East Riding Local Development Framework

EAST RIDING LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

HOUSING SITE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

MAY 2007

“Plan East Riding” Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Contents

Introduction 3

Part 1: Site Assessment Methodology 6

Stage 1: Initial Assessment and Site Exclusion 6

Stage 2: Initial Ranking 7

Stage 3: Detailed Site Specific Considerations 9

Stage 4: Deliverability 15

Part 2: Explanation 18

Stage 1: Initial Assessment and Site Exclusion 18

Stage 2: Initial Ranking 26

Stage 3: Detailed Site Specific Considerations 32

Stage 4: Deliverability 44 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Introduction

This document sets out the way that we will assess and compare the suitability of potential housing sites. It will be used to help identify those sites that will be allocated for residential development in the Housing Development Plan Document (DPD)(1). The Housing DPD is one of a number of documents that make up the new East Riding of Yorkshire Local Development Framework (LDF).

A draft version of this document was published for public consultation in June 2006. We received almost 600 responses which have resulted in many changes being made to the document. Many of the comments identified areas where further clarification or explanation were required. Others suggested ways in which the methodology should be altered. Details of all the comments that we received and how they have been taken into account are available from our website or through the contact details shown below.

We have also been able to take into account new Government guidance that has been published since the draft methodology was prepared. This includes guidance relating to Housing (Planning Policy Statement 3), Flood Risk (Planning Policy Statement 25) and the consultation document on Planning and Climate Change (Supplement to Planning Policy Statement 1).

This document has been prepared to help inform the preparation of the Housing DPD. It is known as a 'background document' and contributes towards the evidence base of the Housing DPD.

Purpose

The methodology will be used to assess the following potential housing sites:

Those that have been suggested to us by the general public (including landowners, developers and planning agents) both before and during the preparation of the Housing DPD. Those that are allocated in an existing Local Plan and have not been developed (or are not under development). Those that have been identified through other studies such as our Urban Potential Study(2). Other sites we believe merit consideration.

Only those sites above 0.25 hectares or 5 dwellings will be considered as potential housing allocations. These thresholds have been previously agreed with house builders who have an interest in the East Riding. Sites below 0.25 hectares or 5 dwellings are unlikely to be allocated for housing development because they are too small and are often suggested to us for infill development or a single house. This doesn't mean however, that all sites below this threshold are unsuitable for development. Instead, such sites will be considered as 'small sites' and any subsequent planning application for residential development will be considered against more general policies in the Housing DPD and other relevant LDF documents.

1 Some housing sites in Bridlington will be considered through the Bridlington Area Action Plan. See www.bridlingtonregeneration.com for further details 2 Strategic Urban Potential Study, East Riding of Yorkshire Council, July 2002

3 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

The methodology will also be used to help inform any phasing or managed release policy that may be considered through the Housing DPD. It will also provide guidance on the key issues that may be considered when other potential housing sites are brought to our attention unexpectedly once the Housing DPD has been finalised. This may include employment sites that become available for redevelopment.

We have made every effort to include all the important issues that should be taken into account when considering the location of new residential allocations. However, other factors that are perhaps only relevant to individual sites or small groups of sites, may become apparent during the assessment process. If any such issues become apparent they will be taken into account and weighted accordingly.

This document is set out in two parts. Part 1 outlines the specific questions of the site assessment methodology. Part 2 explains the reasoning behind the questions.

Monitoring and Information Update

The methodology refers to many different sources of information. This information is either prepared by various departments within the Council or obtained from other organisations such as the Environment Agency or Natural England (formerly the Countryside Agency and English Nature). Much of this information is updated on a regular basis and the site assessments will be undertaken against the latest available information.

We intend to update the methodology as regularly as possible (for example if new national planning guidance is published for a certain topic). If you consider any part of the methodology to be out of date please contact us through the details below.

Next Steps

The methodology will be used to help identify our preferred housing allocations. These will be published for consultation in Autumn 2007 as part of the 'Preferred Options' Housing Development Plan Document. Following this consultation exercise, we will consider any changes to the allocations before the Housing Document is submitted to Government in 2008. The submission document will involve a further period of consultation.

Contact Details

For further information on this document or the Housing DPD please contact:

Stephen Hunt, or [email protected] Forward Planning Unit, County Hall, or visit www.eastriding.gov.uk/planning/ldf Beverley, East Yorkshire, HU17 9BA Tel: 01482 391740

4 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Part 1: Site Assessment Methodology

East Riding of Yorkshire Council 5 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Stage 1: Initial Assessment and Site Exclusion

A. Conformity with the East Riding settlement hierarchy

Q1: Does the site lie within or adjacent to a settlement that is identified in the Yes / No LDF settlement hierarchy? Q2: Are further housing allocations required for the settlement? Yes / No

Sites with a 'no' to either answer are dismissed

B. Principal environmental and cultural constraints

Q3: Would residential development cause a significant negative effect on an Yes / No international or national site of biodiversity or geological value? Q4: Would residential development be unsuitable because the site lies within Yes / No an area that is at the greatest risk from flooding or coastal erosion? Q5: Would residential development cause a significant negative effect on a nationally important archaeological site or monument or a nationally or Yes / No internationally important historical site?

Sites with a 'yes' to any answer are dismissed

6 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Stage 2: Initial Ranking

A. Previously developed land / Greenfield land

Q6: Does the site contain previously developed land, Greenfield land or a mix of both?

Wholly previously developed 6 Mixed: > 75% PDL 5 Mixed: 50 - 75% PDL 4 Mixed: 25 - 49 % PDL 3 Mixed: < 25% PDL 2 Wholly Greenfield 1

B. Accessibility considerations

Q7: How accessible is the site to existing public transport?

Destination Journey time to Destination by Public Transport Within 15 Within 30 Within 45 Within 60 Over 60 Minutes Minutes Minutes Minutes Minutes To 'Major' Centres 6 4 2 1 0 To Employment 6 4 2 1 0 Shopping 6 4 2 1 0 Secondary Health 6 4 2 1 0 Secondary & 6 4 2 1 0 Tertiary Education

Total Score 27 + 26 - 23 22 - 19 18 - 15 14 - 11 10 - 7 6 - 0 Points 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

7 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Q8: How accessible is the site to existing services and facilities?

Walking Distances Cycling Distances within within 400m 800m 1200m 1.2 km 3.6 km 5 km Shopping areas (including leisure) Hull city centre N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 Other centres 6 4 2 4 2 1 Employment Main employment 6 4 2 5 3 1 area Education Primary School 6 4 1 1 0 0 Secondary School 6 4 2 2 1 0 Further education 4 2 1 3 2 1 Health GP premises 4 2 1 2 1 0

Total Score 42 + 41 - 37 36 - 32 31 - 27 26 - 22 21 - 16 15 - 0 Points 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

8 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Stage 3: Detailed Site Specific Considerations

Environmental

A. Biodiversity, flora, fauna and geology

Q9: Would residential development affect a regional or local site of biodiversity or geological value or affect legally protected species?

Positive Existing features could be conserved/retained and are likely to be Impact enhanced or new features can be incorporated into the proposal No or No impact / existing features could be conserved/retained or impact Neutral could be satisfactorily mitigated (e.g. by removal of species) Impact Adverse Features unlikely to be retained in their entirety. Partial mitigation Impact measures agreed Significant Features unlikely to be retained. No satisfactory mitigation measures Adverse agreed or possible. Site may be inappropriate for development Impact

Q10: Would residential development affect trees or hedgerows, or areas of ancient woodland not subject to statutory protection?

Positive Existing features can be conserved/retained and there is opportunity Impact for their enhancement or new features can be incorporated into the proposal No or No impact / existing features can be retained or impact could be neutral satisfactorily mitigated (e.g. by providing new/replacement features) Impact Adverse Features unlikely to be retained in their entirety. Partial mitigation Impact measures agreed Significant Features unlikely to be retained. No satisfactory mitigation measures Adverse agreed or possible Impact

9 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

B. The historic, cultural and built environment

Q11: Would residential development affect the historic or cultural environment?

