purpose and has been designed to meet the specific needs of the occupants. It should demonstrate how the accommodation is large enough to provide sufficient space for privacy, socialising, studying, cooking, dining, sleeping, washing and storage of household goods and belongings. All dwelling units should have convenient access to adequate private or communal amenity space and benefit from good levels of day lighting, privacy and security.
8.280 The usefulness of a room can depend as much on design as on its size. Therefore, to ensure that rooms function comfortably and efficiently for their intended purpose, their position and dimensions of doors and windows, natural lighting and ventilation will also be taken into account.
8.281 Homes should have sufficient activity, storage and circulation space to provide for the needs of all potential occupants and their visitors. Dwelling plans should demonstrate that suitable space is provided for standard-sized furniture, a washing machine and for drying clothes within the home and its curtilage.
8.282 Those details not evident on the dwelling plan are required to be detailed in the Design and Access Statement and relevant schedule of accommodation (for example, details such as level entry showers and the route for ceiling mounted hoists). The number of occupants each home is designed to accommodate should be made clear, in order for the standards to be verified.
8.283 Garages and integral garages are often not used for their intended purpose due to a lack of storage provision, inadequate sized garages/doors and a trend towards increasingly large vehicles. This places additional pressure on parking in the public realm and can result in the loss of front gardens as these are paved over. Therefore, integral or standalone garages will not be counted as a parking space unless they are an adequate size (currently 3x6 metres minimum clear internal dimensions).
8.284 The Council acknowledges that there may be some conflict between meeting standards and sympathetically converting or adapting historic buildings, or the extent of adaptation required to the existing fabric may not be viably achievable in some minor developments. In such instances design proposals should ensure that the most appropriate balance is achieved and applications will be considered on their merits.
132 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Policy SP 57
Sustainable Construction
To enable high quality, functional and sustainable design to be clearly embedded in in future development, proposals should:
a. promote the use of renewable and recycled materials during construction; b. satisfy the requirements of Policy WCS7 of the Barnsley, Doncaster and Rotherham Joint Waste Plan (March 2012), regarding the management of waste products arising from the development and future occupation; c. demonstrate feasible and appropriate methods, locations and receptors for the temporary storage and re-use of high quality soils d. meet the relevant BREEAM ‘very good’ standards for non-residential buildings over 1000sqm; e. consider the installation of integrated renewable & low carbon energy technologies in new
and existing developments, in order to off-set CO2 emissions and mitigate the impacts of climate change. These could include (but are not limited to):
i. Solar Thermal ii. Solar Photovoltaic iii. Biomass Boilers iv. Ground Source Heat Pump v. Wind turbines vi. Combined heat & power schemes & associated infrastructure
Explanation
8.285 All new buildings should be built to a standard which minimises the consumption of resources during construction and thereafter in its occupation.
8.286 In order to be sustainable, durable and adaptable, developments must be designed for the long-term and use the minimum necessary amount of resources over their lifetime. The materials used and building design will enable the development to be easily maintained and altered for different uses and respond to the different needs of its users.
8.287 To achieve the highest standards of sustainable construction and accord with the energy hierarchy established in CS30, a number of measures could be employed such as incorporation of energy efficient passive solar design, use of environmentally friendly construction materials and avoidance of materials with a high embodied energy. Two useful reference guides are the nationally recognised "Green Guide to Specification" (BRE) and "GreenSpec".
8.288 It will be necessary to demonstrate that appropriate consideration has been made of the height and duration of soil storage mounds, and ensuring that these are viable alongside construction compounds and work sites. Loss of soil quality which is due directly to the inappropriateness if its
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 133 8
handling prior to re-use would not be acceptable. Further consideration of these issues is provided in SP37 Soil Resources.
8.289 All new proposals will need to be designed to withstand and adapt to the predicted impacts of climate change such as high temperatures, increased risks of flash flooding and changing ground conditions, to ensure that the building is practical and comfortable for all users during its lifespan. Relevant design and technological measures, for example green roofs and grey water recycling, which enable proposals to realise their full potential to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and adapt to climate change should be incorporated in the early design stage.
8.290 Reflecting paragraph 4.44 of the Barnsley, Doncaster and Rotherham Joint Waste Plan, appropriate private or communal waste storage areas and recycling facilities should be well-screened and integrated into the design and layout of new development. The location of these facilities should be accessible to residents as well as waste collection vehicles from the kerb-side, and these proposals must be shown on site plans.
8.291 The Council will support renewable energy proposals unless they would have unacceptable adverse effects which are not outweighed by the local and wider environmental, economic and social benefits of the development taking account of Core Strategy Policy CS30 and National Planning Practice Guidance for Renewable and Low Carbon Energy. This includes wider benefits arising from a clean, secure energy supply, reductions in greenhouse gases and other polluting emissions.
8.292 In determining whether a development is suitable to connect to a decentralised energy network, the Council will consider the heat demand of the development and it’s proximity to a decentralised energy network as well as the feasibility and viability of connecting or including plant equipment.
8.293 The mapped distribution of the renewable energy resource in Rotherham is given in the included 'Energy Opportunity Map'.
134 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Map 7 Energy Opportunity Map
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 135 8
Policy SP 58
Shop Front Design
The Council will seek the highest standards in the control of shop frontage by requiring new or replacement shop fronts to be designed so that:
a. they respect the character of the whole building and the overall character of the street scene; b. they respect the period and style of the building in terms of proportion and quality of materials and relate well to neighbouring properties; c. the use of transparent glazing is maximised on all windows and doors, including upper floors where they are in use; d. security precautions give protection against burglary and vandalism whilst respecting amenity and public safety; e. where shutters are required, their design and location do not obstruct any architectural features on the building or have an adverse environmental impact, and any external shutters are perforated and painted with the shutter box sited behind the fascia; f. any canopies should be incorporated within the overall design; g. in general, door recesses should not be deeper than 600mm.
An existing shop front which contributes to the character of a building or area should be retained and refurbished rather than replaced. Any original features such as pilasters and fascias that have been concealed by later additions should be exposed and restored in order to enhance the appearance of the shop front.
Explanation
8.294 The Council is committed to creating centres and shopping environments that are welcoming and attractive, projecting an image of quality and friendliness. The design of shop fronts has a major role to play in creating such quality environments. They are designed to attract attention, but this needs to be done sympathetically to the building upon which they are imposed and to the street scene in general. The promotion of good shop front design is therefore seen as essential.
8.295 It is important that shop fronts should not compromise the local character, scale and architectural quality of individual buildings. The Council is keen to encourage both the provision of contemporary designs with flair and the reinstatement of historic shop fronts. Where an existing shop front contributes to the character of a building or area the Council considers that this should be retained and refurbished in preference to being replaced, with original features being exposed and restored.
8.296 Policy SP58 sets out how we will assess proposals for new or replacement shop fronts to secure improvements to the visual quality of shop frontages and promote good shop front design that celebrates the character and architectural detailing of the original buildings to improve the townscape, which will benefit all the traders and the community as a whole.
136 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.297 Transparent glazing used wherever possible in doors and windows can assist in presenting an active and attractive street frontage. Whilst it is acknowledged that security measures will be required in shop fronts, we will encourage these to be limited to that which is reasonably necessary as excessive use can be detrimental to the setting of the overall character of the building and to the wider frontage. In this respect the policy sets out our requirements for the design and location of shutters and canopies. Where canopies contain advertising material they will be considered against SP58 'Advertisements'.
8.298 Building Regulations require doorways and entrances to be accessible to people with disabilities. Whilst door recesses can help provide variety and interest to a shop front these can become detrimental to access and to the buildings character when they are too deep. Therefore in general door recesses should not be deeper than 600mm.
8.299 The Council has produced a shop front design guide to encourage good quality design. Further work will be undertaken to update this guide and adopt it as a Supplementary Planning Document.
Policy SP 59
Advertisements
Advertisements are required to be of the highest possible standard and contribute to a safe and attractive environment.
Advertisements (including hoardings, illumination of hoardings, illuminated fascia signs, free-standing display panels, and estate agent boards) which require consent must not cause a public safety hazard or contribute to clutter or a loss of amenity. Proposals for advertisements will be supported where they:
a. are of a high quality and sensitive to their visual appearance in relation to their size and siting (including the building or structure on which they are to be sited) and the surrounding street scene, especially in the case of listed buildings and conservation areas; and b. do not contribute to an unsightly proliferation or clutter of signage in the vicinity; and c. do not cause a hazard to pedestrians or road users; and d. do not cause visual intrusion by virtue of light pollution into adjoining residential properties and avoid light pollution of nearby wildlife habitats; and e. do not have flashing internal or external illumination.
Explanation
8.300 Policy SP59 sets the criteria by which amenity and public safety will be assessed in Rotherham in relation to advertisements. The term "advertisement" covers a very wide range of advertisements and signs. Some advertisements are not regulated by the council and others benefit from "deemed consent", which means permission is not needed; this will depend on the size, position and illumination of the advert. Others advertisements will always need consent. For more information refer to DCLG’s
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 137 8
explanatory booklet on advertisement control ('Outdoor Advertisements and Signs – A Guide for Advertisers').
8.301 Poorly sited or badly designed advertisements and signs can have a detrimental effect on the character and appearance of areas and may raise issues of public safety. This can include projecting signs and illuminations, particularly flashing illuminations. When deciding applications for advertisements the Council will have regard to considerations of amenity and public safety, as well as the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 & NPPG on Advertisements.
Policy SP 60
Telecommunications
Proposals for the installation of telecommunications equipment should demonstrate that:
a. There is no significant adverse effect on the external appearance of the building on which, or space in which, they are located; b. The development would not have an unacceptable effect on areas of ecological interest, areas of landscape importance, archaeological sites, conservation areas or buildings of architectural or historical interest; historic parks & gardens c. The possibility of sharing facilities, such as masts, cabinet boxes and satellite dishes, and erecting antennae on existing buildings or other structures has been fully explored and where practical becomes the preferred location; d. Technologies to miniaturise and camouflage any telecommunications apparatus have been explored; e. They are appropriately designed, coloured and landscaped to take account of their setting; and f. There is no unacceptable adverse impact on the visual amenities of neighbouring occupiers.
Explanation
8.302 With demand for new telecommunications continuing to grow, the Council are keen to facilitate this expansion whilst at the same time minimising any environmental impacts. In particular, the Council will seek to ensure that the development of modern telecommunications equipment is sympathetic to Rotherham’s townscape and countryside. The aim is to ensure that telecommunications equipment is kept to a minimum through encouraging the sharing of existing facilities and/or proposed where this is technically possible. Proposals will not be supported where there is an unacceptable visual impact upon neighbouring occupiers, particularly within residential areas. The visual impact of telecommunications equipment can be minimised through careful design, placement, colouring and landscaping. In addition, using available technologies to miniaturise and camouflage apparatus can also contribute to reducing any visual intrusion. This will help to protect the character of an area and the appearance of property.
8.303 The policy applies to planning applications or prior notification applications for the installation of satellite dishes, microwave antennae, radio masts, cabinet boxes and other types of
138 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 telecommunications apparatus which require planning permission. When considering such applications the council will also have regard to the legal requirements placed upon telecommunications operators to provide an adequate service, and any technical and operational constraints that may be faced.
Policy SP 61
Safeguarding Community Facilities
Those areas allocated on the Policies Map for Community Facilities will, wherever possible, be retained or developed for such purposes. In addition, land or buildings currently used or last used for community purposes, including sport and recreational facilities but not identified as such on the Policies Map will be similarly safeguarded wherever possible. Development proposals which involve the loss of key community facilities shall only be permitted where the local planning authority is satisfied that adequate alternative provision has been made or where some other overriding public benefit will result from the loss of the facility, or that the retention of the land or building in community use is no longer viable, on the basis that:
a. the site or premises have been marketed to the Council's satisfaction for at least 12 months and included both traditional and web-based marketing, and regular advertisement in local, regional and/or national publications as appropriate; and
b. opportunities to re-let premises have been fully explored including the formation of a social enterprise or charitable group that can take over the premises; and
c. the premises/site have been marketed at a price which is commensurate with market values (based on evidence from recent and similar transactions and deals) and
d. it has been demonstrated that the terms and conditions set out in the lease are reasonable and attractive to potential businesses, and that no reasonable offer has been refused.
Explanation
8.304 Community facilities and services play an essential role in the quality of life of the borough’s residents and visitors, helping reduce car use, contributing towards the creation of sustainable communities. These can take many forms and the demand for which will vary in response to the demographic and economic changes in society and the needs of different groups in the community. This Policy is included to retain and ensure an adequate distribution of community facilities within the borough.
8.305 The Policies map identifies a range of community use sites for leisure, education and civic uses. However this is not exhaustive and the Policies map does not identify smaller community uses. For clarity community facilities may include, but are not limited to, places of worship, education facilities, village halls, community centres, local shops including post offices, public houses, doctors surgeries, health services (such as midwifery care, health visiting and mental health services), social
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 139 8
clubs, banks or cash points, swimming pools, leisure centres, sports halls and other sport and recreational facilities, and civic offices.
8.306 Commercial opportunism may often lead to pressure to displace community uses in favour of more profitable forms of development. This can be damaging to the interests of the local community dependent on such facilities. It may be particularly damaging for rural communities where key village services are lost. Consequently, the Council will seek to prevent the loss of such community facilities to other forms of development, unless alternative provision is made, there is some over-riding public benefit arising from development or there is demonstrable evidence that there is insufficient demand to warrant their retention.
8.307 To ensure that viable sites and premises are not lost to alternative uses, applicants should provide evidence that the land or property has been advertised on the open market for at least 12 months. The Council expects marketing to have taken place at least four times at roughly equal periods over the year, at a realistic price which reflects its value as a community use and that no reasonable offer has been refused.
8.308 The Council will seek evidence that a range of appropriate marketing methods have been employed, that opportunities to re-let premises have been fully explored and that the terms and conditions set out in the lease are reasonable and attractive to potential occupiers. Depending upon the type of facility in question there may be opportunities for premises to be taken on by local co-operatives, social enterprise or charitable groups. The Council will seek to ensure that such opportunities have been explored prior to granting planning permission that result in the loss of community facilities.
8.309 The Council will expect proposals to include an audit of community uses taking place within the premises to be lost, and evidence that these needs can be met through alternative provision. We will also take account of existing community activities in the area, any identified need for other community uses, services and facilities and any evidence of deficiency or over-provision of accommodation to provide such uses.
140 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Policy SP 62
Loss of Public Houses
Proposals for the redevelopment or change of use of public houses to other uses will be excepted to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the local planning authority:
a. that the public house is no longer economically viable; b. opportunities to re-let premises have been fully explored including the formation of a social enterprise or charitable group that can take over the premises; c. the site or premises have been marketed to the Council's satisfaction for at least 12 months and included both traditional and web-based marketing, and regular advertisement in local, regional and/or national publications as appropriate; and d. the premises/site have been marketed at a price which is commensurate with market values (based on evidence from recent and similar transactions and deals) and e. another community-based facility is proposed as part of any re-development in line with this Policy.
Explanation
8.310 The Borough has experienced the loss of a number of public houses in recent times, usually through redevelopment as public houses continue to face challenging trading conditions. Public houses can bring communities together, promoting social cohesion and integration and they are considered an important element in maintaining vitality and vibrancy within the area. It is acknowledged that it is possible to use permitted development rights contained in the Use Classes Order to change the use of a pub to a restaurant/café (Class A3), financial or professional services office (Class A2) or retail shop (Class A1). However where planning permission is required for redevelopment or a change of use Policy SP62 introduces a presumption against the loss of public houses unless future proposals can demonstrate that the criteria within policy has been fulfilled.
8.311 The policy seeks to ensure that pubs play a role within the local community and are retained to continue to provide such a role. Public houses are considered to be an established part of community life and can play an important social role, offering residents a meeting place for food, drink, entertainment and functions. However, where pubs are no longer economically viable or do not provide an important community function, alternative uses of the site may be considered.
8.312 Evidence will need to be submitted and this should include evidence of the appointment of a property consultant / estate agent to handle the marketing of the property and records of where and how the property has been marketed for a minimum of 12 months. The Council will look to ensure that opportunities for public houses to be taken on by local co-operatives, social enterprise or charitable groups have also been explored.
8.313 Development involving the loss of a public house may be acceptable where there is alternative access within the local area to at least one public house. For the purposes of this policy reasonable walking distance is normally defined as 800 metres, measured from the site of the proposed development, taking into account barriers such as main roads, rivers and railway lines. It is recognised
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 141 8
that flexibility will be required in certain circumstances; therefore walking distances may be shortened (for example where locations are particularly steep) or lengthened (for example in rural locations and green belt villages) where appropriate.
Policy SP 63
Access to Community Facilities
Residential development should have good access to a range of shops and services. On larger scale residential developments of 10 or more dwellings the majority of homes should be within reasonable walking distance via safe pedestrian access of a local convenience shop and a reasonable range of other services or community facilities. This may require the provision of local services or facilities by developers where these requirements would not otherwise be met or where new development would place an unacceptable burden upon existing facilities, unless it can be demonstrated that such provision would not be viable or would threaten the viability of the overall scheme.
Explanation
8.314 Access to a local convenience shop is considered vital to ensure that communities have access to every day essential items. Communities should also have access to a reasonable range of other local facilities and services. These include, but are not limited to, other shops, banking facilities, public houses, libraries, hospitals, schools, health care surgeries, places of worship, nurseries, day care provision, indoor and outdoor recreation, cultural and leisure facilities, youth centres, village halls and emergency service buildings. Other types of facilities which offer benefits to the community will be considered on their merits.
8.315 On new housing developments of 10 or more dwellings we will expect the majority of dwellings (ie 80%) to be within reasonable walking distance of a local convenience store, and a reasonable range of other local facilities. Access should be via a safe pedestrian route. For the purposes of this policy reasonable walking distance will be 800m from the centre of the site, taking into account barriers such as main roads, rivers and railway lines. It is recognised that flexibility will be required in certain circumstances; therefore walking distances may be shortened (for example where sites are particularly steep or the facility would serve older or disabled people) or lengthened (for example in rural locations and green belt villages) where appropriate.
8.316 Where development proposals would otherwise not meet the requirements of this policy the Council may require the provision of local services or facilities. This could be in the form of shop units to provide for local needs, or other facilities as appropriate to that community. New developments not only create demands for new infrastructure but also impact upon wider community and civic provision. For example, a large new housing development may place a burden on the capacity of existing shops, schools, nurseries, libraries, and social services or may exacerbate a situation where an under-provision already exists in the area. Provision of, or a contribution towards new or improved facilities may therefore be sought where development would place an unacceptable burden upon existing facilities. It is acknowledged that in some circumstances such provision may not be viable or may threaten the viability of the overall scheme. In such cases the Council will require that
142 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 developers provide suitable, robust evidence to demonstrate that this is the case. This should include appropriate viability assessments, which should adopt an 'open-book' approach.
Policy SP 64
Development Within Mixed Use Areas
In Mixed Use Areas, as defined on the Policies Map, new development or change of use will be permitted provided that it complies with the menu of acceptable uses for that area as set out in Table 12 'Acceptable Uses Within Mixed Use Areas' and meets the requirements of other planning policy as appropriate.
Table 12 Acceptable Uses Within Mixed Use Areas
Acceptable Uses
Mixed Use Area Ref. B1a B1b/c C1 C2 C3 D1 D2 Sui Gen.
MU01 Manvers Lakeside • • Leisure
MU02 North of Wath Town Centre • • • •
MU03 North of Stocks Lane, Rawmarsh • • • •
MU04 East of Bellows Road, Rawmarsh • • • •
MU05 East of Rawmarsh Hill, Parkgate • • •
MU06 Parkgate Business Park (North) • •
MU07 Masbrough Street (West of Centenary Road), Rotherham • • • • •
MU08 Bridge Street, Rotherham • • •
MU09 Main Street, Rotherham • • • •
MU10 Westgate, Rotherham • • •
MU11 Effingham Street (North of Centenary Way), Rotherham • • • •
MU12 Doncaster Gate / Percy Street,Rotherham • • • • •
MU13 Doncaster Gate • • • •
MU14 Junction 33 (M1) • Motorway
service area
MU15 Woodhouse Green, Thurcroft • • • •
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 143 8
Acceptable Uses
Mixed Use Area Ref. B1a B1b/c C1 C2 C3 D1 D2 Sui Gen.
