APPENDIX 7
Draft Infrastructure Study & Delivery Plan
Oct 2011
Draft Infrastructure Study and Delivery Plan Chesterfield Borough Council October 2011
CHESTERFIELD BOROUGH COUNCIL
• We want everyone to be able to understand us. • We want everyone to be able to read our written materials. • We are committed to breaking down communication barriers to enable you to read and talk and write to us. • On request we will provide free: 9 Language interpreters, including for sign language. 9 Translations of written materials into other languages. 9 Materials in large print, on tape or in braille.
2
Contents Page
FOREWARD 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7
1 INTRODUCTION 8
2 TRANSPORT 12
3 EDUCATION 23
4 GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE 28
5 FLOOD DEFENCE 31
6 UTILITIES 35
7 HEALTH FACILITIES 40
APPENDIX 1: 43 INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY PLAN
APPENDIX 2: 50 INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY PLAN MAP
3 FOREWORD
The Infrastructure Study & Delivery Plan has been prepared to inform policies within Chesterfield Borough Council’s Local Development Framework. More specifically, it will provide background information and evidence for the Core Strategy Development Plan Document as required by PPS 12: Local Spatial Planning.
The work will focus on the strategic infrastructure requirements in relation to the following:
• Transport • Education • Green Infrastructure • Flood Risk • Utilities • Health Facilities
The study part of the work will identify:
• Type of infrastructure required within the borough to support delivery of proposals in the Spatial Strategy. • Where in the borough strategic infrastructure may be required. • Where possible, how and when infrastructure will be funded and delivered.
Appendix 1 of the study contains the Infrastructure Delivery Plan. This provides a picture of the council’s key infrastructure requirements within the context of potential funding and development phasing.
Methodology and Approach
This work is a desk-based exercise which has analysed existing policies, plans and other information relating to the provision of infrastructure throughout the borough including the council’s Community Infrastructure (2009) and Green Infrastructure (2010) studies.
Following the initial research, letters and questionnaires were sent out to service providers (as well as follow-up letters and emails to those who had not responded).
This research initiates a process that will continue following the publication of the Core Strategy. It is intended that information will be collected from service providers continuously, particularly in respect of specific sites and areas where development may be allocated. Thus the work will inform other parts of the council’s Local Development Framework, including the Sites and Boundaries Development Plan Document.
Importantly, the council will continue to engage with Derbyshire County Council. The county is currently preparing a Derbyshire Infrastructure Plan which will set out the county’s short and long-term priorities for investment in infrastructure and services. As Chesterfield Borough Council continues its work on infrastructure planning and
4 looks to the possibility of introducing a Community Infrastructure Levy, it will continue to liaise with the county on infrastructure matters.
In preparing the Core Strategy, the council has engaged in discussions with infrastructure providers. Whilst in some instances it has been difficult to gain a response from some providers, all reasonable attempts have been made to contact them1. However, as consultation continues and as more information is gathered, the study and plan will be updated and reviewed.
As some service providers are members of the Chesterfield and North East Derbyshire Local Strategic Partnership (CHART LSP), it was important for the study to reflect the plans and priorities of the various LSP Action Groups. Consequently, meetings have taken place with the CHART LSP Co-ordinator to identify any LSP activities that were relevant to the study. Furthermore, the CHART LSP has been consulted on the council’s Core Strategy on a regular basis.
There has also been input from the council’s Policy and Performance Lead Officer who was able to identify any other potential areas where partner’s plan or programme might be relevant to the study.
The table below shows the service providers that provided information about their service provision.
Service Provider Consultation
Area of Infrastructure Service Provision Transport • Highways Agency • Derbyshire County Council • Network Rail • Train operators – East Midlands Trains
Education • Derbyshire County Council
Green Infrastructure • Chesterfield Borough Council • Derbyshire County Council
Flood Risk • Environment Agency • Chesterfield Borough Council • North East Derbyshire
Utilities • Chesterfield Borough Council • Yorkshire Water • Severn Trent • National Grid
Health • Derbyshire County PCT
1 PPS 12 recognises that less information may be available when the Core Strategy is being prepared than would be ideal. This is reflected in advice from the Planning Inspectorate (September 2009) which indicates that Inspectors will take a realistic view about what infrastructure can be provided.
5
Contact Details
For further information about this study please contact:
Scott Nicholas, Senior Planner Richard Bryant, Principal Planner Forward Planning Forward Planning Chesterfield Borough Council Chesterfield Borough Council Town Hall Town Hall Rose Hill Rose Hill Chesterfield Chesterfield Derbyshire Derbyshire S40 1LP S40 1LP Tel: 01246 345796 Tel: 01246 345790 Fax: 01246 345743 Fax: 01246 345743 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]
6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This work is made up of two elements: an Infrastructure Study and Infrastructure Delivery Plan. Both provide details about infrastructure requirements and delivery as required by PPS12: Spatial Planning. The purpose of the work is to identify the infrastructure to support future growth resulting from additional housing and employment allocations within the Core Strategy period up to 2031.
The work identifies the key infrastructure requirements resulting from the council’s Spatial Strategy. This includes the development areas of Chesterfield Waterside, the Eastern Villages, Chatsworth Road Corridor, Chesterfield Town Centre, the Western Suburbs/Residential Neighborhoods, Brimington Parish and Staveley Town Centre. A range of different infrastructure requirements are reviewed relating to Transport, Education, Green Infrastructure, Flood Risk, Utilities and Health Facilities.
The approach has been to focus on those infrastructure requirements which will require some form capital expenditure, largely in the form of physical works. But the work also identifies any capacity issues in relation to education and health provision.
Due to the nature of the council’s Spatial Strategy, the infrastructure schemes identified will be mostly strategic in nature. Where there is the need for site specific infrastructure then this would be dealt with and negotiated at the detailed planning stage (masterplanning will be a key delivery mechanism, ensuring that infrastructure requirements are considered at the outset via liaison with infrastructure providers).
The study highlights that there are no significant infrastructure ‘show stoppers’ which would seriously compromise the delivery of the council’s Spatial Strategy (‘show stoppers’ here are defined as being an infrastructure requirement without which development would not be able to go ahead).
There are some areas where significant infrastructure improvements will be necessary to achieve the council’s long-term planning aspirations. This relates mainly to the Staveley and Rother Valley Area Action Plan where upgrade of Staveley Waste Water Treatment Works may be required. There is also an issue over the funding of major road infrastructure should it be demonstrated that this is required. But for the most part, infrastructure requirements will be funded via existing funding mechanisms such as developer contribution or – should the council introduce it – the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).
This will be a ‘living’ document, and as such there will be ongoing monitoring of infrastructure requirements and dialogue with infrastructure providers, through the Plan period. Where necessary the Plan will be updated and new priority schemes included.
7 1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Core Strategy Development Plan Document (DPD) will be the principal document of Chesterfield Borough Council’s Local Development Framework (LDF). It will set the vision for the future of the borough over the next twenty years and will provide a strategic policy framework that will shape development to achieve this vision.
1.2 Within the context of national planning policy the Core Strategy will address a range of social, environmental and economic considerations in order to address the challenges and opportunities facing the borough. The aim is to guide the aspirations of not only Chesterfield Borough Council but also other service providers and stakeholders.
1.3 Core Strategies should be produced in conjunction with a strong evidence base. Part of this evidence base is the assumption that appropriate physical, social and green infrastructure will be in place to support new development.
1.4 The requirement for infrastructure planning is a requirement included in PPS12: Planning for Local Development Frameworks. Table 1 shows this requirement
Table 1. PPS 12: Spatial Planning & Infrastructure
The Core Strategy should be supported by evidence of what physical, social and green infrastructure is needed to enable the amount of development proposed for the area, taking account of its type and distribution. This evidence should cover who will provide the infrastructure and when it will be provided. The Core Strategy should draw on and in parallel influence any strategies and investment plans of the local authority and other organisations.
Good infrastructure planning considers the infrastructure required to support development, costs, sources of funding, timescales for delivery and gaps in funding. This allows for the identified infrastructure to be prioritised in discussions with key local partners. The infrastructure planning process should identify, as far as possible:
• infrastructure needs and costs; • phasing of development; • funding sources; and • responsibilities for delivery.
(PPS12, page 8)
1.5 PPS 12 goes on to highlight that infrastructure planning should support housing growth and it should identify the specific requirements for strategic sites. Key infrastructure stakeholders are encouraged to engage in such discussions and to reflect the Core Strategy within their own future planning.
1.6 PPS 12 also recognises the significance of infrastructure planning to the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and states that it could form the basis for establishing policies for charging CIL on developments in areas where local planning authorities choose to introduce it.
8 The Spatial Strategy
1.7 To meet the strategic housing requirement the council is required to deliver sites for 7,600 homes between 2011 and 2031 (this equates to 380 dwellings per year). In accordance with Government guidance set out in PPS3 and PPS12, the council has completed a housing trajectory to set out how these annual targets can be met in the borough over the plan period to 2031.
1.8 The council’s latest Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) was completed in February 2011 which identifies possible sites for inclusion in the trajectory. The SHLAA demonstrates that whilst there is sufficient potential supply of land to meet the council’s strategic requirement.
1.9 Consequently, the council has put forward a planning strategy that aims to meet the borough’s housing and regeneration requirements by developing brownfield sites and existing town, district and local centre. This will be in line with the strategy of ‘Concentration and Regeneration’ to focus regeneration and development in the following areas:
• Staveley and Rother Valley Corridor • Chesterfield Waterside development • Around existing town and district centres • Close to the local service centres • Around the eastern villages
1.10 Table 3 shows those areas of the borough where development and regeneration will be focused as well as indicating the distribution of housing in each settlement.