Positive Development would result in enhancement (e.g. existing features Impact can be retained and there is significant opportunity for their enhancement) No or Development unlikely to impact on the historic or cultural neutral environment. Existing features can be retained or impact could be Impact satisfactorily mitigated Adverse Development likely to detract from the existing historic or cultural Impact environment. Features unlikely to be retained in their entirety. Partial mitigation measures agreed Significant Development likely to cause a significant detraction from the existing Adverse historic or cultural environment. Features unlikely to be retained. Impact No satisfactory mitigation measures agreed or possible. Site may be inappropriate for development

Q12: Would residential development affect the existing built character of the settlement?

Positive Development would result in significant enhancement (e.g. through Impact redevelopment or removal of vacant/derelict building) No or Development unlikely to impact (whether positive or negative) / neutral impact very minor Impact Adverse Development likely to detract from the existing built character. Impact Existing, important features unlikely to be retained in their entirety. Partial mitigation measures agreed Significant Development likely to cause a significant detraction from the existing Adverse built character. Features unlikely to be retained. No satisfactory Impact mitigation measures agreed or possible. Site may be inappropriate for development.

10 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

C. Landscape character and the setting of the settlement

Q13: What is the capacity of the landscape to accommodate residential development?

High Site has low sensitivity to development. (e.g. because development Capacity would not be visible, existing important features could be retained, existing landscape quality is poor) Medium Site has medium sensitivity to development Capacity No Impact -- Site will not impact on landscape character (e.g. because site lies within built up area) Low Site has medium to high sensitivity to development. Development Capacity likely to detract from landscape character. Existing, important features unlikely to be retained in their entirety. Only partial mitigation measures agreed Very Low Site has high sensitivity to development. Development likely to Capacity cause a significant detraction from the existing landscape character. Important features unlikely to be retained. No satisfactory mitigation measures agreed or possible. Site may be inappropriate for development

D. Flood risk and air quality

Q14: Does the site lie within an area at risk from flooding?

Zone 1 Low probability. Residential development is appropriate Zone 2 Medium probability. Residential development is appropriate subject to appropriate mitigation Zone 3 (iii) High probability (lowest risk to life). Subject to exception test. Site may be inappropriate for development Zone 3 (ii) High probability (manageable risk to life). Subject to exception test. Site may be inappropriate for development

11 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Q15: Does the site lie within an area of low air quality or would residential development result in a significant adverse impact on air quality?

Site lies within an area where air quality is currently acceptable and not approaching prescribed levels. Development is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in air quality Site lies within an area where air quality is currently acceptable but approaching prescribed levels. Development is unlikely to result in the prescribed levels being exceeded Site lies within an area where air quality is over prescribed levels, but mitigation measures would prevent a further decrease in quality or would result in a partial improvement Site lies within an area where air quality is over prescribed levels, or development may push air quality over prescribed levels. No mitigation measures have been agreed or possible

E. Resources

Q16: Would residential development result in the loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land?

Extent of No Loss Loss 0.1ha - 5ha 5.1ha - 10ha 10.1ha - 19.9ha More than 20ha. Site may be inappropriate for development

Q17: Would residential development affect the public drinking water supply?

No Development would not affect the public drinking water supply / mitigation impact measures possible Adverse Development would lead to serious risk of contamination. Site may be Impact inappropriate for development

12 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Q18: Would residential development lead to the sterilisation of mineral resources?

No Site doesn't fall within a preferred area, specific site or area of search No Site falls within a preferred area, specific site or area of search and pre- extraction may be possible (or possible latter). Depending on pre-extraction site may not be suitable for development immediately Yes Site falls within a preferred area, specific site or area of search and pre-extraction is not possible. Site may be inappropriate for development

Social / Economic

A. Infrastructure, services and facilities

Q19: What is the capacity of existing schools to cope with the level of residential development proposed for the settlement?

Sufficient capacity: sufficient surplus places available / No effect on school places (e.g. development will not increase demand for school places) Capacity not sufficient but constraints can be overcome Insufficient capacity and constraints can not be overcome. Site may be inappropriate for development

Q20: What is the capacity of existing utilities and infrastructure to cope with the level of residential development proposed for the settlement?

Sufficient capacity: no infrastructure constraints Capacity limited or insufficient capacity, but constraints can be overcome. Site may not be suitable for development until infrastructure is in place Insufficient capacity and constraints can not be overcome. Site may be inappropriate for development

Q21: What is the capacity of the highway network to cope with the development of the site?

13 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Q22: Would residential development result in the loss of any existing or proposed physical or social infrastructure or would it contribute to the construction of new physical or social infrastructure?

New infrastructure is proposed and is viable and sustainable Development would involve loss of existing well used infrastructure or proposed (e.g. allocated) infrastructure that is still required but replacement facility agreed -- New infrastructure is proposed but is not viable or sustainable / no new infrastructure is proposed Development would involve loss of existing well used infrastructure or proposed (e.g. allocated) infrastructure that is still required. No mitigation or replacement measures agreed

Q23: Would residential development help support the regeneration of the locality?

Yes Development is likely to help the regeneration of the locality No -- Development unlikely to have a major beneficial impact on the regeneration of the locality

B. Compatibility considerations

Q24: Would residential development be compatible with existing or proposed neighbouring uses or conflict with land that has been protected/safeguarded for alternative uses?

Yes Residential development would be compatible. Site unaffected by protected/safeguarded land Yes Residential development would be compatible with mitigation measures No Residential development would be incompatible. Mitigation unlikely. Site may be inappropriate for development.

14 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Stage 4: Deliverability

Developability and Deliverability

A. Availability

Q25: Are there any other insurmountable physical, environmental or legal constraints that may prejudice the development of the site?

No No constraints No Constraint(s) identified but mitigation is possible Yes Constraint(s) identified but mitigation unlikely. Site may be inappropriate for development

Q26: Is the site subject to any ownership constraints and is it likely to be attractive to the market?

No No known constraints: owner(s) willing to sell Yes Constraints likely: known ownership constraints or evidence of no developer interest

B. Deliverability

Q27: In the light of the answers to questions 1 to 26 is the site likely to be developable within 15 years of the adoption of the Housing DPD? If the answer is yes, is the site deliverable within 5 years of adoption?

Deliverable No known constraints or constraints can be overcome within 5 years within 5 years Developable Constraints identified and and unlikely to be overcome within 5 years, but achievable within 6 - 15 within the lifetime of the Housing DPD. years Not Constraints so significant that development unlikely within the lifetime of the developable Housing DPD. Site not considered for allocation. Re-assess position on subsequent review of Housing DPD.

15 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

16 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Part 2: Explanation

East Riding of Yorkshire Council 17 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Part 2 of this methodology provides background information and explanation for the questions contained within Part 1.

In some instances an entire potential housing site will fall within a particular boundary or designation (for example a nature designation). In other instances a site will fall partially within a designation and partially outside. Where this is the case a site will be considered either as a whole or in part depending on the nature of the boundary or designation. Similarly, many sites are large in size and will be considered either as a whole or as a potentially smaller site.

The site assessments will be undertaken using information obtained from site surveys, any documentation submitted by those promoting the site and where appropriate through discussions with those promoting the site and the relevant consultee (e.g. Natural England).

Stage 1: Initial Assessment and Site Exclusion

Stage 1 represents an initial sieving exercise. The objective is to dismiss at an early stage all those sites that have a significant constraint to development. The 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 East Riding Local Development Framework (LDF) settlement hierarchy and a number of key environmental and cultural considerations.

A. Conformity with the East Riding Settlement Hierarchy

The starting point for assessing potential housing sites is to consider how the site fits within the overall LDF settlement hierarchy. The aim is to identify and dismiss all those sites that are in clear conflict with this hierarchy.

Question 1

The LDF settlement hierarchy is currently set out in the Joint Structure Plan and in the emerging Smaller Settlements Development Plan Document. It provides a sustainable framework for directing future development. The promotion of more sustainable patterns of development is also a target of the Community Plan. (3)

The Joint Structure Plan divides the East Riding into four sub-areas and states how many homes should be built in each area. It also identifies a limited number of large settlements that should be the focus for most of the new development (see picture 1). These are known as the Sub Regional Urban Area, Principal Towns and Towns.