MU16 Bawtry Road, Hellaby • • • •
MU17 Blyth Road, Maltby • • • •
MU18 North of Tickhill Road, Maltby • • • •
MU19 South of Tickhill Road, Maltby • • • •
Table 13 Summary of Uses (Based on Use Classes Order)
B1a Offices other than those that fall within Use Class A2
B1b/c Research and development of products and processes & light industry appropriate in a residential area.
C1 Hotels, boarding and guest houses where no significant element of care is provided (excludes hostels).
C2 Residential care homes, hospitals, nursing homes, boarding schools, residential colleges and training centres.
C3 Dwellinghouses
D1 Clinics, health centres, crèches, day nurseries, day centres, schools, art galleries (other than for sale or hire), museums, libraries, halls, places of worship, church halls, law court. Non residential education and training centres.
D2 Cinemas, music and concert halls, bingo and dance halls (but not night clubs), swimming baths, skating rinks, gymnasiums or area for indoor or outdoor sports and recreations (except for motor sports, or where firearms are used).
Sui Uses not falling within any Use Class. Such uses include: theatres, houses in multiple occupation, hostels Generis providing no significant element of care, scrap yards. Petrol filling stations and shops selling and/or displaying motor vehicles. Retail warehouse clubs, nightclubs, launderettes, taxi businesses, amusement centres and casinos.
Explanation
8.317 The Core Strategy notes that there are many uses which can exist together and that mixed use areas and developments can help in creating linkages between different uses and contribute towards creating more vibrant places. This mixing of land uses, if properly controlled, can help create effective and attractive developments and areas. Whilst each Mixed Use Area is unique in terms of its character, mix of uses and other planning requirements, it is possible to describe, in general terms, the types of uses which are appropriate for each location. Policy SP64 establishes that proposals for appropriate uses will be supported where they comply with menu of appropriate uses set out in Table 12 'Acceptable Uses Within Mixed Use Areas' and the requirements of other relevant planning policy. These uses have been identified with regard to the Use Classes Order; further explanation of the types of uses acceptable within different Use Classes is provided in Table 13 'Summary of Uses (Based on Use Classes Order)'.
144 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 8.318 Within Mixed Use Areas it is unnecessary to prescribe or precisely delineate the areas of land appropriate to each particular land-use. This flexibility allows attractive, imaginative and viable schemes to be developed. In line with other planning policy uses within Mixed Use Areas should be complementary and not result in conflict of land uses. Design and layout should address the needs of all proposed uses and provide a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants. Where other uses not identified as acceptable as proposed within Mixed Use Areas they will be considered on their merits.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 145 1
1 Proposed Development Sites in Rotherham Urban Area
1.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy)
1.1 The Local Plan Core Strategy proposes the following for the Rotherham Urban Area:
Table 14
Position in Core Strategy Main Location for New Growth Settlement Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Strategy The Rotherham Urban Area will be identified as the main (Core Strategy Policy CS1) location for new housing and employment growth. Rotherham Town Centre will be the principal focus for new retail and leisure floorspace. More localised retail and service floorspace is available at Parkgate and Rawmarsh. Rotherham Town Centre has a train station linking Sheffield in the west, Doncaster to the east and Leeds in the north. There is also a public transport interchange connecting to much of the rest of the Borough and the wider City Region. There are significant employment opportunities in the urban area, a college of further education, a hospital and NHS walk-in centre.
Bassingthorpe Farm, in close proximity to Rotherham Town Centre and to neighbourhood services and facilities provided in Greasborough and Kimberworth, will be developed as an extension to Rotherham urban area. New development will integrate with existing communities. Supporting infrastructure, including a new local centre if required, will be provided as necessary to meet the needs of the emerging community and to ensure that existing provision is not working beyond its capacity.
Current Size of settlement 43.8% (as % of Borough Total Number of Households) Target Number of New Total : 5,471 - 38% Homes (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough (1,700 - 12% at Bassingthorpe Farm) Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) (3,771 - 26% - Rest of Rotherham Urban Area)
146 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Target Amount of New Total 71 hectares - 30% Employment Land (2013-2028) and (11 hectares - 5% at Bassingthorpe Farm) Percentage of Borough Total (60 hectares- 25% - Rest of Rotherham Urban Area) (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Position in Core Strategy Rotherham Town Centre - Principal Town Centre Retail Hierarchy Parkgate - District Centre (Core Strategy Policy CS12) Local Centres Core Strategy Retail Rotherham Town Centre - Maintain and enhance role as Strategy for Settlement the principal town centre (Core Strategy Policy CS12) Parkgate - Maintain the quality and range of retail and service uses, improve comparison goods provision Local centres - Encourage developments which improve convenience and comparison goods and service facilities provision and reduce vacancies.
1.2 Settlement Profile
Settlement Characteristics
1.2 North West Rotherham
Diverse character ranging from older areas closer to the town centre, where there is a mix of predominantly terraced housing and some employment uses, to the more suburban character of more outlying areas, with a mix of Council built and privately developed housing. Many parts of the area are characterised by large areas of open space, including broad green margins to the highways. Many areas benefit from good public transport services, with areas closest to the Town Centre having good access to Rotherham Central Railway Station. Masbrough is a key “gateway” linking its surrounding neighbourhoods with the Town Centre. Good access to the strategic Highway network. Centenary Riverside nature park & Blackburn Meadows. Close proximity to Wentworth Woodhouse, associated deer park and Repton designed landscape. Grange Park golf course is located near-by.
1.3 Rawmarsh/Parkgate
Strong Relationship with Rotherham, Doncaster and surrounding settlements via good transport links, but A633 connection to Rotherham is congested at peak times. Frequent circular bus service linking Rotherham to the residential areas of Rawmarsh. Redeveloped Bellows Centre. Employment Opportunities are reasonable given the number of schools, the two centres and Parkgate Industrial Area. However the majority of opportunities lie adjoining and just outside of the settlement.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 147 1
Unemployment and deprivation levels are significantly above the Borough average. A Local Wildlife Site is found at the New Stubbin Colliery Site & Incline.
1.4 Aldwarke
Predominantly Industrial Area. Parkgate Retail World, the Barbot Hall industrial estate and a further area of significant retail warehousing (at Great Eastern Way) lie to the west whilst the north eastern area is dominated by the Aldwarke Steelworks. Retail World includes a significant variety of high street shops and a major supermarket. Dependent on many of the facilities and services found in Rotherham Town Centre. Local shopping facilities are available along the A630 at Eastwood and Dalton but these are in need of qualitative improvement. St. Ann’s leisure centre (on the A633) opened November 2008. The residential areas are within some of the most deprived in the Borough.
1.5 Thrybergh & East Rotherham
Reasonable access to the Strategic Road Network from Herringthorpe, East Herringthorpe and East Dene. Moorgate and Broom have an excellent bus service – part of the Maltby Quality Bus Corridor. The Sheffield - Rotherham - Doncaster (X78) high frequency bus service runs along the A630 in this area. The ASDA supermarket located at the Mushroom Roundabout serves the needs of the whole of east Rotherham. A small Aldi convenience store at St Anne's / Eastwood caters for some shopping needs in this locality. Herringthorpe, East Herringthorpe and East Dene are some of the most deprived in Rotherham. Includes Herringthorpe Valley Park with its running track and playing pitch facilities attracting visitors from across the Borough. Clifton Park Museum and its surrounding open space and recreational play facilities provide a draw as do Rotherham Golf Club and Thrybergh Country Park which are also within this area.
1.6 Upper Don & Rother Valley
Area extends along the lower Rother Valley adjacent to the communities of Brinsworth and Canklow and the predominantly industrial areas of Ickles and Templeborough. Brinsworth and Canklow have good access to the national motorway network via A630 and A631. Canklow is a one of the most deprived areas in the Borough. Existing employment opportunities in Brinsworth at its industrial estate and nearby Templeborough. Brinsworth has limited growth potential. Canklow has undergone residential regeneration schemes to help improve the quality and image of the area.
148 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Significant regeneration within Templeborough including recently completed employment opportunities and office space. Includes Boston Castle & parkland as well as the open spaces of Canklow Woods and Moorgate Cemetery.
1.7 Rotherham Town Centre
Principal regeneration area : The Rotherham Heritage Initiative encompasses investment / funding from the public and private sectors. Re-development of the majority of the Guest & Chrimes site to provide a new civic centre and football stadium illustrate the type and scale of projects being undertaken. Despite decline / competition it remains the Borough’s primary centre with a variety of shops, leisure, recreation and community facilities. Incorporates a Customer Services Centre and library within the civic buildings - Riverside House. Limited population of approximately 1600 people. The area has concentrations of poor quality private sector housing. Investment in the new railway station, civic offices and Rotherham College campus, is bringing substantial changes and releases a number of sites for re-development, offering an opportunity for the restructuring of the urban centre. Construction has commenced to deliver a Tesco Extra superstore on the site of former Council offices. Whilst the Conservation Areas may constrain some forms of development, retaining and improving the character of these areas (for example through the Townscape Heritage Initiative) also offer opportunities for enhancing the urban centre. Includes the Scheduled Ancient Monument of Rotherham Old Bridge as well as the Chapel of our Lady on Rotherham Bridge and Rotherham Minster. Moorgate Crofts business centre with its green roof provides exemplar sustainable design.
Development Constraints
1.8 Future development is constrained by:
1.9 North West Rotherham
Landscape constraints (Wentworth Scheduled Parklands) to north/ west of Kimberworth Park/Greasbrough/Wingfield. Air Quality Management Area found along part of Wortley Road in Kimberworth and at Blackburn adjacent to Junction 34 of the M1.
1.10 Rawmarsh/Parkgate
Rosehill Victoria Park located in the northern part of the settlement is identified as a Local Nature Reserve and an Area of Ancient Woodland. However, this will only affect localised potential for growth. Land to the east and south of Rawmarsh/ Parkgate (although not immediately adjacent to the settlement) is identified as being within the indicative flood plain.
1.11 Aldwarke
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 149 1
Significant flood risk associated with River Don flood zones 2 and 3, limiting the ability to accommodate new development. Air Quality Management Zone situated to the south of the area in Eastwood. The Yorkshire Water Sewage Treatment Works at Aldwarke are a significant constraint to new residential development in this locality and within the wider Rotherham Urban Area and a 400 metre cordon sanitaire is proposed by Yorkshire Water for sensitive uses. Some industrial activities in this area are bad neighbour activities including heavy industrial activity, glass production and oil recycling.
1.12 Thrybergh & East Rotherham
A wide area of open countryside extends beyond the built settlement north-eastwards towards the borough boundary with Conisbrough in Doncaster. Limited potential for expansion of Thrybergh, Dalton, Herringthorpe, East Herringthorpe and East Dene due to the high quality of the surrounding landscape and physical containment by existing built uses. Air Quality Management Area along the length of Fitzwilliam Road.
1.13 Upper Don & Rother Valley
Flood risk associated with the River Rother. Brinsworth is physically constrained by the M1 Motorway, railway line to the east and golf course to the north. An Air Quality Management Area is found in the locality of Junction 33 of the M1.
1.14 Rotherham Town Centre
Major transport infrastructure including the railway line running along the western edge of the settlement and the major road network. The river and canal result in a significant area of land predominantly to the west of the river falling within Flood Risk Zones 2 and 3. Rotherham town centre, Moorgate and Doncaster Road Conservation Areas. Air Quality Management Area found along Wellgate. 1.3 Bassingthorpe Farm (Core Strategy Strategic Allocation)
1.15 As already noted the Bassingthorpe Farm urban extension is a strategic allocation in the Core Strategy. In total, the development will provide around 2,400 new homes with 1,700 homes being delivered in this Plan period (up to 2028). The development will also provide around 11 hectares of land for employment together with associated infrastructure requirements. The Bassingthorpe Farm strategic allocation is shown as an “inset” boundary on the Policies Map that accompanies the Sites and Policies document. Please refer to the Core Strategy for more details of this strategic allocation. All individual sites previously part of this allocation have been deleted from the Sites and Policies Document. A masterplan for the development will be finalised before pursuing an outline planning application for the site.
150 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 1.16 A clear overall vision included within Policy CS1 of the Core Strategy will guide all future masterplanning, design codes and appropriate design measures, for this strategic allocation. The essential elements of this vision include the creation of a number of interlinked but distinct mixed use sustainable urban extensions with strong connections to and well integrated with, the existing communities and neighbourhoods of Greasbrough, Thorn Hill and Rotherham town centre. The development will be of a high quality design and will respond to the wider natural landscape. The approach to all future development on site will be through a Green Infrastructure led approach. A number of development objectives have been prepared to guide the development of future masterplans, design codes and appropriate design measures,and planning applications for the site.
1.17 Delivery of residential development on site will be around 35 to 40 dwellings per hectare and is proposed on a mixed tenure basis. A new primary school will be required on site and children's play facilities and sports pitches and facilities will be provided. There will be space for allotments and some mixed commercial uses.
1.18 A number of evidence base studies have been prepared to investigate the constraints and opportunities on site and to aid the determination of the overall scale and capacity of future development on site.
1.19 The map below shows the proposed Bassingthorpe Farm Policies Map extract which, is included in the Core Strategy. For clarity, this approach means that Bassingthorpe Farm is allocated in the Core Strategy rather than the Sites and Policies document. The Bassingthorpe Farm Concept Plan is included as Map 6.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 151 1
Map 8 Bassingthorpe Farm Core Strategy Strategic Allocation
152 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Map 9 Bassingthorpe Farm Concept Plan
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 153 1
1.4 Location Maps of Rotherham Urban Area
The following maps show all options for site allocations in the Rotherham Urban Area (split into 6 surveyed areas which includes sites immediately adjacent) plus Rotherham Town Centre.
Map 10 Rotherham Urban Site Survey Areas
1.4.1 North West Rotherham
1.20 Map 11 'Proposed Development Sites in the North West of the Rotherham Urban Area' shows all the proposed development sites in the North West of the Rotherham Urban Area as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
1.21 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
1.22 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
154 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 1.23 Further detail is also given in the following schedule of sites.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 155 156 1 Map 11 Proposed Development Sites in the North West of the Rotherham Urban Area Si tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 1.4.2 Rawmarsh / Parkgate
1.24 Map 12 'Proposed Development Sites in the Rawmarsh / Parkgate area of Rotherham Urban Area' shows all the proposed development sites in the Ramarsh / Parkgate area of the Rotherham Urban Area as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
1.25 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
1.26 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
1.27 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 157 158 1 Map 12 Proposed Development Sites in the Rawmarsh / Parkgate area of Rotherham Urban Area Si tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 1.4.3 Aldwarke
1.28 Map 13 'Proposed Development Sites in the Aldwarke area of the Rotherham Urban Area' shows all the proposed development sites in the Aldwarke area of the Rotherham Urban Area as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
1.29 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
1.30 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
1.31 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 159 160 1 Map 13 Proposed Development Sites in the Aldwarke area of the Rotherham Urban Area Si tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 1.4.4 Thrybergh
1.32 Map 14 'Proposed Development Sites in the Thrybergh area of Rotherham Urban Area' shows all the proposed development sites in the Thrybergh area of the Rotherham Urban Area as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
1.33 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
1.34 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
1.35 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 161 162 1 Map 14 Proposed Development Sites in the Thrybergh area of Rotherham Urban Area Si tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 1.4.5 East Rotherham
1.36 Map 15 'Proposed Development Sites in the East Rotherham area of the Rotherham Urban Area' shows all the proposed development sites in the East Rotherham area of the Rotherham Urban Area as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
1.37 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
1.38 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
1.39 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 163 164 1 Map 15 Proposed Development Sites in the East Rotherham area of the Rotherham Urban Area Si tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 1.4.6 Lower Don and Rother Valley
1.40 Map 16 'Proposed Development Sites in the Lower Don and Rother Valley area of the Rotherham Urban Area' shows all the proposed development sites in the Lower Don & Rother Valley area of the Rotherham Urban Area as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
1.41 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
1.42 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
1.43 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 165 166 1 Map 16 Proposed Development Sites in the Lower Don and Rother Valley area of the Rotherham Urban Area Si tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 1.4.7 Rotherham Town Centre
1.44 Map 17 'Proposed Development Sites in Rotherham Town Centre' shows all the proposed development sites in the Rotherham Town Centre survey area (note this is for survey purposes only, not the defined town centre boundary) of the Rotherham Urban Area as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
1.45 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
1.46 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
1.47 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 167 168 1 Map 17 Proposed Development Sites in Rotherham Town Centre Si tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 Si tes 1.5 Schedule of Sites and
Table 15 P ol icies Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment
Final Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated
Dr total or
aft balance
remaining 2014 to be built)
LDF0014 OFF CENTENERY WAY / BAWTRY Industrial vacant Employment Development Site 0 6.65 ROAD (Business & Industry)
LDF0018 FIELD VIEW Business use vacant industrial Residential Development Site 111 0.00 premises
LDF0023 OFF GRANGE LANE Industry and business vacant industrial Employment Development Site 0 4.40 buildings (Business & Industry)
LDF0027 FORMER THORN HILL PRIMARY Community Use vacant Residential Development Site 13 0.00 SCHOOL
LDF0031 LAND OFF ROTHERHAM ROAD industry & business vacant land Employment Development Site 0 1.63 (HENRY BOOT SITE) (Business & Industry)
LDF0045 LAND OFF STUBBIN ROAD Green Belt Paddock / Grazing Residential Development Site 21 0.00 Area
LDF0046 LAND OFF SYMONDS AVENUE Part Green Belt / Part Grazing / Informal Residential Development Site 13 0.00 Residential Public Open Space
LDF0047 LAND OFF WENTWORTH ROAD Residential - H42 Agriculture Residential Development Site 188 0.00
LDF0060 LAND OFF HIGH STREET Community Facilities Informal public open Residential Development Site 16 0.00 space
LDF0064 SITES ON RYECROFT SPORTS Part Urban Sports ground Residential Development Site 37 0.00 GROUND Greenspace / Part Green Belt
LDF0065 LAND OFF YORK ROAD, Residential public car park Residential Development Site 30 0.00
LDF0070 BELLOWS ROAD CENTRE Retail Various retail Residential Development Site 58 0.00
169 operations 170 1 Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total or balance remaining to be built)
LDF0074 LAND TO REAR OF PROPERTIES Residential Poultry Farm Residential Development Site 48 0.00 ON OCCUPATION ROAD
LDF0077 DALTON ALLOTMENT SITE Urban Greenspace and vacant allotment land Residential Development Site 150 0.00 residential
LDF0080 SITE OFF BARBERS AVENUE Part Residential / Part Social club Residential Development Site 24 0.00 Urban Greenspace
LDF0088 BOSWELL STREET AND Community Facilities / vacant land Residential Development Site 61 0.00 ARUNDEL ROAD Urban Greenspace
LDF0089 HERRINGTHORPE LEISURE Community Use vacant site - former Residential Development Site 97 0.00 CENTRE leisure building
LDF0097 LAND TO SOUTH OFALDWARKE Industry / Business Formerly used as part Employment Development Site 0 8.62 LANE- ADJACENT YORKSHIRE of the sewage (Business & Industry) WATER STW treatment works adjacent to the settling lagoons.