Table 2. The Spatial Strategy
Area Description Staveley Works The Staveley and Rother Valley Corridor Area Action Plan will Corridor regenerate 150 ha of former industrial land once occupied by former industrial uses. The area will accommodate approximately 2,000 homes and approximately 20 ha of business use (measured as site area).
Chesterfield Chesterfield Waterside is an area of former industrial land adjacent Waterside to the A61 Corridor and has outline planning consent for a mix of uses adjacent to the river and canal. The area will accommodate approximately 1500 homes and approximately 30,000 sq m of office use
Chesterfield Town Development within Chesterfield Town Centre will enhance the Centre town’s role as a sub-regional centre with a growing number and range of shops and services. Chesterfield town Centre will provide around 700 new homes.
Eastern Villages The eastern villages will be expanded to provide access to a choice of housing and services supported by community facilities. This could provide around 800 new homes.
9
Chatsworth Road Chatsworth Road will be established as a mixed use corridor with a Corridor strong independent retail and food and drink role. The area will provide around 100 homes and approximately 50,000 sq m of business use (measured as gross floor space).
Chesterfield Town Development around existing town and district centres which could Centre, Staveley around 1650 new homes. Town Centre, Whittington Moor District Centre, Chatsworth Road District Centre Local Service The aim is to improve the vitality of local service centres which Centres of could provide around 850 homes. Brimington, Holme Hall and Hasland
Funding and Viability Issues
1.11 It follows that where infrastructure provision is demanded from developers it may have significant impacts on scheme viability. Therefore, an understanding of the role of developer contributions and other types of funding will be required during the infrastructure planning process.
Replacement Chesterfield Borough Local Plan (2006)
1.12 Currently, the Replacement Chesterfield Borough Local Plan (2006) ensures that infrastructure requirements are met via planning policy GEN9: Infrastructure and Facilities. This states that where there is an issue over infrastructure capacity, as a result of development proposals, the council would seek contributions from developers to mitigate any potential impacts. The majority of developer contributions received as a result of GEN 9 related to the following: • Affordable Housing; • Highways/cycling/public transport requirements; • Percent for Art; • Play or Open Space provision; • Education provision; • Travel Plans. External or Public Funding
1.13 In addition to developer contributions, external or public funding has also been made available to fund infrastructure requirements. This type of funding has generally been applied to large-scale planning and regeneration projects such as funding major reclamation works or feasibility studies. Previous examples within the borough would include funding from the East Midlands Development Agency for the engineering works for the new canal basin at Waterside or the substantial investment into masterplanning and feasibility studies as part of the Staveley and Rother Valley Area Action Plan.
10 1.14 It is usually difficult to predict forward funding streams as they tend to be in a constant state of flux and the amount of money available form central government varies. Outside the mainstream funding, initiatives come and go, according to the priorities of government and changes in ministerial teams and policy initiatives.
1.15 Planning or infrastructure grants also tend to be bid based, meaning that local authorities have to apply for a particular project or programme. Consequently, while it is possible to factor in external funding for infrastructure requirements which are already agreed and timetabled, any long-term aspirations will be subject to a level of uncertainty.
Looking to the Future
1.16 In addition to the continuing availability of development contributions via the Section 106 system and potential external funding, there is also the Community Infrastructure Levy.
1.17 As a consequence of the limitations of the existing S.106 system, in April 2010 the government introduced an alternative system of securing develop contributions based on a tariff style system called the Community Infrastructure Levy. Currently, a number of local planning authorities are currently introducing the new system into their areas.
1.18 The Community Infrastructure Levy sets a single rate of financial payment which can be applied to any development and used to help fund the full range of infrastructure. The CIL regulations allow for a wide definition of infrastructure so that Local Authorities can decide what types of infrastructure they would like to see funded2. Local Planning Authorities would be the charging authority for the purposes of the Community Infrastructure Levy and would be required to prepare a Charging Schedule showing where infrastructure is required and the levy rate.
1.19 It is likely that the Community Infrastructure Levy will be an important element of infrastructure funding in the future. Furthermore, in accordance with PPS12, infrastructure plans should be prepared with a view to adapting to the new system. Consequently, this study and plan should be seen a prelude to any work carried out a part of its implementation.
2 Affordable housing is currently not part of CIL and will continue to be negotiated via planning obligations.
11 2.0 TRANSPORT
Roads
Key Issues
2.1 In addition to the M1 to the east of the borough, the key strategic road network consists of the A61 and the A619. The former runs in a north-south direction parallel to the M1 and the latter runs in an east-west direction to the south of the town centre. The A619 is one of the major routes across the county, giving regional access to the Peak District and then, via the A623, to the Greater Manchester area.
2.2 For a number of years the traffic demands within the Chesterfield area have grown as both town centre trips and longer distance traffic attempt to use the same parts of the network. The borough’s strategic routes are highly congested at peak times resulting in proposals for Air Quality management Areas on parts of the network.
2.3 While congestion is less of issue in the less developed Eastern Villages, there is an issue over access to services, job and facilities due to the peripheral status of Mastin Moor and Duckmanton. There is also an issue over lower levels of car ownership in this part of the borough due to higher levels of deprivation.
2.4 Overall the key highway network issues for the borough are:
• How congestion is managed on key roads into Chesterfield town centre (including Chesterfield Waterside) and Staveley , including measures to improve walking and cycling. • The funding of road works at the former Staveley Works corridor, via the Staveley and Rother Valley Area Action Plan. • Ensuring new strategic development is adequately served by the existing road, network, particularly in the Eastern Villages.
2.5 Local transport policy is driven by Derbyshire County Council (DCC) as the local transport authority. DCC sets out its transport strategy and policy via the Local Transport Plan (LTP). Previously, LTP 2 (2006 – 2011) contained two major scheme allocations relating to Chesterfield Borough: the new Junction 29a works at Markham Vale and A61 improvements3. The former is now complete, while the latter is an ongoing traffic management scheme. There are also allocated resources for an audit of pedestrian and cyclist routes into Chesterfield. This has also now been completed.
2.6 Apart from usual maintenance programmes, there were no other major schemes or integrated programmes relating to the borough’s infrastructure requirements in LTP 2 (this excludes maintenance programmes).
3 This excludes M1 Widening (Junctions 21 to 30) which affects parts Chesterfield and North East Derbyshire and is the responsibility of the Highways Agency.
12
2.7 DCC has now published LTP 3) which will cover the period up to 2026
The plan indicates that the county will be undertaking a streamlining process of major transport projects in the future including an appraisal of each scheme. Regarding Chesterfield Borough these include the following:
• A61-A617 ‘Avenue Link Road’ - to provide access to the Avenue Coking Works and ease congestion on the A61 (identified via liaison with North- East Derbyshire District Council) • A61 Chesterfield Inner Relief Road Junctions - one of ‘priority’ schemes identified in preparation of second LTP. • A619 Staveley-Brimington Bypass - protected scheme ‘on hold’ pending review of impacts of the Markham Vale development and subject to consideration as part of the Staveley and Rother Valley Area Action Plan.
2.8 In addition to the schemes identified in LTP 3, the council has also adopted a Chesterfield Town Centre Masterplan (2009) which advocates a number of development projects to improve the economic development and regeneration of the town and its wider environs. Whilst these proposals may not necessarily be essential to the council’s Spatial Strategy in terms of enabling or accommodating development, they are key strategic proposals which will have significant benefits for Chesterfield Town Centre and the wider borough. Of these proposals, two are specifically related to transport improvement:
• Hollis Lane Link Road - a new link road is proposed linking Hollis Lane to the railway station and Brimington Road which would circuit the town centre providing improved access to the railway station and an increase in the quality of the public realm along Lordsmill Lane
• Northern Gateway - the Town Centre Masterplan advocates extending the retail core of the Town Centre to encompass land currently used for car parking and adjacent commercial land that comprises the ‘Northern Gateway’.
• West Bars Gateway – improvements to the roundabout configuration at West Bar area are put forward to improve the ‘gateway status’ of the area. There are also recommendations for improvement to the Park Road/Queens Park junction, including the strategic cycle route that follows the River Hipper.
Funding & Viability
2.9 For roads and highways, the majority of funding comes from Department for Transport (DfT). Delivery is split between the Highways Agency who are responsible for maintenance and building work on all trunk roads (except toll roads) and local transport authorities who are responsible for non-trunk roads.
2.10 DfT funds the Highways Agency’s national trunk roads programme directly. The regional aspect of this programme is funded through the Regional
13 Funding Allocation (RFA), which gives the regional bodies a chance to propose priorities to central government. The most recent round of the RFA process took place in 2009 when the East Midlands Regional Assembly, jointly with the East Midlands Development Agency, submitted their new advice on transport investment for the East Midlands in February 2009. There are no major transport schemes within Chesterfield Borough that are included in the RFA.
2.11 The Local Transport Plan (LTP), prepared by Derbyshire County council in their role as Highway Authority, is an important document as it sets out the authority's local transport strategies and policies, and an implementation programme over a five year period. However, the LTP is not a bid for integrated transport capital funds, but a realistic programme based on allocated capital funding levels4.
2.12 Notwithstanding the current uncertainty about funding streams for major transport projects within Chesterfield Borough, the schemes identified within the LTP3 could be accorded high priority for early research and potential early implementation.