Once completed the Smaller Settlements Document will identify those smaller settlements in the East Riding that provide important local facilities and act as a focal point for the surrounding rural community. These settlements are smaller than those identified in the Joint Structure Plan and will be known as 'Market Villages'. They may be suitable for limited development to meet local needs.

3 Our East Riding. The East Riding Community Plan 2006 - 2016. 2005, East Riding Local Strategic Partnership.

18 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

The draft (preferred options) version of the Smaller Settlements Document was published for consultation in October 2006 and identified 28 settlements. Any changes to the number of Market Villages as the Smaller Settlements Document progresses through to adoption will be reflected in the methodology.

The current settlement hierarchy is set out in the table below:

Sub Regional Comprising Hull and the adjoining East Riding settlements of Anlaby, Willerby, Urban Area Kirkella, Cottingham and Hessle Principal Bridlington, Beverley and Goole Towns Towns Driffield, Pocklington, Market Weighton, Elloughton cum Brough, Hedon, Hornsea, Howden, Snaith and Withernsea. Market Aldbrough, Beeford, Brandesburton, Bubwith Easington, Gilberdyke, Villages (draft Holme-on-Spalding Moor, Hutton Cranswick, Keyingham, Kilham, Leconfield, - Preferred Leven, Melbourne, Middleton-on-the-Wolds, Nafferton, Newport, North Cave, Options) North Ferriby, North Frodingham, Patrington, Rawcliffe, Roos, Skipsea, Skirlaugh, South Cave, Stamford Bridge, Wetwang, Wilberfoss Rural Villages All remaining settlements (draft - Preferred Options)

Table 1 East Riding Settlement Hierarchy

The draft (preferred options) Smaller Settlements Document suggests that those settlements not identified within the Sub Regional Urban Area or as Principal Towns, Towns and Market Villages will be known as 'Rural Villages'. The document states that residential development may be allowed in Rural Villages if it is for the conversion of an existing building, for wholly affordable housing or possibly for single dwellings.

This means that the only residential sites that are likely to be allocated in Rural Villages will be for wholly affordable housing. We are preparing a Housing Needs Survey(4) to identify the need for such housing within each settlement. If a need has been identified in a Rural Village potential sites will be considered under the methodology. Any site will be allocated as an 'exception site' for affordable housing only.

4 East Riding Housing Needs and Market Assessment, Forthcoming 2007

19 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Picture 1 Joint Structure Plan Sub Areas & Settlement Hierarchy

Sites will be dismissed if they do not fall within or adjacent to the Sub Regional Urban Area, Principal Towns, Towns or Market Villages and are not required for affordable housing in the Rural Villages.

The term adjacent refers to sites that lie immediately next to the built form of the settlement and sites that lie so close to the built form that it is reasonable to consider them as a potential allocation. The latter may include sites that are detached from the built form by a small field boundary or an area of open space (e.g. playing field). Sites that are some distance from a settlement (for example separated by several fields) are unlikely to be considered through the methodology.

Any future changes to the current settlement hierarchy will be considered through the preparation of a new Core Strategy. This Strategy will eventually replace the Joint Structure Plan.

Question 2

The Housing Development Plan Document will identify the number of new homes to be built in each of the settlements listed above. The size and number of new housing allocations will depend upon a number of factors including the number of homes proposed for the settlement and the number of homes that already have a planning permission and are likely to be built.

20 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

The Issues and Options version of the Housing Document was published in August 2005 and sought comments on the number of homes that could be developed in the larger settlements. It stated that in some settlements there are already a large number of dwellings with a planning permission and suggested that no further housing allocations would be needed. In other settlements it suggested that new housing allocations would be required.

The next version of the Housing Document, (known as the preferred options) is due for public consultation in Autumn 2007. This version will suggest the number of new dwellings that should be built in each settlement and suggest where they may be built.

Sites will be dismissed if they fall within or adjacent to the Sub Regional Urban Area, Principal Towns, Towns or Market Villages and the Housing Development Plan Document identifies that no further new allocations are proposed for the settlement.

B. Principal Environmental and Cultural Constraints

Question 3

Planning Policy Statement 9(5) sets out the Government's national policies on the protection of biodiversity and geological conservation through the planning system. This guidance is supplemented through a Government Circular(6) and through a supplementary Good Practice Guide. (7)

The key principles of this guidance are that planning policies should avoid, mitigate or compensate for harm and should seek ways to conserve, enhance and restore biodiversity and geology. The guidance identifies that appropriate weight should be attached to designated sites of international, national and local importance.

Internationally designated sites are the most important sites for biodiversity. They are afforded the maximum weight and are legally protected. It is important that local authorities ensure that this legal protection is not prejudiced. As a consequence we will prepare an Appropriate Assessment to assess the impact that development may have on such sites. (8) Any site that would cause a significant negative effect on an international designation will be dismissed at this stage.

International sites comprise:

Special Protection Areas (SPA) Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) Ramsar Sites

5 Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, ODPM, August 2005 6 Government Circular: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation - Statutory Obligations and their impact within the Planning System, ODPM, 06/2005 7 Planning for Biodiversity and Geological Conservation: A Guide to Good Practice, ODPM, defra, English Nature, March 2006 8 The requirement to consider the need for an Appropriate Assessment is set out under Article 6(3) and (4) of the EU Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC

21 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Nationally designated sites are also legally protected. Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) Local Planning Authorities must take reasonable steps to further the conservation and enhancement of their special features. They comprise:

Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) including, National Nature Reserves (NNR)

Government guidance identifies that development should not normally be allowed where it is likely to have an adverse effect on a Site of Special Scientific Interest. An exception should only be made when the benefits of the development would clearly outweigh the impacts that it is likely to have on the features of the Site. Any site that would cause a significant negative effect on a national designation will be dismissed at this stage.

Natural England will be consulted over any site that may impact upon an international or national designation and their comments will be critical in considering whether or not a site should be dismissed. Should it appear likely that a site is to be dismissed, those promoting the site will be offered the opportunity to provide evidence to demonstrate that development will not have a detrimental effect upon the protected site. Such evidence may be provided through an ecological assessment of the site.

Regional and Local designations are considered in the stage 3 assessment.

Question 4

The Government has recently published Planning Policy Statement 25 which relates to Development and Flood Risk.(9) The Statement identifies a risk-based approach and sequential test for proposals for development in or affecting flood risk areas. The approach identifies a continuum from virtually no risk of flooding to a high risk with the aim of directing development to areas with a lower probability of flooding (see Table 2 ‘Flood Risk Vulnerability’ below). The guidance identifies which types of development may or may not be appropriate in different flood risk areas. It also states where development may need to be of a design and with an appropriate level of protection to ensure that the risk of damage from flooding is minimised.

The Statement also introduces an 'exception test'. If, following the consideration of the sequential test, it is not possible for the development to be located in zones of lower probability of flooding, the exception test can be applied. For the exception test to be passed it must be demonstrated that:

1. the development provides wider sustainability benefits to the community that outweigh flood risk. These may relate the need to avoid social and economic blight or because of restrictive national designations such as landscape, heritage or nature conservation designations which prevent development on lower risk sites.

9 Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk, Communities and Local Government, December 2006

22 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

2. the development is on previously developed land or if not that there are no developable previously developed sites available, and

3. development will be safe, without increasing flood risk elsewhere, and, where possible will reduce flood risk overall. This must be demonstrated through a site flood risk assessment.

The exception test is required for all residential sites (including residential care homes) that fall within a high probability flood risk area (Zone 3).

We are preparing a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment(10) to examine the variation of flood risk throughout the East Riding of Yorkshire. The Assessment will divide the East Riding into flood risk zones (the sequential test), and show those areas that are subject to a low, medium and high probability of flooding. It will also consider areas of functional floodplain and identify any local drainage issues. Because a large part of the East Riding lies within a high risk area, the Assessment will also identify where there are variations in flood risk within the high risk areas. The flood zones to be used in the Assessment are shown in the table below.

