• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Issues and Options Consultation Responses Organisation Full Name Details Agent Full Name Number Consultee Responses Whilst I have no specific comments to raise at this point in time, the recognition of the strong links that Bassetlaw has with South Yorkshire (notably the Doncaster-Rotherham-Sheffield conurbation) is welcomed, in particular the clear synergies that exist in terms of economic growth, skills, transport and housing provision. It is also noted that each of the options presented has to some degree the potential requirement for the creation of urban extensions. If it is concluded from the current consultation that strategic sites are an appropriate method of ensuring housing and employment land delivery, we would appreciate the opportunity to make representation upon the specific sites identifies as part of subsequent drafts of the Core Strategy. This request also extends to engagement in wider-work Mr Noel Bell surrounding the site allocations DPD. In summary the Core Strategy Issues and Options report is a strategic overview of options for future residential and employment development over the next 15 years. Whilst the study is at a strategic level and is not intended to be site specific, significant residential and employment allocations appear inevitable conclusions for Worksop and Retford. What is clearly missing is a supporting transport study which is needed to identify the cumulative transport implications of residential and employment growth options within the District in order to identify the likely transport infrastructure requirements and constraints. There is a danger that a preferred option will be chosen which subsequently cannot be delivered if transport infrastructure shortcomings cannot be mitigated or are too expensive to be delivered. In this regard the document should incorporate, or at the very least refer to, Chapter 5 of the DfT's Guidance on Transport Assessment which is headed "The link with the development plan making process", which in essence requires LPA's to ensure that their proposals are based on a sound and credible evidence base. To this end they will need to produce/commission their own transport models to test all of the options under consideration. Cross reference is also made to para 4.56 (formerly para 4.24) of PPS12. This is an important issue to get across (and to all other LPA's) as the County Council cannot be relied upon to undertake these on their behalf as we have neither the Mrs Sally Gill resources nor facilities to do so. Issues and Options Consultation Responses Organisation Full Name Details Agent Full Name Number Consultee Responses Thank you for your letter received 17 September 2009 seeking the views of the Government Office for the East Midlands (GOEM) on Bassetlaw's Issues and Options consultation document (September 2009). We have the following informal comments to make regarding your non-statutory consultation report, which is the first public stage of the process and includes the statutorily required Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report. We suggest that you consider these comments and address them in preparing your intended Preferred Options consultation document, programmed for January/February 2010. As you know, the Core Strategy for Bassetlaw is also required to take into account policy on Local Development Frameworks set out in PPS12 (Local Spatial Planning June 2008) and guidance contained in the accompanying Plan Making Manual. It is also required to satisfy the statutory requirements of the Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations (as amended). We also advise you to look at the latest PINS ‘Examining Development Plan Documents: Learning from Experience' September 2009 document, available at: http://www.planning- inspectorate.gov.uk/pins/appeals/local_dev/index.htm This document is particularly helpful in preparing your Core Strategy. For example, paragraph 9 which states "too many core strategies resemble local plans in that they seek to address a full range of topic areas irrespective of whether these topic areas contain critical issues that relate to the way the area is intended to develop". You should also have particular regard to the latest PINS ‘Examining Development Planning Documents: Soundness Guidance' (August 2009 2 nd Edition), available at: HTTP://www.planning- inspectorate.gov.uk/pins/appeals/local_dev/ldf_testing_soundnessaug09.pdf You are also advised to look at Core Strategies that have been found sound following examination, especially more recent ones. Although it is important to note that the Planning Inspectorate do not recommend Core Strategies as models to be copied these give a good idea of what has worked elsewhere and what to avoid. SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL SCOPING REPORT As advised by PPS12 paras 4.39 to 4.43, the "sustainability appraisal" required by S19(5) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 should be an appraisal of the economic, social and environmental sustainability of the plan. Such assessments should feed into and be summarised in the sustainability appraisal. It must be proportionate to the plan in question. The Sustainability Appraisal should perform a key role in providing a sound evidence base for the plan and form an integrated part of the plan preparation process. In particular Sustainability Assessment should inform the evaluation of alternatives and should provide a powerful means of proving to decision makers, and the public, that the plan is the most appropriate given reasonable alternatives. CORE STRATEGY ISSUES & OPTIONS GOEM GOEM CONSULTATION DOCUMENT Para 1.1 refers to this being the first formal consultation stage, Mrs Auriol Bird Question 1 Need facilties in the smaller settlements e.g. shops,transport and jobs. Ms Judith M Retford is falling behind in comparison to Worksop in development in all areas - This must not be Goacher Question 1 allowed to happen. Issues and Options Consultation Responses Organisation Full Name Details Agent Full Name Number Consultee Responses The Local Development Scheme sets out in table 3.1 that the Core Strategy will be adopted in April 2011. If this is achieved then the Core Strategy will meet the very minimum time requirement for a Core Strategy as required by PPS12 (para 4.13) that requires the time horizon of the core strategy should be at least 15 years from the date of adoption. Our experience of participating in a number of core strategies is that the timescale set is too optimistic and there is a very real possiblility of the core strategy reaching the date of adoption and not being conformity with the advice in PPS12. It is also a certainty that there will be either a new Regional Spatial Strategy by 2011 or potentially a different regime althogther for the planning of housing. In such cirumstances there is a very strong and logical argument that the timescale of the core strategy should be extended to 2031 so as to be in line with the emerging RSS but also to give added certainty to the strategy. A longer timescale means that changes to matters such as the overall level of housing required may be accommodated not by a review of the strategy but by the review of the rates at which development or allocations are brought forward. An extension of the time frame to 2031 would also provide a strong signal to future investors that the Council was planning for the longer term and was committed to the proposed strategy. This submission is based upon an assessment of both the opportunities for accommodating development within the district but also an analysis of the differing pressures that are not just impacting on the district at the present time but those that are likely to merge or become more pertinent in the future. There is a clear and unambiguous need to at least produce a Core strategy that is capable of accommodating changes in the housing requirement, most importantly the ability to guide higher levels of development should they be required. The demographic evidence is that there is likely to be continued pressure on the housing stock in the district both from local need and demand and from migration. Analysis of the age structure of the population and levels of future workers suggest that migration at least to an extent should be welcomed as a way of maintaining a balanced community and to support future employment prospects. As well as the demographic drivers for distribution there is also the ability of locations to accommodate new development, such as the flood issues at Retford, and the positive impact that development can have in locations such as Harworth. Considering these issues together it is important that the Core Strategy selects an option which can accommodate the future projected levels of housing requirement and that the distribution reflects both the demographic requirements but also the economic and environmental implications of development. In particular this means accommodating much of the growth in the larger settlements and supports the upgrading of Harworth to a location that can accept significant levels of development. Harworth/Bircotes in Mr Simon MIller Persimmon Homes Question 1 particular needs careful consideration for while there are draft proposals for the coal mine these are Issues and Options Consultation Responses Organisation Full Name Details Agent Full Name Number Consultee Responses The document acknowledges there is an urgent need for the District to address issues certain pockets of deprivation, including former coal mining areas, and to provide access to jobs and training in the knowledge sector, and good quality office accommodation. Towns on the western edge of Bassetlaw: Worksop, Haworth/Bircotes, Carlton-in-Lindrick and Langold have significant regeneration potential with ready access to the strategic road network (A1(M), M18, M180) and the Doncaster, Rotherham Sheffield conurbation. Importantly, the general area is within relatively easy access to Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield (RHADS). RHADS is a strength on which the District can build in order to address some of its economic weaknesses.

Load more

  205

Copy Link