2.13 There is a £560M pot of central government funding called the Local Sustainable Transport Fund which is available to local transport authorities to promote sustainable transport schemes or projects. The fund runs for a 4 year period up to 2014 -15. Derbyshire County Council – in partnership with the districts and boroughs – are currently putting together bids for funding. The bids will focus on such measures as Travel Planning, cycling/walking networks and greenway development.
2.14 Regarding future impacts on the strategic road network Derbyshire County Council have commissioned consultants (with the cooperation of the Highways Agency) to prepare a Joint Transport Study to test the highway implications of the preferred development options for Chesterfield, Bolsover and North East Derbyshire. The study looks at the cumulative traffic impacts to as a result of Core Strategy proposals. Whilst the study puts forward a package of sustainable transport measures for further investigation there is currently no information regarding specific funding or implementation programmes.
2.15 The County is also preparing a Chesterfield Transport Model to establish a computer based transport model of the highway network to assist consideration of future development. This will be a valuable tool is assessing the impact of development on the strategic road network as a result of proposals within Core Strategies. But again, it will not identify specific mitigation measures or infrastructure improvements.
4 Although additional funding is available for LTPs judged to be of high quality.
14 Local Rail
Key Issues
2.16 Access to the rail network is provided by Chesterfield RailwayStation which is located at the edge of the town centre. Issues over capacity and growth are the responsibility of Network Rail whose remit is the development and management of national rail infrastructure. Network Rail prepares Route Utilisation Strategies (RUS) and these provide more detail about the capacity of the existing network. The current draft East Midlands RUS highlights the following issues for Chesterfield:
• Total passenger demand in the East Midlands – London St Pancras Corridor is expected to grow by 28 percent over the next 10 years . The market for rail travel to and from Birmingham (including Chesterfield) has increased by 40 percent over the same time frame, with the general local demand increasing by 30%, particularly commuting. • The route between Chesterfield and Birmingham via Derby is one of the major drivers of performance in the East Midlands, the mix of fast and stopping passenger trains and freight services presents a major performance challenge. Freight demand is anticipated to increase between 25 and 50% during this period. • Operational flexibility at Chesterfield has been recently (2010) enhanced by the provision of a new platform - this scheme is currently included as part of the current RUS programme5.
2.17 Clearly, the development of rail infrastructure is outside the scope of a local planning authority. The role of the council is one of consultation. Network Rail, via the planning consultation process, will be made aware of the growth projections of the borough and have the opportunity to factor in the borough’s strategic development options into future RUS programmes.
2.18 In terms of long-term rail aspirations, there have been discussions, via the Staveley and Rother Valley Area Plan, to reopen passenger lines to serve Markham Vale and the Staveley Works Area (via the Staveley and Rother Valley Area Action Plan). While there has been work carried out to assess potential sites for a new train station at Markham (a planning condition on the consent for the Markham Vale), these proposals currently remain outside any existing programme or feasibility study. Their status will therefore remain aspirational until such time as a case is built up to support and lobby for them.
Funding & Viability
2.19 Network Rail is the owner and operator of the national rail infrastructure with a remit to ensure effective management and development of that infrastructure. Network Rail operates under a license enforced by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR).
5 The Draft East Midlands Route Utilisation Strategy (2010)
15 2.20 Network Rail agrees Regional Planning Assessments (RPA) with the DfT6. The objective of RPAs is to develop an understanding of the priorities for the development of the railway in each region over the next twenty years, in the context of forecast changes in population, the economy and travel behaviour and associated regional spatial policy and strategy.
2.21 Regional Route Utilisation Strategies (RUS) go into more detail and should follow the RPA through identifying potential schemes. The RUS provides an analysis into the capacity and capability of the existing network and train services. Future demand is then analysed, taking into account any major changes planned to the network or services over the next 10 years.
2.22 The final part of the process is the government’s Comprehensive Spending Review with the DfT providing input in the form of the High Level Output Statement (HLOS) and associated Statement of Funds Available (SoFA) (the most recent period being July 2007). The ORR determines the level of funding necessary for Network Rail to meet its operations, maintenance and renewal requirements for each 5 year regulatory charging period.
2.23 Aside from regional network improvements, minor improvements to Chesterfield Train Station and local long-term aspirational rail projects, there are currently no major rail schemes being put forward that will have a major impact on existing rail services.
The Bus Network
Key Issues
2.24 Chesterfield Town Centre and the outlying local and district centres are well served by the bus network, enabling resident and commuter access to the borough’s key services, such as shops, schools, places of work and leisure facilities. There are also regular services to the borough’s closest cities and towns such as Sheffield, Derby, Nottingham, Mansfield, Bolsover, Clay Cross, Alfreton, Dronfield and Eckington.
2.25 In addition to local services, the borough is also served by Chesterfield Coach Station which provides services to towns and cities throughout England, including Manchester, East Midlands Aiirport and the London airports.
2.26 The major bus and coach operator in the borough currently is Stagecoach. Other bus companies operating in the borough include TM Travel, Hulleys and Trent Barton. Aside from the latter, who provide services to Mansfield and Nottingham, these companies offer more limited and localised services.
2.27 The Spatial Strategy is intended to sustain and support the borough’s existing bus network and services as growth options tend to be in those areas that are well supported by public transport. The long-term aim is to offer non-car mode
6 The East Midlands Regional Planning Assessment can be viewed on the DfT’s website: www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/strategyfinance/strategy/rpa/
16 modes of travel and address the borough’s congestion and pollution problems, especially around Chatsworth Road and the A61.
2.28 Those areas in the Spatial Strategy that are less well served by bus routes - such as the Eastern Villages - may find that new areas of housing and development support the provision of new bus services as a result of the growth in population. Importantly, it will be necessary to ensure that new housing development in the Eastern Villages is designed so that residents are able to easily access new or existing bus stops by foot. This can be achieved by effective masterplanning of developments.
Funding & Viability
2.29 Local bus services were deregulated in the 1980s as a result of the Transport Act 1985. This allowed for the introduction of competition on local bus services for the first time since the 1930s. Two kinds of bus service can be now be provided: commercial and subsidised. Any bus operator can run whatever commercial services it wishes so long as certain criteria are met. Commercial services are those provided without any subsidy (excluding concessionary fares) and there are no restrictions on fares.
2.30 If certain routes are commercially unviable for the bus companies then Derbyshire County Council can subsidise services. These would be routes that the council consider as socially necessary. The fares, routes and times of these subsidised services are set by the local authority. These uncommercial routes in Derbyshire and Chesterfield Borough would tend to be in the rural or peripheral areas in the borough7.
2.31 The borough’s bus network is planned and implemented by Derbyshire County Council. As highway authority, the county has a key role in controlling and planning investment in the infrastructure and services that make up the bus network and is best placed to assess development proposal and consider opportunities for extending the bus network via negotiation/discussion with the Highways Agency for major schemes and bus operators/developers for minor proposals.
2.32 Local Transport Plan Three (LTP3) sets out the programme of capital and revenue schemes to enable funding requests from central government. LTP3 recognises the congestion problems on the borough’s strategic road network and the need for improved bus services.
2.33 It will be important to review arrangements with Derbyshire County Council over the Core Strategy period. As the Public Transport Authority, the county has a key role in controlling and planning investment in bus infrastructure and services that make up the network. As strategic development proposals come
7 One example would be the North Eastern Derbyshire Accessibility Partnership which subsides bus services to improve accessibility to key services for residents in North East Derbyshire (including Chesterfield Borough), aiming primarily at young people without access to a car.
17 forward the county will be consulted as to the feasibility of enhancing and improving existing services.
Walking & Cycling Networks
Key Issues
2.34 Providing opportunities for walking and cycling within the borough is a key element in promoting sustainable forms of transport and reducing levels of congestion (as well as providing opportunities for healthy living and green infrastructure). The council views walking and cycling routes as important elements of infrastructure and should be considered and planned at the outset when development proposal come forward.
2.37 The borough has a network of existing strategic greenways and walking/cycling routes. It will be the role of the Core Strategy to ensure that these routes are protected and, where opportunities arise, enhanced and extended.
2.35 The Spatial Strategy being put forward will promote access to existing routes, especially in the Town Centre and Western Suburbs. The strategy will also provide the opportunity to extend the network at Waterside, Staveley Works and Chatsworth Road, via masterplanning, where new cycling and walking routes are planned.
Funding & Viability
2.36 As the highway authority, Derbyshire County Council has the main responsibility for the managing, maintaining and developing the borough’s strategic cycling and walking network. Whilst Chesterfield Borough Council and some private landowners will own and manage some routes, only the County have the resources and strategies in place – via the Local Transport Plan, Rights of Way Improvement Plan and East Derbyshire Greenways Strategy – to carry out major improvements or extensions of the strategic network.
2.37 As part of the work programme and budget for Local Transport Plan 2 (LTP2) an audit of pedestrian and cyclist routes into Chesterfield was carried out. The main aim of the work, which has now been completed, was to develop better routes from outlying areas into Chesterfield Town Centre, thereby providing opportunities to reduce congestion. Whilst there is currently no funding programme for actual physical works, the audit will provide the framework to identify where future improvements can be made. However, if funds for physical works are not made available in future LTP programmes, there may be the opportunity to access developer contributions as a result of development coming forward over the Core Strategy period.