LDF0098 LAND OFFWADDINGTON WAY, Industry / Business General industry / Employment Development Site 0 8.75 ALDWARKE transport museum (Business & Industry)
LDF0099 LAND TO NORTH OFSTADIUM Mixed use and General vacant Employment Development Site 0 14.30
Si WAY, PARKGATE industry (Business & Industry) tes
and LDF0102 PARKGATE BUSINESS PARK Mixed Use vacant Employment Development Site 0 1.58 (SOUTH) OFFBEALE WAY (Business & Industry)
P ol icies LDF0103 LAND OFF WESTFIELD ROAD Residential Informal open space / Residential Development Site 14 0.00
vacant allotment land Final LDF0104 ROUNDWOOD COLLIERY General Industrial vacant land Employment Development Site 0 6.16
Dr ACCESS OFF ALDWARKE LANE (Business & Industry) aft
2014 Si tes Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment
and Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated
P
ol total or icies balance remaining
Final to be built)
Dr LDF0105 LAND WITHIN ALDWARKE STEEL General Industrial vacant / railway Employment Development Site 0 7.11 aft WORKS (CORUS) OFF sidings (Business & Industry)
2014 DONCASTER ROAD LDF0110 EAST OF BRECKS LANE, R/O Green Belt agriculture Residential Development Site 95 0.00 BELCOURT ROAD
LDF0130 OFF FAR LANE Residential amenity open space Residential Development Site 13 0.00
LDF0134 LAND TO NORTH WEST OF Education Former Millside school Residential Development Site 38 0.00 DONCASTER ROAD DALTON
LDF0152 LAND ADJOINING FERHAM RD Community Facilities Vacant Land Residential Development Site 10 0.00 AND BELMONT ST
LDF0156 LAND BETWEEN FENTON RD Residential / Urban Countryside Residential Development Site 71 0.00 AND HENLEY LANE Greenspace
LDF0158 LAND NORTHWEST OF Residential H9 Countryside Residential Development Site 100 0.00 MUNSBROUGH LANE
LDF0170 LAND BETWEEN GRAYSON RD Urban Greenspace Urban Greenspace Residential Development Site 18 0.00 AND CHURCH ST
LDF0181 LAND BEHIND BRADGATE CLUB Urban Greenspace Urban Greenspace Residential Development Site 15 0.00
LDF0185 WHINNEY HILL SITE A Residential Allocation vacant land Residential Development Site 66 0.00
LDF0192 LAND NORTH OF ST GERARDS Green Belt Agricultural Residential Development Site 351 0.00 CATHOLIC SCHOOL, WEST OF DONCASTER ROAD
LDF0198 OLDGATE LANE SOUTH, B1 light industry / mix of residential and Residential Development Site 26 0.00 THRYBERGH residential industrial uses
LDF0199 CHESTERHILL AVENUE (EAST), B1 Light industry / industry and Residential Development Site 55 0.00 THRYBERGH Residential residential 171 172 1 Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total or balance remaining to be built)
LDF0200 GLEBE CRESCENT / Residential / Urban Residential / urban Residential Development Site 67 0.00 CHESTERHILL AVENUE Greenspace greenspace
LDF0233 OFF LATHE ROAD / WORRY Green Belt agriculture Residential Development Site 500 0.00 GOOSE LANE
LDF0237 OFF SHROGSWOOD ROAD Green Belt & AHLV agriculture Residential Development Site 248 0.00
LDF0563 LAND OFF GODSTONE ROAD Mixed Use and Derelict Building Residential Development Site 26 0.00 Conservation Area
LDF0565 LAND AT THE JUNCTION OF Mixed Use - MU23 The site is derelict. Residential Development Site 128 0.00 WELLGATE AND HOLLOWGATE
LDF0575 LAND TO WEST OF WESTGATE Mixed Use - part of Soring office and Residential Development Site 143 0.00 MU21 grounds, car park
LDF0602 PHOENIX BUSINESS PARK (UDP Industry / Business Employment Development Site 0 2.55 E27 & E29 REMAINDER) (Business & Industry)
LDF0608 SWINDEN TECHNOLOGY Light industry open space within the Employment Development Site 0 0.55 CENTRE grounds of Swinden (Business) House LDF0691 LAND NORTH OF KILNHURST Green belt Agricultural Residential Development Site 97 0.00 RD, RAWMARSH Si tes LDF0747 LAND ADJACENT TO MAGNA Industry and Business vacant sites Employment Development Site 0 2.09 and TEMPLEBOROUGH (Business & Industry)
P ol LDF0755 FORMER DC COOK SITE Industrial and vacant [former car Employment Development Site 0 1.01 icies business sales] (Business & Industry)
Final LDF0756 RECREATION GROUND, SCHOOL Urban Greenspace informal recreation Employment Development Site 0 1.79 LANE (Business)
Dr aft LDF0761 LAND TO EAST OF HARDING Green Belt Agriculture Residential Development Site 291 0.00
2014 AVENUE (FORMERLY PART OF LDF0049) Si tes Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment
and Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated
P
ol total or icies balance remaining
Final to be built)
Dr LDF0793 LAND NORTH OF HARRY CROFT Urban Greenspace Residential Development Site 79 0.00 aft
2014 LDF0822 LAND OFF MUNSBROUGH LANE Part Residential, part Former cricket ground Residential Development Site 57 0.00 Urban Greenspace plus part nursery
LDF0826 FOSTERS GARDEN CENTRE, Retail, small part Garden Centre and Residential Development Site 40 0.00 THRYBERGH Green Belt petrol station
Safeguarded Land
LDF0020 OFF WEST BAWTRY ROAD Green Belt Agricultural Safeguarded Land 219 0.00
LDF0129 FORMER CRICKET GROUND OFF Green Belt Agricultural Safeguarded Land 136 0.00 BRECKS LANE
LDF0664 LAND TO NORTH OF GRANGE Green Belt Agricultural Safeguarded Land 345 0.00 ROAD 173 2
2 Proposed Development Sites in Dinnington, Anston and Laughton Common
2.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy)
2.1 The Local Plan Core Strategy proposes the following for the Dinnington, Anston and Laughton Common settlement grouping:
Table 16
Position in Core Strategy Principal Settlement for Growth Settlement Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Strategy The Dinnington Settlement Grouping (Dinnington, Anston, (Core Strategy Policy CS1, Laughton Common) will be identified as a principal Table 1) settlement capable of accommodating significant growth at an appropriate level in the future. Dinnington has significant employment opportunities available locally, there is a college of further education and a modern transport interchange linking the wider rural hinterland to Rotherham - Sheffield - Worksop. Current Size of settlement 7.8 % (as % of Borough Total Number of Households) Target Number of New 1300 - 9% Homes (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Target Amount of New 38 Hectares - 16% Employment Land (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Position in Core Strategy Dinnington Town Centre Retail Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS12) Local Centres
Core Strategy Retail Town Centre - Improve the range of retail and service Strategy for Settlement provision, reduce vacancies and improve townscape and (Core Strategy Policy CS12) landscaping
174 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Local centres - Encourage developments which improve convenience and comparison goods and services facilities provision and reduce vacancies.
2.2 Settlement Profile
2.2 Settlement Characteristics:
2.3 Dinnington
Pockets of very poor quality housing along Leicester Road, Silverdales and East Street which are some of the most deprived in the Borough. Strong centre with a variety of shops and community facilities including a College of Further Education. Substantial regeneration investment has taken place to reclaim the colliery site and create industrial/ commercial development and greenspace. Recent infrastructure investment including a new school, community resource centre, transport interchange and managed workspace.
2.4 North Anston
Number of attractive properties, particularly in and around the Conservation Area. Characteristics of a commuter village. Investments in Woodland Drive estate to improve housing and environmental quality. New health centre/ children’s play facilities at entrance to Greenlands Park. Potential in the short to medium term (i.e. within next 5 years) for the Sustrans Connect 2 project to invest in networks of walking and cycling routes running from Thurcroft via North Anston through to Woodsetts.
2.5 Laughton Common
Strategic location on the western edge of Dinnington. Close to employment opportunities provided through the colliery site re-development. Opportunity to develop prominent ‘gateway’ sites into Laughton Common are well underway. Recent housing development and investment has increased the population, provided a wider range and type of housing and new neighbourhood centre.
2.6 South Anston
Desirable commuter village character with higher value residential profile. Limited range of services. Very little opportunity for additional development.
2.7 Development Constraints:
2.8 Future development is constrained by:
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 175 2
The Area of High Landscape Value to the north, south and east. The railway line running along the western edge of Dinnington and between North and South Anston. Anston Brook situated between North and South Anston is within Flood Risk Zones 2 and 3. A number of Local Wildlife Sites and Greenspace sites within the study area. Dinnington, North Anston and South Anston Conservation Areas. The high grade agricultural land quality to the east of Dinnington 2.3 Location Map of Sites
2.9 Map 18 'Proposed Development Sites in Dinnington Anston and Laughton Common' shows all the proposed development sites in the Dinnington, Anston and Laughton Common settlement group as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
2.10 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
2.11 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
2.12 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
176 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 18 Proposed Development Sites in Dinnington Anston and Laughton Common and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 177 178 2 2.4 Schedule of Sites
Table 17
Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Residential Employment Allocation Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total or balance remaining to be built)
LDF0207 ALLOTMENT LAND Urban Greenspace Currently used as allotment land, Residential 15 0.00 OFF EAST STREET however, the allotments are Development Site overgrown and appear unused. LDF0208 LAND TO THE EAST Green Belt, Part The site is an undeveloped field in Residential 38 0.00 OF PENNY PIECE Conservation Area the Green Belt. Development Site LANE LDF0209 LAND BETWEEN Business Use Depot site to west of Ryton Road Residential 30 0.00 SHEFFIELD ROAD Development Site AND MINERAL RAILWAY
LDF0219 LAND OFF Green Belt Vacant Field. However there are a Residential 243 0.00 WENTWORTH WAY number of desire lines running Development Site through part of the site suggesting an informal local use.
LDF0221 LAND OFF Green Belt The site is the CiSWO recreation Residential 46 0.00 SILVERDALES ground. * An element of recreation Development Site to be retained, reflected in residential capacity figure.
Si LDF0222 LAND OFF Residential Area - The site is currently vacant scrub Residential 51 0.00 tes LEICESTER ROAD H29 land and minor miscellaneous Development Site
and activities including industry occur here.
P ol icies LDF0223 LAND OFF Retail Use Grassland with small hard standing Residential 20 0.00 UNDERGATE ROAD area Development Site
Final LDF0229 LAND OFF Industrial & The southern half of the site is Employment 0 5.50
Dr BOOKERS WAY Business, known currently used for industrial and Development Site aft interest, business purposes. The northern (Business &
2014 greenspace half of the site is undeveloped. Industry) Si tes Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Residential Employment
and Allocation Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total
P
ol or balance icies remaining to be built)
Final Part of the undeveloped section is
Dr designated as business and aft industrial use and the other part
2014 is an area of known interest and urban greenspace. (To be retained)
LDF0232 LAND OFF Residential The site is currently an Residential 43 0.00 OUTGANG LANE undeveloped agricultural field. Development Site Planning permission granted and construction started.
LDF0235 LAND TO THE Industrial and Undeveloped open grassland. Employment 0 17.08 SOUTH OF Business Use Restored former colliery site. The Development Site MONKSBRIDGE site has been reclaimed for (Business & ROAD industrial and business purposes. Industry) LDF0238 TIMBER YARD OFF Industrial and Timber Yard and Works. Residential 271 0.00 OUTGANG LANE Business Use Outline planning permission for Development Site 274 dwellings was granted 16/02/10 [RB2008/0220]
LDF0239 OLD SCHOOL SITE Community The site is currently unused scrub Residential 75 0.00 OFF DOE QUARRY Facilities and land which was formally part of an Development Site LANE Residential old school site/ playing field.
LDF0240 Former KWIK SAVE Retail Use / UGS Various uses including derelict land Residential 22 0.00 SITE OFF LORDENS and some car parking. Former Development Site HILL allotments. Planning permission for residential. LDF0242 LAND OFF Community Use Grass scrub land Residential 28 0.00 ATHORPE ROAD Development Site
LDF0498 LAND OFF Green Belt Agricultural Land (formerly larger Residential 311 0.00 OLDCOTES ROAD site including new LDF0799) Development Site (WEST) 179 180 2 Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Residential Employment Allocation Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total or balance remaining to be built)
LDF0598 DINNINGTON Mixed Use Part of the former Dinnington Employment 0 4.18 COLLIERY SITE Colliery site has already been Development Site PHASE 1 developed for employment (Business & (REMAINDER) activities and a family pub / Industry) SOUTH OF restaurant. OUTGANG LANE
LDF0830 TODWICK NORTH Green Belt Agricultural Land Employment 0 29.96 (north of A57) Development Site (Special Policy Area) Safeguarded Land
LDF0717 LAND OFF LODGE Green Belt Paddock, agricultural, part Safeguarded Land 105 0.00 LANE (2) woodland
LDF0799 LAND OFF Green Belt Agricultural Land (formerly part of Safeguarded Land 759 0.00 OLDCOTES ROAD site LDF0498) (EAST) Si tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 3 Proposed Development Sites in Wickersley, Bramley and Ravenfield Common
3.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy)
3.1 The Local Plan Core Strategy proposes the following for the Wickersley, Bramley and Ravenfield Common settlement grouping:
Table 18
Position in Core Strategy Principal Settlement for Growth Settlement Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Strategy Bramley / Wickersley / Ravenfield Common provide a good (Core Strategy Policy CS1) range of service provision, are in close proximity to the main urban area and considered able to accommodate new growth. Particular consideration will be given to addressing a shortfall in school places to ensure that educational needs in this community are met. Current Size of settlement 8.9% (as % of Borough Total Number of Households) Target Number of New 800 - 6% Homes (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Target Amount of New 16 hectares - 7% Employment Land (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Position in Core Strategy Wickersley - District Centre Retail Hierarchy Local Centres (Core Strategy Policy CS12) Core Strategy Retail Wickersley - Maintain the range of retail and service Strategy for Settlement provision, improve convenience retail provision (Core Strategy Policy CS12) Local centres - Encourage developments which improve convenience and comparison goods and service facilities provision and reduce vacancies.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 181 3
3.2 Settlement Profile
3.2 Settlement Characteristics
Small area of deprivation in Sunnyside, with the remainder of the settlement being comparatively affluent The majority of the housing stock is in good condition with many properties being larger than the Borough average. The main employment area is the Business Park and Morrisons superstore to the east of the settlement adjacent to the M18 Motorway. A very limited number of general industrial type operations are located in the settlement. High quality shopping within the district centres. Conservation Area within Wickersley. Easy access to the M18 and wider motorway network making Bramley and Wickersley attractive to commuters. Silverwood former colliery tip has now been completely restored, creating new greenspace.
3.3 Development Constraints
3.4 Future development is constrained by:
The M18 Motorway to the east. Brecks Plantation to the west. Former disposal site for mineral waste to the north-west. Areas of High Landscape Value to the south and west. A number of Candidate Local Wildlife sites are dispersed around the settlement boundary. 3.3 Location Map of Sites
Map 19 'Proposed Development Sites in Wickersley, Bramley and Ravenfield Common' shows all the proposed development sites in the Wickersley, Bramley and Ravenfield Common settlement group as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
182 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Map 19 Proposed Development Sites in Wickersley, Bramley and Ravenfield Common
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 183 184 3 3.4 Schedule of Sites
Table 19
Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total or balance remaining to be built)
LDF0359 LAND OFF MELCISS ROAD Residential Informal public open Residential Development 45 0.00 Development Site - space Site H47 LDF0360 PONY PADDOCK OFF SECOND Green Belt Pony Paddock Residential Development 56 0.00 LANE Site
LDF0366 COUNCIL DEPOT & YORKSHIRE Business Use Highways Depot / Residential Development 26 0.00 WATER SITE OFF BAWTRY Yorkshire Water Site ROAD reservoirs LDF0368 LAND OFF GILL CLOSE Residential Maintained grassland Residential Development 21 0.00 Development Site - Site DVU0046 LDF0391 LAND OFF ALLOTT CLOSE Green Belt Overgrown former Residential Development 22 0.00 allotments Site
LDF0649 LAND OFF NETHERMOOR Green Belt Agricultural Residential Development 128 0.00 DRIVE / SECOND LANE Site
Si LDF0737 LAND OFF FAIRWAYS Residential No formal use Residential Development 12 0.00 tes Site and LDF0774 LAND EAST OF MOOR LANE Green Belt Agriculture Residential Development 350 0.00
P ol SOUTH Site icies Safeguarded Land
Final
LDF0371 LAND OFF ST ALBAN'S WAY Green Belt, Area of Agricultural field Safeguarded Land 136 0.00
Dr High Landscape Value aft
2014 Si tes Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment
and Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated
P
ol total or icies balance remaining to
Final be built)
Dr LDF0375 WREXHAM HOUSE Green Belt Cattery / Residential Safeguarded Land 23 0.00 aft
2014 LDF0458 LAND ADJACENT WREXHAM Green Belt Natural grassland Safeguarded Land 53 0.00 HOUSE
LDF0798 LAND EAST OF MOOR LANE Green Belt Agriculture Safeguarded Land 437 0.00 SOUTH (2) - FORMERLY PART OF LDF0452 185 4
4 Proposed Development Sites in Wath-upon-Dearne, Brampton and West Melton
4.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy)
4.1 The Local Plan Core Strategy proposes the following for the Wath-upon-Dearne, Brampton and West Melton settlement grouping:
Table 20
Position in Core Strategy Principal Settlement for Growth Settlement Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Strategy Wath / Brampton / West Melton lie at the heart of the (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Dearne Valley communities. Wath provides the range of service provision which aligns with the role of Principal Town and which serves the neighbouring settlement of Brampton / West Melton, which are close to a major retail park on the site of the former Cortonwood Colliery site. Wath / Brampton / West Melton settlements are within a key public transport corridor, and there are significant employment opportunities available in the locality. A Further Education college is also located at Wath. Current Size of settlement 7.1% (as % of Borough Total Number of Households) Target Number of New 1,300 - 9% Homes (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Target Amount of New 16 hectares - 7% Employment Land (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Position in Core Strategy Wath-upon-Dearne Town Centre Retail Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS12) Local Centres
Core Strategy Retail Town centre - Maintain the range of retail and service Strategy for Settlement provision
186 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 (Core Strategy Policy CS12) Local centres - Encourage developments which improve convenience and comparison goods and services facilities provision and reduce vacancies.
4.2 Settlement Profile
4.2 Settlement Characteristics
4.3 Brampton
Formerly within a Housing Market Renewal Area. Pockets of poor quality former National Coal Board housing situated between Wath Road, Pontefract Road and Knollbeck Lane Substantial regeneration investment has taken place to reclaim the Cortonwood colliery site and create industrial/commercial development, but this development is difficult to access from Brampton without a car.
4.4 West Melton
Lies between Brampton and Wath, looking to Wath for its service provision. Developed from an agricultural village based around Melton High Street, spreading northwards to become a commuter settlement. New housing development to the north east, at Manvers, is offering a wider choice of housing in this locality but with poor links to Cortonwood Business Park. Development south of Melton High Street is limited by Flatts Valley which is drained by Brook Dike.