Low Probability (Zone 1) Medium Probability (Zone 2) High Probability(11) (Zone 3a) Lowest (Zone 3a(iii) risk to life

Manageable (Zone 3a(ii)) risk to life

Highest (Zone 3a(i)) risk to life

Functional Flood Plain (Zone 3b)

Table 2 Flood Risk Vulnerability

For the purposes of question 4, the following sites are identified as being at greatest risk from flooding:

10 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, East Riding of Yorkshire Council, Forthcoming 2007. 11 Please note that PPS 25 does not sub-divide zone 3 into the thee risk areas. This sub division has been put forward through the East Riding Strategic Flood Risk Assessment

23 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Functional flood plains (Zone 3b) High Probability - Highest risk to life (Zone 3a(i))

Functional flood plains comprise the unobstructed or active areas where water regularly flows in time of flood. The Government considers that built development should be wholly exceptional and limited to essential transport and utilities infrastructure that has to be there.

The high probability (highest risk to life) zones are those areas situated immediately behind raised flood defences. A catastrophic failure (or overtopping) of the defence may result in a flood wave that will pass through Zone 3a(i) at depth and/or high velocity. This may pose a serious risk to life.

Any site (or part of a site) that falls within a functional flood plain will be dismissed at this stage. Any site (or part of a site) that falls within a high probability zone - highest risk to life will be dismissed unless it is proven through the exception test that residential development could be an acceptable form of development. In accordance with the exception test a site specific flood risk assessment should be prepared. This should follow guidance in the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment and include a detailed breach assessment to ensure that the potential risk to life can be safely managed over the lifetime of the development. The consideration of a site against the remaining questions within this methodology will help assess how well a site performs against part 1 of the exception test. The Environment Agency will be consulted over any site that may be at risk from flooding.

Sites falling within other areas at risk from flooding (Zones 1,2,3a(ii) and 3a(iii)) will be considered in the stage 3 assessment.

The risk from coastal erosion is also an important consideration. We have monitored erosion rates along the East Riding coast since 1951. This has provided an accurate record of actual cliff loss and has helped to determine past erosion rates.

As a general guide, the coast erodes at a rate of 1-1.5 metres per year between Barmston and Atwick, and at a rate of 1.5-2 metres per year between Hornsea and Kilnsea. Using this information we have identified those parts of the East Riding that are likely to be eroded over the next 50 and 100 years.

Our Building Control Section has advised that a new dwelling should be built to last a minimum of 50 years. This is similar advice to that contained in a recent Government consultation paper(12)which identifies that new homes should be built to last for at least 60 years. However, it is generally expected that they should be capable of lasting for a much longer period of time.

12 Proposals for Introducing a Code for Sustainable Homes - A Consultation Paper, ODPM, December 2005

24 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Our existing policy on the Roll Back of Residential Dwellings'(13) states that existing dwellings could be allowed to move back from the coast provided that they are rebuilt beyond the part of the coastline that is likely to be eroded within the next 100 years. The same threshold will be used in this methodology.

Any site (or part of a site) that falls within an area that is likely to be eroded within the next 100 years will be dismissed at this stage.

Question 5

Planning Policy Guidance Note 16(14) relates to archaeology and planning. Archaeological remains are seen as a finite and non-renewable resource and care must be taken to ensure that they are not needlessly or thoughtlessly destroyed. The guidance identifies that where nationally important archaeological remains, whether scheduled or not, are affected by development there should be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation. Nationally important remains comprise:

Scheduled Ancient Monuments Other sites of national archaeological significance

These sites are protected under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979.

English Heritage has also advised that a number of nationally important historical sites and buildings should be afforded protection at this stage of the methodology. These are:

Grade 1 Listed Buildings (of which there are approximately 100 in the East Riding and are recognised as being of particularly great importance to the nation's heritage). The single Grade 1 Historic Park and Garden (which is at Sledmere and recognised as being of international importance) The sole Registered Battlefield (which is at Stamford Bridge and of national importance).

Any site that would cause a significant negative effect on a nationally important archaeological site or monument or a nationally or internationally important historical site will be dismissed at this stage.

English Heritage and / or the Humber Archeological Partnership will be consulted over any site that may impact upon the sites listed above and their comments will be critical in considering whether or not a site should be dismissed. Should it appear likely that a site is to be dismissed, those promoting the site will be offered the opportunity to provide evidence to demonstrate that development will not have a detrimental effect upon the protected site.

Regionally and locally important archaeological features are considered in stage 3 of this methodology.

13 The Roll Back of Residential and Agricultural Dwellings at Risk from Coastal Erosion in the East Riding of Yorkshire, East Riding of Yorkshire Council, December 2005 14 Planning Policy Guidance Note 16: 'Archaeology and Planning', ODPM, November 1990

25 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Stage 1 Outcome: To identify all potential housing sites that:

fall within or adjacent to a settlement where further housing allocations are required and, would not cause a significant negative effect on a international or national environmental designation and, would not be unsuitable due to being at the greatest risk from flooding or coastal erosion and, would not cause a significant negative effect on a nationally important archaeological site or monument or a nationally or internationally important historical site.

Those sites that are not identified do not represent sustainable locations for development and will be excluded from further assessment.

Stage 2: Initial Ranking

Stage 2 assesses all sites that are deemed suitable under stage 1 against two key objectives of Planning Policy Statement 3 'Housing'(15). These relate to the priority to focus development on previously developed 'brownfield' land and ensuring that housing is developed in locations which offer a range of community facilities and with good access to jobs, services and infrastructure.

The aim is to provide sites with an initial ranking which will prioritise those sites that contribute most to the achievement of sustainable development. These sites will then be subject to a more detailed assessment in stage 3 and 4 which will consider a range of social, economic and environmental issues.

A. Previously developed land / greenfield land

Question 6

Planning Policy Statement 3 prioritises the development of previously developed land but also confirms that not all previously developed land will be suitable for housing. This question scores sites highly for being previously developed. However, other questions within this methodology will also help to determine whether such sites are ultimately suitable for residential development.

The definition of previously developed land is contained within the Statement. Based on this definition previously developed sites may comprise the following uses:

Residential land, hostels, old people's homes etc, including gardens that are closely related to the house Community buildings (inc. health, schools, religious buildings) Leisure and recreational buildings (sports halls, museums, cinemas, hotels)

15 Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing, Communities and Local Government, November 2006

26 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Employment land including offices, storage and warehousing Retailing (inc. shops, garages, pubs, restaurants) Utilities and transport (inc. highways, car parks, railways) Mineral workings, quarries and landfill waste disposal sites where provision for restoration has not been made Vacant and/or derelict land and buildings (except those formerly used for agriculture) Defence land and buildings (inc. airfields, barracks)

Examples of Greenfield sites may include:

Agricultural land (inc. orchards, nurseries) Agricultural buildings (inc. vacant buildings) Woodland and forestry Outdoor recreation (inc. playing fields, parks, sports grounds, golf courses) Allotments Urban land not previously developed (e.g. amenity areas)

Sites will be scored according to the proportion of previously developed land that they contain. Those sites that are wholly previously developed receive the highest score (6 points) whilst those that are wholly Greenfield receive the lowest (1 points). Sites that contain a mix of both previously developed and greenfied land will receive between 2 points (less than 25% previously developed) and 5 points (more than 75% previously developed).

B. Accessibility considerations

Question 7

According to the Department for Transport (DfT), accessibility is the ease with which an individual can access services and facilities that he or she needs or desires. It also describes the catchment characteristics of a given location. A range of factors impact upon accessibility, including:

Travel time; Cost of travel; Location of facilities and services; Fear of crime; Knowledge of available travel and service choice; and Travel horizons

Assessing the level of accessibility by public transport will be used to quantify the accessibility of locations, measuring the relative ease of accessing one or more services.