2.38 Other improvements to walking and cycling routes (which are included as LTP programmes) are those schemes which relate to the East Derbyshire Greenways Strategy or Rights of Way Improvement Plan. These programmes
18 reflect Derbyshire County Council’s statutory obligation to maintain the definitive public rights of way network. Access to budgets is dependent on the evidence presented demonstrating that the rights of way or Greenway is focussing on sustainability objectives. Greenways in particular offer important links and have the status of transport infrastructure in the LTP8.
2.39 In addition to LTP programmes, there are likely to be opportunities to enhance the strategic walking and cycling network (including greenways) over the Core Strategy period via developer contributions, particularly in those areas on the urban rural fringe where new connection to existing greenways are possible such as Brimington Parish and Staveley Works.
8 The council’s Green Infrastructure Study provides more information and on the role and function of the borough’s Greenways and provides information on the organisations involved in their promotion.
19 T Table 3. Transport Infrastructure : Key Issues
Staveley Works Corridor
Roads Local Rail The Bus Network Cycling & Walking Networks Staveley Regeneration Route – this Existing freight line and former Requirement for new services - Expanding the existing network - could provide a bypass for Staveley- station- these are located at there may be opportunities to an enhanced network of paths and Chesterfield traffic. Its current status is northern part of the Staveley Works introduce new bus services to the greenways will provide connections uncertain; an alternative option may be Corridor There may be the potential area as a result of new residential to the Trans Pennine Trail. pursued as part of the Staveley and in the long-term to reopen the line development. Rother Valley Area Action Plan. for passenger rail and open up commuting between Bolsover and Staveley Northern Loop Road Phase Chesterfield. 2 – would help alleviate congestion at Staveley Town Centre. Its current status is uncertain; an alternative option may be pursued as part of the Staveley Works Area Plan.
Chesterfield Town Centre (including Chesterfield Waterside)
Roads Local Rail The Bus Network Cycling & Walking Networks Congestion on key routes - traffic on Chesterfield Railway Station - Sustaining existing services - any Extending the network - the existing Chatsworth Road and the town centre Network Rail proposes minor increase in population is likely to town centre network will, where network is at capacity during peak upgrades to the station. This may sustain and support existing possible, be expanded and times. Consequently, the aim will be the increase cycling provision. services. enhanced. enhancement and improvement of the cycling and walking network and the promotion of demand management measures such as Travel Plans.
Town Centre Masterplan - a number of schemes are proposed to improve connectivity and the public realm in Chesterfield Town Centre:
• Hollis Lane Link Road • Northern Gateway • West Bars Gateway Draft Infrastructure Study and Delivery Plan Chesterfield Borough Council October 2011
Whittington Moor Park & Ride - a S.106 agreement is in place to allow a Park & Ride Scheme to be included as part of the redevelopment of the former Donkins Site (the council has to demonstrate a need for a scheme).
Brimington Parish
Roads Local Rail The Bus Network Cycling & Walking Networks Off-site road improvements - will be No issues. Sustaining existing services - any Extending the network - the existing required to connect to main highway increase in population is likely to network will, where possible, be routes. sustain and support existing expanded and enhanced. services.
Eastern Villages
Roads Local Rail The Bus Network Cycling & Walking Networks Off-site road improvements - will be No issues. Sustaining existing services -any Expanding the existing network - required, particularly off Tom Lane, increase in population is likely to an enhanced network of paths and Duckmanton. sustain and support existing greenways could provide new services. connections to the Trans Pennine Trail.
Western Suburbs/Residential Neighbourhoods
Roads Local Rail The Bus Network Cycling & Walking Networks Congestion on key routes - traffic on No issues. Sustaining existing services -any Expanding the existing network - Chatsworth Road and the town centre increase in population is likely to an enhanced network of paths and network is at capacity during peak sustain and support existing greenways could provide new times. Consequently, the aim will be the services. connections to the Homebrook Valley enhancement and improvement of the Route and Hipper Valley Trail. cycling and walking network and the promotion of demand management measures such as Travel Plans.
21
Chatsworth Road Corridor
Roads Local Rail The Bus Network Cycling & Walking Networks Chatsworth Road congestion - the No issues. Sustaining existing services - any Expanding the existing network - level of traffic on Chatsworth Road is at increase in population is likely to an enhanced network of paths and capacity during peak times. Currently sustain and support existing greenways could provide new there are no major road infrastructure services. connections to the Homebrook Valley improvements planned to ease Route and Hipper Valley Trail. congestion. Consequently, the aim will be the enhancement and improvement of the cycling and walking network as well as the promotion of demand management measures such as Travel Plans.
Staveley Town Centre
Roads Local Rail The Bus Network Cycling & Walking Networks MEGZ/Staveley loop phase 2 – whilst No issues. Sustaining existing services - any Expanding the existing network - this is a part of an existing planning increase in population is likely to an enhanced network of paths and permission, the council is at present sustain and support existing greenways could provide connections consulting with the Highways Authority services. to the Trans Pennine Trail and other to discuss the status, role and feasibility routes surrounding the Chesterfield of the route. Canal.
22 3.0 EDUCATION
Key Issues
3.1 As described in the council’s Community Infrastructure Study (2009), the number of schools and colleges in Chesterfield currently stands at:
• 8 secondary • 8 infant • 7 junior and 21 primary • 1 college (on a split campus)
3.2 How children are allocated a place at school is currently based on the ‘normal area’ system, whereby a school place is allocated according to where a person lives. This system allows a level of predictability regarding Core Strategy planning as it is possible to identify which local schools will be the normal area for new residential development. Local planning authorities can then identify which schools might be at capacity and consult with the education authority regarding developer contributions or other funding streams which may be necessary to increase capacity.
3.3 It should be noted however that parental choice in education is an issue and one that is increasingly being promoted in the UK (e.g. recent proposals to allow ‘free schools’ which exist outside the control of local authorities). This choice means that parents can exercise a certain degree of parental control in deciding which school their children attend. From a planning perspective, there are drawbacks to this approach as it will be difficult to identify how new residential development will impact on schools in a specific area. However, for the foreseeable future it is likely that the majority of new pupils generated by new housing development will attend schools within the normal areas.
3.4 There is a good geographical distribution of Infant, Junior and Primary schools throughout the borough, with the exception of Walton Ward and Linacre Ward. Although most of the schools have unfilled places, the local authority has no plans to close or merge any of the schools at present. The key issue over for the Core Strategy over the period up to 2031 therefore, is likely to be how proposed housing can sustain existing schools, rather than placing pressure on school resources and facilities.
3.5 However, some schools within the borough – both pre-secondary and secondary - do show a surplus of pupils on register, but this could be due to the popularity of schools rather than unmet need within the borough. Whilst there are capacity issues in some schools, there is generally enough capacity at other schools to provide an even distribution. One exception is the Staveley area where there may be an issue over capacity in the long-term as a result of residential development on the Staveley Works Corridor. The council will continue to liaise with Derbyshire County Council as the Staveley and Rother Valley Area Action Plan is implemented.
23 3.6 Table 5 shows education provision in relation to the emerging Spatial Strategy.
Funding & Viability
3.7 Revenue funding for mainstream primary and secondary schooling is split from the rest of Derbyshire County Council funding and ring fenced as Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG). Funding is allocated on the basis of expected school populations and should reflect population growth. However, problems can arise in two areas: 1) where rapid migration takes place and; 2) where the population growth is enough to trigger new schools provision. Whilst the council is unable to control inward migration, the Spatial Strategy does not propose the levels of growth which would have unacceptable impacts on the borough’s school capacity.
3.8 It is likely that throughout the Core Strategy period S.106 monies will be sought to address any potential shortfall at existing schools. Derbyshire County Council has an established developer contributions policy in line with national guidance, and which is incorporated into the planning process.
3.9 Table 2 shows the formula used by Derbyshire County Council to calculate the level of developer contribution required as a result of residential development.
Table 4: Education Contribution Formula
For every 100 dwellings the following amount of pupils are generated: • 20 primary • 15 secondary • 6 post-16
This is based on analysis of the 2001 census data for housing occupancy and live birth data and averaged across dwellings of all sizes. Therefore DCC do not distinguish two bedroom flats from five bedroom houses within a development. The calculation also includes one bedroom flats (although DCC may exclude one bedroom flats where the overall balance of the development is that these predominate).
The Department for Education (DfE) provides an annual update on the cost per pupil of capital development projects. For 2011/12 these are:
• Per primary pupil: £11,399.01 • Per secondary pupil: £17,176.17 • Per post-16 pupil: £18,627.90
While there can be a significant amount of new pupils generated by development, it is rare that enough pupils are generated to warrant the construction of a new school, either primary or secondary. The minimum thresholds to which DCC work are as follows:
• For a new primary school – 1000 dwellings: this would generate about 200 primary pupils which is a one form entry school. • For a new secondary school – 8000 dwellings: this would generate about 1200 pupils which is a six form entry school.
While the above figures are approximate, they do provide a fair guide on where DCC start when assessing the need for new school place or school infrastructure.
24
Table 5: Education: Capacity9
Staveley Works Corridor
Normal Area Normal Area Secondary Capacity issues? Primary • Springwell Community School • Barrow Hill Primary School Due to the level of housing proposed at Staveley there may be long-term issues over capacity at Springwell Secondary School and Barrow Hill Primary School.
Waterside
Normal Area Normal Area Capacity issues? Secondary Primary • The Meadows Community • Christ Church Primary School Secondary School • Abercrombie Community Primary School Brookfield School is at capacity. • Brookfield Community School • St Marys Catholic Primary School Primary Abercrombie and St Marys Schools at capacity.