4.5 Wath upon Dearne
Main town in the north of Rotherham Borough. Town centre would benefit from more investment. Numerous new homes have been created in the recent past, particularly around Manvers. Significant industrial and commercial redevelopment has taken place to the north of the settlement to provide new employment opportunities following the colliery closures. Sustainable transport links to the new development at Manvers need improving. Road links to the M1 and the A1(M) have been greatly improved. In close proximity is found the Dearne Valley Country Park, the RSPB Old Moor Wetlands Centre and Manvers Lake & Nature Trail Projects being undertaken to regenerate the wider area following the decline of the mining industry include the Dearne Valley Eco-Vision, which sees a quality natural setting as key to economic and social progress, and the Dearne Valley Green Heart Project with its emphasis on environmental improvements. A Nature Improvement Area has been designated in the Dearne Valley. River Dearne itself provides a significant feature. A new fire station has been built at Manvers to replace the former fire station at Knolbeck Lane.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 187 4
4.6 Development Constraints
4.7 Future development is constrained by:
Borough boundary to the west and north. Green Belt to the south including an Area of High Landscape Value based around Wentworth Park. Brook Dike in Flatts Valley between West Melton and Wath incorporates a Local Wildlife Site. Areas of industrial land to north east of Wath Town Centre susceptible to flooding. Conservation Area in central Wath. Flood zones 2 and 3 found predominantly on the northern edges of the study area Yorkshire Water Waste Water Treatment Works 4.3 Location Map of Sites
4.8 Map 20 'Proposed Development Sites in Wath, Brampton and West Melton' shows all the proposed development sites in the Brampton, Wath upon Dearne and West Melton settlement group as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
4.9 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
4.10 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
4.11 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
188 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 20 Proposed Development Sites in Wath, Brampton and West Melton and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 189 190 4 4.4 Schedule of Sites
Table 21
Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total or balance remaining to be built)
LDF0258 LAND TO THE EAST OF Industrial and Business Disused hillside covered Residential Development Site 233 0.00 CORTON WOOD BUSINESS Use in trees shrubs and PARK grass. LDF0267 LAND TO THE NORTH OF Residential Currently under Residential Development Site 94 0.00 WESTFIELD ROAD construction
LDF0268 OFF ORCHARD PLACE Residential / Urban grassed area and Residential Development Site 14 0.00 Greenspace off-street parking
LDF0292 HIGHFIELD FARM Residential Farm Residential Development Site 70 0.00
LDF0308 MANVERS WAY/ STATION Mixed use vacant Employment Development Site 0 1.92 ROAD (Business & Industry)
LDF0324 BRAMPTON CENTRE Business Use and Medical centre Residential Development Site 66 0.00 Community Facilities
LDF0335 LAND OFF DENMAN ROAD Residential Former garden land Residential Development Site 110 0.00
LDF0345 BROOKFIELD WAY Industry and Business Vacant land / Employment Development Site 0 1.83
Si Distribution depot (Business & Industry) tes and LDF0347 MANVERS WAY (EXPRESS Industry and Business residential development Residential Development Site 205 0.00
PARKS) underway P ol icies LDF0348 MANVERS WAY/ DEARNE Industrial and Business vacant industrial land Employment Development Site 0 3.74
LANE (Business & Industry) Final
LDF0351 MANVERS WAY Industry and Business vacant industrial land Employment Development Site 0 3.51
Dr (Business & Industry) aft
2014 Si tes Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment
and Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated
P
ol total or icies balance remaining
Final to be built)
Dr LDF0605 BOLTON ROAD MANVERS Industry Business Employment Development Site 0 1.48 aft UDP E11 (PART) (Business & Industry)
2014 LDF0771 LAND NORTH OF STUMP Community Use Vacant land Residential Development Site 21 0.00 CROSS ROAD, WATH
Safeguarded Land
LDF0270 LAND TO EAST OF Green Belt Grassed Field Safeguarded Land 260 0.00 WESTFIELD ROAD
LDF0288 LAND TO NORTH OF Green Belt Agricultural Safeguarded Land 70 0.00 ELSECAR ROAD
LDF0298 LAND OFF FARFIELD LANE Green Belt agricultural land and Safeguarded Land 696 0.00 allotments 191 5
5 Proposed Development Sites in Kiveton Park and Wales
5.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy)
5.1 The Local Plan Core Strategy proposes the following for the Kiveton Park and Wales settlement grouping:
Table 22
Position in Core Strategy Principal Settlement Settlement Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Strategy Kiveton Park / Wales provide a reasonable level of service (Core Strategy Policy CS1) provision. There are two railway stations providing links to Sheffield and the East Coast Main Line at Retford. Wales / Kiveton Park is considered suitable to accommodate some new growth in the Borough. Growth in the settlement may enhance its overall sustainability and give rise to opportunities for improving its current infrastructure and physical environment. Current Size of settlement 2.4% (as % of Borough Total Number of Households) Target Number of New 370 - 3% Homes (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Target Amount of New 9 hectares - 4% Employment Land (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Position in Core Strategy Kiveton Park District Centre Retail Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS12) Core Strategy Retail Improve the quality and range of retail and service Strategy for Settlement provision, and environmental quality. (Core Strategy Policy CS12)
192 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 5.2 Settlement Profile
5.2 Settlement Characteristics
Opportunity to improve sustainability of schools and existing shops and services. Main employment sources at Wales Bar to the west and Kiveton Park Station area to the east Former colliery site has been subject to substantial reclamation, and provides opportunities for leisure based around the long term aspirations to restore the Chesterfield Canal and the creation of an active marina. Former Unsco Steel at Kiveton Park Station is a substantial site which is now home to a number of commercial uses. Reasonable access to M1 and two railway stations, although currently these have a limited service, there could be scope for improved services in the long term, to help link communities into job opportunities in the wider Sheffield City Region. In the long term, potential exists for the Chesterfield Canal to be extended from Norwood Tunnel at Kiveton Park to Nethermoor Lake at Rother Valley Country Park. Potential in the short to medium term (i.e. within next 5 years) for the Sustrans Connect 2 project to invest in networks of walking and cycling routes. Wales Parish Playing Fields are a well used recreational facility in the heart of the settlement.
5.3 Development Constraints
5.4 Future development is constrained by:
An area to the north of Kiveton Park is of significant importance to over-wintering birds Limited growth potential to the northeast due to the Local Wildlife Site Air quality management area in locality of School Road Wales where it crosses M1. Chesterfield Canal Area is designated as a Local Wildlife Site and there are significant listed structures associated with the canal. 5.3 Location Map of Sites
5.5 Map 21 'Proposed Development Sites in Kiveton Park and Wales' shows all the proposed development sites in the Kiveton Park and Wales settlement group as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
5.6 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
5.7 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
5.8 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 193 5
194 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 21 Proposed Development Sites in Kiveton Park and Wales and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 195 196 5 5.4 Schedule of Sites
Table 23
Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total or balance remaining to be built)
LDF0462 KIVETON PARK COUNCIL Green Belt, Known Depot Gypsy / Traveller Site 0 0.00 DEPOT Interest Outside Protected Site LDF0469 LAND OFF KEETON HALL Residential Agriculture Residential Development Site 101 0.00 ROAD Development Site
LDF0475 CHAPEL WAY Residential Agriculture Residential Development Site 268 0.00 Development Site
LDF0483 NORTH OF SCHOOL RD Green Belt Agriculture Employment Development Site 0 5.99 (Business & Industry)
LDF0484 OFF WALESWOOD WAY Green Belt agriculture Employment Development Site 0 1.09 (Business & Industry)
LDF0547 HARD LANE Urban Greenspace garages /wasteland Residential Development Site 14 0.00 Si
tes / public amenity and LDF0599 LAND TO EAST OF Industry business vacant employment Employment Development Site 0 2.85
P ol MANSFIELD ROAD, land (Business & Industry) icies WALESWOOD / VECTOR 31
Final LDF0600 LAND TO WEST OF Industry business Vacant land Employment Development Site 0 8.85
Dr MANSFIELD ROAD, (Business & Industry) aft WALESWOOD / VECTOR 31
2014 Si tes Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment
and Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated
P
ol total or icies balance remaining to
Final be built)
Dr Safeguarded Land aft
2014 LDF0476 SOUTH OF LAMBRELL AVE Green Belt Agriculture Safeguarded Land 220 0.00
LDF0480 STOCKWELL LANE Green Belt Agriculture Safeguarded Land 137 0.00 197 6
6 Proposed Development Sites in Maltby and Hellaby
6.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy)
6.1 The Local Plan Core Strategy proposes the following for the Maltby and Hellaby settlement grouping:
Table 24
Position in Core Strategy Principal Settlement Settlement Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Strategy Maltby performs the function of a principal settlement. (Core Strategy Policy CS1) However it may not be able to provide significant opportunities for expansion in the future given the settlement's constraints. These include the Doncaster / Rotherham Borough boundary to the north, the topography of the land and the Sites of Special Scientific Interest to the south and the limits to development to the east imposed by the Maltby Colliery site). An alternative urban extension has been appraised as part of the Sustainability Appraisal to accompany the Core Strategy on sites to the south west of Maltby, close to the settlement of Hellaby. Current Size of settlement 7.2% (as % of Borough Total Number of Households) Target Number of New 700 - 5% Homes (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Target Amount of New 5 hectares - 2% Employment Land (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Position in Core Strategy Maltby - Town Centre Retail Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS12) Local centre
198 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Core Strategy Retail Town centre - Improve pedestrian mobility / accessibility, Strategy for Settlement the quality and range of comparison shopping outlets, and (Core Strategy Policy CS12) environmental quality.
Local centre - Encourage developments which improve convenience and comparison goods and services facilities provision and reduce vacancies.
6.2 Settlement Profile
6.2 Settlement Characteristics
6.3 Maltby
High levels of deprivation in the eastern half of Maltby, in particular the White City, Birk’s Holt, Model Village and Admirals Estate Main employment area is the Aven Industrial Estate . Newly opened customer service and leisure centre. Poor quality town centre shopping and public realm along High Street. Easy access to the M18 and wider motorway network making Maltby attractive to commuters. Coronation Park forms a focal point for the settlement. Significant recent redevelopment through the Building Schools for the Future scheme. Due to a range of geological, technical and safety issues associated with underground mining, operations at Maltby Colliery are to cease.
6.4 Hellaby
Main employment source is the Hellaby Industrial Estate. Small volume of housing in the Hellaby area. Grade II* Listed Building and Scheduled Ancient Monument at Hellaby Hall Hotel.
6.5 Development Constraints
6.6 Future development is constrained by:
The Doncaster / Rotherham Borough boundary to the north. The M18 motorway to the west. The minerals railway line to the south-east of Maltby Maltby Dyke to the south which results in adjacent land being within Flood Risk Zones 2 and 3. Maltby Wood and Low Common to the east. Area of High Landscape Value to the south. A number of Local Wildlife Sites within the area. Site of Special Scientific Interest in south-east Maltby at Wood Lee Common
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 199 6
Permission for extraction of minerals at the Clay Pits site between Maltby and Hellaby extant until 2042. Stately home and Capability Brown designed landscapes of Sandbeck Park to the south-east of Maltby. 6.3 Location Map of Sites
6.7 Map 22 'Proposed Development Sites in Maltby and Hellaby' shows all the proposed development sites in the Maltby and Hellaby settlement group as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
6.8 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
6.9 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
6.10 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
200 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 22 Proposed Development Sites in Maltby and Hellaby and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 201 202 6 6.4 Schedule of Sites
Table 25
Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total or balance remaining to be built)
LDF0271 LAND TO THE SOUTH OF Green Belt Agricultural Field Residential Development Site 400 0.00 STAINTON LANE
LDF0289 SITE OF COUNCIL DEPOT AND Business Use council depot and Residential Development Site 55 0.00 LANTERN ENGINEERING LTD OFF lantern engineering HAMILTON ROAD
LDF0294 NEWLAND AVENUE, BRAITHWELL Residential Area Vacant Residential Development Site 74 0.00 ROAD AND CHADWICK DRIVE, MALTBY
LDF0296 RECREATION GROUNDS AND Urban Greenspace Mix of recreation, Residential Development Site 150 0.00 ALLOTMENTS TO THE EAST OF allotments HIGHFIELD PARK
LDF0305 LAND AT MALTBY COLLIERY Green Belt Maltby Colliery Employment Development Site 0 24.01 (Special Policy Area)
LDF0327 LAND OFF CUMWELL LANE Green Belt Agriculture Employment Development Site 0 9.10 (Business & Industry)
Si LDF0328 LAND OFF ROTHERHAM ROAD Business Use Informal open space Employment Development Site 0 1.03 tes (Business) and LDF0409 TARMAC SITE OFF BLYTH ROAD Mixed Use - MU32 Tarmac depot Residential Development Site 23 0.00
P ol icies LDF0699 LAND NORTH OF SANDY LANE, Green Belt Agriculture Employment Development Site 0 2.81 HELLABY (Business & Industry)
Final LDF0709 LAND NORTH OF HELLABY Green Belt No formal use Employment Development Site 0 1.72
Dr INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, HELLABY (Business & Industry) aft
2014 Si tes Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment
and Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated
P
ol total or icies balance remaining
Final to be built)
Dr LDF0779 LAND ADJACENT TO M18 Green Belt Agriculture Employment Development Site 0 3.98 aft JUNCTION 1 AND A631 (Business & Industry)
2014 LDF0828 PARK HILL LODGE Residential Former care home Residential Development Site 26 0.00 and grounds
Safeguarded Land
LDF0723 LAND OFF OUTGANG LANE Green Belt Agriculture Safeguarded Land 97 0.00
LDF0800 LAND EAST OF CUMWELL LANE, Green Belt Agriculture Safeguarded Land 433 0.00 SOUTH OF BATEMAN ROAD 203 7
7 Proposed Development Sites in Aston, Aughton and Swallownest
7.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy)
7.1 The Local Plan Core Strategy proposes the following for the Aston, Aughton and Swallownest settlement grouping:
Table 26
Position in Core Strategy Principal Settlement Settlement Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Strategy Aston / Aughton / Swallownest provide a reasonable level (Core Strategy Policy CS1) of service provision. They are considered able to accommodate new growth in the borough. Growth may enhance the overall sustainability and give rise to opportunities for improving current infrastructure and the physical environment. Current Size of settlement 5.4% (as % of Borough Total Number of Households) Target Number of New 560 - 4% Homes (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Target Amount of New 19 hectares - 8% Employment Land (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Position in Core Strategy Swallownest - District Centre Retail Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS12) Local centre
Core Strategy Retail District centre - Maintain the quality and range of retail Strategy for Settlement and service uses. (Core Strategy Policy CS12) Local centre - Encourage developments which improve convenience and comparison goods and services facilities provision and reduce vacancies.
204 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 7.2 Settlement Profile
7.2 Settlement Characteristics
7.3 Aston
Retains elements of historic character particularly in the Conservation Area. Historic Aston Hall Hotel & surrounds and Aston Church - both listed Good connections with the strategic road network and M1 junction 31. Situated on a medium bus frequency route. Limited range of services. Small local centre. Characteristics of a commuter village. A new swimming pool and sports facilities provided within the Aston Comprehensive School for wider community use.
7.4 Aughton
Limited range of services. Good connections with the strategic road network and Ulley Country Park Situated on a medium bus frequency route. Strong historic core. Ulley Country Park is found close-by to the north.
7.5 Swallownest
Strong district centre with a variety of shops and community facilities. The provision of integrated community service facilities (health, police and RMBC customer services and library) provided at Mill Stone Hill in the one stop shop format. Situated on a medium bus frequency route. Good connections with the strategic road network (A57) and M1 junction 31. Situated on a medium bus frequency route. Leisure facility to be developed within the nearby Rother Valley Country Park, includes ancillary facilities. The Core Route of the Sustrans Connect2 project, extending from Rother Valley Country Park to Killamarsh provides a multi-user trail linking in with existing routes.
7.6 Development Constraints
7.7 Future development is constrained by:
The Area of High Landscape Value to the north and north east of the settlement. The A57 and B6200 which runs along the southern edge of the settlement. A number of Greenspace sites within the study area. Woodhouse washlands (functional floodplain) to west of Swallownest. Ulley Country Park to the north of Aughton. The proposed HS2 route
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 205 7
7.3 Location Map of Sites
7.8 Map 23 'Proposed Development Sites in Aston, Aughton and Swallownest' shows all the proposed development sites in the Aston, Aughton and Swallownest settlement group as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
7.9 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
7.10 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
7.11 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
206 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 23 Proposed Development Sites in Aston, Aughton and Swallownest and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 207 208 7 7.4 Schedule of Sites
Table 27
Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total or balance remaining to be built)
LDF0418 LAND TO NORTH OF ASTON Green Belt Agricultural land Residential Development Site 99 0.00 BYPASS A57, EAST OF MANSFIELD ROAD
LDF0419 LAND TO EAST OF LODGE LANE Urban Greenspace vacant land Residential Development Site 19 0.00
LDF0429 LAND AT JUNCTION OF MAIN Community incidental greenspace / Residential Development Site 15 0.00 STREET AND ROTHERHAM ROAD landscaped area SWALLOWNEST
LDF0447 LAND TO EAST OF PARK HILL Green Belt / B1 light Agricultural land / Petrol Residential Development Site 96 0.00 FARM industry Filling station / car sales
LDF0448 ASTON COMMON EAST OF Green Belt Agricultural / pasture Residential Development Site 175 0.00 WETHERBY DRIVE Agricultural land land
LDF0449 ASTON COMMON - WEST OF Green Belt Agricultural land / Employment Development 0 2.36 MANSFIELD ROAD scrubland Site (Business & Industry)
LDF0451 LAND AT FORMER LAYCAST B1, B2, B8 general Coal extraction / Potential Employment Site 0 9.33 WORKS industry remediation (Business & Industry) Si tes LDF0453 LAND TO SOUTH OF SHEFFIELD Business Use agricultural land Potential Employment Site 0 2.64 and RD, FENCE (Business)
P
ol LDF0601 OLD COLLIERY WAY, BEIGHTON Mixed Use allocation Vacant land awaiting Potential Employment Site 0 1.94 icies development (Business & Industry)
Final LDF0758 ASTON COMMON - EAST OF Green Belt Agricultural land Employment Development 0 2.43 MANSFIELD ROAD INDUSTRIAL Site (Business & Industry)
Dr ESTATE aft
2014 LDF0759 ASTON COMMON - SOUTH OF Green Belt Agricultural land Residential Development Site 150 0.00 MANSFIELD ROAD Si tes Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment
and Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated
P
ol total or icies balance remaining
Final to be built)
Dr LDF0792 LAND OF MANSFIELD ROAD Green Belt Agricultural land Residential Development Site 18 0.00 aft
2014 Safeguarded Land
LDF0454 DISUSED TIP ON ASTON BYPASS Urban Greenspace disused tip Safeguarded Land 50 0.00 (B6200) LDF0772 LAND TO NORTH OF ASTON Green Belt Agricultural land Safeguarded Land 211 0.00 BYPASS, EAST OF CHURCH LANE 209 8
8 Proposed Development Sites in Swinton and Kilnhurst
8.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy)
8.1 The Local Plan Core Strategy proposes the following for the Swinton and Kilnhurst settlement grouping:
Table 28
Position in Core Strategy Principal Settlement Settlement Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Strategy Swinton / Kilnhurst are located in the Dearne but are in (Core Strategy Policy CS1) close proximity to Rotherham Urban Area. The settlement grouping has high levels of population and provides some higher order services. Although the communities do not serve a wider catchment area they provide a level of service provision which supports the local population. Swinton has a railway station linking to Sheffield / Leeds and Doncaster which may make it suitable for future growth opportunities. It is considered that Swinton / Kilnhurst fulfils the role of Principal Settlement although future opportunities for growth are limited. The former heavily industrialised Croda site, within the settlement, is currently providing residential development opportunities. Current Size of settlement 5.8% (as % of Borough Total Number of Households) Target Number of New 560 - 4% Homes (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Target Amount of New 0 hectares - 0% Employment Land (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Position in Core Strategy Swinton - District Centre Retail Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS12) Local Centre
210 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Core Strategy Retail District Centre - Improve environmental and physical Strategy for Settlement quality of the shopping precinct in particular. Improve retail (Core Strategy Policy CS12) provision and pedestrian movement.
Local centre - Encourage developments which improve convenience and comparison goods and services facilities provision and reduce vacancies.
8.2 Settlement Profile
8.2 Settlement Characteristics
8.3 Swinton
Formerly within a Housing Market Renewal area. Town centre would benefit from more investment. Railway station provides direct train links to Rotherham, Sheffield, Doncaster and Leeds. Industrial area to north east, between the town and neighbouring Mexborough. Swinton Pottery (The Rockingham Works) Scheduled Ancient Monument is found. A Rotherham Borough Council Customer Service Centre is found on Station Street.
8.4 Kilnhurst
Residential developments in the 1980’s effectively joined Kilnhurst and Swinton. Looks to Swinton for its services. Road access is relatively poor, particularly for goods vehicles. Has a good centrally located community building and sports ground that provides a community focus. New housing development underway on former industrial land to east of settlement, adjoining the canal. Lack of employment land to meet future requirements. Potential for further canal-side residential development.