There are several different ways of considering accessibility for public transport. This methodology considers accessibility using the public transport system to activities and opportunities, specifically:

27 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

'Major' centres - including Hull, Beverley, Bridlington, Goole, York and Selby Employment - 130 locations (see table 3 for further information) Shopping - (see table 3 for further information) Secondary Health (hospitals) Secondary & Tertiary Education

The Threshold Measure is the most commonly used type of measure. The term 'threshold' refers to bands of travel time - for example locations within 15 minutes of a facility, locations within 15-30 minutes of a facility, and so on.

We will use the accessibility modelling software Accession to assess relative public transport accessibility of sites. Accession can be used to provide a quantified means of measuring accessibility. The accessibility of a site can be mapped for different time periods during the day, such as the morning peak period (0700-0900), the daytime inter-peak (1000-1500) and the evening peak (1600-1800). The journey times are calculated using the public transport routes available, and take into account the following:

Walking time to the nearest bus stop; Journey time on the bus / train; Any interchange time; and Walking to the final destination

As a minimum, journey time thresholds for sites need to correspond with the Second Local Transport Plan(16) accessibility indicator. This indicator measures the proportion of households within 60 minutes journey time of a 'major' centre by public transport in the am peak (0700-0900).

We will also take into account the likely provision of new infrastructure (such as bus stops or re-routing of a bus route) that may arise as a result of a particular development.

Question 8

Planning Policy Guidance Note 13(17) identifies that walking is the most important mode of travel at the local level and offers the greatest potential to replace short car trips, particularly under 2 kilometres. Research by URBED on Urban Potential Studies and the Sustainable Settlements Guide (UWE/LGB, 1998) both provide guideline distances of between 400m and 800m as 'easy walking distances'. At such distances they state people would be expected to walk rather than use the car, cycle or public transport. The Institution of Highways and Transportation (18) also advise that the mean average length for walking journeys is approximately 1 km.

16 Second Local Transport Plan 2006 - 2011, East Riding of Yorkshire Council, March 2006 17 Planning Policy Guidance Note 13: 'Transport', ODPM, March 2001 18 Providing for Journeys on Foot, Institution of Highways and Transportation, 2000

28 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 also advises that cycling has the potential to substitute for short car trips, particularly those under 5 km. Similarly the Institution of Highways and Transportation advises that the mean average length for cycling journeys is approximately 4 km although states that journeys of up to three times these distances are not uncommon for regular commuters.

Taking into account this guidance, this methodology will assess sites based on whether they are a 400m walk (approximately 5 minutes), 800m walk (10 minutes) or 1200m walk (15 minutes) from the services and facilities listed in the table below. Distances of 1200m, 3600m and 5000m will be used to assess the potential for cycling. Sites within the shortest walking and cycling distances will receive the highest score.

The following indicators will be used to consider the potential for residents to be able to walk or cycle from the site to key destinations:

Indicator Comment Shopping (including leisure) Hull city centre: These areas are shown on the relevant local plan proposals map(19). They represent the main destinations for shopping and leisure Hull city centre activity. Key shopping areas within Hull are included as many are within walking and/or cycling distance of potential housing sites Other centres: in the East Riding.

District centres within Hull city centre: Parts of Cottingham, Anlaby and Willerby fall Hull (3) within a 5km cycle ride of the city centre boundary. Sites within Large local centres 5km receive a comparatively high score for cycling taking into within Hull (5) account the range of services and facilities that are on offer within Kingswood & St the city. The city centre is outside the specified walking distances. Andrews Quay shopping areas (Hull) Other centres: The district centres within Hull comprise North Town Centres within Point, Hessle Road and Holderness Road. The large local centres the East Riding are made up of Anlaby Road, Chanterlands Avenue, Gipsyville, Other shopping areas Newland Park and Spring Bank. Many of these are within cycling within the East Riding distance of Hessle, Anlaby, Kirk Ella, Willerby, Cottingham, Woodmansey, Dunswell, Wawne, Bilton and Saltend.

Town centres within the East Riding comprise the Principal Towns and Towns. Other central shopping areas include Hessle, Cottingham and Anlaby all of which provide a good range of services and facilities.

19 Please note that the Beverley Borough Local Plan does not define a town centre for Elloughton-cum-Brough. For the purposes of this exercise we have included the shops on Welton Road / Skillings Lane to be representative of a town centre.

29 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Indicator Comment Employment Main employment area: 130 sites/areas have been identified within Hull and the East Industrial estates Riding. These comprise individual large employers, industrial estates Employment areas / and clusters of employment uses. Also included are allocated sites clusters that are just coming onto the market (such as Melton Park). Large employers The large town centres within the East Riding comprise those where Hull city centre 300 or more jobs have been recorded (census 2001). These are Large town centres Beverley, Bridlington, Cottingham, Driffield, Goole, Howden, within the East Riding. Hornsea, Hedon, Market Weighton, Pocklington and Withernsea.

The scoring system for cycling distances is higher reflecting the fact that a higher proportion of people cycle to work.

Education Primary school Access to the nearest sustainable school. The nearest school will Secondary school be based on the school's catchment area. The scoring system reflects College / Further the fact that cycling is unlikely to be realistic option for those education travelling to a primary school.

Further education does not include universities. The walking distances scores for further education are generally lower, reflecting the fact that it is not compulsory so lower numbers will attend compared with primary and secondary school. The cycling scores are higher however, as those that do attend are more likely to cycle.

Health The nearest GP Health centres and hospitals were not included as different facilities premises provide a varied range of services. It is considered that including these would lead to an inconsistent comparison of sites.

The scoring system is lower representing that fact that this service is used on a less frequent basis.

Table 3 Indicators for Walking and Cycling Distances

30 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Distances will be calculated from the nearest realistic access point into the site to the closest part of the nearest indicator (e.g. the edge of a town centre)(20). A judgment will be made on the likely route taken between these two points. In some instances the nearest realistic access point will be on the border of two distances (e.g. the end of 800m and the start of 1.2km). Where this occurs a site will usually be placed within the furthest of the two distances, reflecting the fact that the vast majority of residents will be within the longer distance to the particular indicator.

A site will not score additional points for being within the specified distances of two or more sources of the same indictor. However, proximity to two or more shopping or employment areas may be used to assess the relative accessibility of a site if a number of sites receive the same overall score.

The construction of any new or proposed retail, leisure, employment, education and health facilities will also be considered as part of this methodology.

Stage 2 Outcome: Sites that are deemed acceptable under stage 1 will be prioritised according to whether they comprise previously developed land or greenfield land and their accessibility to a range of services and facilities by public transport, walking and cycling. Previously developed sites that are accessible to a range of services and facilities will receive the highest scores.

20 Distances for schools will be based on the school's catchment area

31 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Stage 3: Detailed Site Specific Considerations

The aim of this final stage is to assess all the sites that were not dismissed in stage 1 against a number of detailed site-specific factors. These relate to a variety of social, economic and environmental issues that are most relevant to achieving sustainable development within the East Riding. Many of these issues have been identified through the East Riding LDF Sustainability Appraisal/Strategic Environmental Assessment (21) and in the East Riding Community Plan.

Sites will be scored against each factor using the cross or tick approach. A site that is not constrained by a particular question will receive a positive weighting (tick(s)). Conversely a site that is subject to some constraint(s) will receive a lower weighting (cross(es)). The number of ticks or crosses given to each question reflects the relative importance of that particular question. For example, flood risk is viewed as an important consideration and sites falling within a low probability area receive a high weighting.

The result of the stage 3 assessment will be a series of ticks and crosses. This will enable comparisons to be made between sites. Sites with the highest number of ticks will, in general, be the most suitable for development. A site will be dismissed if the constraint is deemed so significant that it could prevent development from taking place. However, a site will not be dismissed without discussions with those promoting the site and the relevant consultee to enable any mitigation or alternative measures to be fully considered. The results of the stage 3 assessment will be combined with those from stage 2 to provide an overall assessment of the site. The final stage (stage 4) will assess whether or not a site is developable within the lifetime of the Housing DPD.