Chesterfield Town Centre
Normal Area Normal Area Capacity issues? Secondary Primary • St Mary’s Catholic High • Westfield Infant School Secondary School • Brampton Primary School Brookfield, Hasland, Newbold and St Marys Schools are at • Newbold Community School • Old Hall Junior School capacity. • Brookfield Community School • Spire Junior School Primary • Hasland Hall Community • Whitecoates Primary School Old Hall, Abercrombie, St Marys and Newbold Schools are at School • Christ Church Primary School capacity. • Parkside Community School • Abercrombie Community Primary School • The Meadows Community • St Marys Catholic Primary School School • Mary Swanwick Primary School
9 This information is based on Derbyshire County Council’s (DCC) School Organisation Plan (2008 – 2013) and on consultation with DCC Officers.
25 • Gilbert Heachcote Nursery & Infant School • Cavendish Junior School • Newbold Church of England Primary School • Highfield Hall Primary School • William Rhodes Primary School
Brimington Parish
Normal Area Normal Area Capacity issues? Secondary Primary • Springwell Community School • Brimington Junior School No short-term capacity issues. However, in the long-term • Henry Bradley Infant School capacity of Springwell School may be an issue as a result of • Hollingwood Primary School housing development coming forward at Staveley Works • Brimington Manor Infants & Nursery School (which shares the same normal secondary catchment as Brimington Parish).
Eastern Villages
Normal Area Normal Area Capacity issues? Secondary Primary • Netherthorpe School (Mastin • Norbriggs Primary School (Mastin Moor) No current capacity issues (including Bolsover School which Moor) • Duckmanton Primary School (Duckmanton) serves Duckmanton). • Bolsover School (Duckmanton)
Western Suburbs/Residential Neighbourhoods
Normal Area Normal Area Capacity issues? Secondary Primary • St Mary’s Catholic High • Holme Hall Primary School Secondary School St Marys and Newbold Schools are at capacity • Newbold Community School
26
Chatsworth Road (Gateway to the Peak)
Normal Area Normal Area Capacity issues? Secondary Primary • Parkside Community School • Brampton Primary School No current capacity issues • William Roads Primary School
Staveley Town Centre
Normal Area Normal Area Capacity issues? Secondary Primary • Netherthorpe School • St Josephs Catholic Primary School Secondary • Springwell Secondary School • Poolsbrook Primary School Netherthorpe School is at capacity • Speedwell Infant School • Staveley Junior School
27 4.0 GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE
Key Issues
4.1 As highlighted in the council’s Green Infrastructure Study (2009), a key aim of council planning policy will be to ensure that major development is planned properly and opportunities are taken to extend or enhance the borough’s green infrastructure network.
4.2 The council’s large-scale regeneration projects at Waterside, Staveley Works Corridor and South of Chatsworth Road are all located next to river or canal corridors. Masterplanning will ensure that water corridors are protected or improved and that green infrastructure is considered at the outset of any development proposals.
4.3 In addition to these strategic regeneration sites are those areas identified for housing growth where the provision of green infrastructure will be critical to ensuring sustainable development at Brimington Parish, the Eastern and Western Villages. These sites will be brought forward by masterplanning and have full regard to green infrastructure principles, particularly the requirement that proposals fit into the landscape and that the scale, siting, design, materials are such that the visual effect of proposals is minimised and buildings are in keeping with their surroundings and reflect local character10.
4.4 In respect of green infrastructure provision in the urban area of Chesterfield Town Centre, Staveley Town Centre and Chatsworth Road, it is more important to consider how existing green infrastructure assets - such as parks and areas of open space - might be enhanced via developer contributions. This is because available development sites are likely to be too small to incorporate green infrastructure on-site.
Funding & Viability
4.5 Unlike other types of service delivery such as education or transport, the provision, maintenance and management of green infrastructure tends to be the responsibility of various bodies and organisations. The borough’s parks, allotments, canal, wildlife sites, greenways, woodlands, hedgerows, etc, will be owned or managed by various public sector bodies or private land owners. This makes it difficult to identify one type of funding stream or system that can be relied upon when trying to coordinate the funding, improvements or delivery of the GI network
4.6 The main funding for existing key green infrastructure assets, such as borough and community parks, will be through the council’s existing revenue funding. While the council can access funding from its capital reserves, this is rare as capital funding tends to be prioritized for other service areas. This puts some pressure on the council when new areas of open space or play provision are put forward, particularly as a result of major housing proposals as resources
10 Strategic Housing Sites and Green Infrastructure Assessments has been carried out by Derbyshire County Council for each of the council’s strategic housing proposals.
28 struggle to meet an increase in management and maintenance requirements. Consequently, the provision of areas of open space or green infrastructure in the borough tend to be reliant on developer contribution or various streams of grant and match funding11
4.7 Regeneration projects in the borough have sought to find new management models of GI. The public realm improvements at Waterside for instance will be managed and maintained via a management fee on residential properties. The aim here is to ensure that the river and canal is managed effectively and that the waterside environment is key to the development’s identity.
4.8 Another example of an alternative management model is the planned restoration and extension of Hollingwood Lock House to provide a waterway hub close to the Station Road area. There are proposals to form a Community Interest Company which would generate income to support the building and secure the canal’s long-term future.
4.9 However, notwithstanding these alternative management models, the main mechanism for the funding and delivery of open space and green infrastructure will be via developer contribution (or potentially the Community Infrastructure Levy) as a result of new development. The council adopted an Open Space and Play Provision Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) in 2008 which provides guidance on open space requirements when developers submit development proposals, particularly for major housing proposals. The SPD has been devised to ensure that opportunities are sought for both new areas of open space and improvements to existing areas.
Table 6. Green Infrastructure: Key Issues
Area Green Infrastructure Requirements
Staveley Works The Staveley Works Corridor is an important green infrastructure asset Corridor and the Staveley and Rother Valley Area Action Plan recognises the importance of the canal and river and this will be reflected in masterplanning which will show areas of wildlife and potential recreation (including walking and cycling – the former canal towpath forms part of the Trans Pennine Trail). Chesterfield The masterplan for the site includes a number of core design principles Waterside including those relating to public open space and landscape. The masterplan indicates that the provision of open space will exceed normal open space standards. This will ensure that the river and canal setting are enhanced (based on flood mitigation measures) and Waterside is an important aspect of the River Rother/Chesterfield Canal Corridor. Chesterfield Development sites within the town centre (excluding the regeneration Town Centre areas of Waterside and South of Chatsworth Road) will be scattered and relatively small in size. Therefore, resolution of the deficiencies in open space via development will be dependent upon opportunities arising. If development proposals are close or near to existing parks or areas of open space, there will be opportunities to enhance existing or provide new
11 A current example of external and match funding for new areas of open space in the borough would be the new play area and associated open space at Barrow Hill which was funded by a combination of Heritage Lottery money and match funding.
29 facilities via planning obligations and the Open Space & Play Provision SPD. Brimington As well as being areas of attractive landscape, open countryside around Parish Brimington is adjacent to a number of existing GI assets such as pathways, woodland, rural lanes, hedgerows and waterways 12. Any development within these areas will be guided by development briefs and masterplanning to ensure that council policy is adhered to and that existing GI assets are an integral part of any development proposals. Eastern Opportunities exist for an enhanced GI network, including access Villages connections to the wider network and biodiversity connections to the Pools Brook (possibly as part of a SUDS scheme). Any major residential development within these areas will be guided by development briefs and masterplanning to ensure that council policy is adhered to and that existing GI assets are an integral part of any development proposals. Western There is potential to significantly extend the borough’s western suburbs in Suburbs/ an area of open countryside to the west of Ashgate/Loundsley Green. Residential While the site is not rich in GI assets, there is potential to enhance the Neighborhoods existing network, particularly regarding connections to the adjacent junior school. The area is also close to Ashgate Plantation Wildlife Site, meaning any development proposals should consider potential impacts. A development brief or masterplan for the area could integrate GI assets at the outset. Chatsworth Potential development sites in The Chatsworth Road area are scattered Road (Gateway throughout the urban framework to the west of the town centre. The to the Peak) largest development sites reside south of Chatsworth Road, an area which is subject to an existing masterplan. This identifies existing GI assets which should be integrated into any development proposals, including opening up the river Hipper, improving the public realm and improving connections, particularly in relation to the enhancement of the Hipper Valley Trail. Staveley Town As development within Staveley Town Centre will be scattered on smaller Centre sites within the urban framework, opportunities to create new areas of green infrastructure will be limited. However, Staveley has very good access to existing key green infrastructure assets such as the Trans Pennine Trail and Chesterfield Canal. The Staveley Town Centre Masterplan sets out proposals to take advantage of these assets and create better linkages, including links to the proposed Canal Basin and nearby Poolsbrook Country Park. There may be opportunities over the Core Strategy period to use developer contributions or potential grant funding streams to carry out these proposals.
12 See the Landscape Character of Derbyshire (2003). This can be downloaded at: www.derbyshire.gov.uk/environment/conservation/landscapecharacter/default.asp Derbyshire County Council has also undertaken a GI and landscape character assessment of all of the borough’s strategic housing sites.
30 5.0 FLOOD DEFENCE
Key Issues
5.1 Chesterfield has a long history of flooding from the Rivers Rother, Hipper and Whitting. This has caused severe problems for local residents as well as the borough’s industrial and commercial interests. At its worst it has also affected critical infrastructure assets such as A617 (a key access route from the city centre to the Chesterfield Royal Hospital). Currently there are 1731 properties at risk of flooding during a one per cent probability flood assuming no defences13. The EA advises that this may rise to 1899 in the future due to climate change.