8.5 Development Constraints
8.6 Future development is constrained by:
Conservation Area in central Swinton. Railway line, canal and river corridor to the east of settlements. Local wildlife sites to south and west of Swinton Flood zones 2 and 3 to the east of both Swinton and Kilnhurst
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 211 8
8.3 Location Map of Sites
8.7 Map 24 'Proposed Development Sites in Swinton and Kilnhurst' shows all the proposed development sites in the Swinton and Kilnhurst settlement group as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
8.8 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
8.9 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
8.10 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
212 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 24 Proposed Development Sites in Swinton and Kilnhurst and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 213 214 8 8.4 Schedule of Sites
Table 29
Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Allocation Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total or balance remaining to be built)
LDF0376 CIVIC HALL SITE Retail, community, Various Town Centre Residential Development Site 50 0.00 (PART) greenspace and Uses. (Part to residential. residential) LDF0392 LAND OFF TALBOT Industrial and Business Vacant Field Employment Development 0 1.54 ROAD Use Site (Business & Industry)
LDF0397 CRODA SITE Industrial and Urban Construction started Residential Development Site 381 0.00 Green Space
LDF0403 OFF LAWRENCE DRIVE, Urban Greenspace Grassland and scrub Residential Development Site 32 0.00 PICCADILLY
LDF0404 BRAMELD ROAD Residential cleared site Residential Development Site 32 0.00
Si LDF0827 CHARNWOOD HOUSE Residential Former nursing home Residential Development Site 20 0.00 tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 9 Proposed Development Sites in Catcliffe, Orgreave, Treeton and Waverley
9.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy)
9.1 The Local Plan Core Strategy proposes the following for the Catcliffe, Orgreave, Treeton and Waverley settlement grouping:
Table 30
Position in Core Strategy Catcliffe, Orgreave & Treeton - Local Service Centre Settlement Hierarchy Waverley - Principal Settlement (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Strategy With more limited social infrastructure the Catcliffe, (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Orgreave & Treeton grouping provides a local service centre function. This does not necessarily preclude further development, particularly where they are well served by public transport. The grouping includes several out of centre retail uses at Catcliffe. Waverley is defined as a Principal Settlement. Waverley new community will deliver 3,900 new homes in total (although only 2,500 are anticipated to be delivered in the Plan period) and along with supporting community services and facilities will create a new sustainable community in this locality. The adjacent Advanced Manufacturing Park provides a significant number of local job opportunities. Current Size of settlement Catcliffe, Orgreave & Treeton: 2.6% (as % of Borough Total Waverley: 0% Number of Households) Target Number of New Catcliffe, Orgreave & Treeton: 170 - 1% Homes (2013-2028) and Waverley: 2,500 - 17% Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Target Amount of New Catcliffe, Orgreave & Treeton: 12 hectares - 5% Employment Land Waverley: 42 hectares - 18% (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Position in Core Strategy Local Centre Retail Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS12)
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 215 9
Core Strategy Retail Encourage developments which improve convenience and Strategy for Settlement comparison goods and services facilities provision and (Core Strategy Policy CS12) reduce vacancies.
9.2 Settlement Profile
9.2 Settlement Characteristics
9.3 Catcliffe
Small settlement divided into three by the railway and the A630. Southern part of village is low-lying and has in the past, been subject to flooding problems. Has a large supermarket and recently located Boundary Mills within a large retail warehousing unit. Limited local services within the village. Good road links to Sheffield, Rotherham and the national motorway network. The Scheduled Ancient Monuments of the Glassworks Cone and Blue Mans Bower are found.
9.4 Treeton
Popular commuter village. New residential developments on site of former colliery. Good sporting facilities off Washfield lane. Historic village centre designated as Conservation Area. Strong Green Belt boundary. Limited local services
9.5 Orgreave
Small residential area to south of study area, with no local facilities other than a new children’s play area. Bounded by railway to west and the B6200 to the south No scope for additional development. Immediately adjacent to Sheffield City Council administrative area and the settlement of Woodhouse Mill.
9.6 Waverley
Former open cast site reclaimed for development. Already partly developed for advanced manufacturing park. Planning permissions for a new mixed community at Waverley have been granted, with homes for sale & residents moving in. New community will provide employment, housing, recreation, retail and leisure opportunities. Major greenspace opportunities within the Green Belt. This will include an enhanced potential for biodiversity interest as well as new recreational amenities and allotments. Possible creation of new link road.
216 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 9.7 Development Constraints
9.8 Future development is constrained by:
The railway line running along the western edge of Treeton and the eastern edge of Catcliffe. Local Wildlife Sites to the south of Treeton. The land adjacent to the River Rother which is within Flood Risk Zones 2 and 3. Functional flood plains. The Sheffield Parkway A630 and the M1 motorway. The Brinsworth Air Quality Management Area which covers Brinsworth, the M1 junction 33 and part of the Sheffield Parkway. The proposed HS2 route 9.3 Location Map of Sites
9.9 Map 25 'Proposed Development Sites in Catcliffe, Treeton, Orgreave and Waverely' shows all the proposed development sites in the Catcliffe, Orgreave, Treeton and Waverley settlement group as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
9.10 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
9.11 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
9.12 Further Detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 217 218 9 Map 25 Proposed Development Sites in Catcliffe, Treeton, Orgreave and Waverely Si tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 Si tes 9.4 Schedule of Sites and
Table 31 P ol icies Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment
Final Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated
Dr total or
aft balance
remaining 2014 to be built)
LDF0489 LAND TO THE SOUTH OF Green Belt Agricultural Land Residential Development Site 75 0.00 WOOD LANE
LDF0491 LAND OFF ROTHER Community Facilities Agricultural Field, planning Residential Development Site 43 0.00 CRESCENT and Residential permission granted.
LDF0501 LAND TO THE REAR OF Urban Greenspace informal greenspace Potential Employment Site 0 3.13 BLUEMANS WAY (Business)
LDF0502 LAND OFF EUROPA LINK Green Belt Open fields. Potential Employment Site 0 6.55 (Business & Industry)
LDF0505 LAND WEST OF SHEFFIELD Retail vacant land Potential Employment Site 0 2.15 LANE (Business)
LDF0507 LAND TO THE NORTH OF Residential Vacant Land, planning Residential Development Site 13 0.00 FRONT STREET permission granted for residential LDF0524 WAVERLEY AMP SITE Industry and Restored colliery site. Open Employment Development 0 21.00 Business cast site partly developed for Site (Special Policy Area) Industry and Business
LDF0535 WAVERLEY MIXED USE Industry / Business Former opencast site under Residential Development Site 2,500 0.00 COMMUNITY / Minerals restoration. Planning permission granted for 3,890 homes (2,500 in Plan Period)
LDF0754 EWS DISMANTLED Industry and Disused railway line Employment Development 0 5.85 RAILWAY LINE, WOOD business Site (Business & Industry) LANE 219 220 9 Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total or balance remaining to be built)
LDF0760 HIGHFIELD COMMERCIAL Industry and reclaimed opencast site Employment Development 0 13.24 business Site (Business) Si tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 10 Proposed Development Sites in Thurcroft
10.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy)
10.1 The Local Plan Core Strategy proposes the following for the Thurcroft settlement grouping:
Table 32
Position in Core Strategy Local Service Centre Settlement Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Strategy Thurcroft provides a Local Service Centre function although (Core Strategy Policy CS1, this does not necessarily preclude further development, Table 1) particularly where they are well served by public transport. Current Size of settlement 2.1% (as % of Borough Total Number of Households) Target Number of New 300 - 2% Homes (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Target Amount of New 7 hectares - 3% Employment Land (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Position in Core Strategy Local Centres Retail Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS12) Core Strategy Retail Encourage developments which improve convenience and Strategy for Settlement comparison goods and services facilities provision and (Core Strategy Policy CS12) reduce vacancies.
10.2 Settlement Profile
10.2 Settlement Characteristics
Reasonable access to the strategic road network. However, although immediately adjacent to the M1 Motorway, the nearest motorway junction is at Bramley/Hellaby to the north (Junction 1 M18).
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 221 10
Majority of the housing stock is in good condition and it is evident that a proportion of the housing stock in the western part of Thurcroft is within local authority ownership. Limited range of employment opportunities provided by industrial estate and the local shops and services. Despite pockets of deprivation, overall the settlement does not form part of the most deprived areas in the Borough. To the north east of the settlement lies a fairly new housing estate (‘The Villas’) which is isolated from the remainder of the settlement. The intervening land and land between Steadfolds Lane and the disused railway has relatively poor visual quality. The restoration of Thurcroft colliery includes the maintenance of an area for biodiversity interest as Great Crested Newts are found. The recreation ground adjacent to the Gordon Bennett Memorial Hall forms a focal point of the settlement.
10.3 Development Constraints
10.4 Future development is constrained by:
The former railway line to the east, provide a pedestrian / cycle route to employment opportunities within Dinnington as part of the Sustrans project. M18 motorway to the west. A number of Local Wildlife sites are in close proximity to the settlement, particularly to the south and east. There is a need to fully consider the impact on coalescence with, and visual prominence from, Brampton en le Morthen. 10.3 Location Map of Sites
10.5 Map 26 'Proposed Development Sites in Thurcroft' shows all the proposed development sites in the Thurcroft settlement group as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
10.6 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
10.7 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
10.8 Further Detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
222 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 26 Proposed Development Sites in Thurcroft and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 223 224 10 10.4 Schedule of Sites
Table 33
Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total or balance remaining to be built)
LDF0432 NORTH OF THURCROFT Green Belt Agriculture Employment Development 0 6.17 INDUSTRIAL ESTATE Site (Business & Industry)
LDF0434 GREEN ARBOUR SCHOOL Residential overgrown grassland Residential Development 20 0.00 PLAYING FIELD (SOUTH) development site Site
LDF0435 GREEN ARBOUR SCHOOL Community Facilities Overgrown former Residential Development 20 0.00 PLAYING FIELD (NORTH) playing fields Site
LDF0436 SOUTH OF IVANHOE ROAD Urban Greenspace, Overgrown land Residential Development 39 0.00 Residential Site
LDF0437 OFF SAWN MOOR ROAD Development Site H23 Construction started Residential Development 369 0.00 Site Si tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 11 Proposed Development Sites in Non-Green Belt Villages : Thorpe Hesley, Todwick, Harthill, Woodsetts and Laughton-en-le-Morthen
11.1 Settlement Targets (from Core Strategy)
11.1 The Local Plan Core Strategy proposes the following for the Non-Green Belt Villages (Thorpe Hesley, Todwick, Harthill, Woodsetts, Laughton en le Morthen):
Thorpe Hesley, Todwick, Harthill, Woodsetts and Laughton en le Morthen
Table 34
Position in Core Strategy Local Service Centre Settlement Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Strategy Thorpe Hesley, Todwick, Harthill, Woodsetts and Laughton (Core Strategy Policy CS1) en le Morthen all perform functions as local service centres. They provide a mainly local function, although this does not necessarily preclude further development, particularly where they are well served by public transport. The details of any potential growth opportunities within and on the edge of these communities will be decided within the emerging Sites and Policies Document. Current Size of settlements Thorpe Hesley - 2.1% (as % of Borough Total Number of Households) Todwick, Harthill, Woodsetts, Laughton en le Morthen - Less than 1%
Target Number of New Thorpe Hesley: 170 - 1% Homes (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Todwick, Harthill, Woodsetts, Laughton en le Morthen : 170 Total - 1% (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Target Amount of New 0% Employment Land (2013-2028) and Percentage of Borough Total (Core Strategy Policy CS1) Position in Core Strategy Local Centre (Harthill) Retail Hierarchy (Core Strategy Policy CS12
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 225 11
Core Strategy Retail Local centre - Encourage developments which improve Strategy for Settlement convenience and comparison goods and services facilities (Core Strategy Policy CS12) provision and reduce vacancies.
11.2 Settlement Profiles
Thorpe Hesley
Settlement Characteristics
Well preserved rural character. Contains a concentration of deprivation on the Hollywood estate of social housing to the south. Good connections with the strategic road network and the M1. Reasonable local services. Approximately one bus every hour to Sheffield and Rotherham. Capacity to accommodate some minor expansion.
Development Constraints
11.2 Future development within Thorpe Hesley is constrained by:
the setting of Wentworth Woodhouse, Kepples Column, the Registered Park and Garden and the designed landscape setting
Todwick
11.3 Settlement Characteristics
Small but desirable rural village with up-market residential profile. Good road links to Kiveton Park and Kiveton Bridge railway stations. Good road links to Worksop and the M1 motorway via A57 route. Strong Green Belt boundary protecting its rural setting. Limited local services. Approximately one bus every hour to Dinnington and Rotherham. Improvements to Todwick crossroads and A57 to improve safety and increase capacity.
Harthill
11.4 Settlement Characteristics
Small but desirable rural village with an increasingly upmarket residential profile. Good links to Kiveton Park and Kiveton Bridge railway stations. Proportion of social housing on the estate around Carver Close and Pryor Mede. Opportunity to regenerate residential development at North Farm Close. Strong Green Belt boundary protecting its rural setting.
226 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Limited local services. Approximately one bus every hour to Sheffield and Rotherham.
Woodsetts
11.5 Settlement Characteristics
Small but desirable rural village with an increasingly upmarket residential profile. Good road links to Dinnington, Worksop and the M1 motorway via A57 trunk route. Strong Green Belt boundary protecting its rural setting. Limited local services. Approximately one bus every hour to Worksop and Rotherham.
Laughton-en-le-Morthen
11.6 Settlement Characteristics
Attractive historic settlement. Numerous listed buildings in historic core. Lack of convenience facilities. Unsympathetic village expansion in the 1960s and 70s. Strong Green Belt boundary protecting its rural setting. Approximately one bus every hour to Dinnington and Rotherham
Development Constraints
11.7 Future development within Todwick, Harthill, Woodsetts and Laughton-en-le-Morthen is constrained by:
Ensuring that rural character is retained and the loss of open countryside is prevented. For instance, at Thorpe Hesley local facilities and public transport links 11.3 Location Map of Sites
11.8 Map 27 'Proposed Development Sites in Thorpe Hesley' shows all the proposed development sites in the Non Green Belt village of Thorpe Hesley as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
11.9 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
11.10 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 227 11
11.11 Further Detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
228 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 27 Proposed Development Sites in Thorpe Hesley and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 229 11
11.12 Map 28 'Proposed Development Sites in Todwick' shows all the proposed development sites in the Non Green Belt village of Todwick as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
11.13 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
11.14 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
11.15 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
230 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 28 Proposed Development Sites in Todwick and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 231 11
11.16 Map 29 'Proposed Development Sites in Harthill' shows all the proposed development sites in the Non Green Belt village of Harthill as well as the proposed revised Green Belt boundary.
11.17 Sites proposed to be allocated for residential and employment development uses are shown separately along with an estimate of the potential number of homes that could be built or the area in hectares respectively. Land that could potentially be allocated for employment use is shown (this is subject to the final route of the proposed High Speed 2 rail link) plus Safeguarded Land for residential - i.e. land that is proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt but would be protected and not considered for development until after the Plan Period (after 2028).
11.18 These sites can all be viewed through our Local Plan web pages.
11.19 Further detail is given in the following schedule of sites.
232 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 29 Proposed Development Sites in Harthill and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 233 11
234 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes 11.4 Schedule of Sites and
Thorpe Hesley P ol icies Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment
Final Allocation Capacity Area (ha) (estimated total or
Dr balance remaining
aft to be built)
2014 LDF0512 LAND AT THORPE COMMON Green Belt Overgrown vegetation Residential Development 52 0.00 and car showroom Site
LDF0513 LAND AT ELDERTREE LODGE Green Belt Farm Residential Development 21 0.00 Site
LDF0515 LAND TO THE NORTH OF Green Belt Maintained grassland Residential Development 137 0.00 UPPER WORTLEY ROAD Site
Safeguarded Land
LDF0514 LAND TO THE SOUTH OF Green Belt Agricultural field Safeguarded Land 46 0.00 UPPER WORTLEY ROAD 235 236 11 Todwick, Harthill, Woodsetts
Site LDF No Site Name Current UDP Existing Use Proposed Allocation Residential Employment Allocation Capacity (estimated Area (ha) total or balance remaining to be built)
LDF0533 LAND OFF WINNEY HILL, Green Belt Grassed Field Residential Development 39 0.00 HARTHILL Site
LDF0551 NORTH FARM CLOSE, Residential, Dilapidated Residential Development 40 0.00 HARTHILL Conservation Area and Residential dwellings. Site Known Interest
LDF0730 LAND TO THE WEST OF Green Belt Agricultural Land Residential Development 107 0.00 KIVETON LANE, TODWICK Site Si tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 12 Methodology: Identification of Site Allocations
Developing the Site Selection Methodology
12.1 The process of identifying or “allocating” sites for new development requires a significant number of factors to be taken into account. There is numerous planning, heritage and nature conservation legislation, Central Government's National Planning Policy Framework and other best practice which requires potential impacts from development to be considered. This appendix provides details regarding the evidence base studies completed since work commenced to prepare an up to date development plan to guide future decision-making on planning applications; the identification of sites for consideration as potential development sites, and the methodology developed to assess the sustainability of a site and subsequently the selection of sites for future development - the allocations.
12.2 Around 650 individual sites have been considered as potential site allocations in Rotherham. It is essential that an objective and transparent method for choosing sites for future development and allocation is used. The following sections describe the methodology and evidence base studies that have been prepared over previous years prior to the preparation of this latest draft Sites and Policies document.
Evidence Base
12.3 Whilst the Council must plan for future growth, it also needs to protect sensitive areas from development and ensure that the pattern of development does not have a negative impact on the long term sustainability of the environment. Planning for the identification of potential development sites is supported by an extensive evidence base. This is discussed below.
Sources of Sites
12.4 Representations received as part of the preparation of the Unitary Development Plan during the 1990s, and commencement of its subsequent review in the early 2000s, yielded a long standing source of sites for consideration. Following the introduction of Local Development Frameworks by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004), the Council invited the submission of potential development sites from landowners.
12.5 This “call for sites” took place between January 2007 to November 2008 via the Council’s website and as part of the then consultation on the LDF’s Core Strategy (Core Strategy Preferred Options, 2007). Sites continued to be accepted after this date. The Council’s own Asset Management Team was also consulted for details of land in the Council’s ownership which should be considered.
12.6 Further sources of sites came from technical studies undertaken within the Planning Policy Team including the Urban Potential Study (2004), Employment Land Review (2007, updated 2010) and from Masterplans prepared to support the Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder initiatives.
Green Belt Review
12.7 A key task in deciding where and when new development should take place is to consider the potential impact of site allocations on the Green Belt (as defined in National Planning Policy
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 237 12
Framework (NPPF)). It is important to take into account the Green Belt’s historic and current context, its changing role over time and its geographical extent. Consideration is given to how the Green Belt performs in respect of the role and purposes defined by the NPPF.
12.8 A Strategic Green Belt Review, available to download from the Local Plan web pages, has been prepared which sets out the need, rationale and broad methodology for undertaking a Green Belt Review. The Green Belt Review provides an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of existing Green Belt boundaries, plus a consideration of wider sustainability issues. The Sites and Policies Document reviews the Green Belt and proposes appropriate changes to accommodate development proposals in the future. This Review provides certainty throughout the Local Plan period that no further changes to the Green Belt will be necessary.
12.9 The Council recognises the important role of the Green Belt in the Borough, particularly in preserving its towns and settlements from merging into one another, safeguarding the countryside and concentrating development into its urban areas, it is a key element to achieving sustainable development. The main objectives of the Local Plan in respect of the Borough’s Green Belt and settlement pattern are:
To maintain the Green Belt as the principal means of protecting the openness of the countryside and prevent the coalescence of Rotherham, Sheffield, Barnsley and Doncaster.
To maintain the existing settlement pattern of the Borough.
To concentrate development into, and on the edge of, the Borough’s main towns and settlements.
South Yorkshire Settlement Assessment (2005)
12.10 This study provided a consistent basis for assessing the role and function of settlements across South Yorkshire and to inform strategic regeneration and growth decisions at the local and regional level. This was undertaken through:
An assessment of the current role of settlements taking into account how the settlement functions in terms of provision of schools, health care, employment, retail and leisure opportunities. This assessment included a profile of each settlement based on its social and economic characteristics, service provision, accessibility, housing infrastructure and capacity considerations.
A comparison, based on this profile, of each settlement in terms of its current role and how regeneration, investment and decisions on growth may change its future.
Identification of the potential for each settlement to accommodate future growth in terms of how this would contribute to achieving long term change and overall sustainability - based on information available at the time.
12.11 The South Yorkshire Settlement Assessment 2005 is available to download from the Local Plan web pages.
Settlement Capacity Survey Methodology
238 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 12.12 The Core Strategy identifies broad targets for how much, and broadly where, new development should take place over the Plan period. However, this Document determines the Borough’s capacity to accommodate the level of growth envisaged and identifies specific sites for housing and employment uses. In the next consultation on this document town centre retail and leisure, waste and transportation related uses will also be identified.
12.13 In 2007 work began to identify the growth opportunities and capacity in the Borough for new development to inform the Core Strategy Revised Options which were published in 2009. An assessment of potential development sites was undertaken for each settlement and any potential expansion of them. The established methodology took account of factors such as:
The settlements' position in the South Yorkshire Settlement Assessment (2005) hierarchy.
Settlement form, e.g. edge of settlement or open countryside.
Physical constraints, e.g. topography, agricultural land, flood risk.
Healthy environment e.g. contamination, impact on greenspace.
Landscape and townscape impact .
Biodiversity and geodiversity - including Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), Local Nature Reserves (LNRs), Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) & Regionally Important Geological Sites (RIGS).
Availability of and accessibility to services and facilities.
Transport access – comments received from the South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive based on modelling to measure the relative public transport accessibility.