Environmental

A. Biodiversity, flora, fauna and geology

Question 9

Sites of regional and local biodiversity and geological interest have a fundamental role to play in meeting overall national biodiversity targets, contributing to the quality of life, well-being of the community, and sustainability objectives. Government guidance identifies that such sites (which can be greenfield or previously developed) must be conserved and enhanced. Where development does take place it should involve retaining and incorporating features into the development of a site.

Regional and local sites sites do not however have the same level of protection as nationally or internationally designated sites. They include:

Local Nature Reserves (LNR) Regionally Important Geological Sites (RIGS)

21 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Local Development Framework, Scoping Report: Sustainability Appraisal/Strategic Environmental Assessment, Atkins, March 2006

32 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCS) Priority Habitats

Sites may have populations of internationally or nationally protected species which receive statutory protection under a range of legislative provisions(22). The two main pieces of legislation protecting wildlife species are Part I of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and the Habitats Regulations. Furthermore, some animals are protected under their own legislation (for example the Protection of Badgers Act, 1992).

In many instances a protected species may fall within an international or national designation. These sites are considered in stage 1 of this methodology. Elsewhere, and where there is a reasonable likelihood of a protected species being present and affected by the development of a site, those promoting the site will be required to undertake an ecological survey. This should also address any necessary measures to protect the species. Natural England will be consulted in such cases. Example of sites that may contain protected species are those containing woodland (badgers, bats), old buildings (bats), ponds (great crested newts and other amphibians) and ditches, rivers and canals (otters and water voles).

The UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP)(23) provides the starting point for identifying regional and local biodiversity priorities. Local priorities for biodiversity action are contained in the East Riding Biodiversity Action Plan(24), which sets out action plans for nine priority habitats and 17 species. However, these areas have not been mapped and more detailed work (including a Phase 1 Habitat Survey) is still required. Work on preparing a Phase 1 Habitat Survey commenced in Spring 2007.

Question 10

A significant number of trees across the East Riding are protected by Tree Preservation Orders. These Orders are used to protect selected trees and woodlands if their removal would have a significant impact on the local environment and its enjoyment by the public. Trees may be protected for their intrinsic beauty or for their contribution to the landscape or because they screen an eyesore or future development. Trees are also protected if they are located within a designated Conservation Area(25)

Since 1997 we have had a duty to protect hedgerows in the countryside under the Hedgerow Regulations. Hedgerows can be important because they can provide valuable natural habitats and can help link sites of biodiversity importance by providing routes for the migration of species. They may also be valuable from an archaeological, historical and landscape perspective.

22 Advice about protected species and the planning system can be found in Planning Policy Statement 9 23 see www.ukbap.org.uk 24 Biodiversity in the East Riding of Yorkshire, 1998 25 Tress protected within Conservation Areas are at least 75mm in trunk diameter when measured at 1.5m above ground level

33 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

The consideration of the impact that a site may have on an important hedgerow will take into account whether it would be possible to maintain the hedgerow and whether development could lead to fragmentation or isolation of the hedgerow. To be deemed important a hedgerow should be at least 30 years old.

Ancient woodland is a valuable biodiversity resource both for its diversity of species and for its longevity as woodland. Much of the East Riding's Ancient Woodland has statutory protection as a designated Site of Special Scientific Interest. These sites are considered in stage 1 of the methodology. However, a number of areas are not statutorily protected. Government guidance advises that development that would result in a loss, or deterioration of Ancient Woodland should only be allowed if benefits would outweigh the loss of the habitat.

We will consult our Landscape and Conservation Unit and where necessary Natural England if there is a possibility that a site may be affected by trees, hedgerows or ancient woodland not subject to statutory control.

B. The historic, cultural and built environment

Question 11

The impact on the historic and cultural environment will take into account the potential impact upon the following:

'Unscheduled' Archaeological Sites (regional and local) Parks and Gardens of Historic Interest (except Grade 1) Conservation Areas Listed Buildings (except Grade 1)

The Government (26) identifies that there should be effective protection for all aspects of the historic environment. It forms part of the country's cultural heritage and sense of national identity. At a local level it helps to sustain a sense of local distinctiveness that is important to the character and appearance of towns, villages and the countryside. The need to protect our built heritage is also identified as a target in the Community Plan.

Whilst Government guidance identifies a presumption in favour of the physical preservation of nationally important remains it states that cases involving remains of lesser importance will not always be so clear cut. Regionally and locally important archaeological features contribute to the overall historic character of an area and the guidance identifies that the need to protect these sites should be weighed against other factors, including the need for the development. Any proposed development involving such sites will be discussed with our Landscape and Conservation Team and where relevant the Humber Archeological Partnership and/or English Heritage.

26 Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: 'Planning and the Historic Environment, Department for National Heritage, September 1994

34 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Historic Parks and Gardens and Registered Battlefields are not subject to any additional statutory controls. However, guidance identifies that these designations should be protected wherever possible. The single Grade 1 listed Historic Park in the East Riding and the sole Registered Battlefield are of international and national importance respectively. These sites are considered in stage 1 of the methodology.

Development that may affect a listed building needs very careful consideration. The assessment of a potential site will need to consider the desirability of preserving the setting of the building and whether or not development is likely to affect the building concerned. Grade 1 Listed Buildings are of national importance and considered in stage 1.

Conservation Areas are 'areas of special architectural or historic interest the character or appearance of which it is desirable to preserve or enhance'(27). The assessment of a potential site will need to consider the impact that a development could have on the area. This assessment will need to reflect the reasons why the particular Conservation Area has been designated. Although Conservation Areas vary, certain aspects are almost always relevant. These include the topography (e.g. thoroughfares and property boundaries) and its historical development, the archaeological significance and potential, the prevalent building materials, the character and hierarchy of spaces, the quality and relationship of buildings and also of trees and other green features. The consideration of trees within Conservation Areas is covered in question 9.

When assessing housing sites we will consider both sites that fall within a designated area and those that lie outside an Area but may affect its setting.

Question 12

This question considers the potential effect that a new development may have upon the character, appearance and quality of the built character of the settlement. The impact could take a variety of forms and be either positive or negative. Developments that may lead to an improvement in the overall quality of the streetscape could include those that involve:

The removal or conversion of a derelict/vacant site or building The removal of an existing eyesore or unsightly building The opportunity to introduce new or enhance existing landscape features

Alternatively those developments that may have an adverse impact on urban character could include those that involve:

The loss of open areas (either public or private - perhaps where they are providing an important break in an otherwise built up area or softening the transition between built up and rural areas). The loss of amenity space or green areas (such as allotments or informal recreation areas)

27 PPG 15 para 4.1

35 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Over development in areas of lower density development Development in gardens or the grounds of houses with a large curtilage or paddock where it would detract from the existing character and amenity of the area.

The assessment will consider the current role and function of a site (for example, amenity space) and whether or not this would be affected (either in a positive or negative way) by new development. In assessing the role and function of a site it will be necessary to consider the sites existing quality (e.g. well maintained or derelict) and function (e.g. is it a valuable amenity space, recreational area or providing a setting to another building/part of the settlement).

The assessment will not consider very detailed matters (such as specifying new building heights or car parking spaces) unless these issues are considered so significant that they may prevent future residential development on the site. If the site is allocated for residential development, these matters will be considered when a planning application is submitted.

C. Landscape character and the setting of the settlement

Question 13

Government guidance(28) highlights the importance of maintaining and improving landscape diversity and identifies the need to protect the intrinsic character and quality of the countryside.

We have prepared a Landscape Character Assessment (29) to help inform judgements on the possible impact that a development may have on the landscape. The Assessment describes and classifies the landscape of the East Riding. It also makes judgements on the quality of the landscape and its sensitivity and capacity to accommodate development. The Assessment has been supplemented by a more detailed analysis(30) of the landscape and townscape surrounding the settlements identified in the Joint Structure Plan.

Nationally designated areas have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. National designations include areas such as National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The East Riding does not contain any national landscape designations. However, a number of areas have been identified as being of relevance locally. These include:

Heritage Coast Local Landscape Designations

Wherever possible these areas should be protected from development that would have a detrimental impact on their landscape quality.