5.2 Chesterfield Borough is a sub-area within the Don Catchment Flood Management Plan. The main watercourses within the borough are the Rivers Hipper, Doe Lea, Drone, Whitting and Rother. Flooding originates from either rivers & watercources, inadequate surface water drainage and overwhelmed sewer systems.
5.3 In accordance with PPS 25 the council has assessed potential allocations in relation to flood risk. The council has also commissioned a Stage 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment which gives an up to date picture of flood risk in the borough and advices on policies which the council may wish to include in their LDFs. However, it still remains that parts of Chesterfield Town Centre, Staveley Works, Waterside and South of Chatsworth Road will be within Flood Risk Zones 2 & 3.
5.4 The master-planning process will ensure that these areas are allocated for the least vulnerable type of land uses, but there will still remain a requirement to build in mitigation measures where necessary. The EA has identified a number of specific flood mitigation measures and measures which need to be undertaken within the borough via the Draft Don Catchment Management Plan (Jan 2010).
5.5 The EA has also invested in detailed studies to assess options on the Rivers Hipper, Whitting and Rother. The most recent study is the Draft Chesterfield Flood Alleviation Scheme Initial Assessment which was prepared by Arup in May 2010 on behalf of the Environment Agency. This integrates and up-dates the results of the various assessments carried out historically in Chesterfield and considers options for providing a comprehensive solution to flood risk in the borough. As such, it provides a potential framework for the borough’s long- term flood infrastructure requirements.
5.6 The study puts forward a number of options for addressing flooding within the borough, ranging from Option 1: do nothing to Option 6 which indicates a comprehensive package of flood mitigation measures. The study then identifies the likely costs and benefits of the various mitigation measures of each option. The study concludes that only Option 6 can provide an
13 Draft Don Catchment Management Plan: Summary Report (Jan 2010), p.12 (Environment Agency)
31 innovative, sustainable solution with multiple benefits and will actively promote regeneration of the borough’s river corridors14. Table 7 shows Option 6.
Funding & Viability
5.7 Provision of strategic or regional flood defence is the responsibility of the Environment Agency. Regional Flood Defence Committees (RFDCs) have been set up to deliver regional flood risk management functions15. The RFDC covering Chesterfield is the North East RFDC.
5.8 RFDCs take decisions about the annual programme of improvement and maintenance works. These are mainly grant funded by DEFRA. Unless flood defence measures meet the grant requirements then flood defence will be developer responsibility. The local authority’s role is to allocate development to low risk sites or to require flood defence as part of the development proposals (via developer contributions).
5.9 The obligation to provide flood defences for new development falls on the developer. Where a site is subject to severe flood risk, the normal course of action would be for the Environment Agency, as the statutory consultee, to object to development. If the development is then permitted, or if the flood risk is not so severe that the Environment Agency objects, then development may go ahead with mitigation measures. Unless public funding is available for such measures, these measures will have to be factored into any developers infrastructure costs.
5.10 Where there is significant level of gap funding due to flood constraints on site, in addition to developer contributions, there will be a requirement to seek extra funding from external regeneration agencies (both for physical regeneration and green infrastructure improvements) to overcome these constraints.
14 The study also indicates that Option 6 is likely to fully satisfy the requirements of the Defra decision rules and has a high chance of receiving Defra grant in aid funding. 15 RFDCs are made up of local authority representatives and members appointed by DEFRA and the Environment Agency.
32
Table 7. Flood Mitigation Measures
Source: Draft Chesterfield Flood Alleviation Scheme Initial Assessment (Arup 2010)
Staveley Works Corridor
Flood mitigation scheme Location Aims of mitigation Estimated costs Installation of a floodgate on Works Road, Staveley. Staveley Works, Staveley, Chesterfield To reduced risk of flooding to 143,776 Major work properties in this area, particularly Staveley Clocktower Business Park.
Chesterfield Town Centre (inc Chesterfield Waterside)
Flood mitigation scheme Location Aims of mitigation Estimated costs Removal of a sluice gate in the River Rother at East of the A61, Chesterfield To reduced risk of flooding to 5,000 Sherwood Street properties in the area. Minor work Provision of resilience measures to 29 properties in the Brampton, Chesterfield. To remove residual flood risk in this Not priced. Brampton area of Chesterfield. area.
Replacement of a trashscreen at Riddings Brook. Station Road, Sheepbridge, Chesterfield The existing trash screen under 64,000 Minor work the B6052 Station Rd is not designed in accordance with best practice and is prone to blockage. This would reduce flood risk in this area.
Chatsworth Road Corridor
Flood mitigation scheme Location Aims of mitigation Estimated costs Removal of footbridges at Hipper Street West and South of Chatsworth Road, Chesterfield. To remove residual flood risk in this 135,204 Hipper Street South, and masonry arch bridges at area. Under Hipper House. Raising of a footbridge at Alma St. West. construction and due for completion 2013/2014)
33 Closure of gaps in flood walls at Griffin Mill. South of Chatsworth Road, Chesterfield To remove residual flood risk in this Not priced. area.
Areas in North East Derbyshire District
Flood mitigation scheme Location Aims of mitigation Estimated costs Construction of a 350m long flood storage embankment Within the administrative boundary of North A flood storage area would be 3,351,581 4m high at Avenue Coking Works, with a storage East Derbyshire District Council (between created at Wingerworth. This would capacity of 245,000m³. Creation of 78ha of BAP habitat Chesterfield and Clay Cross) lead to reductions in flood risk as part of this scheme. downstream on the River Rother Major work (and to a lesser extent, reductions on the lower Hipper). Construction of a 420m long flood storage embankment Within the administrative boundary of North A flood storage reservoir would be 8,772,326 7m high at Holymoorside, with a storage capacity of East Derbyshire District Council (at created. This would lead to 125,000m³. Holymoorside). reductions in flood risk downstream Major work on the River Hipper (and to a much lesser extent, further reductions on the River Rother). Service utility diversions would be necessary at this site hence the high estimated cost. NB: further feasibility work to identify a more economical project in a different area may be required.
34 6.0 UTILITIES
Water and Sewerage
Key Issues
6.1 The main water and sewerage operators for the Chesterfield area are Yorkshire Water Services (sewerage) and Severn Trent Water (water supply). The infrastructure for the supply of clean water and disposal and treatment of waste water is classed as essential infrastructure and the water companies operate within a five-year investment programme called the Asset Management Plan (AMP)16.
6.2 Yorkshire Water’s current position is that whilst it is not possible to input current Core Strategy proposals into the current AMP (2010 – 2015) it is able to take account of projected infrastructure capacity when preparing its next AMP (2015 - 2020). However, no infrastructure ‘show stoppers’ which might seriously undermine the council’s development strategy have been identified during consultation with Yorkshire Water. The only concern raised relates to Staveley Waste Water Works which in the long term may have capacity issues. 17.
6.3 Yorkshire Water has indicated that there is enough capacity at Staveley Waste Water Works for a further 1000 dwellings. As there are 2,000 new dwellings planned at the former Staveley Works Corridor there will therefore be an issue over long-term capacity. Also, as this capacity is also shared by areas within Bolsover District (25%), then coordination will be required between the two authorities.
6.4 Because development at Staveley is phased over a long period there is the flexibility for Yorkshire Water to include proposals in subsequent Asset Management Plans. This will ensure there is adequate infrastructure capacity as part of the Staveley Works proposals. There is likely to be a requirement for developer contributions.
6.5 Regarding water supply, Severn Trent Water is the supplier for the Chesterfield Area. The key issue is whether existing water supply can meet projected growth. Severn Trent are aware of the council’s Spatial Strategy and projected housing numbers and are confident there are will be no major problems with supply in the borough. Therefore, in their assessment, based on the projected housing growth, there is unlikely to be any potential capacity issues apart from the usual requirement for minor reinforcement works. This can be dealt with in the normal way via developer contributions.
Water Cycle Scoping Study
6.6 A Water Cycle Scoping Study has been prepared in partnership with North East Derbyshire District and Bolsover District Councils. The aim of this study is
16 Ofwat, the regulator, is currently reviewing the AMP period system. 17 Core Strategy Issues & Options consultation (July 2009).
35 to consider the key infrastructure issues relating to sustainable water management. It also provides an opportunity for discussion between the water authorities, the Environment Agency and local authorities in ascertaining the requirement for water infrastructure works.
6.7 The scoping work concluded that notwithstanding the requirements via the Management and Investment Plans of the water authorities, there are no foreseeable problems relating to the supply of water in the Study Area. Regarding sewage disposal, as highlighted above, there could be a capacity issue in the Staveley area as a result of proposed development via the Staveley and Rother Valley Area Action Plan. However, considering the long- term planning timeframe of the Staveley proposals, this is not considered to be a constraint or’ showstopper’ of the council’s strategic housing proposals.
Funding & Viability
6.8 Water companies prepare 5 year Asset Management Plans (AMPs) which determine the price levels that can be charged to fund investment programmes. Given this, it is difficult for water companies to provide commitments to provide capacity to service potential developments beyond the current Asset Management Plan periods, particularly as there are competing demands on the investment programme from other potential growth strategies within the various regions18.