Infrastructure capacity – a separate Infrastructure Delivery Plan has been prepared to inform Local Plan preparation.
12.14 Survey criteria were prepared based upon an analysis of the Sustainability Objectives detailed in the Rotherham’s LDF Sustainability Appraisal General Scoping Report (2006). This aimed to ensure the balanced consideration of all three aspects of sustainability (social, environmental and economic).
12.15 In November 2007 a workshop took place to discuss and agree the breadth and detail of the methodology which was subsequently used to undertake site assessments. This was attended by more than 60 people from a range of Council service areas and external interests.
12.16 Site surveys undertaken across the Borough in 2007-08 applied this methodology to assess each identified site.
12.17 The methodical evaluation of sites meant a collective professional judgement could be formed with regard to each site and was assessed in terms of whether future development would be constrained or whether there are minor or major reservations in terms of its potential for future allocation. Consultation was undertaken on the Sites and Policies Issues and Options Document in June 2011.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 239 12
12.18 Settlement Capacity Reports for each Settlement Grouping were prepared and the information presented in the following way:
Settlement role;
Settlement characteristics and key development constraints;
Schedule of sites surveyed (categorised according to survey source);
Options showing development potential for a range of potential uses. Options include (a) Containment; (b) Containment and Minor Expansion; and (c) Major Expansion;
Discussion of the achievability of Options;
Summary of survey findings illustrated on the accompanying Map; and
Conclusion on the ability of a settlement to achieve its Settlement Role
12.19 The settlement capacity reports prepared in 2008/09 are available from the Local Plan web pages. This survey work was used to re-evaluate the conclusions drawn within the 2005 South Yorkshire Settlement Study, comparing likely development opportunities and re-assessing the settlement classification.
Spatial Options Report (March 2009)
12.20 Further information on this progression is provided in the Spatial Options Report which itself has been subject to its own Sustainability Appraisal and formed the basis for the Core Strategy Revised Options.
12.21 It sought to reflect Planning Advisory Service guidance on producing an evidence base by focusing on:
Identifying the patterns and levels of growth in the Borough from Regional Spatial Strategy requirements and Growth Point status (1).
Setting out the additional evidence which had been produced since the 2007 Core Strategy Preferred Options document.
Reviewing and updating the Preferred Option on the basis of this new evidence.
How earlier consultation helped to refine the Preferred Options.
Setting out the revised spatial options in the context of other distinctive alternatives and what the implications of these different options might be.
1 In July 2008 South Yorkshire was granted new Growth Point Status by the Government, which increased Rotherham’s housing target 20% above the Regional Spatial Strategy.
240 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Urban Potential Study
12.22 This Study established the anticipated extent to which urban areas can accommodate additional housing development. It provides a basis to consider future land allocations and in the development plan.
12.23 The hybrid methodology used site survey and estimation techniques and was carried out in accordance with the Government’s guide to best practice, “Tapping the Potential” and the Yorkshire and Humber Assembly guidance "‘Regional Framework for Urban Potential Studies”. It involved the following stages:
Stage 1 Defining the study area
Stage 2 Identifying the potential sources of capacity
Stage 3 Surveying to identify opportunities
Stage 4 Assessing the potential housing yield
Stage 5 Discounting the potential to provide a realistic assessment of how much can be realised
12.24 Given the importance of the findings of the Urban Potential Study, the Borough Council commissioned Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners to maintain a watching brief over the Council’s urban potential work. This involved the verification of the methodology and the survey process, technical auditing of the study components and advising on a realistic discounting procedure.
12.25 The Urban Potential Study is available to download from the Local Plan web pages.
Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder
12.26 The overall strategic aim of the Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder in South Yorkshire was: “To build and support sustainable communities and successful neighbourhoods where the quality and choice of housing underpins a buoyant economy and an improved quality of life”
12.27 The strategic objectives were to:
Achieve a radical improvement in the character and diversity of neighbourhoods, helping to secure a more sustainable pattern in the sub-region.
Grow the area’s housing range, increasing housing choice in order to meet the aspirations of existing, emerging and incoming households.
Improve housing quality, ensuring that all tenures capitalise on the opportunities created through innovations in design, standards and efficiency.
12.28 Strategies to guide future development and implement practical solutions to restructure and renew housing markets were prepared. These formed the basis for the consideration of future
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 241 12
development opportunities and accompanying re-allocation requirements that may exist. The five target areas for the programme in Rotherham were:
The Town Centre
Rotherham West – Kimberworth, Kimberworth Park, Masbrough, Thorn Hill, Meadowbank
Rotherham East – Dalton, Thrybergh, East Herringthorpe, Herringthorpe
Rawmarsh and Parkgate
Wath and Swinton
Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment
12.29 The Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) identifies how much land is potentially available to meet the housing land requirements for the Local Plan allocations. The SHLAA provides the evidence base to demonstrate that there is enough land to support the housing growth strategy set out in the Core Strategy. Within Rotherham, a joint Sheffield and Rotherham assessment has been undertaken to assess the potential future housing land supply within the Sheffield and Rotherham Strategic ‘Housing Market Area’. An Area of Search for the most sustainable locations for new housing outside existing built-up areas was determined and further details of this task are given below. The SHLAA has been overseen by a Working Group consisting of Council officers and other key stakeholders including adjoining local authorities, Council Protection of Rural England (CPRE) and representatives of the Home Builders Federation.
12.30 An important role of the SHLAA is to enable the assessment of a 5-year supply of deliverable sites. To be considered deliverable, sites should, at the point of adoption be:
Available – the site is available now and free of ownership constraints;
Suitable – the site offers a suitable location for development now and would contribute to the creation of sustainable, mixed communities;
Achievable – there is a reasonable prospect that housing will be delivered on the site within the time-frames identified.
12.31 Government Practice Guidance suggests that it may be helpful to identify particular types of land or areas within the areas of search that should be excluded from the assessment. On approval of the Working Group, the following categories of land were excluded, not all are applicable to Rotherham:
Internationally important nature conservation sites (RAMSAR sites, Special Areas for Conservation, Special Protection Areas)
Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs and National Nature Reserves (NNRs)
242 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Local Nature Reserves (LNRs)
Cemeteries, graveyards and crematoria
Active flood plains (Flood Risk Zone 3b)
Land associated with a Scheduled Ancient Monument
Waterways, reservoirs, lakes, ponds and dams (though waterways were not used to constrain the consideration of adjoining land if the waterway could reasonably be bridged)
12.32 As a general rule, it was considered undesirable to build housing on sites that are environmentally sensitive, are important for outdoor recreation or are in areas where the living environment may not be satisfactory. The following areas fall in this category:
Locally important nature conservation sites, as identified in the adopted UDP or emerging Local Plan.
Mature woodland not covered by nature conservation designations
Areas in active recreational use – parks, playing fields, sports grounds, golf courses, allotments and public open space identified by the Open Space Audit. Excludes vacant or derelict recreational land
Sites within 200m metres of the M1 & M18 motorways
Greenfield sites on the edge of smaller villages
Greenfield sites in Flood Risk Zone 3a
12.33 However potentially sensitive landscape areas were not excluded from consideration, but sensitive landscape areas do provide a useful indicator of those locations where development could have an unacceptable landscape impact. Areas where overhead power lines would be a potential constraint to development were also identified.
12.34 In identifying potential sites for development, the Council considered a transport-orientated approach to ensure that development:
Makes the best use of existing transport infrastructure and capacity;
Takes into account capacity constraints and deliverable improvements, particularly in relation to junctions on the Strategic Road Network; and
Considers public transport accessibility and maximises accessibility by walking and cycling.
Employment Land Review (2007, 2010)
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 243 12
12.35 In order to help provide a robust evidence base for preparation of the Local Plan and assist when determining planning applications, the Council produced an Employment Land Review in 2007. The preliminary report is divided into three parts:
Part 1 - Taking stock of the existing situation; sets out a review of Rotherham’s local economy at present. Part 2 - Identifying future requirements; utilises a range of methodologies to determine the amount of land that will be required to meet future employment needs. It shows how the likely portfolio of new sites provide for a range of requirements such as office floorspace, high quality business parks and supporting small businesses, as well as how these sites meet sector requirements. Part 3 - Identifying a new portfolio of employment sites; presents the outcomes of a qualitative review of employment land to help move towards establishing a portfolio of employment land suitable to meet Rotherham’s future requirements and market needs.
12.36 The report is accompanied by three background papers to further explain these issues.
12.37 A subsequent update took place in 2010 which takes stock of Rotherham’s current economy, looks at likely future economic changes and requirements, and considers the amount of land likely to be required for development to help meet these needs.
12.38 The Employment Land Review has assessed the suitability for continued, or potential use for economic purposes, of a range of sites across Rotherham, focusing primarily on land allocated for employment development in the Unitary Development Plan which remains undeveloped, a number of other sites currently or formerly used for employment purposes, and sites identified as potential allocations as part of our early Site Allocations work.
Accessibility to Public Transport
12.39 The South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive developed a methodology, in conjunction with the South Yorkshire local authorities, to assess the sustainability of proposals in terms of access to public transport and accessibility. The model, known as 'Land Use Transport Interaction Models (LUTI)' was used to test the potential site allocations at 2009, against the 'Core Public Transport Network' as defined in the Second South Yorkshire Local Transport Plan (LTP2). This includes the medium and high frequency bus corridors (6+ buses per hours), the Supertram Network and the Railway Network. The Core Network has been used as this provides an attractive public transport service and therefore focuses development in the areas where we can best utilise existing resources.
12.40 Once the Core Network was mapped, a walking distances buffer was applied to the access points (railway station, tram stops, medium and high frequency bus corridors) to create a catchment area buffer. Institute of Highways and Transport (IHT) guidance on walking distances to access public transport from new developments states that an individual is likely to walk 400m to access a bus service, 600m to access light rail (Supertram) and 800m to access a railway station.
12.41 The site classification process uses an allocation's proximity to the Core Network as a scoring mechanism. The scores are ranged on a red, amber, green assessment:
244 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Red : The characteristics of a red site are that the site does not fall within the buffer of the Core Network. Development on this site is not desirable as the site has limited access to public transport and is outside of the specified walking catchment area.
Amber : sites that require transport interventions to be considered as there are restriction to using public transport.
Green : Green sites fall completely within the Core Network buffer. In general, these allocations require minimal (if any) public transport intervention. However, if there are capacity restrictions, an intervention will need to be considered.
12.42 Consideration of the outcomes of the LUTI assessment was provided by representatives of the Council’s Transportation Section. Professional judgement was provided on the merits of the outcomes of the computerised modelling together with opinion on whether a site should be classified as Red, Amber or Green. This included deliberations on whether additional land/demolition would be required to enable the provision of appropriate access, identifying land which is remote from other residential areas, facilities and bus links, and establishing where there could be capacity issues, notably near the Motorway Network.
Infrastructure Delivery Study and Transport Modelling
12.43 The Council has also undertaken an Infrastructure Delivery Study (Roger Tym and Partners 2012) to investigate likely supporting infrastructure required to enable the delivery of sustainable development, by meeting the social and infrastructure needs of new residents within an area, and to mitigate any potential problems arising from significant new employment, residential and other development in a specific locality, where, this is viable to do so. Additionally Transport Modelling work (by MVA Consultants 2013) undertaken over the last year has specifically considered the impact the growth in housing and employment opportunities could potentially have on the local highway network. Ongoing consideration is being given to the likely mitigation required.
Flood Risk Assessment
12.44 The Council has produced Strategic Flood Risk Assessments (SFRA) to identify and assess the risk of flooding across Rotherham. A Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (2008) for the whole borough identified that a proportion of Rotherham is at risk of flooding. This includes parts of Rotherham town centre and surrounding areas which are at medium to high flood risk. However as the Borough’s principal service centre and given its location at the heart of the urban area, it is a key development and regeneration area. A more detailed Level 2 SFRA and Flood Risk toolkit (2011) has therefore been produced to help address these more specific challenges at the heart of the urban area. It splits the defined study area (called the “Rotherham Regeneration” area) into nine character zones and provides guidance on the acceptability of different types of uses, advises on applying the sequential and exception tests and addresses flood mitigation and resilience issues. It recognises the flood risks present but acknowledges that continuing development is necessary for wider sustainable development and town centre regeneration reasons. It concludes that the flood risk and regeneration challenges within and adjacent to Rotherham Town Centre can be overcome through a pro-active and comprehensive strategy towards flood risk management. This will involve all parties working together from the outset to deliver the vision by managing flood risk.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 245 12
12.45 In selecting proposed sites for allocation the Level 1 and Level 2 Strategic Flood Risk Assessments and the Environment Agency’s flood risk mapping data and consultation responses have enabled the identification of each site’s flood risk. This has allowed the application of the sequential approach to flood risk in site selection as set out in national planning policy.
Integrated Impact Assessment
12.46 The Integrated Impact Assessment incorporates the Sustainability Appraisal, Health Impact Assessment and Equalities Impact Assessment. It incorporates the requirements of the EU Strategic Environmental Assessment Regulations. The purpose of the sustainability appraisal process is to appraise the social, environmental and economic effects of a plan from the outset. In doing so it will help ensure that decisions are made that contribute to achieving sustainable development. Jacobs UK Ltd have been appointed to undertake the Council's Integrated Impact Assessments.
Concluding Remarks
12.47 The above initial site assessment methodology and evidence base documents, enabled the identification of sustainable development survey criteria that has subsequently been used to guide the preparation of the Site Selection Methodology 2013 applied to all the sites surveyed for the consultation in 2013.
Current Site Selection Methodology
12.48 Stage 1 represents an initial sieving exercise. The objective is to filter out at an early stage all those sites that have a significant overriding constraint(s) to development or are already developed. It also enables the defining of the “reasonable alternatives” in order to meet a requirement of the SEA Regulations. Any constraints are so significant that development is highly unlikely to be appropriate. The constraints relate to whether or not the site broadly conforms to the Rotherham Local Plan Core Strategy settlement hierarchy and a number of key environmental and heritage considerations.
12.49 Stage 2 considers the remaining sites and looks at more detailed site specific considerations and constraints. The aim of Stage 2 is to assess all sites that are deemed suitable under Stage 1 against a number of detailed site-specific sustainability factors and potential constraints to development, and by doing this, to comply with SA / SEA requirements. These relate to a variety of social, economic and environmental issues which conform to the statutorily agreed SA Framework. A simple Red / Amber / Green assessment for each of the criteria is used.
12.50 It should be noted that SA is not a decision-making tool, but rather SA informs decision-making. While the SA Objectives must be taken into account, planning considerations will influence decisions. Red / Amber / Green SA overall ‘scores’, one covering socio-economic considerations and one covering environmental considerations, will be given to each site and considered as part of the Stage 3 site prioritisation.
12.51 Stage 3 aims to prioritise all the sites that have progressed through from stage 1 and gone through the SA process. This will enable sites to be compared against each other and will prioritise those sites that are the most sustainable for development and best meet the priorities as per the Core Strategy. This stage will look at Green Belt / non Green Belt, type of urban extension to
246 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 settlements, deliverability and other known physical constraints, including the proposed HS2 route. The SA cumulative effects of development will also be considered / scored here.
12.52 It should be noted that even some poorly performing sites may still need to be chosen to be allocated at the Stage 3 site prioritisation assessment if there are insufficient alternative sites available to meet the development needs for each settlement grouping identified within the Core Strategy. This process must be clearly and carefully recorded and an explanation given for the reason for allocation / non-allocation of each site.
Process:
Stage 1 - Automatic Site Exclusions:
12.53 A. Site developed or unavailable
Site is already fully developed – some sites that were put forward at the beginning of the process have now been fully developed Any site proposed for development must be likely to be developed (or at least started) during the plan period. Sites that are to be retained as Urban Greenspace will therefore be discounted as being unavailable. Constraints may also occur relating to ownership, or where the site is unlikely to receive any interest from a developer. The latest Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) will be used to determine that there is a reasonable prospect that a site will come forward.
12.54 B. Conformity with the Local Plan Core Strategy settlement hierarchy:
The Core Strategy identifies urban settlement groupings that should be the focus for most of the new development (Policy CS1). Larger existing Local Service Centres are suitable for limited growth with other villages suitable for only limited housing growth to meet local needs. The strategy for Green Belt villages is not to provide for any further development other than some very limited small in-fill. Sites will therefore be discounted if they do not fall within or close to the identified settlement groupings unless they are of a proportionate size.
12.55 C. Key environmental and heritage considerations:
Biodiversity - Any site that falls within or so close to an international or national designation so as to cause significant harm will be discounted at this stage. International sites comprise Special Protection Areas (SPA), Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) and Ramsar Sites. Nationally designated sites comprise Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) including, National Nature Reserves (NNR). Regional and local designations will be considered at a later stage. Flooding - Any site (or part of a site) that falls within a functional flood plain (flood risk zone 3b) will be discounted at this stage. Sites falling within areas that are a lower risk / medium risk from flooding, or which fall within high risk (floor risk zone 3a) but not what is defined as ‘functional floodplain’ (i.e. they can be defended), will be considered at a later stage. Archaeological - Any site that would significantly affect a nationally important archaeological site will be discounted at this stage. Nationally important remains comprise Scheduled Ancient
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 247 12
Monuments (SAM) and other sites of national archaeological significance. Regionally and locally important archaeological features will be considered at a later stage. Air quality – Any unoccupied site that falls within an existing Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) would be contrary to the objectives of the AQMA via the relevant air quality objectives, which are set to protect people’s health (and the environment).
Stage 2 – Sustainability Appraisal (SA) and Detailed Site Considerations / Constraints:
12.56 Stage 2 will be structured in accordance with our statutorily agreed Sustainability Appraisal (SA) Framework. This is made up of SA Topics and Objectives covering environmental, social and economic issues. We will frame our criteria under the SA Topics. The criteria mainly focus on constraints and therefore risks of negative effects, which are a proportionate level of assessment at this stage and viewed to be SEA compliant.
12.57 A simple Red / Amber / Green assessment for most of these criteria will be used. The purpose of this scoring will be not only to compare sites, but also to report on their “likely significant effects” in order to comply with the SEA Regulations. A site with a high number of ‘red’ assessments (i.e. many risks of major negative effects) is unlikely to be suitable for allocation as a development site unless a shortage of more suitable sites results in insufficient allocations to reach the Core Strategy settlement target. The assessments may not capture all constraints, but any additional known constraints on particular sites can be included within the overall site assessment at Stage 3. Additional refinement and further investigations can also be carried out at the prioritisation stage if required.
Red = potentially significant constraint and/or significant negative impact on the achievement of an SA Objective Amber = some potential constraint and/or negative impact on the achievement of an SA Objective Green = no known constraint and/or little negative impact on the achievement of an SA Objective
i. SA Topic 1: Population and Equality ii. SA Topic 2: Health and Well-Being iii. SA Topic 3: Accessibility / Community Facilities iv. SA Topic 4: Education / Skills Combined consideration due to overlaps in available and usable data.
12.58 A. Proximity to services:
Average Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) ranks of Lower Layer Super Output Areas (LLSOAs) within / adjacent to the site for “Geographical Barriers” (i.e. access to services). This nationally prepared indicator is made up of road distance to: a GP surgery; a supermarket or convenience store; a primary school; and a Post Office. Inherent limitations to this indicator will be borne in mind, however it is a good starting point for consideration of accessibility and bolstered by application of the settlement hierarchy in Stages 1 and 3. Within the top 20% (inclusive) most deprived LLSOAs = Red, between 20% and 40% most deprived = Amber, less than 40% most deprived (i.e. 40.001% or greater) = Green.
12.59 B. Greenspace
248 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Accessibility to Greenspace – from the Greenspace Audit (local = within 280m, neighbourhood or borough = within 840m) a simple Yes/No where Red = no accessibility to greenspace and Green = accessible to greenspace
12.60 C. Other Leisure
Proximity to leisure facility – this will only be able to account for Council-owned leisure facilities. It will be based on whether or not the site is within a settlement or connecting settlement which has a leisure facility = Green, vs. no leisure facility present = Amber.
12.61 D. School Capacity
Settlements with a current or projected deficit in primary and/or secondary school capacity. Current pupil numbers and the capacity for each school in the borough are compared to show excess/deficit capacity. This criterion allows us to report the potential effect on school capacity without mitigation (e.g. a developer contribution). Within a settlement area with an existing deficit in both primary and secondary capacity = Red. Within a settlement at full capacity or with a deficit in either primary or secondary capacity = Amber. Within a settlement with available capacity in both primary and secondary education = Green.