28 Planning Policy Statement 7: 'Sustainable Development in Rural Areas, August 2004 and Planning Policy Statement 1: 'Delivering Sustainable Development' (2005) 29 East Riding of Yorkshire Landscape Character Assessment, East Riding of Yorkshire Council, November 2005. (Available to view at www.eastriding.gov.uk) 30 Available to view at www.eastriding.gov.uk

36 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Heritage Coasts are non-statutory designations and are agreed between the relevant maritime local authority and the Countryside Agency (now Natural England). Heritage Coasts are managed so that their natural beauty is conserved.

Landscapes that we have identified as being highly valued locally include a large part of the Yorkshire Wolds (which has been identified as an Area of High Landscape Value) and various open areas between settlements. The location of these designations is shown on the proposals maps for the existing Local Plans.

In considering the capability of a site to accommodate development from a landscape and townscape perspective the following issues will be considered:

Quality of the existing Consider: landscape existing local landscape designations the intactness of landscape characteristics, important views, distinctiveness, integration to the existing urban edge, diversity of characteristics and presence of any detractors.

Low quality landscapes are usually fragmented and already have detractors present.

Sensitivity of the Based on the effect that a particular type of development might have landscape to further on the characteristics and landscape features. Sensitivity is assessed change against visibility, tree and vegetation cover, loss of characteristics and landscape quality.

High sensitivity would mean that a development would adversely affect the key characteristics of the landscape or a significant detractor would be introduced to the landscape resulting in significant change of either views, scale, character or quality. This will also take into account whether a site would lead to the further coalescence of settlements.

Capacity of the Related to sensitivity. Where a landscape has a low sensitivity to a landscape to take further particular type of development it would have a high capacity to accept development change.

The assessment will not consider very detailed matters (such as specifying new building heights) unless these issues are considered so significant that they may prevent future residential development on the site. If the site is allocated for residential development, these matters will be considered when a planning application is submitted.

37 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

D. Flood risk and air quality

Question 14

Those sites that fall within areas that are deemed to be at the greatest risk from flooding (zone 3b -functional flood plain and zone 3a(i) - highest risk to life) are considered and potentially dismissed in stage 1 of this methodology. This question assesses those sites that fall within the other flood zones. These comprise:

Low Probability (Zone 1) Medium Probability (Zone 2) High Probability - Lowest risk to life (Zone 3a(iii)) High Probability - Manageable Risk to life (Zone 3a(ii))

As identified in the supporting text to question 4 the East Riding Strategic Flood Risk Assessment will advise on the potential suitability of land for development. It will identify those areas that may have a high probability of flooding but (due to issues such as topography) mitigation measures may be relatively straightforward, and of moderate financial and environmental cost. It will also identify areas within settlements that may have a lower risk from flooding and therefore from a flood risk point of view may be more suitable for development.

In a similar fashion to question 4, those sites falling within a high probability zone (zones 3a ii and iii) will be subject to the exception test. Further details are set out in the explanation to question 4.

Question 15

We are responsible for reviewing and assessing ambient air quality in the area. If there is a risk that levels of particular pollutants will be higher than prescribed levels, we are required to designate an Air Quality Management Area. If areas where high levels of pollution are known to exist it may be necessary to restrict development or explore the possibility of securing mitigation measures. Such matters will be assessed through the preparation of an air quality assessment.

There are currently no known Air Quality Management Areas in the East Riding, although this situation is continuously reviewed through a network of monitoring stations. Any areas identified in the future will be taken into account in this methodology.

38 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

E. Resources

Question 16

Planning Policy Statement 7 identifies that the presence of the best and most versatile agricultural land should be taken into account when determining proposals for development. It states that where significant development of agricultural land is unavoidable, local planning authorities should seek to use areas of poorer land in preference to that of higher quality, except where this would be inconsistent with other sustainability considerations.

This question considers the area of best and most versatile agricultural land that could be lost to new development. Sites that involve the loss of 20ha or more of the best and most versatile land are considered significant and will be referred to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). This threshold is the same threshold as the one used in the consideration of planning applications.

The best and most versatile agricultural land is defined as land in grades 1, 2 and 3a of the Agricultural Land Classification. Areas of poorer quality land are grades 3b, 4 and 5.

Question 17

The Environment Agency has identified a number of Groundwater Source Protection Zones within the East Riding. These have been defined to protect aquifers and groundwater flows including wells, boreholes and springs used for the public drinking water supply. These zones show the risk of contamination from any activities that might cause pollution. The closer the activity, the greater the risk and therefore the greater the constraint to development.

Source Protection Zones have been split into three main zones;

Zone 1 (inner protection zone) Zone 2 (outer protection zone) Zone 3 (total catchment)

A fourth zone of special interest is occasionally applied.

The development of any site that may affect a Groundwater Source Protection Zone will be discussed with the Environment Agency and those promoting the site. This will include consideration of any mitigation measures. A site will be dismissed if it cannot be proven that the development would not lead to a serious risk of contaminating the water supply.

39 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Question 18

The East Riding contains a wide variety of valuable mineral reserves. These include sand, gravel, chalk, oil, gas, clay, peat and limestone. The Joint Minerals Local Plan (31) identifies Areas of Search where there is a reasonable expectation of minerals being present in viable quantities. It also identifies preferred areas and areas where active sites, dormant sites with planning permission and sites with planning permission but not yet commenced are located. In assessing sites account will need to be taken of the need to safeguard the value of the mineral deposits and whether or not pre-extraction would be possible.

Social and Economic

A. Infrastructure and physical constraints

Question 19

All areas of the East Riding fall within a school's catchment area. For most children their catchment area school is their nearest school. Every year we monitor the existing number of children attending primary and secondary schools throughout the East Riding. We also anticipate the number of children that will be attending the schools in the future. This is done through a formula to enable us to establish how many school places are likely to be generated for each new home. This provides an accurate indication of where capacity issues (either surplus places or a lack of school places) exist.

This question aims to assess the capacity of the nearest sustainable school (based on the school's catchment area) to accommodate the level of development proposed. The question will take into account any programme of school expansion and refurbishment and any programmed closures. Where no capacity currently exists, the ability of a developer to fund the works required or suggest an alternative solution would be considered. Any solutions must be to the satisfaction of the Council (as the local education authority). It is proposed that a site is only likely to be dismissed if there is no spare capacity and no solution has been agreed to address the issue.

Housing developments that will not generate school places will not be considered against this question. These may include retirement homes and specialist care homes for the elderly.

Hospitals have not been included in this question due to the varying facilities that they provide. It is considered that including these would lead to an inconsistent comparison of sites.

31 Joint Minerals Local Plan for Kingston Upon Hull & the East Riding of Yorkshire, January 2004

40 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Question 20

The capacity of the utilities services and existing infrastructure is an important factor in determining the suitability of a site for development. The utilities services and infrastructure includes water, wastewater treatment, drainage, gas and electricity. The highway network is considered in question 21.

Information concerning capacity issues and provision will be sought from the service providers such as Yorkshire Water.

Where capacity is likely to be an issue we will also consider the mitigation measures that are likely to be required. The extent, and possible cost, of any mitigation measures will be discussed with the relevant service provider and those promoting the site. Any planned replacement or upgrading of existing infrastructure will also be taken into account.

Question 21

Our Transport Policy and Highway Control Teams will be consulted over proposals affecting the highway network. The Highways Agency will be consulted where a site may impact upon the strategic truck road network. Their main interest in the East Riding is the A63/M62 corridor (including the A1033 to Saltend). They will review any traffic assessment and the impact the development will have on the strategic trunk road network.

In all other cases a traffic assessment will be required in accordance with the Council’s current guidance “Guidelines for Transport Assessments” which identifies a threshold of over 200 residential units or where the existing traffic and environmental conditions are sensitive for the provision of traffic assessment’s from developers. However, please be aware that national guidance on this matter is under review and the consultation document identified thresholds much less than the 200 unit currently included in the Authority’s guidance.

Question 22

This question considers whether those promoting a site are proposing to remove any existing or proposed infrastructure, services or facilities or include other forms of infrastructure that may help improve a settlement's sustainability. It does not consider issues relating to schools, utilities or highways which are considered in questions 19, 20 and 21.