6.9 Yorkshire Water, submitted a Business Plan for the current AMP (2015 – 2020) in early 2009. This included growth forecasts to allow for infrastructure investments in this AMP. The forecasts for Chesterfield were based on the 2005 Second Deposit Local Plan and committed sites. Anything over this growth has not been accounted for in the 2010 – 2015 AMP.
6.10 Therefore, it is likely that throughout the Core Strategy period the Water and sewage companies will rely, as they do now, on developers contributing infrastructure provision through various mechanisms19. Yorkshire Water have stated that identifying large strategic sites may make it easier for developers to pay for the necessary improvements if sites were brought forward without Yorkshire Water including it in a growth forecast20. This is consistent with the council’s strategy which identifies large strategic sites as part of its Spatial Strategy.
6.11 Ultimately, the opportunities to tie in more closely with the council’s plans will not be until the next round of water and sewerage AMP preparation for 2015 – 2020. At this point the council will have identified its preferred sites for development over the long-term and identified periods of phasing in the Site Allocations Development Plan Document. The water companies should therefore be able to plan for infrastructure expansion via the AMP process.
18 In addition to AMPs, Water Companies are also required to prepare Water Resources Management Plans which identify the long-term supply and demand issues over a 25 year period. 19 The statutory utilities have mechanisms in place to ensure development pays for connections to the water, sewerage, power and telecommunications networks. 20 Core Strategy Issues and Options consultation (July 2009).
36
6.12 A meeting of the interested parties took place during 2010 including representatives from Chesterfield Borough, Bolsover and North East Derbyshire Districts, Severn Trent Water, Yorkshire Water and the Environment Agency. It was agreed that:
• Liaison will continue to take place at critical points in the preparation of the local authorities’ Local Development Frameworks. • The authorities will indicate the strategic distribution of development likely to be included in their Core Strategies. • The water companies and the Environment Agency will respond to the authorities’ consultations.
Gas Supply
Key Issues
6.13 National Grid owns and operates the high pressure gas transmission system in England, Scotland and Wales. National Grid has a duty to develop and maintain an efficient coordinated and economical transmission system for the conveyance of gas and respond to requests for new gas supplies in certain circumstances.
6.14 New gas transmission infrastructure developments (pipelines and associated installations) are periodically required to meet increases in demand and changes in patterns of supply. Developments to the network are as a result of specific connection requests e.g. power stations, and requests for additional capacity on the network from gas shippers. As a general rule, network developments to provide supplies to the local gas distribution network are as a result of overall demand growth in a region rather than site specific developments.
6.15 National Grid Gas plc owns and operates the local gas distribution network in the Chesterfield Borough Council area. At present there are no known capacity issues regarding the gas distribution network in the borough. National Grid have a dedicated team responsible for providing advice about the local gas distribution network and local capacity issues (the ‘Plant Protection Team’) and they have been consulted during the preparation of this study.
Electricity Supply
Key Issues
6.16 National Grid has a statutory duty to develop and maintain an efficient, co- ordinated and economical transmission system of electricity and to facilitate competition in the supply and generation of electricity.
6.17 National Grid operates the national electricity transmission network across Great Britain and owns and maintains the network in England and Wales, providing electricity supplies from generating stations to local distribution
37 companies. The company does not distribute electricity to individual premises directly, but its role in the wholesale market is essential to ensuring a reliable and quality supply. It is the role of local distribution companies to distribute electricity to homes and businesses. The electricity distribution company in the Chesterfield Borough area is EON Central Network.
6.18 National Grid’s high voltage electricity transmission assets within Chesterfield Borough’s administrative area, include the following:
• 4ZV line – 275kV route from Chesterfield substation in North East Derbyshire to Brinsworth substation in Rotherham.
6.19 During consultation, National Grid have stated that development proposals will not have a significant effect upon Nation Grid’s infrastructure, both gas and electricity submission. It is unlikely that any extra growth will create capacity issues for National Grid given the scale of these gas and electricity transmission networks. The existing network should be able to cope with additional demands.
6.20 While the precise nature of the influence of any proposed developments on gas and electricity infrastructure will need to be determined in the first instance via discussion with the relevant gas and electricity Distribution Network Operators National Grid EON Central Network respectively) there are currently no known issues to prevent the delivery of the core strategy in respect of gas and electricity supply (notwithstanding the need for usual reinforcement/connection works via developer contributions). At the time of writing there are currently no known capacity issues regarding the gas distribution network in the borough.
Table 8. Utilities
Staveley Works Corridor
Water & Sewerage Gas Electricity Capacity at Staveley Waste No capacity issues identified. No capacity issues identified. Water Treatment Works is an issue. The projected number of dwellings will require an upgrade to the Waste Water Works.
Waterside
Water & Sewerage Gas Electricity Sewerage diversion No capacity issues identified. No capacity issues identified. undertaken in 2009. No other capacity constraints.
Chesterfield Town Centre
38 Water & Sewerage Gas Electricity No capacity issues No capacity issues identified. No capacity issues identified. identified.
Brimington Parish
Water & Sewerage Gas Electricity There may be need for No capacity issues identified. No capacity issues identified. sewerage infrastructure improvements.
Eastern Villages
Water & Sewerage Gas Electricity Upgrades to the sewer No capacity issues identified. No capacity issues identified. network likely to be required at both Duckmanton and Mastin Moor (i.e. Bent Lane Sewage Pumping Station and Staveley Wastewater Treatment Works).
Western Suburbs/Residential Neighbourhoods
Water & Sewerage Gas Electricity No capacity issues No capacity issues identified. No capacity issues identified. identified.
Chatsworth Road (Gateway to the Peak)
Water & Sewerage Gas Electricity No capacity issues No capacity issues identified. No capacity issues identified. identified.
39 7.0 HEALTH FACILITIES
Key Issues
7.1 As described in the Community Infrastructure Study (2009), Chesterfield is currently served by the following primary and secondary health care facilities:
• 19 Doctors’ surgeries • 3 health centres • 2 hospitals • 19 dentists’ practices
7.2 Chesterfield Royal Hospital is located at Hady and Community Hospital is located south of Chesterfield town centre. The former is a principal hospital serving Chesterfield and north east Derbyshire while the latter specialises in elderly health care.
7.3 There is a reasonable geographical distribution of GPs and health centres within the borough. The Derbyshire PCT have been consulted during the Core Strategy process and are aware of the Council’s Spatial Strategy. Consequently, the PCT has provided information which identifies where there may be issues are over primary health care capacity as a result of new residential development.
7.4 The PCT are satisfied that the borough has a reasonable distribution of primary and secondary health care and that the borough’s spatial strategy is unlikely to have a serious impact on existing facilities, However, some GPs surgeries are currently at capacity where there are more numbers on GP patient lists that is recommended by government advice. Table 8 shows those GP surgeries most affected by the council’s Spatial Strategy and identifies which surgeries would be most impacted as a result of the quantum of potential patients caused by new residential development.
Funding & Viability
7.5 Health care remains the responsibility of central government through the Department of Health (DoH). Currently, Derbyshire Primary Care Trust is responsible for implementing the provision of health care within the county and direct financial resources to primary and secondary care providers as well as regulate the primary care activities of General Practitioners (GPs), Dentists, Optometrists and Pharmacists21.
7.6 The Derbyshire PCT estimate the impact of new residential development in two ways: 1) 'The Red Book' which identifies what the amount of floor space should be for GP practices (based on number of patients) and; 2) Number of patients per GP (any GP with a patient list of 1, 800 is considered to be at capacity). When assessing the level of developer contribution sought the PCT
21 This information only covers NHS Services and does not reflect the distribution and services provided by private companies across the Borough.
40 work to a formula which is based on the cost of developing existing primary health care premises. They then translate this into a cost per dwelling which equates to £512.56 per dwelling (based on 2.3 people per dwelling). The PCT formula only applies to proposals of 10 dwellings or more and the criteria for assessing whether a residential development proposal is affected is whether it is in the 'immediate area' of primary health care facilities.
7.7 During 2010, the Derbyshire PCT consulted with Chesterfield Borough Council about the most effective way of consulting with local planning authorities during the planning application process. Other public sector services such as the Police, the Education Authority and the Highways Authority were consulted as a matter of course on relevant planning applications, but the PCT did not have an established procedure in place.
7.8 Consequently, the PCT and the council have now formalised arrangements regarding consultation on planning applications. The PCT can now make formal requests for developer contributions if it is felt development was making significant demands on local health services. This will ensure that throughout the Core Strategy period the PCT has the opportunity to identify capacity issues as a result of development proposals.
Table 9. GP Surgeries
Staveley Works Corridor
Nearest GP Surgery Concern over capacity? Hollywell House Surgery (Hollywell Road, Chesterfield) Yes
Chesterfield Town Centre, Waterside & Chatsworth Road
Nearest GP Surgery Concern over capacity Wheatbridge Road Surgey (Wheatbridge Rd, Chesterfield) No
Hasland Medical Centre (Jepson Road, Hasland) No
Philips Drive Surgery (Philips Rd, Hasland) No
Avenue House Surgery (Saltergate, Chesterfield) No
Avondale Road Surgery (Avondale Rd, Chesterfield) No
Chatsworth Road Medical Centre (Chatsworth Road, No Chesterfield)
Rectory Road Medical Centre (Rectory Road, Staveley) Yes
Brimington parish
Nearest GP Surgery Concern over capacity? Brimington Medical Practice (Foljambe Road, Brimington) No
41 Whittington Medical Centre (High St, Old Whittington) Yes
Brimington Surgery (Church St, Brimington) Yes
Whittington Moor Surgery (Scarsdale Rd, Whittington) No
Eastern Villages (Duckmanton & Mastin Moor)
Nearest GP Surgery Concern over capacity? Welbeck Road, Bolsover No
Barlborough Medical Practice, Barlborough Yes
Western Suburbs/Residential Neighbourhoods
Nearest GP Surgery Concern over capacity? Newbold Surgery (Windemere Road, Newbold) No
42 Appendix 1: Infrastructure Delivery Plan
Draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) NB: This draft IDP is an evolving document which will be updated as more knowledge is obtained about infrastructure costs, funding and delivery. It will also outline the Borough Council’s key infrastructure requirements should it decide to introduce the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).