12.62 E. Access to PROW Network
Sites which have footpaths or other Public Rights of Way (PROW) within their boundaries have the potential benefit of improved accessibility, but also may negatively affect their use through diversions or reduced visual amenity. Therefore, a simple “yes / no” scoring will be used for this criterion, and it will inform the consideration of cumulative effects later in the SA process. Site includes or is within 100 m of the PROW network = Yes. Site is beyond 100 m of the PROW network = No.
12.63 F. National Cycle Network or Long-Distance Trail
Access to the National Cycle Network (NCN) or long-distance trails (Long-Distance Walkers Association mapping). Sites within 5 km of the Trans-Pennine trail or NCN Route 6 or 2 km of a long-distance trail = Green. All other sites = Amber. (Red does not apply.) i. SA Topic 5: Economy and Employment
12.64 G. Access to Employment
Situation relative to settlement hierarchy, accessible by public transport. Within Rotherham town or a Principal Settlement (for growth or recognised Principal Settlement) = Green. Other settlements = Yellow. Isolated locations = Red.
12.65 H. Infrastructure (Non-Transport)
Sites have been assessed by Severn Trent Water / Yorkshire Water re sewerage and water capacity constraints which they have scored Red where significant capacity issues occur, Amber where more minor capacity issues occur (both of which may be overcome by phasing or additional infrastructure work), and Green where there are no capacity issues.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 249 12
i. SA Topic 6: Transport and Emissions
12.66 I. Highways / Site Accessibility
The Rotherham MBC transport section has assessed each site re the ease of access from/to the current highway network. Significant access problems = Red, Some access issues = Amber, No access problems = Green.
12.67 J. Transport / Accessibility:
New development should be located in highly accessible locations such as town and district centres or on key bus corridors which are well served by a variety of travel modes (but principally by public transport). The South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE) have been supplied with details of the majority of potential development sites and have assessed using their LUTI (Land Use and Transport Integration) modelling software to identify possible impact on the public transport network and accessibility issues which would require mitigation. High Impact = Red, Medium Impact = Amber, Low Impact = Green.
i. SA Topic 7: Biodiversity
12.68 K. Biodiversity
Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) – RMBC ecologist has surveyed many of the sites and given an assessment on potential impact of any development on local wildlife sites and any mitigation that may be required. High Impact = Red, Medium Impact = Amber, Low Impact = Green (sites not surveyed given Amber rating if within 100m of LWS) Local Nature Reserves - Site on / overlapping = Red, site close to (within 250m) = Amber, other = Green. Ancient woodland - Site on / overlapping = Red, site close to (within 250m) = Amber, other = Green. We also have a number of candidate status site designations (cLWS, cLNR) where there is potential for biodiversity interest. Sites which fall wholly, or in part, within these candidate sites will be assessed as Amber to highlight potential impact, other = Green. Protected Species Assessment – RMBC ecologist has considered the proposed development sites and given an assessment on potential impact on protected species that have been recorded (using a methodology based on RMBC ecological records, species importance, site surveys) and any possible mitigation that may be required. High Impact = Red, Medium Impact = Amber, Low Impact = Green
12.69 Ecological Network data work is on-going but when available, will also need to be taken into consideration.
i. SA Topic 8: Air Quality
12.70 L. Air Quality
250 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Air quality is mostly caused by traffic so any development in or close to Air Quality Management Areas (AQMA’s) is likely to have an impact. Site within AQMA = Red, site close (within 250m) to an AQMA = Amber, site not in or close to an AQMA = Green i. SA Topic 9: Water Resources
12.71 M. Potential to Modify a Water Body
The Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires that water bodies are not significantly deteriorated via physical modification. Development which abuts or is in very near proximity to water bodies may involve replacing important natural features with hard-standing areas, including buildings or infrastructure. In the case of brownfield sites along watercourses or adjacent to water bodies, it can be assumed that such natural features have already been removed. Therefore, the scoring is: Greenfield site within or adjacent to a known (i.e. mapped) water body or within a flood risk zone = Red, Greenfield site not adjacent but within 50 m = Amber, beyond 50 m = Green.
12.72 N. Groundwater Sources
Groundwater Source Protection Zones (SPZs) allow the Environment Agency to prevent potentially hazardous activities from harming water which eventually flows to groundwater abstraction points. Brownfield sites tend to be former industrial or commercial land, and therefore any conversion to housing would generally represent a less hazardous land use. Greenfield or economic (employment) site within SPZ I = Red. Greenfield or economic site within SPZ II or III = Amber. Brownfield site intended for housing (only!) within any SPZ or not within an SPZ = Green. i. SA Topic 10: Soil and Geology
12.73 O. Soil
Agricultural land is classified into five grades, Grade one is best quality, whilst grade five is the poorest quality. Sites in Grade 1 = Red, sites in 2 = Amber, sites in 3 (or less including urban areas) = Green Rotherham has traditionally been very successful in building on previously developed land / brownfield sites but the supply of these is now insufficient to fulfil the identified need over the plan period. Brownfield sites remain the preferred option in most cases. Greenfield Site = Red, Mixed Site = Amber, Brownfield Site = Green.
12.74 P. Geodiversity
Regionally Important Geological Sites (RIGS) – Site on / overlapping RIGS = Red, site close to RIGS (within 250m) = Amber, other = Green. We also have a number of candidate status site designations (cLGS, cRIGS) where there is potential for biodiversity / geodiversity interest. Sites which fall wholly, or in part, within these candidate sites will be assessed as Amber to highlight potential impact, other = Green. i. SA Topic 11: Flood Risk
12.75 Q: Flood Risk
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 251 12
Sites falling within a functional floodplain will already have been discounted but a risk of flooding exists to some extent in all areas. High risk (Zone 3a) = Red, Low to medium risk (Zone 2) = Amber, Little or no risk (Zone 1) = Green. Sites will be assessed in line with the flood risk sequential and, where necessary, exception tests set out in NPPF paragraphs 99-102. This will be detailed in a separate evidence base document
i. SA Topic 12: Waste and Mineral Resources
12.76 R. Waste
Access to recycling centre. Although this is not a true constraint, development which is not accessible to recycling centres which take in more types of recyclable waste than roadside collections may reduce the overall sustainable waste management performance of the borough. Within a settlement having a Council recycling centre = Green. Settlement not having a recycling centre = Amber.
12.77 S. Minerals
Mineral Safeguarding Areas (MSA’s) – development on sites that lie within or close to a MSA could result in unnecessary sterilisation of economic reserves. Simple Amber / Green split used for this indicator as MSA’s cover a significant portion of the borough. Site within a MSA = Amber, site outside a MSA = Green. Coal Mining Referral Areas – The Coal Authority has defined new Coal Mining Development Referral Areas. These are areas, based upon Coal Authority records, where the potential land stability and other safety risks associated with former coal mining activities are likely to be greatest. Due to widespread coal mining in the borough over many years these cover a significant proportion of sites. Simple Amber / Green split used for this indicator. A site within = Amber, site outside = Green
i. SA Topic 13: Landscape and Townscape
12.78 T. General Landscape
Landscape Sensitivity – all Green Belt areas in the borough have been assessed for sensitivity to development. Sites considered with medium-high or high sensitivity = Red, medium sensitivity = Amber, low or low-medium sensitivity to development = Green. Sites falling within the built area are given a green rating at this stage.
12.79 U. Designated Landscapes
Proximity to Area of High Landscape Value or Country Parks – these landscapes are enjoyed for the quality of their setting and views, as well as any recreational assets within them. Development in view of these sites may reduce the extent of their enjoyment by all; however most sites can be developed sympathetically, given an appropriate size, shape and density. Within 100 m (inclusive) of an Area of High Landscape Value or Country Park = Amber. Beyond 100 m = Green.
12.80 V. Townscape
252 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Loss of essential greenspace or Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) – these features tend to create a very strong component of townscape. (Other townscape issues must be dealt with by looking at sites ‘in combination’ during later SA tasks.) Loss of well used or culturally significant greenspace, or many (approx. 10+) TPO trees = Red, Loss of other greenspace or less than ten TPO trees = Amber, No loss of greenspace or TPO trees = Green. i. SA Topic 14: Historic Environment
12.81 W. Historic and Built Environment
Archaeology – sites containing archaeological remains of national significance will already have been discounted at Stage 1. South Yorkshire Archaeology Society recommendations: Major archaeological objections = Red, potential archaeological objections = Amber, little or no (or uncertain) archaeological objections = Green. Potential impact on listed buildings and/or historic parks and gardens. Conservation officer assessment on most important grade 1 or 2* otherwise by proximity - High Impact = Red, Medium Impact = Amber, Low Impact = Green Conservation Areas – sites which are within or in close proximity to Conservation Areas can result in development which deteriorates their historic character or setting. Sites in conservation area = Red, within 50m = Amber, others = Green.
Results:
12.82 All sites are carried forward to the Stage 3 prioritisation stage and they are given an overall SA rating – one for socio-economic constraints / concerns and one for environmental constraints / concerns. There may be sites which have just one particular constraint which cannot be overcome / mitigated against and therefore renders the site totally unsuitable for development. Similarly a site may have several constraints but they may be more minor in nature and more easily be addressed with mitigation measures. However, as a general rule, sites with a lower number of ‘Red’ assessment scores will be more likely to be given a more favourable overall assessment.
12.83 Note: SA / SEA requirements are met through the consideration of the various sustainability criteria and scoring applied, but it is not required that the “most sustainable” sites are inevitably selected. In particular, policy or other (e.g. community) considerations during Stage 3 can lead to the selection of sites which do not perform as others under the SA Topics / Framework. However, it is required that the SA Report explains how environmental considerations were taken into account when making these decisions.
Stage 3 –Site Prioritisation:
12.84 A. SA Socio-economic:
Overall sustainability assessment for socio-economic constraints / measures. Scores poorly on many indicators or has a major constraint which may be impossible to overcome = Red. Scores poor / moderately on some indicators but any constraints can be mitigated against = Amber. Has very few constraints and which are minor in nature = Green
12.85 B. SA Environmental:
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 253 12
Overall sustainability assessment for socio-economic constraints / measures. Scores poorly on many indicators or has a major constraint which may be impossible to overcome = Red. Scores poor / moderately on some indicators but any constraints can be mitigated against = Amber. Has very few constraints and which are minor in nature = Green
12.86 C. Green Belt:
The Core Strategy has highlighted the shortage of suitable development sites available to meet the identified need and therefore some sites will be required to be allocated that are within the current Green Belt boundary. However the number of sites to be taken out of the Green Belt are too be kept to a minimum. Green Belt Site = Red, Part Green Belt Site = Amber, Non-Green Belt Site = Green
12.87 D. Urban Extensions:
As per Stage 1 any sites not falling within or close to defined settlements will already have been discounted. Urban extensions will be assessed based on type – i.e. edge of settlement which would extend the built up area further into the countryside = Red, edge of settlement but contained within the existing confines = Amber, within the existing built up area = Green.
12.88 E. Deliverability:
Any site proposed for development must be genuinely available and likely to be developed during the plan period and the NPPF requires that the council should maintain at least a five year supply of developable housing land. Sites are therefore more likely to be preferred if they are expected to be deliverable within a relatively short timescale. Sites which have some significant constraint(s) but which can potentially contribute before the end of the plan period (and in the following years) = Red, sites which may have some constraints in the shorter term but likely to be available within first 10 years = Amber, sites available immediately or within first 5 years of the plan period = Green.
12.89 F. Town, District and Local Centres
National planning policy requires Council’s to allocate sites for main town centre uses in line with the sequential approach. Where site selection relates to main town centre uses (as defined in NPPF) the assessment will take account of the site’s location. Sites outside of town, district or local centres = Red, sites on the edge of town, district or local centres = Amber, sites within town, district or local centres = Green
12.90 G. Green Infrastructure Corridors
Many of the Green Infrastructure assets that contribute to Rotherham’s Green Infrastructure network will have been considered in Stage 2 when looking at detailed site constraints. However, to further consider the potential cumulative impact of development on Strategic and Local Green Infrastructure Corridors any sites falling within these will be given an Amber assessment.
12.91 H. HS2 Rail Route
254 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 The recent announcement of the go ahead of the high speed rail link shows the proposed route and an associated 200m buffer. Although the final route remains subject to further consultation any site that falls within the 200m buffer is given a Red assessment.
12.92 I. Other known constraints / issues
Sites may have a variety of other physical constraints to development, some of which may require mitigation or could render part or the entire site unsuitable. These include utility apparatus (e.g. phone masts, pylons) or contamination sources. Major constraints whole site = Red, minor constraints part/all of site = Amber, no known constraints = Green.
12.93 J. SA Cumulative Effects
The SA must consider the potential for cumulative effects (or combined effects) from different combinations of sites. These may lead to the need to consider different groupings of sites as alternatives, and this may include sites previously discarded. Red = SA identifies major adverse cumulative effect(s) in combination with other sites which render the site unviable. Amber = SA identifies adverse cumulative effect(s) in combination with other sites which can be reduced or overcome with mitigation. Green = SA does not identify any change to the original SA of this site.
Final Results:
12.94 The best performing sites when measured against these criteria and based on current knowledge of constraints will be recommended for allocation for future development, subject to reaching the targets set out for each settlement grouping within the Core Strategy. The number of new housing allocations will depend upon the number of homes proposed for the settlement and the number of homes that already have an outstanding planning permission. Some otherwise suitable sites may therefore be discounted at this stage if a sufficient number of outstanding permissions already exist (with additional to allow for choice). However, consideration will also need to be given to the identification of some sites as safeguarded land to meet identified needs for 5 years beyond the end of the plan period (Policy CS5). New or further evidence on constraints and possible mitigation could alter the scoring / outcome in the future.
12.95 For those sites that are being proposed to be taken out of the Green Belt a further consideration will be undertaken in respect of the four Green Belt purposes. A site which falls within a parcel of land that scored ‘Red’ against either (or both) purposes 1 and 3 or purposes 2 and 4 in the Strategic Green Belt Review will be subject to a detailed assessment of that site using the criteria used in the Strategic Green Belt Assessment. This can then be used as part of the overall site assessment and in comparing potential Green Belt sites, but should not override broader sustainability considerations.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 255 13
13 Retail Centres
13.1 The following maps highlight the boundaries of the defined town and district retail centres in the borough along with the areas within defined as primary and secondary shopping frontages.
256 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Map 30 Rotherham Principal Town Centre
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 257 13
Map 31 Dinnington Town Centre
258 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 32 Maltby Town Centre and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 259 260 13 Map 33 Wath upon Dearne Town Centre Si tes and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 Si tes Map 34 Kiveton Park District Centre and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 261 13
Map 35 Parkgate District Centre
262 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 36 Swallownest District Centre and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 263 13
Map 37 Swinton District Centre
264 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Si tes Map 38 Wickersley District Centre and
P ol icies
Final
Dr aft
2014 265 14
14 Glossary
Accessibility: The ability of people to move around areas and reach places and facilities.
(The) Act: The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
Affordable housing: Housing accessible to households who cannot afford open market rental or purchase. It includes a range of tenures, i.e. shared ownership, discounted market housing, key worker housing, subsidised social renting etc.
Aggregates - the mineral materials, such as sand or stone, used in making concrete.
Air Quality Management Area (AQMA): Air Quality Management Areas have to be declared by Local Authorities for any parts of their areas where the air quality is unlikely to meet Government objectives as set out in the Environment Act 1995, and where people are expected to be exposed to the poor air quality.
Allocations - Sites to meet future development
Annual Monitoring Report (AMR): The annual monitoring report will assess the implementation of the local development scheme and the extent to which policies in local development documents are being successfully implemented.
Area Action Plan: A type of Development Plan Document focussed upon a specific location or an area subject to conservation or significant change (for example, major regeneration).
Area of High Landscape Value: A local landscape designation used to identify land of particularly high landscape quality.
Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land: Land in grades 1, 2 and 3a of the Agricultural Land Classification.
Biodiversity: The whole variety of life on earth; all species of plants and animals and the ecosystems of which they are part.
Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP): A plan which sets out proposals to protect and improve the places where trees, plants, animals and insects live.
Biomass: Plants and trees, and the non fossil fuel based fraction of the waste stream, when used to create energy.
Broad locations for growth: Indicative areas of major development.
Brownfield (previously developed) land: Land that is or was occupied by a permanent structure.
Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM): This is a tool to measure the sustainability of non-domestic buildings.
266 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Bulky goods: Retail categories that include furniture, white goods, electrical equipment, bedding, lighting, automotive parts, camping and outdoor equipment, tools, building materials and DIY and homemaker products.
Carbon Compliance: The ''built performance'' emissions from new homes that should not be exceeded. This compliance is expressed as kg CO2/M2 and is the amount of CO2 a dwelling can produce. On-site contributions to achieve these targets include energy efficiency and low & zero carbon energy.
Carbon emissions: Gases, such as carbon dioxide, caused by burning fossil fuels in transport and energy generation which contribute to global warming and climate change.
Chain of Conformity: It is important that we make sure the inter-relationships between different Local Plan documents are clear and that the Local Plan as a whole is consistent with national policy. This consistency is commonly referred to as the ‘chain of conformity’.
Code for Sustainable Homes: Provides a set of national standards for the design and construction of new homes to reduce carbon emissions.
Combined heat and power: The use of a heat engine or a power station to simultaneously generate both electricity and useful heat.
Community Infrastructure Levy: A form of planning gain tax, where a proportion of the increase in value on land as a result of planning permission is used to finance the supporting infrastructure, such as schools and will 'unlock housing growth'
Community Strategy: Although no longer a statutory requirement, Local Authorities can prepare Community Strategies with aim of improving the social, environmental and economic well being of their areas. In Rotherham the Community Strategies is prepared by the Local Strategic Partnership, which includes local authority representatives.
Comparison goods: These can be described as goods that consumers buy at infrequent intervals and normally would compare prices before buying eg. TV, fridges, clothes etc.
Conservation Area: An area, usually part of a settlement, designated by a local planning authority for preservation or enhancement because of its special architectural or historic interest under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act, 1990.
Contextual indicators: Measure changes in the wider social, economic, and environmental background against which policies operate. They help to relate policy outputs to the local area.
Convenience goods: A consumer item that is widely-available, purchased frequently and with minimal effort. Examples of convenience goods include newspapers and sweets.
Core Strategy: Sets out the long-term spatial vision for the local planning authority area, the spatial objectives and strategic policies to deliver that vision. The core strategy will have the status of a development plan document.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 267 14
Density: The number of buildings in a given area. In the Local Plan it is used mainly in relation to housing, being expressed as dwellings per hectare or ‘dph’.
Department for Communities & Local Government (DLCG): Established in 2006 as the successor to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, DCLG is the Government department for communities and local government and has policy responsibility for (amongst others) planning, urban regeneration and building regulations.
Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs (Defra): The government department responsible for environmental protection, food production and standards, agriculture, fisheries and rural communities.
Designations: Areas of land where specific policies apply.
Development Plan: As set out in Section 38 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, an authority’s development plan consists of the relevant regional spatial strategy (for Yorkshire and the Humber Region) and the development plan documents contained within its Local Plan. It sets out the local planning authority’s policies and proposals for the development and use of land and buildings in the authority’s area.
Development Plan Documents (DPD): Spatial planning documents that undergo independent examination. They can include a core strategy, site specific allocations of land, generic development control policies, and area action plans (where needed). Proposals will all be shown on a policies map for the borough. Individual development plan documents or parts of a document can be reviewed independently from other development plan documents. Each authority must set out the programme for preparing its development plan documents in the local development scheme. A development plan document is used to make decisions on proposals for development.
Ecosystem: A biological environment consisting of all the organisms living in a particular area, as well as all the physical components of the environment with which the organisms interact, such as air, soil, water and sunlight.
Ecosystem Services: The benefits that we derive from the natural world and its constituent ecosystems, including products like food, fibre, wood and water; services like pollination, nutrient cycling, soil formation, water purification, flood defence and opportunities for reflection and recreation.
Energy crops: Energy crops are a carbon neutral energy source and when substituted for fossil fuels can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and contribute to renewable energy generation. An examples of an energy crop is short rotation coppice (e.g. willow and poplar), which is densely planted and then harvested on a 2-5 year cycle.