In certain instances proposals for new residential development may also include the provision of new facilities. This may include a new community hall, health facility or sports/leisure facility. Proposed developments will receive a positive weighting where the infrastructure proposed is of a

41 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

suitable scale and viable in the long-term for the settlement. Sites will not be weighted positively if new infrastructure is proposed that is not required to meet the needs of the settlement and is not suitable in scale.

In some instances, developments may result in the loss of an existing facility or the loss of a site that is allocated for a new facility. This may involve a playing field, allotments or a community building (e.g. meeting hall). Sites will receive a negative weighting if their development would result in the loss of a facility and no replacement or alternative measures have been agreed. In such circumstances we will also take into account the current usage of the facility. For example, the loss of a well used and valued facility will be considered less favourably than the loss of an underused or unused facility. The loss of an undeveloped allocated site will not be considered favourably if the allocation is still required to meet the needs of the settlement and no alternative, suitable replacement site has been agreed.

Question 23

In accordance with the Government's aim of 'building communities' this question considers whether or not development would help support the regeneration of the locality. Locality could mean the part of the settlement within which the site sits, or it could comprise the entire settlement. To provide an example, we recently released a site for residential development in Old Goole. A key reason for the release was because of the substantial beneficial effect that development would have on the regeneration of that part of Goole. We will refer to the existing and emerging regeneration strategies when considering this question.

B. Compatibility Issues

Question 24

It is important to consider whether or not new housing would be compatible with existing or proposed developments. Proposed developments may be those that are subject to a planning consent but have not yet been developed or are allocated in the local plan or other emerging Local Development Framework documents. This includes land that has been safeguarded for certain uses and may include a new road, railway line or a particular employment development.

Key considerations will relate to the potential impact from noise, smell and light which can have a significant effect on future residential amenity. The potential risks posed by identified hazardous installations, such as pipelines and Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG) facilities will also be an important consideration. Developments to particularly take into account include:

Intensive livestock units Sewage treatment works Industrial units (especially general industry) Uses that are subject to a Health and Safety Executive defined consultation distance Electricity pylons

42 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Ministry of Defence sites Main roads

The existing local plans set protective distances around existing intensive livestock units to help minimise future conflict. This methodology follows these existing guidelines. Therefore sites in the Sub Regional Urban Area, Principal Towns, Towns and Market Villages that fall within 800m of an Intensive Livestock Unit will be closely scrutinised. In other locations (i.e. the rural villages) a protective distance of 400m will be used.

The Health and Safety Executive has identified over 70 sites (and consultation distances) in the East Riding involving hazardous installations. Advice will be sought from the Executive on the suitability of any site that falls within the defined consultation distances.

Sewage treatment works can cause both a smell and noise nuisance. Yorkshire Water will be consulted on any site that lies near to a sewage treatment works.

The National Grid has published guidance (32) on the development of sites crossed by high voltage overhead lines. This guidance identifies that whilst such lines present a constraint to development, they do not in the majority of cases necessarily prevent it. The guidance promotes the successful development of sites and the creation of well-designed places.

The Ministry of Defence have also identified two safeguarding zones within the East Riding where they expect to be consulted on certain applications. These are:

1. Cowden (South of Hornsea) - No need to consult on residential proposals 2. Leconfield (North of Beverley) - Need to consult on proposals involving the erection of buildings exceeding 15.2m or 45.7m (depending upon the location within the safeguarding zone). (Note: the average 2 storey residential property is approximately 9m high).

In instances where a concern is highlighted, those promoting the site will be asked to examine whether appropriate mitigation measures can be achieved. Any such matters will need to be to the satisfaction of the Council and the relevant consultation body(s).

Stage 3 Outcome: To assess and weight all the sites that have progressed from stage 1 and 2 against a detailed range of social, environmental and economic indicators. Those sites that are subject to a significant constraint will be identified. If mitigation is not possible or practicable these sites will be deemed inappropriate for residential development at this time. The weighting from stage 3 will be added to the sites score from stage 2.

32 A Sense of Place: design guidelines for development near high voltage overhead lines, 2005

43 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Stage 4: Deliverability

Deliverability and Developability

Any site proposed for development must be genuinely available and likely to be developed during the period of the Housing Document. Government guidance(33) identifies that we should identify broad locations or sites that will enable a continuous delivery of housing for at least 15 years from the date of adoption of the Housing DPD. In particular the Statement states that we should maintain a continuous five year supply of deliverable land and identify a further supply of developable sites for years 6 - 10 and where possible for years 11 - 15. To be considered developable a site should be in a suitable location for housing development and there should be a reasonable prospect that the site is available for and could be developed at the point in time envisaged. To be deliverable a site must be:

available (the site is available now) suitable (the site offers a suitable location for development now and would contribute to the creation of mixed and balanced communities) and achievable (there is a reasonable prospect that housing will be delivered on the site within five years.

A. Availability

Question 25

A number of other physical or environmental factors may restrict the availability of a site. The list below is not exhaustive but the most common issues may revolve around:

Contamination Ransom strip Access into the site (e.g. through residential roads or private drives) Site topography/gradient

In cases where it becomes apparent that a site may be constrained, the issue will be discussed with those promoting the site and the relevant consultee. These may comprise our Public Protection or Highway Control units. The extent of possible mitigation measures will also be considered.

Our Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy (34) and subsequent review (35) identified 439 sites where there is a very high probability of contamination. These comprise former or existing landfill sites, gasworks, scrap metal stores, chemical manufacturing sites, a former metal smelter and a former tar and resin distillery.

33 Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing, DCLG, November 2006 34 Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy, East Riding of Yorkshire Council, July 2001 35 Contaminated Land Inspection Strategy Review, East Riding of Yorkshire Council, 2003

44 East Riding of Yorkshire Council Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Other physical constraints may arise from a steep gradient on the site, if there are ground instability problems, if it is difficult to achieve a satisfactory or acceptable access or if the site can only be accessed through a ransom strip.

Legal constraints may arise for example, if residential development is restricted by a covenant or another form of legal agreement.

Question 26

Two important issues in relation to the developability of a site relate to ownership and the likely level of developer interest.

Where an owner has expressed a willingness to release or sell the site within the time period of the Housing Document (i.e. to 2025) it will be assumed that there are no constraints. Constraints may occur where the owner is unknown, not contactable, unwilling to release the land or where the site is owned by a number of different (and possibly competing) interests. Information relating to the ownership of a site will be obtained from those people who have submitted details of the site and where appropriate Officer knowledge.

Knowledge of developer interest will be obtained from the house building industry. A site will only be deemed to be constrained by developer interest if this has been brought to our attention by the industry.

B. Deliverability

Question 27

The assessment of the sites under questions 1 - 26 help to confirm whether a site could be developable. This question considers whether a site is likely to be deliverable within 5 years from the adoption of the Housing DPD, or whether or not it may be deliverable later in the plan period (i.e. within 6 - 15 years). This may be because of the likely time that it would take for an identified constraint to be overcome.

Sites that are deemed suitable under questions 1 - 26 and have no constraints will be considered as potential allocations within the first 5 years. For those sites that are considered suitable but have constraints, whether or not the site falls within 5 years or within 6 - 15 years will depend upon the nature of the constraint. Some constraints are likely to take longer than 5 years to overcome. These sites will be considered as a potential allocation in the 6 - 15 years category.

Sites that have a constraint that is so significant that they are unlikely to be overcome within the lifetime of the Housing DPD will not be considered for allocation. Such sites will be reconsidered in future reviews of the Housing DPD.

45 Housing Site Assessment Methodology

Stage 4 Outcome: To identify all sites that are suitable for residential development and state whether development would be achievable within 5 years or 6 - 15 years of adoption of the Housing DPD.

46 East Riding of Yorkshire Council East Riding ofYorkshire Council will, on request, provide this document in Braille, audio or large print format.

If English is not your first language and you would like a translation of this document in any of the following ten languages, please telephone:-

Should you require the document to be translated into any other language, please telephone 01482-393939

County Hall, Beverley