Staveley and Rother Valley Corridor
Key Core Estimated Normal Funding Phasing & Strategy Implementation Lead Bodies Infrastructure Requirements Infrastructure Costs Sources Delivery Policy PS5: Staveley and • Chesterfield Borough Land decontamination and Overall costs: £60M - Regeneration Medium Staveley & Rother Valley Council remediation £70M agencies and term: Rother Corridor Area • Staveley Town Council Source: Options developer 2020 - 2026 Valley Action Plan • Chatsworth Settlement Report, Taylor Young contributions or CIL Corridor Trust (landowner) (2010) • Saint Gobain (landowner) On-site road infrastructure and Overall costs : £12M Regeneration Medium • Homes & Communities off-site road improvements Source: Options agencies and term: Agency Report, Taylor Young developer 2020 - 2026: • Derbyshire County (2010) contributions or CIL Council Flood mitigation and defence Overall costs: £7M Regeneration Medium- works Source: Options agencies and term: Report, Taylor Young developer 2020 - 2026: (2010) contributions or CIL Masterplanned green Not currently Included as part of Long-term: infrastructure provision (inc estimated development costs or 2026 - 2031: proposed greenways) CIL Potential capacity issues at Dependent on local Developer Long-term: Springwell Secondary School school capacity at the contributions or CIL 2026 - 2031 time housing proposals come forward
43 Hollywell House Surgery and Only applicable to Developer Long-term: Rectory Road Medical Centre are residential contributions 2026 - 2031 approaching capacity development of 10 dwellings or over. Derbyshire NHS currently request £512 per dwelling.
NB: Contributions will depend on the location of proposed development and its distance to existing surgeries. Increased capacity required at Not currently Developer Long-term: Staveley Waste Water Works estimated contributions or CIL 2026 - 2031
Chesterfield Waterside
Key Core Estimated Normal Funding Phasing & Strategy Implementation Lead Bodies Infrastructure Requirements Infrastructure Costs Sources Delivery Policy PS3: Waterside • Urbo Regeneration (which Engineering and sewerage £100,000 East Midlands Completed Waterside Masterplan includes Bolsterstone and diversion for the town centre Development Agency & the the main landowner, canal basin (2008) Potteries Arnold Laver) • Chesterfield Borough Off-site road improvements. Up to £5M Developer Short-term: Council Source: Planning contributions 2011- 2020 • Chesterfield Canal application legal Partnership agreement • East Midlands Masterplanned green Not currently Included as part of Medium- Development Agency infrastructure provision estimated development costs. term: (until March 2012) NB: Ongoing 2020 - 2026 management of green infrastructure will be funded via a management fee on residential properties
44
Chesterfield Town Centre
Key Core Estimated Normal Funding Phasing & Strategy Implementation Lead Bodies Infrastructure Requirements Infrastructure Costs Sources Delivery Policy PS1: No overall • Chesterfield Borough Enhancement of the town centre No current estimates Developer The Core Chesterfield implementation Council cycling and walking network (costs will vary contributions and Strategy Town programme for • Development industry (based on the network put according to types of Local Transport Plan period: 2011 Centre town centre • Landowners forward by Derbyshire County infrastructure allocations - 2031 development • East Midlands Council, 2010) required for the except for Development Agency various routes) those projects (until March 2012) A61 improvements Included as part of an Developer highlighted in • Derbyshire County overall budget in the contributions and the Council Local Transport Plan Local Transport Plan Chesterfield allocations Town Centre Potential capacity issues at Dependent on local Developer Masterplan Brookfield Secondary School school capacity at the contributions (2009) time housing proposals come forward Only applicable to Developer residential contributions development of 10 dwellings or over. Derbyshire NHS currently request £512 per dwelling
NB: Contributions will depend on the location of proposed development and its distance to existing surgeries
45 Chesterfield Town Centre Not currently Developer Masterplan: estimated contributions, CIL or - Northern Gateway road regeneration infrastructure proposals agencies. - West Bars roundabout improvements - Hollis Lane link road
Brimington Parish (Local Centre)
Key Core Estimated Normal Funding Phasing & Strategy Implementation Lead Bodies Infrastructure Requirements Infrastructure Costs Sources Delivery Policies CS1 – Future • Chesterfield Borough Foul sewerage provision £190,000 Included as part of Long-term: CS20 masterplanning Council Source: Design developer costs 2026 - 2031 • Brimington Parish Council Services, CBC • Development industry Sustainable drainage systems Not currently Included as part of • Derbyshire County estimated developer costs Council New road access Not currently Included as part of estimated developer costs Masterplanned green Not currently Included as part of infrastructure provision (inc estimated developer costs proposed greenways) Brimington GP Surgery and Only applicable to Developer Whittington Medical Centre are residential contributions or CIL approaching capacity development of 10 dwellings or over. Derbyshire NHS request £512 per dwelling.
NB: Contributions will depend on the location of proposed development and its distance to existing surgeries.
46
Eastern Villages (Duckmanton & Mastin Moor)
Key Core Estimated Normal Funding Phasing & Strategy Implementation Lead Bodies Infrastructure Requirements Infrastructure Costs Sources Delivery Policies CS1 – Future • Chesterfield Borough Upgrades to the sewer network Not currently Included as part of Long-term: CS20 masterplanning Council likely to be required at both estimated developer costs 2026 - 2031 • Development industry Duckmanton and Mastin Moor • Derbyshire County (i.e. Bent Lane Sewage Pumping Council Station & Staveley Wastewater Treatment Works)
Off-site junction improvements Not currently Included as part of will be required estimated developer costs Masterplanned green Not currently Included as part of infrastructure provision (inc estimated developer costs proposed greenways)
Potential capacity issues at Dependent on local Included as part of Netherthorpe Secondary School school capacity at the developer costs time housing proposals come forward Barlborough Medical Practice is Only applicable to Developer approaching capacity. residential contributions development of 10 dwellings or over. Derbyshire NHS currently request £512 per dwelling
NB: Contributions will depend on the location of proposed development and its distance to existing surgeries
47
Western Suburbs/Residential Neighbourhoods
Key Core Estimated Normal Funding Phasing & Strategy Implementation Lead Bodies Infrastructure Requirements Infrastructure Costs Sources Delivery Policies CS1- CS20 No overall • Chesterfield Borough Enhancement of the cycling and Not currently Included as part of The Core implementation Council walking network estimated developer costs Strategy programme for • Development industry period: 2011 this area of • Derbyshire County Potential capacity issues at Dependent on local Developer - 2031 Chesterfield Council Newbold Secondary School school capacity at the contributions time housing proposals come forward Off-site road improvements Not currently Included as part of Development and enhancement estimated developer costs of the GI network
Chatsworth Road Corridor
Key Core Estimated Normal Funding Phasing & Strategy Implementation Lead Bodies Infrastructure Requirements Infrastructure Costs Sources Delivery Policies CS1- CS20 South of Chesterfield Borough Council Bridge works (Hipper Street £ 135,204 Environment Agency The Core Chatsworth Development industry West, Hipper Street South, Source: Arup, 2010 & North East RFDC. Strategy Road Landowners Hipper House and Alma St) to included as part of period: 2011 Masterplan Derbyshire County Council mitigate flood risk along the River developer costs - 2031 (Highways & Education). Hipper. Environment Agency. Capacity at Brookfield School Dependent on local Included as part of school capacity at the developer costs time housing proposals come forward Enhancement of the cycling and Not currently Included as part of walking network estimated developer costs
Development and enhancement Not currently Included as part of of the GI network estimated developer costs
48
Staveley Town Centre
Key Core Estimated Normal Funding Phasing & Strategy Implementation Lead Bodies Infrastructure Requirements Infrastructure Costs Sources Delivery Policies CS1- CS20 Staveley Town • Staveley Town Council Whilst the Staveley Town Centre There are no cost • Regeneration The Core Centre • Chesterfield Borough Masterplan provides a framework estimates for agencies Strategy Masterplan Council for new development in the town, proposals in the • Developer period: 2011 • Regeneration agencies development is mainly focused Staveley Town Contributions or - 2031 NB: Whilst not • Development industry on public realm improvements. Centre masterplan CIL part of the LDF Therefore, development is programme the unlikely have a significant impact masterplan on existing infrastructure capacity does set out the Hollywell House Surgery and Only applicable to Developer The Core long-term Rectory Road Medical Centre are residential contributions Strategy development approaching capacity development of 10 period: 2011 options for dwellings or over. - 2031 Staveley Town Derbyshire NHS Centre. These currently request options have not £512 per dwelling. been costed and specific NB: Contributions will delivery depend on the arrangements location of proposed are not yet in development and its place. distance to existing surgeries.
49 Appendix 2: Map of Potential Infrastructure Requirements
50