Equality impact assessment: A process designed to ensure that a policy, project or scheme does not discriminate against any disadvantaged or vulnerable people.
Essential Infrastructure: In relation to flood risk, this comprises essential transport infrastructure (including mass evacuation routes) which has to cross the area at risk; essential utility infrastructure which has to be located in a flood risk area for operational reasons, including electricity generating power stations and grid and primary substations; and water treatment works that need to remain operational in times of flood; wind turbines.
268 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 European Landscape Convention: This promotes the protection, management and planning of European landscapes and organises European co-operation on landscape issues.
Evidence base: Information gathered by a planning authority to support preparation of local development documents. It includes quantitative and qualitative data.
Front loading: Front loading encourages more active involvement of communities, stakeholders and commercial interests earlier in the Local Plan process than under the previous planning system. The aim is to seek agreement on essential issues early in the process. Where agreement is difficult to achieve, front loading allows the maximum opportunity for participants to understand each others’ positions and to negotiate a way forward.
Flood alleviation: The avoidance of the possibility of flooding by controlling the flow of water in rivers.
Flood and Water Management Act 2010: The Act aims to improve both flood risk management and the way we manage our water resources.
Geodiversity: The variety of rocks, fossils, minerals, landforms and soils, and all the natural processes that shape the landscape.
Green Belt: An area of open land where strict planning controls apply in order to check the further growth of a large built-up area, prevent neighbouring towns from merging or to preserve the special character of a town.
Greenfield: Land (or a defined site) that has not previously been developed. (Not to be confused with Green Belt.)
Greenhouse gas: components of the atmosphere that contribute to the greenhouse effect (the process by which an atmosphere warms a planet).
Greenspace: Breaks in the urban environment formed by open areas such as parks, playing fields, woodlands and landscaped areas. These spaces may exist as definable linear routeways, forming part of a network linking urban areas to the surrounding countryside.
Green infrastructure: The network of multi-functional green space, both new and existing, both rural and urban, which supports the natural and ecological processes and is integral to the health and quality of life of sustainable communities.
Gross Value Added (GVA): This measures the contribution to the economy of each individual producer, industry or sector - the value of outputs (goods or services) less the value of inputs (labour & materials) used.
Habitats and Species of Principle Importance for Biodiversity: The habitats and species in England that have been identified via the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 as requiring action in the England biodiversity strategy and which Local Authorities have a duty to protect and enhance.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 269 14
Hazardous installations: Installations that use, manufacture or store significant quantities of hazardous substances that have the potential to cause serious harm to people on and surrounding the site.
Health impact assessment: The process by which a policy, program or project may be judged as to its potential effects on the health of a population, and the distribution of those effects within the population.
Hectare: A metric unit of measurement equivalent to 100 metres x 100 metres or 2.47 acres (i.e. approximately one and a half football fields).
Highly vulnerable uses: In relation to flood risk, this comprises: Police stations, Ambulance stations and Fire stations and Command Centres and telecommunications installations required to be operational during flooding; Emergency dispersal points; Basement dwellings; Caravans, mobile homes and park homes intended for permanent residential use; Installations requiring hazardous substances consent. (Where there is a demonstrable need to locate such installations for bulk storage of materials with port or other similar facilities, or such installations with energy infrastructure or carbon capture and storage installations, that require coastal or water-side locations, or need to be located in other high flood risk areas, in these instances the facilities should be classified as ‘Essential Infrastructure’).
Housing Market Renewal (HMR): There are some areas of the borough where houses are unpopular, sometimes because of the design of the houses or the housing estate. This can result in houses becoming so unpopular that no-one wants to live in them. This is known as housing-market failure. Housing-market renewal is when we or the Government takes action to solve this problem. This can involve refurbishing existing houses, replacing existing houses with new ones or improving the local environment to make it more attractive to live in.
Housing trajectory: A means of showing past and future housing performance by identifying the predicted provision of housing over the lifespan of the Local Plan.
Independent Examination: An independent process where formal objections to a DPD made at Submission stage are considered by a government inspector. The Examination itself will be run by a government inspector. Many objections to DPDs will be considered through written comments made by the objector and the council. However, objectors have a right to make their case in person at the Examination if they choose.
Infill: Housing development that goes in the gaps between existing buildings.
Infrastructure: Physical services including water, gas, electricity, telecommunications supply and sewerage. It can also refer to community facilities, for example, schools, shops and public transport.
Infrastructure Delivery Plan: This will help direct growth to the most appropriate locations, and ensure that the different economic, social and environmental infrastructure needs of the borough’s residents and businesses are met.
Inspector’s Report: A report produced by the inspector (from the Planning Inspectorate) following the Independent Examination. This sets out the inspector’s conclusions on the issues considered at the Examination. The report will recommend to us if the DPD needs to be changed as a result and in what way.
270 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Integrated Impact Assessment: A report which accompanies the Core Strategy and includes the Sustainability Appraisal, a Health Impact Assessment and an Equalities Impact Assessment.
Issues and Options: Produced during the early stage in the preparation of development plan documents.
Joint Waste Plan: Produced jointly by Barnsley, Doncaster and Rotherham councils and adopted on 8th March 2012, this provides a detailed planning framework to manage all types of waste in the three boroughs. It forms part of Rotherham's Local Plan and has the status of a Core Strategy.
Key Diagram: The diagrammatic interpretation of the spatial strategy, as set out in a local authority’s core strategy.
Landscape Character Area: A unique geographic area with a consistent character and identity, defined by geology, land form, soils, vegetation, land use, settlement and field pattern
Landscape Character Assessment: A way of assessing the appearance and essential characteristics of a landscape in terms of particular combinations of geology, landform, soils, vegetation, land use and human settlement.
Landscape Scale: This refers to action covering a large spatial scale and usually addressing a range of ecosystem processes, conservation objectives and land uses (the Natural Environment White Paper 2011).
Landscape Scale Conservation: This is characterised by the pursuit of multiple benefits across a defined area (eg water quality, biodiversity, access). The best examples links to wider economic and social priorities where enhancing nature can provide benefits to the local economy and quality of life (the Natural Environment White Paper 2011).
Less vulnerable uses: In relation to flood risk, this comprises: Police, ambulance and fire stations which are not required to be operational during flooding; Buildings used for: shops; financial, professional and other services; restaurants and cafes; hot food takeaways; offices; general industry; storage and distribution; non–residential institutions not included in ‘more vulnerable’; and assembly and leisure; Land and buildings used for agriculture and forestry; Waste treatment (except landfill and hazardous waste facilities); Minerals working and processing (except for sand and gravel working); Water treatment works which do not need to remain operational during times of flood; Sewage treatment works (if adequate measures to control pollution and manage sewage during flooding events are in place).
Lifetime of development: This is as long as the development which has been permitted endures.
Listed Building: A building that has been placed on the Statutory List of Buildings of Special Architectural or Historic Interest.
Local Development Document (LDD): The collective term in the Act for development plan documents, supplementary planning documents and the statement of community involvement.
Local Development Framework (LDF): See Local Plan
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 271 14
Local Development Scheme (LDS): Sets out the programme for preparing local development documents.
Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP): The LEP is based on a relationship between the public and private sector and a strong commitment to work together to ensure the growth of a rebalanced local economy. The LEP will be led by the private sector and will contribute significantly to the renewal of the national economy as a whole.
Local Nature Reserve (LNR): A statutory designation made under Section 21 of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949, and amended by Schedule 11 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006.
Local Plan: The name for the portfolio of local development documents and related documents. It consists of development plan documents, supplementary planning documents, a statement of community involvement, the local development scheme and annual monitoring reports. It may also include local development orders and simplified planning zone schemes. Together all these documents will provide the framework for delivering the spatial planning strategy for a local authority area. The Local Plan was previously referred to as the Local Development Framework.
Local Service Centre: Where there are opportunities for sustainable development these will be pursued, but the settlement and growth strategy is mindful that the social infrastructure in these communities is more limited.
Local Sites: Including Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) and Regionally Important Geological Sites (RIGS). Non-statutory areas of local importance for nature conservation that complement nationally and internationally designated geological and wildlife sites. Local Sites are protected within the planning framework.
Local Strategic Partnership (LSP): Representatives from the public, voluntary, community and business sectors brought together with the objective of improving people’s quality of life.
Localism Act 2011: An Act of Parliament which made changes to the powers of local government in England.
Main Town Centre Uses: Retail development (including warehouse clubs and factory outlet centres); leisure, entertainment facilities the more intensive sport and recreation uses (including cinemas, restaurants, drive-through restaurants, bars and pubs, night-clubs, casinos, health and fitness centres, indoor bowling centres, and bingo halls); offices; and arts, culture and tourism development (including theatres, museums, galleries and concert halls, hotels and conference facilities).
Microgeneration: The production of heat and/or electricity on a small scale from a low carbon source, e.g. solar panels.
Monitoring: Regular and systematic collection and analysis of information to measure policy implementation.
More vulnerable uses: In relation to flood risk, this comprises: Hospitals; Residential institutions such as residential care homes, children’s homes, social services homes, prisons and hostels; Buildings used for: dwelling houses; student halls of residence; drinking establishments; nightclubs; and hotels;
272 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Non–residential uses for health services, nurseries and educational establishments; Landfill and sites used for waste management facilities for hazardous waste; Sites used for holiday or short-let caravans and camping, subject to a specific warning and evacuation plan.
National Character Areas: Divide England into 159 distinct natural areas. Each is defined by a unique combination of landscape, biodiversity, geodiversity and cultural and economic activity. Their boundaries follow natural lines in the landscape rather than administrative boundaries, making them a good decision making framework for the natural environment.
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF): The National Planning Policy Framework sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. Council's must take account of the NPPF when preparing their Local Plans.
Non-bulky goods: Includes items such as clothes and footwear.
Non-potable water: Water that is not of drinking quality, but which may still be used for many other purposes.
Outcomes: Macro-level (global, national and regional), real world changes which are influenced to some degree by the Local Plan.
Output indicators: Measure the direct effect of a policy. Used to assess whether policy targets are being achieved in reality using available information.
Outputs: The direct effects of a policy, e.g. number of houses built, amount of employment floorspace developed, etc.
Plan, Monitor and Manage (PMM): Means of measuring and reviewing policy, involving the adjustment of policy through monitoring if necessary.
Planning Act 2008: This legislation was intended to speed up the process for approving major new infrastructure projects such as airports, roads, harbours, energy facilities such as nuclear power and waste facilities. The Localism Act 2011 also makes changes to the regime under the Planning Act.
Planning gain: The benefits and safeguards, often for community benefit, secured by way of a planning obligation as part of a planning approval and usually provided at the developer’s expense, e.g. affordable housing, community facilities or mitigation measures.
Planning Inspectorate: A government organisation which makes recommendations about the policies and proposals in DPDs through a formal Independent Examination. The inspectorate is a neutral organisation which arbitrates where people and organisations do not agree with the Council. They also check whether our proposals are in line with relevant government policy.
Planning obligations and agreements: A legal agreement between the Council and a developer which is needed before a development can go ahead. It will usually deal with things that need to happen away from the development site, including improvements to roads and open spaces.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 273 14
Planning Policy Statement (PPS)/Planning Policy Guidance (PPG): National statements of planning policy prepared by the Government, but which have now been replaced by the National Planning Policy Framework and an accompanying Planning Policy Guidance website.
Policies Map: A plan which shows policies and proposals for specific sites and locations. These are shown on an Ordnance Survey map.
Policy implementation: Assessment of the effectiveness of policies in terms of achieving their targets. Measured by use of output and contextual indicators.
Policy directions: These pulled together broad issues that were taken into account in preparing the final policies for the Core Strategy.
Preferred Options document: Produced as part of the preparation of development plan documents for formal public participation..
Principal Settlement: Where there is a full range of social and community infrastructure to meet current needs but the opportunities for growth are limited.
Principal Settlement for Growth: Where new social infrastructure and community services exist, or are able to be provided as part of a major development scheme to support new growth opportunities
Recycling: The reprocessing of waste either into the same product or a different one.
Regional Development Agency (RDA): Government-funded organisations in England that aimed to ‘spread economic prosperity and opportunity’. This was delivered through a number of initiatives, including events, advice services and funding. The RDA's ceased to operate in 2012 and are being replaced by Local Enterprise Partnerships.
Regional Econometric Model (REM): The Regional Econometric Model is an economic database and model used within the Yorkshire & Humber region to provide historic and projected labour market information on employment, output, and productivity.
Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS): Set out policies in relation to the development and use of land within Yorkshire and the Humber and formed part of the development plan. The Yorkshire and Humber Plan was revoked by Government on 22 February 2013 except for policies relating to York’s Green Belt, and no longer forms part of Rotherham’s development plan.
Register of Historic Parks & Gardens: The register aims to 'celebrate designed landscapes of note, and encourage appropriate protection', so safeguarding the features and qualities of key landscapes for the future. Each park or garden included is of special historic interest.
(The) Regulations: Legal documents prepared by the Government. They provide detailed information about how acts should be applied, i.e. The Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012.
Renewable energy: Energy obtained from naturally occurring sources that are essentially inexhaustible, unlike, for example, the fossil fuels, of which there is a finite supply. Renewable sources of energy include wood, wind and solar thermal energy.
274 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Rotherham Renaissance: A project aimed at creating a vibrant Rotherham town centre which includes proposals for apartments, shops, outdoor cafés, and enhanced public spaces.
Safeguarded land: This is land which is set aside in case it is needed for development in the long term. It is not available for development in the short term because it is not needed. The need to develop safeguarded land will be considered when the Local Plan is reviewed.
Saved policies or plans: Existing adopted development plans are saved for a time period agreed with Government. The local development scheme should explain the authority’s approach to saved policies.
Scheduled Ancient Monument: This is a 'nationally important' archaeological site or historic building, given protection against unauthorised change.
Sequential approach: Considering options for sites for development in a particular order. For example, in terms of new shops, we would first look for sites within a shopping centre and then for sites on the edge of the shopping centre before looking at sites outside the centre. The same approach is applied to finding land for housing.
Settlement hierarchy: A way in which towns, villages and hamlets are categorised depending on their size and role. It can help make decisions about the amount and location of new development.
Sheffield City Region: This covers an area spanned by local authorities within South Yorkshire and the northern part of the East Midlands region. Over recent years, the Sheffield City Region Forum has overseen work in the City Region to increase the pace of economic growth through collaboration. Following Government's invitation to come forward with proposals to establish a Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP), a LEP was set up and the Forum stood down in 2010.
Significant effects: Effects which are significant in the context of the plan. (Annex II of the SEA Directive [see later definition] gives criteria for determining the likely environmental significance of effects).
Significant effects indicators: An indicator that measures the significant effects of the plan or programme.
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI): Representative examples of nationally important wildlife and geology. SSSI are notified by Natural England under section 28 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 as being of special value for nature conservation and are legally protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, as amended by the Countryside and Rights of Way (CROW) Act 2000 and the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006.
Sites & Policies Development Plan Document: This will show specific development sites and contain policies to guide the release of land and design of new development.
Social inclusion: Making sure that everyone has access to services and opportunities no matter what their background or income.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 275 14
Soundness: At the Independent Examination, the inspector must assess whether the DPD is ‘sound’. This includes assessing whether the DPD has been prepared in the right way using the right procedures and if it is broadly in line with national planning guidance.
South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (SYPTE): Responsible for the various public transport services in the sub-region.
Spatial planning: Goes beyond traditional land use planning to bring together and integrate policies for the development and use of land with other policies and programmes that influence the nature of places and how they function. Spatial planning includes policies that can impact on land use, for example by influencing the demands on, or needs for, development, but that are not capable of being delivered solely or mainly through the granting or refusal of planning permission.
Spatial planning zone: These are defined by considering various characteristics including housing markets and travel to work factors.
Statement of Community Involvement (SCI): Sets out the standards that authorities will work to by involving local communities in the preparation of local development documents and development control decisions.
Strategic Allocation: an area for development allocated in the Core Strategy. Other sites will be allocated through the Sites and Policies document.
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA): This term is used internationally to describe the environmental assessment of plans, policies and programmes. This environmental assessment (the SEA Directive) looks at the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment.
Strategic Flood Risk Assessment: These are a required part of the planning process and are intended to form the basis for preparing appropriate policies for flood risk management at the local level.
Strategic Housing LandAvailability Assessment: This provides information on the opportunities that exist to meet housing need within a specified area over the Plan period. The information from the assessment will inform the Local Plan, but will not actually allocate land for housing.
Strategic Housing Market Assessment: Housing Market Assessments establish the level of need and demand for housing examining issues such as the particular accommodation requirements of specific groups, for example Gypsies and Travellers.
Strategic Road Network: This consists of the M1 motorway between Woodall Common south of Woodall Motorway Service Area and Brinsworth north of Junction 33, and the M18 motorway from its junction with the M1 to Moor Lane north of Junction 1.
Sub-region: The administrative areas of Rotherham, Barnsley, Doncaster and Sheffield.
Submission: This is the stage at which people and organisations have the legal right to make a formal objection that will be considered by a government inspector. Submission also refers to the point at which the DPD is formally sent to the Secretary of State – which happens at the start of the submission consultation.
276 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD): Provide supplementary information in respect of the policies in development plan documents. They do not form part of the development plan and are not subject to independent examination.
Surface Water Management Plan: A framework through which key local partners with a responsibility for surface water and drainage in their area work together to understand the causes of surface water flooding and agree the most cost effective way of managing that risk.
Sustainability Appraisal (SA): Describes the form of assessment that considers social, environmental and economic effects of plans and proposals. It includes the requirements of the SEA Directive, referred to above. This has to be produced at each main consultation stage when preparing Local Development Documents.
Sustainable communities: A sustainable community is one in which most of the services and facilities people need, including schools and shops, are easy to get to, preferably without the need to use a car.
Sustainable development: Development that has an acceptable or positive effect on the economy, the environment and social conditions, and which uses natural resources carefully. Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. This concept offers the prospect of reconciling the pressures for growth with the need for conservation.
Sustainable settlements: See Sustainable Communities.
Targets: These are thresholds used to identify the scale of change to be achieved by policies over a specific time period (e.g. number of affordable homes to be built by a set date).
Transport nodes: Areas where transport links are concentrated or cross each other, e.g. bus and train stations, interchanges.
Tree Preservation Order: These are used to protect specific trees or a particular area, group or woodland from deliberate damage and destruction.
Unitary Development Plan (UDP): A document which is used to make decisions on proposals for development. The Rotherham UDP covers all the borough. Under the Act, the UDP will be replaced by DPDs.
Urban cooling: Cooling and shading provided by green open spaces can help counter the tendency of buildings, structures and hard surfacing to retain heat in urban areas as temperatures increase with climate change.
Urban Extensions: Significant development sites which have the potential to yield more than 500 dwellings.
Urban Potential Study (UPS): Studies undertaken to establish how much additional housing can be accommodated within urban areas.
Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014 277 14
Veteran Trees: A tree which, because of its great age, size or condition is of exceptional value for wildlife, in the landscape, or culturally.
Waste hierarchy: The principle that there are different levels of dealing with waste, ranging from the higher (more sustainable) levels such as reducing waste, re-using then recycling or composting, to the lower (less sustainable) levels such as burning and finally to landfill.
Water compatible development: In relation to flood risk, this comprises: Flood control infrastructure; Water transmission infrastructure and pumping stations; Sewage transmission infrastructure and pumping stations; Sand and gravel workings; Docks, marinas and wharves; Navigation facilities; MOD defence installations; Ship building, repairing and dismantling, dockside fish processing and refrigeration and compatible activities requiring a waterside location; Water-based recreation (excluding sleeping accommodation); Lifeguard and coastguard stations; Amenity open space, nature conservation and biodiversity, outdoor sports and recreation and essential facilities such as changing rooms; Essential ancillary sleeping or residential accommodation for staff required by uses in this category, subject to a specific warning and evacuation plan.
Wildlife corridor: An area, usually linear, of undeveloped land that links two or more sites or areas of natural or semi-natural habitat providing a safe route for movement of wildlife.
Windfalls: Sites for new housing that are not identified when allocating land in a development plan document but that may come forward for development during the Plan period. For example, the redevelopment of former industrial premises following unanticipated closure or relocation of a business.
Yorkshire and Humber Plan: See Regional Spatial Strategy
Yorkshire Forward: See Regional Development Agency
278 Sites and Policies Final Draft 2014